That means, i don't know what to think.
Not everything is bull crap on the net.
Babe,
xoxo
Printable View
After eight pages and this silliness still confuses you? Why? What do you find confusing about this? Some preWWII writings mention the word "holocaust" (which at the time meant "sacrifice" and did not yet refer to the genocide perpetrated by the NAZIs). So what? Explain exactly, in your own words, what you think is confusing about that?
Hi trish,
And i had asked you if you were suggesting if the rabbi authors in the articles were using "holocaust" to say that the Jewish people were offering up their homes and belongings in exchange for their "freedom". I did disagree with that.
Did you answer that, by the way? I must have missed that.
You're asking me WHAT I THINK in my own words?
Well, as i have said, and said, again, i am not sure what to think.
Not good enough? Sorry, honestly.
I won't be rushed into a making a hasty decision when i am NOT SURE what to think about it.
There has not been much of a discussion, really.
I've basically been accused and accused and accused. Not by you, but the "time traveler"?...and the "Jehova's hypothesis" comment?... seemed rather insincere, and the ridiculing Valiant Thor comments were below the belt.
It seems if any one disagrees with you or has a different belief, you ridicule them for it. That's not fair. That's rather ignorant behavior, trish. Sorry to be the one to tell you.
And then the bronco makes his big "comeback" coming in with again with MORE accusations. Pfffffft! What jerk - a schmuck.
The majority of this thread is you asking the same questions over and over again and me saying what i've written in my responses over and over again.
I never said in this thread, 'Please ask me what i think.'
I asked for a discussion. Not to be tried as if in a court.
A 'discussion" is not only you offering your personal opinion, and it's case closed.
And then bronco coming in, foaming at the mouth.
I see no REAL discussion with the many members of the forum like i thought it would be. I was planning to sit back and read.
I've been defending myself, basically, against ruthless, and false accusations!!!
Bronco is over there reloading his bad attitude. Looking for more ways to INSULT- his own character by being how he is.
Must be unmarried with a rotten, self-centered attitude like that. Who'd want it? He acts like the Strict Orthodox but he has no idea what his Holy Book says. What a fake.
Thanks,
Babe,
xoxo
Trish,
The silliness comes from you repeating your questions after i address them to the best of my ability. Think about it.
Re-asking the same questions will not produce different responses from me.
What is that saying again?...
"The sign of insanity is the repetition of an action which produces the same futile results". Something like that.
Babe,
xoxo
I am not your secretary. Okay?
If i can find things like i have already done - anyone can - even a dopey person like you. Change your meds!
I have found various archived articles from before 1945 and it took me less than a few minutes to find them, upon YOUR VERY insincere, challenging, hateful request.
I've read them, and posted them, all within only a few minutes.
BUT NOOOO not good enough when i find one from 1945?
You like to split hairs, eh, freakofan?
Get OUT!!
Don't let the the swinging door hit your ass on the way out. I don't want a dirty skid-mark. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!
YOU see what i do, you FREAK? Eh?
When i disapprove of a low class post, i make it PUBLIC - NOT like what you do by hunting down my posts and voting them down like you did in the Happy Holiday thread, and when you hunted down my other posts, too.
Hypocrite!! Backstabber!!
You are supposed to try to be better in life as a Jewish man. NOT WORSE. You are so far gone - you are a LOST soul in the world. AND you will be a lost soul on the Day when that Day arrives when God judges you and your hatred.
Your soul is full of hatred!!! HATER!!!
GRRRRR~!!
I hate posting comments like this!!!!!
Stay away from my threads. Such a petty little man you turned out to be!!
Simple machines respond in the same way to the same input. People, who are capable of thinking and learning, modify their behaviors and beliefs.
Yes, I answered that. No, it was not being suggested that the Jewish people were “offering” up their homes, their livelihood and community as a sacrifice, but rather that their loss was a sacrifice nevertheless. It’s not an outlandish use of language to say, for example, that many lives were sacrificed before we learned how to inoculate against smallpox. You can quibble that it’s not exactly accurate were one to insist on a literal reading of the word “sacrifice,” but it can’t be denied that figuratively such usage is common. The same with holocaust. You can argue that not all the homes were burnt and you can say they weren’t sacrificed to Jehovah. But in that time (before the word “holocaust” referred to the genocide committed by the NAZIs) it could easily have been used figuratively to mean a sacrifice of almost any sort.Quote:
And i had asked you if you were suggesting if the rabbi authors in the articles were using "holocaust" to say that the Jewish people were offering up their homes and belongings in exchange for their "freedom". I did disagree with that.
An antisemite sorts through three decades of newspaper articles and cherry picks a mere three hundred articles (which, as far as we know, have not been vetted by any independent source) which mention the number “sixty million” or the word “holocaust,” and somehow you are snowed by this?! It’s soooo confusing for you? It’s time to tell us why? What is it about the facts and logic here (I’m not asking for a personal story) that you find so alluring, mysterious or in need of explanation?
BTW Truly, if someone is willing to take seriously the existence of a space alien named Thor, then I figure that same someone is open-minded enough to consider the possibility that information can be sent from the future back through time. Indeed, I would speculate that same someone might be open to the possibility that the 271 newspaper articles are indeed evidence of just that conjecture.
Dahlia, you've had no "real discussion" on this thread for three simple reasons.
1. Your information sources are at best misrepresentative and at worst completely fake.
2. Trish has answered your questions on page 3, post 25 and several times since, including the post above, to the satisfaction of everyone else except you. The question remains, why you can't accept her explanation?
3. You attack anyone who posts an opinion that you don't agree with on the thread, including me for daring to suggest that the internet may not be the universal source of truth you think it is. Yet, you accuse everyone of attacking you. Double standards?
Icedentally, how do you expect to start a discussion without asking what people believe in? Discussion is all about personal opinions.
I asked you whether you vetted the articles or took the word of the person who excerpted them, who many healthy skeptics would believe had a motive not to be honest. You did not answer whether you had done that in advance but instead frantically started doing it. The issue was not whether the articles are genuine, but whether you assumed they were without checking independent sources.
To show your diligence you post an article as an example that is from 1945, at the tail end of the Holocaust. How does an article reporting 6 million casualties from the Holocaust prove that the number 6 million was used before the Holocaust? The fact is it does not. You hadn't read the article and did not know its contents. This was one of something like five articles you posted and were not even aware of what it contained. The person who copied the article thought it was proof that the Holocaust was made up, or he would not have saved it as jewmadeup.jpg.
It is also relevant that the only places these articles are located are extremely anti-semitic, Holocaust-denial websites. Every other person who thinks the number 6 million being used before the Holocaust signifies something is making the argument that the Holocaust is a lie. Yet you continue to pretend you are not saying that.
I've also answered your question, though obliquely. The articles refer to a number of things. When they refer to Eastern European atrocities, they use the word holocaust, in lower case letters. Many of the articles refer to the Kishinev pogrom where homes were literally burned. These types of pogroms took place for several decades around that time. When the articles refer to 6 million they were often referring to existing population estimates, such as six million Jews in Russia.
But it's a waste of time to talk about the articles unless you have a point to make. Saying you find it confusing is not an answer.
In addition to answering your question, I've also tried to head off any conclusion to be drawn from the conspiracy angle by pointing out that among Holocaust scholars the number six million does not have any special significance. It is an average. The studies that were done on the Holocaust by men such as Raul Hilberg were exhaustive studies, filling books over a thousand pages long. They did not posit round figures...but numbers like 5.1 million or 5.7 million or 6.2 million. But I have a question for you.
Are we to believe that in addition to just having an innocent question about newspaper articles that list the number six million, you also think Jewish people get too much attention for the Holocaust (as you posted in the other thread), are primarily responsible for the trans-atlantic slave trade, and are responsible as a group (rather than as individuals) for producing degrading songs? And you so innocently stumbled onto this information on a harmless site crafted by merely curious people who write articles like The Jew Joke Al Franken, or How Israel Did 9/11, or The Jews who Run Hollywood? There's a name for this type of activity. It's called anti-semitism.