People should be allowed to take a revisionist look at historical facts without right wing Jewish groups pulling their “Your a Nazi” card in any debate.
No doubt, they should. Of course, that’s not happening here, (and in fact, I see neither a discussion of history nor right wing Jewish groups), so I wonder why you bring it up.
:shocked:
I’m in a right-wish Jewish group and I didn’t even know it!
I demand a recount.
Lets say a professor in a University challenged the so called “Facts” he would probably loose his job because the university is probably sponsored by offshoots of B’nai Birith or another jewish group of that nature.
Why the hell has the U.S been funding Israel’s military? Perhaps they have been setting up the war from behind the scenes.
Baltazar, you can put away the sock puppets. People aren’t going to agree with you any more because you’re using a new name.
Given the number of openly anti-Jewish college professors I have encountered (including those who attained tenure after letting their feelings show), I think we can dismiss this claim as pure bullshit.
(I have heard of two college teachers (one in the U.S. and one Canadian) whose jobs were threatened for teaching that the Holocaust never happened, but that is a simple matter of firing an incompetent for teaching lies. There are many college professors who are hostile to the actions of Israel in regards to the Palestinian situation who blythely teach their views with no interference.)
Cite, please. :rolleyes:
Did Mr. Shahak also mention that the US has sent money to Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, etc…? Because that clearly proves that the US also supports the world Islamic conspiracy. :rolleyes:
Baltazar, it ought to have occurred to you by now that you have cast your seeds of hatred upon stony ground.
Now let’s all join hands and sing, shall we?
Intolerant verbal Onanism? I like the sound of that.
Hiyruu: Some proof of professors being silenced by colleges in thrall to the Jewish conspiracy please. Let’s not make these things up if we can’t support them. Also, would you expand on “setting up the war from behind the scenes” and provide some proof of this as well?
Hiyruu said:
How about a different “let’s say”? Let’s say you actually find out what you’re talking about before spewing it here?
The fact of the matter is that one of the most well-known Holocaust deniers of past years is a professor at Northwestern University. He has not been fired and even has used a Northwestern University website (as any professor can) to help promote his views. Northwestern University also happens to be in the heart of the (rather Jewish) Chicago suburbs.
Gosh, a person who defends anti-Semites doesn’t know what he’s talking about. What a shock…
I’ve never heard that Bnai Brith was right-wing, either. So, Hiyruu, could you give us examples of that occuring? Also, could you please let me know what that has to do with this thread, which, as I stated, contains neither a debate on history nor right wing Jewish groups?
Perhaps the most serious Holocaust revisionist, David Irving, was allowed to continue in his ways for decades before he put the legal rope around his neck, stood on a wobbly libel action case in the British courts and jumped off.
It was only when his views were openly challenged by an American journalist that he took her to court, hoping to claim damages for defamation and libel, that he was finally examined in a public arena against the so-called facts that he purported to be true.
The British legal system can be slow and it isn’t perfect but when it demands rigour in proving facts it is without peer, that legal sytsem, reonwned for its independance, looked at the facts presented by both sides and then declared that David Irving had no basis for his action with the final sting in the tail being that he was required to meet the legal costs of both sides, which has bankrupted him.
Point and lesson being that he had been left alone to make his statements, he won several cases when actions were brought against him, but in a nice twist of justice, when he brought a spurious case against another it did for him.
Balthazar
If you think you have never met a Jew then how do you know that you have not met one ?
Unfortunately I must decline, for a variety of reasons. But there are several Dopers who are familiar with Talmudic issues, and one or more of them usually comment when such issues arise.
That’s not what the Talmud says, or what I said. Its “most thieves are Jews”, not the other way around.
Obviously, no such statement could be made about every time and place. The statement was made with regards to an incident in which unknown thieves had tampered with some barrels of wine. The question arose as to whether one must suspect that they may have used the wine for idolatrous purposes. One of the lenient factors was the fact that “most thieves are Jews” making the suspicion less likely.
I did not bring this up to make a statement about Jews, but rather as an example of how the Talmud contains many blunt statements, both positive and negative, about Jew and Gentile. To assess the overall picture the totality must be considered in context. But it does provide ample opportunity for someone with an agenda to present a one-sided picture.
A side note of related interest: the type of accusations of Prof. Shahak are not new, but have been hurled by anti-Semites for generations. In many eras there were government-appointed censors, responsible for making sure that no “objectionable” material was printed. These people were frequently ignorant, which led to many bizarre misunderstandings. One example that I recall was when a censor objected to the Aramaic word min meaning “heretic”, and would replace it with “Gentile”. Unfortunately, he frequently confused this with the (more common) Hebrew/Aramaic word min meaning “type”. And thus he replaced “type of beans” with “Gentile of beans”, and so on.
I seem to recall this being discussed in a previous thread.