Darwinist troll gossips about my religion
In a comment on The Intersection blog, "Mel" told me,
The jerk is an anti-Semitic scumbag who thinks he has "outed" me as a former Jew. The dunghill thinks he is like the "informers" that the Nazis supposedly relied upon to identify Jews. The two biggest hoaxes in history: Darwinism and the "systematic" Jewish holocaust.
Gossiping about people's religious affiliations or beliefs is beyond the pale and I have asked The Intersection's bloggers to delete the comment immediately.
"apparently when you decided you weren’t Jewish any more you also decided to get rid of the Jewish tradition of learning"
The jerk is an anti-Semitic scumbag who thinks he has "outed" me as a former Jew. The dunghill thinks he is like the "informers" that the Nazis supposedly relied upon to identify Jews. The two biggest hoaxes in history: Darwinism and the "systematic" Jewish holocaust.
Gossiping about people's religious affiliations or beliefs is beyond the pale and I have asked The Intersection's bloggers to delete the comment immediately.
posted by Larry Fafarman | 7/03/2009 03:38:00 AM
7 Comments:
I thought you were against censorhip.
And what do you mean the the "systematic holocaust" being myth?
Goldstein's Student
By "systematic" Jewish holocaust, I mean a holocaust where there is objective and reliable identification of all Jews and all non-Jews. I assert that such identification is impossible.
And since no historian claims that particular viewpoint, I don't see how that is relevant.
WHAT particular viewpoint? And why can't a particular viewpoint be relevant without being claimed by a historian?
No historian believes that there was completely objective or completely reliable identification of Jews, nor do they believe all the Jews were identified.
You seem to base your claim of being a Holocaust Revisionist on a strawman.
Wrong. They call the holocaust systematic, not "systematic", and unlike a "systematic" holocaust, a systematic holocaust by definition requires a thorough and consistent effort to identify what the Nazi's defined as Jews. It does not have to be objective or reliable in order to be systematic. Those are just bonus traits (in the eyes of the Nazis).
For example, a census that includes questions regarding current and ancestral religious affiliations is a consistent but not necessarily reliable method of identifying Jews. Coupled with the thoroughness of its administration, such a census meets the definition of systematic.
How the data was gathered to identify the Jews has been well studied. However, few have tried to figure out what the Nazi's did with the data after it was gathered.
>>>>>> They call the holocaust systematic, not "systematic", <<<<<<<
I used the quote marks for emphasis, not because I thought that the word was being used in a way that the intended meaning was different from the correct meaning.
>>>>>> a systematic holocaust by definition requires a thorough and consistent effort to identify what the Nazi's defined as Jews. It does not have to be objective or reliable in order to be systematic <<<<<<<
Then the word "systematic" is meaningless -- it can mean anywhere between a 1 percent success rate and a 100 percent success rate in identifying Jews and non-Jews. Actually, identifying Jews and non-Jews is virtually impossible because we have no objective definition of the word "Jew." And If the Nazis had attempted to carry out a "systematic" Jewish holocaust, then we would have heard more complaints from people who believed that they were mistakenly identified as Jews.
>>>>>> For example, a census that includes questions regarding current and ancestral religious affiliations is a consistent but not necessarily reliable method of identifying Jews. Coupled with the thoroughness of its administration, such a census meets the definition of systematic. <<<<<<
The Nazis could control census-taking only in Germany, and that was only after they came to power. And the Nazis made no attempt to conceal their anti-Semitism, so Germans had a strong incentive against self-identifying themselves as Jews. Also, supposedly many "Jewish" victims of the holocaust did not even think of themselves as Jews.
Also, there is something I have wondered about -- why weren't Jews tattooed as soon as they were identified? Why did the Nazis wait until the Jews were in concentration camps to identify them with tattoos?
>>>>>> How the data was gathered to identify the Jews has been well studied. <<<<<<
Then where are the studies? Even Edwin Black, author of "IBM and the Holocaust," said that "few have asked" about how the Jews were identified.
>>>>>> However, few have tried to figure out what the Nazi's did with the data after it was gathered. <<<<<<
A stunning admission.
Post a Comment
<< Home