Home | Community | Message Board

Myco.ca - Spores & Cultivation Supplies
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Left Coast Kratom Premium Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]
OfflineSirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 5,790
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 2 months, 9 days
History of Genocide Under Debate
    #6368008 - 12/13/06 11:18 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

AHHHHH, how refreshing! Send this aspiring American to the debate!


KKK's David Duke Tells Iran Holocaust Conference That Gas Chambers Not Used to Kill Jews

Dec. 12: David Duke, former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, and former state representative in Louisiana, attends a conference on the Holocaust in Tehran.


TEHRAN, Iran — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's conference questioning the Holocaust came to an end Tuesday, but not before hearing former KKK Imperial Wizard David Duke say that gas chambers were not used to kill Jews.

"The Zionists have used the Holocaust as a weapon to deny the rights of the Palestinians and cover up the crimes of Israel," Duke told a gathering of nearly 70 "researchers" in Tehran at Ahmadinejad's invitation.

"This conference has an incredible impact on Holocaust studies all over the world," said Duke, a former state representative in Louisiana who twice ran for president.

"The Holocaust is the device used as the pillar of Zionist imperialism, Zionist aggression, Zionist terror and Zionist murder," Duke told The Associated Press.

Also at the end of the conference, Mohammad Ali Ramini, an Ahmadinejad adviser who has called the Holocaust a "myth," announced that he will chair a committee to find "the truth on the genocide of Jews."

Other members of the committee will be Robert Fuerisson, a French professor who denies the existence of gas chambers, along with Holocaust deniers from Syria, Switzerland, Austria, Canada, the United States and Bahrain.

Tuesday's speeches included Ali Akbar Mohtashamipour, a former interior minister and one of the founders of Lebanese militia Hezbollah, who labeled the Holocaust as a "tale."

"All the studies and research carried out so far have proven that there is no reason to believe that the Holocaust ever occurred and that it is only a tale," he stated.

Austrian historian Wolfgang Froehlich, who served a two-year jail sentence in his home country for denying the Holocaust, did not read out his speech — which was handed out to participants — for fear of being jailed again. Denying the Holocaust is a crime in a dozen European countries, including Austria, where British historian David Irving was jailed in February for three years for denying the Holocaust.

Nabil Soleiman, an adviser to the ministry of religious affairs in Syria, said, "If the Holocaust ever occurred, it was a conspiracy against the Arab-Islamic world as today the Middle East is still paying the consequences."

Ahmadinejad opened Tuesday's session by thanking God that the Zionist regime was declining, telling conference participants, “its lifetime will be over and their interests as well as reputation will be endangered,” the Islamic Republican News Agency reported.

International condemnation continued to pour in against the government-sponsored conference in Tehran, which has drawn Holocaust deniers from around the world.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said it was "shocking beyond belief" and called the conference "a symbol of sectarianism and hatred."

He said he saw little hope of engaging Iran in constructive action in the Middle East, saying, "I look around the region at the moment, and everything Iran is doing is negative."

The United States, which also condemned the gathering, has been considering whether to open a dialogue with Iran to get its help in calming neighboring Iraq. President George W. Bush has so far refused to approach Iran, accusing it of backing terrorism.

The White House condemned the gathering of Holocaust deniers in Tehran as "an affront to the entire civilized world as well as to the traditional Iranian values of tolerance and respect."

A statement from press secretary Tony Snow noted the meeting coincided with International Human Rights Week, which renews the pledges of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights drafted in the wake of World War II atrocities.

"The Iranian regime perversely seeks to call the historical fact of those atrocities into question and provide a platform for hatred," Snow said.

Earlier this year, Ahmadinejad described the Holocaust as a "myth" that has been used to impose the state of Israel on the Arab world and called for Israel to be wiped off the map.

"Ahmadinejad's Holocaust comment opened a new window in international relations on this issue. Twenty years ago, it was not possible to talk about [the] Holocaust and any scientific study was subject to punishment. This taboo has been broken, thanks to Mr. Ahmadinejad's initiative," Georges Theil of France told conference delegates on Tuesday.

Theil was convicted earlier this year in France for "contesting the truth of crimes against humanity" after he said the Nazis never used poison gas against Jews.

Michele Renouf, an Australian socialite supporter of "Holocaust skeptics," called Ahmadinejad "a hero" for opening a debate about the Holocaust. Renouf, a blonde former beauty queen, addressed the audience wearing a green robe and Islamic headscarf, abiding by Iranian law requiring women to cover their hair.

Frederick Toben, an Australian who in 1999 served jail time in Germany for his Holocaust views, told the conference in no uncertain terms that the number of Jews killed in Nazi death camps — an estimated 6 million — is a myth.

''The number of victims at the Auschwitz concentration camp could be about 2,007,'' Toben said. ''The railroad to the camp did not have enough capacity to transfer large numbers of Jews."

Among the 67 participants from 30 countries, who included some of Europe's most prominent Holocaust deniers, were two rabbis and four other members of the fringe group Jews United Against Zionism.

They were dressed in the traditional long black coats and black hats of ultra-Orthodox Jews. The group says the creation of the state of Israel violates Jewish law and argues that the Holocaust should not be used to justify its founding.


--------------------
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.”


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineThe_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN Flag
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: SirTripAlot]
    #6368371 - 12/14/06 12:47 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Right there joining Chomsky when it comes to cozying up with violent extremist regimes, not like im saying the zionist lobby isnt powerful in Washington and uses their power in the cause of Israel, But smoozing around with a guy sitting on the largest oil and natural gas reserves and he needs "nuclear energy", no ones going to think of your opinion as being rational.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinegregorio
Too Damn Old
Male

Registered: 09/08/05
Posts: 2,831
Loc: Classified
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: SirTripAlot]
    #6368787 - 12/14/06 03:03 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

but not before hearing former KKK Imperial Wizard David Duke say that gas chambers were not used to kill Jews.




I have always wondered what the big deal is about whether or not gas chambers were used by the NAZI's to kill Jews.

What difference does it make?

Millions of them were murdered and that is what is important to me, not the means of how they went about it.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMAGnum
veteran

Registered: 07/08/04
Posts: 2,421
Last seen: 9 years, 10 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: gregorio]
    #6368811 - 12/14/06 03:11 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Haulicost deniers are lame.


--------------------
Agent 727
7


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinemoho456
The Past Inside The Present
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/10/06
Posts: 223
Loc: Translinguistic Matter
Last seen: 6 years, 11 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: MAGnum]
    #6369547 - 12/14/06 10:45 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

I think that if the Holocaust did in fact happen, it would be a terrible thing.

Although, I don't think anyone here has nearly enough information to make any substantiated claims for or against.

People strike down drugs out of ignorance, what if the Holocaust never did happen? What if all this time we shit all over the nazi's and arabs for no reason?

It would have been a convenient situation for the United states in a time of political and economic instability, a time when the country was

Extraordinary vulnerable to a Fascist Revolution.

Just a hypothesis, not denying or confirming anything.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 14 years, 2 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: gregorio]
    #6369568 - 12/14/06 10:52 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

gregorio said:
I have always wondered what the big deal is about whether or not gas chambers were used by the NAZI's to kill Jews.

What difference does it make?

Millions of them were murdered and that is what is important to me, not the means of how they went about it.



The big deal is that it was a war and many millions of people died. 6 million Jews were killed, but so were 17 million Germans (in total) and 25 million Russians (again, in total).

If the dead bodies are found malnourished, shot, injured, etc. then the holocaust deniers can claim that the deaths were an inevitable result of the war. Even starvation alone wouldn't be enough to prove the holocaust because of the vast amount of starvation in Ukraine, Lithuania, and other parts of what would become the Soviet Union. That's the argument that holocaust deniers want to make: That the Jews died because it was the biggest war ever, not because there was a concerted effort to single out and kill them specifically.

However, if you can show the existance of gas chambers, then there is no longer any denying the holocaust. Clearly people who died, en masse, in gas chambers were being singled out and exterminated. Once you accept the existence of gas chambers (which I most definitely do), then the entire argument about the Jewish deaths being nothing more than an unfortunate result of armed conflict falls apart.

@moho456

I sincerely hope you're joking. Please look into the Neuremburg trials if you're not. The amount of eyewitnesses, captured documents, photographs, and movie film is overwhelming. Not to mention the problems that arose when the Soviets and the allies disagreed about how to conduct the trials, and the stringent rules of evidence that were imposed.

I'm sorry, but claiming there isn't enough evidence just sounds naive to anyone who's spent a couple hours reading about what happened at Neuremburg.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Economist]
    #6369788 - 12/14/06 12:28 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

I am not denying the holocaust, but there are some very interesting things to consider. I would argue that it was greatly exaggerated, by wealthy bankers and movie makers. Keep in mind how many movies have been made on this subject.....google it if you like.

1)The so called evidence. The photos and films, while disturbing does not prove genocide. It proves poor conditions for people taken prisoner during a fucking war. 

2)What would be in it for Jewish people to lie about such a thing? How about hundreds of billions of dollars in reparations, a country, and global sympathy. The holocaust is one of the most well known, talked about subjects in history. Google the word holocaust and see what comes up.

I don't doubt the Jews were treated like shit during WW2, but so were the Germans as Russian armies advanced. So were the French, and English, and countless others. Who do we constantly hear about though, the 6 million chosen. I think it would be more accurate to assume that the "concentration camps" were probably prison/work camps.

Why kill people when you can force them to work for your war effort.

Also, in Winston Churchill's extensive accounts of WW2, not once is the holocaust mentioned. It was an event that seemed to gain more knowledge and attention as time went on.

I will finish with a quote from 1984. Those who control the past control the future. Those who control the present, control the past.

Just my two cents, now you can proceed to call me a Nazi, though my grandfather was killed by one too. (where is his reparations?) :confused:

Edit: One very important point I forgot.

This is the ONLY section of history, which is illegal to debate, punishable by prison, in many countries. If that is not a red flag, I don't know what is.

The truth should be able to stand up to any debate, and win. Anyone feel the same way?


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Edited by Hank, FTW (12/14/06 12:31 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 14 years, 2 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6369983 - 12/14/06 01:21 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
1)The so called evidence. The photos and films, while disturbing does not prove genocide. It proves poor conditions for people taken prisoner during a fucking war.



So, you believe the extensive documentation kept by the Nazis on how the Jews were being moved, where they were being moved to, and how many were being "liquidated" was all just evidence of poor conditions during the war?

If so, why didn't England, or the United States, or any other participant keep similar records on how and where the Jews were located, what resources were being devoted to corralling them, and finally how rapid their liquidation could be carried out?

These records are real, they all met stringent evidence requirements to be submitted to the Neuremburg trials, and they can all be retrieved at various libraries and museums today.

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
2)What would be in it for Jewish people to lie about such a thing? How about hundreds of billions of dollars in reparations, a country, and global sympathy.



None of this was guaranteed at the end of the conflict. There was no way to know what the reparation methods would be (if any).

Also, what "hundreds of billions of dollars" are you talking about? Decisions to pay reparations weren't made until the late 1990s. Are you seriously suggesting that the Jewish peoples made up a lie on the off chance of making money 50 years later?

Turned on its head, a better question to ask would be why do the holocaust deniers only attack the Jews? Even the smallest estimates put Gypsy executions during the holocaust at hundreds of thousands, and yet no one ever claims that the "Dirty Gypsys are just making this shit up!"

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
I think it would be more accurate to assume that the "concentration camps" were probably prison/work camps.



Then maybe you could explain why the Nazis meticulously documented the output of their actual work camps and industry, and yet killing camps like Auschwitz do not have associated production records? Why would the Nazis keep very specific records of the war production from ALL OTHER work camps and yet magically not have records of war output from the camps with the gas chambers?

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
Why kill people when you can force them to work for your war effort.



So, are you suggesting that the court-documented killings of African American slaves in America also didn't happen because no one would ever kill someone who works for them for free?

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
Also, in Winston Churchill's extensive accounts of WW2, not once is the holocaust mentioned. It was an event that seemed to gain more knowledge and attention as time went on.



Maybe you'd better check your history again. It's true that Churchill's book doesn't mention it, but his "extensive accounts" are another story entirely, and the knowledge of the holocaust began well before the war's end.

I suggest looking up the declaration of 17 December 1942 if you still don't believe that the holocaust was recognized well before the war's end.

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
Just my two cents, now you can proceed to call me a Nazi, though my grandfather was killed by one too. (where is his reparations?)



American soldiers were all paid death benefits, I'm sorry if Canada was not as well organized.

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
This is the ONLY section of history, which is illegal to debate, punishable by prison, in many countries. If that is not a red flag, I don't know what is.

The truth should be able to stand up to any debate, and win. Anyone feel the same way?



I agree that it shouldn't be illegal to debate, and thankfully here in the United States it isn't. And yet with the freedom to debate the holocaust in the United States the conclusion among academics time and time again has remained the same: It Happened.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Economist]
    #6370121 - 12/14/06 02:06 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Economist said:
Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
1)The so called evidence. The photos and films, while disturbing does not prove genocide. It proves poor conditions for people taken prisoner during a fucking war.



So, you believe the extensive documentation kept by the Nazis on how the Jews were being moved, where they were being moved to, and how many were being "liquidated" was all just evidence of poor conditions during the war?

Again, how does this prove genocide. How easy would it have been to shoot every Jew on spot, from the get go. Why they spent all this money moving them around, housing them, feeding them(though poorly) is a big mystery to me.

If so, why didn't England, or the United States, or any other participant keep similar records on how and where the Jews were located, what resources were being devoted to corralling them, and finally how rapid their liquidation could be carried out?

Jews were considered an enemy in Germany, as they had declared "financial war" via sanctions as early as 1930. Meanwhile they were securing positions of power in USA and England, interesting that they would soon declare war on Germany(I am not defending Germany's provocation of WW2).

http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/articles/jdecwar.html

They were not singled out for their religion, they were singled out for their hostility towards German financial interests.



These records are real, they all met stringent evidence requirements to be submitted to the Nuremberg trials, and they can all be retrieved at various libraries and museums today.

Yeah, after 50 years, another RED FLAG.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/11/18/world/main2199121.shtml


Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
2)What would be in it for Jewish people to lie about such a thing? How about hundreds of billions of dollars in reparations, a country, and global sympathy.



None of this was guaranteed at the end of the conflict.  There was no way to know what the reparation methods would be (if any).

Also, what "hundreds of billions of dollars" are you talking about?  Decisions to pay reparations weren't made until the late 1990s.  Are you seriously suggesting that the Jewish peoples made up a lie on the off chance of making money 50 years later?

No, they exaggerated the truth to gain a country and world sympathy. Yeah Germany should have started paying restitution while much of it was behind the iron curtain. The fact is, they are paying the money. They are the only people to be paid by a government for such a thing, as far as I know. Why doesn't Germany repay the Russians, the Americans, the English....ETC ETC. People die in wars, Jews today seem to be cleaning up from this fact of life.

Turned on its head, a better question to ask would be why do the holocaust deniers only attack the Jews?  Even the smallest estimates put Gypsy executions during the holocaust at hundreds of thousands, and yet no one ever claims that the "Dirty Gypsys are just making this shit up!"

Did the Gypsies get a country? Do they receive billions a year in restitution? I don't think anybody is flat out denying the holocaust, but rather pointing out that it was likely exaggerated and exploited for profit, by a certain group.

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
I think it would be more accurate to assume that the "concentration camps" were probably prison/work camps.



Then maybe you could explain why the Nazis meticulously documented the output of their actual work camps and industry, and yet killing camps like Auschwitz do not have associated production records?  Why would the Nazis keep very specific records of the war production from ALL OTHER work camps and yet magically not have records of war output from the camps with the gas chambers?

First off, have you ever seen pictures of these so called gas chambers? Flimsy doors, and ventilation ducts....in gas chambers. Okay, if you say so. I will ask, why goto all the trouble to kill people. Shoot them for next to no money, or stab/beat them for free.

Again, these records were not available to the public for over 50 years, RED FLAG.


Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
Why kill people when you can force them to work for your war effort.



So, are you suggesting that the court-documented killings of African American slaves in America also didn't happen because no one would ever kill someone who works for them for free?

No, but was America fighting a total war at the time? Please do not use examples that can not relate.

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
Also, in Winston Churchill's extensive accounts of WW2, not once is the holocaust mentioned. It was an event that seemed to gain more knowledge and attention as time went on.



Maybe you'd better check your history again.  It's true that Churchill's book doesn't mention it, but his "extensive accounts" are another story entirely, and the knowledge of the holocaust began well before the war's end.

It is not mentioned in one of the most extensive accounts of WW2, by a great man and the leader of the main enemy of Germany(their country was destroyed by the Germans). That was my point.

I suggest looking up the declaration of 17 December 1942 if you still don't believe that the holocaust was recognized well before the war's end.

Please elaborate.
Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
Just my two cents, now you can proceed to call me a Nazi, though my grandfather was killed by one too. (where is his reparations?)



American soldiers were all paid death benefits, I'm sorry if Canada was not as well organized.

I'm sure the families of the dead soldiers got paid equal to what the holocaust survivors were paid :rolleyes:. People who would not fight for their own freedom....who had to be saved by us.  :rolleyes:

That reminds me of another thing....for a holocaust, there sure are a lot of survivors. If Hitler was trying to kill the entire people, why not just shoot them all while in camps?? Please answer this question.

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
This is the ONLY section of history, which is illegal to debate, punishable by prison, in many countries. If that is not a red flag, I don't know what is.

The truth should be able to stand up to any debate, and win. Anyone feel the same way?



I agree that it shouldn't be illegal to debate, and thankfully here in the United States it isn't.  And yet with the freedom to debate the holocaust in the United States the conclusion among academics time and time again has remained the same: It Happened.
This fact alone should tell you there is something fishy going on. We are a product of a lifetime of "learning" about the holocaust. I used to never question it(mainly out of fear) but it just seems all to Orwellian for me to ignore it anymore. My grandmother(from france) has told me countless stories of her living in occupied france. She has told of some horrific things, but never of a people being systematically wiped out by gas.





--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleSlashOZ
:D
Male

Registered: 10/20/06
Posts: 3,557
Loc: Following the water cycle
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: SirTripAlot]
    #6370156 - 12/14/06 02:12 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

just read some of hitlers speeches or just listen to them. yeah there was a holocaust i am positive. i find it far fetched that jewish leaders were like hey wwII just happened let us fabricate the biggest lie in history so we can have isreal created by the international community as a country for the jews and then have that scheme actually work because the whole world is naive enough to buy it. if that happened the moon is made of cheese and i'm dick fucking cheney.


--------------------
"Life sucks but in this really beautiful way" - Axl Rose
"Life's a bitch and then you die that's why we get high cuz you never know when you're gonna go." - NAS
"When people don't know what you're about they put you down and shut you out" - Black Sabbath
"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" - Gandhi
"Look up at me I am God, look down on me and I am evil, look at me I am you." - Charles Manson.
"Don't question my reality." - Me (as far as I know)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: SlashOZ]
    #6370183 - 12/14/06 02:19 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Again, nobody is saying that.

The holocaust is being exaggerated and exploited for the benefit of 1 people, in a war where millions others have died. It is like their lives are worth more than everyone Else's.

Am I the only one who sees this?????

If hitler had wanted them all dead, they would have all be dead.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370228 - 12/14/06 02:32 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Okay, if you say so. I will ask, why goto all the trouble to kill people. Shoot them for next to no money, or stab/beat them for free.




They were using firing squads at first, because of how cheap it was. The German officers complained of low troope morale because of this, however.

Quote:

That reminds me of another thing....for a holocaust, there sure are a lot of survivors. If Hitler was trying to kill the entire people, why not just shoot them all while in camps?? Please answer this question.




Much of the movement of Jews into camps didn't occur until late into the war. Look up the history of Dachau and Auschwitz; they were heavily used until the last couple years before Germany surrendered.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Redstorm]
    #6370244 - 12/14/06 02:35 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Okay, I can see how a crazy Hitler, losing the war might say "finish off all the Jews before they close in on us". So why not order them shot. I don't think he would care much about moral at that point.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineThe_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN Flag
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Redstorm]
    #6370258 - 12/14/06 02:42 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Its very difficult to systematically kill so many people, (of course thats what IBM was there for), so usually their prisoners were divided up between going to work camps and death camps, also on their particular infration on the Reich. Gypsies,Communists,Slavs,Russians,and Poles.

Most of the times the germans would establish death camps close to cities with large jewish populations, especially in Poland which had numerous death camps.

The Jewish population in Europe couldnt of been more then 30 or 40 million, 6 million jews killed is a substantial number, and considering the amount Stalin forced into Pogroms and killed, even though Stalin himself had jewish blood.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleJonnyOnTheSpot
Sober Surfer
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/27/02
Posts: 11,527
Loc: North Carolina
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370259 - 12/14/06 02:42 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

oh dear... :rolleyes:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: SirTripAlot]
    #6370274 - 12/14/06 02:46 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

If the holocaust happened exactly as it has been stated, no reason we can't debate it, end of story.

When I first found out it was illegal to question in many countries, my eyes were opened.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 14 years, 2 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370384 - 12/14/06 03:11 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Hank, FTW

I don't really know where to begin, it's hard to debate this subject because you seem to be missing some basic knowledge of the realities of World War II.

To begin with, the gas chambers were initially filled with Carbon Monoxide in order to kill those inside. This is found in both documents (Gerstein Report) and from eye witness testimony. As anyone who's heard about Carbon Monoxide deaths on the news knows, you don't need anything special to build a carbon monoxide gas chamber. People in America die every year because they accidentally leave their cars running in garages located below their bedrooms.

Thus, carbon monoxide gas chambers really don't need to be anything more than a room with a door and vents for the gas.

Next, it's well known that Germany had a shortage of nitrates, and that gunpowder was thus in short supply. So, not only was there an issue with troop morale (as Redstorm pointed out) but there was also the issue of expending gunpowder when you didn't have to.

You also seem to be missing some cause-and-effect. The Jews tried to impose financial strains on Germany because Hitler rose to power in the midst of anti-Semitic rhetoric. This is identified by Churchill in 1933, and he even recommends the Jews take this sort of action. (http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=605 )

Thus the Jews were singled out, and then they began to fight back, they were not singled out because they were fighting.

Additionally, the news story you linked states that the documents were held by the Red Cross for 50 years, but that they are also not the full extent of the documents. Are you suggesting the Red Cross is complicit in a conspiracy? And how do you account for the documents not held for 50 years, why doesn't their existence dimish the so-called "red flag"?

I also think you don't understand how reparations work at all. While the Jews have infact recieved the bulk of it, money has also been paid out to the Gypsys and Slavic peoples who were targetted by the Nazi regime.

I don't know what you want elaborated about the 17 December declaration of 1942, except that Churchill sent his foreign secretary to the house of commons with the message: "The German authorities are now carrying into effect Hitler's oft repeated intention to exterminate the Jewish people of Europe," (Eden was the secretary)

I'd say that's pretty good confirmation that the holocaust was well known even before the war's end.

I also don't know what you're talking about with the Orwell and the "lifetime of learning". In America it is 100% legal to debate the holocaust. America has its share of holocaust deniers, who are free to state their views. Mainstream historians have listened to these views, examined the evidence, and determined that they are wrong. "Orwellian" as you keep suggesting, would describe a world where you must accept the holocaust as fact. That does not accurately describe the situation in America, and it is therefore not relevant. You are free to take any position on the holocaust that you want, and with this freedom the vast majority of mainstream academia has decided that it did infact happen.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Economist]
    #6370425 - 12/14/06 03:22 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Yeah, they are free to state their views, with out being examined by unbiased people....

All I am saying is, if hitler wanted them all dead, they would all be dead. That is my main point. My other point, is they were not the only people to suffer in that war, so they should stop acting like this was the case. Maybe they should thank people like my grandfather, who died to help save them. I guess this is why I am bitter deep down.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleJonnyOnTheSpot
Sober Surfer
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/27/02
Posts: 11,527
Loc: North Carolina
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370452 - 12/14/06 03:29 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:


All I am saying is, if hitler wanted them all dead, they would all be dead. That is my main point.




hitler also wanted to take over europe, but he didn't get to do that either.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370454 - 12/14/06 03:30 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

All I am saying is, if hitler wanted them all dead, they would all be dead. That is my main point.




Do you have any evidence that they had the means to both exterminate the entire "Jewish race" and fight a two-front war?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRoosterCogburn
Fearless,one-eyed U.S.Marshall
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/25/06
Posts: 8,508
Loc: Dirty South, NJ
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370458 - 12/14/06 03:31 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

All I am saying is, if hitler wanted them all dead, they would all be dead.




Why?

I think you are underestimating how difficult it actually is to capture and kill ~40,000,000 people.

They were trying as best as they could, and they did a damn "good" job for the technology they had. Mass killing would be more feasible today.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: RoosterCogburn]
    #6370462 - 12/14/06 03:32 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Not the entire Jewish population, just those he had imprisoned.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRoosterCogburn
Fearless,one-eyed U.S.Marshall
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/25/06
Posts: 8,508
Loc: Dirty South, NJ
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370728 - 12/14/06 05:02 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Ok, it's still hard to kill hundreds of thousands of people... The point is the German's were trying very hard to exterminate an entire class of people AND wage world war... It was simply too hard to do, and then the war ended.

Not being able to complete such a hienous task doesn't make it any less heinous.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinerubixcubies
porch monkey ferlyfe
Male User Gallery

Registered: 08/05/06
Posts: 1,218
Loc: ottawa on
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: RoosterCogburn]
    #6370736 - 12/14/06 05:06 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

who cares if the holocaust happened we should be focusing on injustices in the present not quibbling over some shit that happened half a century ago that WE CANT CHANGE.


--------------------
i'm a very evolved ape you know.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinemoho456
The Past Inside The Present
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/10/06
Posts: 223
Loc: Translinguistic Matter
Last seen: 6 years, 11 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6370743 - 12/14/06 05:08 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
I am not denying the holocaust, but there are some very interesting things to consider. I would argue that it was greatly exaggerated, by wealthy bankers and movie makers. Keep in mind how many movies have been made on this subject.....google it if you like.

1)The so called evidence. The photos and films, while disturbing does not prove genocide. It proves poor conditions for people taken prisoner during a fucking war. 

2)What would be in it for Jewish people to lie about such a thing? How about hundreds of billions of dollars in reparations, a country, and global sympathy. The holocaust is one of the most well known, talked about subjects in history. Google the word holocaust and see what comes up.

I don't doubt the Jews were treated like shit during WW2, but so were the Germans as Russian armies advanced. So were the French, and English, and countless others. Who do we constantly hear about though, the 6 million chosen. I think it would be more accurate to assume that the "concentration camps" were probably prison/work camps.

Why kill people when you can force them to work for your war effort.

Also, in Winston Churchill's extensive accounts of WW2, not once is the holocaust mentioned. It was an event that seemed to gain more knowledge and attention as time went on.

I will finish with a quote from 1984. Those who control the past control the future. Those who control the present, control the past.

Just my two cents, now you can proceed to call me a Nazi, though my grandfather was killed by one too. (where is his reparations?) :confused:

Edit: One very important point I forgot.

This is the ONLY section of history, which is illegal to debate, punishable by prison, in many countries. If that is not a red flag, I don't know what is.

The truth should be able to stand up to any debate, and win. Anyone feel the same way?




Very good counterpoint information brought to the table here.

Telling us that "I read a book about it." Doesn't mean shit.

The line from 1984 rings very true, look at how we demonize fascism and communism.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: moho456]
    #6370810 - 12/14/06 05:30 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Telling us that "I read a book about it." Doesn't mean shit.




Where else are we supposed to get information about the past other than from accounts by those who were alive during that time?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: moho456]
    #6370812 - 12/14/06 05:31 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

I knew many survivors. I saw their tattoos. The more we get removed from the actual event the more there will be assholes who deny it.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineEconomist
in training
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/11/05
Posts: 1,285
Last seen: 14 years, 2 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6371175 - 12/14/06 07:42 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:
All I am saying is, if hitler wanted them all dead, they would all be dead.



And on that note...

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL!!!

AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT!!!



Edit: I'm pretty out of my mind right now (in the best sense) and this seemed a perfect reply, if you don't like it, hang out with me and the spirit of Andy Kaufman sometime...


Edited by Economist (12/14/06 07:47 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: SirTripAlot]
    #6375071 - 12/15/06 09:30 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

http://eugie.typepad.com/from_new_york_and_all_ove/2006/12/how_my_grandad_.html

My father’s father died when I was 16, 15 years ago. Or was I 18? I don’t remember exactly. It was a long time ago. My memory fails me, the daguerreotype has faded. I know that he was. And then he was not. I know this because I saw him when he was. And then I saw him again. And he wasn’t any more. He lived, and then he died. It is a fact.

My grandfather had a little sister. I know what she looked like. I have seen the photo. A 1941 photo. Or was it 1940? I don’t remember exactly. It was a long time ago that I saw it last. My grandfather knew. But he has been dead for a while, so he cannot tell me. If the photo was taken in 1941, that is the year my grandfather’s sister died.

In his 60s, towards the end of his days, my grandfather got very sentimental. He had had three heart attacks, the first one when he was in his 40s, so he wasn’t good for much towards the end of his days. He would sit on the couch, clutching his sister’s old photo, and cry. About 40 years had passed, but he would still cry. I can’t say for sure, but I suspect that, many years after my parents go, may they live a long life, I will cry exactly like he did. My people, the Jews, are like that. Cry babies.

So his sister lived, and then she died. It is a fact. I know that, because I have seen my grandfather cry over her photo.

I know how she died. I wasn’t there, because I had not been born and wasn’t born until 34 years later. I wish I had remembered the year of the photo. Anyway, I wasn’t there. My grandfather wasn’t there either. He was in the Red Army. He was, don’t laugh, a trumpet-player in the Red Army. He was a trumpet player in the Red Army, and he must have been a good one, because he got medals. I wasn’t there when they gave him the medals, but I know he got them, because I have seen them, and they are still at my grandmother’s. May she live a long life too.

Even though neither my grandfather nor I were there, I know how my grandfather’s sister died, because I have seen the letter that describes that. Yellowed paper, somewhat smudged but largely clear handwriting. Dated 1945. Written in Ukrainian. To my grandfather, from my grandfather’s mother’s former neighbor. A Ukrainian, not a Jew. I don’t speak Ukrainian, but I speak Russian. Ukrainian is very similar to Russian. I can understand most of the letter. What I didn’t understand, my father translated for me.

My grandfather’s sister was living with her mother, in a little village in the Ukraine, when she died, in 1941. The mother was also, of course, my grandfather’s mother. That’s where he left them when, at 17, he went to war to be a trumpeteer in the Red Army - in their house in the village. I am glad I have never seen it.

My grandfather and his sister had many relatives. The exact count is not known. My grandfather used to know, but, as time went by and his mind weakened, his estimates started to vary. Somewhere around 20 seems to be about the right number. You can count 16 in the group photo from 1940, or is it 1941, that I have seen. You only get 8, I think, if you count the names mentioned in the yellowed letter. Yes, I think it’s 8 names that the neighbor lists as my grandfather’s relatives who were lined up outside the village and shot by Germans and Ukrainians in 1941. It’s 8 if you just count the names, but then the letter does refer to “and everyone else.” I don’t remember the


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 4 months, 16 days
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6378468 - 12/17/06 03:32 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

You only get 8, I think, if you count the names mentioned in the yellowed letter. Yes, I think it’s 8 names that the neighbor lists as my grandfather’s relatives who were lined up outside the village and shot by Germans and Ukrainians in 1941.




But the president of Iran, along with the leader of the KKK, told me that it never happened, and they have no motive to lie. Why would I believe you, or academics that have researched the meticulous records kept by the Nazi's, over Duke or Ahmadinejad. Just because there is undeniable and overwhelming evidence that genocide did indeed take place, doesn't mean it actually happened. (sarcasm)


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Seuss]
    #6378828 - 12/17/06 10:52 AM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Here's HankFTW:
Quote:


This fact alone should tell you there is something fishy going on. We are a product of a lifetime of "learning" about the holocaust. I used to never question it(mainly out of fear) but it just seems all to Orwellian for me to ignore it anymore. My grandmother(from france) has told me countless stories of her living in occupied france. She has told of some horrific things, but never of a people being systematically wiped out by gas.




Hank's "reasoning" here seems to amount to pointing out that since we have been told something is true for so long it must surely be a lie. Brilliant. Just brilliant. There is more than a slight whiff of pathological paranoia in this "reasoning".

As to Granny living in France not seeing gas chambers, I would direct Hank's attention to any map from WW2 locating the death camps. There weren't any in France. He might want to ask his grandmother about why so many of the French were ever so helpful in identifying the Jews in their midst and helping to load them on to the trains. I suspect that many European nations have restricted holocaust denial because they know in their black hearts that they are a little too susceptible to repeating their behaviour


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinegluke bastid
Stinky Bum
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/21/00
Posts: 3,322
Loc: Charm City
Last seen: 3 years, 10 days
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6378967 - 12/17/06 12:21 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:

All I am saying is, if hitler wanted them all dead, they would all be dead. That is my main point.




He did want them all dead. It was known as Hitler's "final solution" to the "Jewish Problem" and was discussed openly throughout the Third Reich beginning in 1942.

wikipedia article Shoah education


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil
 
- Thomas Paine


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleLuddite
I watch Fox News
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: RoosterCogburn]
    #6379818 - 12/17/06 06:12 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Incredibly huge genocide caused by Islam in Asia which is unkown or ignored by the left.




Case Study:
Genocide in Bangladesh, 1971
Summary

The mass killings in Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) in 1971 vie with the annihilation of the Soviet POWs, the holocaust against the Jews, and the genocide in Rwanda as the most concentrated act of genocide in the twentieth century. In an attempt to crush forces seeking independence for East Pakistan, the West Pakistani military regime unleashed a systematic campaign of mass murder which aimed at killing millions of Bengalis, and likely succeeded in doing so.

The background

East and West Pakistan were forged in the cauldron of independence for the Indian sub-continent, ruled for two hundred years by the British. Despite the attempts of Mahatma Gandhi and others to prevent division along religious and ethnic lines, the departing British and various Indian politicians pressed for the creation of two states, one Hindu-dominated (India), the other Muslim-dominated (Pakistan). The partition of India in 1947 was one of the great tragedies of the century. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed in sectarian violence and military clashes, as Hindus fled to India and Muslims to Pakistan -- though large minorities remained in each country.

The arrangement proved highly unstable, leading to three major wars between India and Pakistan, and very nearly a fourth fullscale conflict in 1998-99. (Kashmir, divided by a ceasefire line after the first war in 1947, became one of the world's most intractable trouble-spots.) Not the least of the difficulties was the fact that the new state of Pakistan consisted of two "wings," divided by hundreds of miles of Indian territory and a gulf of ethnic identification. Over the decades, particularly after Pakistani democracy was stifled by a military dictatorship (1958), the relationship between East and West became progressively more corrupt and neo-colonial in character, and opposition to West Pakistani domination grew among the Bengali population.


Catastrophic floods struck Bangladesh in August 1970, and the regime was widely seen as having botched (or ignored) its relief duties. The disaster gave further impetus to the Awami League, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. The League demanded regional autonomy for East Pakistan, and an end to military rule. In national elections held in December, the League won an overwhelming victory across Bengali territory.

On February 22, 1971 the generals in West Pakistan took a decision to crush the Awami League and its supporters. It was recognized from the first that a campaign of genocide would be necessary to eradicate the threat: "Kill three million of them," said President Yahya Khan at the February conference, "and the rest will eat out of our hands." (Robert Payne, Massacre [1972], p. 50.) On March 25 the genocide was launched. The university in Dacca was attacked and students exterminated in their hundreds. Death squads roamed the streets of Dacca, killing some 7,000 people in a single night. It was only the beginning. "Within a week, half the population of Dacca had fled, and at least 30,000 people had been killed. Chittagong, too, had lost half its population. All over East Pakistan people were taking flight, and it was estimated that in April some thirty million people [!] were wandering helplessly across East Pakistan to escape the grasp of the military." (Payne, Massacre, p. 48.) Ten million refugees fled to India, overwhelming that country's resources and spurring the eventual Indian military intervention. (The population of Bangladesh/East Pakistan at the outbreak of the genocide was about 75 million.)

On April 10, the surviving leadership of the Awami League declared Bangladesh independent. The Mukhta Bahini (liberation forces) were mobilized to confront the West Pakistani army. They did so with increasing skill and effectiveness, utilizing their knowledge of the terrain and ability to blend with the civilian population in classic guerrilla fashion. By the end of the war, the tide had turned, and vast areas of Bangladesh had been liberated by the popular resistance.

The gendercide against Bengali men

The war against the Bengali population proceeded in classic gendercidal fashion. According to Anthony Mascarenhas, "There is no doubt whatsoever about the targets of the genocide":

They were: (1) The Bengali militarymen of the East Bengal Regiment, the East Pakistan Rifles, police and para-military Ansars and Mujahids. (2) The Hindus -- "We are only killing the men; the women and children go free. We are soldiers not cowards to kill them ..." I was to hear in Comilla [site of a major military base] [Comments R.J. Rummel: "One would think that murdering an unarmed man was a heroic act" (Death By Government, p. 323)] (3) The Awami Leaguers -- all office bearers and volunteers down to the lowest link in the chain of command. (4) The students -- college and university boys and some of the more militant girls. (5) Bengali intellectuals such as professors and teachers whenever damned by the army as "militant." (Anthony Mascarenhas, The Rape of Bangla Desh [Delhi: Vikas Publications, 1972(?)], pp. 116-17.)
Mascarenhas's summary makes clear the linkages between gender and social class (the "intellectuals," "professors," "teachers," "office bearers," and -- obviously -- "militarymen" can all be expected to be overwhelmingly if not exclusively male, although in many cases their families died or fell victim to other atrocities alongside them). In this respect, the Bangladesh events can be classed as a combined gendercide and elitocide, with both strategies overwhelmingly targeting males for the most annihilatory excesses.


Younger men and adolescent boys, of whatever social class, were equally targets. According to Rounaq Jahan, "All through the liberation war, able-bodied young men were suspected of being actual or potential freedom fighters. Thousands were arrested, tortured, and killed. Eventually cities and towns became bereft of young males who either took refuge in India or joined the liberation war." Especially "during the first phase" of the genocide, he writes, "young able-bodied males were the victims of indiscriminate killings." ("Genocide in Bangladesh," in Totten et al., Century of Genocide, p. 298.) R.J. Rummel likewise writes that "the Pakistan army [sought] out those especially likely to join the resistance -- young boys. Sweeps were conducted of young men who were never seen again. Bodies of youths would be found in fields, floating down rivers, or near army camps. As can be imagined, this terrorized all young men and their families within reach of the army. Most between the ages of fifteen and twenty-five began to flee from one village to another and toward India. Many of those reluctant to leave their homes were forced to flee by mothers and sisters concerned for their safety." (Death By Government, p. 329.) Rummel describes (p. 323) a chilling gendercidal ritual, reminiscent of Nazi procedure towards Jewish males: "In what became province-wide acts of genocide, Hindus were sought out and killed on the spot. As a matter of course, soldiers would check males for the obligated circumcision among Moslems. If circumcised, they might live; if not, sure death."

Robert Payne describes scenes of systematic mass slaughter around Dacca that, while not explicitly "gendered" in his account, bear every hallmark of classic gender-selective roundups and gendercidal slaughters of non-combatant men:


In the dead region surrounding Dacca, the military authorities conducted experiments in mass extermination in places unlikely to be seen by journalists. At Hariharpara, a once thriving village on the banks of the Buriganga River near Dacca, they found the three elements necessary for killing people in large numbers: a prison in which to hold the victims, a place for executing the prisoners, and a method for disposing of the bodies. The prison was a large riverside warehouse, or godown, belonging to the Pakistan National Oil Company, the place of execution was the river edge, or the shallows near the shore, and the bodies were disposed of by the simple means of permitting them to float downstream. The killing took place night after night. Usually the prisoners were roped together and made to wade out into the river. They were in batches of six or eight, and in the light of a powerful electric arc lamp, they were easy targets, black against the silvery water. The executioners stood on the pier, shooting down at the compact bunches of prisoners wading in the water. There were screams in the hot night air, and then silence. The prisoners fell on their sides and their bodies lapped against the shore. Then a new bunch of prisoners was brought out, and the process was repeated. In the morning the village boatmen hauled the bodies into midstream and the ropes binding the bodies were cut so that each body drifted separately downstream. (Payne, Massacre [Macmillan, 1973], p. 55.)
Strikingly similar and equally hellish scenes are described in the case-studies of genocide in Armenia and the Nanjing Massacre of 1937.

Atrocities against Bengali women

As was also the case in Armenia and Nanjing, Bengali women were targeted for gender-selective atrocities and abuses, notably gang sexual assault and rape/murder, from the earliest days of the Pakistani genocide. Indeed, despite (and in part because of) the overwhelming targeting of males for mass murder, it is for the systematic brutalization of women that the "Rape of Bangladesh" is best known to western observers.

In her ground-breaking book, Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, Susan Brownmiller likened the 1971 events in Bangladesh to the Japanese rapes in Nanjing and German rapes in Russia during World War II. "... 200,000, 300,000 or possibly 400,000 women (three sets of statistics have been variously quoted) were raped. Eighty percent of the raped women were Moslems, reflecting the population of Bangladesh, but Hindu and Christian women were not exempt. ... Hit-and-run rape of large numbers of Bengali women was brutally simple in terms of logistics as the Pakistani regulars swept through and occupied the tiny, populous land ..." (p. 81).

Typical was the description offered by reporter Aubrey Menen of one such assault, which targeted a recently-married woman:

Two [Pakistani soldiers] went into the room that had been built for the bridal couple. The others stayed behind with the family, one of them covering them with his gun. They heard a barked order, and the bridegroom's voice protesting. Then there was silence until the bride screamed. Then there was silence again, except for some muffled cries that soon subsided. In a few minutes one of the soldiers came out, his uniform in disarray. He grinned to his companions. Another soldier took his place in the extra room. And so on, until all the six had raped the belle of the village. Then all six left, hurriedly. The father found his daughter lying on the string cot unconscious and bleeding. Her husband was crouched on the floor, kneeling over his vomit. (Quoted in Brownmiller, Against Our Will, p. 82.)
"Rape in Bangladesh had hardly been restricted to beauty," Brownmiller writes. "Girls of eight and grandmothers of seventy-five had been sexually assaulted ... Pakistani soldiers had not only violated Bengali women on the spot; they abducted tens of hundreds and held them by force in their military barracks for nightly use." Some women may have been raped as many as eighty times in a night (Brownmiller, p. 83). How many died from this atrocious treatment, and how many more women were murdered as part of the generalized campaign of destruction and slaughter, can only be guessed at (see below).

Despite government efforts at amelioration, the torment and persecution of the survivors continued long after Bangladesh had won its independence:

Rape, abduction and forcible prostitution during the nine-month war proved to be only the first round of humiliation for the Bengali women. Prime Minister Mujibur Rahman's declaration that victims of rape were national heroines was the opening shot of an ill-starred campaign to reintegrate them into society -- by smoothing the way for a return to their husbands or by finding bridegrooms for the unmarried [or widowed] ones from among his Mukti Bahini freedom fighters. Imaginative in concept for a country in which female chastity and purdah isolation are cardinal principles, the "marry them off" campaign never got off the ground. Few prospective bridegrooms stepped forward, and those who did made it plain that they expected the government, as father figure, to present them with handsome dowries. (Brownmiller, Against Our Will, p. 84.)
How many died?

The number of dead in Bangladesh in 1971 was almost certainly well into seven figures. It was one of the worst genocides of the World War II era, outstripping Rwanda (800,000 killed) and probably surpassing even Indonesia (1 million to 1.5 million killed in 1965-66). As R.J. Rummel writes,

The human death toll over only 267 days was incredible. Just to give for five out of the eighteen districts some incomplete statistics published in Bangladesh newspapers or by an Inquiry Committee, the Pakistani army killed 100,000 Bengalis in Dacca, 150,000 in Khulna, 75,000 in Jessore, 95,000 in Comilla, and 100,000 in Chittagong. For eighteen districts the total is 1,247,000 killed. This was an incomplete toll, and to this day no one really knows the final toll. Some estimates of the democide [Rummel's "death by government"] are much lower -- one is of 300,000 dead -- but most range from 1 million to 3 million. ... The Pakistani army and allied paramilitary groups killed about one out of every sixty-one people in Pakistan overall; one out of every twenty-five Bengalis, Hindus, and others in East Pakistan. If the rate of killing for all of Pakistan is annualized over the years the Yahya martial law regime was in power (March 1969 to December 1971), then this one regime was more lethal than that of the Soviet Union, China under the communists, or Japan under the military (even through World War II). (Rummel, Death By Government, p. 331.)
The proportion of men versus women murdered is impossible to ascertain, but a speculation might be attempted. If we take the highest estimates for both women raped and Bengalis killed (400,000 and 3 million, respectively); if we accept that half as many women were killed as were raped; and if we double that number for murdered children of both sexes (total: 600,000), we are still left with a death-toll that is 80 percent adult male (2.4 million out of 3 million). Any such disproportion, which is almost certainly on the low side, would qualify Bangladesh as one of the worst gendercides against men in the last half-millennium.

Who was responsible?

"For month after month in all the regions of East Pakistan the massacres went on," writes Robert Payne. "They were not the small casual killings of young officers who wanted to demonstrate their efficiency, but organized massacres conducted by sophisticated staff officers, who knew exactly what they were doing. Muslim soldiers, sent out to kill Muslim peasants, went about their work mechanically and efficiently, until killing defenseless people became a habit like smoking cigarettes or drinking wine. ... Not since Hitler invaded Russia had there been so vast a massacre." (Payne, Massacre, p. 29.)

There is no doubt that the mass killing in Bangladesh was among the most carefully and centrally planned of modern genocides. A cabal of five Pakistani generals orchestrated the events: President Yahya Khan, General Tikka Khan, chief of staff General Pirzada, security chief General Umar Khan, and intelligence chief General Akbar Khan. The U.S. government, long supportive of military rule in Pakistan, supplied some \\$3.8 million in military equipment to the dictatorship after the onset of the genocide, "and after a government spokesman told Congress that all shipments to Yahya Khan's regime had ceased." (Payne, Massacre, p. 102.)

The genocide and gendercidal atrocities were also perpetrated by lower-ranking officers and ordinary soldiers. These "willing executioners" were fuelled by an abiding anti-Bengali racism, especially against the Hindu minority. "Bengalis were often compared with monkeys and chickens. Said Pakistan General Niazi, 'It was a low lying land of low lying people.' The Hindus among the Bengalis were as Jews to the Nazis: scum and vermin that [should] best be exterminated. As to the Moslem Bengalis, they were to live only on the sufferance of the soldiers: any infraction, any suspicion cast on them, any need for reprisal, could mean their death. And the soldiers were free to kill at will. The journalist Dan Coggin quoted one Punjabi captain as telling him, 'We can kill anyone for anything. We are accountable to no one.' This is the arrogance of Power." (Rummel, Death By Government, p. 335.)

The aftermath

On December 3, India under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, seeking to return the millions of Bengali refugees and seize an opportunity to weaken its perennial military rival, finally launched a fullscale intervention to crush West Pakistani forces and secure Bangladeshi independence. The Pakistani army, demoralized by long months of guerrilla warfare, quickly collapsed. On December 16, after a final genocidal outburst, the Pakistani regime agreed to an unconditional surrender. Awami leader Sheikh Mujib was released from detention and returned to a hero's welcome in Dacca on January 10, 1972, establishing Bangladesh's first independent parliament.

In a brutal bloodletting following the expulsion of the Pakistani army, perhaps 150,000 people were murdered by the vengeful victors. (Rummel, Death By Government, p. 334.) The trend is far too common in such post-genocidal circumstances (see the case-studies of Rwanda, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, and the Soviet POWs). Such largescale reprisal killings also tend to have a gendercidal character, which may have been the case in Bangladesh: Jahan writes that during the reprisal stage, "another group of Bengali men in the rural areas -- those who were coerced or bribed to collaborate with the Pakistanis -- fell victims to the attacks of Bengali freedom fighters." ("Genocide in Bangladesh," p. 298; emphasis added.)

None of the generals involved in the genocide has ever been brought to trial, and all remain at large in Pakistan and other countries. Several movements have arisen to try to bring them before an international tribunal (see Bangladesh links for further information).

Political and military upheaval did not end with Bangladeshi independence. Rummel notes that "the massive bloodletting by all parties in Bangladesh affected its politics for the following decades. The country has experienced military coup after military coup, some of them bloody." (Death By Government, p. 334.)



http://www.gendercide.org/case_bangladesh.html


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6382680 - 12/18/06 12:20 PM (14 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Here's HankFTW:
Quote:


This fact alone should tell you there is something fishy going on. We are a product of a lifetime of "learning" about the holocaust. I used to never question it(mainly out of fear) but it just seems all to Orwellian for me to ignore it anymore. My grandmother(from France) has told me countless stories of her living in occupied France. She has told of some horrific things, but never of a people being systematically wiped out by gas.




Hank's "reasoning" here seems to amount to pointing out that since we have been told something is true for so long it must surely be a lie.  Brilliant.  Just brilliant.  There is more than a slight whiff of pathological paranoia in this "reasoning".

As to Granny living in France not seeing gas chambers, I would direct Hank's attention to any map from WW2 locating the death camps.  There weren't any in France.  He might want to ask his grandmother about why so many of the French were ever so helpful in identifying the Jews in their midst and helping to load them on to the trains.  I suspect that many European nations have restricted holocaust denial because they know in their black hearts that they are a little too susceptible to repeating their behaviour




The fact that you can't keep the original context of my quote is very telling.  :laugh:


If it happened like they said it happened, it should not be illegal to discuss in over 15 nations.

"As to Granny living in France not seeing gas chambers"

Of course she wouldn't see them, she lived in France, but maybe, just maybe she would hear of the single most evil event to happen, while it was taking place. Probably not though, just another point to bring up.

Yes, everyone hates the Jews, keep singing your tune. I fucking hate complainers, especially ones who capitalize financially off of said complaints. 12 million Russians dead, not one dollar paid.

A whole month long unit in my grade 11 "history class" about the Holocaust. Heh, maybe we should have learned a bit more about Canada's role in WW2?

Give me, just me, a knife and line up 1000 people(who would not fight back....never heard any accounts of Jews actually standing up and fighting back) and I could get through them in a few hours. Now, instead of me, get the SS, apparently the most officiant killing machine to walk this Earth, and what do we have? Millions of holocaust survivors.

Bull fucking Shit.

They were treated like shit, yes, but "systematically wiped out"TM, give me a break.

I feel like I am having some horrible dream, where people refuse to accept reason.


Edited by Hank, FTW (12/18/06 01:35 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: Hank, FTW]
    #6384089 - 12/18/06 08:19 PM (14 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Hank, FTW said:


I feel like I am having some horrible dream, where people refuse to accept reason.




Believe me when I tell you I know what you mean.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: History of Genocide Under Debate [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6386164 - 12/19/06 01:15 PM (14 years, 9 months ago)

Saw that coming a mile away.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Left Coast Kratom Premium Bali Kratom Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* History a crime to recite...............??? SirTripAlot 744 5 10/21/06 01:01 AM
by The_Red_Crayon
* My thoughts, Iraq, war, and genocide Ellis Dee 1,718 14 03/18/03 06:11 AM
by Anonymous
* Howard Zinn - People's History
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 all )
kotik 5,139 127 10/27/05 05:13 PM
by looner2
* PA clergy call for genocide of Jews
( 1 2 all )
zip 2,615 33 11/10/04 09:05 PM
by Great_Satan
* Ariel Sharon (cartoon)
( 1 2 3 all )
mm. 4,221 42 10/19/02 12:09 PM
by Phluck
* Iraq vet: "We're comitting genocide in Iraq"
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
exclusive58 9,482 158 11/10/05 06:38 PM
by Redstorm
* Armenian Genocide: Forgotten History Redstorm 453 3 01/17/05 08:22 PM
by Baba_McKensey
* Critique pinky's analysis of the debate here
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Phred 4,742 98 10/04/04 10:15 PM
by Divided_Sky

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,767 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.047 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.