4 ms·

Now that was truly eye opening! Thanks for posting it.

by shiven 12y ago

ptaipale 12y ago
That article has some rather strange claims, and there's more than a hint of the traditional anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. No point in starting to refute things point by point, but just to pick a few: At that point the German government thwarted the international banking cartels by issuing its own money. As if the Weimar Republic didn't have its own money, which it printed with lots of zeroes after a non-zero. World Jewry responded by declaring a global boycott against Germany. Oh, there's a declaration by World Jewry? Hitler began a national credit program ... All these were paid for with money that no longer came from the private international bankers. Except, of course, where money came by confiscating the property of racial and political enemies [edit] that happened to be bankers [/edit]. Under the National Socialists, Germany’s money wasn't backed by gold That was no news, exactly. The Weimar Reichsmark wouldn't get you much gold, either.
- innguest 12y ago
  The boycott of "Judea against Germany" is well known or should be, at least. What was the anti-Semitic part again? Or do you just throw accusations like that for no reason? Edit: as far as my reading goes this "Hitler went against the bankers" idea has no place in reality.
  - ptaipale 12y ago
    You refer to a boycott which was a response to persecution that Nazis commenced right when they were able to, post January 1933. This was not about bankers. It was a boycott due to Nazis starting to do what Hitler had promised to do, to start his actions on the road to the Holocaust. Yes, this kind of claims are typical of anti-Semitic nutjobs. I don't throw such accusations for no reason; I throw them because it is repugnant to claim that the Jews brought their misfortunes to themselves by this or that boycott or by being bankers or whatever. There are many Web sites that make a big deal about this "Judea against Germany". And it's mostly disgusting stuff.
    - innguest 12y ago
      > persecution that Nazis commenced right when they were able to, post January 1933 > Nazis starting to do what Hitler had promised to do, to start his actions on the road to the Holocaust. Can you source those claims? I don't remember Hitler giving any orders to start a persecution of Jews, but I do remember mainstream holocaust historian Raul Hilberg saying under oath in a 1985 Toronto trial that there are no documents to source that claim, and that the Nazis conducted what they did through a "meeting of minds, a consensus mind-reading by a far-flung bureaucracy". Without documentation, this is conspiracy theory at best. No doubt the Nazis killed millions of Jews. But they did not conspire to do so. Let's make sure we teach people real history, not conspiracy theories with hidden pro-Israel agendas. The Nazis committed innocenticide at a large scale, but after 1970s WWII became all about the chosen people, and I thought we were all Africans. I'll preempt your calling me "anti-Semite" by saying I have nothing against any ethnicity (but I do have something against religions that say their people are better than other people, like the Nazi religion or the Judaism religion, in fact I'm against all religions) and I do not believe for a second that religious Jews conspire in any way, like Raul Hilberg believes the religious Nazis conspired through mind reading. That, my friends, is preposterous. Edit: If you read Raul Hilberg's book The Destruction of European Jews you'd learn that in 1933 the final solution was deportation. Only after 1941 is it ever seriously claimed by mainstream historians that the final solution became killing. So Judea declared war on Germany over their plans to deport Jews. This should put things in perspective and this is mainstream history no matter how uncomfortable for you it is to accept. PS: if you do come up with a source, please also address why Raul Hilberg did not consider that a source when he testified under oath in 1985. PPS: downvoters, could you please point out where I'm wrong or why am I deserving of downvoting?
      - ptaipale 12y ago
        Having a Final Solution of "only" deporting Jews - after taking their possessions - and murdering just a few, for a warning or for a bit of fun, is not really that much more humane than the later industrial extermination into which things developed. Or let's say that making a point about difference there is just, well, gross. Starting to give sources to a revisionist, regarding Nazi persecution of Jews not only as retaliation for a "Judea against Germany" boycott "act of war", is much like starting to play chess with a flock of pigeons. There's no point.

Now that was truly eye opening! Thanks for posting it.

by shiven 12y ago

Now that was truly eye opening! Thanks for posting it.

That article has some rather strange claims, and there's more than a hint of the traditional anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. No point in starting to refute things point by point, but just to pick a few: At that point the German government thwarted the international banking cartels by issuing its own money. As if the Weimar Republic didn't have its own money, which it printed with lots of zeroes after a non-zero. World Jewry responded by declaring a global boycott against Germany. Oh, there's a declaration by World Jewry? Hitler began a national credit program ... All these were paid for with money that no longer came from the private international bankers. Except, of course, where money came by confiscating the property of racial and political enemies [edit] that happened to be bankers [/edit]. Under the National Socialists, Germany’s money wasn't backed by gold That was no news, exactly. The Weimar Reichsmark wouldn't get you much gold, either.

innguest 12y ago
The boycott of "Judea against Germany" is well known or should be, at least. What was the anti-Semitic part again? Or do you just throw accusations like that for no reason? Edit: as far as my reading goes this "Hitler went against the bankers" idea has no place in reality.
- ptaipale 12y ago
  You refer to a boycott which was a response to persecution that Nazis commenced right when they were able to, post January 1933. This was not about bankers. It was a boycott due to Nazis starting to do what Hitler had promised to do, to start his actions on the road to the Holocaust. Yes, this kind of claims are typical of anti-Semitic nutjobs. I don't throw such accusations for no reason; I throw them because it is repugnant to claim that the Jews brought their misfortunes to themselves by this or that boycott or by being bankers or whatever. There are many Web sites that make a big deal about this "Judea against Germany". And it's mostly disgusting stuff.
  - innguest 12y ago
    > persecution that Nazis commenced right when they were able to, post January 1933 > Nazis starting to do what Hitler had promised to do, to start his actions on the road to the Holocaust. Can you source those claims? I don't remember Hitler giving any orders to start a persecution of Jews, but I do remember mainstream holocaust historian Raul Hilberg saying under oath in a 1985 Toronto trial that there are no documents to source that claim, and that the Nazis conducted what they did through a "meeting of minds, a consensus mind-reading by a far-flung bureaucracy". Without documentation, this is conspiracy theory at best. No doubt the Nazis killed millions of Jews. But they did not conspire to do so. Let's make sure we teach people real history, not conspiracy theories with hidden pro-Israel agendas. The Nazis committed innocenticide at a large scale, but after 1970s WWII became all about the chosen people, and I thought we were all Africans. I'll preempt your calling me "anti-Semite" by saying I have nothing against any ethnicity (but I do have something against religions that say their people are better than other people, like the Nazi religion or the Judaism religion, in fact I'm against all religions) and I do not believe for a second that religious Jews conspire in any way, like Raul Hilberg believes the religious Nazis conspired through mind reading. That, my friends, is preposterous. Edit: If you read Raul Hilberg's book The Destruction of European Jews you'd learn that in 1933 the final solution was deportation. Only after 1941 is it ever seriously claimed by mainstream historians that the final solution became killing. So Judea declared war on Germany over their plans to deport Jews. This should put things in perspective and this is mainstream history no matter how uncomfortable for you it is to accept. PS: if you do come up with a source, please also address why Raul Hilberg did not consider that a source when he testified under oath in 1985. PPS: downvoters, could you please point out where I'm wrong or why am I deserving of downvoting?
    - ptaipale 12y ago
      Having a Final Solution of "only" deporting Jews - after taking their possessions - and murdering just a few, for a warning or for a bit of fun, is not really that much more humane than the later industrial extermination into which things developed. Or let's say that making a point about difference there is just, well, gross. Starting to give sources to a revisionist, regarding Nazi persecution of Jews not only as retaliation for a "Judea against Germany" boycott "act of war", is much like starting to play chess with a flock of pigeons. There's no point.