Holocaust memorial day posters defaced in East London

Sadly, these days the three of them are all getting merged together. And that's the problem. They should be seperate issues, but unceasingly we're seeing pro palestinian groups attempting to gain support from the anto semtics.

Holcaust denial and anti semetism are linked in Europe. Holcaust denial is a code. A code that diminished the horrors of facism .

Are they? Granted I never really dealt with the 'Pro-Palestine' groups at uni as I lumped them along with any other political cause (because often it seemed to be people hollowly parroting rhetoric and who only seemed interested in having some political identity rather than any actual interest in the cause). Nonetheless, many notable commentators who align themselves with the Palestinian cause and such groups will indeed criticize Israel, even go over the top at times, but I rarely see the foundation of this criticism being anything to do with the religion. If I criticize inequality and corruption in America, I am not criticizing liberal democracy, I am criticising inequality and corruption. If I am against the intimidation and silencing of opposing media in Russia, I am not against Russians, Slavs or the Orthodox Church, I am against the intimidation and silencing of opposing media in Russia.

If a group are against Israeli actions in occupied land, they are not against the Jewish religion or the Jewish ethnicity or Jewish culture or Jewish anything, they are against Israeli actions in occupied land. It is people like you who make the jump from this to anti-semitism because the grounds in countering the idea that the Israeli government has scant regard for Palestinian life are shaky at best, and drawing on a word that is associated with the horrors of Nazism takes away attention from that.

Its actually quite disgusting and abhorrent that people like you throw around the word 'anti-semitism' so freely considering the unimaginable suffering that many Jews (and gyspsies, slavs, disabled people etc) went through. Yet here you are using it as a cheap insult against anyone with an opposing view to yours. Disgusting.

Abhorrent?

I used Palestine as one of several potential contributing factors for the increase in anti semetism. There's enough nutters turning up on pro Palestinian threads supporting both issues and the increase in anti semtic attacks seems to in correlation with the amount of medi attention on Palestine.

Worried you may share a common cause with a right wing nutter?

I'm going to ignore your really crappy attempt at provocation, though I will note that this attempt highlights your habit of conflating two separate topics in order to make it appear that you understand a topic that you quite clearly dont.

Again. Just because someone is verhment in their criticism of Israel does not make them anti-semitic.

Even if you want to claim that the majority of people that criticize Israel's policy towards the palestinians are also anti-semitic that in itself doesn't make sense. If they are showing support of one semitic peoples in order to show their disdain for another, how is that anti-semitic. If I support, say, Kazakhstan in an imaginary conflict they may have with Uzbekistan, I can hardly be accused of hating Turkic peoples now can I?

30 million were killed in Russia by communists. Mao killed tens of millions more than Hitler, yet, Hitler is classified as the most evil man in the world whilst Mao is ignored. Hitler isn't even the second biggest killer in human history.

You're back, are you? Ban finally lifted?

Buchenwald and dachas were labour camps. Not death camps.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buchenwald_concentration_camp

You do understand that not all concentration camps had gas chambers don't you?

You do realise that as well as gassing people to death, the nazis worked them to death, asphyxiated and shot people in their tens of thousands?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_camp

So as you can see. Some concentration camps were labour camps. Some were pure extermination camps and some were a mixture of labour and extermination camps.

An example of the latter is auschwitz. Auschwitz was a network of concentration camps.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auschwitz_concentration_camp

It was auschwitz birkenau that was the extermination part of the complex.

There were an awful lot of french people who over egged their involvement in restistance. Youre man wasn't a resistance fighter as you claimed. Interesting to note that the claim on Wikipedia about smuggling jews out isn't referenced.

The camp doctors must supervise more often than in the past the nutrition of prisoners and, in cooperation with the administration, submit improvement recommendations to the camp commandents

Yes, I appreciate that distinction is now made. My point was that is not what was claimed at Nuremberg following the war. It was originally claimed, based on eyewitness accounts, that those were extermination centers where people were gassed. That it happened on German soil. For example, American forces which liberated Dachau released a photograph of what was claimed to be a gas chamber for killing prisoners. Similar claims were made in relation to Buchenwald.

Rassinier, as we know, came out and said that wasn't correct.

If I understand correctly, it wasn't until 1960 that Dr Martin Broszat, head of the West German Government's Institute for Contempory History, made a statement to the effect that they weren't used as extermination camps. In other words Rassinier's claims, in relation to what happened in Germany, was effectively accepted.

So, immediately after the war you had eyewitness testimony about the Buchenwald gas chamber and the Dachau gas chamber, which was submitted to the Nuremberg Tribunal. That is no longer accepted.

In relation to Auschwitz there is a women called Maria Vanherwaarden who was interned there. She gave evidence in 1988 that she was told by another inmate on the way there they would be killed in gas chambers. According to Vanherwaarden upon arrival they were ordered to enter a windowless concrete room and remove their clothes. What emerged from the showers wasn't gas, but water. Vanherwaarden gave evidence of people dying from disease.

A Jewish woman named Marika Frank Abrams arrived at Auschwitz-Birkenau from Hungary in July 1944. She likewise testified after the war that she heard and saw nothing of gas chambers during the time she was interned there. She heard the gassing stories only later.

It's not as though testimony and recollections are consistent or necessarily reliable.

There is, however, complete consistency in relation to the intercepts of the British Intelligence, the records of German military doctors at camps and the reports of American and British doctors regarding typhus outbreaks and malnutrion as conditions deteriorated towards the end of the war.

There is also evidence the Germans wanted to keep inmates for wartime labour and tried to prevent the conditions worsening. For example, an order sent to Auschwitz camp on 28 December 1942:



It was even noted that Himmler had stated the "the death rate absolutely must be reduced."

I doubt this was necessarily for humanitarian reasons, probably it was because they needed the wartime labour.

You competlly lost me when you said no mention was made in the Nuremberg trials.byhat statement you've made is competlly incorrect and misleading. The holcaust and use of the gas chambers was quite clearly mentioned in the Nuremberg trials.

to say the Americans mislead, is in itself misleading.

Yes, what I said above is that it was claimed at the trials that gas chambers were used for that purpose on German soil. That was based on eyewitness accounts. Rassinier said that wasn't correct, as he was an innmate in some of the German ones such as Buchenwald.

If I understand correclty it wasn't until 1960 that was no longer officially accepted.

Used on german soil.

All of the extermination camps set up by the nazis weren't on german soil. They were set up on occupied eastern soil predominantly in Poland.
Auschwitz was in Poland. That had an extermination camp in it.
Sobibor was in Poland.

In fact Heres alist of all the extermination camps with gas chambers.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extermination_camp

There's even a map on there to show you.

We're errors made at Nuremberg? I think so. Difficult to get all of the details in the chaos of war, but all that happened post Nuremberg was further evidence was pieces together and a better, clearer picture wa available post 1946.

I'll let you into a secret. The people that did all the genocide tried to cover their tracks and it took some time to get a more holistic understanding of what happened because those involved opted not to offer up incriminating evidence.

You e claimed that huler was concerned about the death rates in camps. I'm sure he was, numbers weren't high enough. The extermination camps were going hell for leather towards the end.

I shall speak plainly.. there is no danger to Jews in this country no more than there is to anyone else.

The media are whipping things up into a frenzy, creating a story where there isnt one, and by doing so, they are actually in danger of creating the problem and stirring up thickos who may well make anti Semitic attacks.

Posters get defaced all the time.

I have to tell you i am heartily sick of having the holocaust rammed down my throat whether from the media or other sources. It happened, it was bad, now move on.

Again - my point is that the contemporaneous eyewitness evidence at the time was that they were also on German soil. That subsequently was abandoned after the likes of Rassinier pointed out it wasn't correct.

In relation to the ones where they were going towards the end then you have people like Marika Abrams who were at Auschwitz & wasn't aware of gas chambers being used for that purpose.

Again - the consistent point is that towards the end their were typhus outbreaks & malnutrition as the place became chaotic and supplies ran out. - that been confirmed by US and British medics.

What's scary is that if you look at evidence from revisionists starting with Paul Rassinier, to Arthur Butz or Gemar Rudolf, onwards is that their arguments aren't as crazy as people make out. It's almost given a sacred or religious like quality now to put it beyond any robust discussion.

That said, in the case of posters being defaced I suppose it arises in the context of rising attacks in France (schools having to be guarded etc) and large numbers of people leaving so people will be on heightened alert for similar developments in the UK.

No **** Sherlock.

However if somebody is passionate enough about a topic you'd be Suprised what they come out with.

yoid also be Suprised how many deviants piggy back other people's protests in order to gain support for their own cause?

You're a typical right wing anti Semite will align himself with whoever they see as a potential ally. And sadly our resident rent a mob for a left wing cause are just that grouping in some case

Happy New Year to you too I have never been banned as far as I'm aware? I take it you aren't a fan of freedom of expression in relation to historical events? Why is that?

Indeed. We have heard much said and witnessed great protests in defence of free speech and i think it should be someone's individual right and freedom to deny the events described as the Holocaust as it is their right to deny their belief in Father Christmas or anything you care to think of.