The Zionist propaganda machine behind the Holocaust exploitation

No need to be so restrained Claus. Putting this out is despicable, specially with a headline including the phrase "holocaust myth".

Denying the holocaust again are we, Keld?

How low can you sink?

No, something becomes a myth when it is not true. It's one thing to say that it's exploited and talked about too much, but calling it a "myth" implies that it never happened or wasn't as bad as people claim. You need some completely different evidence to support such a ridiculous claim as that.

I agree. Calling the Holocaust a myth is at very, very least inaccurate. I've signaled this article as such. I would hope you'd change the title, if not pull the whole thing.

The fact that you consider that site to be reliable is a good indication that you're not worth debating on this subject.

There ought to be scanned versions of the documents that this website refers to. The common number, 6 million, is obviously an estimate. I am not entirely sure at this point if the person or person behind the research even understand what they are researching, or have anything resembling method. The dates are not in chronological order. Anyone familiar with the process of uncovering the the Nazi crimes know that initially, right after the war, little was known about the gargantuan nature of the genocide. There appears to be a mix up of the total death toll and the death toll for Auschwitz. The Nazis ran concentration camps and death camps both in Germany and in occupied countries, namely Poland. Auschwitz is but the most famous of these. As the war proceeded towards its end, the deportations escalated, and labor camps were transformed into death camps. My guess would be that the Adelaide Institute has gotten it all wrong.

Mark Weber is intelligent, I don't think many people would disagree, if he wasn't then perhaps he wouldn't be so careful in his words, and you wouldn't seed him. I agree with Claus, it's not wise to use him as a source, while he may quote non disagreeable sources, and doesn't directly deny the holocaust himself (in the video), he defends others for doing so. He's a nationalist right-wing racist, and as the video goes on you can pick up on it more and more.

I think that the use of the word myth isn't accurate enough, I would agree with definition 2. but not any of the others. A (true) story that has become associated with institutions that illustrate cultural ideals. In the case of Israel, it illustrates a nationalist ideal, that Israel needs to exist, and that Jews need a nation state to defend themselves from persecution.

1. a. A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society: the myth of Eros and Psyche; a creation myth.
b. Such stories considered as a group: the realm of myth.
2. A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal: a star whose fame turned her into a myth; the pioneer myth of suburbia.
3. A fiction or half-truth, especially one that forms part of an ideology.
4. A fictitious story, person, or thing: "German artillery superiority on the Western Front was a myth" Leon Wolff.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/myth

I don't give a damn about the Anti-Defamation League,

So maybe you don't care what the ADL says about Mark Weber and the IHR. How about how the IHR decribes itself:

the world's leading Holocaust denial organisation.

Claus,

My guess would be that the Adelaide Institute has gotten it all wrong.

I'd like to point out a detail of the link:

Mr Bush, Mr Blair, Mrs Merkel, and your controllers

And who can we suppose that refers to? Maybe the Adelaide Institute is just another hate site Keld has linked to, and "getting it all wrong" is putting things far too mildly.

Keld - I agree with the sentiments of Claus and Marilyn L above: the headline should be changed.

I of course accept your statement below (#3.1) that you agree that the Holocaust happened; however that means that use of the word "myth" in the headline is incorrect and will offend - and detract from the serious and genuine argument that Racist Zionists (RZs) and racist Bush-ites (RBs) exploit the horrible reality of the Jewish Holocaust to excuse anti-Arab anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and the Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Holocausts (post-invasion excess deaths 0.3, 0.9 and 2.1 million, respectively) which these people deny or ignore in a continuing act of Holocaust Denial mediated by Western politicians and lying, racist, holocaust-denying Mainstream media (for an analysis see: Bush-ites, racism, mass murder & Holocaust denial and Bush & Blair Holocaust Commission & Denial ).
.

Weber has warned against America's becoming "a sort of Mexicanized, Puerto Ricanized country. . . . I don't believe it's possible for Black Americans to be assimilated into white society."

That's anad hominem argument. It has nothing to do with whether Zionists have or have not exploited the Holocaust in order to justify the crimes committed against the Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, Americans and others.

We've seen plenty of use of the Holocaust to justify the theft of Palestine from its residents here, so I don't think we have to rely on Weber alone to make the argument. Only recently I was told here on Newsvine that the Holocaust only occurred because Jews didn't have a country.

It's very common for Zionists to cite the association between the Grand Mufti of Palestine and Hitler. Why is this important? Because they believe that it justifies the ethnic cleansing of '48.

Then don't call it a myth. Words have meanings. You know what "myth" means. Using it to refer to the Holocaust is sensationalist bull@!$%#. It's not a myth.

Thank you Adam. I cannot tell if Keld actually believes this @!$%# or if he simply posts it to get recognition. Trying to twist "myth" to mean exaggeration is despicable. A myth is a fantasy, with no basis in reality. So to call the holocaust a myth is to deny it, no matter how you want to twist your words. Keld you should be ashamed of yourself, though sadly I know that you are not.

nobody here denies that the Holocaust happened. And neither does Weber in the video.

Only that it should be viewed as a bad thing.

What power do the mullahs have Keld? It is more the case that the people of Iran have just given them all a cold shoulder with the low turnout for electing Ayatollahs. Only 2 million out of 15 million people in Teheran voted. We have sources that tell from inside that some voting booths had only 50 people visiting them. Remember also that the government finances 6 million basij, and they could not be bothered to turn out either.

I'm sorry, Keld, but in one sentence (your headline) you do as much as say that the Holocaust never happened:

• the Holocaust myth-- the common understanding of the term myth will lead most people to the conclusion that you think it never happened, or at least fail to take it seriously
• propaganda machine-- the myth is put forward as propaganda, generally taken to be highly suspect or one-sided information
• The zionist propaganda machine-- intimating that the "story" is only promoted to further an agenda of zionism

This may not be what you intend, but it is certainly present in the text of your headline. If it's not what you meant, I'd highly recommend changing it. I don't know about anyone else, but I won't bother to post to this article again unless this happens. The title is disrespectful and inflammatory (and the write-up, such as it is, doesn't do anything to interest me in discussing the subject beyond noting the problems with the headline). Sorry, but no thanks.

Again, it can only be made a "myth" if the stories being told are untrue. That is not the case here.

No one is bothering to refute what this guy said because he's not worth refuting. I wouldn't take that as a validation of his point of view. It's more of a refusal to waste time and effort on idiotic, anti-Semitic ramblings.

Thank you for changing the title. Regardless of your protestations, Ibelieve your header was entirely inaccurate for the reasons I've posted.

I think you do a disservice to Jews when you pretend that the Holocaust is a "legend" promoted by Zionists, and only that, as your statement seems to imply. I took the time to watch Weber's video (and let me say that I wish I could ask you for my twenty minutes back). It's a simultaneous mixture of "duh" and "so what?".

Do people use the Holocaust for political ends? Hell yes. Do people use any tragic incident in history for political ends? Of course they do. The United States currently uses the events of 9/11 in exactly the same way that Weber describes. Again, so what?

Are we to believe that educated and reasonable people can't see the difference between the event itself and the political uses to which unscrupulous people would put that event? I simply believe otherwise. Weber would have you believe that remembrance of the Holocaust is an industry put forward by the evil cabal of world jewry to secure further power. Here's something I found exceedingly strange-- he notes the jewish ancestry or origin of all the folks identifying the unscrupulous uses to which reference to the Holocaust is put as though this somehow bolsters his argument. For him, the context in which these quotes appear-- the identification of suspect motivations, and the encouragement to critically analyze the use to which these references are put-- simply evaporates, and what he would put in place of context is the supposition that these quotes are imperatives. He doesn't see "hey, here's some shady uses to which unscrupulous people will put these references," he sees "hey, super secret cabal of world jews; break out your secret decoder ring and get ready to recieve today's instructions on how to use the media that we control to continue to dominate the world! Bwahahahahaha!!!"

If you don't find that mindset particularly odious, or the uses to which Weber puts references to the Holocaust suspect, it's quite likely that you're already approaching this subject with a preconcieved notion.

Weber claims that the most prominent "prisoners of conscience" in Europe today are David Irving, Ernst Zundel, et al. The mind boggles. Mikhail Trepashkin? No. Mikhail Marynich? No. Any of hundreds of legitimate prisoners of conscience? No. Holocaust deniers. By god, of course!

I happen to think free speech is a right, and a great thing. I also know that the laws of the countries in which Holocaust denial is illegal are based on Roman civil law, not common law, as in the US and Britain. Those countries have not only made Holocaust denial illegal, but have also broadly criminalized most hate speech in an effort to protect minorities. Now we could argue that a "universal right to free speech" should apply everywhere. I certainly would. But if you're going to examine Holocaust denial laws, they should be examined in the context of the laws of the countries that have them. Claiming that the criminalization of Holocaust denial is solely the product of "zionist power" is asinine.

Weber would like to claim some moral legitimacy for opposing any official remembrance of the Holocaust. The motivation behind his claims lacks any moral force. He'll need to do a much better job of showing that the Super Secret Organization of World Jews for Global Dominance exists before I'd be willing to entertain any more poorly documented "uses of zionist power."

Changing the title is irrelevant. This is still Holocaust denial and still antisemitic conspiracism.

This is still Holocaust denial and still antisemitic conspiracism The question for me was whether the denial and conspiricism was Keld's or David Weber's. I think Keld has tendencies to believe in "jewish conspiracies", but I have my doubts about whether he's a Holocaust denier. at any rate, the new title focuses the discussion on Weber's contentions, not on whether the Holocaust actually happened or on Keld's intentions. That's an improvement, in my book. If Keld wants to defend Weber, by all means let him do so. I'd prefer the defense to be explicit, rather than implied. That way we know what we're dealing with.

impressive evidence to show that the Holocaust remembrance campaign is an expression of Jewish-Zionist power

Keld wrote that. We don't even have to get into questions of why Keld would seed such hateful material. It is still about why Keld would write such hateful material.

You're not criticizing Israel, though. You're talking about a Jewish conspiracy.

You're not criticizing Israel, though. You're talking about a Jewish conspiracy.

Exactly. Criticizing Israeli policies is fine, but saying that there's a massive Jewish conspiracy to exploit the holocaust to promote Zionism is pretty much anti-Semitic, not to mention completely ridiculous.

Keld, I don't think that the Jewish lobby or zionists or any other cabal of Jewish interests is pimping the Holocaust on unwitting or unwilling individuals. that's where Weber's (and your) theory breaks down. He makes it seem as though people just wouldn't be that interested if it weren't for those pesky Jews constantly throwing it up in everyone's faces. That's asinine. First off, the Holocaust is in no way solely a Jewish remembrance. They may have been the ones most affected by Nazi actions, but they were by no means the only group to be so. In addition to the 3 million Polish Jews who were killed were 3 million Polish Christians. Half the Romany were killed. Gays were targeted, etc. Pretending that the remembrance of the Holocaust is solely a Jewish thing is factually incorrect, and the people who promote that view have, IMO, a suspect agenda of their own.

Does the Jewish lobby exert too much power in American politics? Sure. Do people manipulate other folks politically (or in online forums) by reference to the Holocaust? Sure. Is the remembrance of the Holocaust a manufactured industry which has the sole (or main) purpose of protecting Israel from criticism? Hardly. For other ways in which Weber is wrong, see my previous post.

And you don't think it's a little condescending of Weber to claim that nobody takes other genocides seriously, or that virtually no one knows the figures on other genocides? The "20 million dead Russians" is a figure that is pretty widely known by anyone with a passing interest in WWII. I'm fairly certain that many people are aware of millions killed under Communist dictatorial regimes. The Khmer Rouge are pretty well known in their atrocities. What you won't find are very many people that are very familiar, for example, with America's role in the genocide in East Timor.

I think it's necessary, every now and then, to have a good discussion about the way in which Israel's actions are exempted from criticism, or the way in which the Holocaust might be being used to deflect legitimate criticism. What's not necessary, or even very palatable, is tto try to kick start that discussion by referencing a work of anti-semitism by a prominent anti-semite as either "impressive evidence" or a particularly well-reasoned argument.

Weber's a Jew-hating hack, and anyone who relies on his "evidence" is going to eventually have their motivations put to question. Better to make your own argument than to let Weber be your spokesman, even if you happen to coincidentally believe in some of the things Weber refers to as "evidence."

Weber's a Jew-hating hack, and anyone who relies on his "evidence" is going to eventually have their motivations put to question.

Geez, it's not like this is the first time Keld has published Holocaust Denial.

It's the first time I've seen it. But I'll admit that I don't regularly check up on his seeds.

Here's a nice example.

...and by people you mean Keld.

Kai,

I choose my right to remain silent.

I thought that the U.S. or Western countries would try to destroy this country because the belief in the Holocaust is the central pillar of the West and the world.

Wrong.

The alleged Holocaust of the Jews is a myth.

He doesn't mince any words there. BTW, glad you're citing this article as proof that you're not a Holocaust denier...

The Jews invented the story, I'm sorry, of the Zyklon B.

No, there is historical proof. Big @!$%#ing difference to this man's opinion of whether something could or could not have happened simply because of procedure...

It is technically impossible.

No it was very technically possible.

It's the sword and the shield of the state of Israel and… Jewry, all together.

Yes, a very impartial judge of the crime, i'm sure.

That's about all of that article I could stand. Keld, this is a joke. This man is clearly denying the Holocaust happened at all, which is at odds with your contention that it is debate over exaggeration. As I said, your motives and research are suspect.

your motives and research are suspect

No suspicion required - they're absolutely plain.

It is absolutely what holocaust remembrance is about. A warning that something as unthinkable can happen even in a supposedly modern civilized democratic society and might happen again. Indeed it has happened again, maybe not quite in the same way, but there have been subsequent genocides to our eternal shame.

Keld is drawing attention here to claims of a Zionist propaganda machine, but propaganda is more Keld's line. The "man in the street" is not aware of any deliberate and cynical campaign by the "Jews" or "Zionists" to reduce everyone to tears of sympathy by exploiting the holocaust.

This is just so much malicious mischief making put out by anti-semites and anti-Zionists in a fairly pathetic attempt to undermine the State of Israel. Israel is the target and any avenue to attack it will be exploited. That's the only exploitation taking place.

It reflects rather worse on them than it does on the Jews/Zionists.