A Holocaust Test
in honor of Dr. Norman Finkelstein
40 beheaded babies
Babies in ovens
Systematic mass rape and sex crimes
Babies stabbed to death in front of their families
Baby cut from mother's womb & stabbed while still attached to umbilical cord
Families tied together and tortured to death
Raped women's breasts cut off and used for soccer balls
It appears somewhere between highly likely and absolutely certain that Israel and its apologists have lied about the October 7 attacks in AT LEAST the ways listed above.
I could go on -- but none of these tales have been substantiated - unless you count a sitting POTUS publicly lying about at least one - and most or all have been discredited and debunked.
Test question: if Zionists and their apologists are so quick to invent horror-tales of persecution ... incidentally whilst murdering & maiming many tens of thousands of Palestinian children and civilians ... is there reason to wonder or raise questions about any part of the narratives from WWII ?
As an adolescent and young teen, I never questioned the WWII holocaust accounts. If anything, I assumed that they were probably understated. But in the words of Paul of Tarsus:
When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
I Corinthians 13:11
It’s difficult to identify the turning point in my attitudes towards the Zionist project. As I have said elsewhere, the view I already held in middle life was that the creation of Israel was the single greatest foreign policy blunder or tragedy of the 20th century, but that “we are stuck with it.” At this point in history, the “stuck with it” part has echoes of the “tar-baby” in Uncle Remus.
Naturally in these days of reasoned and calm discourse - that latter is sarcasm, for those who may not recognize it on sight - there will be some who will hurl the epithet “antisemite” at any one who raises such questions, no matter how carefully couched. If so, I’ll be in the company of a great many Jews who share the same doubts.
One who has made a study of the post-WWII marketing of the holocaust from an historian’s perspective is Prof. Norman Finkestein. His brief and articulate book, an eye opener, is available for free at this time, though I prefer a book in hand.
https://archive.org/details/HolocaustIndustry
Readers can find it new or used in a wide array of venues.
As an aside and with credit to the Wikipedia, the name Finkelstein (Hebrew: פֿינק(ע)לשׁטײַן or פינקלשׁט(י)ין, Russian: Финкельштейн) is a German and Yiddish surname originating from Old High German funko (spark) and stein (stone). Some interpret this to mean pyrite; one wonders if it night signify the sparking flint? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finkelstein
He might just as well be nicknamed “lightening rod.” That was the nickname of Ben Franklin.
Feel free to comment honestly ... after all, we live in a country that honors freedom of speech, conscience, and open debate … right? Don’t all speak at once …
History of messy. Within tribes there have almost always arisen rival clans vying for leadership. When tribal groups settle in one place, control over land becomes an important component of power within the tribe. Hierarchy eventually appears, and with hierarchy claims by the elite to a larger and larger share of what is produced. The result is an economy of scarcity, and scarcity within the group leads to efforts to take what is needed and desired from others. The people whose heritage goes back to the ancient tribes of Israel are subject to the same internal socio-political dynamics. And, yes, your observation about Jewish people coming from Europe (where they had generations of exposure to embrace the aggressive cultures of European tribes is valid. I have many "Jewish" friends. Some are not particularly political, as is the case with most Americans. Others are very committed to either a progressive, conservative or libertarian ideology. The same can be said for members of my own family. And, my father was something of a racist, although he was quiet about his racial views.
Over a life-long study of and writing about human history I came to the conclusion that we humans remain instinctively tribal in our primary associations. Migration generates conflict but a degree of assimilation (provided the migrating group abandons most of its own cultural norms in favor of the norms of the majority tribe). The experience of many minority groups who come into another tribal group and whose children are immersed into the majority culture reveals there is a lingering distrust or worse that continues on thru generations, even when there is inter-marriage. Remember that in the United States, the White tribe categorized any person with even a very small percentage of Black ancestry as Black. Very, very slowly, those Blacks who embrace White cultural norms gained acceptance into the White tribe, remembering that it also took generations before Whites who came to the United States from Ireland (and who practiced Catholicism) or from countries where English was not their spoken language experienced and still experience a degree of ethnic isolation from "the mainstream culture." The historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. wrote about this issue, concerned that the pluralism he viewed as constructive was being replaced by a destructive trend toward multiculturalism.
The above is just a prelude to the observation that wherever tribes are competing for sovereignty over the same territory and resources, the competition will inevitably involve unrelenting violence. Remember what happened after Tito's regime fell and the ethnic groups were no longer constrained by the police powers of state socialism. All around globe these tribal conflicts have been ongoing for centuries. The difference today is the expanded capacity to kill large numbers of people from a distance.
As I write this, I wonder how much time we have before the regional wars now being fought explode into global war.