Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

What would it take for Russia to be #1?


  • Please log in to reply
7545 replies to this topic

#5281 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 18 May 2005 - 04:03 PM

Originally posted by Gari-Gari
With this post I just want to say that, speaking for certain countries such as G. and A., I do find it justified that a special attention is given to the Holocaust and the newly growing hatred of Jews in the present time. These are countries where Communism is not very likely to ever become a driving force and therefore not too much time is dedicated to talking about the shortcomings of Communism. Instead, time is being dedicated to find ways that would allow an integration of society with Jews and viceversa, because if this integration is not being cared for, terrible things could eventually happen again.



The real problem in Austria and Germany--and for that matter in the rest of the world--is the lion. I mean the LIE. No Nazi takeover will ever happen again in those countries nor there will be another Kristallnacht, at most some incidents here and there that will go to feed Israel. That's good for "the cause," you know, just as playing the victim in WWII is...;)

If you don't believe me, why are they planting Jews in those troubled waters, or simply why don't they airlift the 10,000 Jews out of Austria?

Meanwhile the real and present problems, ILLEGAL WARS (that surely feed terrorism), ENVIRONMENTAL DEVASTATION, POVERTY IN THE THIRD-WORLD COUNTRIES (that result in massive immigration, by far a greater problem that Jewish immigration) ARE IGNORED.

WE ARE BEING SCARED WITH A GHOST WHILE THE REAL BEAST BREATHES ON OUR NECK.

And that should be taught in school. Perhaps we can start with these stories about the jungle...;)

WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE
http://committed.to/justiceforpeace
  • 0

#5282 Gari-Gari

Gari-Gari

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts

Posted 18 May 2005 - 04:34 PM

Originally posted by donquijote
It's not in the interest of the lion do so. Now in the 60th anniversary of WWII, our TV--lead by History Channel--overwhelmes us with the crimes of the Third Reich, of course, mostly against the Jews. They recently asked in one of those programs why the Germans didn't stop Hitler since they knew of his atrocities. In the end, in a logical pattern, the Germans received their due...

Now, if you extrapolate the facts and bring it to 2005, you see the same thing happening all over again. We are told the war in Iraq is to bring "democracy" to them, but so the German conquest was meant to bring "civilization" to barbaric people. So PROPAGANDA may give us a lead. Also, people is shut off from atrocities because they happen "far and away," I guess a fault in human nature.

"WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND."
Why were journalists not discussing the occupation of Iraq? Because, says Lehrer, "the word occupation ... was never mentioned in the run-up to the war." Washington talked about the invasion as "a war of liberation," not a war of occupation, so as a consequence, "those of us in journalism never even looked at the issue of occupation."


"In other words," says Jonathan Mermin, "if the government isn't talking about it, we don't report it." I came to believe that objective journalism means describing the object being reported on, including the little fibs and fantasies as well as the Big Lie of the people in power.'

http://www.freepress.net/news/8120




Hi Donquij,

while I responded to Bader you wrote this post, which I could read only now.

It is a great problem of journalism being so easily influenced by political interest groups. Moreover, we live in times when media "belong" to someone. Media are not as independent and free as would wish to be. Also, nowadays exist media-conglomerates that reunite the most important news media in different countries. EG. "El Mundo" in Spain is directly wired to information service that French, German, GB Media receive etc. Finally you read slight variations of a same interpretation.

What needs to be admitted first is that "objective journalism" simply does not exist.

Great teachers of journalism I have had, from NY Times and Herald Tribune (true, believe it!) who taught us that a journalist needs to be aware of his personal opinion and believes. These are not supposed to distort the truth of the story but can be admitted in some way - according to the type of article one writes. Most importantly there does seem to be a growing concern among journalists to reporting with ethics.

We called this form of journalism "public" or "civic" journalism: news is covered from the citizen up, not from the expert down. It takes ordinary people seriously, addressing some of the issues they think are important, instead of relying solely on the experts and insiders to set the agenda.

We analyzed and discussed nearly for an entire year the difficulties of reporting on a war or "invasion", in the foreign country, eg. by the controversial new form of "embedded journalism", or in the invading country itself; the difficulties of covering Islam; the facts about lacking ethics in journalism in second world countries that are not yet used to freedom of speech and so on.

A mayor problem about journalism in the US seems to be the feeling of cultural superiority towards other countries, eg. journalists were sent from the US to countries with whose culture, history and language they were not familiar with at all. Subsequent situational misinterpretations of these journalists led to a nationwide misinformation about "facts" etc.

The next point is certainly, as you state, the vocabulary used. In this Iraq war some words have been placed out of their natural context, eg using citations of the Bible for indirectly justifying this war, and people have been mislead by it.

Hopefully journalism could mean "describing the object being reported on, including the little fibs and fantasies as well as the Big Lie of the people in power."

In practice, journalists tend to have unstable and tough jobs and they are often dependent on the final touches the editor gives to a story.

Look at the Christian Monitor who has adapted greatly to White House speech.

Look how Newsweek finally gave in to White House pressure and "admitted" that their - certainly, cerainly well researched and TRUE account of facts about abuses at Guantanomo prison - was based on incorrect research.

I do not have any facts at my hands but I am really very convinced that Newsweek reported in good journalistic manner about happenings that they have researched well and had some evidence about. It is a shame that they as a newspaper are being made responsible by the White House for the international blame that falls upon the US. Should it not have been the WH to take care that none of the mentioned crimes against prisoners (who DO have rights) as well as no desacrations would happen?



"Anything a man does can bring him closer to the Supreme Wisdom, as long as he works with love in his heart."
http://www.paulocoelho.com
http://www.warriorofthelight.com
  • 0

#5283 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 04:07 AM

Hey Bader, someone else is on the trail of the lion. He went into the website and digged out your comment below. The "ijccr" (Int'l Jrnl o Community Currency Research) is a very cool group found at Yahoo that you may want to check out since it's within "your field"...

Description
To provide a forum for the dissemination of knowledge and understanding about the emerging array of community currencies (including 'money-based' systems such as LETS, 'time-based' systems such as time dollars, other scrip-based community exchanges, as well as business trade exchanges) being used throughout the world both at present and in the past.

Here's my post first, then his comment...

"For the sociopathic lion behavior you may visit a
factory or maquiladora everywhere, but for the social
monkey, there's a good example of real behavior in
this kibbutz..."

WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE

http://committed.to/justiceforpeace ...
  • 0

#5284 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 05:53 AM

Howdy Woj:

You believe in human cannon-fodder. The end justifies the means eh? Crimes against humanity to me but you would only call it a crime if it was against Slavs.

Russian Patriot Act. Yep, thats socialism for you. Do citizens
need a a breathing act to breath? It should come naturally but the state believes it has the right to prescribe what already exists! Who will be first with a Parental Sex Act?

So all you need Woj is a Slavs Unite Act.

Hitler was a blessing to millions and many countries? YOu assume
he planned the second half of the World War? He was the fall-guy, thank someone else. It was the US that pushed for the
disolution of the French and British Empires at the end of the war.
It made way for the new international regime out of Bretton Woods and the cold war destablisation by Moscow and Washington to make healthy democratic growth impossible and you listed a number of those counties that you think were liberated. Liberated to what? CIA banana republics?
The break up of Yugoslavia was the same operation but fast-track.

Slavs cant even help themselves so how are they going to help anyone else. Poland right now is helping Bush in Iraq, perhaps all Slavs should go there to unit? At least get liberated by a car-bomb.
  • 0

#5285 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 11:49 AM

Originally posted by Gari-Gari
I do not have any facts at my hands but I am really very convinced that Newsweek reported in good journalistic manner about happenings that they have researched well and had some evidence about. It is a shame that they as a newspaper are being made responsible by the White House for the international blame that falls upon the US. Should it not have been the WH to take care that none of the mentioned crimes against prisoners (who DO have rights) as well as no desacrations would happen?



Howdy Gari
The Media doesn't doesn't get off the hook with me though it may not fully qualify for the Nuremberg Trial.;)

A few brave journalists out there, but they are mostly sold out. In the jungle's order of things they fall in the upper part of the food chain, and they party with the lion, travel with the lion, and get served a juicy piece of red meat by the lion. Of course, then they only see what the lion wants them to see. Nobody dared say "occupation," nobody dared say "lie," so the public bought the media's account at face value. Big mistake we are paying now and forever.

Bader proposes not buying newspapers (not feeding the li-on) and I'd go along with it. The Media is the Minion to the lion.

The last hope is the Internet, of whom Bill Moyers, the brave journalist I quoted before, says...

'But the real hope "lies within the Internet with its 2 billion or more Web sites providing a wealth of information drawn from almost unlimited resources that span the globe. - If knowledge is power, one's capacity to increase that power increases exponentially through navigation of the Internet for news and information."'

It's here that we are humbly chipping in.;)

I'll leave you with this (written by another brave journalist)...

"And so long as George is angry and Condi appalled, Newsweek knows what
to do: swiftly grab its corporate ankles and ask the White House for
mercy."


COWARDICE IN JOURNALISM AWARD FOR NEWSWEEK
Goebbels Award for Condi
by Greg Palast

"It's appalling that this story got out there," Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice said on her way back from Iraq.

What's NOT appalling to Condi is that the US is holding prisoners at
Guantanamo under conditions termed "torture" by the Red Cross. What's
not appalling to Condi is that prisoners of the Afghan war are held in
violation of international law after that conflict has supposedly ended.
What is NOT appalling to Condi is that prisoner witnesses have reported
several instances of the Koran's desecration.

What is appalling to her is that these things were REPORTED. So to
Condi goes to the Joseph Goebbels Ministry of Propaganda Iron Cross.

But I don't want to leave out our President. His aides report that
George Bush is "angry" about the report -- not the desecration of the
Koran, but the REPORTING of it.

And so long as George is angry and Condi appalled, Newsweek knows what
to do: swiftly grab its corporate ankles and ask the White House for
mercy.

But there was no mercy. Donald Rumsfeld pointed the finger at Newsweek
and said, "People lost their lives. People are dead." Maybe Rumsfeld
was upset that Newsweek was taking away his job. After all, it's hard
to beat Rummy when it comes to making people dead.

And just for the record: Newsweek, unlike Rumsfeld, did not kill
anyone -- nor did its report cause killings. Afghans protested when they
heard the Koran desecration story (as Christians have protested crucifix
desecrations). The Muslim demonstrators were gunned down by the Afghan
military police -- who operate under Rumsfeld's command.

Our Secretary of Defense, in his darkest Big Brother voice, added a
warning for journalists and citizens alike, "People need to be very
careful about what they say."

And Newsweek has now promised to be very, very good, and very, very
careful not to offend Rumsfeld, appall Condi or anger George.

For their good behavior, I'm giving Newsweek and its owner, the
Washington Post, this week's Yellow Streak Award for Craven Cowardice in
Journalism.

As always, the competition is fierce, but Newsweek takes the honors by
backing down on Mike Isakoff's expose of cruelity, racism and just
plain bone-headed incompetence by the US military at the Guantanamo prison
camp.

Isakoff cited a reliable source that among the neat little
"interrogation" techniques used to break down Muslim prisoners was putting a copy
of the Koran into a toilet.

In the old days, Isakoff's discovery would have led to Congressional
investigations of the perpetrators of such official offence. The
Koran-flushers would have been flushed from the military, panels would have
been impaneled and Isakoff would have collected his Pulitzer.

No more. Instead of nailing the wrong-doers, the Bush Administration
went after the guy who REPORTED the crime, Isakoff.

Was there a problem with the story? Certainly. If you want to split
hairs, the inside-government source of the Koran desecration story now
says he can't confirm which military report it appeared in. But he saw it
in one report and a witnesses has confirmed that the Koran was defiled.

Of course, there's an easy way to get at the truth. RELEASE THE
REPORTS NOW. Hand them over, Mr. Rumsfeld, and let's see for ourselves
what's in them.

But Newsweek and the Post are too polite to ask Rumsfeld to make the
investigative reports public. Rather, the corporate babysitter for
Newsweek, editor Mark Whitaker, said, "Top administration officials have
promised to continue looking into the charges and so will we." In other
words, we'll take the Bush Administration's word that there is no
evidence of Koran-dunking in the draft reports on Guantanamo.

It used to be that the Washington Post permitted journalism in its
newsrooms. No more. But, frankly, that's an old story.

Every time I say investigative reporting is dead or barely breathing in
the USA, some little smartass will challenge me, "What about Watergate?
Huh?" Hey, buddy, the Watergate investigation was 32 years ago -- that
means it's been nearly a third of a century since the Washington Post
has printed a big investigative scoop.

The Post today would never run the Watergate story: a hidden source
versus official denial. Let's face it, Bob Woodward, now managing editor
at the Post, has gone from "All the President's Men" to becoming the
President's Man -- "Bush at War." Ugh!

And now the Post company is considering further restrictions on the use
of confidential sources -- no more "Deep Throats."

Despite its supposed new concern for hidden sources, let's note that
Newsweek and the Post have no trouble providing, even in the midst of
this story, cover for secret Administration sources that are FAVORABLE to
Bush. Editor Whitaker's retraction relies on "Administration
officials" whose names he kindly withholds.

In other words, unnamed sources are OK if they defend Bush,
unacceptable if they expose the Administration's mendacity or evil.

A lot of my readers don't like the Koran-story reporter Mike Isakoff
because of his goofy fixation with Monica Lewinsky and Mr. Clinton's
cigar. Have some sympathy for Isakoff: Mike's one darn good reporter, but
as an inmate at the Post/Newsweek facilities, his ability to send out
serious communications to the rest of the world are limited.

A few years ago, while I was tracking the influence of the power
industry on Washington, Isakoff gave me some hard, hot stuff on Bill Clinton
-- not the cheap intern-under-the-desk gossip -- but an FBI report for
me to publish in The Guardian of Britain.

I asked Isakoff why he didn't put it in Newsweek or in the Post.

He said, when it comes to issues of substance, "No one gives a sh--,"
not the readers, and especially not the editors who assume that their US
target audience is small-minded, ignorant and wants to stay that way.

That doesn't leave a lot of time, money or courage for real reporting.
And woe to those who practice investigative journalism. As with CBS's
retraction of Dan Rather's report on Bush's draft-dodging, Newsweek's
diving to the mat on Guantanamo acts as a warning to all journalists who
step out of line.

Newsweek has now publicly committed to having its reports vetted by
Rumsfeld's Defense Department before publication. Why not just print
Rumsfeld's press releases and eliminate the middleman, the reporter?

However, not all of us poor scribblers will adhere to this New News
Order. In the meantime, however, for my future security and comfort, I'm
having myself measured for a custom-made orange suit.
  • 0

#5286 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 01:21 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by donquijote
B]
In the old days, Isakoff's discovery would have led to Congressional
investigations of the perpetrators of such official offence. The
Koran-flushers would have been flushed from the military, panels would have
been impaneled and Isakoff would have collected his Pulitzer.

QUOTE]

War almost never end they way starters had in mind . ( M. Forbes).
It is maxim which journalist- agents should have in their mind when they start to make history. :)

Today reporters are agents not to report history only to make history.
And the Newsweek report were to be one of them.
It was designed as a psychological attack to depress the Muslim; to show them how their God is insulted and nothing would happened to insolent Masters.

When absent Muslims instead of putting arms away as it was projected by US government, Muslims united and stand against Americans. In respons the Americans they try to escape to the new lie that it was just erroneous reported .

I don
  • 0

#5287 Gari-Gari

Gari-Gari

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 01:43 PM

Originally posted by donquijote

The Media doesn't doesn't get off the hook with me though it may not fully qualify for the Nuremberg Trial.;)

A few brave journalists out there, but they are mostly sold out. In the jungle's order of things they fall in the upper part of the food chain, and they party with the lion, travel with the lion, and get served a juicy piece of red meat by the lion. Of course, then they only see what the lion wants them to see. Nobody dared say "occupation," nobody dared say "lie," so the public bought the media's account at face value. Big mistake we are paying now and forever.

Bader proposes not buying newspapers (not feeding the li-on) and I'd go along with it. The Media is the Minion to the lion.

The last hope is the Internet,


In the old days, Isakoff's discovery would have led to Congressional
investigations of the perpetrators of such official offence. The
Koran-flushers would have been flushed from the military, panels would have
been impaneled and Isakoff would have collected his Pulitzer.

No more. Instead of nailing the wrong-doers, the Bush Administration
went after the guy who REPORTED the crime, Isakoff.

Mike's one darn good reporter, but
as an inmate at the Post/Newsweek facilities, his ability to send out
serious communications to the rest of the world are limited.

That doesn't leave a lot of time, money or courage for real reporting.
And woe to those who practice investigative journalism. As with CBS's
retraction of Dan Rather's report on Bush's draft-dodging, Newsweek's
diving to the mat on Guantanamo acts as a warning to all journalists who
step out of line.

Newsweek has now publicly committed to having its reports vetted by
Rumsfeld's Defense Department before publication. Why not just print
Rumsfeld's press releases and eliminate the middleman, the reporter?




Donquij,

excellent story.
I am already fearing for this reporter. (btw what is a "orange suit"? does he think he will be forced to do other, lower jobs, eg selling orange juice? - hmm, don t know the expression refers to here).

The way they handled the Newsweek story is, indeed, a scandal for the freedom of journalism.

I would really await massive protests from the media world.

But, as stated before, media aren t independant or just only dependent on themselves. Reporters are integrated as functional units into big corporate interest chains. There is little space for free expression, of what they do see with their own eyes, unless they work for an NGO, as I did, whose aim is to track back governamental violations of press freedom and fight for rectifications.

" In the jungle's order of things they (journalists) fall in the upper part of the food chain, and they party with the lion, travel with the lion, and get served a juicy piece of red meat by the lion. Of course, then they only see what the lion wants them to see."

I would never blame a journalist for travleing with the lion.
You need to know first what the lion is doing.
The problem is that the lion is providing, directly or indirectly, a livelyhood to the journalist. And there are hardly any other options to be provided a livelyhood other than by the lion.

This is the mayor problem a journalist faces.
When I worked for a German-language newspaper abroad, I noticed the same dependance of the newspaper on the government and, in particular, on businesses. You can?t imagine how many stories the business section of the paper published every week which were actually camuflaged publicity-stories for certain businesses or enterprises or directors of enterprises. The stories pretended to report about facts that were actually aimed at impressing the readers. The newspaper received a good amount of money by the enterprises it wrote favorably about.
Luckily I had less pressure and obligation on me because I was in the culture section of the paper.

It is hard to find a newspaper nowadays that would abide with good journalistic ethics and which would be able to provide a decent living to a journalist if he worked for it. Therefore many journalists end up directly in publicity or totally different fields that only remotedly have to do with writing and publishing.




"Courage. By beginning the journey with that word and continuing with faith in God, you will arrive wherever you need to arrive."
http://www.warriorofthelight.com
  • 0

#5288 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Gari-Gari
B]

But, as stated before, media aren t independant or just only dependent on themselves. Reporters are integrated as functional units into big corporate interest chains. Of course, then they only see what the lion wants them to see."


B]

TV Networks Vie
For Richest Viewers


The TV sitcom "The Office," a documentary-style parody of corporate life, will return to General Electric Co.'s NBC in September despite a weak ratings performance. NBC's "Committed" -- a higher-rated sitcom about two neurotic twentysomethings -- won't be back.
The primary reason: Rich people like "The Office." The sitcom ranks high in "concentration" of wealthy viewers.. "That's the type of product we want on our network."
What viewers with higher incomes watch on TV is becoming more important to the broadcast networksTo distinguish themselves to advertisers, broadcasters increasingly are touting how popular their shows are with moneyed viewers..
. Baiting wealthy types is also a strategy, some network ad executives say, to lure more luxury marketers to broadcast TV -- a popular medium for pitching shampoo and crackers, but not five-star hotels and private jets.
Adding to the upscale buzz: a new ability to measure high-income households. Nielsen Media Research historically has only offered statistics on viewers with household incomes of $75,000 or more. Since last year's, Nielsen has started providing data on viewers who make more than $100,000 and viewers with incomes of more than $125,000. Nielsen says it started offering the service in response to demand from networks and because of the boom in luxury marketing in general. http://online.wsj.co...=public_home_us
The Media ethics -an affluent viewers :) :)
  • 0

#5289 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 04:16 PM

Originally posted by Gari-Gari
Donquij,

excellent story.
I am already fearing for this reporter. (btw what is a "orange suit"? does he think he will be forced to do other, lower jobs, eg selling orange juice? - hmm, don t know the expression refers to here).



Thanks. The Orange Suit refers to the suit they make so called "terrorists" wear at Guantanamo. In return terrorists make Western hostages wear the same suit.

Very enlightening picture you give us from inside a newspaper. The emphasis on comouflage is very appropriate for our jungle language, and because it makes us understand that political news are camouflaged as well. Best thing is NOT to buy newspapers at all.

I'm paraphrasing here something I came across: "In a society where truth is so camouflaged and avoided," the li-on hunter (read 'lie') is the most honest profession.:cheers:
  • 0

#5290 Gari-Gari

Gari-Gari

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts

Posted 19 May 2005 - 11:04 PM

Donquij,

thank you very much for explaining the "orange suit" to me. I didn t even notice that they all wear orange suits.

Your suggestion is to by no newspapers.

I find this hard to follow. Perhaps one can read quite some newspapers online, which is a way out to not buying them. But you know what, after being a sworn in reader of the intellectual "minority" newspapers here, I have changed to buying also the small format, most widely spread newspapers and magazines here. They use a reduced amount of vocab, have nude pictures on page 3 and the headlines are printed as fat as possible. I read these papers now because I need to know what the majority of the population is feeding their mind with. I need to know why my neighbour argues the way he does. It is because
this is the news he is getting familiar with. No other news.

I am in favour that we KNOW what the most widely spread newpapers say. If you can avoid buying them, don t buy them. But you need to know what statements they operate with, otherwise you would have one tool less to undermine the reasons of their false reality.

It is up to everybody to keep a critical mind and, while reading lies, staying awake and recognize that these are lies.

In Journalism class we read on purpose a bunch of articles by low class newspapers (those most sold) as well as of the high class newspapers which were clearly biased or commited to a certain idea.
It is good to read this and approach it with a possibly sharp mind that will question how they present news and WHAT is news for them.
As a matter of fact, the mere choice of what is news and what not is BIASED. Biase is part of journalism and will always be there. The issue is just how does a newspaper handle its own bias. That is where ethics comes in.

Cheers to all.





"Courage. By beginning the journey with that word and continuing with faith in God, you will arrive wherever you need to arrive."
http://www.paulocoelho.com
http://www.warriorofthelight.com
  • 0

#5291 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 20 May 2005 - 04:07 AM

Originally posted by Gari-Gari
Donquij,

thank you very much for explaining the "orange suit" to me. I didn t even notice that they all wear orange suits.

Your suggestion is to by no newspapers.

I find this hard to follow.



Howdy Gari
It wasn't my suggestion but Bader's. I say "DO NOT FEED THE LION," which means you choose HOW not to feed the beast. If you feel cheaper but "real" journalism fits your need, then go ahead and enjoy. My own style of revolution is not stuffy but rather sexy and lively. We must learn from the enemy, right?;)
  • 0

#5292 Bader

Bader

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1757 posts

Posted 20 May 2005 - 07:20 AM

Howdy Gari-Gari:

"There is a continuing need to talk about evidence of the holocaust..."
Many would agree, that would put the end of the silencing- condemnation of those who try to but being treated as holocaust deniers-criminals who in some countries go to Jail, which includes Germany who obviously learnt no lessons from the Third Reich and persecution against freedom of speech.
The 'Jewish' claims, including the 6 million, should be put on a website with all the evidence to silence the critics for ever - leave innocent kids out of it!

I suspect German Youth reject the cult of guilt. The Germans have their own holocaust experience after the cease-fire in 1945.
There is no question about the selective bombarment of information on the public, which drew the 'holocaust industry'
label. Thats politics, not the outworking of the hard lesson that should have been learnt in the thirties and forties. Inspite of 60 years of bombardment of selective information, crimes against humanity continue around the world. The Zionist backed US war against Iraq for over ten years, with its genocidal Depleted Uranium, shows how hypercritical the whole issue is. There are Jews who are disgusted that zionusts are looked upon as Jews.

So another sixty of 'Jewish' privilege wont bring peace anywhere.

No one denies that many millions suffered. In terms of the original meaning of holocaust there were three, Dresden, and
the two Japanese cities upon which the US live-tested their A bombs, all civilian targets.

US Jewish influence has been discussed often, usually in referrence to the Neo-Conservatives, a media preference for 'Zionists'. Americafreepress.net advertise a book called
"The New Jerusalem" which is based on research on the subject.

There are many issues in and around the subject, Pravda recently had a thread on it. It didnt last very long which reflects no one is really competing with the so called holocaust industry although there are specific places that take issue with it and have a collection of 'evidence'.

It is rather rich to say they have full right to acknowledgement
afer 60 years of sole rights that amounts to holocaust denial of the others much more numerous. Would they like to face imprisonment for 2 years for denial of others? Nazi-ism is not dead is it? Since when in history is 'Truth' defended by threats of prison sentences? Only in despotic environments.

A big part of this political/psychological programming is the
inferred oneness/sameness of 'the Jews'. Its also misleading.
You have intimated that the European Jew and the US Jew are not the same, that is true. YOu can read on the Jewsnotzionist website that the Zionists closed the door to Jewish escape so they were sacrifics for a new state of Israel. Some Jews demonstrate publically, in NY, against the bastardisation of the name Israel by the zionsts in calling their state Israel. And much more.

There are many things that could be raised in the greater context of the issue but it is pointless, each one is responsibile for their 'education'.

My view is that this political/psychological programming is anti-semitic. My view is based on the Old Testament- History and prophesy ( history in advance). I suspect that the Jewish remnant of the Hebrew people, a minority, will be sacrificed for
the promises made to them in the future by imposter Jews.

It would be better to teach the Old Testament in schools. Are you aware of the saying "he who control history controls the future"? The BIble is the only sacred book that provides its 'faithful' protection from that.
  • 0

#5293 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 20 May 2005 - 01:52 PM

Originally posted by Bader
B]It would be better to teach the Old Testament in schools. Are you aware of the saying "he who control history controls the future"? The BIble is the only sacred book that provides its 'faithful' protection from that. /B]


It would be better to teach Koran in schools.
The Pictures show Iraq's Saddam in his underwear and Koran flushing down the toilet to demis Islam spirit; and in result ex Taliban minister will candidate in the Afghanistan election. Hip hip hurray!
Congratulation Sir!
  • 0

#5294 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 20 May 2005 - 02:01 PM

Thousands of Shiites, many waving Islam's holy book over their heads, protested the U.S.-led occupation in Iraq on Friday, setting off clashes in at least one southern city as they answered a call by a radical cleric to paint Israeli and American flags on the ground and stomp on them
http://story.news.ya...m/fc/world/iraq

Rights have only the religion which members are follow it.:) :Isn't?
  • 0

#5295 Gari-Gari

Gari-Gari

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts

Posted 21 May 2005 - 12:21 AM

Donquij,

thank you for the orange suit explanation!

- Yes, that was the point I was trying to make: we need to know what all others (including the lion and the "enemy") think and read. As a matter of fact, heavily biased newspapers tend to have a higher printrole and tend to be read by more pple than the intellectual papers.



http://survivekorea..../pattern_th.jpg
  • 0

#5296 Gari-Gari

Gari-Gari

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts

Posted 21 May 2005 - 12:27 AM

Dear Bader,

your introduction to the differences on Jews and Zionists is offering me a new insight. Thank you very much. It is now much clearer for me, also the wording of "neocons". Before I did not deciffre for myself what was hidden behind this terminology.
You are right, everybody is responsible for their "education". I will follow up on the subject and eventually read the book you mention.

Again, thank you for the extensive introduccion on the subject!



"The gift belongs to whoever chooses to accept it. It is enough to believe and not to be afraid to make a few mistakes."
http://www.paulocoelho.com
http://www.warriorofthelight.com
  • 0

#5297 donquijote

donquijote

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3919 posts

Posted 21 May 2005 - 03:42 AM

Originally posted by Gari-Gari
Donquij,

thank you for the orange suit explanation!

- Yes, that was the point I was trying to make: we need to know what all others (including the lion and the "enemy") think and read. As a matter of fact, heavily biased newspapers tend to have a higher printrole and tend to be read by more pple than the intellectual papers.



http://survivekorea..../pattern_th.jpg



Howdy Gari
I wouldn't consider tabloids the enemy, but, yes, they are a problem (as Hussein pics show) along with the greatest source of pop culture in the world: HOLLYWOOD. If we ignore their appeal among the people and how they promote CULTURAL IMPERIALISM around the world, we are doomed. We must bring people out of their tabloid reading and Hollywood movie watching and offer them something better: being able to make the news, or better, being the star of their own movie.

For one, my movie (meeting hundreds of interesting people while proposing to change the world) is more exciting than any Hollywood can make. Particularly when I promote Banana Revolution.:devil:
  • 0

#5298 Gari-Gari

Gari-Gari

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts

Posted 21 May 2005 - 08:10 AM

Originally posted by donquijote
Howdy Gari
I wouldn't consider tabloids the enemy, but, yes, they are a problem (as Hussein pics show) along with the greatest source of pop culture in the world: HOLLYWOOD. If we ignore their appeal among the people and how they promote CULTURAL IMPERIALISM around the world, we are doomed. We must bring people out of their tabloid reading and Hollywood movie watching and offer them something better: being able to make the news, or better, being the star of their own movie.

For one, my movie (meeting hundreds of interesting people while proposing to change the world) is more exciting than any Hollywood can make. Particularly when I promote Banana Revolution.:devil:



Dear Donquij,

I share your view about cultural imperialism. Actually it is happening with the transfer of "values" that the US is trying to make by bringing "democracy" to Iraq. On the other hand, films about the luxury life style in first world countries have long curruped the minds of people who have to endure hardships and social enjustice: they only seek one thing in life and that is mouving to one of these first world countries and achieving a same life style.
Media are the most important possible allies of the lion. On one of the websites indicated here in the forum I read that the White House has even stated that they view "the media as another interest group to target", clearly - for having them on their side.

Your activites sound very lively and I suppose they are similar though perhaps even more intense than what I used to be involved with at the peace mouvement. The question with such activities is, in which one puts all one s heart and usually also own resources, whether one will be able to make a still a normal living aside of or from them. Usually these are voluntary jobs and they consume up to 18 hours a day... So one needs to be lucky for having the conditions to be able to sacrifice oneself for ideas that need to be fought for but which will not bring any (material) income whatsoever. It is wonderful that you are active with it, in a place where such activites are really needed.




"Courage. By beginning the journey with that word and continuing with faith in God, you will arrive wherever you need to arrive."
http://www.paulocoelho.com
http://www.warriorofthelight.com
  • 0

#5299 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 21 May 2005 - 12:10 PM

Since politician never believe what he says he is surprised when others believe him. (Charles Gaulle)

An honest politicians is one who when he is bought will stay bought .(Simon Cameron)

Politics; a strife of interest masquerading as a contest of principle . (Ambrose Bierce)

Alliance ; In international politics , the union of two thieves who have their hands so deeply into each other pocket that they cannot separately plunder a third. (Ambrose Bierce)

Orators are most vehement when they the weakest cause, as man get on horseback when they cannot walk (Cicero)

These are proverbs which generally cover my opinion on Donq and Gari=Gari :angel: talk .:tralala:



I have to add, that no man has a right to commit aggression
and to restrain him is the main and necessary point from where world should start. :chok:
  • 0

#5300 woj1@cyberonic.

woj1@cyberonic.

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 10667 posts

Posted 21 May 2005 - 12:21 PM

Originally posted by Gari-Gari
"Courage. By beginning the journey with that word and continuing with faith in God, you will arrive wherever you need to arrive."
]



Before you go any further please answer an eternal question;

Why did (God) give us genitals then if he wanted us to think clearly? (Graham Greene)
:silence:
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru