Former Iranian President: "Hitler Saved Europe from the Jews"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Well thats news for Europe:dizzy2: don't you mean that Hitler tried to rid europe of Jews..but of course some people cannot make distinctions eh ?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:


Really ? then why does he use the word Zionist and then also use the word Jew , you claim they are the same and there is no distinction ..funny really when you consider that the Iranian State run TV had an Austrian orthodox rabbi being highly critical of what passes for Zionism in Israel...surely if there was no distinction then this statewould certainly not have a rabbi on TV as he must be a zionist , but if he is not a zionist then they would be undermining the claim you put upon them that jews and zionists are inseperable and indistinguishable

...so panzer would you like to borrow a gun to shoot yourself in the foot or have you managed to do it already:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

---

edit..

Quote:

---

was merely paraphrasing the generally accepted statements coming from various Iranian officials concerning the Holocaust, such as......."The Holocaust never happened, but was a Zionist hoax."

---

ah so that would be the conference about myths about the holocaust and the exploitation and misrepresentation of historical facts concerning the systematic slaughter of european Jews...another translation error thing . :2thumbsup: thank you(though that time it is mainly the BBC{obcviously liberals}whose farsi service screwed upthe translations that were repeated by worldwide media)
Tell me Rotor can you think of one myth about ha-shoah that is often repeated again and again on this forum and no matter how many times people point it out it still gets repeated...(hint ...Americas war against Germany)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Well thats news for Europe:dizzy2: don't you mean that Hitler tried to rid europe of Jews..but of course some people cannot make distinctions eh ?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

---

And so did the English, the French, the Italians, the Spanish, and several other European peoples over the last, say....nine centuries or so. Where stands the Irish on Anti-Zionism, Jewishness, or Anti-Semite feelings? Er...I mean in the past?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

aLWys happy to see you FraG, your posts make ridicule so much easier.
So now my little dutch anti muslim fetishist can you provide an accurate translation of the speech???? ..dreadfuly sory but most of thee translationservices arestill going onabout previous "translations"from memri .Give them a chance to catch up with te propoganda machine
Soooo...you know what they say about assumptions .:yes:

---

Uhmm, it is your claim not mine, man, you must really miss the days that saying anti was enough for applause.

So, the correct translation, I and not just me, asked for it, well several times.

Do tell what they say about assumptions

I appreciate that tempers have been kept in check so far, but a little more civility would not go amiss.

Thank you kindly.

:bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Well thats news for Europe:dizzy2: don't you mean that Hitler tried to rid europe of Jews..but of course some people cannot make distinctions eh ?:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:


Really ? then why does he use the word Zionist and then also use the word Jew , you claim they are the same and there is no distinction ..funny really when you consider that the Iranian State run TV had an Austrian orthodox rabbi being highly critical of what passes for Zionism in Israel...surely if there was no distinction then this statewould certainly not have a rabbi on TV as he must be a zionist , but if he is not a zionist then they would be undermining the claim you put upon them that jews and zionists are inseperable and indistinguishable

...so panzer would you like to borrow a gun to shoot yourself in the foot or have you managed to do it already:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

---

uh huh... Do you have that translation that disputes the one I posted. Thats really all you're needed for, k? ~:)

Hmmm found a few where he does in fact says zionists(jews get more hits though), Tribes might just have a point about translation, but later he talks about 'jews' causing problems so for the purpose of this thread, yes the destinction is rather unclear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rotorgun

And so did the English, the French, the Italians, the Spanish, and several other European peoples over the last, say....nine centuries or so.

---

You mean the ugly track record organized Christianity has concerning Jews ? It actually goes far back enough that the first-phase Muslim conquerors were welcomed as liberators from the oppressive Byzantine, nevermind now Iberian Visigothic, yoke... which they pretty much were too. (Smaller Christian sects at odds with the big boys tended to like them too.)

But hey, it's not like Zionism came out of nowhere.

Quote:

---

Hmmm found a few where he does in fact says zionists(jews get more hits though),

---

What ??OMG you don't mean to say that there are several differnt "translations" avail;able , surely something as simple as a striagjhtforward translation would only give one version...then again I suppose that the message that you want to convey could possibly if you really stretch it to the limits give a slightly or entirelty different version of the actual words...whodathunkit eh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

What ??OMG you don't mean to say that there are several differnt "translations" avail;able , surely something as simple as a striagjhtforward translation would only give one version...then again I suppose that the message that you want to convey could possibly if you really stretch it to the limits give a slightly or entirelty different version of the actual words...whodathunkit eh

---

Don't get too eager, it is 'zionists' as you said but later in the article it says 'jews', neither of us speaks farsi so your guess is as good as mine, but ok I admit you were right on how the title was presented.

then again Frag there are many types of zionism , not all of which are Jewish , it does leave an even larger scope for misrepresentation doesn't it...and the main complaints about memri do concern misrepresentation and decontextualisation in their "translation" services .

He makes a distinction, but immediately goes on attributing the Holocaust, and then the shoah in particular, as an event that had been provocated beforehand by some kind of Zionist plot or somesuch idiocy.

Does he ?
I thought he blamed it on a European movement that blamed everything from military defeat to the repossesion problems facing Bavarian farmers on the Jews ..
Oh well you learn something new every day .

Wasn't the holocaust in fact not one big robbery? Would be interesting to know how much capital the jews really had and how socialistic the nazi's really were. Replace 'rich' or 'company's' with 'jews' et voila. Why hate jews what did they ever do to us, makes no sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Does he ?
I thought he blamed it on a European movement that blamed everything from military defeat to the repossesion problems facing Bavarian farmers on the Jews ..
Oh well you learn something new every day .

---

In this video (note that this is only a clipping from Rafsanjani's full speech, one proper piece of criticism concerning MEMRI) our friendly beard attributes the Nazi's Final Solution not to a Jewish problem, but to a Zionist one. In this way he implies that "normal" Jews should distance themselves from Zionist ones since it was the Zionists who brought the shoah on the Jewish people. Which, as you note in your post, is utter crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baba Ga'on

In this video (note that this is only a clipping from Rafsanjani's full speech, one proper piece of criticism concerning MEMRI) our friendly beard attributes the Nazi's Final Solution not to a Jewish problem, but to a Zionist one. In this way he implies that "normal" Jews should distance themselves from Zionist ones since it was the Zionists who brought the shoah on the Jewish people. Which, as you note in your post, is utter crap.

---

Classic rhetorical tactic by Mr. R., though. Allows him to maintain his "Israel must be smashed" stance that plays so well among the non-Shia M.E. audience while providing plausible deniability regarding anti-semitism. Can simply label Israel as the problem while ostensibly (and actually?) not being racist. Iran's policies regarding its native Jewry seem to support this stance as well. If this involves a little historical "redaction" on R.'s part, he wouldn't be the first political speaker to do so by a long chalk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Wasn't the holocaust in fact not one big robbery? Would be interesting to know how much capital the jews really had and how socialistic the nazi's really were. Replace 'rich' or 'company's' with 'jews' et voila. Why hate jews what did they ever do to us, makes no sense.

---

Christian European hatred of the Jews was always kinda light on the rational reasons side, outside the facts they were A) an unapologetically distinct and noticeable group (and we all know how well Joe Average likes that in general, nevermind when the times are trying - and for the common folk, they were that more or less all the time...) B) widely scattered in small groups and hence fairly easy to victimize if necessary C) got a lot of crap piled on them by the rather influential religious authorities for a number of murky reasons, which sort of stuck.

The Church did have a ban on usury going for a long time so that left the Jews and their real enough contacts with each other as the main moneylenders and proto-bankers in Europe for quite a while; this did make many of them quite rich, although assorted regulations often made it next to impossible for them to display their wealth - nevermind now that it would have been distinctly dangerous for them to do so anyway. Due to some cultural reasons Jews also tended to be among the better educated and more literate people around, forming a sort of grassroots intelligentsia - Jewish doctors were in fairly high demand among the more pragmatically minded aristocrats for example, AFAIK.

In any case I think I don't need to explain why all that did not particularly help the opinion the unwashed majority held them in. Or the more dogmatic prejudices.

Later on, especially in the more primitive backwaters of the "serf states" of Central and Eastern Europe, the Jews were one of the few groups with any real degree of financial savvy and competence. This made them the natural middlemen of assorted potentates, and the serfs readily enough transferred the resentement they felt for their superiors to the "middle management" level as well - doubly so as it was a whole lot safer. Not that the Jews were any less prone to abusing the power and authority such positions gave them than anyone else, of course. Tax farmers and loan sharks tend to be somewhat unpleasant anywhere, especially as their bosses tend not give a hoot about their doings so long as they get their dues.

And then there was of course the general developement towards a "persecuting society" in Europe, argued to have been well on its way already in the Middle Ages (when lepers and Jews were curiously readily lumped together for ostracization, and often with oddly similar arguments), and not particularly hindered by the savage religious wars and later militant-jingoist nationalisms.


As for the Nazis, meh. Hitler made a point of purging the people who took the "socialist" part too literally; you will recall he wasted no time getting cozy with Big Business and outlawing labour unions and similar "hives of Bolshevist villainy"... The Nazis' curiously archaic policies of pillaging were more the result of their quite questionable fiscal management practices (and sheer incompetence thereof) and the resulting shortages of funds and resources, and plain old abuses of largely unfettered power over your fellow man which tends to do bad things to anyone's head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Church [I

did[/I] have a ban on usury going for a long time so that left the Jews and their real enough contacts with each other as the main moneylenders and proto-bankers in Europe for quite a while; this did make many of them quite rich, although assorted regulations often made it next to impossible for them to display their wealth - nevermind now that it would have been distinctly dangerous for them to do so anyway. Due to some cultural reasons Jews also tended to be among the better educated and more literate people around, forming a sort of grassroots intelligentsia - Jewish doctors were in fairly high demand among the more pragmatically minded aristocrats for example, AFAIK.

---

In some cases, it was the fact that the rulers of many "Christian" nations owed so much to the Jewish bankers who loaned them the money for their wars that led to many a sort of mini-holocaust. Witness the behavior of the great Plantagenet King Richard, Cour de Lion, who presided over one such purging. It was a convenient way to rid himself of an enormous debt. (The Plantagenet Chronicles)

Quote:

---

As for the Nazis, meh. Hitler made a point of purging the people who took the "socialist" part too literally; you will recall he wasted no time getting cozy with Big Business and outlawing labour unions and similar "hives of Bolshevist villainy"... The Nazis' curiously archaic policies of pillaging were more the result of their quite questionable fiscal management practices (and sheer incompetence thereof) and the resulting shortages of funds and resources, and plain old abuses of largely unfettered power over your fellow man which tends to do bad things to anyone's head.

---

Once again vast sums of wealth were gotten from the victims of the Nazi demonization and extermination of the Jews. It is interesting to note how similar the propoganda is from the various times.

I'll leave the history of jew hating to others, they have been here forever. No such thing as anti-semitism. Not with us at least.

Yeah, it's been kinda out of fashion in the West since '45 for some reason. Wasn't too unusual before that though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I'll leave the history of jew hating to others, they have been here forever. No such thing as anti-semitism. Not with us at least.

---

Eh? Holland has the dubious honor of having the highest death rate per deportation for victims of the Holocaust anywhere. And, no, that is hardly only attributable to them land-grabbin' Jerries. It had to do with widespread collaboration amongst state agencies, and, yes, Jewish (I'm thinking Jewish councils here) and Dutch civilian groups as well, often with full knowledge of what they were partaking in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baba Ga'on

Eh? Holland has the dubious honor of having the highest death rate per deportation for victims of the Holocaust anywhere. And, no, that is hardly only attributable to them land-grabbin' Jerries. It had to do with widespread collaboration amongst state agencies, and, yes, Jewish (I'm thinking Jewish councils here) and Dutch civilian groups as well, often with full knowledge of what they were partaking in.

---

That is because one's religion was registered, made it pretty easy for the nazi's. Could have burned registers of course, but who sees something like the holocaust comming, nobody did. Of course a lot were caught, it's a small country and there were I dunno how many jews, a few hundred thousand? We also have the the most people helping/active resistance I believe, railroadstrike was quite something. Without calling any names, somewhere to the east people needed little encouragement from the nazi's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

That is because one's religion was registered, made it pretty easy for the nazi's. Could have burned registers of course, but who sees something like the holocaust comming, nobody did. Of course a lot were caught, it's a small country and there were I dunno how many jews, a few hundred thousand? We also have the the most people helping/active resistance I believe, railroadstrike was quite something. Without calling any names, somewhere to the east people needed little encouragement from the nazi's.

---

There was a reason hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Jews were desperately trying to leave Europe after 1933, you know... the Holocaust was not something that just came dropping out of the fair blue Aryan sky above the Eagle's Nest one day to which Hitler and chums said, "Hey, that sounds fun! We'll do that today." In fact, relatives of mine that decided to cooperate with the Nazi's when deportations began were immediately told that they were going to be sent off to their deaths. Being the true blind shtetl Jews (and people under enormous duress) that they were, they didn't believe it. They were some of the first victims of the shoah.

Also, as the Dutch national historian, Loe de Jong, has amply proven, there was widespread collaboration throughout the government apparatus with the occupiers. Bureaucratic mindset, you see. Those in control may change, but those executing their policies don't and all that jazz. Them cars that brought people to Westerbork? NS cars, friend. And the people that were in them were found through registers provided by bureucrats as well as through the ignorant collaboration of the Jewish Council.

So yeah, the Dutch history with us Jews ain't exactly uncheckered, to say the very least.

Yeah you have a point, whatever is in charge will want to be in charge, that is kinda strange. But you cannot say the dutch are an enemy of the jews, the most you can say is that we didn't care. That lack of care is probably why jews always have been here, if it has to be ugly so be it but don't say it's evil. You are jewish, ever had any reason to defend being that? I doubt it, I have never in my life met someone with a gripe against jews and I have many peculiar aquintances.

I never said that all Dutchmen were enemies of my people. My point was that Holland, despite all the imagery of a liberal paradise for all humanity, is far removed from an uncheckered past concerning minorities within its borders. Holland and what remained of its bureaucratic apparatus was no exception in Europe during WW2 concerning the Holocaust.

Hitlers mistake was that he thought he was fighting the "Jews" but really.. he was being used by them.

Not all Germans are nazis, Not all chinese are commys and Not all Jews are evil. But some of them are. Holocaust are not a fact yet.. However eventhough some of the evidence are dodgy once and some peoples says there were no holocaust one thing we know for sure is the fact that Hitler was not a kind and gentle knight in shiny armour. He might have saved milions of Germans by giving them an job, he might have rebuilt Germanys confidence, he might have caught some of the members who plan a new world order. But at the same time he killed countless innocent people all over the world.

Thats me trying to be objective as possible. Sorry for going off topic a bit. If this is about Hitler Saving Europe from Jews (Jews done nothing wrong.. Its just this secret organization with lots of Jews in it...) he failed epically. Those lads got everything they wanted (Money.. more influence..) in the last two world wars and they want another one.

Look out Iran.. Your next on the hit list.

Uh... we have like the minute bureaucratic records of the Nazi death industry, at least one surviving meeting record of the "final solution" order being handed down, and no shortage of witness accounts (including surviving inmates) and material evidence concerning the camps and other funny stuff themselves...

How do you mean, "not a fact" ? Millions of Jews and Gypsies and others the Nazi ideology found undesirable didn't just vanish into thin air from Europe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baba Ga'on

I never said that all Dutchmen were enemies of my people. My point was that Holland, despite all the imagery of a liberal paradise for all humanity, is far removed from an uncheckered past concerning minorities within its borders. Holland and what remained of its bureaucratic apparatus was no exception in Europe during WW2 concerning the Holocaust.

---

Well the only party that was still allowed was the NSB, those officials were ranked highest and crap flows down, not really surprising. The real collaborators are of course Colijn and his buddies who decimated army funding when we kinda needed an army, allowing the germans to conquer us in 5 shamefull day. Loe de Jong was linked with the WRR I believe, and as we all know they can't be taken seriously. Puppets of the pvda, no scientists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beefy187

Hitlers mistake was that he thought he was fighting the "Jews" but really.. he was being used by them.

Not all Germans are nazis, Not all chinese are commys and Not all Jews are evil. But some of them are. Holocaust are not a fact yet.. However eventhough some of the evidence are dodgy once and some peoples says there were no holocaust one thing we know for sure is the fact that Hitler was not a kind and gentle knight in shiny armour. He might have saved milions of Germans by giving them an job, he might have rebuilt Germanys confidence, he might have caught some of the members who plan a new world order. But at the same time he killed countless innocent people all over the world.

Thats me trying to be objective as possible. Sorry for going off topic a bit. If this is about Hitler Saving Europe from Jews (Jews done nothing wrong.. Its just this secret organization with lots of Jews in it...) he failed epically. Those lads got everything they wanted (Money.. more influence..) in the last two world wars and they want another one.

Look out Iran.. Your next on the hit list.

---

Are you on drugs? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Are you on drugs?

---

Don't be silly Louis , look ....Beefy....its mad cow disease .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Are you on drugs? :inquisitive:

---

God help me, I lol'd so hard :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: