Oliver Stone: Holocaust Blown Way Out of Proportion by Jewish Dominated Media

[PanzerJaeger]

This thread was ostensibly meant to discuss whether the Holocaust is overblown in respect to its actual effects compared to other events during the war and in its historical significance. And if so, why?

I think you've made your point, Megas.

Well, he lost me at jewish controlled media. I do not subscribe to that tinfoil hat conspiracy nonsense, so whatever argument he could have made afterwards is lost on me.

I think that depends on what he meant by 'Jewish controlled'. If he meant some sort of round table of Jews sitting around plotting to hype the Holocaust a la the Council of Zion, then I agree that such an idea is crazy. However, if he means that the Jews have a disproportionate amount of control over the media compared to their numbers, and are thus able to emphasize events that are important to their history - even subconsciously - he may have a point.

I think it is hard to argue that the Holocaust has not taken on a historical significance far beyond the actual events of which it was comprised.

Hitler was a jerk, but I'm not sure why he was terrible and napoleon, ghengis khan, tamerlane, etc are every historians sweethearts. Give it time and Hitler was just a cruel and interesting leader, or else every big whig in history was the worst person ever.

This is a good point. Hitler is no more or less amoral than thousands of leaders throughout history that have plotted the destruction of unwanted subgroups. He simply had a more modern apparatus to accomplish his goals. In fact, some of the first accounts of ethnic cleansing occur in the Torah itself, committed by the Jews at the will of their god.

Yet he is the evil of all evils. You would think that if anti-communist sentiment had anything to do with the media's representation of events, Stalin and Mao would take the top spots. However, they play a distant second fiddle. There is something else at work here, and I think Mr. Stone is correct in his attribution.

[Fragony]

I think it's such a trauma because it was such a cruel reality-check. Europe thought it had reached a certain point of civilisation at the end of the 19th century, the age of optimism. Two wake up calls, the grinder that was WW1 and a full genocide in the second.

[Banquo's Ghost]

I think that depends on what he meant by 'Jewish controlled'. If he meant some sort of round table of Jews sitting around plotting to hype the Holocaust a la the Council of Zion, then I agree that such an idea is crazy. However, if he means that the Jews have a disproportionate amount of control over the media compared to their numbers, and are thus able to emphasize events that are important to their history - even subconsciously - he may have a point.

This paragraph demonstrates the basic assumption that always confuses me in these kind of discussions. Someone please tell me how exactly you define "the Jews"? Are we talking about Israeli citizens, various nationals of a certain genetic heritage (and how much such material qualifies) various nationals who self-identify as such, or various nationals of a certain religious persuasion (and which branches qualify)?

Why are these people (apparently uniquely among human groupings) so completely focussed on a single, agreed agenda?

[rory_20_uk]

Well, it is only senior rabbis who can answer that question, and will check one's family tree to ensure that you're "pure"... Rather like what the Nazis did, but the other way around. Completely different though as otherwise I'm being anti-semetic.

Yes, the Torah / Bible might list many episodes of genocide, but that's OK as it was merely the Chosen People clearing dross out for a place to live. I imagine that would be "Lebensraum" in German. Oh, but Hitler called Eastern Europe that, so it's completely different, otherwise I'm being anti-semetic.

The industrial deaths of Jews was great, but I do think that it tends to blot out all the other episodes of mass killings that were committed, especially on the Eastern Front and in Asia.

[Fragony]

Meanwhile, naturally in Sweden http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/138797 Because it's Sweden this is not a hatecrime but vandalism, a hatecrime is spitting out your chewing-gum near a mosk.

Maybe the ZIONIST MEDIA has a point milking the holocaust, if they do that never noticed it.

[Skullheadhq]

Maybe the ZIONIST MEDIA has a point milking the holocaust, if they do that never noticed it.

Oh, then you missed the 642335465 Holocaust movies they showed last night. It's all made to make us feel bad. Israel lives on pity, do you think we'd swallow all of Israel's **** without the holocaust?
How many movies have you seen about the British concentration camps in South Africa? The genocide of the Indians in South-America? The Dutch concentration camps in Indonesia? The Japanese concentration camps in Indonesia? The systematic gassing of Haitians by Napoleon? And the list goes on and on.

For example, the concentration camps of the British where they exterminated the females and children of the Boers had a significant impact on the Second Boer War, the Holocaust didn't have any impact on the result of WWII, and why do we see so much Holocaust movies instead of Boer Wars movies?

There are only two sorts of WWII movies: 642335465 Holocaust movies and 23345436 D-Day movies, this is sad, because WWII was more than that.

Oliver Stone is an idiot and a liberal nutcase.

X is Y so argument Z is invalid. How are these arguments called?

[Husar]

X is Y so argument Z is invalid. How are these arguments called?

If that's a valid question I'm going to try and prove I learned something on the .org:
I think it's "non sequitur" as in "does not follow" since you cannot logically say that Z is invalid just because Y applies.

This is an interesting topic, I find it hard to make a moral judgement on the Holocaust in comparison to the rest of WW2 because on one hand it wasn't a necessary slaughter, it was just born out of the lunacy of the ones who thought it up, as rory said they probably made a net loss, they just wanted to kill the jews because in their minds the jews had these and these bad traits and were controlling the world etc. On the other hand I don't think organized and industrialised killing is any worse in itself than slaughtering a lot of villagers with a mob of warriors or whatever, both are murder and both are horrible in their own way, some argue gas makes it worse, others could argue that being scalped or torn apart by a rusty blade isn't fun either, in the end I think you cannot say one is worse than the other.

And of course it was at the same time intertwined with WW2 and not, WW2 did not spawn the holocaust as the first concentration camps etc were being built shortly after Hitler came to power, on the other hand the war allowed for a great expansion of the holocaust because of the jews in the newly captured territories. Then there is the point of the war being necessary if Hitler really wanted to exterminate all jews, he'd have to conquer the world, I doubt the USA for example had handed him their jews to kill. But at that point we're arguing about the mind of a someone who had become an insane megalomaniac already.

That it was a major event for those who were in it is an important point, some of them are still alive to tell the story, it's hard to find someone who can give an account of the Mongol horde raping and pillaging in his village so the horror is lost, the same level of technology that allowed the nazis to kill so many jews in an industrial fashion also allowed them and others to keep very detailed records of it, I guess if we had video material of the events that inspired the Song of the Nibelungs, we wouldn't give it to our kids so they could make a school play out of it, I haven't seen a school play about the Iraq war or Kosovo either and most would probably call it very tasteless. that's the impact of history and technology, the video already changed the world before YouTube came along if you ask me, as they say, "a picture is worth a thousand words", and a video consists of thousands of pictures...well, that and it's recent history as I mentioned so I don't really see the surprise in the holocaust being more prominent than many other cruel events.

I also think WW2 dwarfs WW1 in public discussion, movie making, video games etc. even though WW1 was a very horrible, big war as well, but I haven't seen anyone complain about that.

[rory_20_uk]

Concentration camps pre-date WW2, but not extermination camps. I believe that initially the plan was to expel all Jews from Europe. WW2 rendered this impossible as well as allowing more extreme methods to be employed.

[Skullheadhq]

I also think WW2 dwarfs WW1 in public discussion, movie making, video games etc. even though WW1 was a very horrible, big war as well, but I haven't seen anyone complain about that.

WWI shooter.

Objective:
-Put on Gas Mask
-Shoot with artillery
-Surive for 2 months while doing nothing
-Mission COMPLETED!

Next Mission: September-December 1915...

I don't think a WWI shooter would be very succesful. There are some quality movies about WWI, but that's from Chaplin's time and IMHO WWI is much more interesting than WWII, only if the outcome of the war was not clear until the armistice. The war in the west was literally raging to the last minute with no clear victor.

But you make valid points. But I'd like to add that what Hitler is now Napoleon was in the 1800's and Genghis Khan in the 1400's and Atilla in the 500's.

[rvg]

But I'd like to add that what Hitler is now Napoleon was in the 1800's and Genghis Khan in the 1400's and Atilla in the 500's.

I couldn't disagree more. Napoleon, Genghiz Khan and Atilla were Warlords, and their conquests were very rational for a military point of view. Hitler was driven primarily by hate, thus his military strategy was irrational, even if he had some of the most brilliant tacticians at his disposal. Not to mention that he thought he knew how to wage a proper war, when he obviously had no clue.

[HoreTore]

But I'd like to add that what Hitler is now Napoleon was in the 1800's and Genghis Khan in the 1400's and Atilla in the 500's.

Say whaaaat? Napeleon was at the head of a revolution that led to the eventual downfall of every european hereditary dictator, and was spreading civil rights everywhere he went.

Or in order words, the exact opposite of Hitler.