Is there a 'World Jewish Conspiracy'?

[Heresson]

Originally posted by molly bloom

Where did you get that notion from ? None of it is eye-witness reporting as we know it. The various gospel texts were written well after the event and collated by others.

There is some doubt. And anyway, it's been in the times people still remembered stuff. They didn't have to tell the truth, but that's better than speculations we're forced too.

So how on earth are we meant to read this:

Are You having troubles with reading, or troubles with reasoning? I'm just saying that it's the only source, but I am not saying it's 100% true. I'm not even saying that it's 75% true. I'm just saying that the burden of proof is on those who try to prove it wrong.

Only after it was mentioned by me, in response to your remark about any critic of the 'official bible version' having to show their lack of bias !

as if it makes any difference. I didn't mention anti-judaic bias, because it was obvious. Yes, a critic of the Bible has to prove lack of bias. Am I to believe You don't agree with that notion?

In which respect ? Just hate the faith and not the person ?

Yes. I'm glad I could open your eyes and widen your horizons once more.

Especially the last century...

If I didn't know that You aren't that dumb and biased, I'd think You suggest Christianity is to blame for Holocaust...

I wasn't aware you were doing so; a standard for you to aim for, perhaps...

I'm too busy guiding You to it right now.

Of course it does, if we're meant to believe it's an UNBIASED UNCRITICAL historical account with an accurate depiction of events that are meant to have occurred involving Jews and Romans.

Dear molly, I'd like to inform You there's something named "content", and something what people call "commentary". Look it up or ask your mom. The point is that bias of the commentary doesn't necessarily mean that the content isn't true.

In English, please.

Oh, sorry, a silly mistake. It should have been "they" instead of "there", I believe. One could surmise that, I guess You not.

In logic, sense or language skills ? Be more precise.

language

No, really ? I had missed out on the four gospels bit...

Yeah, so it seams.

Wow. You didn't win any debating prizes, did you ?

Stop talking to yourself

Obvious from my posts. And not what you claimed I was trying to do.

I don't think that quote proves anything. The situation was different.

Why ? Why not the gospels ?

Of course, it's one of the possibilities. But just one.

I prefer not to speculate needlessly.

You prefer not to think

I meant citizens as 'subjects'. If you can be illogical and vague, I can occasionally be imprecise.

Oh, if only it was the only time...

Really ? How many legions has the Pope ? as a Georgian once said.

It wasn't ever possible for the Church, militant or otherwise, to 'crush' all the Jews.

I do not have to make fun of that statement. It's enough silly itself.

Thank You for admitting You're wrong in the Danish case.

Originally posted by BeBro


The "Regular europeans (...) were more anti semitic than the church" part is debatable, several medieval monarchs gave Jews a special status (like Friedrich II. for all Jews in the HRE) incl. special protection - against payment though - but this was similar to the practice in muslim countries where non-muslims (as dhimmis) had to pay special taxes.

Frederic II is everything but a regular European of his times.

[BeBMan]

However, he wasn't the only one granting that status to Jews.

[Heresson]

I'm not saying that; I'm just saying that the example is bad. And the rulers in general are not "regular" people.

[BeBMan]

Sigh, above my post I quoted Barnabas' original which has:

"Regular europeans be them peasants or monarchs...." (I reduced peasants and monarchs alike to some little (...).

See the link now? Barnabas sets regular people against church, which is fine for the purpose of this thread.

Besides, only Germans are allowed to be pedantic.

[Heresson]

You're not a German. You're a germanised Polabian. Oneday You shall throw off that germanic crust covering You

[Barnabas]

Only the english and dutch are germans, germans are germanised poles anc celts

[Heresson]

Dividing Germany between Poland and France
But we'll get the crappy part

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Heresson

(On the Catholic Church's rapprochement with Italian Fascists and the German Nazis and abandonment of Catholic conservative parties)

Yeah, surely they thought about Jews when doing that, and surely they knew exactly what would happen to Jews

Now, where was I before I left to do some more interesting things than read through your attempts at arguments ?

Oh yes...

Both the conservative Catholics/clerical parties and the Vatican aligned themselves with Mussolini's party in Italy- a strange choice one might think, for Mussolini was an ex-socialist who didn't make a scret of his atheism.

The same thing occurred in France with the right wing Action Francaise headed by another atheist/agnostic, Charles Maurras- who ended up being approached by Pius X.

The same pope who condemned a Catholic party in France- the French Christian Democrats.

Pius XI continued in the same vein by criticising the Italian Christian Democrats, the Popolari, and just before the infamous 'March On Rome' by Mussolini in 1922 ordered all Catholic priests to withdraw from politics, effectively neutralizing any opposition from a genuinely Catholic conservative party to Mussolini.

Two years later when Giacomo Matteotti leader of the Italian Socialists was assassinated, Pius XI's response was to condemn the Popolari (!) and order all priests to resign- from a Catholic party.

A no doubt grateful Mussolini then sets about agreeing the Concordat with the Vatican- but lets be fair- after doing all he could to neutralize aby effective Catholic parliamentary opposition to an atheist led Fascist Party, Pius XI still had gall to whinge in the Papal encyclical Quadragesimo Anno that Mussolini didn't manage to honour all the elements of the Concordat.

Good to see he had his priorities right...

This of course is all repeated in the following decade in Germany. The Vatican abandons the German Catholic Centre Party- even telling Monsignor Kaas, the leader of the Centrists, to instruct his supporters to vote for the Enabling Act which formed the legal basis for Hitler's dictatorship.

Monsignor Kaas then went to Rome in person, to work out the details of the Nazi-Vatican Concordat.

The Catholic Church and two Popes approved of rightwing antisemitic parties in favour of Catholic conservative parties which were democratic and worked within the parliamentary systems.

Your notion that somehow the Catholic Church was
'uninformed' or 'deceived' as to the antisemitic natures of say, Action Francaise or the German Nazi Party, is laughable at best.

The aim of RCC was to stop communism, not to hurt the Jews.

As far as I'm concerned the aim of the Church from Pius X onwards has been to stop Socialism, modernism and any other -ism it disapproves of.

If stopping Communism (often associated solely with Judaism and Jews by Catholics, Fascists and the Nazis) also meant the death of a few hundred or thousand Jews- well the Church had been responsible for more than a few Jewish deaths in the past- what would a few more matter ?

As far as I know, even later Zabotynski wanted to get a deal with Hitler to fulfill his zionist goals, so it's not like no-one was talking to Hitler but Teh Evil Catholics.

Aside from being irrelevant and addressing a point I hadn't made, Jabotynski's actions meant the saving of Jewish lives.

The church's hierarchy, including the pope, was helping the Jews as well.

Of course! By abandoning parliamentary Catholic parties in Italy, France and Germany, by getting Catholics to vote for the Enabling Act in Nazi Germany, by concluding Concordats with Hitler and Mussolini and by helping to run the Slovakian and Croatian Nazi satellite states.

Which both did so much to help Jews find a final resting place...

Yeah, Sweden is so far, far away.

Gosh, the debating skills of a spoilt 8 year old girl. Here's what you said, in case you forget:

Denmark is surrounded mostly by sea, with countries that were not involved in conflict within sight.

No mention of Denmark's only land border being with Nazi Germany, of the proximity of Nazi occupied Norway and the Netherlands, of the German navy, of Denmark's occupation since 1940, or the enormous effort it took to save Denmark's Jews.

Nor that the Protestant Danes refused, ON PRINCIPLE, to treat their Jewish compatriots any differently from themselves.

I note now that thanks to my information, 'neutral countries' has now been reduced to just Sweden.

I'm glad I have helped improve your knowledge of both geography and World War II history.

You can see Sweden from Copenhagen.

And so presumably could the German army, S.S., navy and air force.

Danes were considered a brotherly race and didn't face the consequences that may have been faced by other nations

Rubbish. From 1942 (a year before the Jews were rescued) Hitler's policy towards Denmark changed.

S.S. Obergruppenfuhrer Karl Werner Best became the Nazi Reich-Plenipotentiary in Denmark. Both sabotage and active resistance increased in Denmark- a fairly high risk strategy for Danish resistance members, given their proximity to Nazi Germany, the size of Denmark and lack of any great tracts of forest or mountain ranges to escape to.

In August of 1943 the German army occupied Copenhagen, disarmed Danish forces , dissolved the Danish parliament and placed the King under arrest. Then they declared martial law and a state of emergency. The Germans then scheduled the round-up of Denmark's Jews for October 1st 1943.

Even when some Danish Jews failed to escape and were deported to Theresienstadt, the Danish government persisted in its efforts to visit the camp and check on the condition of its citizens. Thanks to this care, none were sent to Auschwitz.

Oh and you also managed to get this wrong too:

it (Denmark) only helped danish jews- when it comes to the ones seeking help from other countries, they were left to die.

It's estimated that 1 500 of the Jews resident in Denmark were recent refugees from Nazi Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia.

German authorities didn't try to stop the action.

Utter toss. German patrol boats intercepted Danish fishing boats and searched them.

Unlike Jews in eastern Europe, Jews were assimilated and it was easier to treat them as a part of danish nation.

As well as being irrelevant (again) many Jews were assimilated in Germany, Austria, France and the Netherlands and Italy. It didn't save them.

I must say you're going out of your way to denigrate the unique effort of the Danes as a nation and the risks they took to save the Jewish population.

The only country in Nazi occupied Europe to do so, with the Lutheran Church of Denmark being a noted opponent and critic of the Nazi's proposed treatment of the Jews.

Much like the Protestant Confessional Church of Prussia in Germany in that respect... the only Christian body in the period from 1933-1945 to speak out again and again at the Nazi regime's treatment of Jews.

Compares well with the German Catholic Church which could only manage real concern for the euthanasia programme. But then that didn't just kill Jews...

I particularly like the advice of (Catholic) Bishop Berning to an Auschwitz guard:

One must not obey immoral orders, but nor must one endanger one's own life.

Makes you wonder where the Catholic Church would be if the early Christian martyrs had taken such an equivocal standpoint...

No, the ones that were in Denmark and were asking for help.

Which they did, and more.

Well, there were 100 000 or so Jews that survived hidden in Poland. Some were hiding themselves in the forests etc, of course.

Estimating Poland's pre-1939 population of Jews at 3- 3.5 million, and allowing for the fact that many Jews fled to Soviet occupied areas of Poland, and that Poland had huge areas of forest to escape to and bordered Soviet Russia, should we really be that impressed ?

I note you don't give any source for your figure of Jewish survivors. Thankfully you don't imply that Catholic Poles or the Polish Catholic Church hierarchy saved all of them.

My figure for surviving Polish Jews is somewhat lower- between 50 and 70 000.

This is divided between those still in Poland, serving in the Polish army and in camps in Germany. The Soviet Union also rescued a further 180 000 who were repatriated.

(about Denmark saving only 'Danish' Jews)
I've read it in one article years ago. I don't remember it, but try searching the web...

Ah, the Ned approach to history.

Not interested.

If you assert something as fact, prove it.

Instead of information on Denmark's treatment of non-Danish Jewish refugees, you appear to have provided me a link to a website about the history of the Trotskyite movement in Denmark. I'd ask why, but I'm not that interested.

And even better- a link to an article detailing that 20 (not 20 000, or 200 or 200 000) Jews were expelled from Denmark to face imprisonment by the Nazis.

Compares rather well with the numbers deported by Catholic Croatia and Slovakia and Austria and Italy and France and Belgium....

You are very biased against catholics, molly.

As a Catholic I find that very funny indeed.
My bias is for historical accuracy, not scapegoating Protestants and blame-shifting.

But what's your bias ?

mali bloom sucks

From your signature.

Juvenile and futile, but a useful reminder of yet another thread where your 'argument' ended up in shreds and tatters .

Thanks to me.

Serb has the whackiest political convictions, but I do not have a "problem" with him, personally. He's on my buddy list. It's probably because I can't really take him seriously. Molly Bloom, on the other hand...

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=166345

Oh, I love how you love me.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Heresson

There is some doubt. (Of the New Testament's supposed historical accuracy)

No, really ? What tipped you off ?

Getting the Roman governors of Judaea wrong, getting Jewish practice and religious law wrong, the Synoptic Gospels disagreeing with each other and with John's gospel...

It's not as if any of this is some big slander cooked up by me last week.

Christian scholars and theologians have been casting doubt on the supposed historical accuracy and inerrancy of the New Testament narratives at least since Reimarus was Professor of Oriental Languages at the University of Hamburg in the first half of the 18th Century.

Isn't it about time you caught up ?

And anyway, it's been in the times people still remembered stuff.

Oh that's all right. People always remember things correctly, don't they ?

They didn't have to tell the truth, but that's better than speculations we're forced too.

You're the one speculating. I'm addressing facts.

Are You having troubles with reading ?

No, with your writing.

Or troubles with reasoning?

I wouldn't dream of encroaching on your territory.

I'm just saying that it's the only source

They're not the only extant gospels, nor are they the only source for information on Pilate or 1st Century A.D. Judaism.

but I am not saying it's 100% true.

I'm afraid it's quite difficult to tell from your poorly expressed English.

I'm just saying that the burden of proof is on those who try to prove it wrong.

I'm afraid that's not how evidence works.

as if it (mentioning anti-Jewish bias) makes any difference. I didn't mention anti-judaic bias, because it was obvious.

Oh good grief. How dense can one person be ?

The split between the Christians adhering to Jewish laws and rites and those in favour of allowing them to lapse is crucially important especially in view of the Jewish Revolt of 66-73 A.D. and what Christians who were not adherents to the Jewish laws would do with the documents and narratives they had both at the time of the Revolt and later.

Not mentioning the obvious anti-Jewish bias in the New Testament narratives (and how this would later affect the Church's treatment of and relationship to Jews) is a major mistake in any discussion of Christian bias towards Jews.

Yes, a critic of the Bible has to prove lack of bias.

I'm in favour of historical accuracy and against stupid sweeping statements like this:

The New Testament claims otherwise and there are no other sources about it, right?

There's my bias.

Am I to believe You don't agree with that notion?

Find a sensible 'notion' of yours buttressed by facts and I'm likely to agree with it.

Yes. (on agreeing that there is a supposed 'difference' between faith-based antisemitism and racial antisemitism)

It would have been little short of miraculous for the Catholic Church in the 15th or 16th Century or for the monarchs of Reconquista Spain to have promulgated a race based theory of antisemitism.

Especially given that they weren't aware of the Scientific Revolution of the 17th Century, Linnaeus or the Enlightenment or 19th Century science.

To be fair though, their treatment of both the Jewish and Moorish Christian convert communities in Spain, its colonies and the Portuguese Empire has all the hallmarks of the ethnic cleansing of the 20th Century.

I'm glad I could open your eyes and widen your horizons once more.

My eyes weren't shut, nor my horizons truncated. You do have a big opinion of yourself...

If I didn't know that You aren't that dumb and biased,

If I could only say the same about you. Your delightful homage to me in your signature indicates otherwise...

I'd think You suggest Christianity is to blame for Holocaust...

Surely not. Not that Christianity which saw so many pogroms, mass burnings, and murders of Jews.

Where should we begin ? Not with the (as you admit) openly antisemitic New Testament.

How about:

A.D. 418 : Bishop Severus incites Christians in Mahon to burn synagogues, seize the Jews and forcibly baptise them.

Byzantine conquest of Vandal Kingdom by Belisarius- edict ordering conversion of synagogues into churches, A.D. 533 .

In the city of Burion Jews are forced to convert, their synagogue turned into a church. They flee to the more hospitable Berber tribes of the interior, some of whom convert to Judaism.

The non-Christian Sassanids of Iran were rather more tolerant towards Jews at this time- Jews were allowed to govern themselves through the office of an exilarch.

Emperor Justinian I's Novellae added to the corpus iuris civilis- forbids the reading of the Torah in Hebrew, allowing it only in Greek.

Abolition of the Jewish patriarchate by Byzantium.

Jews forbidden to reside in Jerusalem, destruction of Samaritan community after a revolt in 484 A.D. . Emperor Zeno erects a church on Mount Gerizim.

Axum goes to war against the Jewish Himyarite Kingdom (Axum is friendly with Byzantium) in Arabia.

Emperor Heraclius promulgates an edict of forced conversion on remaining Jews in 632 A.D. after his forces have massacred Jewish communities in the Holy Land. Jews are forbidden to reside in Jerusalem, following Heraclius's revival of the pagan Hadrian's edict.


In non-Byzantine Christian Visigothic Spain things were quite similar:

The Third Church Council of Toledo in 589 A.D. (under the auspices of King Reccared) declared that Catholicism was to be the sole religion in the country. Jews were forbidden to marry Christian women or own Christian slaves.

In the County of Barcelona the regional council of priests compels all residents to rest on Sunday.

In 612 A.D. King Sisebut orders the release of any Christian slaves owned by Jews.

In 613 A.D. King Sisebut expels from his realm any Jews who refuse to convert to Christianity (a man ahead of his time, obviously...) .

In 633 A.D. the Fourth Church Council of Toledo calls for more restrictions on Jews and begins the persecution of converted Jews.

Let's skip a few centuries...

1012 A.D. Emperor Henry II expels Jews from Mainz who refuse to convert to Christianity. Among those forcibly baptised is the son of Rabbenu Gershom.

1096 A.D. 3rd May: Crusaders and Christian citizens of Speyer kill 11 Jews.

18th May: Christians attack and kill Jews in Worms. 800 Jews massacred by Crusaders and Christian citizens.

27th May: In Wurzburg 1 100 Jews are killed, including some who choose suicide rather than forced conversion.

That's a brief look at some of the Rhineland pogroms and massacres- carried out by Christians and those going to fight for the Christian faith in the Holy Land.

England:

1190 A.D. Massacre of Jews in Clifford's Tower, York.

November of 1278- mass arrests and execution of Jews in London

1290 A.D. Edict of Banishment compels Jews to leave England by November 1st on pain of death. Destruction of Jewish houses and property and synagogues.

Moving along...

1399 A.D. 'Blood libel' in Poznan results in massacre of Jews and looting of Jewish property and neighbourhood.

1407 A.D. University students of Cracow massacre Jews.

1420 A.D. Duke Albert V orders seizure of all Austrian Jews and confiscation of their property.

1421 A.D. March: Duke Albert orders burning of 92 Jewish men and 122 women; expels remaining Austrian Jews confiscating Jewish property.

1495 A.D. Jews expelled from Lithuania and Cracow (allowed to reside only in Kazimierz).

1475 A.D. Following the discovery of a child's body in a Jewish courtyard in Trento in Italy, Jewish community leaders are arrested, interrogated and burned at the stake. Pope Sixtus IV halts the judicial proceedings (not before the burnings alas..) but they are reopened after a papal court of inquiry justifies the 'blood libel'.

Et cetera, et cetera. Jews could even be massacred by 'association'- during the campaign to suppress Hussite Revolt, for instance.

And what helped all these expulsions, confiscations, fines, burnings, and mass murders along ?

Antisemitic Passion and Mystery plays, performed with the consent of the Church hierarchy.

Preaching against the Jews, the publication of anti-Jewish manuscripts and the decoration of places of pilgrimage, churches and cathedrals with anti-Jewish motifs- the personification of confusion, deceit and treachery and lying as 'Synagogue' for instance.

The notion that the Catholic Church was 'verus Israel', and the repeated message that the Jews murdered Christ, and were responsible for kidnapping and murdering Christian children, taking the host and desecrating it.

It took the (non-religious) French Revolution for the spread of the idea that Jews could have civil rights

I'm too busy guiding You to it right now.

I don't need a seeing eye dog, thanks.

Dear molly, I'd like to inform You there's something named "content",

No, really. You should try acquainting yourself more closely with it. Fewer opinions and more facts would help you.

and something what people call "commentary".

Oh I recognise that all right.

Look it up or ask your mom.

Mmm, those 8 year old girl debating skills again.

The point is that bias of the commentary doesn't necessarily mean that the content isn't true.

Good grief. So depicting the Jews as braying for the death of Jesus and the Jewish leaders as arranging for Jesus to be killed by the Roman authorities is just unbiased reportage.

You must watch too much Fox News.

Oh, sorry, a silly mistake.

Just one ?

It should have been "they" instead of "there", I believe. One could surmise that, I guess You not.

You know you have a lot of nerve to comment on my inability to comprehend your mangled attempts at English.

The fault is in your writing, not in my intelligence. Especially when you attempt to patronize me with:

I guess You not

Well....



Fluently incompetent in two languages, eh ?

Yeah, so it seams.

Yes- bad grammar, inept colloquial usage, atrocious spelling- are you trying to depict yourself as some kind of Polish version of Manuel from 'Fawlty Towers' ?

Stop talking to yourself

8 year old girl again.

I don't think that quote proves anything.

Well:

One could surmise it does, I guess You not.

You prefer not to think

That 8 year old girl is back....

Oh, if only it was the only time...

Shall we discuss your pathetic inability to locate Denmark on a map or your abysmal knowledge of Mali's history or Denmark's history in World War II ?

I do not have to make fun of that statement.

On the evidence so far, you don't have the requisite skills.

It's enough silly itself.

Good yours English are, okay ?

Thank You for admitting You're wrong in the Danish case.

Oh dear.

As well as being all adrift on WWII Danish history and geography, you're now experiencing some awful delusions.

Originally posted by Heresson
Also, it'd be nice if You did not expect me to don't know what I'm talking about.


Really ?

quote:
Btw, Mali sux.


Indeed ?

quote:

Be more precise, plz


O.k. so:

quote:

99,99% people of the world do not even know what or where is Mali.



Consistency is everything:

quote:

OK. Mali isn't that bad.

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=136511&highlight=Mali+heresson

Lest we forget.

Do not praise molly. He's conceited anyway.

But you put temptation in my path...

[Arrian]

Stop insulting 8 year old girls.

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

The Catholic Church and the Pope did speak out against the Nazis and IIRC did act to save some number of Jews from the camps. Could they have done more? Quite likely but then so could have a large number of actors at the time.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
The Catholic Church and the Pope did speak out against the Nazis

They also urged German Catholic members of parliament to vote for the Enabling Act of 1933 which ushered in Hitler's dictatorship in Germany.

A Catholic priest was head of the Slovakian fascist state which allied itself with Hitler and killed Jews.

The Vatican and Catholics in France, Italy and Croatia and Germany helped Nazis, war criminals and mass murderers escape justice.

and IIRC did act to save some number of Jews from the camps.

Too few, too late and that would be a moral obligation on any Christian.

Could they have done more?

In comparison with Denmark's Lutheran Church and Prussia's Protestant Confessional Church ?

Hell, yes.

[Heresson]

Your "arguments" are that catholics made it easier for the fascists to obtain power. Perhaps - but that doesn't prove their antisemitism in any way.
You're commiting a silly mistake of judging someone by your knowledge of events that were yet to come.
Not to mention that antisemitism wasn't anything really special in these days. But no-one could expect what's happened.

Aside from being irrelevant and addressing a point I hadn't made, Jabotynski's actions meant the saving of Jewish lives.

So it's OK for a Jew to talk with Hitler to serve jewish interest, but Teh Evil for RCC to talk with Hitler to serve what it thought was in catholic interest? Mollybloomism at its finest.

Gosh, the debating skills of a spoilt 8 year old girl.

You must be my younger sister, then.

No mention of Denmark's only land border being with Nazi Germany, of the proximity of Nazi occupied Norway and the Netherlands, of the German navy, of Denmark's occupation since 1940, or the enormous effort it took to save Denmark's Jews.

I do not find it necessary to write about what is obvious. Your attempts at blurring the quite obvious picture of your defeat in this case are not only not successful, but pathethic.
Again:
- Denmark had HUGE autonomy under german rule
- the numbers of Jews to be saved was tiny and it can hardly be called "enormous effort" to save them. Netherlands and Norway were close, but Sweden even closer. And, while You insinuated that Sweden would not necessarily accept Jews (by writing that it was trading with Germany), it's turned out that Sweden announced it will accept any fleeing Jews...

I note now that thanks to my information, 'neutral countries' has now been reduced to just Sweden.

I've already admitted commiting this mistake 2 posts ago

And so presumably could the German army, S.S., navy and air force.

these were in all occupied countries. Not all were treaten in the same mild way as Denmark and not all had a neutral state (that's already announced it'll accept Jews) next to them.

Rubbish. From 1942 (a year before the Jews were rescued) Hitler's policy towards Denmark changed.

Still they were treaten much much better than eastern-european countries... You must be completely ignorant or biased not to recognise that.

Utter toss. German patrol boats intercepted Danish fishing boats and searched them.

proof?

[/quote]
As well as being irrelevant (again) many Jews were assimilated in Germany, Austria, France and the Netherlands and Italy. It didn't save them.
[/quote]

Austria and Germany are something very different. When it comes to France and Netherlands, the size of jewish population and the geography probably have played some role as well.

I must say you're going out of your way to denigrate the unique effort of the Danes as a nation and the risks they took to save the Jewish population.

I am not saying that it was not unique - I am just saying that the circumstances were unique as well. Also, I am saying your "evil catholics, good protestants" theory is wrong.

The only country in Nazi occupied Europe to do so,

the only or one of few countries that had such a possibility.

Much like the Protestant Confessional Church of Prussia in Germany in that respect... the only Christian body in the period from 1933-1945 to speak out again and again at the Nazi regime's treatment of Jews.

Compares well with the German Catholic Church which could only manage real concern for the euthanasia programme. But then that didn't just kill Jews...

"Mark well that in the Catholic Mass, Abraham is our Patriarch and forefather. Anti-Semitism is incompatible with the lofty thought which that fact expresses. It is a movement with which we Christians can have nothing to do. No, no, I say to you it is impossible for a Christian to take part in anti-Semitism. It is inadmissible. Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual progeny of Abraham. Spiritually, we [Christians] are all Semites."

"Whoever exalts race, or the people, or the State, or a particular form of State, or the depositories of power, or any other fundamental value of the human community—however necessary and honorable be their function in worldly things—whoever raises these notions above their standard value and divinizes them to an idolatrous level, distorts and perverts an order of the world planned and created by God; he is far from the true faith in God and from the concept of life which that faith upholds"

"This God, this Sovereign Master, has issued commandments whose value is independent of time and space, country and race."

- Pius XI

I particularly like the advice of (Catholic) Bishop Berning to an Auschwitz guard:

proof?

Which they did, and more.

proof?

Estimating Poland's pre-1939 population of Jews at 3- 3.5 million, and allowing for the fact that many Jews fled to Soviet occupied areas of Poland, and that Poland had huge areas of forest to escape to and bordered Soviet Russia, should we really be that impressed ?

I note you don't give any source for your figure of Jewish survivors. Thankfully you don't imply that Catholic Poles or the Polish Catholic Church hierarchy saved all of them.

My figure for surviving Polish Jews is somewhat lower- between 50 and 70 000.

This is divided between those still in Poland, serving in the Polish army and in camps in Germany. The Soviet Union also rescued a further 180 000 who were repatriated.

The ones in the camps in Germany were mostly killed. over 2/3 of the ones who served in Anders army stayed in Palestine. You needn't have mentioned the ones who escaped to USSR, I've already mentioned them and didn't calculate them. My number was what I remembered from history lessons, but I find similar one in wikipedia and elsewhere. There are forests, but one needs food from outside of it. Poland was in much worse situation than any other country when it comes to hiding Jews - there was death penalty for it, the food rations weren't enough for yourself, not to mention any Jews, millions of Poles were thrown out of their homes - to slave labour in Germany, to General Gubern out of territories annected by the Reich, to inner USSR. There were millions of Poles who died during the war, not only Jews. Poland could not just send her Jews abroad and have peace. Jews weren't mostly assimilated, they had different look, different customs, different polish dialect, if they even spoke polish. Most lived in majorly jewish small cities, or formed large minorities in the bigger ones - if a city is 90% jewish, it's really hard to hide Jews. Or if there are 0,3mln of Jews in a single city.

If you assert something as fact, prove it.

Isn't danish prime minister assering it as fact enough?

Instead of information on Denmark's treatment of non-Danish Jewish refugees, you appear to have provided me a link to a website about the history of the Trotskyite movement in Denmark. I'd ask why, but I'm not that interested.

Yes, I should've chosen another one.

And even better- a link to an article detailing that 20 (not 20 000, or 200 or 200 000) Jews were expelled from Denmark to face imprisonment by the Nazis.

Compares rather well with the numbers deported by Catholic Croatia and Slovakia and Austria and Italy and France and Belgium....

As if it had anything to do with their religion.
Anyway, it's not about the number, but element of their politics You've tried to deny, in vain.

As a Catholic I find that very funny indeed.

You're not a catholic.

My bias is for historical accuracy, not scapegoating Protestants and blame-shifting.

Mali bloom sux is not a bias, it's a fact.

Oh that's all right. People always remember things correctly, don't they ?

I never claimed they do.

You're the one speculating. I'm addressing facts.

Sure.

No, with your writing.

Get yourself better glasses.

I wouldn't dream of encroaching on your territory.

What are You doing there, then?

It's not the only extant set of gospels, nor is it the only source for information on Pilate or 1st Century A.D. Judaism.

What do these other sources (but gnostic gospels) write about Jesus?

I'm afraid it's quite difficult to tell from your poorly expressed English

I'm afraid it's difficult for You due to your poorly working brain.

Oh good grief. How dense can one person be ?

As the most dense one, You should know the answer.

Not mentioning the obvious anti-Jewish bias in the New Testament narratives (and how this would later affect the Church's treatment of and relationship to Jews) is a major mistake in any discussion of Christian bias towards Jews.

I do not think mentioning something obvious is necessary.

Find a sensible 'notion' of yours buttressed by facts and I'm likely to agree with it.

So... the idea of that a critic of the Bible should be free from bias is allien to You. OK.

You do have a big opinion of yourself...

No, but I do have low opinion of yourself...

Surely not. Not that Christianity which saw so many pogroms, mass burnings, and murders of Jews.

Where should we begin ? Not with the (as you admit) openly antisemitic New Testament.

I've agreed that there is some anti-judaic bias in NT.
I do not deny antisemitism in christian culture through centuries, but at the same time I am not sure if the hierarchy is (always) to be blamed for it, and I do not see the direct link between christian-culture-like antisemitism and Holocaust. I think blaiming RCC for Holocaust is a manipulation.

Good grief. So depicting the Jews as braying for the death of Jesus and the Jewish leaders as arranging for Jesus to be killed by the Roman authorities is just unbiased reportage.

Why not? Why do You deny the possibility that the Jewish leaders actually wanted Jesus to be killed?

The fault is in your writing, not in my intelligence.

I make mistakes, including some as silly as this one. If You do not understand my writing, ask politely and I will explain. I wouldn't mind pointing out my mistakes, I'm sure I can learn much from You at least in this matter :b

Yes- bad grammar, inept colloquial usage, atrocious spelling- are you trying to depict yourself as some kind of Polish version of Manuel from 'Fawlty Towers' ?

OMG! A colloquial usage! Oh no! A typo! How could I!!!!

8 yo girl...

Shall we discuss your pathetic inability to locate Denmark on a map

No, perhaps your pathetic conviction that I can't locate it.

Lest we forget.

For me it's a story of a guy who wanted to get some +1s and a jerk who took him seriously.

I will forever remember You also for your belief that central Ukraine remained greek-catholic and your disability to accept You're wrong etc, that is lecturing me on history of my own region without any basis, for your faith in Zosimos' stories, and many others.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Heresson
Your "arguments" are that catholics made it easier for the fascists to obtain power.

No, the facts I presented showed that Popes and the Vatican concluded concordats with Fascists in Italy and Nazis in Germany, in preference to already established conservative Catholic parties.

The Enabling Act of 1933 in Germany gave Hitler dictatorial powers. By using its authority over Catholic prelates and their authority over Catholic congregations, the Vatican aided Hitler's rise to absolute power in Germany.

Perhaps - but that doesn't prove their antisemitism in any way.

Believe it or not, but that's a separate argument, although how you expect me to believe that the Vatican didn't know that Charles Maurras and Action Francaise (for instance) were antisemitic when they made no secret about it, and when they were founded during the Dreyfus Affair... well you stretch the boundaries of incredulity beyond breaking point.

You're commiting a silly mistake of judging someone by your knowledge of events that were yet to come.

I'm doing nothing of the sort. I'm correct as to the relevant dates, and the programme of the N.S.D.A.P. (for instance) proclaimed in February of 1920 and published later that year, makes no secret of its antisemitism.

Not to mention that antisemitism wasn't anything really special in these days.

Oh, well that's all right then. If it's a common prejudice in mainly Catholic countries, then what's the big deal ?

Good grief.

But no-one could expect what's happened.

Arguing a point I haven't made. Again.

So it's OK for a Jew to talk with Hitler to serve jewish interest

To save lives ? Yes. When did Jabotynski 'talk with Hitler' exactly ?

but Teh Evil for RCC to talk with Hitler to serve what it thought was in catholic interest

One saved lives, the other meant Catholic support for Hitler and c ooperation with the Nazi, Ustasha, Vichy and Slovakian regimes and the mass extermination of Jews and Romanies amongst others.

Really, can you not see the difference ?

Mollybloomism at its finest.

Pointing out the fatuity of your flawed comparison ? Yes.

You must be my younger sister, then.

If she can write better English and has a greater grasp of logic than you...

I do not find it necessary to write about what is obvious.

Your posts suggest otherwise.

Your attempts at blurring the quite obvious picture of your defeat in this case are not only not successful, but pathethic.

Your self-delusion, although mildly amusing, gives me leave to worry about your knowledge of WWII, Denmark and your mental state.

the numbers of Jews to be saved was tiny and it can hardly be called "enormous effort" to save them.

The numbers of Jews was not the point- again, arguing a point I haven't made.

I love the way you denigrate the efforts of a whole country and people though.

And, while You insinuated that Sweden would not necessarily accept Jews (by writing that it was trading with Germany)

I insinuated nothing of the sort. You stated (incorrectly) that Denmark could send its Jews to nearby neutral or non-involved countries- plural.

Not only was Sweden trading with Nazi Germany, but there were Swedish Nazi sympathisers too.

It was also the only nearby 'neutral' country (singular)
to which Danes could send Jews from Denmark.

I've already admitted commiting this mistake 2 posts ago

Yes, I was glad to help you out with the correct information. Again.

(the S.S., German Army, air force, navy...) these were in all occupied countries.

Remind us which country shares a land border with Denmark and had a navy patrolling between Denmark and Sweden. Nazi Germany, wasn't it ?

You're wrong again in any case:

In August of 1943 the German army occupied Copenhagen, disarmed Danish forces , dissolved the Danish parliament and placed the King under arrest.

Yawn...

Still they were treaten much much better than eastern-european countries... You must be completely ignorant or biased not to recognise that.

Irrelevant. The Protestant Danes saved Jews in Denmark.

We're not comparing Nazi treatment of Danes and Czechs pre-1943.

proof?

Disprove it. So far in this thread my sources haven't been shown to be wrong by you.

Austria and Germany are something very different

Again irrelevant. There were many Jews who were assimilated in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Croatia- they weren't all Hassids.

I am not saying that it was not unique

You do seem to be doing your best to minimize the effort and risk involved.

Also, I am saying your "evil catholics, good protestants" theory is wrong.

You might be saying that, but that isn't what I've said. I leave that kind of emotive rubbish to you.

the only or one of few countries that had such a possibility.

Hogwash.

Pius XI

The same chap whose Vatican hierarchy saved Nazi war criminals ? Ustasha and Vichy murderers ? Who provided escape routes to Catholic countries in South America ?

And of course whose successor concluded concordats with Hitler and Mussolini... the very same!

proof?

Hey, you show some for your assertions and maybe I'll show mine.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by molly bloom
No, the facts I presented showed that Popes and the Vatican concluded concordats with Fascists in Italy and Nazis in Germany, in preference to already established conservative Catholic parties.

Was Holy See able to conclude concordats with these catholic parties?

The Enabling Act of 1933 in Germany gave Hitler dictatorial powers. By using its authority over Catholic prelates and their authority over Catholic congregations, the Vatican aided Hitler's rise to absolute power in Germany.

Perhaps it's faciliated this, but they didn't know what it would lead to.
Also, I may be wrong, but it's Holy See that concludes concordats, not Vatican.

I'm doing nothing of the sort. I'm correct as to the relevant dates, and the programme of the N.S.D.A.P. (for instance) proclaimed in February of 1920 and published later that year, makes no secret of its antisemitism.

Did they write there they'll send Jews to ovens?

Oh, well that's all right then. If it's a common prejudice in mainly Catholic countries, then what's the big deal ?

Good grief.

Yes, there's no difference between disliking someone and killing him.

Arguing a point I haven't made. Again.

You claim christianity is responsible for Holocaust, and RCC is to be blamed as well, right?

To save lives ? Yes. When did Jabotynski 'talk with Hitler' exactly ?

I am not completely sure, but in the 30s. I've read about it in a book named "Izrael", by Chojnowski A., Tomaszewski J.
I may check. But You surely know it better, so tell me.

One saved lives, the other meant Catholic support for Hitler and c ooperation with the Nazi, Ustasha, Vichy and Slovakian regimes and the mass extermination of Jews and Romanies amongst others.

Really, can you not see the difference ?

I don't think RCC was aware it'd mean that. And we're talking about deals from the 30s!

Pointing out the fatuity of your flawed comparison ? Yes.

No, double-standarts, bias and manipulations.

If she can write better English and has a greater grasp of logic than you...

Its easier for her to write better english if it's her native language. I don't think she has a greater grasp of logic, though she surely thinks she does.

The numbers of Jews was not the point- again, arguing a point I haven't made.

Would Denmark save its Jews if there were 100000 of them?

I love the way you denigrate the efforts of a whole country and people though.

I am not, I am puting it into context.

I insinuated nothing of the sort. (...)
Not only was Sweden trading with Nazi Germany, but there were Swedish Nazi sympathisers too.

what did You mean by posting that?

Or Sweden ? Which as far as I know was only one country at the time in question and which was still trading with Nazi Germany...

You're wrong again in any case:

Irrelevant. The Protestant Danes saved Jews in Denmark.

We're not comparing Nazi treatment of Danes and Czechs pre-1943.

You have to do it to know the circumstances.

Disprove it. So far in this thread my sources haven't been shown to be wrong by you.

Hey, you show some for your assertions and maybe I'll show mine.

again I say - a proof, please

Again irrelevant. There were many Jews who were assimilated in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Croatia- they weren't all Hassids.

You're not referring to my points.

You might be saying that, but that isn't what I've said. I leave that kind of emotive rubbish to you.

I'll gather quotes of You later on and post them to prove that wrong, don't have time right now

Hogwash.

You don't agree? Prove me wrong.

The same chap whose Vatican hierarchy saved Nazi war criminals ? Ustasha and Vichy murderers ? Who provided escape routes to Catholic countries in South America ?

You're mistaking Pius XI and Pius XII

And of course who concluded concordats with Hitler and Mussolini... the very same!

And what's wrong in that?