Friday, October 14, 2011

ZionTruth Has Some Words

"The real question is what makes a Nazi a Nazi?"

In my opinion:

Exterminationism padded with moral-sounding arguments to make it look like justice.

The Nazis gave plenty of reasons why the extermination of the Jews was justified. The Marxists ("Progressives") do it in a more laid-back style: "Ya know, I'm not saying suicide bombing is justified, BUT you can't occupy and oppress a people for more than 60 [sic] years and expect nothing to happen!"

You just get the idea they'd greet an Iranian atomic attack on Israel (God forbid) with crocodile tears: "I grieve for the people who were destroyed because they were so uncompromising and addicted to their ill-gotten gains of land."

As for the fact that such an attack could be the end of the Sudeten-Arabs as well as those "Zionist oppressors"—well, you can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. So long as the Sudeten-Arabs exist, there's something to blame the Jews, uh, I mean Zionists for. Not Naher El Bared, their massacre in Lebanon by fellow Arabs, because that doesn't serve the purpose.

Shabbat Shalom.

.
.
.

Editor's Note:

The Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in Lebanon was subject to a massacre in 2007.

But as this was a case of Arabs killing Arabs, no one in the west cared. Certainly the progressive-left never cares when Arabs kill Arabs or when Muslims kill Muslims or when Muslims kill Jews or Christians.

This is because the progressive-left has given up entirely on notions of universal human rights and thus basically stands for nothing.

10 comments:

  1. btw, Zion, most "progressives" in the US do not really think of themselves as Marxists and, in fact, virtually none of them have ever actually read Marx.

    Their vague ideology does go to Marx, of course, but they simply do not use that terminology.

    FYI

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think they more resemble Marxist-Leninists in the way they rigidly follow ideology and squash opposition in an authoritarian manner, because they claim to know the higher truth.

    ReplyDelete
  3. oldschooltwentysix,

    You wrote, about "progressives":

    "I think they more resemble Marxist-Leninists in the way they rigidly follow ideology and squash opposition in an authoritarian manner, because they claim to know the higher truth."

    Yes, that's right.

    However, the ideology of so-called "progressives" - the contemporary political "Left" - has become outright "Protocols of the Elders of Zion"-type genocidally anti-Jewish ideology - which was the ideology of the German National Socialists -- the Nazis (NAtionalsoZIalistische: Nazi).

    Furthermore,

    Marxism -- the core ideology of Karl Marx which is expressed in the texts of Karl Marx -- is explicitly racist anti-Jewish.

    Socialism is a name of a political movement whose ideology is based on the ideology of Karl Marx.

    The German National Socialists and the Italian Fascists were Socialists. The German National Socialists and the Italian Fascists were what is now called "Leftist".

    Fascism was a subgroup of Socialism.

    Some (I think maybe many) Socialist prominent members of Western societies (British and other European societies) supported the German National Socialists in the 1930's.

    I've heard, and read, excerpts from one or two speeches attributed to Hitler which is moralizing, "brotherhood-of-man" , "peace-to-all", "justice-for-all", rhetoric which sounds like it could have been made by any current West European Socialist so-called "multiculturalist" politician.

    I think that Socialists who, in the 1940's, sided with the Soviet Communists against the German National Socialists and against the Italian Fascists began to call the German National Socialists and the Italian Fascists "Right-wing" and began to call themselves "Left-wing". I think that that's how the use of the terms "Left-wing" and "Right-wing" and "Left" and "Right", in regards to referring to political ideology, began. I think that, after World War II, after the genocidal murderous crimes of the German National Socialists were revealed to the world, Western pro-Soviet Socialists used the term "Right-Wing" as a demonizing epithet against anyone whose ideology they opposed.

    Now, the so-called "Left" -- that is: the Socialist movement -- has, literally, gone Nazi, again.

    Jewish people were blind in the 1930's, and Jewish people are blind now.

    And now, since the ideology of the Western political Left has developed into a more sophisticated, and more perverse, form of Nazi ideology, Jewish people are allowed to join the current Nazi "Left" political movement, and some Jewish people -- deranged immoral Jewish people -- have joined, and are, in some cases, leading, the current Nazi "Left" political movement.

    What's happening now is like a combination of what happened in Europe during the Middle Ages (with Christian convert "Theobald Jews", etc.) and what happened in Russia in the 1900's (with Socialist Communist ethnically Jewish racist anti-Jewish members of the Soviet Communist regime of Russia, etc.) and what happened in Germany in the 1930's, and what happened in the United States of America and Britain in the 1930's.

    Furthermore, and most importantly,

    The ideology of the regime in Iran and the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood are based on the ideology of the German National Socialists and on the ideology of orthodox authoritative Islam, and are consciously and explicitly ideologically racist genocidally anti-Jewish and are seriously militaristically intendedly genocidally anti-Jewish.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dan, remember,

    sometimes less is more.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "What we learned is that there is no Left and Right. There are the decent people and there is the mob."

    -- my paraphrasing of what I remember as being a quote that I heard which I remember as being attributed to a Jewish person who was a survivor of, or a witness of, the Holocaust

    I think that I heard this quote in one of the audio recordings of one of the parts of the conference which the following web page has links to audio recordings of.

    Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin - Documentation of the Iran-Conference: Business as usual; Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin - Iran-Conference 2008
    http://www.mideastfreedomforum.org/index.php?id=105&L=1

    The following notice is currently on the website Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin.

    "Free Maikel Nabil Sanad!"

    Maikel Nabil Sanad is an Egyptian blogger who is pro-Israeli and who has been arrested by the Egypt authorities and who is currently in jail in Egypt and who is currently on a hunger strike and who is dying.

    Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin
    http://www.mideastfreedomforum.org

    Blogger Maikel Nabil's Hunger Strike, by Matthias Küntzel
    http://www.matthiaskuentzel.de/contents/blogger-maikel-nabils-hunger-strike

    ReplyDelete
  7. Shavua Tov!

    Karmafish,

    Since everybody nowadays knows Marxism has a track record of tens of millions dead to it, few would use that explicit name. Just as Neo-Nazis usually call themselves fairly moderate-sounding names like "White Nationalists," the majority of today's Marxists have disavowed that name in favor of "Progressives," which sounds positive and carries none of the historical baggage.

    But, "a rose by any other name"...

    ReplyDelete
  8. "What we learned is that there is no Left and Right. There are the decent people and there is the mob."

    Daniel...great quote.

    Yeah, everyone, scratch most progressives and you get a neo-commie, neo-Marxist, whatever. It certainly explains their affinity for and ability to get into to bed with some of the worst actors on the world stage just like the lefties did with the genocidal Commies back in the day.

    Certainly at dKos, most of the Israel haters are Marxists or some derivative as are the majority on any Israel hating site which calls itself progressive. Ziontruth is spot on I think.

    Someone told me once that Liberals began calling themselves progressives because the word Liberal had obtained such a bad rep. This article talks about it....a good read.

    "What's the difference?

    Liberals tend to care more about individual freedom, Podesta wrote, while progressives care more about the public good. Their number includes Republicans, he added, citing historic reformers such as Roosevelt and Robert LaFollette. That liberals in their day also included Republicans goes unmentioned, as Podesta is at great pains to make the small point that liberal and progressive are "not exactly the same."

    Still, Podesta wrote that when asked the difference between liberals and progressives, he responds, "Call me whatever you want."

    Democratic presidential contenders were reluctant about the L-word, too, in the last campaign. "I prefer the word progressive," Hillary Rodham Clinton said in a July 2007 debate.

    "We're all progressives," John Edwards chimed in.

    The political gain from shifting to "progressive" is massive, according to the public-opinion research firm Rasmussen Reports.

    Only 20 percent of respondents considered calling a candidate a liberal to be a positive description, it found. However, 35 percent considered it positive to call a candidate a progressive.

    Equally telling, 39 percent considered "liberal" a negative, while only 18 percent saw "progressive" as negative......"

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008942098_progressives29.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. These terms are exceedingly slippery.

    For example, while I no longer consider myself a "progressive" I am most certainly a liberal by any definition.

    Certainly I am a classic liberal in the sense that I favor free elections, a free press, freedom of speech, and moderated capitalism.

    Of course, by that standard, Ronald Reagan was also a liberal.

    However, I am also a modern liberal in the sense that I opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, favor a woman's right to choose an abortion, believe that Gay people should have the right to marry, and would generally like to see a tax code more favorable to the poor and to the middle class.

    But, I also believe that Jewish people, or people who care about the well-being of the Jewish state, should boycott the progressive movement and the Democratic party, so that they will come to understand that they must choose between us and anti-Zionists.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Apropos of Reagan, he once said, "I didn't leave the Democrat Party, the Democrat Party left me." American Jews by and large remain loyal to the Democrat Party because they think it's the same as it was in the days of Truman and Kennedy; they don't realize the Far Left has taken over it.

    ReplyDelete