Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Wroclaw]

As in it's, the Shoah, all about money. TA DA.

No, the Shoah is the matter of people having been killed. Nobody's getting any money as a result of someone having been killed. That simply isn't done.

 

[Dogzilla]

Or it helps people understand that one of the elements of Nazi anti-Jewish policy was property theft - through Aryanization, through organized dispossession and looting, with Nazi "principles" assigning Jewish property to the Reich. Individual theft also occurred, with neighbors of Jews who had been expelled, deported, and/or murdered taking over real and movable property. So the restitution awards are easily "proof" of this aspect of Nazi anti-Jewish actions. The profitability here was profit to the Reich, through its various SS and other administrative bodies (the Rosenberg Task Force, e.g.) with the postwar settlements a small measure of restoring value back to the community from which the property was stolen. Do you know nothing about this?

And there's all the people who lost property when Stalin collectivized agriculture. And all the personal property that confiscated by the Communist regimes set up in eastern Europe after the war. And all the Poles who were evicted from their land in eastern Poland when the Soviet Union annexed the territory or all the Germans who were evicted from their land in eastern Germany when Poland annexed that territory. There's the Japanese Americans who were forced to abandon or otherwise dispose of their belongings when they were "resettled in the East" after Pearl Harbor. Then there's the Palestinians who were run off their land by Jewish settlers after the founding of Israel and the Palestinians who are still being run off their land by Jewish settlers today. And let's not forget the whole Gosh Darned North American continent that was taken over by the European hordes.

Alot of people have suffered innumerable injustices throughout history. Especially in times of war. Very rarely are any of them ever compensated. Don't you know any of this? Or are those people just not as worthy of our compassion and sympathy?

 

[tsig]

If you're not convinced by this thread that the Holocaust is mostly lies and fabrications you're likely a Zionist shill or a Zionist dupe.

If you are a lurker who has seen the light and realizes the Holocaust is a self serving lie send me a message.

I am not convinced so it's shill or dope.


BTW: how do you tell the shill from the dope?

 

[Wroclaw]

I'm sorry if you don't like our cretinous repetitive arguments but if you had a cogent response to them we wouldn't repeat them.

There is apparently a difference between a cogent argument (Nick and I have offered several that go against your making a comparison between Holocaust survivors and UFO abductees) and an argument on which you will cede a point.

If you don't want us to say there are no documents, stop saying there are documents.

But there are documents. Two, as I said yesterday, off the top of my head, that explicitly mention gas chambers and one that mentions extermination of the Jews.

When asked for a document that unambiguously says "extermination," don't offer one that says "special treatment."

SS judgment against Max Täubner.

If you say that a German saying "ausrotten" in connection with the Jews is irrefutable proof of the intent to exterminate all the Jews

Literally no one says that.

explain why Americans saying "exterminate" in connection with the Japanese is just flowery language.

It isn't. When Americans referred to exterminating the Japanese, they meant killing them.

Don't say that the documentary evidence of a planned ethnic cleansing is evidence of an extermination.

What would you call it when your ethnic cleansing program leaves very few survivors?

Don't say that one ambiguous word that appears once in one memo is the smoking gun that proves gas chambers at Auschwitz.

Literally no one says that.

Don't quote the opinion of a court that convicted members of the SS of treating Jews inhumanely as evidence that there was a policy of physically annihilating all the Jews.

Why not? Why would the judge have said that?

Don't offer a report that says X number of Jews were shot in retaliation for the murder of a German soldier as evidence that all the Jews were going to be killed.

Again: LITERALLY nobody makes such a claim.

And ferchrissakes, stop offering findings of fact from the judgement of a post-war war crimes trial as documentary evidence of anything--show us the evidence that the court relied upon to determine the finding of fact.

You can do that yourself. It's all in the public domain.

 

[tsig]

You play with matches you get burnt. Why is it people think Jews accrued enormous wealth without screwing anyone?

Odd these people don't look Jewish.


http://www.forbes.com/wealth/billionaires

 

[Wroclaw]

Alot of people have suffered innumerable injustices throughout history. Especially in times of war. Very rarely are any of them ever compensated. Don't you know any of this? Or are those people just not as worthy of our compassion and sympathy?

They're simply not as well organized. That's the bottom line. There have been plenty of suits by all of the people you mention, but one of the thing that hampers more justice being meted out is the sheer lack of political power of most of the victimized groups.

 

[Nick Terry]

It's easy. When Person A replies to a post from Person B on JREF, the post from Person B is included in very lightly shaded quote box at the top of Person A's post. It starts with "Originally Posted by Person B" and has a little arrow icon next to it. If you hold your mouse cursor over the little arrow icon, you'll see that it is a link back to the original post by Person B. Click on that little arrow and you'll jump to the original post. If you keep doing that, you'll jump one message back until eventually you are at the beginning of the conversation. It's helpful because sometimes conversations go off on wild tangents or other people join in the fray. It's pretty easy to forget what we were talking about so sometimes we need to go back and figure out why a comment that might seem out of context and a 'complete mystery' is actually a direct response to an earlier comment.

This unsurprisingly, and as per usual, completely misses the point of the preceding discussion. There were two separate issues raised in the course of that discussion

1) whether your UFO gambit can be legitimately compared to the evidence for gassing

and developing out of one of your replies

2) exactly what kind of corroboration is needed for quite ordinary historical events.

Wroclaw and I demonstrated, not for the first time, that the UFO comparison is bogus, because contrary to your repeated lies, it is flatly untrue that we only possess eyewitness testimonies about gassings. Whereas that's all we have for UFO abductions. The two cannot be compared, yet you keep on doing so, which makes you a very dishonest and/or very stupid person, who is incapable of absorbing and comprehending the totality of the evidence for the extermination camps.

The fact that there is more than one type of evidence for gassing whereas this is not the case for UFO abductions means that you cannot then flip things 180 degrees and drag the two down to the same level.

The reason to elaborate on ordinary events and their sourcing/corroboration is because you are selectively hypersceptical of anything to do with the Holocaust. If you followed that hyperscepticism through consistently, then you'd be unable to believe anything at all.

UFO abduction is a competely extraordinary phenomenon; because no convincing evidence has been provided for it, skeptics disbelieve it. Clear and convincing evidence has been provided for Nazi gassings, which is why everyone other than Holocaust deniers accepts them as historical facts.

Your "comparison" is obnoxious and tedious because you don't acknowledge the disparity in consensus relevant to each phenomenon.And that's why you insist on lying about the types and quantity of evidence for gassing over and over and over again.

If you could only dial back your hyperbolic rhetoric and remember to say 'little' rather than 'no' evidence, then there might actually be the basis for a discussion. But by lying about this, you discredit your position. So quit lying.

I'm sorry if you don't like our cretinous repetitive arguments but if you had a cogent response to them we wouldn't repeat them.

There have been many cogent responses to these idiotic gambits. It's just that none of you guys seem capable of absorbing the implications and altering your dishonest rhetoric

If you don't want us to say there are no documents, stop saying there are documents.

I'm sorry, what?

There quite clearly are documents about gassing, and about extermination. Not a few have been mentioned a number of times, yet you insist on defaulting back to pretending that there aren't any at all.

This is one of the reasons why it is nigh on impossible to conduct a serious discussion with you, or any of your like-minds, because you manifestly do not revise your assertions when they are contradicted or when it is pointed out that you are wrong on something.

When asked for a document that unambiguously says "extermination," don't offer one that says "special treatment."

This would be cute, if it were not for the fact that numerous unambiguous documents discussing the extermination of the Jews have been presented, and many more are waiting, if only you guys ever bothered to get down to a serious discussion, instead of your incessant trolling and Cretinous Repetitive Argument Points.

If you say that a German saying "ausrotten" in connection with the Jews is irrefutable proof of the intent to exterminate all the Jews, explain why Americans saying "exterminate" in connection with the Japanese is just flowery language.

Since I'm in currently rewatching The Pacific mini-series and have just watched the episode when US Marines slaughter countless Japanese soldiers and Okinawan civilians, this is almost doubly ironic. Americans saying 'exterminate' apropos the Japanese in WWII is hardly 'flowery rhetoric'. It was quite clearly implemented on the battlefield. See among other studies, John Dower, War Without Mercy, a classic study of the Pacific war.

The difference, dear troll, is that the Americans in WWII exterminated Japanese soldiers on the battlefield and were happy to countenance using firestorms and even nuclear weapons on civilians, but they manifestly never rounded up all Japanese in Japan and deported them to camps, and did not have special FBI killing squads following Macarthur and co exterminating Japanese civilians indiscriminately. Wartime hysteria led to the internment of some thousands of Nisei in the continental United States, under conditions which would have been paradisical for Polish Jews by 1940. Indeed more Polish Jews had died by 1940, than there ever were Nisei interned in the entire war.

It's an apples and oranges comparison designed to create a false equivalence. Or what we might well call tu quoque tutti frutti.

And I'm unaware of anyone saying that one German saying 'ausrotten' once regarding the Jews is proof of extermination. It's the fact that lots of Germans, from Hitler on downwards, kept on saying that the Jews would be extirpated and destroyed, that they were being extirpated and destroyed, and finally that they have been extirpated and destroyed, while other Germans quite explicitly discuss the 'killing' of the Jews as it is going on.

Don't say that the documentary evidence of a planned ethnic cleansing is evidence of an extermination.

Since nobody says any such thing, I fail to see the point here. There is no documentary evidence of a plan of ethnic cleansing after January 1942. There are an accumulating number of statements regarding the killing, destruction or extirpation of the Jews, and a number of statements regarding removing the Jews everywhere which make nonsense of claiming any kind of 'ethnic cleansing plan'.

Don't say that one ambiguous word that appears once in one memo is the smoking gun that proves gas chambers at Auschwitz.

One smoking gun? Are you high?

Don't quote the opinion of a court that convicted members of the SS of treating Jews inhumanely as evidence that there was a policy of physically annihilating all the Jews.

Yet when we quoted the SS court verdict on Taeubner, it wasn't about inhumane treatment, but unauthorised mass executions, and the court judgement referred explicitly to a general policy of extermination.

Don't offer a report that says X number of Jews were shot in retaliation for the murder of a German soldier as evidence that all the Jews were going to be killed.

when have we done that? The history books quote several examples from the phase of escalation in 1941 when excuses like reprisals appear to have been needed to get the Nazis into the swing of rationalising mass murder. They then quote other examples when no such excuses are offered and entire communities are reported as wiped out and killed; and then some more documents which make it quite plan that by the end of 1941, the killing units understood their task as wiping out all the Jews they were allowed to in order to achieve a total, final solution.

And ferchrissakes, stop offering findings of fact from the judgement of a post-war war crimes trial as documentary evidence of anything--show us the evidence that the court relied upon to determine the finding of fact.

again, what are you talking about? The findings of postwar trials are useful summaries of a wide variety of types of evidence, obviously including testimonies and cross-examinations since that's generally what you find in any trial. But they also relied on documents and forensic reports which manifestly fed into the judgements of the courts in question.

If only you debated honestly, then there might be a greater inclination to 'show' you more evidence, but when it's transparently clear that you have not absorbed and cannot remember properly the evidence you have been shown on this and other threads; when it's also extremely obvious that you will keep on defaulting back to your lying mantras like 'no documents' and 'no physical evidence' when what you really mean is 'no documents I will accept' and 'no physical evidence I will accept'; and when it's crystal clear that in the 16-17 months you have been on here, you have not bothered to lift so much as a finger to find anything for yourself or to read any of the links and sources recommended to you, then it's not really a surprise that we ask ourselves what is the point of bringing up evidence when you are so manifestly committed to know-nothingism and ignorance.

After all, it's not like your personal incredulity matters a damn. The main reason anybody keeps replying to you is because you offer slightly more sophisticated versions of the Stundies which spew out of the mouths of you comrades.

 

[Nick Terry]

And there's all the people who lost property when Stalin collectivized agriculture. And all the personal property that confiscated by the Communist regimes set up in eastern Europe after the war. And all the Poles who were evicted from their land in eastern Poland when the Soviet Union annexed the territory or all the Germans who were evicted from their land in eastern Germany when Poland annexed that territory. There's the Japanese Americans who were forced to abandon or otherwise dispose of their belongings when they were "resettled in the East" after Pearl Harbor. Then there's the Palestinians who were run off their land by Jewish settlers after the founding of Israel and the Palestinians who are still being run off their land by Jewish settlers today. And let's not forget the whole Gosh Darned North American continent that was taken over by the European hordes.

Alot of people have suffered innumerable injustices throughout history. Especially in times of war. Very rarely are any of them ever compensated. Don't you know any of this? Or are those people just not as worthy of our compassion and sympathy?

Look, if you want to shift to a kind of LIHOP denier-lite and moan about the contemporary impact of the Holocaust on today's western world, then please do so. But then you'd have to shut up about the actual events, since the two things are separate. It is perfectly possible to be a critic of compensation and to accept that the Holocaust happened.

What doesn't logically follow is to pretend, as you seem to want to do, that the way that compensation and commemoration are handled today says anything at all about the events themselves.

 

[LemmyCaution]

I'm sorry if you don't like our cretinous repetitive arguments but if you had a cogent response to them we wouldn't repeat them. If you don't want us to say there are no documents, stop saying there are documents. When asked for a document that unambiguously says "extermination," don't offer one that says "special treatment." If you say that a German saying "ausrotten" in connection with the Jews is irrefutable proof of the intent to exterminate all the Jews, explain why Americans saying "exterminate" in connection with the Japanese is just flowery language. Don't say that the documentary evidence of a planned ethnic cleansing is evidence of an extermination. Don't say that one ambiguous word that appears once in one memo is the smoking gun that proves gas chambers at Auschwitz. Don't quote the opinion of a court that convicted members of the SS of treating Jews inhumanely as evidence that there was a policy of physically annihilating all the Jews. Don't offer a report that says X number of Jews were shot in retaliation for the murder of a German soldier as evidence that all the Jews were going to be killed.

So we did have one of your cabal offer this: "The history of this place is very turbulent. On 10 July 1941, in Vilnus, on the corner of Wielka and Szklana street, a corpse of a German soldier was found. Jews were accused of the murder and, the same day, 123 people were executed." So let's think this suggestion about a corpse of a German soldier lying in a Vilna intersection in July 1941, murdered perhaps by Jews.

- The above is from a commemorative Website, and thus a terrible source. We do have two contemporary sources for an incident in Vilna about this time. One, a report from the 403rd Security Division, said that "shots were ostensibly fired at the SD accommodations building"; OSR 24 reported, "Einsatzkommando 9 Location: Vilinius . . . Because of a short surprise fire fight against the Vilnius Security Police Headquarters a special liquidation was carried out in excess of daily liquidation quotas." No mention in either report, right?, of a dead German soldier.

- More importantly, this is one shooting action, which resulted in, according to the reports a liquidation action "in excess of daily liquidation quotas" or in which "the SD had 300 Jews shot on Sunday."

- But according to OSR 24 there were ongoing liquidation actions outside Vilna starting July 1941 - unconnected with "ostensible" (even the German military doubted the pretext!) shots being fired by Jews.

- Yitzhak Arad, among others, has studied the shootings of Jews in Vilna during summer and fall 1941. He has summarized the following actions and his sources for them (where sources vary, I am giving the lowest estimate of victims):

1) July 2-August 8: 5,000 victims shot by EK9, the above shooting just one of these many

2) August 9-30: 444 victims of EK3 shootings

3) Great Provocation (a 2nd ostensible reprisal) September 2: 3,700 victims

4) transfer to the ghetto, September 12: 3,334 victims

5) Getto No. 1 Aktion, September 17: 1,267 victims

6) Yom Kippur Aktion, October 1: 2,300 victims

7) Ghetto No. 2 Aktion, October 4: 1,983 victims

8) Ghetto No. 2 Aktion, October 16, 1,146 victims

9) Liquidation ghetto no. 2, October 21: 1,500 victims (the German source gives 2,367)

10) Aktionen against Elderly and Sick, October 21: 120 victims

11) First Yellow Pass Aktion, October 25, 27: 2,833 victims

12) Transfer to ghetto, October 30: 1,533 victims

13) Second Yellow Pass Aktion: November 6: 1,200 (German source 1,303)

(and 3 more small actions in December with several hundred victims)

- Now, one of the two "ostensible" reprisals involved the following deaths, again according to Arad, although some sources vary: 2 Jews falsely accused of firing shots at German soldiers, 864 Jewish men, 2,019 Jewish women, and 817 Jewish children. On the best interpretation, the 2 shooters were killed immediately following the shooting - and then two days later ~3,700 Jews were killed in reprisal, including 817 children. That is being charitable. More likely, the area was cleared, Jewish ranks were thinned out by the mass killings, two ghettos were set up, and the "thinning out" continued through the fall.

The fall actions were generally to clear sections of the city, liquidate areas of the ghetto, or eliminate non-working Jews. Not on account of "ostensible" shots at Germans.

As you know, there are many sources for all this; I am citing Arad because it is compact and summarizes a lot of the disparate evidence.

- As to no documents and the rest of your folderol, you seem allergic the Jaeger Report, which said about events in Lithuania (emphasis added), "I can state today that the goal of solving the Jewish problem for Lithuania has been achieved by Einsatzkommando 3. In Lithuania, there are no more Jews, other than the Work Jews, including their families. They are:

In Schaulen around 4,500
In Kauen “ 15,000
In Wilna “ 15,000

I also wanted to kill these Work Jews, including their families, which however brought upon me acrimonious challenges from the civil administration (the Reichskommisar) and the army and caused the prohibition: the Work Jews and their families are not to be shot! The goal of making Lithuania free of Jews could only be attained through the deployment of a raiding commando with selected men under the leadership of SS First Lieutenant Hamann, who completely and entirely adopted my goals and understood the importance of ensuring the co-operation of the Lithuanian partisans and the competent civilian positions. The implementation of such activities is primarily a question of organization. The decision to systematically make every district free of Jews necessitated an exhaustive preparation of each individual operation and reconnaissance of the prevailing circumstances in the applicable district."

(Note that Jaeger's Report lists Jews and Jewesses separate from Communists.)

Here is about when deniers, without any grounds, squeal "Forgery!"

As to this waffle -

And ferchrissakes, stop offering findings of fact from the judgement of a post-war war crimes trial as documentary evidence of anything--show us the evidence that the court relied upon to determine the finding of fact

- well, that is precisely why I have a number of times suggested the Einsatzgruppen trial as a good topic for discussion, in order to review the evidence by which the court found the defendants guilty of murdering Jews, not in retaliation for something the individuals did but because of operations to kill Jews. You have demurred, of course, just as you have demurred when it comes to discussing and assessing the multiplicity of evidence for the murders at Ponar. The matter of this trial of EG leaders reminds me, too, that you do not seem particularly strong on the Ereignismeldungen; your errors of fact and miscues raise, in fact, the question whether you have read them.

 

[MG1962]

And there's all the people who lost property when Stalin collectivized agriculture. And all the personal property that confiscated by the Communist regimes set up in eastern Europe after the war. And all the Poles who were evicted from their land in eastern Poland when the Soviet Union annexed the territory or all the Germans who were evicted from their land in eastern Germany when Poland annexed that territory. There's the Japanese Americans who were forced to abandon or otherwise dispose of their belongings when they were "resettled in the East" after Pearl Harbor. Then there's the Palestinians who were run off their land by Jewish settlers after the founding of Israel and the Palestinians who are still being run off their land by Jewish settlers today. And let's not forget the whole Gosh Darned North American continent that was taken over by the European hordes.

Alot of people have suffered innumerable injustices throughout history. Especially in times of war. Very rarely are any of them ever compensated. Don't you know any of this? Or are those people just not as worthy of our compassion and sympathy?

So the sum total of your argument - no one should be compensated unless all can be compensated. How do you feel when it is non Jews getting compensation.....or do the rules suddenly change?

 

[FluffyPersian]

I don't know, how many times? The Rachel Auerbach reference went over my head. Are you sure you aren't referring to Philip Auerbach who testified he made human soap at Auschwitz and then was convicted for embezzling money earmarked for survivors?

How soon one forgets about the purported forger of "The Jewish Quarter of Warsaw is No More!"

 

[Dogzilla]

Sometimes it's almost touching, like watching a puppy trying to get out of a pond and failing miserably.

Watching a puppy on the verge of drowning is touching? Between this and Breslau's (I think it was him. But I'm not sure) kitten in the oven analogy earlier, you people are starting sound pretty twisted--not twisted in the way that deniers have always seen you but twisted in a way that regular people would see as twisted.

Whatever. Carry on.

 

[MG1962]

Watching a puppy on the verge of drowning is touching? Between this and Breslau's (I think it was him. But I'm not sure) kitten in the oven analogy earlier, you people are starting sound pretty twisted--not twisted in the way that deniers have always seen you but twisted in a way that regular people would see as twisted.

Whatever. Carry on.

Strange how you edited that statement to suit your own agenda. Even when not talking about the holocaust you cant get that dishonest streak to go away

 

[LemmyCaution]

And there's all the people who lost property when Stalin . . . . Alot of people have suffered innumerable injustices throughout history. Especially in times of war. Very rarely are any of them ever compensated. Don't you know any of this? Or are those people just not as worthy of our compassion and sympathy?

You're the one who claimed that "awareness of the many compensation programs available to holocaust survivors helps people understand the motive behind the 'never forget' campaign" and it does no such thing: deal with it.

 

[Dogzilla]

They're simply not as well organized. That's the bottom line. There have been plenty of suits by all of the people you mention, but one of the thing that hampers more justice being meted out is the sheer lack of political power of most of the victimized groups.

OK. So, it's not that Jews suffered any more than non-Jewish victims of the war. It's just that they have more power today and are able and willing to wield that power to receive compensation that other--no less deserving but unfortunately not powerful enough--groups cannot.

Now I think I got it.

 

[Dogzilla]

As to this waffle - - well, that is precisely why I have a number of times suggested the Einsatzgruppen trial as a good topic for discussion, in order to review the evidence by which the court found the defendants guilty of murdering Jews, not in retaliation for something the individuals did but because of operations to kill Jews. You have demurred, of course, just as you have demurred when it comes to discussing and assessing the multiplicity of evidence for the murders at Ponar. The matter of this trial of EG leaders reminds me, too, that you do not seem particularly strong on the Ereignismeldungen; your errors of fact and miscues raise, in fact, the question whether you have read them.

I have demurred because, as I have said, it's not a topic I know alot about. I don't want to Breslau or TSR and start popping off about something I don't know anything about. I have read bits and pieces of the Einsatzgruppen reports that have been referenced in this and other threads. But, no, I don't have drawer full of them that pull out every once in a while. As I had said earlier, I assumed shootings in the East--except for Babi Yar--were fairly well documented. It wasn't until the Pesye Schloss discussion that I realized how pathetic the documentation might be for the holocaust by bullets part of the holocaust.

 

[little grey rabbit]

How soon one forgets about the purported forger of "The Jewish Quarter of Warsaw is No More!"

I know who Rachel Auerbach is, but you may be confusing me with someone else as I have never accused her of forging the Stroop Report.

This may also be the person on whose behaviour in RL you have been spying on. I mention this only as I would hate to have another bear the responsiblity for my thought crimes.

 

[TSR]

I have demurred because, as I have said, it's not a topic I know alot about.

.
Why? It's never stopped you before...

And since you demonstrably don't know a lot about most aspects of the Holocaust, how about you stop making claims about it, do the reading recommended to you, and then get back to us with specific questions, properly cited?
.

I don't want to Breslau or TSR and start popping off about something I don't know anything about.

.
You mean like those NYT articles you claim were written at the behest of the WJC?
.

I have read only the bits and pieces of the Einsatzgruppen reports that have been referenced in this and other threads but can't be bothered do more than attempt lame quote mines and deliberate distortions of them.

.
ftfy
.

But, no, I don't have drawer full of them that pull out every once in a while. As I had said earlier, I assumed shootings in the East--except for Babi Yar--were fairly well documented.

.
What is missing from the Babi Yar documentation (don't forget: read, *think*, then post so your ignorant quote mining doesn't become even more obvious)
.

It wasn't until the Pesye Schloss discussion that I realized how pathetic the documentation might be for the holocaust by bullets part of the holocaust.

.
What, other than your desperate need that it be so, is "pathetic" about the documentation for Schloss?
.

 

[TSR]

OK. So, it's not that Jews suffered any more than non-Jewish victims of the war.

.
... who were targetted solely on the basis of the group membership, and whether or not they (or any rational person) consider themselves members of that group.

Funny how deniers never include that last bit...
.

It's just that they have more power today and are able and willing to wield that power to receive compensation that other--no less deserving but unfortunately not powerful enough--groups cannot.

.
Replace "power" with "willingness" and you have started to get it right.
.

Now I think I got it.

.
As we all "got" you, long ago..
.

 

[Corsair 115]

The holohoax is the systematic worldwide effort of organized Jewry to convince the world that the holocaust did happen, that is, it is a deliberate hoax.

And we're back to the crackpot/borderline insane claim of a grand global Jewish conspiracy which controls all media, all acacemia, and everything else.

Cue the laughing dog smileys.