U.N. Backs Holocaustism

Anti-semites who suggest that Jews manipulatively employ the Holocaust on an international level by masking their specific nationalist goals as universal ones will be shocked to learn that the U.N. has agreed to establish an annual Holocaust Day on January 27th.
Now that the U.N. has taken the brave and controversial position that killing Jewish civilians by the millions is a bad things, we will be expected to take their criticism of Israel much more seriously, as they have proven their evenhandedness. They are against genocide. Even for Jews. The leaders of the world will stand somber and sympathetic during the annual moment of silence. They will run a PR campaign to prove their commitment to fostering tolerance.
And then they will demand that Israel give the Muslims whatever they want.
Mazel Tov!
Full story.

10 thoughts on “U.N. Backs Holocaustism

  1. Jesus-Fu*%#ing -Christ! What kind of UN licker are you man? There´s no such thing as evenhandedness in the world. Give the muslims what they want? They want the caliphate! You go give them I´ll hide in a bunker@!

  2. I’m not sure this is really what we needed. It just pisses everybody off when well intentioned people bring attention to the Holocaust. Not to mention the double standard Israel is held to b/c of the holocaust. How will it look when Israel kills some terrorist on UN Holocaust Day. Sure they had to do it, but that won’t make Norman Finkelstein feel any better about it.

  3. So what will happen with Yom Hashoah in Israel and the rest of the world that marks this day? Do we really need two days?
    Why didn’t Israel want to make the day on Yom Hashoah?

  4. So let me get it straight: if they say anything bad about Israel, they are anti-Semites. And, if they actually profess there should be recognition of the persecution of Jews, they are plotting to give the Muslims what they want. It is a good thing they call it pro-zak, and not anti-zid, otherwise where will we be…

  5. Anti-semiticm is a stupid word: not only is it so obviously imprecise, it negates the histories and civilizations of Babylon, Assyria, Akkadia, Sumeria, Caanan and so forth with its every mention.
    Only a jew could come up with something so illogical, self-serving and devious and have it enter into common parlance.
    What’s wrong with plain English?

  6. Actually, it was Wilhelm Marr, a German anti-Jewish agitator, who coined the term in 1879, apparently to lend an air of “sophistication” to Jew-hatred.
    I agree with you, though. It’s a stupid word. Not the least because it allows Arab Jew-haters to say, “Everyone talks about anti-semitism but Arabs are Semites too blah blah blah.”

  7. Leslie: “Why didn’t Israel want to make the day on Yom Hashoah?”
    My guess is that Yom HaShoah is a luach (Hebrew calendar) date, and an international day would be more appropriate on the Gregorian date so it wouldn’t float around the more universally recognized calendar from year to year.

  8. badchen: “Actually, it was Wilhelm Marr, a German anti-Jewish agitator, who coined the term in 1879, apparently to lend an air of ‘sophistication’ to Jew-hatred.”
    Absolutely right. Marr founded the Antisemitic League in 1879, with what he figured was an intellectually more marketable term than “Judenhass.”
    And this information is so widely available by now that Gershom’s argument should come off exactly like the big steaming pile of pseudo-intellectual bullshit that it is.

  9. Thank you, badchen, for the correction. Jews did not, apparently, invent the word but they certainly use it as if it had some meaning, and are among its most frequent users. I’m glad at least badchen seems to have read his Orwell and understands how damaging and politically dangerous the corruption of plain English can be. By the way Zionista, the fact that I was wrong in ascribing the origin of that stupid word to a jew when I should have ascribed it to a German that dislikes jews, in no way invalidates my other points making them a “…big steaming pile of pseudo-intellectual bullshit…” as you so inelegantly put it. That’s called the fallacy of composition.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.