[Pants-of-dog]

The protests against the genocide are spreading not only to other US campuses, but also to campuses abroad.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Is this a serious question? How else would you describe building extermination camps?

Of course it's a serious question and it seems one you aren't able to answer. I want to show you how your claim about Nazi genocide can be dismissed just as you dismiss the many claims of genocide levelled against Israel.

There are Holocaust deniers as you know and their tactics are exactly the same as the Zionists use when reacting to claims against them committing genocide against non-Jews in Palestine.

In other words the Zionist deniers are NO DIFFERENT to Holocaust deniers, the irony is astonishing.

[Sherlock Holmes]

One doesn't need to assume anything, everyone understands that October 7 was a massacre of mostly civilians and wanting to repeat it 10,000 times over is as genocidal as speaking of a "final solution". Stop weaseling.

Is the killing of innocent civilians in pursuit of a political goal, right or wrong?

The answer in your world is that it is always wrong when Palestinians do it and always right when Israel does it and I and most people on the planet, do not share that view. It is the view of the racist, the colonialist and the narrative used to sanitize is the "goodies vs baddies" narrative like in the US we have the Cowboys and Indians with the good, morally and culturally superior white man fighting the bad, primitive, savages, eventually slaughtering many of them and stealing their land - sound familiar?

[wat0n]

Of course it's a serious question and it seems one you aren't able to answer. I want to show you how your claim about Nazi genocide can be dismissed just as you dismiss the many claims of genocide levelled against Israel.

There are Holocaust deniers as you know and their tactics are exactly the same as the Zionists use when reacting to claims against them committing genocide against non-Jews in Palestine.

In other words the Zionist deniers are NO DIFFERENT to Holocaust deniers, the irony is astonishing.

There is plenty of infrastructure like, you know, the camps themselves that prove the industrialized extermination during the Holocaust.

No such thing can be said about Gaza.

This seems more like you want to deny the Holocaust than an actual argument.

Is the killing of innocent civilians in pursuit of a political goal, right or wrong?

The answer in your world is that it is always wrong when Palestinians do it and always right when Israel does it and I and most people on the planet, do not share that view.

It is wrong, yet killing civilians as collateral damage is not the same as targeting them.

Under your standard, there was no difference between the Nazis and the Allies given that, after all, both sides killed innocent civilians. Yet it is quite evident this was a major goal for the former, that civilians were a target and indeed the Nazis built an industrial complex throughout the territories they managed to control to that effect. The Allies did not build extermination camps in Germany.

This false equivalence was also one of the justifications used by the Nazis themselves during the Nuremberg trials. Essentially, a Nazi talking point and apologia.

[Deutschmania]

Now take a good look at more evidence that it is Israel that calls for genocide not protesting students in the West.

Database of Israeli Incitement to Genocide.

Some excerpts:











All of these are recorded and documented here.

If the incitement to take the foreskin of Hamas fighters as trophies is accurate , it would show just how ignorant Ben Gvir is , if it's not accurate , then the person making the misquote is ignorant . For Muslims , like their Jewish counterparts circumcise their boys . So you cannot tell , just by looking at the penis , whom is Palestinian and whom is a Jew .

https://fiqh.islamonline.net/en/male-circumcision-in-islam/

https://islamcompass.com/circumcision-in-islam-compulsory/

[Sherlock Holmes]

There is plenty of infrastructure like, you know, the camps themselves that prove the industrialized extermination during the Holocaust.

There is no "proof" except in mathematics or logic, there is only evidence and interpretation of it. There are other ways to interpret the claimed evidence for the Holocaust. Each of us needs to do that, we need to assess the evidence and interpret it in the most rational and objective manner.

No such thing can be said about Gaza.

That's clearly false because there are lots and lots of people and organizations saying there's overwhelming evidence of ongoing genocide.

This seems more like you want to deny the Holocaust than an actual argument.

I want to show you and hopefully any open minded people reading this, that denial of the Holocaust is based on the exact alternative interpretation of evidence that the Israelis apply when they deny genocide in Gaza.

It is wrong, yet killing civilians as collateral damage is not the same as targeting them.

I disagree, so called "collateral damage" is not random, there is targeting involved, weapons are aimed, no difference except one is aiming to kill some target and willing to kill additional victims too, so it's actually worse.

Under your standard, there was no difference between the Nazis and the Allies given that, after all, both sides killed innocent civilians. Yet it is quite evident this was a major goal for the former, that civilians were a target and indeed the Nazis built an industrial complex throughout the territories they managed to control to that effect. The Allies did not build extermination camps in Germany.

Yes I agree the Axis power and the Allies killed innocent people and on that basis there was no difference. It was a fight over ideology but to assume the Axis powers were "good" and the Nazis were "bad" is to sanitize reality. The colonial powers killed more victims as a result of their colonial escapades than the Nazis killed Jews, some estimates say that the British Empire resulted in some 100 million deaths.

This false equivalence was also one of the justifications used by the Nazis themselves during the Nuremberg trials. Essentially, a Nazi talking point and apologia.

The Nazis argued their innocence, their justifications just as the Zionists do today, they Nazis denied evidence was evidence just as the Zionists do today, the Nazis cried victim just as the Zionists do today - nothing false about this, all of this is readily verified by a simple internet research session.

[wat0n]

There is no "proof" except in mathematics or logic, there is only evidence and interpretation of it. There are other ways to interpret the claimed evidence for the Holocaust. Each of us needs to do that, we need to assess the evidence and interpret it in the most rational and objective manner.

More copouts, you are like that other weasel in this forum.

Just say you are a Holocaust denier and call it a day. It is just the next step in the process, isn't it?

That's clearly false because there are lots and lots of people and organizations saying there's overwhelming evidence of ongoing genocide.

Not really, and indeed it's why there's a trial in the first place.

I want to show you and hopefully any open minded people reading this, that denial of the Holocaust is based on the exact alternative interpretation of evidence that the Israelis apply when they deny genocide in Gaza.

Material evidence matters. The evidence of the Holocaust's industrial nature is overwhelming.

I disagree, so called "collateral damage" is not random, there is targeting involved, weapons are aimed, no difference except one is aiming to kill some target and willing to kill additional victims too, so it's actually worse.

That is exactly how collateral damage works. When the Allies bombed German cities to destroy military and industrial infrastructure, they were aware German civilians would be killed too.

Yes I agree the Axis power and the Allies killed innocent people and on that basis there was no difference. It was a fight over ideology but to assume the Axis powers were "good" and the Nazis were "bad" is to sanitize reality. The colonial powers killed more victims as a result of their colonial escapades than the Nazis killed Jews, some estimates say that the British Empire resulted in some 100 million deaths.

Lost moral compass, as one can expect from leftists. And you conveniently forget about those killed by communist dictatorships.

The Nazis argued their innocence, their justifications just as the Zionists do today, they Nazis denied evidence was evidence just as the Zionists do today, the Nazis cried victim just as the Zionists do today - nothing false about this, all of this is readily verified by a simple internet research session.

Not really, the Nazis at Nuremberg did not deny their actions and even their intent. Instead, they justified them.

[Sherlock Holmes]

More copouts, you are like that other weasel in this forum.

Just say you are a Holocaust denier and call it a day. It is just the next step in the process, isn't it?

I'm actually accusing you of denial, genocide denial and therefore no better than a Holocaust denier.

Not really, and indeed it's why there's a trial in the first place.

See more denial, even denying there's evidence for ongoing genocide.

Material evidence matters. The evidence of the Holocaust's industrial nature is overwhelming.

As is the evidence of Zionist racial supremacy, ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza overwhelming. I don't have a dog in the fight, I'm a neutral objective party. My argument with you is no different how it would be if I were arguing with a Nazi.

That is exactly how collateral damage works. When the Allies bombed German cities to destroy military and industrial infrastructure, they were aware German civilians would be killed too.

Yes I said as much if you reread what I wrote "Yes I agree the Axis power and the Allies killed innocent people and on that basis there was no difference".

Lost moral compass, as one can expect from leftists. And you conveniently forget about those killed by communist dictatorships.

What exactly do you disagree with? Here, here's the paragraph again:

Yes I agree the Axis power and the Allies killed innocent people and on that basis there was no difference. It was a fight over ideology but to assume the Axis powers were "good" and the Nazis were "bad" is to sanitize reality. The colonial powers killed more victims as a result of their colonial escapades than the Nazis killed Jews, some estimates say that the British Empire resulted in some 100 million deaths.

What do you disagree with??

Not really, the Nazis at Nuremberg did not deny their actions and even their intent. Instead, they justified them.

Many did, they denied it was murder or immoral. They argued that Jews were animals and so killing animals is not murder, sound familair?

Here read it yourself, these are all actual remarks made by Zionists racists:



Do you agree with any of those remarks? do you admire these individuals? do you respect them? Look at the section "Rats" that is from 1938 before WW2 started, before the Holocaust, ten years before the founding of the state of Israel.

I'd only need to edit that text and change a few words and it would be exactly the same as if the Nazis had said those things - because they did. It is disgusting, horrifying and no decent human being can condone such language, it is the languages of the Third Reich, it must be stopped and the war criminals in Israel today must be held accountable, Jews, decent human beings must do this, the Jews must put Israel on trial and rid the land of these dangerous depraved monsters.

Source: Animal stereotypes of Palestinians in Israeli discourse

[wat0n]

I'm actually accusing you of denial, genocide denial and therefore no better than a Holocaust denier.

And to do that you are engaging in actual genocide denial.

See more denial, even denying there's evidence for ongoing genocide.

I am waiting for you to provide the evidence of the Israeli extermination camps in Gaza, or extermination even remotely comparable to the Holocaust or other recent example of genocides. For comparison's sake, in 3 months of genocide Hutu extremists murdered around 800,000 Tutsis out of a population of 1 million using far, far less technology than the IDF can.

As is the evidence of Zionist racial supremacy, ethnic cleansing and genocide in Gaza overwhelming. I don't have a dog in the fight, I'm a neutral objective party. My argument with you is no different how it would be if I were arguing with a Nazi.

You are neither neutral nor objective, as shown by your denial of the material evidence of the existence of the Nazi extermination camps.

Yes I said as much if you reread what I wrote "Yes I agree the Axis power and the Allies killed innocent people and on that basis there was no difference".

And that is exactly what I am pushing against. Killing innocents as collateral damage is not the same as killing them because they are the target.

What exactly do you disagree with? Here, here's the paragraph again:

What do you disagree with??

The idea that both are morally equivalent.

And with your refusal to count the killings by communists, even though they were part of the Allies too. Like with the genocidal calls to repeat October 7 10,000 - there's as usual a different standard for leftists. It's about "who", not "what".

Many did, they denied it was murder or immoral. They argued that Jews were animals and so killing animals is not murder, sound familair?

The Nazis actually argued Jews were worse than animals. And acted accordingly, given their passing of animal welfare laws.

Here read it yourself, these are all actual remarks made by Zionists racists:



Of course you can just deny all this, I know its much easier that way.

I don't deny it.

There are certainly far-right Israelis who utter these statements. They are no different from the leftists who chant they want to repeat October 7 10,000 times, those who want to burn Tel Aviv to the ground and also to those who want to ethnically cleanse Jews in Israel (and sometimes the US).

The difference between us is that I can recognize there are racist Israelis while you can't acknowledge the obvious racism in the left.

Also, Barak's quotes are evidently about the attitude of Arafat's negotiators and also about how he wants to end the conflict - by giving up the "swamp" that is.

[Sherlock Holmes]

And to do that you are engaging in actual genocide denial.



I am waiting for you to provide the evidence of the Israeli extermination camps in Gaza, or extermination even remotely comparable to the Holocaust or other recent example of genocides. For comparison's sake, in 3 months of genocide Hutu extremists murdered around 800,000 Tutsis out of a population of 1 million using far, far less technology than the IDF can.



You are neither neutral nor objective, as shown by your denial of the material evidence of the existence of the Nazi extermination camps.



And that is exactly what I am pushing against. Killing innocents as collateral damage is not the same as killing them because they are the target.



The idea that both are morally equivalent.

And with your refusal to count the killings by communists, even though they were part of the Allies too. Like with the genocidal calls to repeat October 7 10,000 - there's as usual a different standard for leftists. It's about "who", not "what".



The Nazis actually argued Jews were worse than animals. And acted accordingly, given their passing of animal welfare laws.



I don't deny it.

There are certainly far-right Israelis who utter these statements. They are no different from the leftists who chant they want to repeat October 7 10,000 times, those who want to burn Tel Aviv to the ground and also to those who want to ethnically cleanse Jews in Israel (and sometimes the US).

The difference between us is that I can recognize there are racist Israelis while you can't acknowledge the obvious racism in the left.

Also, Barak's quotes are evidently about the attitude of Arafat's negotiators and also about how he wants to end the conflict - by giving up the "swamp" that is.

I see no point in continuing our exchange, nothing constructive can come from it, so I'll just respond to some of the points you made above and then I'm done with you.

1. I have not denied the Holocaust.
2. I have not claimed there are "extermination camps" in Gaza (but could say - as many do - that Gaza itself is an extermination camp today)
3. I have not denied that there is evidence of Nazi concentration camps.
4. I do argue that neo-zionism and Nazis have much in common and share a moral equivalence.

I never denied evidence, I simply asked you to provide it, that you don't grasp that (or pretend not to) is one of the reasons I'm done wasting my time with you.

Good day.

[wat0n]

I see no point in continuing our exchange, nothing constructive can come from it, so I'll just respond to some of the points you made above and then I'm done with you.

1. I have not denied the Holocaust.

...

3. I have not denied that there is evidence of Nazi concentration camps.

It sure looked like it.

2. I have not claimed there are "extermination camps" in Gaza (but could say - as many do - that Gaza itself is an extermination camp today)

Kind of weird to say this given how extermination camps worked. 85% of those sent to Auschwitz died.

Are you saying something even remotely comparable is happening in Gaza?

4. I do argue that neo-zionism and Nazis have much in common and share a moral equivalence.

I never denied evidence, I simply asked you to provide it, that you don't grasp that (or pretend not to) is one of the reasons I'm done wasting my time with you.

Good day.

Yes, ultra nationalists often lack humanity. They can be German nationalists like the Nazis, Jewish nationalists like the Kahanists and Arab nationalists like Bashar al Assad.

That doesn't mean German nationalism, Jewish nationalism and also Arab nationalism are wrong per se or that their right to self-determination should be denied, somehow. What it means is that hyper ideologized, radicalized people are dangerous.

The same can of course be said about the more radical leftist ideologues and also radical libertarians and capitalists.

[Pants-of-dog]

The whole reason kids are protesting is because the IDF and Israeli government are killing civilians in a genocide, similar to why Nazis killed people on the death camps.

In both cases, both used modern technology to do it quickly and easily.

[wat0n]

If that was the case, they would not advocate for burning cities to the ground or repeating massacres 10,000 times nor would organizers allow such rhetoric go unpunished.

In reality, the protests began as early as October 7 itself before any meaningful Israeli response and as the attack was still ongoing.

[Pants-of-dog]

For example, the IDF uses AI algorithms to choose which families to bomb in their homes.

[wat0n]

As most armies likely do.

Yet the fact that protests began on October 7 itself should be telling, shouldn't it @Pants-of-dog?

[Pants-of-dog]

So it is all right for the IDF to commit genocide because other armies, like the Nazis, also did it.

[wat0n]

Or maybe using AI is not genocidal.

Now, supporting massacres of civilian populations like the very same protesters have done ever since October 7 itself OTOH...

[Pants-of-dog]

So targeting families in their homes, like the Nazis did, is genocidal.

But using AI to do that is not the genocidal part.

[wat0n]

Targeting fighters is not genocidal either.

Thinking October 7 was a form of legitimate resistance is, however.

[Pants-of-dog]

Targeting family homes is not targeting fighters. It is targeting family homes, deliberately killing civilians, and hoping fighters are there.

So targeting family homes is fine, like the Nazis did, is apparently legitimate.