How I blew a 6 figure grant for my charity because of my appreciation of Polish history...

Almost all jews think Poles and Nazis were working together to destroy world jewry. They are taught this from a young age.


OP won't be getting a single penny.

Source?

I mean, if you're making such a loaded statement, I would expect there to be at least one reliable source on the matter.

Or is it just something that you made up?

Hitler was quoted in saying that the Polish race was a blight upon Europe. Other high-ranking Nazi officials said that Slavs are backwards and were like monkeys. You can look these things up yourself.

Though how is this surprising? The Wermacht and Nazi Police murdered 30 million non-Jewish Slavs, many were sent to camps and died outside of the camps as well. 10 million of that figure were soldiers fighting on the Soviet front, also murdered by the blocking units. The Wermacht went on rape sprees as well.

And you have the 3 million Polish Catholics who were victims of the Nazis. Though I suspect the number to actually be higher. Jews were not the main victims nor the worst victims.

Also, please look up the books Hitler's Jewish Soldiers and The Lives of Hitler's Jewish Soldiers. These will also dispel some pre-concieved notions.

Good for you, you stood up for what you believed was right, a lot of people who share your view would have probably ignored the comment or simply moved on to another topic, not a lot of them would have had the gumption to set the record straight, due to the discomfort involved.

Sadly i find that some people who perfectly believe the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis on the Jewish people, and so they should, are not as credulous when it comes to life stories and the history of non Jewish Poles.

I'd like to see a reliable source for that. So far only Soviet and Japanese forces were accused of mass rape, the Wehrmacht AFAIK never. There were cases of rape, of course, but not even close to the extent the Soviets or Japanese committed.

Yes I might have been incorrect. The Wehrmacht would only kill. You are definitely right about the Soviets and Japanese. The Soviets raped as many as two million females in East Germany, and the Japanese raped even more throughout China and Southeast Asia.

merely by your past association with Poland. I had a Jewish boss and merely by the association with Poland, not to mention my Ukrainian roots I was a target of his hate. That is life- fair or not. He is pulling the strings, but would you rather get the money form somebody who is a bit more objective? Or it doesn't matter? People who are doing charities need to be really grounded in reality, not in the past.

I am not surprised. They constantly claim that they were victimized and hated by both Polish Catholics and Ukrainian Christians (and everyone), when in fact they themselves are the haters and the perpetrators.

Not all of them think this way. But a lot of them do.

I agree the time for history lessons would have been after the cheque cashed...


masks98, I would have taken it as a " when I was in India " the rule for fundraising is ' Its all about you Sir/Madame " then plenty of antiseptic mouth wash when you get home...

And to say they started in a barn...

How much were you expecting to get from him and what would that money be spent on ?

Gday Masks98,

You did the right thing mate, and good on you for educating the ignorant. How were you to know this character was a 'philanthropist', or that even if he was, if he would give you any money?

Poland has been subject to dissimulation and Communist propaganda for a long time. I sort of understand why the ignorant say these things in those circumstances, but it's people like you at the grass-roots who do so much to change that.

Cheers, Dan.

+1


spiegel.de/international/germany/rape-murder-and-genocide-nazi-war-crimes-as-described-by-german-soldiers-a-755385.html


My Russian friend wrote once that while German forces were advancing on Soviet territory whole villages were raped and then burned. The Nazis were apparently even more cruel there than in Poland. Russians say the result was the revenge done by Soviet troops in Germany.

Paulina, I couldn't find anything about mass rape in the source you've mentioned. Just this paragraph:

Quote:
"While accounts of mass rape provoked at most a mild rebuke from their conversation partners, a number of soldiers clearly still felt that the sexual violence at times reached a limit which should be respected, even in the locker-room environment of the POW camp."


That was probably one factor, plus the fact that violence against civilians - and here especially women (Russian, Polish and German mainly) - was tolerated by the Soviet leadership for far too long.

Looks like you could and did :)
Btw, did you read the whole article?


That too.
However, "all sexual contact with Jews was forbidden" by Nazi military leadership and yet Wehrmacht soldiers raped Jewish women and then killed them, as the article says.

Ha ha ha. That's why I wrote "Just this paragraph" ... :)


To be honest, I browsed just quickly through the article specifically looking for the words 'mass rape'. Seven pages of that horrific stuff is a little too much for me early in the morning.

There are more mentions of rapes in the article. But, still, it's just an article, it's giving some examples and it isn't only about rapes. One would probably find out more by reading that book "Soldiers".


Then maybe try to read it at some point when you feel ready since, as the opening of the article says, "The myth that the Nazi-era German armed forces, the Wehrmacht, was not involved in war crimes persisted for decades after the war."

How I blew a 6 figure grant for my charity because of my appreciation of Polish history...

feel free to post on the above topic.

Come on, Wroclaw, discussions never stay 100% on topic, and it was just a short and friendly conversation between Paulina and me.


Will do.

Let's get this straight:
WWII was NOT about Jews, and millions from many nations were killed.
The "Holocaust" WAS about Jews, and was NOT about WWII. It started from 1933 in German then Austria and then, enabled by the war, in the rest of Europe.

"Holocaust" is a term that was coined to refer to what happened to the Jews. I know that millions of Poles, Russians and Germans were killed during the war. There is a name for that and it's "World War II". What the Nazis did to the Jews was not done in the course of fighting the war, it was done in occupied areas after the front moved on. Plenty of local non-Jews participated in it willingly. But I'll be the first to say that if we're pointing fingers it should be at Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Romanians, Hungarians, French, Dutch and others before talking about Poles. The Poles didn't perpetrate the holocaust. We know that. But when defending Poland, it doesn't have to be done by insulting Jews. That only reinforces the impression that your trying to change.

nicely said

Yes, indeed this proves the point of the poster. That the Holocaust (trademark) was something special and exclusive only to Jews and their suffering, while everyone else just happened to die in WWII, as in, collateral damage. Even though more Christians were killed by the Nazis than Jews, those victims are simply thrown under the bus of a secondary classification. For being Gentiles.

As I have said in previous posts, I don't represent Poland, don't live in Poland, nor am I from Poland.

Also, those other nations, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, France. There were not that many collaborators, and many were not allowed to be since they were considered inferior to the Germans racially. Keep in mind, 7 million Ukrainian Christians were murdered by the Nazis, both within and inside the camps.

It is customary for many Jews to magnify their own losses and demand remembrance for them only. While diminishing, trivializing, and even denying, the suffering of others, making it sound as if their deaths were ordinary, expected, and just part of the times. Most of the suffering of all peoples, Non-Jews and Jews, did not take place separately, and took place in the years 1939-1945.

Never mind that not only is this done out of contempt for non-Jews, but also to cover up the crimes a number of fellow Jews themselves committed. The Communist regimes in Poland, the USSR, and elsewhere were disproportionately Jewish in membership, and killed twice more victims than the Nazis, from 1917-1958.

But the tactic of Holocaustian promotion is just an outgrowth of narcissism.

Respectfully, I disagree. The noun Holocaust has been used throughout the centuries to name such similar acts perpetrated against other peoples, be it on racial or religious grounds. It was not coined specifically as a consequence of the attempted extermination of Jewish people or people of Jewish faith, though I of course appreciate that in the modern context it is in general associated with same, and, undoubtedly, the Jewish people were unparalleled in terms of the savagery and methodical nature in which the Nazis sought to exterminate them and in terms of how many actually perished relative to other groups of people.

It ought be borne in mind that, as one example (other than his plans for Jewish people per se), every Pole (regardless of faith) was, in Hitler's own words, to be killed without mercy or pity. This was attempted, though he was stopped, which meant that people such as you and I are now alive.

In my view, there should be no commodification or naming rights to the term Holocaust, notwithstanding the fact that the Nazis were variable in their zealousness with the speed and manner in which they killed those different people that were subject to it. To do otherwise would arguably be a denial of a remembrance of all those millions of others of different race, nationality and religion who perished under the Holocaust - they should not be marginalised because of a perceived naming right. All the murdered during the Holocaust shared a common killer - they should have at least the dignity of sharing a common remembrance of their passing and a common condemnation of those who sought to liquidate them.


Again, I disagree if you are suggesting that it was just the Jewish people who were murdered in occupied areas after the front moved on. If so, this is clearly untrue. I'd warrant that nearly every member of this forum whose lineage lies in Central/Eastern Europe (for example) had a family member/descendant or knew of someone close to their family who was murdered by the Nazis in some form of operation nowhere near the front lines, and not in the course of what we loosely refer to as 'dying in battle'.


Would you please explain what you mean here, particularly in respect of the insult you refer to?

I have to disagree with you here, Ozi. See my post above your own. I think people associate the terms systematic and methodical with the Nazis simply because of the Nazis' appearance. The coats, the uniforms, the helmets, the marches, etc etc. But, were they that different from the Communists?

It also depends on what exactly makes something more horrific. Is there a worse type of dead body?

Even in warfare, although you have soldiers fighting on both fronts, would anyone want to trade places with them? Soldiers in war are often mutilated, dismembered, captured and tortured, burned alive, shredded by bullets, etc etc. By these technicalities, as just one example, someone who was a veteran of the Vietnam War could claim to have survived a holocaust of their own. So it must be taken into account in terms of what constitutes as what, and why.

One thing is for sure, it's time for non-Jews everywhere to take history back.

Thanks Yerrick - that's fine if you disagree mate.

I think I may need to explain myself more carefully however. When I refer to the Holocaust in the modern context being 'generally' associated with the attempted extermination of the Jewish people, what I mean is that if you were to put this term 'Holocaust' to the average person and ask for their understanding of it, 'generally' the answer would be that it was to do with the deaths of millions of Jewish people in WW2. Does that make sense?


I think it's time for everyone to speak plainly, honestly and respectfully about history. To take somehting back means you owned it. No one owns history, but all people who make up history own the specific parts that they played in it. The problem arises when people like us (who were not contemporaneously part of that history) try to claim ownership of genuinelycontentious historical matters. We must do what we can to avoid that, because my claim to ownership may not be better than yours, and there is no impartial arbiter who can decide priority of claim.

Yes Ozi, that actually does make sense and you are correct on this. When one asks any 5 old kid on the street about who died in WWII, they will mention only 6 million Jews. Not how many people of other groups died, which was much much larger. The Holocaust (trademark) is still being promoted as an exclusively unique and Jewish event, and people are constantly reminded of it in our media. The New York Times, for example, reminds readers of it everyday. There are also 200 Holocaustian movies, maybe more. Holocaust museums and shrines propped up not only throughout the U.S., U.K., and Australia, but throughout the entire world. commemorating, of course, only a certain group.


I couldn't agree with you more on the first sentence, Ozi. I must clarify myself and mention that I was not implying that Non-Jews owned history per se. What I meant was that they don't own any part of history, and instead history is dictated to them. Many Jews are arbiters of history, and therefore write it in their own way. And it is in a way in which everyone must remember only their dead, and everyone must be reminded that they always have been and always are victims. Obviously this is far from the truth, but this is what people are programmed to believe 24/7. If this wasn't true, then people wouldn't be constantly reminded of only one particular event of WWII.

I am sick of Gentiles being constantly smeared and worst. I wish to be an advocate for Gentiles everywhere to reclaim the history that is and has been monopolized.

The term is from ancient Greek. It originally referred to an exceptional sort of sacrifice to the gods in which the entire sacrificial victim was burnt up. Usually the skin and bones of the sacrificial victim were burnt up, for the gods, while the meat of the victim was consumed by the people present. This arrangement was ascribed to the action of humanity's patron Titan, Prometheus, who tricked Zeus into accepting this portion of the victim by hiding it under a rich layer of fat. Holos = whole and kaustos = burnt.

Yes this is true. And the term Holocaust was in fact first used in newspapers to describe the mass murder of Armenian, Greek, and Assyrian Christians in Turkey from 1891-1920.

Thanks mate. I had no idea of its genesis.

So I guess we're making too big a deal over what happened to the Jews.


Yes. A dead victim is more horrific than a dead murderer.


I see. So I guess shipping civilians from all over Europe to Poland and then gassing them by the millions is not real any different than soldiers dying in battle. And if the victims are the same in your eyes, then I guess the perpetrators are the same. So there's no difference between a Polish soldier defending his country against the Germans and a German soldier machine-gunning women and children into an open pit.

Thanks for opening my eyes.

Very much so yes.


True, yet when a dead murderer dies the same or worse horrific death as the victim, then it can be called even.


When a dead murderer dies the same or worse horrific death as the victim, then it can be called even. For the victim's family member, it should be justice. And everyone knows about the 6 million Jews. It's basically part of pop culture. How about the millions of Christians and Moslems killed by the Soviet regime? Never mind who was running the Soviet empire.