Why are Jews pestering Poland for "proper" WW2 monetary restitution/reparations?

Harry will be disappointed. :)

oh, I have a very special category for him :)

I used to have a lot of sympathy for Jewish victims of the holocaust, but their constant attempts to milk everything til the last drop are becoming tiresome.

As an old Jew once said: 'There's no business like Shoa business' :)

('shoa'= Jewish term for the holocaust)

I'm not worried at all, Beëlzebub, don't credit yourself too much; of course it's much better to stay in a little cramped conservative world of which you can be sure it will get you nowhere ;)

And FYI: not all Dutch records concerning WW2 and its aftermath are public. As student in History I had access to a bigger part than the general public, but not all information was disclosed back then. So I am to go by on one hand the info my family gave me and on the other hand the info that was made available to me, which wasn't complete. My granddad undoubtedly made some questionable decisions after the war, but that was given his psyche at the time kinda understandable. "They never offered it to me, but if they did, I would've refused anyway". He didn't want to have anything to do with anybody outside his wife and children, which he beat up on a regular basis. As a trained and experienced economist he went to work as a forrester just for the sake of seclusion and it was a blessing for him when he died due to an accident.

So his role is a bit blurry in this part. Given the assumption that he would've refused and the fact that I could find nowhere in the archives that they actually offered it to him plus the fact that the building was declared a landmark shortly after the war, this is the picture that I could distill out of the sources that I had. Since the Dutch government owns the Dutch landmarks and has the right to confiscate them (or buy them nowadays) the statement that they didn't offered it back to him should be true beyond reasonable doubt.


No! Are you joking me? I really didn't know that. Thanks for enlightening me!

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

hey, you forgot about me. I am a liberal too:)

Aphro thinks that liberals are people who don't see everything in black and white:) and putting people in boxes it the worst thing one can do.

How awfully cute :) I'll tell ya what, hippie-dippy: you go on and keep ‘politically correcting’ Holland right into the ground, and when you are done, one of those truly backward countries like Poland will show you some common sense.


Nonsense: why would documents about private property be secret? Even in communist Poland, Poland who went through occupation and war those archives called 'księgi wieczyste' were available for involved parties. Your story makes absolutely no sense. You either are the owner and have papers supporting your claim or you are not.

Bollocks.
Property information has been traditionally available to all interested parties. I can check my neighbor, or someone on the left coast of Canada. I can see all the previous and current owners, dates of sale, sizes of rooms, and even whether their basement is finished and if they have a deck in their backyard. That info is free to me. In some countries your have to pay a small fee for the information, and the information can be even more elaborate, as it is in the case of The Netherlands.

Searches available in the Netherlands:

You can search property by address, post code, land registry code, map of the Netherlands, place map

Products available:


eulis.eu/countries/profile/netherlands

Indeed. Here in oz we call it a title search and conveyance of any property requires such search to be provided to say a lender or purchaser.

Our searches also show when the property was 'created', all past owners, easements, encumbrances, caveats and so on. These sorts of searches are integral to any land registry system and I find it difficult to believe that in Holland this info, even if it relates to WW2 title ownership, cannot be ascertained. Even if so, the chain of ownership of this persons' ancestors' property would be traceable via such search as it applies to pre WW2 ownership.

Surely MareG you could conduct an online search and type in your ancestor's full name or a proper description of the villa he owned? It's inconceivable that any modern, transparent goverment would withhold this information. If they do, then surely you have right to complain to whatever tribunal regulates complaints against your government.

look people Jews try to extort money.
why not ask them how you going to compensate for the land you stole from Palestinians

It's generally accepted that NL is about 20 years ahead of most European countries and at least 60 years of PL, mentality- and innovation-wise, so I doubt that PL can teach NL anything. PL can't even cope with their own past.


Some ppl need that, for otherwise they can't cope with life's little ironies, eh :) Tolerant ppl have to tolerate the intolerant, unfortunately, yet the other way around hardly ever happens. Let's just say that these little souls are so insecure that they need some guidance in their lives, be this religion or the plain old "us against them" adage. Let's just feel sorry for them as they seem to have forgotten that, with the exception perhaps of Abe Lincoln, no conservative has ever brought any substantial change for the good in history. :)

But I see that we have here two Holland-specialists in the room...Two Americans of Polish descent who probably never even have set foot in the Netherlands but yet are fully aware of the archival structure and I am sure they haven't forgotten that governmental pieces are generally not released to the public until 50 years after the event?


I did all the searches available to me at the time, but nowhere I found evidence that they offered it back to my grandfather - he would've refused it anyway. I left it at my findings. I did it mainly to get clarity, but that's the reason in the first place why I went to study History anway. Not to gain money or sth. And besides: the building has burned down to the ground in 1960, so there is nothing to gain. Not that I wanted to gain any financial stuff for that matter.

Bzi, Mare is right. I was even talking about it with my colleagues. For example, in Poland we still think that a man+woman relationship/marriage is normal, while in Netherlands it's already considered a perversion.

:)

Are the Dutch regressing to narrow-mindness?


huffingtonpost.

You'd be surprised. I would suggest you go there and see for yourself how big the gay-infestation is in NL.

M-G (doesn't hold much hope for PL to be steaming ahead in current of modernity)

Yes but jews are greedy and always want more.

That party doesn't exist anymore, was legally banned and excluded from any interaction. The fact that they couldn't get 600 signatures over and over again in a country of nearly 17 Million ppl shows that the majority of the Dutch public was/is disgusted by the existance of such a party. Pedophiliae is just as illegal in NL as it is anywhere else in the world. So that argument doesn't take hold, I'm afraid.

>^..^<

M-G (pedophiliae has nothing to do with homosexuality)

For such a party to be legally registered shows how far the Dutch are ahead of the rest of us normal people. Freaks.

Not really, the system worked.

First of all, they were NOT legal in NL. They had plenty of court cases against them over time in order to disband them. It would be different if the majority would condone such a party. They didn't, so there is no reason to worry. Freaks? There are pedophiles everywhere, yes, also in PL. What I would call freaks is when parents kick out their own son or daughter for being gay. And that still happens in PL on a massive scale. Some Polish shops are known to sell swastika flags. Poles are normal ppl?

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

---Dan Elbaum, director
---Larry Adelman, president
Chicago Office of the American Jewish Committee

Now, that's a nice piece.

Jews spoke well of Lech Kaczyński before his death, so it is not surprising they speak well of him now. The editors of JPost wrote an article in which they really captured his honorable character, very perceptive and recognizable to us who know more of the late President than what oposition made him out to be, and it would be hard to find another president in the world who knew more about the plight of Jews in Europe and was sympathetic to Jewish affairs. This did not include being schemed by Jewish organizations.

But let's stay on topic, if possible, since the sudden influx of trolls here.

Hardly a Catholic thing... The (Rabbinic) Talmud explicitly condones pedophilia.

Of course, those of the Muslim faith have been known to 'marry them young'...

I find it amusing to see how whenever the CC is somehow discredited by her behaviour, the good Catholics always drag other religions into it. They are also remarkably silent when sth bad happens within the CC and manage to blame the other religions for pointing these bad things out or even condoning the matter, because it's the CC.

The other way round, when sth bad occurs with other religions the good Catholics don't do that. Instead they scream "see how bad they are! We don't have that in Catholic religion!". Catholics in that case go to extreme lengths to show that this is "proof" of the badness of other religions. Quite amusing and predictable.

Richasis, I would like you to show us with which phrase the Talmud explicitly condones paedophilia and how you explain the fact that it hardly occurs within the Islam.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)

good question, I am getting my cookies.

Given your great enthusiasm, allow me to do this, and one better, along with some commentary:

From the English translation of the Babylonian Talmud, stated to be the most authoritative text:
(R.C. Musaph-Andriesse, From Torah to Kabbalah: Basic Introduction to the Writings of Judaism)

Sanhedrin 54b . A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.

Sanhedrin 55b . A Jew may marry a three year old girl (specifically, three years "and a day" old).

Sanhedrin 76a . God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife
for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean [or "Gentile"]..." THE INFERENCE IS CLEAR.

This translation is based on the Jewish-authorized, English translation of the Babylonian Talmud.

..........

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years) ... Unexpectedly, Allah's Apostle came upon me
in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 58 (Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234) - University of Southern California

Now, perhaps one better (where in the Talmud is THAT?):

Now, for my little bit of commentary on the whole subject:

Given the current laws governing pedophilia, my grandfather - and maybe yours - proves guilty of it.
He, at age 22, met and married my grandmother, age 16 - together they lived happily for 50+ years.

And to think you would have me eat crow while you enjoy cookies. As Always, I am... Happy to Help :)

richasis,

Every religion and group has its extremists. Christianity and Islam have radical things written in their name.

I don't believe these Talmudic writings are mainstream Jewish teachings. The Talmud was written a long time ago, about 1700 years ago. Although misguided, it was meant to keep Jews from converting to Christianity.

Its radical teachings are rejected by mainstream Judaism.

This is what it's actually says:


I don't read anywhere that he is allowed to have sex with a 9 year old?

come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_54.html#PARTb

Neither do I read that in following:


And in 76A I cannot find anything else than that Incest is punishable by stoning or fire.


Here's the full text. Looks immediately a bit different than how you put it:

Narrated Aisha:


By the way: Tutankhamon married when he was 12 with his niece of 12 years old. The Talmud was written about 2700 years ago - ppl lived to be 30 years max at the time, it was completely normal to marry around 12 years or even a little younger.

All the quotes you selectively put here are still no explanation as to why you need to defend Catholic priests that nowadays with all the laws against it, still performing sexual acts with under aged. Nowadays, ppl tend to get older, therefore the age of consent has gone up as well. Priests should know that.

Circumsizing is not sexual abuse, by the way. If it's performed under hygenic circumstances there is nothing against it as it is even more hygienic than when you would leave your foreskin there. And besides, one article doesn't make summer, especially not when you compare it to the tsunami of Catholic cases that come to surface now. And the fact that you try to defend acts like that makes you look not that good.

Here's a nice one as well: israelect/Come-and-Hear/editor/ca-trimm/index.html

Take especially a look at the first reaction-email.

So I guess, I still will be eating cookies and you will still be eating crow... As always, happy to rebuke you again :)
Especially since you tend to be a bit arrogant, makes it more fun :)

Oh, and my Grandparent were both 26 when they married. The other two were 28 and 25, so they followed proceedings and morales very correctly.


Not only that, but it doesn't even say what he wants it to say as well.

>^..^<

M-G (tiens, tiens)

I agree - and most religions are thought extreme by those who practice opposing faiths.
I am what one may call 'Agnostic' - I find such ancient texts to be but historical record.
It is unfortunate that some have inferred my comments as support for one over another.


While I agree with your premise, my research leads me to rethink the role of the Talmud.
The more respected scholars within the rabbinical community have thus proclaimed that
"the Talmud is the legal code which forms the basis of Jewish Religious Law and it is the
textbook used in the training of Rabbis" (Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer; 1952).


The teachings of the Talmud are accepted by Christians in the highest political echelons.

One such Christian (who first recognized Israel) was 33rd-Degree Mason Harry Truman:
When presented with his second set of Talmud writings, Truman was quoted as saying,
"I have read many more of the ones presented four years ago than a lot of people think."

A known avid reader, Truman claimed the book he read the most was the Talmud which,
in his words, "contains much sound reasoning and good philosophy of life." (Fair enough)
("Facts are Facts" - Benjamin H. Freedman).

Here's some more information about Harry Truman and his association with B'nai B'rith:
fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/history/zionism/news.php?q=1259090646

Again, I mean no judgment here. My passion for history just happens to coincide with my obsession :)


How so? Granted, it's more wordy in full content, but the context remains.


Fair enough, BUT...


NETHERLANDS has no sodomy laws, the age of sexual consent is 16 for all,
sex between an adult and a young person between the ages of 12 and 16
is permitted by law as long as young person consents - LOWERED in 1990.
ageofconsent.com/netherlands.htm


VATICAN CITY: There is an equal age of consent set at 12 years of age in Art. 331 (1).
When there is a relationship of dependence (teacher/student, etc.) the age of consent
is 15 years in Art. 331 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe)


It's called 'debate' - I'm not going to argue your case for you. :)


Like I (truthfully) stated to MediaWatch, I have no agenda. I am, however, Agnostic.

Still, some outside of the Catholic Church not only condone, but advocate, such behavior. I DO NOT, but the point is, SOME DO:

A new book that says child molesters are not a major peril to children is part of a larger movement within academia to promote "free sexual expression of children."

Feminist writer Judith Levine's book "Not Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Kids from Sex" has been condemned by those who say she excuses sexual abuse of children - a charge she strongly denies.

Ms. Levine says she was "misunderstood" after a news article last month quoted her saying a boy's sexual experience with a priest "conceivably" could be positive.

"Do I advocate priests having sex with their child parishioners? No, absolutely no," she said in a telephone interview. However, she said, "The research shows us that in some minority of cases, young - even quite young - people can have a positive [sexual] experience with an adult. That's what the research shows."

Featuring a foreword by Clinton administration Surgeon General Dr. Joycelyn Elders, Ms. Levine's book endorses a Dutch law, passed in 1990, that effectively lowered the age of consent to 12.

come-and-hear.com/editor/ca-wt-04-19-02/index.html


There's really no argument here. My point of that article is its practice as Talmudic Law.


Even doctors debate this. Besides, it didn't quite work out in the example I cited, did it?


Conversely, as was your assumption this was my intent...


Again, this may require a re-visit on your part:
"Update July 2003: For the Latest on James Trimm and his activities, including his false doctorate..."

"James Trimm has posted to Mormon forums under the names of Rabbi Yosef, Rabbi Yosef ben Yehudah and Yosef Liahona. Trimm aka Yosef was promoting the idea he was a qualified Jewish Rabbi with a doctorate. He was teaching that the Book of Mormon was a relevant Jewish book and that it was true. James Trimm was then at his own Nazarene forum refuting that, using the name James Trimm, but he was also posting as Steve Cohen who was also advocating the Book of Mormon."


This would be condescending, if not so ludicrous. I dare say your grandparents EXCEEDED
"proceedings and morales (sic)" deemed legal requirement throughout the whole of Europe.
Are you SURE you're not CONSERVATIVE?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age

If my grandparents were still alive, I would have them inform the Rabbi who married them
of his failure to "very correctly" follow social norms you espouse, despite 50 happy years.

PS - The correct answer to


is: [The Mishnah] Shabbos (19:2; 133a). Sorry, no Bonus Points.

Have a look at this:


Article 245, Article 247 (in Dutch)

Age of consent was lowered from 18 to 16 in 1990. Nothing wrong with that.

/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Europe

The Vatican is the youngest with 12, followed by Spain with 13.

>^..^<

M-G (no time)

Why are Jews pestering Poland for "proper" WW2 monetary restitution/reparations?
because they have no shame and someone needs to pay for new settlements and ghetto guards and new prisons for Palestinians.

All large organized religions are screwed up because they (defacto) become corporations which trumps spirituality.