This isn’t antisemitic

….has claimed that four million Jews, not six million, died in the Holocaust.

Leave everything else aside, how have we ended up with people seriously claiming that that’s an antisemitic comment? Sure, it’s wrong and it’s about Jews but that’s not enough to qualify….

67 comments on “This isn’t antisemitic

  1. Umm… did you read the article? That’s not the remark that caused him to be labeled as anti-semitic.

  2. Does the “anti-semitism” of a statement depend on the intent of
    the speaker? Somebody misremembering a statistic, somebody whose honest estimate is below the low end of the historical consensus, somebody who wants to deliberately play down the figure (e.g. because if you knock a couple of million off then you can claim some other group of people have suffered more) all seem in quite different moral categories to me.

  3. It might or it might not be anti-semitic.

    If someone wants to examine the evidence and recalculate the numbers that is one thing.

    If your objective was to make the argument that Jews inflated the number to gain sympathy then you might imagine that a 33% reduction would reduce sympathy proportionally or more.

    Think about Ken. He wants us to believe that Zionists were complicit in the Holocaust. We know that desperate people do not behave as we might like. For instance, we know that Jews were Kapos, or fed the ovens. We also know that the Jewish leadership tried to save as many people as they could in Romania. Yet the vile Ken wants to make this more. Why is he making this into an act of collusion? I think we know the answer. Not from the one statement perhaps but from the pattern of remarks about one particular group of people. There’s an obsessiveness present that gives the game away.

  4. Yes Tim but that is not how language works, words and statements hang out there in the public mind and it becomes useful and possible to imply all by saying only part or just by using associated ideas
    Think of the use of such concepts as
    ” Identity”
    ” Social Coherence”
    or
    “Pressure on services ”
    All are dog whistling to ethnic insecurity and aggression
    It has become common for people to rehabilitate ideas that are outside the window by means of opaque reference

    In the referendum for example , there was an advert which showed an old ;lady waiting for treatment increasingly distressed because no-pine would look after her in EU Britain.
    The advert didn`t say..”because a load of brown people are clogging up the queue” it didn`t need to , the ground work for that had been laid over decades and surveys show this is exactly what Brexit voters believe”

    Think of statements made by my own MP such as this
    ” Many people are concerned that House prices and higher than they wold be thanks to excessive immigration”

    As a statement that can be defended but with the backcloth of racist lies over the years it really says …you can`t get a house because the darkies are swarming all over the market.
    As a political tactic it has something in common with all marketing ,, the genius of Disney was to make the shape of Mickey`s ears conjure the whole of the Disney brand .

    So ..the defensible statement that holocaust is exaggerated is not “meaning ” about numbers.It is a push towards rehabilitating denial and form there to denying the right of Israel to exist which rests on its truth
    Seamus Milne does much the same with Stalin`s numbers

    That is how language works

  5. ” Many people are concerned that House prices and higher than they wold be thanks to excessive immigration”

    As a statement that can be defended but with the backcloth of racist lies over the years it really says …you can`t get a house because the darkies are swarming all over the market.

    No doubt there are areas of the country where it would be interpreted as referring to ‘darkies’ (has anyone, apart from lefties wanting to make a point, used that word since ‘Love Thy Neighbour’?), but in Lincolnshire it would be taken as referring to eastern Europeans. People interpret statements made in a national context according to their local experience – who knew?

  6. Cambridge University said he should not be banned because they respect freedom of speech.

    Liars

  7. It’s sterile to take one tendentious claim made by an antisemite and contend that that claim taken in isolation isn’t of necessity antisemitic.

  8. Seamus Milne does much the same with Stalin`s numbers

    That is how language works

    Newmania does exactly the same thing with Brexit and those who support it. Every comment, every thread is about how those who voted Brexit are somehow unintelligent racists. Which tells us more about Newmania than it does about people who voted Leave.

  9. It’s so much easier to decry Brexit because the motive is mere racism than to argue that the USA were wrong to choose independence and “taxation with representation”.

  10. If only he’d said that he wished they’d used battery acid instead of gas, the left would have chortled at the hilarious joke.

  11. @ Henry Crun
    It isn’t just Newmania – it’s almost anyone who reads “The Guardian”. I am repeatedly told that anyone who voted “Leave” is a racist.

  12. Newmania summarises why so many Labour voters drifted off to the National Front in the 70s and 80s.

    “I have a concern about immigration”

    The Left – “You are a racist”

    “OK, I’ll go talk to someone who listens”

  13. It’s great how the story here isn’t that some funny little foreign chappie made Jew jokes, but that some anonymous people in the audience at Cambridge laughed.

    While my manservant (the cat) fetches the smelling salts, what were they supposed to do when a nonagenarian dignitary they invited to speak was jestering? Where do embarrassed titters fall on the Mel Gibson scale? Should we jail guffawers?

    The politician, who was Malaysian Prime Minister between 1981 and 2003 before returning in 2018, once wrote: “The Jews are not merely hook-nosed, but understand money instinctively.”

    This is only partially true, he forgot their Hebraic propensity to play violins on the roofs of their houses while singing about their plans to become a wealthy man.

  14. @Steve

    Yeah, fancy wanting three staircases (one of them leading nowhere ‘just for show’).

  15. Newmaniaspeak: A dictionary.

    Dog-whistling – mentioning any concept I am opposed to.

  16. And ironic how people like Newmania do so much to promote the causes they oppose. Bandying about terms like “racist” just serve to desensitise people to their use. It’s getting to the point where the label “racist” will be worn as a badge of pride. Hope, when some real racists come along, they\ll be pleased with their work.

  17. Henry

    “Newmania does exactly the same thing with Brexit and those who support it. Every comment, every thread is about how those who voted Brexit are somehow unintelligent racists. Which tells us more about Newmania than it does about people who voted Leave.”

    The more common and strident Newmania complaint is that Brexiters are largely uneducated and thick coffin-dodgers, who are inter-generational kleptomaniac parasites.

  18. @Newmania
    ” Many people are concerned that House prices and higher than they wold be thanks to excessive immigration”
    Surely the correct response is to see if it is true.
    Personally I don’t think blaming immigration for something is racist. If a ship sinks because there are too many passengers, no one thinks “That is anti passenger”.
    They think what idiot let too many people on to that boat, without checking if there was the capacity to have that many.
    The same with housing I think “What idiot let so many people come here without checking if there were enough houses?”

    A bit embarrassing really as we used to have better Governments than this.

  19. I have never thought that Brexit voters were stupid; on the contrary it has always been my view that if the issues had been properly presented they were clever enough to vote remain……… for the most part

  20. How do you explain, Newmania, that a lot of the pro-Brexit commentators on here actually live in EU countries other than the UK? We hardly need explaining to about the issues. We live them.

  21. “The Jews are not merely hook-nosed, but understand money instinctively.”

    The more I read that sentence, the more bizarre it sounds. Is he suggesting some link between nose shape and financial acuity? My old man had a bit of a schnozz on him, but his finances were all over the place…

    IIRC Jim Bowen told a great Jewish joke at the Oxford Union.

    “Arrogant lot, aren’t they, the Jews?”

    * hushed, worried, silence *

    “They get an inch chopped off the old fella before they even know how long it’s going to grow!”

    * laughter, applause, relief *

    These days he’d probably get lynched.

  22. In what way was it improperly presented?

    Personally, if the Remain side, or ‘Government and media’ as we call it, hadn’t lied outrageously daily with Project Fear then more would have voted Leave.

  23. @ Anon
    “What idiot let so many people come here without checking if there were enough houses?”
    Anthony Charles Lynton Blair

  24. @ Rob
    I beg to differ – I think that Project Fear was so apalling that it wasn’t believed, and a plausible “Remain” campaign would have been more successful.

  25. @john 77
    Thank you, saying that he left 12 years ago and things have not got any better.

    @Newmania
    Perhaps if Remain politicians had done a better job in the last 25 years or so then they would have won. John “ERM” Major springs to mind as Tony Blalr who decided that open door immigration, generous benefits and restricted planning controls would not cause any problems

  26. I dare say almost nobody has a clue whether the number murdered was four million, six million, or eight million.

    So I suspect “Sure, it’s wrong” is wrong.

    I can say that eight million was the number bandied about when I was a boy but perhaps it referred to all the victims not only the Jewish ones. Dunno. And in a sense don’t care: there was a mass slaughter of defenceless people for vile reasons, so what the hell does the precision of an estimate matter? It can’t alter the nature and scale of the crime.

  27. ‘a plausible “Remain” campaign would have been more successful’: I did wonder why there wasn’t an intellectually serious Remain campaign. But then a journalist in the Telegraph touched on the likely explanation. The more you tell people about the EU the more they dislike it.

    That does pose problems for the Remainers.

  28. According to the figures, between the 2001 and 2011 census,
    the ‘white” population of the UK rose by 919,654 (up 1.7%) , the “Asian” population of the UK rose by 1,794,51 (up 69.58%), the “Black” population of the UK rose by 755,946 (up 65.8%).

    These are facts.

    The % identifying as ‘non-white’ in 1991 was 5.9% and in 2011 was 12.9%

    This is also a fact.

    I am sure that to Newmania, these are racist facts and there is nothing to see or consider.

    I don’t know what the results will show in 2021 but what we are seeing is a pretty dramatic shift in the demography of the UK. This may work out wonderfully, with all colours and creeds getting along in lefty-unicorn peace and love. It might not. Ethnic and cultural tensions exist in abundance around the world. Even people of the same colour and only slightly different ways of worshiping the same God seem to delight in killing each other.

    But since it’s racist to even suggest that it’s a good idea to talk about these things, let’s not bother.

  29. Dearie – And in a sense don’t care: there was a mass slaughter of defenceless people for vile reasons, so what the hell does the precision of an estimate matter?

    Yeah. Who’s thinking: “ACKSHUALLY, sheeple, Hitler ONLY murdered four million Jews! Bet you feel silly now lol”?

    Apart from Jeremy Corbyn, natch.

    As Russell Brand once said: “I think most of us made up our minds about Ian Huntley when he killed those children…” How hard can it be to, maybe, y’know, not cause the deaths of millions of innocent people? I think there’s something in the Bible about that.

    Andrew, TMB – But did he have to biddy-biddy-bum all day long? Seems excessive.

    MC – Shofar, so good.

  30. “In the referendum for example , there was an advert which showed an old ;lady waiting for treatment increasingly distressed because no-one would look after her in EU Britain.
    The advert didn`t say..”because a load of brown people are clogging up the queue” it didn`t need to , the ground work for that had been laid over decades and surveys show this is exactly what Brexit voters believe””

    Maybe because they’s the evidence that their own eyes tell them when they go to the doctors surgery or to A&E? Dog whistling doesn’t work if there’s no underlying facts, because no one will have even considered it.

    If a political party produced a dog whistle campaign designed to imply that terrorism is all the fault of the owners of Chinese takeaways, it would fall flat on its face, no one would have a clue what it was on about. One based on the owners of curry houses, different story.

    You appear to think that the campaigns create the thought in the voters mind, whereas the thought (and the experience that created that thought) precede the campaign, and the purpose of the political campaign is to attract the people who have already made their minds up on a particular subject to vote for their party.

    You like to think if the campaign didn’t exist the thoughts wouldn’t exist, but they would. And eventually get a public airing somehow. You regard the voters as idiot sheep, dragged hither and thither by sinister Goebbels types (but only on the Right of course, those on the Left are noble and pure of thought), when the reality is the views of the public drive the views of the politicians, not the other way around. Rather in the same way the views of the readers of a paper drive its political views, rather than vice versa. Change derives from the people upwards, not from the elites downwards. The elites can create the illusion of imposed change, but all they are doing is storing up pressure for a rapid snap backwards of the pendulum.

    This is what we are seeing now – the elites have been pushing the pendulum sideways, further and further from an equilibrium and imagining it will stay there of its own accord, that they’ve shifted the entire clock. When in reality fairly soon will lose control of it, and it will sweep all before it in a rapid swing to the opposite.

  31. Newmania,

    That is how language works

    I don’t know what language you are using, but it isn’t English.

  32. In the run-up to the referendum I was expecting discussions similar the The Federalist Papers, but instead it was two shitstorms clashing into each other.

  33. @Jim
    “You appear to think that the campaigns create the thought in the voters mind, whereas the thought (and the experience that created that thought) precede the campaign, and the purpose of the political campaign is to attract the people who have already made their minds up on a particular subject to vote for their party.”
    Very true. I voted leave for two reasons :-
    1) CFP I didn’t think it was fair
    2) I know immigrants who have come here and because they are single Mums were given nicer housing than I can afford. Not the EU’s fault of course but it is the fault of remain supporters

  34. @ Steve
    There’s something in the Bible about not killing 50 or 40 or … 10 innocent people and lots about about not killing, or harming, a single innocent but not about killing millions of innocent people. That concept was beyond the prophets’ imagination.

  35. @john 77
    There’s plenty of examples of smiting, sow the earth with salt etc. in the Old Testament that I don’t see the prophets having any problem with imagining mass slaughter

  36. John 77 –

    Something worth reflecting on, when we consider the savagery of our ancestors, especially the medieval ones, is that they’d probably regard us as barbaric.

    Genocides have been going on forever (Psalms talks about invaders taking children and bashing their heads against rocks, for example), but by the time of medieval Europe wholesale slaughter of civilian populations was no longer the norm. Massacres, certainly, but not genocide.

    So Edward I destroyed Berwick, in an attack so brutal it was said the king only put a stop to it after seeing a pregnant woman run through with English steel, before His Grace invented the rigmarole.

    But generally medieval combat was between professional knights or hired mercenaries, and the peasantry would be expected to just continue doing peasant stuff under their new feudal lords. The practice of aerial bombardment of cities, or rounding up civilians for cold-blooded starvation and murder, would’ve seemed shamefully cowardly to Sir Percy the Hotspur.

    At the Battle of the Standard English chivalry successfully repelled the slave-raiding Scots after raising the Body of Christ onto a mast in the centre of their formation.

    This mixture of piety and practical butchery seems strange to us, but the medieval mind was in some ways more humane than the modern one – it’s hard to imagine Christ-fearing Norman nobles unleashing atomic desolation on a weakened foe. It’s equally difficult to envisage a modern potentate showing the humility Henry IV did on the Road to Canossa. A Khan or a Caesar might countenance the firebombing of Dresden until every woman and child was reduced to ash, a King would not.

    In Hoc Signo Vinces is preferable to the 20th century invention of Total War, and it is my fondest wish that the next phase of the Conservative Party leadership campaign should be a jousting tourney where the winner shall be feasted with viands and feted by England’s most fragrant virgins.

  37. Talking about smiting etc, the noble Prof Potato is being dished out a bit of biblical from Vern Dakin over at TRUK.

    Hilarious!

  38. Steve said:
    “it is my fondest wish that the next phase of the Conservative Party leadership campaign should be a jousting tourney”

    The TV debates would be more interesting.

  39. @ BniC
    Mass slaughter involved wiping out armies comprising hundreds or thousands of men – but killing millions of children was beyond their imagination.
    I am not defending the morality of Gideon etc, just stating that the concept of killing a million children was beyond their immagination.

  40. “by the time of medieval Europe wholesale slaughter of civilian populations was no longer the norm. Massacres, certainly, but not genocide.”

    The slaughter of the Albigensians would nowadays – if somewhat illogically – qualify as a genocide.

    Depending on when you count the start of the Middle Ages, you could include the Franks’ treatment of the Saxons as a genocide too.

    And then there was that occasion when the Anglo-Saxon king instructed his people to murder their Danish neighbours – that must undeniably have been an attempt at genocide.

  41. If you ever use the number ’11 million’ referring to those killed by the Germans some will call you anti-Semitic.
    The non-Jews apparently don’t count.

    Which in itself is racist.

  42. @ dearieme
    Aethelred the Redeless (meaning he would not listen to advice) got his well-deserved come-uppance for that.

  43. @ Martin
    Slight shortage of millionaire Roma in New York to launch a “Romacaust Memorial Day”.
    Racist anti-Roma sentiment lingers on in Eastern Europe. Why should we be surprised that thousands of them came over here after 2004/2007 (as appropriate)?

    I presume that you are talking about civilians/prisoners, not the million or two Russian soldiers killed in the battle of Stalingrad by the vastly outnumbered German army …

  44. @Andrew C June 18, 2019 at 1:32 pm

    +1

    Racist Facts that must not be mentioned have existed for decades: IQ, Diabetes, FGM, Inbreeding…

    .
    @Jim June 18, 2019 at 2:16 pm

    You [Newmainia] like to think if the campaign didn’t exist the thoughts wouldn’t exist, but they would. And eventually get a public airing somehow.

    Similar to Gov’t, Pols, Police, Councils, MSM covering up RoP gangs raping and pimping children for decades and still doing it.

    Tommy Robinson exposed it and is now punished by state & msm on a daily basis

    .
    @RichardT June 18, 2019 at 4:51 pm

    Re: Channel 4 Conservative Party leadership debate – youtube

    LittlejohnDidn’t bother watching the Tory tub of lard debate on Channel 4 with the repulsive, Leftie snob Krishnan Guru-wossname, who once refused to shake hands with a friend of mine — a brilliant journalist, far more accomplished than this posturing third-rate Jon Snow wannabe — because he was suspected of liking Mrs Thatcher.

    Why did former Brexiteer Gove and the rest of them go along with it?

    Review:

    Channel 4 managed to generate a banality circus on Sunday night with the five also-rans in the Conservative Party leadership contest. The absolutely decisive issue, of who governs Britain, was not raised by presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy. That is to say, the issue of Parliament being sovereign over a nation state called Great Britain as against an economic bloc with all-encompassing regulatory powers, continuing to accrue to itself more and more governance and so, in effect, displacing Parliament’s sovereignty. That is the core issue of Brexit, and it was not placed on the table at all.

    We did have a faux righteous bluster by Hunt, Gove, Stewart and Javid expressing outrage at the prospect held out by Raab as a last resort, of proroguing Parliament if it were paralysed from leaving as it had legislated to do. Oh no, that would be deeply undemocratic, said the four thinly veiled Remainers, it would offend Parliamentary sovereignty.

    Again, the blindingly obvious point was not made by the presenter nor any of the MPs on show, that Mrs May’s BRINO, her Withdrawal Agreement and Politicial Declaration, is a long proroguing of Parliamentary sovereignty, two years and probably far longer, under the jurisdiction of the ECJ, under the economic control of the Joint Committee as specified in the WA, under EU laws with no veto and not repealable, entailing the loss of the fisheries rather than their return as Gove promised – at one time. But proroguing Parliament in order to regain Parliamentary sovereignty, oh dear no.

    Is this sheer ignorance of the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration? Is this obfuscation and cover-up? Or is it intellectual incompetence or laziness? The fab four were being utterly disingenuous in speaking up for Parliamentary sovereignty when they are planning to hand it over under the WA/PD for years. Raab surely should have made this point, but did not. He needs to bring his copy of both to the next instalment of ‘Channel 4 baits Brexit’ and quote it extensively. And if he does not know its full horror, then he must urgently read Caroline Bell’s ‘The Seven Deadly Sins of the WA’ and Martin Howe QC’s recent list of the features contained in the WA which are detrimental to the UK and which would make ‘Brexit’ illusory.

    How wise of Johnson to avoid its descent to the level of sixth-form derision and emotivism. I am not sure he has been wise to accept the invitation to the BBC lions’ den tonight. If he can insistently speak of democracy, national sovereignty, Parliament being the supreme law maker, our judiciary not the ECJ being our legal bedrock, he will do well, but the BBC is an artful foe and will do all it can to stop the real agenda surfacing as did Channel 4.

    I would like the topic of ‘how will the Joint Committee govern Britain under the WA/PD regime?’ force its way on to the BBC agenda. I would like to hear the MPs discuss the UK’s right to appeal to The Hague International Court against any WA/PD affronts to justice in the UK and in respect of the legitimacy and size of the £39bn exit fee.

    But no: I fear none of the truly major issues will be discussed, just as with the Channel 4 debate – only the banalities of vanity signalling and personal advancement.

    This leadership election is about Brexit versus Brino and that is what any contender should be challenged on if they are claiming they can ‘deliver’ Brexit. If we get from them May’s Brino then we get serfdom and the issue is how that will impact on British lives until we yield sufficiently to EU terms to be granted ‘a deal’ in two years or longer away. How will the nation cope with the outrage and acrimony when the public discovers the humiliating rule by an unelected group of EU apparachiks who desire only to extract what they can from us, with our Parliament there for show only?”

    conservativewoman.co.uk/big-questions-go-unasked-in-the-tv-leadership-circus/

    It was dire

  45. From article:

    On the day of the event, The Cambridge Union urged members “rightly concerned about the Prime Minister’s views and actions to come to the Union this evening to have the chance to question him in person”.

    In a statement after his appearance, the union said the laughter “originated from the middle section, which was composed of the prime minister’s delegation”.

    “The prime minister was scrutinised on his record throughout the event both from the moderator and the audience,” it added.

    “As a society, free speech and student welfare are equally important to us. We invited the [university’s] Jewish Society to attend the talk to ask questions to the prime minister and we allowed them to hand out flyers to the audience.”

    Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad | Prime Minister of Malaysia | Cambridge Union
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9JM5ZEyPKY

  46. “Mass slaughter involved wiping out armies comprising hundreds or thousands of men – but killing millions of children was beyond their imagination.
    I am not defending the morality of Gideon etc, just stating that the concept of killing a million children was beyond their immagination.”

    Its estimated that the Mongols killed 5% of the entire global population in the 13th century during their invasions westward. Estimates range for 20m to 40m deaths, so the concept of killing a million people was certainly within both their imagination and capability.

  47. “Cambridge University said he should not be banned because they respect freedom of speech.”

    Noah Carl and Jordan Peterson, to name two, will have a wry smile at that if they read it.

  48. john77, yes just civilians.
    Soldiers and those fighting that are acting like soldiers so we can refer to as soldiers are a separate figure.
    Not usually gassed retail or wholesale.

    Includes those wearing other clothing than yellow star. Germans really had it in for a lot of their own people, not just on parentage.

  49. Re: pre-20th Century slaughter, the Taiping rebellion in China offed 20-70m people, with some estimates reckoning 100m, according to Wikipedia.

    In fact the Chinese have been responsible for many of the world’s worst bloodlettings, without really stepping foot beyond their own borders. Worth bearing in mind when you hear Westerners say they welcome the day China overturns the Septic Hegemony.

  50. Jim – and if you read as to why the Mongols subscribed to terror tactics you will also find as to why diplomats are protected so well now.
    The reasons are linked.

    Killing a few tens of thousands in one city, leaving a handful to spread the tale, means not having to kill a few million in the next few months as places surrender first.

    These days we do air bombing campaigns and even have dropped atomic weapons with the same strategic aim.

  51. As for the ‘chivalry’ of mediaeval warfare – the Chevauchée was a common tactic, and even if terror raids weren’t a war aim, any army marching through a territory would strip the peasants of every scrap of food they had, even in their own countries. These armies didn’t have sophisticated organisations of supply.

    So even when not actually slaughtering the peasants, armies would often end up starving them anyway.

  52. If you thought Sunday’s debate was dire, you haven’t watched tonight’s. Yeah Gods! What a squabbling cunch of bunts.

    The bit that got me shouting at the telly was:
    * Will you call an election?
    # waffle waffle waffle

    The correct answer is “If I was PM I *CAN’T* call an election, only PARLIAMENT can call an election”.

  53. As for the ‘chivalry’ of mediaeval warfare – the Chevauchée was a common tactic,

    It’s fun for those who like such things that “chivalry” and “chevauchée” have a shared etymology.

    I’m not sure that the chevauchée was all that common a tactic because the cost of the expedition was not justified by a gain in territory but the Black Prince did a couple of good ones in 1355 and 1356 culminating in Poitiers and capturing the French king.

    Talking of Jean II and the unpaid ransom, could Manu be warned that this continued defalcation represents a sovereign default?

  54. Late to the party today so I will just point out again that arrogant snobbish twat the Racepainter is amongst the lowest crawling pieces of remainiac shite in Britain today.

    You can of course discover this by reading the smeared ordure of all of his communications. He gives brazen evil a bad name.

  55. “Genghis Khan was *not* an Old Testament prophet.”

    I thought the argument was that the people back in history were not capable of the genocides that we have seen in the last 100 years? That genocide is a ‘modern’ phenomenon?

  56. I find it bizarre that remainers haven’t yet worked out that insulting those that voted differently isn’t an effective debating tactic…

    Three years of insults… You’d have thought that at least one of them would have thought, “Hold on, we’ve been calling them thick, racist little Englanders for three years and not one of them has changed their mind. Perhaps a change of tactics is in order…?”.

  57. Never understood the argument, Jim. For most of history killing the women & children was the point of warfare. Get rid of those & you don’t have to fight the next generation of warriors. Although there was always killing the warriors but taking the women & children into slavery as the caring sharing option.

  58. I suppose it comes from the heads on coins version of history that historians like. Mostly bollocks. King wants a war, he needs warriors. So the question is, what do the warriors want, makes it worth going to war? Rape & plunder.

  59. It’s Holocaust minimisation, a form of Holocaust denial. Therefore it’s antisemitism. You’re wrong here, Tim.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

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