Research shows that worshipped World War 2 hero orchestrated Genocide

[Greenman]

Oh please, some book by some dolt "writer" named mukerjee, and a blog hosted on google are supposed to mean something? Come back when you have something credible.

Pretty much my thoughts. It's easy to rewrite history and put whatever spin on it you want.

 

[RabidMongoose]

According to Infohawk's (aka, the dictionary), the Holocaust wasn't a genocide. It doesn't fit his description.

 

[Steeplerot]

Can we write a capitalist black bible then now? Is it politically correct to mention the millions of victims of imperialism/colonialism for that almighty $ worldwide?
Or, lets just keep pointing out atrocities of Stalin/Hitler.
We won of course, and $ writes the books.

 

[CanOWorms]

Pretty much my thoughts. It's easy to rewrite history and put whatever spin on it you want.

You can't rewrite archives from the era. They are what they are.

 

[CanOWorms]

According to Infohawk's (aka, the dictionary), the Holocaust wasn't a genocide. It doesn't fit his description.

I've been thinking about it, and I think I may know what his definition is even though he won't just say it.

Infohawk believes in racial purity. Not the exact one as Hitler did, but another form. He repeatedly believes that the white race is under attack, Europe is the sacred homeland of the white race, etc.

I think that he believes that if one race kills its own then that's a genocide because it attacks the concept of racial purity.

Thus, the Holocaust was a genocide for Infohawk since white people were killing white people. The Rwanda genocide was a genocide if you confine it only to the actions of Rwandans.

But when it comes to mixed-race genocide, such as the largely white British vs. the brown Bengalis, then it's not a genocide as one race can kill off another. Native Americans killed off is not a genocide because it was different races.

I think that is his main distinction.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I don't know what he exactly believes in, but it must certainly be disgusting. I think that he likely has some sort of strange bond or allegiance to Europe and thus tries to excuse European bloodshed against non-Europeans..maybe because he doesn't even consider non-Europeans to be human, thus his comments about birth rates precluding genocide.

 

[cirrrocco]

Just an FYI:

Khmer is not a "He".

Khmer is the name of a group of people and also the name of their language.

I assume you meant the "Khmer Rouge" which was the name of the Communist army in Cambodia.

The name of its leader was Pol Pot.

He did indeed like genocide.

Umm I meant the organization. Similarly when I said Pakistan, I meant the Pakistani army..so instead of beating around the bushes trying to correct my grammar , Is that genocide or not, because according to Infohawk, they are not, yet officially classified by historians as Genocide.

 

[cirrrocco]

Maybe you should take a few more minutes to make your posts. (See Feralkid's post.) To answer your question it depends on whether the intent was to kill off a race, because you know that's what genocide means and all. Anyway, I'm done posting in the this troll thread. COW is much more entertaining than you or Rabidmongoose but unfortunately he won't share more about his racist incident.

haha run away the Khmer conflict was officially termed Genocide. Time magazine calls the pakistani army killing 3 million bangladeshis a gencodide, but according to you it is not.

 

[Infohawk]

haha run away the Khmer conflict was officially termed Genocide. Time magazine calls the pakistani army killing 3 million bangladeshis a gencodide, but according to you it is not.

You can barely write. I have no idea what you're even talking about. I think you're trying to play gotcha with me but I never passed any judgment on other alleged genocides (except the OP's) so you're bound to fail.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Using Infohawk's (dictionary's) own 'logic', we can already say that he does not believe that the Khmer conflict was a genocide. Same with Pakistan and what not. In fact, he doesn't believe that what most people accept as genocides are actually genocides.

But I bet he'll change his tune once he realizes that his own child-like logic would preclude genocides committed by non-Europeans from being called genocides.

 

[feralkid]

Umm I meant the organization. Similarly when I said Pakistan, I meant the Pakistani army..so instead of beating around the bushes trying to correct my grammar , Is that genocide or not, because according to Infohawk, they are not, yet officially classified by historians as Genocide.

I'm not involved in the "definition of genocide" debate.

I was simply pointing out that there was no guy named "Khmer"

mmmkay?

 

[cirrrocco]

I'm not involved in the "definition of genocide" debate.

I was simply pointing out that there was no guy named "Khmer"

mmmkay?

You should have posted / ended mmkay with a south park video. ..anyway I wasnt accusing you or anything and thanks for correcting me.

 

[cirrrocco]

You can barely write. I have no idea what you're even talking about. I think you're trying to play gotcha with me but I never passed any judgment on other alleged genocides (except the OP's) so you're bound to fail.

hhaa sorry infohawk. I was getting ready to go out but I just logged in and was trying to type up something real quick. I am not trying to play any gotch games just that I feel that Churchill's name should not be among the hall of legends but should be placed alongside the names of Hitler and Stalin. I know that you disagree with me, but killing 3 million people slowly is no joke for me.