The pogroms in Russia pushed the Jews to Germany. This immigration caused a backlash against German anti-Semitism, and Einstein tried to combat these aspects of anti-Semitism.
In the 1920s the Jews could not defend themselves against the onslaught of anti-Semitism which was contagious like a disease on the German Jews; Antisemitism that appeared when the First World War ended. Eastern European Jews began pouring into Germany as soon as the war ended; What pleased the West were the pogroms and persecutions that intensified with the chaos of the Russian Revolution and the Civil War. This exodus helped stimulate and increase the Jewish population of Berlin from 44,000 in 1910 to 173,000 Jews in 1925.
The Ostjuden as they were called or the Jews from Eastern Europe, suddenly created a foreign presence in the German capital, an attraction and a target for attacks, and they settled in the poor, dense residential neighborhoods of the eastern part of Berlin and as their community grew they were denounced by Berlin residents and by anti-Semitic elements as living in the neighborhood Stinking, whose streets are dark and claustrophobic; Dressed in a long black hood, and described as foreigners.
A shocking demagogic description exactly similar to that of Eastern European Jews would later appear in Hitler. Anti-Semitism has always been in Germany but now gradually after the First World War it turned into a political movement that swept town after village. With the collapse of German military power in the war, Jews could be labeled with precise crimes. The Jews were accused of being traitors against the German patriots. The anti-Semite's target was of course the state of Weimar, which was perceived as being ruled by the Jews and as being closer to the reason why Germany lost the war. It is worth remembering in this context the great deception of 1918. The Social Democrats ended the war with a cease fire, although Germany lost the war before Kaiser Wilhelm fell, but they still did not tell the people about the defeat; This is to make the people think that the defeat was led by the social democrats and not the militaristic nationalists, or rather the army that represents their views, which was defeated in the war a few months earlier - as it actually was...
Between 1919 and 1920 what the Germans called the Ostjuden could be arrested almost without reason. It is enough that such a Jew was out of work and that was already a reason to keep him in the camp. Also suspicions about such subversive acts or intentions, or inability to pay taxes, or anything else a policeman could dream of. Once imprisoned, this Jew was completely victimized, unable through any formal action or appeal to change the course of events.
Now we come to the most shocking part of the story of the Jews, and perhaps it can be called a form of self-flagellation. In 1921, the new union of national German Jews was established to fight "all forces in German Jewry that sought to strengthen a non-German Jewish identity". At the first public meeting of this organization, the main speaker "emphasized the fundamental differences between the Eastern Jews... and the assimilating Western Jews." Given such differences, the spokesman said that "as a German...[he]...would prefer stricter immigration rules" even worse.
A case in point: a German-Jewish professor, who said - after the Nazis came to power when they started the official persecution of the Jews: "Hitler cannot be blamed for his views about the Jews". why not? Hitler was Austrian, and exposure to the Austro-Hungarian Empire's diverse collection of Ostjuden naturally tends to evoke nausea and contempt. This matter is simple, said the professor. "If he had known the German Jews well, he would never have had such a poor opinion of us." Just read and don't believe. Such smug stupidity was unusual and not the universal image and opinion of the Jewish community in Berlin. But it reflects the humiliation and contempt of the assimilated Jews. And she is extremely shocking.
Albert Einstein, who lived in Berlin at the time, felt an obligation to the Jewish refugees from Eastern Europe and worked against their transfer to camps. He felt a kinship of blood, a bond of identity, even though their religion was foreign to him - at least in its traditional visible form. When he visited Palestine in 1923 and he saw Jews praying at the Western Wall, he felt a kind of distance from those "gloomy members of my tribe". They "prayed loudly, their faces turned to the wall, their bodies swayed back and forth." He considered it a "pathetic sight of the man with a past but no future".
Einstein saw religiosity as something stupid and a superstition. Despite this, Einstein realized that at his home in Berlin, anti-Semitism was on the rise, it was like a contagious disease and started to become very violent. And the Eastern European Jews who were in Berlin became the obvious target for the worst abuses. And that's what Einstein was worried about. He did not suffer it quietly. At first he denounced the plan announced in 1919 to deport the Jews of the East.
In 1917 the Balfour Declaration called for the creation of a homeland for the Jews in Palestine, when for the first time it gave legitimacy to the national ambitions of the Zionist movement.
In 1921, Einstein communicated publicly with the Zionists and their leader, the English chemist Chaim Weizmann, while declaring his support for the creation of an independent Jewish state. "Incitement against these unfortunate refugees," he said, "who just saved themselves from the inferno in Eastern Europe, has become an effective political weapon, which every demagogue successfully exploits." The attack on these Jews "awakened in me the Jewish national feeling", which led me to "demand the preservation of Jewish nationalism".
These words were said by Einstein the "internationalist" (advocating an international philosophy) - who generally abhorred nationalism. Einstein had to overcome the contradiction between the national emphasis and his ingrained tendency towards internationalism: internationalism.
His explanation from that time is given in the form of a story: "I am against nationalism but sympathize with Zionism... When a person has two hands and he always says I have a right hand, then he is a chauvinist. But when the right hand is missing, he must do everything in his power to compensate for the missing limb. Therefore, as a human being, I oppose nationalism, but as a Jew I support the Jewish-nationalist efforts of the Zionists." And so Einstein was ready to speak in the language of nationalism. And it showed how much he thought that the circumstances in Germany in those days of the early 1920s had become threatening to the Jews (especially the Eastern Europeans).
In the end - and it will become clear later, Zionism was looking for exactly what Einstein did not like: it determined the need to create or accept a government for one group that is defined in an ethnic way. She cherished the institutions of the state, with all the rights and privileges that Einstein mocked. He knew that and he gritted his teeth in the meantime. Still when the Nazis were in power in 1938 Einstein said that "our tribal relatives" (the Jews) might need a state. This despite the fact that he said in a speech to a Zionist audience in New York that "my awareness of the fundamental nature of Judaism opposes the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of petty power." Because "I fear the internal damage that Judaism will undergo - especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within his position."
On December 30, 1919, Einstein wrote to the Berliner Tageblatt "Among the voices of the German public, demands for legal measures against the Jews of Eastern Europe are increasingly heard. It is claimed that there are 70,000 Russians, i.e. Eastern European Jews, in Berlin alone. And suspect that these Eastern European Jews are smugglers, black market traders, Bolsheviks, or elements that are opposed to work. All these arguments call for the most comprehensive measures, that is, the grouping of all immigrants into concentration camps or their deportation." Einstein was shocked by the situation of these Jews and he wrote that the case of the Eastern European Jews in particular raises the suspicion that the judgment regarding them is steeped in strong anti-Semitic instincts, and these influence the mindset of the people and divert them from the real problems and the real causes of the general disaster.
Einstein was shocked by the fact that no official from the authorities revealed the "invalidity" of accusations against Eastern European Jews in Berlin. In addition, he claimed that there are not 70,000 Eastern European Jews in Berlin as they claimed. There are perhaps 15,000 Jews who have emigrated from the East since the signing of the peace treaty while the vast majority of Jews in Berlin are average Germans. Then comes Einstein's crushing sentence: "Almost without exception they [Eastern European Jews] were forced to flee the horrific conditions in Poland and seek refuge here [in Berlin] until they were given the opportunity to emigrate elsewhere. Let us hope that most of them will find a homeland as free sons of the Jewish people in the newly established Jewish Palestine." And Einstein continued to be angry that "the public conscience is so opaque to the pleas for humanity, that it no longer even feels the terrible injustice that we are observing here." Finally, Einstein said, "Germany's recovery will not be achieved by using force against a small and helpless part of the population."
69 תגובות
Hello Ernest,
There are many theories about rationale. You say "by definition", but since you don't provide the definition itself, I don't know how to approach it.
I did not understand how you came to the conclusion "this is science" at the end of the first paragraph. Maybe you meant to say "it is due to scientific reasons" or something like that?
I assume that in the third paragraph you meant something heavy, but I couldn't understand what it was.
You personally do not believe that the concept of "rationale", which you are talking about, exists. You are probably in a better position than me, because I don't even understand what this is about.
And seriously: even though I didn't understand you, I responded here now because you specifically addressed the things to me. But I don't promise that I will respond to the next one as well.
jubilee
Thinking of any kind is not stable or consistent due to the fact that various materials are involved in its processes which are not stable by the very nature of the material and are constantly exposed to the effects of external and internal forces. It's science.
Rationale by its very definition should be free from activity or random forces, this condition can exist
Only in an independent soul detached from matter.
Any mechanism that depends on matter and random effects cannot, by convention, create a rationale, unless the mechanism is in something spiritual, non-material, non-material, and thus is not subject to the same influence. The rationale is built and influenced only by conscious ideas, information, and everything that cannot be seen, touched, sensed, measured, and
I personally do not believe that there is a rationale.
Seriously, what you say is very interesting, but I'm not sure I understood it.
It seems to me that if there is a rationale that can be understood or discovered, it is a logical mechanism like a computer program.
Israel
If I'm not mistaken, any Torah that claims that there is a certain rationale in the behavior of man and humanity
And it can be understood that his discovery is based on the existence of some independent spiritual entity in man, such as the soul.
mine as well..
Israel
It was just a joke…
jubilee.
I have no intention of entering into a long Socratic discussion on the subject of psychomechanics, especially with someone who has already decided that it is a "flower crow" before even knowing what it is. The discussion with R.H. was enough for me.
If you would like to hold a (short!) discussion according to my terms (I am the one who asks the guiding questions, and ends when I think it is time for it), questions await you in an excellent and almost not elevated article that deals with psychology issues:
https://www.hayadan.org.il/epygentics-sciam-170412/#comment-336399
serious
It seems to me that most of the visually impaired would welcome the technology (glasses) and have very little interest in the science behind it (optics). The main thing is that it works.
The same goes for psychotechnology.
And regarding the divorce - before the invention of the glasses, there were few couples who even reached the age where the wrinkle theory can be tested... Popper does not approve the refutation test for your theory.
Shapira
As for the glasses,
A person's visual acuity naturally weakens, with the appearance of wrinkles on his skin, during the aging period,
Therefore, the invention of the glasses was the main reason for the divorce.
Oops 🙁 I got confused in the door story I brought,
In the second case, the emptying will be faster, and not as I wrote
I asked, but he dodged the claim that I was repeating other people's things like a parrot. He says that you have already asked these questions. So I'll try to answer in his place, if that's okay with you.
I don't know Nir Lahav. The only thing I have from him is a response to your story in which PM is mentioned. If it does not indirectly refer to the subject of the discussion, then I only have one story, and it is even less than I had hoped for...
A few weeks ago I tried to calculate the rate of emptying of a certain lecture hall through two adjacent doors according to the following data: 1) Only one of the two doors is open and on the outside are students waiting to enter the hall for the next lecture and blocking the way for those leaving. 2) One of the doors is open and the way out is clear. 3) Both doors are open. In the first case, the hall will be emptied very quickly. In the second case it will drain more slowly. I calculated and found that if both doors are left open and no blocking student stands, the hall will empty at the same rate as it would empty in the first case (one door is open and the way out of it is not smooth). The reason for this is that the students leaving one of the doors do not continue in a straight line, but each one turns in a different direction and some of them block the way for those who are still inside. It reminded me of a certain physical experiment on the interference of light passing through one or two slits. Also, the "flow" of the students out has characteristics of viscosity (like water, oil or honey). If you click on my name you can watch a YouTube video that shows how social behavior has physical characteristics. What I intend to say in this whole story is that it is absolutely clear that there is room for a connection between physics and sociology (or psychology, if you will). But I qualify this because every living "particle" has properties that are not necessarily found in particles from the world of physics. Among humanity, the variety of traits that do not have parallels in physics is very large (vexation, ego, sex, schizophrenia, and more and more).
I would like to expand on the speed of light as part of the definition of the concept of time that I started with a century or two ago.
Yes.
I mean no.
Za maybe.
I mean why don't you ask the almighty creator with whom you have soul talks?
On the occasion, I asked him two questions, which interest me as well:
1. Can the Almighty double the speed of light?
2. When did Nir Lahav ever refer to psychomechanics?
Israel,
All the material I have on the science of psychomechanics is summed up in two stories written by Galileo. One is a story from your keyboard and the other is a comment from Nir Lahav. I hope you agree with me that it is not much.
Beyond the fact that you and Asimov ah tell beautiful stories and to a similar degree of fascination (great minds think alike). I would also like to see organized developments. Massimov I can no longer get an explanation, but you are still alive and vibrant.
My business in this area is more serious than I manage to convey. I believe, like you, that the behavior of the crowd has characteristics similar to the behavior of fluids in certain states of movement and aggregation. But in order to attribute to creatures in one domain the features of the customers from creatures in another domain (for example entropy of human society) a little more needs to be explained. Don't you think that there is some justice in their words?
After debating with friends for a whole day about the question of whether God exists or not, and after conducting a comprehensive poll whose results did not lean in any direction, I decided to go to the source, ask the horse's mouth - as they say.
"God!", I said to him and his mercy, "Tell me, please, do you exist or do you not exist."
"Yes!", blessed Dakodsha answered me.
"Thank you", I answered with a reluctant joy, but I immediately came to my senses: "So what? Does it exist or does it not exist? With your permission, I will ask more specifically. Do you exist?".
"No!", answered Brich "I don't exist".
"Good!", I was happy to receive confirmation of my solid opinion and turned to leave. But suddenly I realized that something was wrong here.
"Wait, sorry, so how do you talk to me if you don't exist?".
"And you, like, exist yourself?" The Blessed One answered me with a question.
"I think, that means I exist", I answered from the hip.
"I also know how to quote De Carte," said the Sovereign of the Worlds, "and even in Latin." But does he, Descartes, exist?"
"Technically, no," I answered in shame, "he caught a cold and died." But once, in the past, he existed and even thought he existed."
"He thought himself to know!", the laughter of Al-Shehi of the bad guys in space. I joined his laughter, out of politeness.
"Rivinoushel", I addressed him in the affectionate name I knew, "please tell me. Are you Jewish?".
"Why are you asking?", Rivionushel answered me with a question.
"Simple, because Jews always answer a question with a question, so I thought maybe, you know...", I answered with great embarrassment.
He must have started to feel sorry for me, because suddenly he spoke to me like a little child. He asked: "Do you know how to distinguish between a Jew and a Gentile?" And without waiting for an answer he continued, "According to the word." That is, according to what is not there. But I'm not just speechless, I'm completely absent."
What will I tell you? I got tired. All I understood is that whether he exists or not, he has no word.
I don't know what happened - a response was sent alone. we will continue
Later on property.
and on power.
and on knowledge.
But there will always be a struggle. If you dig deep, you will see that the basic reason (in my opinion) is the second law of thermodynamics: a system cannot reduce its disorder on its own.
If the topic interests you, we can continue with free comments. It really has nothing to do with Einstein.
jubilee
When I go to work I try to inform if someone is waiting for a response as part of a current dialogue, and there have been things before.
Do you have moves on the founder of this science?”
What interest does the founder of this science have in discussing with you? What interest does a short-sighted person who enjoys the benefit of glasses every day discuss with someone who doubts the science of optics, whose whole purpose is to prove the non-existence of this science? (without, of course, bothering to learn it first).
The hole ends very simply
Anyone who does not understand is nonsense.
serious
Cain killed Abel because of jealousy. God accepted Abel's offering and rejected his own.
The children in kindergarten will fight over toys.
At school for the girls.
worthwhile
jubilee
There are many ways around this word and its silence, but not its devastating effect.
So that you too can hear Leibovitz's "prophecy" and understanding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1mluix9cQU&feature=related
If religion or belief was private, personal, everything would be different.
There are other ways. For example, instead of writing God, you can write in missing spelling and without punctuation - God
And on the first or second day, create the score
I hope the jokes were a little funny.
(Did you see how I bypassed the filter? 🙂 )
Ernest,
Most of the things you say are self-explanatory. What is not clear to me is what right you have to argue with God
And Yuval regarding the sentence in which she wrote about the creation of woman, according to an in-depth analysis I did:
It is not certain that he created the woman from a rib, which he took out of the man's body, what is certain is that this is what the man felt.
And Yuval regarding the sentence in which she wrote about the creation of woman, according to an in-depth analysis I did:
It is not certain that God created the woman from a rib, which he took out of the man's body, what is certain is that this is what the man felt.
The response is awaiting approval.
Yuval, despite Einstein's greatness:
More believe in what is written in one stone (the Tablets of the Covenant)
than believe what one stone wrote (Iain Stein)
Father, seriously!
Wherever there is monopoly you will find corruption. We, willingly and knowingly, allowed one body to take exclusivity over our lives, so what do we do because we will complain.
If you can spare an hour to watch the following hard-hitting movie, you'll see another example of monopoly leading to corruption. I am talking about the monopoly that the police have over criminal investigations and the judicial system that cooperates with them:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kXTulGfnWKs
In that period women were made from the ribs of men. We are not told about the creation process of Cain's wife, because it is just a boring repetition of what we already read in the previous chapter. But since we are all wise and we are all wise and there is a commandment for us, etc., it goes without saying.
my father
By chance one day I came across Leibovitz's lecture, you must listen, mainly
On the issue of the role of religion and its corrupt and slaughtering institutions, within the governmental and political system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1mluix9cQU&feature=related
Later it is written that Cain knew his wife. Where the hell did she come from?
Israel
True, in the nature of the animal and plant world.
Israel, the one going to work (about whom, if I may ask?),
Do you have moves in the founder of this science? I have a lot of serious questions to ask him
jubilee
There are those who disbelieve in the usefulness of science (by Netori Karta).
There are those who disbelieve in the usefulness of technology (according to Amish).
Since I have no doubts about the usefulness of psychomechanics, (and especially psychotechnology) to its user, I find myself in a certain advantageous position over the unbelievers Ben, and I certainly do not intend to expand on the subject with those who disparage and introduce blatant personal papers into the discussion (systematically, by the way).
Do you want to believe that "psychomechanics is not a serious science but a crow-flower"?
break up
serious
If I understand your question correctly, it can be phrased like this: why is there violence at all, wars exist, and is it rooted in the very essence of human existence (and not just human).
Why did Cain kill Abel in a world of only 4 souls?
did I understand correctly?
Going to work.
In every generation anti-Semitism exists, and in every generation it is strong, fresh and firm, whether the fools are recruiting lies or whether they admit the facts outright.
For those who have 23 extra minutes*, it is recommended to watch until the end.
*And for those who don't have it, let them make an effort and find it.
http://vimeo.com/16779150
Serious! The things you say are obvious.
jubilee
Maybe you didn't look enough at what I wrote, I would appreciate a response from Shapira and others as well:
Is it possible that in the behavior of children or rather toddlers there are the same phenomena of hatred, competition, violence...
that we witness in our world. And this may point to something much more basic and natural in those phenomena
Negativity, horrors, etc.
I would like to thank whoever forwards this e-mail to the person who founded the science of psychomechanics:
Greetings to the founder,
Harini would like to ask you an intimate question.
If I understood correctly, you do not attach any importance to the question of whether the Jewish people actually exist in reality or whether it is just a fiction concocted by the global international anti-Semitic organization.
The Nobel Prize Committee claims (never in words but often in deeds) that much of human progress has been achieved by Jews. It is quite clear that the science of psychomechanics will spread its wings and generations of scientists will be brought up on its knees, and it is not impossible that you will also appear on the list of grooms/brides of this golden dreamer. If I were sure that you were male, I would simply ask if you were cut. On the other hand, Muslims are also cut off and even Muslim. That's why I have to ask bluntly: are you Jewish?
Obviously, the answer to that would be incriminating, whether it is or not. If so, then the Jews clearly exist in reality. If not, then psychomechanics is not a serious science but a crow-flower.
serious
…..its symbol was a hologram of a ball, with the small letter i in the center. The main question she faced was: if, as claimed, human systems behave approximately as thermodynamic systems, does this not necessitate the existence of a principle similar to the law of entropy for human societies? A hair-raising answer: a probability that tends to one as the system is larger and more random, or simply: yes. And hence the fateful question: Can the earth, which is a closed psychomechanical system, reduce its total psychomechanical entropy? A disappointing and discouraging answer: not on his own. The "second law of psychomechanics" excludes the possibility that the entropy in a closed psychomechanical system will decrease, unless the entropy of another system increases.
You can say hello to world peace and brotherhood. Any prosperity and abundance in one group will always come at the expense of another group. The hour of Aquarius will not come on its own, and it will not help if the moon rises in the seventh house and Jupiter and Mars line up as one man. Without an external source of psychomechanical energy, any closed system, be it a state, religious belief or economic status, and subject to psychomechanical pressure, is doomed to a constant tendency to expand as a way of reducing its own local entropy - and this in the absence of free psychomechanical space, at the expense of another psychomechanical system.
jubilee
... Equally interesting is the explanation given by the group to the problem of anti-Semitism. According to the argument of psychomechanics, it does not matter at all what the Jews will do, who they are, what they are and whether they even exist. The source of the problem is one group - the anti-Semites - trying to lower its own psychomechanical entropy by raising the entropy of another group, the Jews.
This claim fits nicely with the finding that anti-Semitism increases in times of crisis, when the psychomechanical pressure increases, and also with the existence of anti-Semitism in countries where there are no Jews at all. This is because, according to the fundamental law of psychomechanics, our feelings arise from the form in which we perceive reality, even if it is only a simulated reality.
Einstein changed the face of physics. Weizmann had a strong influence on the history of Europe. Two great scientists. Jews. Jewish scientists make up between 20 and 30 percent of all Nobel laureates in their category, even though the proportion of Jews in the world population is a hundred times smaller than that. Assuming that the Nobel Prize is a measure of contribution to the advancement of humanity, the Jews are in a good place at the top of the list of benefactors. This is exactly what is embodied in the concept of "Tikhon Olam", one of the main principles of Judaism. And yet, the Jews are persecuted everywhere and at all times.
Why is the world so ungrateful? Does humanity like to harm itself? Is this how evolution works? Does anyone commenting here have any rational explanation for this incomprehensible phenomenon?
As many, there are in my family, the one who took his life, in exile, in the Holocaust, and the one, who sacrificed his life, in Israel, in defense.
However, "interesting", everything that we bring up for discussion here, is said in simple sentences, such as, it is only ours,
We are first, we are always the right ones, we are the winners, we are the chosen ones, and all kinds of us...,
And they are, in my opinion, the foundation stones for all types of anti-Semitism, for political and political struggles left against right, for territorial and religious struggles between families, tribes, nations, nations, brothers, friends, neighbors………………
In the behavior of children in kindergartens and nurseries and in general, it can be seen that there is some quality, inherent in them, that controls their emotions, the children often fight each other brutally without any consideration for the other, whether it is between friends or between siblings, only that the mustache is more childish and their weapon is weaker, and so It looks/sounds like, "This is just mine, I grabbed it first" and a push. Or, "This game is exclusively mine and bite".
It is possible that everything we see in the behavior of adults like that of children is an expression,
to some need or internal urge, perhaps unfortunately natural, which exists in every creature in nature, "even" in man,
And so what is left for humanity, is to try to channel in a wise way, the products of those qualities in a person.
It sounds nice but not the most realistic. right now
Ami, Mirom Golan and anyone who warns of brotherly hatred,
I also quote the following trite sentence: If we don't depend on each other, we will depend on each other.
Seriously, the maximum you can conclude about the existence or non-existence of God is not on this concept itself but only on the (subjective) interpretation you give it.
-At the first public meeting of this organization, the main speaker "emphasized the fundamental differences between the Eastern Jews... and the assimilating Western Jews"
Does anyone recognize the relevance to our day? To me it reminded me exactly of the efforts of the Israeli leftist organizations today, to distinguish themselves from the "settler" Jews in the hope that by doing so the Arabs will make the same distinction and feel sorry for them, for the "enlightened" Jews who hang from Meretz at the ballot box.
What they didn't understand, then as of today, is that they are in the same boat. For the Nazis, there was never a division between civilized and uncivilized Jews. Just as the Arabs did not stop themselves from massacring only the Jews living on the eastern side of the Green Line (Aust Juden). They were not interested in which Jew fought against them and which one was willing to transfer territories from his homeland to them as an act of appeasement.
And one more thing
The Bielski brothers didn't only care about themselves and only their skin. They could do so without difficulty. They made sure to save every Jew in Adar He, and thanks to them about 1260 Jews were saved, including women and children.
At that time, no underground agreed to include/save children and women.
Thank you to Yuval Chaikin.
This is an amazing story about the only case, as far as I know, in which there was an organization of a Jewish underground in the forests of Belarus, which waged a war against the Germans and their allies. The Bielski brothers cast a shadow over the entire area they were in, and made, among other things, every collaborator think twice about betraying or harming the Jews.
It is strange how the subject is not taught at all nor is it mentioned in all school programs.
I personally became aware of the subject by chance, only in 2006, despite being a researcher/instructor on this subject.
Greetings, my friend
I recommend you to read the book by Dr. Zeev Rosencrantz:
http://thejewishchronicle.net/view/full_story/17838415/article-%E2%80%98Einstein-Before-Israel%E2%80%99-sheds-light-on-scientist%E2%80%99s-links-to-Zionism?instance=this_just_in
Seriously, there was a problem with a madman, meaning one who thinks he is God, who wrote the name as his nickname.
Seriously, here I bypassed the filter mechanism. Did you figure out how?
Ernst: It is easy for humans to remember Hitler and his ilk, because the naked monkey's memory is limited to individual details.
Ami,
Thanks for the referral to the Bailski brothers. Indeed, a masterpiece that has no equal in size. The holocaust claimed a huge number of victims and grew stories of heroism of the same magnitude. I hope that our country will exist for many more generations and I believe that one of the next generations will get to know this wonderful story in depth.
From today,
It is forbidden to mention his name to Shaw anymore
assert any claim against him
or doubt its existence.
Because I wrote
The Holocaust proved to me that????? Does not exist even if it does exist
The Holocaust proved to me that God does not exist even if he does exist
jubilee
I found why "the response is awaiting approval".
Equally interesting, those crazy people often also write, speak, argue and think, and the learned audience analyzes, studies and draws conclusions from them. And we all already know why that sick maniac claimed, did, said, thought...
Equally interesting, those crazy people often also write, speak, argue and think, and the learned audience analyzes, studies and draws conclusions from them. And we all already know why that sick maniac claimed, did, said, thought...
The Holocaust proved to me that God does not exist even if he does exist.
They and Hitler are their sons, completely insane, bloodthirsty, with a secular need for violence, power to destroy and annihilate. However, their success over the course of thousands of years and even nowadays proves that there is a mysterious mechanism or feature that causes the masses, young, old, women, children, wise, innocent, poor, rich, to flock as if hypnotized after those madmen.
It's a bit strange that those who killed or were murdered, depending on who defines it, are the ones who appear in the pages and in the history books I studied at school, Napoleon, Mokedon, Genghis, Nebuchadnezzar and many other "heroes" that I don't remember at the moment, what I do remember is that they killed and in my opinion killed tens of millions of people , destroyed cities, nations and tribes..
jubilee
Maybe you know why the article I sent was accompanied by "the response is awaiting confirmation"
.
my father
You are busy cleaning or disinfecting something
my father
Some Comments
It's a bit strange that those who killed or were murdered, depending on who defines it, are the ones who appear in the pages and in the history books I studied at school, Napoleon, Mokedon, Genghis, Nebuchadnezzar and many other "heroes" that I don't remember at the moment, what I do remember is that they killed and in my opinion killed tens of millions of people , destroyed cities, nations and tribes..
They and Hitler are their sons, completely insane, bloodthirsty, with a secular need for violence, power to destroy and annihilate. However, their success over the course of thousands of years and even nowadays proves that there is a mysterious mechanism or feature that causes the masses, young, old, women, children, wise, innocent, poor, rich, to flock as if hypnotized after those madmen.
Equally interesting, those crazy people often also write, speak, argue and think, and the learned audience analyzes, studies and draws conclusions from them. And we all already know why that sick maniac claimed, did, said, thought...
The Holocaust proved to me that God does not exist even if he does exist.
Ami,
We like to talk about brotherly hatred among the Jews. But this phenomenon is one of the sick problems of the human race in general, and we do not have a monopoly on it.
Some Comments
It's a bit strange that those who killed or were murdered, depending on who defines it, are the ones who appear in the pages and in the history books I studied at school, Napoleon, Mokedon, Genghis, Nebuchadnezzar and many other "heroes" that I don't remember at the moment, what I do remember is that they killed and in my opinion killed tens of millions of people , destroyed cities, nations and tribes..
They and Hitler are their sons, completely insane, bloodthirsty, with a secular need for violence, power to destroy and annihilate. However, their success over thousands of years and even nowadays proves that there is a mysterious mechanism or feature that causes the masses, young, old, women, children, wise, innocent, poor, rich, to flock as if hypnotized after those madmen.
Equally interesting, those crazy people often also write, speak, argue and think, and the learned audience analyzes, studies and draws conclusions from them. And we all already know why that sick maniac claimed, did, said, thought...
The Holocaust proved to me that God does not exist even if he does exist.
And from among the Shitin, there is brotherly hatred and the tendency to assimilation and the fear of "the Fritz", it is worth noting, and this appears in the new book about Einstein, because he opposed and despised all those who assimilated and those who wished to be "like all the nations". This matter strengthened his recognition of his Jewishness and the fact that it is appropriate for the Jews to have a state, and he, as is known, also contributed to this.
Today is the day of the Holocaust: why does the wonderful and courageous story of the Bielski brothers not appear anywhere?
How did it happen that a noble brave story and most deserving of the title of heroism is not mentioned or told anywhere.
The thing says preachy!!!! And fun as well.
A hateful torturer before Einstein was Weitzmann. He gave the British the biochemical process (to this day the Haidek at the heart of the process is still named after him) which led to the crushing defeat in the Great War. Weizmann acquired his education in Germany, which means that in the eyes of the tyrant, the Jews are also traitors who give essential knowledge to the enemy.
Weizmann also brought about the Balfour Declaration. Let us imagine what world history would have looked like without Weizmann: Britain would not have promised the Jewish people a national home in Palestine. Germany would have maintained good achievements in the Great War, and World War II would not have broken out. Jews would have continued to be murdered in pogroms, but the Holocaust would not have happened.
gift,
My response to you has been waiting for confirmation for 8 hours.
Many nations and countries rose up against us in that difficult hour.
In my opinion, the bottom line is Einstein beat Hitler. At least that's how Hitler saw it.
Because Einstein was everything that Hitler hated and fought against: Jewish, cosmopolitan, far from nationalism and loyalty to the homeland. hates discipline, militarism,
Hitler also despised the theory of relativity and called it "Jewish science" whose purpose is to prove that nothing is absolute, that moral relativism exists, from which it is implied that the Jews are not the disgusting subhuman as the Nazi race theory claimed.
Bottom line, he fought first and foremost the Jews. He saw the war as a game of chess, where it is possible to win quickly and in a small number of moves (minimum 2) without casualties, but the game can also last a long time and almost all the pieces and pawns will be lost, but what matters in the bottom line is who won, not how many soldiers were lost along the way.
Since in his opinion the Jews ruled Russia, America and the rest of the world, then Stalin and Roosevelt are only tools of the Jews, and in fact the one who plays against him is the Jew, and Einstein is the Jew in the news.
He lost, and he knew it. All of his deterioration in the last years of the war stemmed from the recognition that the Russian sub-man, who steers the Jewish sub-man, defeats him on the battlefield, invades Germany, and destroys its villages and towns (he never dared to visit the destroyed cities). That's why he gave priority to the final solution over anything else. You have to be Hitler to understand what a terrible punishment he received when he learned what the Red Army was doing to the occupied population in East Germany.
The terrible holocaust descended on us, but for people like Hitler or Stalin, only the victory in the war is important, and not how many people died on the way. And Hitler lost the war. for a Jew to Einstein
gift,
Between the German hammer and the British anvil, large parts of our families were wiped out.
What happened in Germany was the embodiment of the weakness of every democracy: a group of satanic power-hungry people (headed by not a German but an Austrian) took advantage of loopholes in the system and took over the nation. I am not saying that the Germans are free from all anti-Semitism. definitely not. But it seems to me that if the extermination plan had come up for an orderly democratic discussion in Germany, it would have been rejected outright. I cannot say that with the same degree of confidence about other countries. Not only the Germans destroyed our relatives. Almost all of Europe spawned humanoid monsters who jumped at the opportunity to carry out their dark impulses under the auspices of the "enlightened" occupation.
I would really like to think that you are not implying that the Germans had no choice but to destroy almost my entire family
Because the British closed the gates of the country, they were literally forced to the standard of the Jewish agency and could not cope
With all those millions of Jews and they decided that if not Palestine then it is better to die
So that we blame the British and not the oppressive Germans
I wonder how things would have turned out had it not been for the Balfour Declaration. My mother, born in Berlin, remembers many inscriptions on the walls of houses in 1933 "Jews go to Palestine". The German people considered themselves the most enlightened among the peoples of Europe and the world in general, and it is hard to imagine that they would support a plan for systematic extermination. However, when Jews have a home in another country, it goes without saying that they should go there. The original stated intention was only to deport the Jews to their natural land, and that is why the camps were established in the first place. However, after Britain broke its promise and closed the country's gates, the Germans were left with camps full of Jews with nowhere to go, and then the actual extermination began.