[Wikipedia-l] [Wikipedia-1] Helga again

[Helga Hecht]

Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2002 11:59:15 -0700
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Helga again
Reply-To: wikipedia-l at nupedia.com


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C250E5.D464E4B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

1. For the record, I don't think that Helga is particularly anti-Semitic
--
although she often comes off that way.	

2. My take is that she pretty
much discounts anything that distracts from or in any way disproves her assertion that non-Jewish Germans were the biggest victims of WWII.
 
3. For her the Holocaust is minor -- as are the Stalinist purges that ran
into the tens of millions -- except those directed towards the Heimatvertriebene.
   
4. This also keeps her from seeing that there may
have been long-standing resentments caused by German actions over a long period of time and began well before Hitler -- not that this is a reason
for genocide or any other wartime or post-war atrocity.  

5. She just seems incapable of seeing any of this in context because she's got her own
agenda that borders on obsession.

6. It's because she can't see context that the rest of us have to judge and weigh what she says in terms of the big picture, and then make sure that
it gets appropriate mention -- but sometimes not at all is appropriate.

Jules
--------------------

I just started the subscription and the first thing I read is this message, which seems to be in answer to some other message, which I do not know. 

J Hoffmann Kemp probably means well.
 
However 

1a.I have to reject even the hint of the "not particular anti-semitic" and replace it with "not at all".

2a.I reject also "My take is that she pretty
much discounts anything that distracts from or in any way disproves her
assertion that non-Jewish Germans were the biggest victims of WWII."
 
I have never said anything like this.

3a. Have never said anything like that either.

4a. I see and know a lot more about things that she could ever read in her school books. Her books tell onesided stories, war propaganda, but not the full truth. 

For example : There was a Daily Express Newspaper declaration March 1933: Judea  declares War on Germany. This militant Zionist group has in 1997 been verified by other religious Jewish groups http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/ and http://www.netureikarta.org/ (wikipedia article: Neturei Karta) as cause of WW II. 

One has to wonder why any of this is being hidden ? 

5a. If wanting to get answers and find out the truth  is bordering on obsession, then I guess you could call it that. 

However I believe I see the complete picture more  clearly than she does.

6a. Editing or correcting etc is fine. 

Control by censorship, keeping basic truth out, not mentioning it at all, leads to a warped picture. It becomes a lie. 

I guess, one has to ask the question, does wipedia want to be like any other commercial enterprize, that
only tells you, what the general public wants to hear
or is there some commitment to be truthfull ?

H. Jonat
-- 
__________________________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup