PDA

View Full Version : " Murata" (Area 731) vs. "The Holocaust" (Warning:Very Sensative Subject Matter)



Shangri-LIE
09-23-2011, 03:48 PM
I remember learning about the Holocaust and Nazi Germany in school, and it is still a part of history that I keep read up on. Back then I never imagined that there could be anything worse, or even comparable to the crimes that were carried out by the SS. I suppose that was because at that point, it was, and still primarily is the ONLY example of such atrocities that is given the most attention. Other than slavery. No wonder so many black individuals fail to realize that they were not the only race to be enslaved, and now subsequently feel a sense of entitlement. It all comes down what our schools teach us, and what they've failed to teach us. Such as every race, and creed has been enslaved, mass murdered and persecuted. But the institutions don't want to teach that as it is not their agenda, no. It's an almost "apologetic" approach to educating in these cirriculums that present anyone who isn't a white Christian as a victim because it gives them a visage of superiority for taking the moral high road. However it is more patronzing and awful than anything. Instead of teaching History on a much broader scale, so many courses focus on either 1.)Slavery, or 2.)Jewish abjection during the 1930's and 40's as the only two studyworthy archetypes of modern day humanity at its worst . Not to take anything away from either of those groups of people.

Not that I am weighing "what was worse?" because that is all relative to your heritage. I just never understood why other occurences of systematic "Holocaustlike" crimes were never given as much infamy. As a matter of fact I am not even sure why I haven't talked about it with more people, or even written about it until now. I want to remain impartial and mainly observant, so I will just post some examples of what went on at the same point in time as The Holocaust, only it was one Continent over and carried out by the Kempetai. Then I want as many people to respond as possible as to why the Holocaust takes precedence over every other horrifying act of genocidal tyranny.

(Area 731)
- Prisoners had their stomaches surgically removed and the esophagus reattached to the intestines just to see what would happen upon excretement.

- Human vivisection, frequently without anesthesia. Victims had their stomach's removed and their esophagus reattached to their intestine just to see what would happen. And living teenage girls had their wombs cut out for Japanese soldiers to examine. They knew very little about women, because it was "It was sex education."

- People were locked into high-pressure chambers until their eyes popped out, or they were put into centrifuges and spun to death like a cat in a washing machine. To study the effects of untreated venereal disease, male and female "logs" were deliberately infected with syphilis.


- Prisoners werewere tied to stakes to find the best range for flame-throwers, or used to test grenades and explosives positioned at different angles and distances. They were used as targets to test chemical weapons; they were bombarded with anthrax.

Edit - I am neither Anti-Semetic nor a Racist

The Empirical Guy
09-23-2011, 11:32 PM
You raise a good point. Location probably has something to do with it, I have heard of this before and I think it's probably being in Australia. We hear a lot more about the Pacific front in World War II, I guess as it's where the bulk of our forces were concentrated and the Japanese were making direct advances towards the Australian mainland. I don't know why it's not as publicized. I would take a guess that it's got something to do with numbers: while atrocities were committed here, they didn't (to my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong) kill as many people as they did in the Holocaust. It's a lot easier, and nicer, to put in the history books "the Nazis killed thousands of Jews" than "the Japanese performed cruel surgery on people". I think that, as a general rule, the public are subconsciously more ok with hearing lots of people are dead, than hearing that a smaller number of people have being subjected to horrendous torture and experimentation. Think about it: in most basic sources that I've seen, they don't even mention the cruelty that went on in Nazi camps, they just mention people were killed.
For a more modern example, think about 9/11: do you think the average person would rather read that 3000 people were killed, or read a very detailed account of how one man was trapped by a falling beam, and slowly asphyxiated in the smoke while the nearby fires blistered the skin off his bones?

Golden Eel
09-24-2011, 12:34 AM
Touching on what The Empirical Guy said, I'd bet the Holocaust gets more attention because it affected a much larger area and portion of the population. The Holocaust and Nazis fucked with quite a few nations in Europe. This is a thing that often annoys me though, I posted a few things on Facebook on the 9/11 anniversary. There are horrible, evil things happening all over the planet right now and I'm constantly confused as to why some tragedies get all the attention. Go survey a bunch of people in the streets, see how many know what the Holocaust is and see how many people know what The Great Leap Forward.

Oh, also and Jews control the media.

Shangri-LIE
09-24-2011, 07:50 AM
EMP - You have some good points as well. Especially about geography and the fact that people would rather hear about mass murder than they would about the subjection of hundreds of thousands of people to insane torture. As long as the amount of dead from one tragedy surpasses the amount from another tragedy then that is the story that becomes the keystone state-of-being-what-is-worth-talking-about. It's what becomes worth "celebrating", or "profitable", or another career bolstering newscast for eager news staffers. Even relating to what MMT has said about 9/11. Not that what unfurled on that day was anything less than horrific, but most stories that you hear, or read, or see that memorialize/document that day, centralize around the twin towers. Sure they cut to segments about the Pentagon, and United 93, but most of the coverage is based around the collapse of the twin towers. It was more of a phenomenon. It looked more terrifying. The buildings were bigger, and there were thousands of victims. I personally find that sickening.


Going back to Area 731. 10,000-40,000 people died from inside experiments and 200,000-600,000 died from field experiments. That is a pretty signifigant number. The death toll from that surpasses 9/11. Yet it hardly gets taught about in schools. What about the death toll from the TWO nuclear bombs that we dropped on Japanese cities? Not to mention the Tsunami among other things. Where do we see them sensationalising it, or pandering for sympathy? We don't. You could start a discussion with an ancestor of The Holocaust, or of even African Slavery and chances are that they will not know what you are going on about. Yet those same people, generations later, will claim that they are somehow a victim to this day because of what happened to people that just happen to be of their race, or religion. Just because they can.

ThreeEyedGod
09-24-2011, 03:30 PM
or the fact that a shit load more people were killed under Stalin than Hitler and the alleged Jewish holocaust.

And this might come across as anti-semitic or whatever, but I really do believe that it is because of the very fact they are Jews, that they have received the a higher instance of martyrdom. Plus they are very involved and effective at constantly keeping the issue at thrive using the media as MMT pointed ou,most of the media is Jewish owned, so it would make sense that is why the holocaust is constantly being pushed.

Shangri-LIE
09-24-2011, 05:09 PM
^ I am not sure that I nessecarily agree with all of that. Not because it comes off as a bit anti-semetic, but because I think to say that Jews run the media is a broad generalization with racist connotations based on no real substantiating facts to support that. That sort of comment just has a resounding "Jews Run The World" sound to it that really isn't true at all.

ThreeEyedGod
09-24-2011, 08:27 PM
MORTIMER ZUCKERMAN, owner of NY Daily News, US News &
>World Report and chair of the Conference of Presidents
>of Major Jewish American Organizations, one of the
>largest pro-Israel lobbying groups.
>
>LESLIE MOONVES, president of CBS television,
>great-nephew of David Ben-Gurion, and co-chair with
>Norman Ornstein of the Advisory Committee on Public
>Interest Obligation of Digital TV Producers, appointed
>by Clinton.
>
>JONATHAN MILLER, chair and CEO of AOL division of
>AOL-Time-Warner
>
>NEIL SHAPIRO, president of NBC News
>
>JEFF GASPIN, Executive Vice-President, Programming,
>NBC
>
>DAVID WESTIN, president of ABC News
>
>SUMNER REDSTONE, CEO of Viacom, "world's biggest media
>giant" (Economist, 11/23/2) owns Viacom cable, CBS and
>MTVs all over the world, Blockbuster video rentals and
>Black Entertainment TV.
>
>MICHAEL EISNER, major owner of Walt Disney, Capitol
>Cities, ABC.
>
>RUPERT MURDOCH, Owner Fox TV, New York Post, London
>Times, News of the World (Jewish mother)
>
>MEL KARMAZIN, president of CBS
>
>DON HEWITT, Exec. Director, 60 Minutes, CBS

I could go on...and you can verify all the names if you wish

and it's crazy you can almost never mention Jews without being labeled an 'antisemite'

Shangri-LIE
09-25-2011, 01:54 PM
I wasn't saying that there aren't Jewish people who work within the media. I was just questioning your assertation that there is a Jewish conspiracy within the media. As in they control it.

ThreeEyedGod
09-25-2011, 08:25 PM
So it is or it isn't a 'conspiracy', that Jews control the media? I guess it would depend on what your definition of 'control' is.