Saturday, November 3, 2018

Tagged under: ,

The Crime of Genocide - Punishment and Recompense

Barry Gilheany discusses the role of the trial in rendering indelible genocide in the public consciousness and memory. 

In this article, I discuss how legal institutions can contribute to collective memory around the crime of genocide. The specificity of genocide is examined particularly in relation to the Shoah/Holocaust[1]; the extermination of European Jewry by Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Reference is also made to the genocide of Rwanda’s Tutsi population in 1994 and to ethnic atrocities in Bosnia in the 1990s. I argue that due to its sheer totality and intrinsic evil, the crime of genocide can never be adequately punished. However, the creation of a permanent legal record, especially through witness testimony, of such events can act as a firewall against attempts in later generations to deny or to trivialise the events and so is essential to the prevention of future genocides. It is also argued that the dramaturgy of trials such as those at Nuremberg and of Adolf Eichmann represent catharsis for the peoples affected by catastrophes such as the Shoah and is vital to the creation of proper rule of law in transitional societies emerging from the shadow of such events.

The crime of genocide is unique and specific compared to all other international crimes such as war crimes, crimes against humanity and slavery. It is not more serious than these crimes; it is different (Fournet, 2007: p.1). The etymology of the word arises from the need to conceptualise the Nazi atrocities against the Jews of Europe which culminated in the Final Solution; a crime without a name[2]; a crime for which ‘language failed us[3]. Therefore, a word had to be found to qualify the Nazi crimes and to encompass all other similar atrocities even the retrospective case of Turkish slaughter of the Armenians in 1915. Consequently, Raphael Lemkin, a Polish lawyer, coined the word ‘genocide’ in 1944 by putting together the Greek term ‘genos’, meaning people sharing the same genetic features, with the term ‘cide’, which originates in the Latin ‘caedere’ meaning ‘to kill’. This term was then legally acknowledged with the adoption of the United Nations Genocide Convention in 1948 (Fournet, 2007: p.5).

This definition is problematic due to the very specificity of the Nazi genocide. This specificity lies in the racialisation of the group targeted for destruction by the perpetrators. The Nazis artificially defined the concept of the ‘Jew’ by collapsing the Jewish religion into a race and the Nuremberg laws of 1935 classified Jews on the basis of ascendance and obscure hereditary rules regardless of whether individuals saw themselves as Jewish or not. The Genocide Convention furthermore depends on the concept of ‘race’ to legally define the crimes. The crime of genocide is perpetrated against a group pre-defined by the genociders through a ‘hereditarisation’ of specific features – whether ethnic, national, religious, political, social etc. – of the group artificially created. This suggests that removal of the concept of ‘race’ from the definition of the crime would deprive this definition of the conceptual element that makes this crime so specific (Fournet, 2007: pp.6-8).

More recently Hutu extremists in Rwanda used artificial categories of ‘Hutu’ and ‘Tutsi’ created by the colonial power, Belgium, in the 19th century on the basis of the height measurements of the respective group as a logistic for the extermination of the Tutsis. Serb (and Croat) nationalist extremists created the concept of ‘Muslim’ prior to the ethnic cleansing campaigns in Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1992-95.

The Nazi genocide is unique in other aspects; the creation of an industrial infrastructure around the death camps, the destruction of the victims’ corpses by burning so as to negate both their lives and deaths; the process of humiliation and dehumanisation prior to entry into the death camps symbolised by the yellow star Jews were forced to wear. The ‘metaphysical crime’[4] ‘against the human of every human’[5] and ‘ontological wickedness’[6] of the Nazi genocide reside in the fact that the means and the end were the same.

Because it is beyond our capacity to comprehend such monstrosity, victims must be able to bear testimony in a suitable judicial arena to create a lasting memory of the crime. In the words of Elie Wiesel, “Memory is a blessing; it creates bonds rather than destroys them”.[7] There is a duty of remembrance because past events like the Shoah do not belong in the past; the traumas of historical genocides are very mush present in the modern age. (Fournet, 2007: p.xxxii).

Collective memory consists of the stories a society tells itself about momentous events in its history (e.g. wars, revolutions, riots, atrocities) and a significant proportion of it is found in the legal proceedings which often arise from these upheavals. The Nuremberg War Crimes Trials indelibly influenced the collective memory of the events they judged. Such trials are moments of truth (Osiel, 2000: p.2).

Moments such as the “discovery” or rehabilitation of Australia’s aboriginal population suggest that acts asserting legal rights or officially condemning their violation often become focal points for the collective memory of whole nations (Osiel, 2000: p.6).

The judicial task at such moments is to employ the law of evidence procedure and professional responsibilities to recast the courtroom in terms of the theatre of ideas, where large questions of collective memory and even national identity are engaged (Osiel, 2000: p.6). The legal memory of genocide is understood as the impact of trials on global society. Legal memory is essential to the construction of social or collective memory of genocidal events (Fournet, 2007: p.xxxii). The memory of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 took such a long time to emerge precisely because of the lack of trials (Fournet, 2007: p.127).

The starting point in the emergence of the collective memory regarding the Nazi Judeocide was the trial of Adolf Eichmann in Israel in 1961, the first acknowledged aim of which was to serve as an educational tool for succeeding generations. In the course of it 111 witnesses were called to testify. Unlike the Nuremberg trials, the Eichmann trial did not rely predominantly on documents but placed emphasis on victims and witnesses. It was the first ever instance of an indictment based on documents and testimonies. The witnesses testified ‘in order to illuminate the destruction in all its detail … they served as faithful proxies of the Holocaust. They were the facts’[8].

They ‘told their own stories and that is what gave weight to their words… The state, represented by the prosecutor, underwrote their testimony and lent it all the weight of the state’s legitimacy and institutional and symbolic power…. For the first time since the end of the war, the witnesses had the feeling they were being heard.’[9]

By focusing on the unexpurgated personal stories of the victims’, the prosecutor sought to design a foundational narrative of the Jewish people that would resound down the generations (Osiel, 2000: p.10).

At the Eichmann trial the survivors gained their social identity as survivors ‘because society now recognised them as such’.[10] Furthermore, the testimony enabled the relatives and descendants of those who died without graves to begin the work of mourning ‘by allowing them to imagine the circumstances of their relatives’ deaths’.[11]

I argue here that only trials and their testimonies can actually integrate the victims into society and collective memory. Without the moral authority of condemnation from a judicial body representing society as a political entity, be it at the national or supra-national level, the social recognition of victims as victims will, at the very least, be greatly impaired. Furthermore, without an appropriate determination of the crimes as those of genocide, they will fail to remain in collective memory as genocide and the trials will leave space for denial (Fournet, 2007: p.134). It is noteworthy, in this regard, that the crimes against humanity for which Nazi leaders were convicted at Nuremberg were subsumed into the supra-crime of “waging aggressive war”[12] (Hirsch, 2003: p.42) less consonant with the crimes committed at Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor and elsewhere. There is no immediate connection in collective memory between Hermann Goering and the Shoah/Holocaust; there is between Adolf Eichmann due to his conviction in Jerusalem as its architect.

It is also noteworthy that, within the contexts of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda respectively, victims were not strictly speaking parties to the trials but merely potential witnesses. This may explain why these trials failed to attract general global interest and why the perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide remain unknown to the general public (Fournet, 2007: p.126).

Trials dealing with genocidal events in Rwanda and the Balkans in the 1990s have heard direct witness testimony from survivors of genocidal sexual violence against women. In both Rwanda and the Former Yugoslavia sexual violence was used not merely as an ancillary weapon in these conflicts but as a fundamental one – a means of committing genocide. Women who suffer genocidal sexual violence suffer not only as women, but as biological and cultural bearers of their community group. Their experiences are distinct; the use of the womb and the vagina as grenades; the objectification of the woman not only as an object of sexual plunder, but also as marker of kin, race and ethnicity and religious icon (de Londras, 2007: pp.113-15).

Just as in the trials relating to the Shoah, truth telling in cases of genocidal sexual violence must provide a supportive theatre in which the narrative or the ‘violence story’.[13] is heard. The performative nature of telling the violence story, through reliving the experience of the violations of the body and the stigmatisation and ostracisation of such ‘sullied’ women after the fact of the exposition, must be considered. Equally, the refiguring of the self as victim by virtue of telling the story must be accommodated since the reconstitution of the law depends on the willingness of survivors/victims to share that story. For acts of genocide are usually carried out in ways to maximise humiliation, degradation and trauma (de Londras, 2007: pp.118-19).

The genocidal character of sexual crimes carried out in Bosnia is illustrated by the case of Kunarac, Kovac and Vukovic[14] which dealt with acts committed by Serb forces on Muslim women and girls at the Foca rape camp to the south-east of Sarajevo. The repeated rape of women and girls ‘were one of the many ways in which the Serbs could assert their victory over the Muslims’ and in her statement at the end of the case stated that ‘Muslim women and girls, mothers and daughters together, robbed of their last vestiges of human dignity … treated like chattels, pieces of property at the arbitrary disposal of the Serb occupation forces. (de Londras, 2007: pp. 122-23).

Justice is fundamentally about the establishment of the Rule of Law to show that nobody is above the law. Justice is therefore served in this case and at the trials of other genocidaires by relying on the testimony of the victims to use the law to re-establish the Rule of Law.

Problems can arise from efforts to employ criminal prosecution to create a collective national story around events like the Shoah or the Rwandan genocide. There are risks to the rights of defendants; trials can unwittingly distort historical understanding of a nation’s recent past; they may foster delusions of a nation’s purity and grandeur and they may fail by requiring greater reflection on revered aspects of a nation’s past than many are willing to make (Osiel, 2000: p.12). State criminality on the scale of Nazi Germany, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge and Ba’athist Iraq, among others, does pose problems for new democratic states seeking to reconstruct trust, social solidarity and collective memory. However open and transparent administration of justice (not really evident at the trial of Saddam Hussein) at such trials will overcome such obstacles.

I hope I have how witness testimony is central to the judgment of the ultimate crime against humanity, genocide and specifically the premeditated and logistically planned mass murder of Europe’s Jews in the Shoah. The Shoah was the ‘perfect crime’ in that rather than killing the victim or witnesses it sought to obtain ‘the silence of the witnesses, the deafness of the judges and inconstancy (insanity) of the testimony’.[15]. Survivor testimonies, full of traumatic truth and factual errors, trump the usual judicial metrics as the magnitude of the Shoah/Holocaust, a sublime event which must be ‘felt’ rather than ‘known’, renders these measurements ‘obsolete’.[16]. More than any other film, documentary, archive or play these testimonies provide the true “warning from history”. Witness testimony was crucial to the functioning of the South African Truth and Reconciliation.

I would also argue that though none of the crimes committed by the parties to the Northern Ireland conflict in any way approximate to the acts of genocide discussed in that any properly constituted judicial and/or historical enquiry into the tragedy of Northern Ireland’s recent past must have witness testimony of the bereaved at its core. Such an historical record would provide a “warning from history” to future generations in the North.


De Londras, F. “Telling Stories and Hearing Truths: Providing an Effective Remedy to Genocidal Sexual Violence against Women” pp.113-24 in Henham, R. & Behrens, P., 2007. The Criminal Law of Genocide. International, Comparative and Contextual Aspects, Aldershot: Ashgate.

Fournet, C., 2007. The Crime of Destruction and the Law of Genocide. Their Impact on Collective Memory, Aldershot: Ashgate.

Hirsch, D. 2003. Law against Genocide: Cosmopolitan Trials, London: Glasshouse Press.

Osiel, M. 2000. Mass Atrocity. Collective Memory and the Law, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers

[1]The word ‘Holocaust’ is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary as ‘a Jewish sacrificial offering burnt on the altar’.  The Hebrew word ‘Shoah’ signifies ‘catastrophe’ as well as ‘destruction and is thus a more appropriate term than Holocaust as it implies Jewish self-sacrifice.  Another appropriate term is ‘Hurbr’, the Yiddish term for destruction; Yiddish was the language of most of the victims of the Nazi genocide. (Fournet, 2007: pp.9-11)
[2]Churchill, Winston, on the mass executions of Jews and Jewish ‘Bolsheviks’ killed in mass throughout the occupied territory of the Soviet Union, August 1941.  See Fussell, J.T., 2006. A Crime Without a Name. Prevent Genocide International (updated 15 June 2006) http: //
[3]Wiesel, E., 1990 From the Kingdom of Memory – Reminiscences, New York: Schocken Books p.245
[4]Jankelevitch, V (1996, original version 1971) Should We Pardon Them? pp.555-6) Translated by Ann Hobart, Critical Inquiry 22 (3): 552-72.
[7]Wiesel, E (1990) p.10
[8]Wiewiorka, A (2006, original version 1998), The Era of the Witness, translated from the French by Jared Stark, Ithica: Cornell University Press p.85
[9]Ibid, p.84
[10]Wiewiorka, A (2006) p.88.
[11]Ibid, p.128.
[12]The Kellogg-Briand Pact (1933) reaffirmed propositions adopted by the Assembly of the League of Nations in 1927and incorporated in 1928 into the Paris Pact for the Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy.  The League of Nations’ Declaration of Aggressive War had declared aggressive war to be an international crime.
[13]Describes a victim’s retold experience of violence in which, through this retelling, victims ‘must mark themselves as victims, which in turn excludes them from the very communities that are brought forth through their own sacrifice’. Cobb, S (1997), ‘The Domestication of Violence in Mediation, 31:3 Law and Society Review 397, p.406
[14]Prosecutor v Kunarac and Vukovic (IT-96-23-T & IT-96-23/1-T) Judgment, 22 February 2001
[15]Stone, D, ‘Holocaust testimony and the challenge to the philosophy of history’ in Fine, R. and Turner, C., Eds (2000) Social Theory after the Holocaust. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press p.220

➽ Barry Gilheany is the author of a PhD thesis Post-Eighth Abortion Politics in the Republic of Ireland from Essex University, Department of Government. He is also the author of The Discursive Construction of Abortion in Georgina Waylen & Vicky Randall (Eds) Gender, The State and Politics Routledge, 1998.


marty said...

Holocaust here Genocide there and relevant may I add , but may I suggest that overlooking one of the largest genocides is possibly tantamount to accepting the crap that has been foisted upon us down through the years , the genocide that I talk of is that period in Irelands history known to many as Gorta Mor , and passed of by successive brit govts and indeed Irish lackey govts as a natural disaster called famine ,millions of Irish men women and children died needlessly from starvation while thousands of armed English army soldiers provided armed escort to huge amounts of grain ,cattle ,sheep etc being shipped out of the country, the facts and records are there to be seen , to overlook this genocide or mass murder is to say imo that it,s irrelevant,or the writer is accepting that myth called famine .

frankie said...

Marty...Don't forget to mention the once great Choctaw nation who experienced their own holocaust at the hands of European settlers, raised $170 ..(an incredible sum at the time worth in the tens of thousands of dollars today.) for Irish Famine relief, when the British were comitting the genocide in Ireland

When you read up on WW2 does the fact the Council on Foreign Relations (mostly Jews but all of them are Zionist) decided over a glass of wine (like the Balfour Declaration just over 20 yrs previous was decided) that Hitler would lose WW2. ever come up....?

On the subject of "The Crime of Genocide - Punishment and Recompense"

How would you recompense the millions of innocent Germans who died under Morgenthau Plan? Henry Morgenthau, Jr. (Jew) , like his supporter Frederick Lindemann, a German-born Jew both floated and endorsed the idea of Gernocide against the German population for the same reasons that Nazi Germany killed millions of people in death camps. I will let you dwell on this quote from Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson...

I found around me, particularly Morgenthau, a very bitter atmosphere of personal resentment against the entire German people without regard to individual guilt and I am very much afraid that it will result in our taking mass vengeance on the part of our people in the shape of clumsy economic action.

What punishment should Morgenthau have faced for killing millions of innocent Germans?

Barry Gilheany said...


There is a case for saying that famines such as Gorta Mor, the Holmodor in the Ukraine in the 1930s and the Great Bengal Famine of 1943 were genocidal acts.

It needs to be said that the English labouring classes were also affected grievously by the application by the British government of the laissez-faire economic dogma of the Corn Laws by which grain and other foodstuffs were exported from the British Isles. Ireland, of course was much worse affected because of its almost total dependence on the potato crop which failed so catastrophically in 1845 and the injustices of the landlord-tenant system.

It needs also to be aid that Tony Blair when PM apologised completely for Britain's callous indifference to the sufferings of the Irish people during the Great Famine of 1845-48. I do not see the point in pressing on with a grievance narrative of that time.

The massacres and ethnic expulsions committed during the Cromwellian conquest approximate closer to the genocidal acts I discuss in the article because they were mass killings done up close and personal.

marty said...

Frankie I totally agree and we could I believe throw Mao in there also,Barry any weasel words from Tony B-liar I treat with contempt,Cromwells genocidal acts foisted upon the Irish because we the Irish were foolish enough to become involved in a royal row, with Seamus an chaca leading the retreat were indeed brutal but Cromwell was that kind of soldier a hound of hell once unleashed it doesn't justify his actions far from it but maybe a tad understandable,however that period known as the black 47 was entirely different ,no corn law or any other man made law could justify what went on here ,and to call it anything other than what it really was ie genocide just perpetuates a myth of famine when no famine existed , there was a potatoe blight but there was a record in crop and meat production , when a major portion of the English army was used to guard foodstuff out of this country ,while it had become common knowledge that people were starving to death here,guilty of no crime other than poor and left to watch their loved ones die a slow and brutal death ,while Victoria and cronies enjoyed their ham and eggs, and we should take those weasel words from a war monger like B-Liar as closure for a crime against humanity that must surely compare to the actions of the Nazis , Genocide Barry simple as no if,s or buts,

Barry Gilheany said...


Sorry to silence your anti-Jewish dogwhistle but the Morgenthau Plan was (from Wikipedia) " a proposal by the Allies in 1944 to eliminate Germany's ability to wage war by eliminating its arms industry, and the removal or destruction of other key industries basic to military strength.....IT WAS NOT ADOPTED" (My emphasis)

I take it that answers your question.

Of course the Choctaw nations and so many Native American nations suffered genocide at the hands of European settlers commanded by military units led by good Irishmen like General Richard Sheridan who coined the phrase "The only good Indian is a dead one" - you may have heard a variation during the Troubles; "the only good copper is a dead one". First Nation groups in Canada, Aboriginal nations in Australia and Maori nations in New Zealand suffered not dissimilar fates. Funny we do not hear calls for the repatriation of the descendants of these countries of for boycott, disinvestment,sanctions campaigns against these countries for their original sins unlike a certain Middle Eastern nation.

What makes the Nazi Shoah of the Jews unique is the totality of it. Not just the attempt to kill very single European Jew but the taxonomy of pseudo-science, the bureaucratic and logistic systems to implement it (transport, quotas of killings, disposal of money, property and body parts) plus the total dehumanisation of the victims before and after death.


By all means add Mao and Pol Pot into the equation. The crimes of neglect committed are stand alone. If you had read closely what I had written, I was not using the Corn Laws as any sort of mitigation for these crimes. I was placing Gorta Mor in the context of (what we would call neo-liberal now) the cruel economic orthodoxy which caused so much death and distress throughout the British Isles.

Another less acknowledged aspect of the Great Famine was that a certain strata of rural Irish society benefited from the elimination of the cottier classes described by historian Emmett Larkin as the thirty acre tenant farmer class who later were to become the backbone of the clergy and nationalism. But that is a discussion (and maybe article for another day).

Murrayd. said...

Marty, I wonder is the author aware of the Jews role in financing Cromwell (Menasseh Ben Israel) and also in setting up his New Model Army (via Carvajal - known as the Great Jew). Is he also aware that they ran the Slave Industry back then. Is it just coincidence that our ancestors were shipped off to the Carribean and elsewhere after Cromwell's genocidal campaign? Who shipped them, who were the crews and who profited. Surely if an Irishman is writing about Jews and genocide these matters should also be discussed. As for his claim about the Irish who benefitted from the so called 'Famine', maybe we should also discuss the Rothschilds too. Or is that for another day too BG. And is any criticism of Jewish power (as opposed to the Jewish people) to be met with the usual Anti-semitic dogwhistle?

Henry JoY said...


when considering 'An Gorta Mór' it might be useful to broaden the context somewhat; the population had grown exponentially in the previous sixty years. In 1780's the population was estimated to be around 3 million. By 1840 it had increased to almost 9 (million). This phenomenal growth was largely attributable to the success of the potato as a subsistence crop, a prolific crop per acre which still thrived in poorer soils. Also it could be used as food and as a conditioning fodder for pigs and fowl. Even a diet of spuds and milk alone provides all the essential vitamins nutrients necessary to survive and thrive.

But for the introduction of the spud we wouldn't have had the population explosion that preceded 'An Gorta Mór'.

Murrayd. said...

"Gaelic society and civilisation had been systematically and deliberately shattered by the English State during this period, in fact since Tudor times. The natural cultural and social constraints of what was a viable civilisation on a stable population growth were constantly weakened. There was no functioning and accepted moral authority, clerical or secular. One of the resulting ‘freedoms’ resulted in a rapid population growth that gave rise to an excessive reliance on the potato. An irresponsible land system resulting from the same source facilitated subletting to complement the reliance on the potato.
The potato had been available for over three centuries and by itself did not, and never would, suddenly give rise to such dependence. It was an effect not a cause – the potato is innocent!"
from Jack Lane - Famine or Holocaust, How Many Died?

Blaming the spud - an argument even our overlords would not come up with. If food grown by Ethiopians was being shipped out of Ethiopia during the famine of the mid 1980s under armed guard by the German Army would you have called it a famine?
No - you'd be lambasting them as genocidalists and bringing up the Holocaust of the Jews.
But when it comes to our island you blame the spuds.
This is the argument of the conquered.
May I suggest you try eating spuds and milk for a month, or even a week - according to your post its a miracle diet. Put it to test I say.

Henry JoY said...


read my post again; I didn't blame spuds, quite the opposite, I venerated them and consider their link to phenomenal population growth over sixty years (if you have an alternate explanation I gladly give it consideration).
I won't be putting an exclusive potato diet to the test for a year though. That's already been done by an Ausie guy. He ate spuds for a year, supplementing only B12, and low and behold most of his health markers improved!

The point of my comment was to encourage a broadening of context. Yes, "An Gorta Mór" was horrendous and contemporaneous accounts are harrowing. But framing it as genocide is somewhat of a "Bad Bwits" trope which neglects the broader context. Yes, Gaelic society and culture had been systematically and deliberately shattered for centuries but that was par for the course during the middle ages; domination and exploitation were the norm of the time.

Agreed, British responses were tardy in 1845 and less than effective. But as we still see today, even in our own State, Governments respond slowly to crises. Potato crop failures were not a rare event. There had been 9 serious blight attacks over the previous hundred years. Though only that of 1741 was comparable to that of 1845 when about 1/3 of the crop was lost. The commonality of those events probably meant that the Tory Government of the day were slow to respond. Also factor in that the Whigs, who had a greater attachment to free-trade and laissez-faire economics were snapping at the Government's heel and we're enmeshed in a much more complex scenario.

Murrayd I suggest yourself and Marty conduct a more thorough and a less emotional review of this painful period.

Barry Gilheany said...


That the Jews were the chief financiers of the slave trade is a slur first put out by KKK ally Louis Farakkhan of the Nation of Islam. A slur that feeds into the longest hatred which mutates down the centuries but which is very much alive and kicking in our age as the Pittsburgh massacre and the reports of UK anti-semitism monitoring body, the Community Security Trust.

I not getting into as discussion on Jewish power now as I intend to write on the genealogy of antisemitism soon for TPQ.

My motivation for writing this piece was to flag up the importance of witness testimony in the recording of the Shoah and other crimes against humanity. Because there was no recorded contemporary testimony to the Armenian Genocide in World War I, Hitler was abler to say "Who remembers the Armenians?"

frankie said...

Sorry to silence your anti-Jewish dogwhistle

We have been through this before, I will debunk what you think again. I am a lot of things to a lot of people but never once has anyone (outside of yourself), includes every Jewish person who I have known, starting with my oldest daughter, her mother, uncles, aunts, grandparents (all Jews) have ever thought of my views being anything other than anti Zionist. Not anti Jewish as you like to say. Big difference being anti Jewish and being anti Zionist....

I take it that answers your question.

The questions which you never answered but waved your finger and pointed it like a parent berates a child are once again...

1...When you read up on WW2, does the fact that the CFR the decided who would win WW2 ever factor into your arguments?

I can buy into the line that the Nazi's were a bad bunch of bastards. What about the Zionist bankers who funded the rise of Hitler & Co., stood back while millions were rounded up like cattle and given a one way ticket to a death camp during the 1st half of WW2. Why are they not as guilty? Is it because their (Zionist bankers) reasons for permitting genocide to take place was a financial one...............

but the Morgenthau Plan was (from Wikipedia) " a proposal by the Allies in 1944 to eliminate Germany's ability to wage war by eliminating its arms industry, and the removal or destruction of other key industries basic to military strength.....IT WAS NOT ADOPTED" (My emphasis)

2...How would you recompense the millions of innocent Germans who died under Morgenthau Plan?

The Morgenthau Plan not only was put into plan but had been in the planning since around the time the CFR decided the outcome of WW2 and the Soviets were that impressed they killed at least 1 million German POWs at the end of WW2. This is Dr. Jones reviewing the book HOUSE OF TRUMP, HOUSE OF PUTIN by Craig Unger, all you need to watch is the first 5mins. It is all about the Morgenthau Plan.

Native American nations suffered genocide at the hands of European settlers commanded by military units led by good Irishmen like General Richard Sheridan who coined the phrase "The only good Indian is a dead one"

Richard Sheridan was an Irish satirist, a playwright and poet. Philip Sheridan, was born either in Albany, New York (as he claimed) or on board one of the many ships that left Ireland hoping for a better life in the US. Sheridan himself never claimed to be Irish, he always said he was an American, could have been because he had hopes of becoming President.....

Let's clear up the quote "the only good indian is a dead one...."

Comanche Chief Tosawi reputedly told Sheridan in 1869, "Tosawi, good Indian," to which Sheridan supposedly replied, "The only good Indians I ever saw were dead." In Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, Dee Brown attributed the quote to Sheridan, stating that "Lieutenant Charles Nordstrom, who was present, remembered the words and passed them on, until in time they were honed into an American aphorism: The only good Indian is a dead Indian.[48] Sheridan denied he had ever made the statement.[citation needed] Biographer Roy Morris Jr. states that, nevertheless, popular history credits Sheridan with saying "The only good Indian is a dead Indian."

frankie said...

Books and Genocide


What I am reading Barry is two books one half inspired by some of your recent comments on The Spanish Civil War, which I know next to nothing about it, apart from it ended at the out break of WW2. So I invested in a book called The Spanish Civil War by Paul Preston and decided to at least start understanding what happened there. The other book, which was staring at me in the face begging to be read is called With what remains by Lesley Bilinda and why she went back to Rawanda to find out the truth as to why her husband was butchered. I started that last month and still trying to digest the first 4 chapters. The last book, which I have just finished is 10 Rillington Place by Ludovic Kennedy.

Barry, what do you call The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment carried out on black African Americans, a few short years before the out break of WW2. Or what is your take on The Origin of Aids, when whole villiages in Africa where injected with the HIV virus by Dr. Hilary Koprowski, an American scientist to over a million people in 1957-1960.

What a lot of people today called Population control, I call it Genocide by another name and the people carrying out the experiments, Hilter, Mengle, Koprowski and the scientists behind the Tuskegee Experiment all have the same mindset , killed give or take, almost identical nubers (more if you look at the AIDS sistutation across this rock) and were paid by the same Zionist Bankers (just as guilty) , who today are committing a slow Genocide on the Palastinian people.

AM said...

Frankie - have read quite a bit on Rwanda but not that one. Must look it out. I think Rwanda was an even worse genocide than the Holocaust in terms of its intensity. Of course it will be trumped in terms of indignation by the Holocaust because the French had a key role in facilitating the Hutus while the UN and US effectively did nothing. Shameful episode.

Murrayd. said...

What a simplistic attempt at explaining demographics. Maybe it's your good self who needs to be more thorough in reading posts (let alone this 'painful period' as you call it), because an 'alternate expalnation' was already provided in my post courtesy of Jack Lane -
"The natural cultural and social constraints of what was a viable civilisation on a stable population growth were constantly weakened. There was no functioning and accepted moral authority, clerical or secular. One of the resulting ‘freedoms’ resulted in a rapid population growth that gave rise to an excessive reliance on the potato. An irresponsible land system resulting from the same source facilitated subletting to complement the reliance on the potato. The potato had been available for over three centuries and by itself did not, and never would, suddenly give rise to such dependence. It was an effect not a cause – the potato is innocent!"
By your mathematics Ireland should have had a population of 100 million by the 1840's if the humble spud, which was here for centuries, was the prime mover in demographics. It's slightly more complex than that however. As for my emotions, what sort of Irishman cannot study this part of our history, or any part of our history without being emotional. Do you think the Jews study their history in some kind of detached anaesthetized state? Being emotionally involved does not mean that one cannot at the same time approach any historical subject with logic and reason and in a spirit of Truth. In fact, I have learned over the years that those who feign a more enlightened and objective and emotionless approach to history are the poorest of scholars and in my opinion it is nothing but a fake type of posturing which ultimately serves the establishment's self-absolving historical agenda. (btw, no British propagandist could do a better job than you at trying to absolve the British government and their supposed economic policies and of being 'tardy' of the time). Tardy indeed!
However what is deeply disturbing about your post is the attempt to brush off what happened here on our island as something that was 'par for the course' at the time - just a bit of old genocide, torture and mutilation and sure shipping Irish girls off as sex slaves was just the way back then. This goes on in our world today - shall I just brush it off as the way things are? This is just shocking. No Englishman (I lived there) and no decent person from any country would come out with this. You have brought post-colonial neurosis to new depths. Also, anyone reading your posts would be forgiven for thinking that the Irish thrived on spuds and milk. Have you any idea how pathetic and cruel this sounds?
As for your puerile use of the term 'Bad Bwits' - the 'Bad Bwits' really were the baddest of the bad, and their own people were the victims of their manifold outrages too, and for centuries, but maybe that's for another day. I lived among the Good Brits sir, and know of what I speak.

Murrayd. said...

With all due respect to you sir I will say that if you continue to deny the history of the Jewish Slave Trade and the other tyrannies associated with Jewish Power, then you only have yourself to blame if others deny the crimes committed against the Jewish People. No honest historian can deny simple straightforward well-documented evidence. Those with a more propagandistic approach to history however will try and link every historical fact relating to the Jewish Slave Trade as something to do with the KKK, anti-semitism, or even Mr Farakhan and other such nonsense. As for your upcoming history of anti-semitism, may I suggest you weave the narrative of Jewish Usury through it so as people might have an idea as to why this anti-semitism arises throughout the ages. As the saying goes - it's not rocket science. Also, you could do worse than cover what happened when The Talmud's disturbing (to say the least) anti-Goy teachings became public knowledge around the 13 th century. However, I suspect the usual linguistic chicanery and accusations of anti-semitism when the facts don’t rhyme with your agenda.

Barry Gilheany said...


For a refutation of the slander that Jews controlled the slave trade read this piece by the acclaimed African-American Henry Louis Gates which demolishes the pseudo-academic narrative that certain African-American antisemites have put about:

Note particularly his comment that the claim that Jews dominated the slave trade depends on an unscrupulous distortion of the historical record.

Marty. Murrayd, Frankie

I am under no moral and intellectual obligation to compare the immense human tragedy of the Great Famine of 1845-48 to the systematic and premeditated extermination of European Jewry by the Nazis. The comparison simply does not stack up. I am not going to collude in the creation of another nationalist victim narrative suffused with the racism that suffuses much of this thread.

Henry JoY said...


with respect to yourself and Jack Lane I'd bring to your attention the following;

at the end of the 16th century, the time that roughly corresponds to introduction of the potato, the population of the island of Ireland was estimated at 1 million. By 1840 it had become the most densely populated country in Europe with somewhere between 8 and 9 million inhabitants (Phillips and Rix 1995).

Genetic evolution of the potato, over two centuries, increased yields form 2 tons per acre in 1670 to 10 tons per acre in 1800 (Mac Con Iomaire 2003:209). The growth in population paralleled that of yields. In the latter half of the 18th century the population entered a rapid period of increase (around 1.6% per annum) which appears to have slowed to 0.6% by 1830. By 1841, the population had reached 8.2 million (according to the census, but the actual figure may be nearer 8.5 million). The population would probably have leveled off at a value of 9 million had it not been for the famine that began in 1845.

Yourself and Mr Lane are not wrong to claim that state policy contributed to the million deaths. Whether this amounts to genocide, including the “intent” specified by the UN definition he has quoted, I am less sure than ye are.

AM said...

Barry - indeed, you are under no moral obligation to put the famine on a par with the Nazi Genocide. As a public writer you are arguably under moral obligation to enhance public understanding and not wilfully distort the narrative. I think you have stepped up to the plate on this. But there are different takes on these matters. The question of Jewish power for example is something that should be as openly discussed as Catholic power or Muslim power. In a discussion of anti-Semitism there should be no avoiding questions such as that raised by MurrayD of usury: if it has fed into a prejudice against Jews. Between the two of you, the debate has been raised and made more nuanced. I think that is to your credit. I like to know how things work and I am not able to know if told to take something for granted. The one drawback is trying to keep up with the comments. Wil probably have to upload once or twice a day so people can bear with us if the comments don't always go up quickly.

wolfe tone said...

It never ceases to amuse me how some folk claim they know all what happened in Germany, Yugoslavia,Rwanda etc just because they obtained a 'PhD'. They still haven't got a clue what happened on their own doorstep never mind further afield! PH Pearse was on to something when he wrote about 'The Murder Machine''s still obviously relevant today. Jesus wept.

Murrayd. said...


We could spend the day sending each other studies confirming or denying the Jewish Slave Trade, but more than likely, neither of us will read each other’s recommendations. What I will post here for you is not some scholarly or pseudo-scholarly work on the Jewish Question, but quotes from the Talmud itself;

* “If a ‘goy’ (Gentile) hits a Jew he must be killed.” (Sanhedrin 58b)
* “If a Jew finds an object lost by a ‘goy’ it does not have to be returned.” (Baba Mezia 24a)
* “If a Jew murders a ‘goy’ there will be no death penalty.” (Sanhedrin 57a)
* What a Jew steals from a ‘goy’ he may keep.” (Sanhedrin 57a)
* “Jews may use subterfuges to circumvent a ‘goy.’” (Baba Kamma 113a)
* “All children of the ‘goyim’ (Gentiles) are animals.” (Yebamoth 98a)
* “Girls born of the ‘goyim’ are in a state of ‘niddah’ (menstrual uncleanness!) from birth.” (Abodah Zarah 36b)
* “The ‘goyim’ are not humans. They are beasts.” (Baba Mezia 114b)
* “If you eat with a ‘goy’ it is the same as eating with a dog.” (Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b)
* “Even the best of the ‘goyim’ should all be killed.” (Soferim 15)
* “Sexual intercourse between the ‘goyim’ is like intercourse between animals.” (Sanhedrin 74b)
* “When it comes to a Gentile in peace times, one may harm him indirectly, for instance, by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice.” (Shulkan Arukh, Yoreh De ‘ah, 158, Hebrew Edition only)
* “‘Yashu’ (derogatory for ‘Jesus’) is in Hell being boiled in hot excrement.” (Gittin 57a)
[’Yashu’ is an acronym for the Jewish curse, ‘May his (Jesus) name be wiped out forevermore.’]
* Yashu (Jesus) was sexually immoral and worshipped a brick.” (Sanhedrin 107b)
* “Yashu (Jesus) was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness and refused to repent.” (Sotah 47a)
* “Miriam the hairdresser had sex with many men.” (Shabbath 104b, Hebrew Edition only)
* “She who was the descendant of princes and governors (the virgin Mary) played the harlot with carpenters.” (Sanhedrin 106a)
* “Christians who reject the Talmud will go to hell and be punished there for all generations.” (Rosh Hashanah 17a)
* "Even though God created the non-Jew they are still animals in human form. It is not becoming for a Jew to be served by an animal. Therefore he will be served by animals in human form." - Midrasch Talpioth
* "Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jews), is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God."- Talmud: Bammidber raba

These quotes are from Brother Nathaniel Kapnar’s site (my personal favourite being - “Jews may use subterfuges to circumvent a ‘goy.’”) I suppose I don’t need to tell you he was raised in the Jewish faith but is now a Christian.

As regards to linguistic chicanery that I mentioned earlier, none exemplifies it more than a Jewish leader who was challenged about the Talmud’s claim that Jesus was burning in hell up to his ears in excrement when the book first became publicly known.The wily Rabbi proclaimed it was a different Jesus being referred to!
This episode was deemed to be the birth of Jewish ‘humour’ by a later commentator. Funny stuff alright.

Murrayd. said...


I'm afraid I can't help you if you're not sure what genocide is.

Barry Gilheany said...

I am disappointed that contributors to the discussion have largely not addressed the issues how the crime of genocide can be punished, remembered and prevented. The central point I focused on was the importance of witness testimony in the recollection of genocide, war crimes and conflict generally.

Mind you, I do not control the narrative!

I posed the question at the end as to the possibility of witness testimony in the historical record of the NI conflict and as a means of truth telling and reconciliation.

Anthony, your work on the Boston College project played such a vital role in those tasks from the point of view of armed participants. What a disgrace that it was sabotaged by the PSNI by the zeal to pursue a prosecution which they knew they could not win.

Eoghan said...

Barry, the comparison doesn’t stack up in terms of body counts. No more than Nazis killing Jews stacks up to Nazis killing more Russians & Slavs for the same reasons!


Or the Japanese killing the Chinese for the same racist self-aggrandizing reasons! All of which were systematic and premeditated fascist government extermination policies. So surely Jewish people don’t have a monopoly on suffering. In WWII China suffered 15 to 20 million deaths and Russia 20 to 27 million!

As such me thinks you protest too much about Jewish suffering. Since all comparisons merely consists of cataloguing similarities and differences. And so, some comparisons are better than others or at least instructive. For instance: Nazis and the Warsaw Ghetto vs. Israelis and the Gaza Ghetto. Both these invaders and occupiers were and are driven by their own sense of racist superiority. And if you don’t think so then why do Jewish people visit and pay homage to this shrine to the Jewish-American mass murderer Baruch Goldstein?

Why is there even this shrine for them to visit in Israel? Even Germany doesn’t permit shrines to Nazis. So much for lessons learned from the Holocaust. Which by the way is a term Jewish Auschwitz survivor Primo Levi disliked because of its politically manipulative religious meaning: “burnt offering”. Levi was an atheist: “I too entered the Lager as a nonbeliever, and as a nonbeliever I was liberated and have lived to this day.”

Levi preferred to just call it what it was: German industrial state genocide. Which I agree with you was especially pernicious. Kind of like Winston Churchill and Bomber Harris dropping mustard gas bombs on Kurds in Iraq. A difference of degree not kind, kind of like comparing the Irish Famine of the 1840’s to the Bengal Famine of the 1940’s. And at the risk of colluding in the creation of another nationalist victim narrative suffuse with racism, see if you can see the similarities and patterns of these imperial racist policies:

“Lack of (Brit) political will”, “genuine (Brit) indifference”, “racist (Brit) undertones”

"British responsible!"

And I get that Irish and Indians are not God’s chosen people because the Bible says so. But don’t you think it is time to consider other historical documents? Because that Bible seems to infuse and skew your political thinking here.

frankie said...

I am under no moral and intellectual obligation to compare the immense human tragedy of the Great Famine of 1845-48 I am not going to collude in the creation of another nationalist victim narrative suffused with the racism that suffuses much of this thread.

What happened in Ireland three times under British rule was 'systematic and premeditated'. Here is Chris Fogarty giving a detailed discussion on An Gorta Mór. In Fogarty's case he at least sourced his information from British Historical records held at Kew Gardens and not a New York Times article.

Barry why is anyone who queries what happened from allowing the holocaust to happen gets called a racist ,anti semite and lambasted, while anyone who dares to mention An Gorta Mór is accussed of creating 'another nationalist victim narrative' ? Both acts were Genocide.

frankie said...


The comparison simply does not stack up to the systematic and premeditated extermination of European Jewry by the Nazis.

Barry people are sick to death hearing about the holocust and how only Jews died. We all know what happened. Japanese never get a mention and they were just as evil as everyone else.

This is basically what is taught in school...Once upon a time an Austrian who sported a Bobby Charlton comb over and had a dodgy mostache with a bad case of napoleonic syndrome siezed control of Germany in 1933. And he had a friend who was just as warped called Joseph Mengele. Both had a hatred for most things and despised everything Jewish. One day they decided to put all the Jews they could find into death camps because Mengele wanted to carry out live human experiments on them. And in 1945 when the Allies had finished carpet bombing Nazi controled Europe and the Soviets had raped every woman on route to Berlin they found the death camps and every one went home blaming the Germans for everything for the next 50 years...

How are the live human experiments that Megele carried out any different that those carried out during the The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment? Or how Dr. Hilary Koprowski, an American scientist who injected over a million people in 1957-1960 with the HIV virus? Any different from the vacines that Bill Gates champions on CNN that he claims will reduce the population of the world any different?

Barry Gilheany said...


I have never argued that the Jews never had a monopoly on suffering and the Bible does not inform my thinking as I have never read the Bible and I am an atheist. The "chosen people" description is an antisemitic trope.

The significance of the Shoah/Holocaust is not so much the ethnicity of the victims but the industrial scale of the extermination programme just as the horror of African slavery resides not so much in the skin colour of those who were enslaved and trafficked but in the stripping away of their humanity by the cruel bureaucracy of the trade. The post-1945 rules based international order of which one important pillar is the EU is built on the imperative of never allowing a crime of the magnitude of the Shoah/Holocaust ever to happen again and to prevent the rise of the nationalism that led to it and two World Wars. It is not to privilege the suffering of Jews above that of any other group or race. Furthermore, the experience of the Shoah does not immunise Jews from the diseases of ethno-nationalism and racism as the actions of settlers on the West Bank so frequently demonstrate.

The article is about the value of witness testimony in the maintenance and recovery of historical memory in the pursuit of justice and recompense. So , Murrayd, quoting the Talmud at me completely misses the point as the exceptionalism of Jewish suffering is not the focus of my article.

Contributors to this thread are entitled to hold the view that An Gorta Mor is comparable to the Shoah/Holocaust. My reply is that no comparison between the two events is even hinted at in the extensive scholarship on the Shoah/Holocaust and on genocide studies. No reputable historian has ever corroborated the claims made that food was exported from Ireland during the Famine at gunpoint from 20,000 British soldiers. Other contributors have described the prevailing economic climate at the time of the Famine.

Wolfe Tone

The possession of my PhD is irrelevant to the views I have expressed on the Shoah, Rwanda, Balkans etc not least because none of those areas were subjects of my PhD research. I do academic research and writing on the basis of my interests and scholastic capacity (which includes subjecting theories to the tests of falsifiability.

To repeat, my article is about mechanisms of justice for victims of genocides and other crimes against humanity. Not Jews. Not the Famine. Not the Gaza Strip.

Henry JoY said...


unlike the viability of a potato-only diet, and unlike the link between the potato and demographic changes ... the case for genocide remains unproven.

wolfe tone,

you might want to check out Pearse's "The Murder Machine" sometime. It's a pamphlet about education.

Eoghan said...


I assume that the second “never” in your first sentence here is a mistake.

That is, you meant to write “ever” there rather than “never”, right?

And what do you mean “chosen people” is an antisemitic trope? Since when?

The Bible, Rabbi Singer and Pastor Hagee are not antisemitic:

“For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth.”

Deuteronomy 7 New King James Version (NKJV)

Rabbi Tovia Singer answers: Who is a Child of God and Why Were Jews Chosen?

Pastor John Hagee:"God’s Chosen People, the Jews, and the Promised Land of Israel are the hub that forms the wheel of prophecy. All End Time prophecy focuses first and foremost on Israel’s importance to God and His eternal covenant with His chosen people to “give to you...the land” (Gen. 17:8).

And what do you mean: “No reputable historian has ever corroborated the claims made that food was exported from Ireland during the Famine at gunpoint from 20,000 British soldiers”?

"It is generally accepted that by the 1840s, Ireland had become the granary of Britain, supplying the grain-hungry British market sufficient to feed two million people annually. Grain was not the only major food export to Britain: the data suggests that at the time of the Famine the population of Britain depended heavily on Ireland for a wide range of foodstuffs, and not just grain. At the same time, large quantities of other merchandise were exported from Ireland. In the twelve month period following the second failure of the potato crop, exports from Ireland included horses and ponies (over 4,000), bones, lard, animal skins, honey, tongues, rags, shoes, soap, glue and seed. This vast export trade suggests the diversity of the Irish economy during these years and how disease and starvation existed side-by-side with a substantial commercial sector. The port of departure of the vessels transporting food from Ireland is in the surviving records. Their pattern of origin demonstrates that the food cargoes were coming from ports throughout Ireland, not just on the east coast. Ports situated in some of the most famine-stricken parts of Ireland were sending cargoes of foodstuffs to Britain: Ballina, Ballyshannon, Bantry, Dingle, Killala, Kilrush, Limerick, Sligo, Tralee and Westport. In the first nine months of 1847, for example, seventy-five ships sailed from Tralee to Liverpool, most of which were carrying grain. In the same period, six vessels sailed from Kilrush in County Clare (which suffered acutely during the Famine) to Glasgow carrying a total of 6,624 barrels of oats. Throughout 1847 also, both Indian corn and potatoes were exported from Ireland."

And how is it you think the British imperial political economy is imposed on others?

By duck feathers or by the use and threat of British Army and Navy guns?

wolfe tone said...

Henry joy, I am familiar with Pearse's 'The Murder Machine' hence my initial comment still stands. I.e is today's 'education system' still doing the work of maintaining the British status quo narrative? It sure looks like it.

Murrayd. said...


Some quotes from Pearse's Murder Machine;

"A French writer has paid the English a very well deserved compliment. He says that
they never commit a useless crime. When they hire a man to assassinate an Irish
patriot, when they blow a Sepoy from the mouth of a cannon, when they produce a
famine in one of their dependencies, they have always an ulterior motive."

" Every crime that the English have planned and
carried out in Ireland has had a definite end. Every absurdity that they have set up
has had a grave purpose. The Famine was not enacted merely from a love of horror.
The Boards that rule Ireland were not contrived in order to add to the gaiety of
nations. The Famine and the Boards are alike parts of a profound policy. "

"The English once proposed in their Dublin Parliament
a measure for the castration of all Irish priests who refused to quit Ireland. The
proposal was so filthy than although it duly passed the House and was transmitted to
England with the warm recommendation at the Viceroy. it was not eventually
adopted. But the English have actually carried out an even filthier thing. They have
planned and established an education system which more wickedly does violence to
the elemental human rights of Irish children than would an edict for the general
castration of Irish males."

"The education system here was designed
by our masters in order to make us willing or at least manageable slaves. It has made
of some Irishmen not slaves merely, but very eunuchs, with the indifference and
cruelty of eunuchs; kinless beings, who serve for pay a master that they neither love
nor hate. "

'The indifference and cruelty of eunuchs' - food for thought. The poster Wolfe Tone mentioned it with a good reason I imagine. Maybe you should have a read of it yourself some day.

"How often does an Irish vocable
light up as with a lantern some immemorial Irish attitude, some whole phase of Irish
thought. Thus, the words which the old Irish employed when they spoke of Education
show that they had gripped the very heart of that problem. To the old Irish the
teacher was ‘aite’, fosterer; the pupil, was ‘dalta’, foster-child; the system was
‘aiteachas’, fosterage; words which we still retain as oide, dalta, oideachas. And is not the precise aim of education to ‘foster'. Not to inform, to indoctrinate, to
conduct through a course of studies [though these be the dictionary meanings of the
word], but, first and last, to ‘foster' the elements of character native to a soul, to help
to bring these to their full perfection rather than to implant exotic excellences. "

Henry JoY said...

wolfe tone & Murrayd,

however that may have read a hundred+ years ago, by today's standards its pretty archaic. In fact, to current generations it will look like the work of a fundamentalist nut-job. Hardly lends weight to either your positions.

I suppose its part of the price we pay for having tried for so long to hang on so trenchantly to our flawed proclamation and foundational myths that we still have, albeit thankfully in ever decreasing numbers, a minority of indoctrinated fools.

Barry Gilheany said...

Henry Joy

You took the words out of my mouth.

wolfe tone said...

Henry joy, again my point still stands and your utterances reinforce it. But thanks anyway.

Henry JoY said...

wolfe tone,

your position reminds me of the story about a mother watching her son march out with his regiment ... the son is obviously and completely out of step ... but the mother proudly declares "Look, look ... they're all out of step except for my darling Johnny!"

frankie said...


You have said two or three times recently that you are dissapointed about the replies you received on a few threads. I am still waiting for yourself and Msspikemilligan answering questions I posed directly to the both you on very different pieces on TPQ.

Maybe if you try adressing the questions people asked instead of complaining about the type of questions posed people may understand your point of view more clearly...

In part, my understanding of what you said is based on a numbers game. If so, what Koprowski carried out or what Bill Gates advocates will kill more people than Mengele could ever hope to. While the Nazis wanted to wipe out the Jewish race, Gates wants to wipe out most of the world.

Q......How are the live human experiments that Megele carried out any different that those carried out during the The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment? Or how Dr. Hilary Koprowski, an American scientist who injected over a million people in 1957-1960 with the HIV virus? Any different from the vacines that Bill Gates champions on CNN that he claims will reduce the population of the world ?

Q...How do you propose to stop Bill Gates from producing a vaccine that will kill not only Jews but other races and creeds...?

Q..Who collected the witness testmonies from those injected with syhillis?

Barry outside of numbers I don't see any difference...

wolfe tone said...

Henry joy, eh......wha?

Eoghan said...

Barry, here's a relevant poem from an English eyewitness:

“Weary men, what reap ye?—Golden corn for the stranger.
What sow ye?— human corpses that wait for the avenger.
Fainting forms, hunger–stricken, what see you in the offing?
Stately ships to bear our food away, amid the stranger’s scoffing.
There’s a proud array of soldiers — what do they round your door?
They guard our masters’ granaries from the thin hands of the poor
Pale mothers, wherefore weeping— would to God that we were dead;
Our children swoon before us, and we cannot give them bread.”

Speranza (Jane Wilde, 1821-1896, mother of Oscar Wilde)(Emphasis added).

The full poem by her, ‘The Famine Year (The Stricken Land)’ can be seen here:

Barry Gilheany said...


The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment was a racist and unethical; medical experiment. It formed part of the pseudo-science of eugenics and racial biology quite prevalent in Western socio-medical practice in the early 20th century; Mengele's experiments represented the ultimate and appalling climax. So no disagreement there.

Edward Hooper's hypothesis that Dr Hilary Koprowski's successful research into the polio vaccine created the HIV vaccine in the Belgian Congo from 1957-1960 is not accepted by the medical community. Research based on an admittedly small sample of 34 subjects indicates that the HIV-1 group virus strain existed in Central Africa 30 years before Hooper made his hypothesis.

I find the idea that Bill Gates is helping to produce a population control vaccine which will wipe out millions something straight from the anti-vaxxers playbook. Are you of that parish, Frankie.

I will not engage any Rothschild fable in relation to the above just as I will not give credence to any racist trope.

Barry Gilheany said...


A very harrowing piece of verse. But I stand over my assertion that An Gorta Mor is not comparable to the Shoah/Holocaust in planning, execution, logistics and scope.

Besides what is the point in revisiting an event which is outside living memory, that nobody disputes the cause, effects and legacy of and that the UK government has apologised for. The British Empire is gone 50 odd years ago; the Republic of Ireland is a confident. modern, secularising European nation despite its housing crisis. Peace of a sport has come to Northern Ireland. Time to move on, methinks.

frankie said...

I take it we agree the only difference between The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment and what Mengele was doing was numbers?

Edward Hooper's hypothesis that Dr Hilary Koprowski's successful research into the polio vaccine created the HIV vaccine in the Belgian Congo from 1957-1960 is not accepted by the medical community. Research based on an admittedly small sample of 34 subjects indicates that the HIV-1 group virus strain existed in Central Africa 30 years before Hooper made his hypothesis.

On April 12, 1955 Jonas Salk's polio vaccine was first licensed for public use in the U.S. In the years afterwards 90 million Americans were vaccinated in the largest mass vaccination campaign ever. Polio virtually disappeared from the continent and Jonas Salk became a hero.

But not long after, 260 children who were vaccinated with Salk's vaccine became sick. Eleven of them died. An investigation showed that some lots of the vaccine were defective and confidence in it was shaken. Two scientific greats, Dr. Hilary Koprowski, director of the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, and Dr. Albert Sabin, a physician at the Cincinnati Children's Hospital, raced to replace the Salk vaccine. Dr. Cecil Fox, a pathologist at the National Institute of Infectious Diseases remembers that it was an intense competition.

Both Sabin and Koprowski's vaccines were derived from monkey organs. They needed to test them in large, non-immunized population groups, no longer available in North America. Dr Hilary Koprowski's moved his study to the Belgian Congo which had one of Africa's more modern health care infrastructures at the time. Between 1956 and 1960 more then 1 million African people were 'encouraged' to receive Koprowski's vaccine called CHAT.

Sabin traveled to the U.S.S.R. and vaccinated more than 6 million people in Latvia, Estonia and Kazakhstan between 1958 and 1959. No AIDS cases emerged in the U.S.S.R. where Sabin did his testing. Sabin analyzed Koprowski's vaccine in 1958 and found it be be 'unstable and contaminated by an unknown virus'. He told Koprowski about his discovery and went then went public with his findings.

Barry, if you want to understand more about HIV vacines contact Fr. Kieran Creagh (he was once my scout leader in Holy Cross, tell him I said "Hello")..who was the first person in Africa to be injected with a HIV vaccine. And to dispel some of the myths you and Peter may have about Catholic Priests. Kieran is a good man...

Creagh readily volunteered to become the first man in Africa to receive an experimental Aids vaccine to see if his system can develop antibodies capable of attacking the Aids virus. Going against the teaching of the Vatican, Creagh is an outspoken advocate of condom use. "The Vatican Hierarchy are quite far removed from normal, day-to-day life. While I support them, I think that if they had to deal with ordinary people on the ground here where I am, they may have very different ideas,"


frankie said...

I find the idea that Bill Gates is helping to produce a population control vaccine which will wipe out millions something straight from the anti-vaxxers playbook. Are you of that parish, Frankie.

No, I don't want to give half the world a vaccine that will kill them, but we both know BIll Gates is on record saying he wants to control the population of the world by killing more people than Mengele could have hoped. I am with Jaques Fresco who wants a world without money. The first thing he talks about is how people live in a fascist dictatorship wether they know it or not. If you watch the 10min video clip you will see that what Fresco talks about is being tried on the streets of New York City today . Tomorrow morning Barry, you will probably have a shower, eat breakfast, clean your teeth and greet the day...I will have beer for breakfast, smoke a spliff listen to Hank WIllams while reading TPQ..........Guess that is the difference between the two of us. The only rules I will conform to are mine.

I will not engage any Rothschild fable in relation to the above just as I will not give credence to any racist trope.

Does that include a 'Goebbels propagandist', who hails fronm Ardoyne with a Jewish daughter?

Eoghan said...

Err...your claim was: “No reputable historian has ever corroborated the claims made that food was exported from Ireland during the Famine at gunpoint from 20,000 British soldiers”. But of course now you want to move on. Rhetorically speaking will you want to do so in a few short years when the Holocaust is outside living memory? Me thinks not because what some people have to do to make tenure.

Murrayd. said...

Are the famines and other horrors inflicted on the Russian people by Jewish Bolsheviks 'outside living memory'? Are these massive crimes against humanity worthy of 'recompense'? Are you aware that David Ben-Gurion declared himself a Bolshevik back in the 1920's? Are you aware that nearly every prime minister of Israel was born in Russia and Poland, were communists or the sons and daughters of communists and that they all changed their names? Is it time for the Jews to start recompensing the Russians in the same way that Germany pays recompense for the Holocaust?

"You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators..........
..........We cannot state that all Jews are Bolsheviks. But; without Jews there would never have been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered sixty-six million between 1918 and 1957."

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, giant of 20th century literature, former Gulag prisoner and Nobel Prize winner.

One minute of Putin confirming that 80% of Bolshevik leaders were Jews-
One minute of Russian priest -
Six minutes of Russian bishop -

This post will be considered 'hate speech' before too long. You can blaspheme God now it seems, but not the Jews. Enjoy your internet freedom while you have it a chairde.
(p.s. Why is it that death camps in Ireland are referred to as work houses? Looks like Pearse lost the education battle Mr. Gilheany/ HenryJoy.)

Barry Gilheany said...


I feel I should apologise for any offence caused by my "Goebbels propagandist" comment.

However as someone who has joined the Jewish Labour Movement as an affiliate and whose banner i was happy to carry at the recent People's Vote march in London, I have no truck with Rothschild stories or any other of the thesaurus of antisemitic slurs (of the contemporary left variety; the far right Judeophobes use the George Soros signifier) which have been too prevalent in the Labour Party under Corbyn.

I quite enjoyed the Jacques Fresco video. I am no devotee of the Calvinist work ethic nor of managerialist oppression having never fitted into that world. I prefer the Christian Brothers study ethic (minus the bad stuff)!

Barry Gilheany said...


It was the actions of a totalitarian ideology, namely Marxism-Leninism, that wrought so much suffering on the peoples of the former USSR not one particular ethnic group. That Jews were over-represented in the leadership of the Bolsheviks was down to the persecution of Jews in the Tsarist era (and in other Eastern European states Persecution which they were little to suffer under Stalin and in post-1945 Soviet satellite states (work that one out if you will).

I would have more respect for if you would defend your racist views (because ascribing collective responsibility to an entire race or ethnic group for the actions of a few is just that) using your own name and identity not those of a faceless moniker.

Henry JoY said...


indeed, educational potential has been stifled. Stifled insofar as we don't adhere to a strengths orientated model of education (if a child is good at playing the tin whistle make sure he has access to a tin whistle). And also to the degree that our system doesn't produce more innovative or critical thinkers. Perhaps though, the capacity to draw out such qualities is essentially limited because these will always be represented as outliers of a range anyways, with competing herding drives always trending towards the comfort of conformity? In this regard we need to factor in too that a majority of parents still preference utility over originality; the secure & pensionable remains for many the hallmark for success, does it not?

At existential and philosophical level most education systems fail. Through religious indoctrination and ideological socialisation educators usually abdicate their responsibilities in supporting learners to maturely face full-on the horrors of the world and the ubiquitous propensities for unfairness in life. In the main, most educators produce psychologically less than resourceful adults who more and more can neither tolerate existential uncertainty nor existential ambiguity. Such deficiencies in intelligence leaves those schooled and socialised in such manner vulnerable to exploitation, with the messianic Pearse's offerings being just another cog within that system.

Intelligent and decent folk would be well-advised to keep a keen eye out for blood thirsty cunts like Pearse!

Barry Gilheany said...

Henry Joy

In defence of Pearse he opposed corporal punishment in schools and advocated a more rounded and less didactic curriculum. In these respects he was way ahead of the curve.

Would that he had lived and not died, for Ireland.

Murrayd. said...


No sorry. The Jewish Bolsheviks were financed by Jewish bankers in New York. It was a Jewish revolutionary movement from beginning to end. I imagine also that the Ukrainians might disagree with your comment too. Between eight and ten million died in the artificial famine there when Stalin took their grain in 1933. This genocide is known as the Holodomor. Also, 80% of Ukraine's intellectuals and writers were executed at this time. Most people haven't heard about this monumental crime against humanity, but then again, Solzhenitsyn's quote above about global media has a part to play in this. The Jewish owned press in the USA covered up this monstrous evil -

I want to thank you for your article as it has allowed me to highlight this genocide which some readers of The Pensive Quill (through no fault of their own) have not heard of.

As for hiding behind monikers, well maybe that's a bad Jewish habit I've picked up! Do you know who Lev Bronstein was? He was the main link between the Jewish financiers in Wall Street and the Jewish Bolsheviks. To save you a google search he was also known as Leon Trotsky and was the bankers favourite to take over as he was advocating world revolution whilst Stalin seemed happy with his own little empire. Thank God for that ice-pick. And he wasn't the only one to have a name change as I'm sure you well know. Those Jewish Bolsheviks had no problem changing their names to more Russian sounding ones when the need arose. Then when returning to Israel had no problem ditching their Russian names. David Grun became David Ben Gurion, Golda Mabovitch - Golda Meyer, Yitzhak Yezernetsky - Yitzhak Shamir, Szymon Perski - Shimon Peres. You get the drift. Also, are you aware that the war criminal David Ben Gurion was at one time involved with the Jewish Labour Movement you are associated with now and was prone to a bit of genocide himself - "We wil expel the Arabs and take their place. In each attack a decisive blow should be struck resulting in the destruction of homes and the expulsion of the population."

Murrayd. said...


Apologies sir, but I can't take that bloated twaddle seriously. All I will say is that it's probably your good self who has the most to gain from some type of sound education. It's never too late.
p.s. - Existentialism was all the rage when I was young.

AM said...


yes, it is much better than people use their own names and stand over what they say. The policy here has been a longstanding one: invisible people invisible rights. We are under no obligation to carry anonymous comments but feel a definite obligation to carry the views of those willing to stand over them.
You are not obligated to respond to monikers in the same way as I would not interact with someone wearing a mask such as a burka or balaclava. At the same time, when you do interact it is best to deal with the arguments rather than dismiss the critic as a racist. If we felt the comments by MurrayD were racist we would toss them over to one of the pages set aside for that. The comments that address Jewish power should be treated no differently than were he to use Catholic power or Muslim power. I would see no racism in them. Jews get no preference or privilege here. As a Holocaust survivor said anti-Semites used to be people who disliked Jews, now they are people who Jews dislike.

I read MurrayD's comments very different from you; a dislike not of Jews but of the way issues involving Jews are not allowed to be as seriously questioned as other issues. I do not see an entire group of people being characterised in a negative way by his comments. I think he is being particular. If he was to use the term Traveller privilege instead of Jewish power, it would probably go unnoticed.

You do a great job here, make a major contribution to the blog and as a writer who stands over what they say there is an onus on us to protect you from abuse from monikers. But, the three people you debate with in the main MurrayD/Northsider, steer clear of personal abuse and try to focus on the issues. Frankie is a not a moniker but he too does not hurl personal abuse.

An option for you is not to engage with monikers. You are within your rights to have a level playing field.

wolfe tone said...

"Intelligent and decent folk would be well-advised to keep a keen eye out for blood thirsty cunts like Pearse!"

Yip, Pearse was right.......The Murder Machine keeps producing them right up to the present day. Shameful stuff.....and pathetic.

Barry Gilheany said...


I will address the issue(s) relating to antisemitism in future articles.

But as anti-racist, I feel duty bound to point out that Jewish-Bolshevik conspiracy was a constant refrain of Hitler and that Judeo-Bolshevik-Freemason conspiracies were a staple of Francoist propaganda. Is MurrayD happy to be bracketed with such company?

And for the record I am fully aware of the Holmodor and would never whitewash any of Stalin's crimes.

AM said...

Barry - at the rate you write we will probably get it published after the Israelis pull out of Palestine!

Is MurrayD really bracketed with Hitler and Franco? I don't know. But it is you who is bracketing him not the questions he asks. If he was to substitute his term Jewish with Arab would there be an outcry?

Maybe his questions are framed by prejudice but people are permitted their prejudices. At one time I felt there was a strong Israeli bias in your perspective which lent itself to a strong anti-Palestinian prejudice. People argued the point with you but you were permitted your perceived prejudice.

We have had commenters on here in the past who clearly were Anti-Jewish and they ended up in the Sewer with Der Sturmer. But some of these people were denying gas chambers, never interested in a real exchange of ideas and were merely promoting hate. I sense that you are being drawn here not because of MurrayD's supposed racism but because of your perceived heightened and selected sensitivity towards Jews. Which in itself is an exercise in generalisation. Not all Jews are ok. Some are bastards just like Catholic, Protestant and Muslim have their ok and their bastards. Jewish power does not mean all Jews. It means that the certain power at a particular juncture was Jewish. Now, that is either wrong or right. Ig wrong, demonstrate it. You provide a sociological explanation rooted in elevation being a response to persecution. But you being right does not make your detractor racist. It worries me at the way public discourse has been shaped in the rush to get to that point of the suffocating language of sameness as Kathleen Lynch once put it.

I intensely disliked the way Kevin Myers was pilloried and harangued as an anti Semite for saying very little. In fact he thought he was praising the Jewish. Had he said the same about the Arabs he would still be a front line columnist.

If MurrayD is not to your liking ignore him. You have the standing whereas he does not in that you are willing to stand over your ideas and shun the use of a moniker.

Henry JoY said...


when I was young there was a different rage ... a rage, in part, seeded by Pearse's mawkish incitements.

frankie said...


I feel I should apologise for any offence caused by my "Goebbels propagandist" comment.

You have no need to apolgise. All you are doing is defending your point of view, if I think your point of view is wrong I will say you are wrong. and I wont give it the Grouch and rant. Then the point I am trying to make gets lost in name calling. I take on board the point you made to Anthony about repling to faceless monikers etc...But in defence of faceless monikers very recently you copy/pasted a faceless moniker (msspkiemilligan<--who I have no doubt is a very real person) to make points on a few pieces I penned for TPQ....Kinda defeats the point you are making....

AM said...

Frankie - a good attitude to have.

On monikers, why I do not warm to their stance is that it has never been easy having to forge the ground on which freedom of opinion can be anchored. The moniker benefits from that but really made little or no contribution to it. We simply refused to countenance them in The Blanket.

On TPQ it is much more relaxed. I never give it the seriousness I put into The Blanket. At the same time monikers can get ideas out and if they refrain from using the platform to insult those who do stand up on the blog, we can live with that. There is no justification of exposing someone to the risks we refuse to take ourselves. I don't think the contributions from monikers on this page have been abusive, tending instead to deal with the arguments raised.

Barry Gilheany said...

To return to the original point of my article, I have just heard on the news of the conviction in Cambodia in the UN convened Court of Noum Chea (Brother No 2) and Khieu Samphan (President) the last surviving members I(I stand corrected) of the Khmer Rouge leadership for crimes against humanity and crimes of genocide (against the Vietnamese, Muslim Cham and Chinese ethnic groups) committed during the Killing Fields era (that film could never do justice to the horrors perpetrated) under Pol Pot 1975-79.

Might a suggest a suitable punishment for these gentlemen would be to be made look in their prison cell at a continuing loop of scenes from the Cambodia Genocide Museum of the atrocities committed on their watch until the end of their worthless cays. True punishment and recompense.

frankie said...


You mentioned earlier in the comments section about maybe penning a piece about the Genocide white Europeans carried out during the American-Indian Wars. If you get around to it can you give a special mention to Apache Indians who suffered

In 1885, the Chiricahua Apache—men, women, and children—surrendered to the United States Army on the condition that they were to be held as prisoners for two years and then they were to be allowed to return to their own land. Instead, they spent the next 27 years as prisoners of war in prisons in Alabama Florida, and Oklahoma.

Irish Republican were and still are deemed enemies of the State in Ireland and Britian.

And maybe a foot note to Jim Bridger (who spoke Crow and Blackfoot) who told Custer..leave them alone, they are good people and you are fighting a losing battle General...

Henry JoY said...

wolfe tone,

so a majority of Irish people who don't share your view of the world are "willing or at least compliant slaves".

Good luck to you then, for you'll surely need it as you try to navigate life with that outdated and faulty map!

(Though I'm sure that deep down you already suspect that your thinking on this is flawed).

Murrayd. said...


I'm afraid you have to go a bit farther back than Adolph Hitler and Franco to find a European leader who highlighted the Jewish-Bolshevik 'conspiracy' as you call it. And no I don't like being bracketed in this man's company just the same as I don't like being bracketed with Hitler and Franco, but yes, the bold Winston Churchil wrote about the Jewish Bolshevik Revolution in The Illustrated Sunday Herald on the 8th of February 1920. (1)

It's also worth noting that a US State Department investigation in 1931 found that the NY Jewish bankers funded the Bolshevik revolution. (2) As did several ambassadors and international intelligence agencies before that. The evidence is overwhelming but you try your best to discredit me and this proof by listing off fascist dictators who took power years after what Winston and others brought to attention - a Jewish revolutionary movement. In fact The Jewish Encyclopedia back in 1905 proclaimed that socialism in Russia had become a movement of the Jewish masses. From the horse's mouth as they say.

Here is another gem from a communist based in England (did he have anything to do with the JLM you are associated with?) called Israel Cohen who wrote the following in the year 1912;

“We must realize that our Party's most powerful weapon is racial tension. By propounding into consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have have been oppressed by the whites, we can mould them to the program of the Communist Party. In America, we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will instill into the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes. We will aid the Negroes to rise to prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America into our hands.” - excerpt from A Racial Program For the Twentieth Century, Israel Cohen, 1912.

The above quote is still very relevant both in the USA and here at home as the towns of Rooskey, Kenmare, Donegal and Wicklow prepare themselves for 'cultural diversity.' I linked a video on another thread on The Pensive Quill a few days ago (3) which exposes the real agenda behind the current 'refugee crisis' and guess what, the NGO exposed in that video was set up by a lady called Ariel. Israel Cohen would be proud of her! You proclaim yourself to be anti-racist. Maybe it's time you exposed the racism and promotion of racial strife of the atheistic Communist (now Globalist) Jews.

As for monikers, an online friend of mine lost her job three years ago for comments she had made on social media. She now too uses a moniker. (Btw - there is no such thing as hiding behind monikers anymore - maybe to you good folks here, but not to the powers that be.)

I am an amateur historian Mr. Gilheany and you should engage with me as such and not try to tag me as some kind of Nazi or Jew hater and resort to the tired old tactic of labelling people who expose Jewish atrocities, whether they are 100 years or 100 seconds old, as anti-semites. It's as ridiculous as claiming Irish people are motivated by some pathological anti-British sentiment when we expose the atrocities inflicted on our ancestors. It's us Irish who are often the best at exposing the crimes of the British elite against their own downtrodden people, because, among other obvious reasons, we are not haters here.


frankie said...


As for monikers, an online friend of mine lost her job three years ago for comments she had made on social media. She now too uses a moniker. (Btw - there is no such thing as hiding behind monikers anymore - maybe to you good folks here, but not to the powers that be.)

If I wanted to hide my IP,ISP, MAC address..basically cover my digital foot print so the spooks in Hollywood, WhiteHall or the FBI will be wondering were I am beaming from..It is only keystrokes away. I don't because I have no intrest in hiding who I am..But to hide your digital foot print...Kinda like making coffee, it is not rocket science.

That aside, I agree more with your version of history than Barrys....