| Revision as of 22:51, 11 October 2002 edit128.193.88.150 (talk) Man!← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:21, 30 November 2002 edit undo203.79.102.254 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| This document has never been proved to be false. If it bears a resemblence to a previous historical document then it might have as easily influenced an "elder of Zion" as much as a myth maker. There are many other things not mentioned in this article and I think who ever has written the main body of it has not done his homework concerning the relationships between certain historical personages. | |||
| Frankly this is a very shoddy piece of work and I believe only the subject matter permits the author(s) to write this crud. | |||
| There is a link to 'false document' here, but the meaning of the ] article appears to relate to artistic creations, rather than to forgeries of this sort. | There is a link to 'false document' here, but the meaning of the ] article appears to relate to artistic creations, rather than to forgeries of this sort. | ||
Revision as of 16:21, 30 November 2002
This document has never been proved to be false. If it bears a resemblence to a previous historical document then it might have as easily influenced an "elder of Zion" as much as a myth maker. There are many other things not mentioned in this article and I think who ever has written the main body of it has not done his homework concerning the relationships between certain historical personages. Frankly this is a very shoddy piece of work and I believe only the subject matter permits the author(s) to write this crud.
There is a link to 'false document' here, but the meaning of the false document article appears to relate to artistic creations, rather than to forgeries of this sort.
We could either:
- remove the link
- change the 'false document' article to reflect the fact that there are non-artistic forgeries
- change the wording to 'forgery'
-- The Anome
Precisely my point.
Also, is it actually agreed by all that it is false? Do there exist rabid anti-semites who believe it's true? If so, then we should say something to the effect that most historians and other sane :-) people believe it's false, but there are a small handful of anti-semites who believe it's true. That is important information, if true, and must be stated fairly if the article is to cohere with the neutral point of view. --LMS
- Arab newspapers insist that the protocols are real. The reality of them are even taught in some high schools in the Arab world as "proof" of the evil nature of Jews". Many Japanese citizens believe that the Protocols are genuine. A small number of Japanese professors and other professionals have even written books about them in recent years, which have shot to the top of Japanese book best-seller lists. Most of these books are flatly anti-Semitic. However, and bizarrely, some of these books aren't anti-Semitic in any way that yoo are I would understand the term, because some of them teach that "The Jews use the protocols to try and conquer the world...but we Japanese can adopt these Jewish techniques so that we too can be as powerful as the Jews, or more so!" That is to say, some of these books are literally written as "Self-Help" books for businessmen, who seem to admire the "international Jewish conspiracy", and wish to emulate it. I have a detailed article on this that I can e-mail you if anyone is interested it. A good study of this fascinating and complex topic is "Jews in the Japanese Mind: The History and Uses of a Cultural Stereotype", by David G. Goodman and Masnori Miyazawa, The Free Press, 1995.
RK, if you want to mail it to me I would be interested. My email address is sj_kissane at yahoo.com -- SJK
I would be interested in this article as well. TLB
The subject page is SO NOT neutral point of view. It is almost like it was written with the single purpose of discrediting these writings.