Friday, June 3, 2016

Holocaust Survivor Israel Shahak Slurred as Unworthy of Survival (1974)

In the 1997 book Open Secrets by Israel Shahak (Chapter 11) he describes a wave of hate mail he received after he spoke at a meeting in the Netherlands in 1974. An individual criticized him in an article which was followed by a wave of hate mail.
After [his] attack on me I received 1081 hate letters within two months. ... Only 36 were in Hebrew and 3 in French: the remaining 1042 were in English. Almost all of their senders provided their US addresses and identified themselves as Jews. They showed a complete ignorance of the matters at issue, confining themselves to calling me an enemy of Israel or of the Jews, or a 'self-hating Jew'. All of them wrote, however, that they 'were reliably informed' that I was a Holocaust survivor and hence my 'treason' was particularly heinous. Some deplored that I had not been exterminated while others expressed a rather curious view that had I been exterminated, 'a better' or 'more loyal' Jew could have been saved instead of me.
Israel Shahak was a Holocaust survivor. One shudders to imagine the horrors he witnessed.

To use one's survival of the Holocaust against a Holocaust survivor is not good. We need to a debate to the issue at hand and not indulge in ad hominem attacks. Particularly ad hominem attacks like that.


  1. It seems that contrary to other blogs like "banned", which mostly serves a satirical purpose, this blog makes an attempt to seriously examine the world in which wcg operated. I dare not mention the name of its leader since on "banned" I am branded as some sort of apologist for him. There are some other books on how South Africa obtained its nuclear program. wcg cannot be understood without the knowledge of the GII log. Then you will see a pattern that is similar to a painting in the UN building in NY. The painting resembles an Ikea type manual for the world. The world as we know it today has a frame. And the GII was exactly following the pattern of that frame. I know that people will interpret what I said as if I am saying hwa or wcg had some significant impact on world affairs. That is not what I imply at all. I am just saying that wcg/hwa/gII did follow the pattern or frame of a new brave world actively being build by US foreign policy. Not many people know about the (legal) frame, only surgeons do. That is why surgeons get paid so much and my critics continually harp on being "the great unwashed masses", while in reality they are willingly so. They are the people that watch in amazement when the people of a start up get rich.Then harp on being victims somehow. I have clearly outlined on other blogs what is the path for the "world start up". When it unfolds they will look in amazement harping on being victimized while I virtually told them where to invest.

    Congratulations, you are clearly making an attempt to dissect how the frame works. Just connect the dots with Japan etc, just follow the yellow brick road, follow the yellow brick road, as the gII did before us.


  2. On banned I got censored for posting Netanyahu's speech some 3 years ago for the United Nations Assembly. It can be obtained at the UN website or Israeli State Department. It is the emotional speech in which he speaks against Iran.

    In this speech he refers to an ancient Seal in his office containing the name "Netanyahu."

    This seal was no doubt offered to him by Hebrew University. I ask you to look up the official purpose of Hebrew University from its foundation and moreover who dug up that seal that served a major Foreign Policy goal for Israel.


  3. And again I am no apologist for hwa. I belief that most "on banned" is probably true. They are however extremely biased in their 1974 view of wcg and have no knowledge at all of the flight pattern of the gII and what that pertained. They have a firm belief that sleezy salesmen can enter the offices of prime ministers and heads of state. My guess is they have forgotten to educate themselves since 1974. (although I fully believe their wcg horror stories being raised in the sixties) But their upbringing is not the standard wcg needs to be measured at.
    It needs to be judged by the actions of the corporate body that controlled the money. And yes hwa had the final say but no control at all.


  4. So, why don't you make your mark or calling within the Armstrong-dissident world
    the compilation and publishing of the G-II log, nck? It has been cited, due to its high cost of operation, as a massive waste of tithes. It has been referred to, because of activities known to have occurred on it, as "the flying whorehouse". And, it was used as the vehicle facillitating HWA's non-gospel message to whomever would see him. The joke back in the '70s was that death and decline usually hit these hapless photo-ops people shortly after HWA visited them.

    If you are in possession of the G-II log, that constitutes insider information which the Armstrong-dissident community would find very useful. Or, you could also simply be another individual blowing smoke. In any case, if you have the log, until you share it, most people who read your comments are not really going to take you seriously. Why hold back? Make yourself credible and valuable!


  5. Since Gary doesn't let me answer a question on Japan. I'll leave my answer to the questioner in this corner. (at the mercy of the blogmaster here)
    Apologies blogmaster.

    Since most of my postings to answer did not make it. I’ll paraphrase it.
    2nd class. That is highest distinction for a non citizen.

    The prime minister explained that the decoration conferred on me was very high and was granted to [the] Japanese only after 20 years of Diet membership plus holding a cabinet post, or equivalent. He laughingly said he had only an “Eighth Class”

    Mr. Armstrong had already contributed to the Japanese delegation at the 1971 ministerial conference in San Clemente, California, and again the following summer, for the summit meeting between Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka and President Richard Nixon in Hawaii.

    In late 1973, Mr. Armstrong met privately with Emperor Hirohito, who had thanked him for his contribution to the reversion of the disputed island of Okinawa.

    As a matter of fact. Moments before the ratification of the treaty of the reversal of Okinawa it was hwa in pm Sato's office. This was one of the most important moments in Japanese history.
    "The Prime Minister thanked me for the help I had given, and reminded me that immediately following our meeting, which was in his private office, he was to step into an adjoining conference room where the U.S. Ambassador and staff were to exchange the ratification instruments with the Japanese Foreign Minister and staff, legally affirming the reversion of Okinawa back to Japan. This was the big moment in Prime Minister Sato's administration."

    Some more background information.

    Since my postings get deleted by the system. I would also like to invite you to study Japanese - Israeli relations after 1967. And Japans relation to South America and the Middle East being an oil dependent nation.
    Some of you are so apt to read an entire story between the lines when reading the autobiography on hwa's hollywood months with dorothy. I urge you to read between the lines in the pgreports, letters, articles when hwa speaks about the japanese sons flying with him to south america, the middle east, south africa (nuclear power). It is not hard to find.

  6. Sorry, nck, we need confirmation by authentic independent historians. I am one who actually researched your contentions on the internet, looking for lists of the various honors, decorations, and awards accorded by Emperor Hirohito, and HWA did not appear on any of the lists. Further, I researched the Okinawa Reversion Agreement, and HWA's participation is nowhere mentioned, with the exception of in the apologetics documents at the HWA library website. HWA describes the event as he did all of his namedropping and photo ops, in a Plain Truth editorial, notably in the editorial "I Lose an Important Friend". (PT June 21, 1975).

    These events you continually bring up are not able to be corroborated from sources outside of Armstrongism. If they are true, I would suggest that you get in touch with Touchstone Pictures, which released the 2015 film "Bridge of Spies" , the behind the scenes story of attorney James Donovan, who negotiated the release of Francis Gary Powers, pilot of the U-2 spy plane which was shot down over Russia in 1960. Seems like your version of HWA would fit right into that genre.


  7. Your research skills are extremely poor.
    Your pokerface is even worse.

    I am wondering if I should even correspond further with you. But the very reason I write is to inform those with the lack of those skills.

    For one I am glad that we are at least narrowing down on one subject. There are independent sources however I will give you the following. (unless you claim the picture is glued together and the award bought at the local market.

    Now that we have established the award as non fiction. You can do a better job on the support wcg gave during the negotiations between Japan and USA. This information is splashed all over the place.


  8. The candidate for the award
    of the Order of the Sacred Treasure
    is usually recomm ended by
    a high-ranking official.

    Permission must then be obtained
    from the foreign office of
    the country of the candidate (in
    the case of the United States it
    would be the State Department

    You seem to claim access to the postings that were censored at banned.

    If so you will have read about my explanation of the role of archeology in diplomacy. Most people see the signing of treaties on the evening news as diplomacy. In reality it is a boring day time job. Countries bestow each other with gifts pertaining to national heritage (treasures to the commoner). Archeological exchanges are more common in the apreciation of other cultures than the signing of treaties. wcg was a factor in aiding (shame culture inwardly turned after wwII) Japan with finding a place in the middle east as an oil dependent nation.

    More importantly in the jewish connection is that Israel found itself isolated after 1967 with the Japanese very cross at Israel because of their dependence of Arab nation oil flow. hwa and rader forged stronger ties between the true elites and true power brokers instead of the career diplomats involved in israeli - japanese relations.


  9. And by the way the photos printed in the WWN are official Japanese Government pictures.


  10. I guess you were busy gardening at AC in your time. Or you would have noticed dr singh being a frequent visitor to Bricket Wood. On you tube he explains the hard time he had in establishing the rule of law on the international scene in the early seventies. One of the GII logs explains how dr singh was transported to japan to talk to elites (whose parents were condemned by international law). Later Japan became a major sponsor of the institution. But that was only later. While the USA still opposes the rule of international law and breached it in a major way for the past 15 yeqrs. A terrible shame.


  11. We need to be careful to debate issues without hurting anyone's feelings or putting down anyone.

  12. I have no idea where where that seal of Netanyahu came from. It does not worry me.

    South Africa has a lot of gold and under Apartheid most of the land's wealth was controlled by the white minority so they had the resources to make a nuclear bomb.

    I do not know what the GII flight log was like. But I do know every co-worler letter by HWA may be seen here:

    Perhaps one should look through this file.

  13. I'm trying to be as respectful as possible, Redfox, but there is disinformation being presented, and ad hominem attacks.

    Nck, I never attended AC at Bricket Wood. I preferred the Beach Boys over the Beatles, so attended in Pasadena.

    I do not enjoy any special privileges on any of the Armstrong recovery/accountability sites. Consequently, I have no knowledge of censored or deleted posts, and I certainly am not empowered to delete or censor posts. I have the same rules and restrictions on me as you do on you.

    Having said all that, even though the website which you cited is an HWA apologetics site, I did check it out, and observed the picture of HWA being presented with the Order of the Sacred Treasure. In Googling "Order of the Sacred Treasure", a Wikipedia article did come up, and Herbert W. Armstrong is listed as a recipient of the 2nd Class, Gold and Silver Star. So this is an established fact. My question for you, would be, did you know of the Wikipedia article, and if so, why didn't you cite it in the first place? It appears that I had to complete the research for you, and to prove one of your points. Now, lets get on to your next points. What do you consider to be the next most important one?


  14. Redfox,

    I am aware that bloggers active at the net sometimes hold high principles on speech. Therefore I volunteer to edit or delete text produced by myself that are truly over the top or not acceptable to the master.

    I wouldn't worry at the UN speech. I was justs making an on topic point on how wcg in its time was very alligned to the zionist agenda. I am not making any judgement on whether that is a good or bad thing. I'm just saying, trying to remain somewhat on topic.


    I mentioned the wikipedia article in my 9:38 posting. And in 15 seconds numerous other sources surface. When you claimed that you had researched the issue I thought you didnt find it credible enough. Therefore I had to confront you with that ghost of the past. I'm sorry. I know that you find that material offensive therefore I included the sentence, that you might feel even that photo was tampered with. (but that would be conspiracy no?)

    Most of what I write has credible basis. A large percentage of that can be verified within 20 seconds. Since I adress many topics and am not into academic whitewashing of hwa I do not provide sources. But mosts facts I present can be researched in seconds.

    Now you ask me what I consider important to prove. I do not like to prove anything regarding hwa. I would just like that if anyone finds my statements on a blog over the top, beliggerent or even not true that they state so by point/issue instead of resorting to flatly denying all that can be verified within seconds at their local library.

    This approach would also prevent me from writing these long winding texts that seem to come across as apologetics. To ask a short question prompts me to answer it in short fashion.

    By denying all facts blog visitors have created the apologist they are not wishing for. And I would like to step down from that position.


  15. Redfox,

    You have been so kind as to have facilitated this discourse between BB and myself.
    You seem to be interested in wider matters.
    By your answer on SA I see you are not fully equipped yet.

    Therefore I provide the following for you.

    The only thing I do at blogs is put wcg travel logs like "I am now flying 10.000 feet over the african continent from Cape Town to Jerusalem after having fruitful disussions blah blah blah blah blah" into the context of information as provided.

    Most people find me over the top. I must however contemplate that sugestion bb made on The Glienicke Brucke movie. I watched that bridge from afar from Emperor Wilhelms former hunting lodge where I was going to have dinner. It always baffles me how times and assessments of those times can change. Me having ordinary dinner at what was once a focal point in world drama.

    I'm just bringing some of that drama back at blogs while having lunch.


  16. nck,

    Written communication lacks many social cues and tools that make it harder to communicate with each other. When one talks face to face with another it is possible use your tone of voice, your facial expressions, etc to soften the blow of any criticism.

    In writing these things are not possible and it is all too easy to forget these things. Criticism in writing alone can seem so harsh. It is easy for one to project one's hostility when one can only see words on a screen and not a human being.

    With such thoughts in mind I must state, out of a desire to prevent enmity, I must say: Please refrain from ad hominem rhetoric. It does no good to say:

    "Your research skills are extremely poor.
    Your pokerface is even worse.

    "I am wondering if I should even correspond further with you. But the very reason I write is to inform those with the lack of those skills."

    It is better to let your words discuss the argument and not the person. We need to be careful with our words.

    I like to say here that Byker Bob has often commented on this blog and I greatly value his contribution. I have quoted him sometimes.

    To end on a positive note I encourage you to consider the possibility of starting your own blog and say what you want to say.

  17. Byker Bob,

    I wish to say here that I greatly value your contribution to this blog. Looking back I wish I had written my first comment differently. I am sorry for that. I was a bit busy then so it was not as well thought through as I would have wished.

  18. Redfox,

    Since your correction on my behavior is soft spoken I will leave my mistake and the correction as it is. (not delete and edit)'

    You are so totally right.

    My frustration comes from a longer period than just these postings. BB made it personal by stating "I did the research on your unfounded assertions". Therefore I responded in kind as irons sharpens iron. He could have stated "I tried but I can not find evidence on what you state, could you provide that evidence?." He can even leave out the "please". I respect him anyway since I've been reading his contributions for over 15 years. (That is even before the little girls he called "dude" were born. (hahah, I 'm sure BB understands by that last sentence that I understand him not understanding what I say.

    And I am sorry to have taken this discourse to your blog. If you keep conversing as you do I will do everything necessary not to irritate too much. That is if asked I will remove, edit, rephrase, substantiate everything I write or even abstain from this blog altogether. My purpose in life is not to irritate you.


  19. To both Redfox and nck, actually I've enjoyed the discussion, and not being thin-skinned, have not been offended. Hopefully, I have also not caused any offense.

    This is the topic that nobody has wanted. That is why it has bombed on several of the other blogs. We who have experienced Armstrongism have been likened to spiritual rape victims. Now imagine an actual physical rape victim being told that the rapist was in fact a philanthropist, who had funded the wing of a hospital, and regularly put on charity events around the world. Would that actually fly? Would those "good" activities undo the bad? I submit that they would not, and most likely the rape victim would not want to hear them.

    So, in essence, honors accorded to HWA, any diplomacy in which he has indulged, and any lasting good deeds he might have performed are not only completely irrelevant to his victims, but also having one persistently present them makes readers question the motives of the "unwilling apologist". While these other acts might impress one who has no other background with HWA, they become offensive to those former insiders who were victimized by his philosophy. In fact, there are reports from those in the know (people formerly in accounting) that this very expensive "diplomacy"' was funded by third tithe being rerouted into the general fund, starting during the early 1970's, with church widows and their children abruptly being instructed to go sign up for welfare. Real people whom I knew were affected. In other words, this diplomacy should never have existed in the first place. Not only did poor people just barely making it fund this with their tithes, but the even poorer who should have been assisted by the original stated purpose of third tithe were denied. That is part and parcel of the basic hypocrisy of this whole issue.

    Hopefully, that explains why attempts to make HWA's diplomacy some sort of redeeming or mitigating factor will continue to bomb. I can't even begin to fathom what would motivate someone to continue to persist in presenting this material. It is also a problem in the present. There are also the mini-Herbs, who imitate his every act, to the extent that their stature and the tithe base with which they have available to work allows. So it is important to register negative opinion on jets, Steuben Crystal giveaways, and hobnobbing with the rich and powerful through international cultural foundations which are set up as subterfuge to avoid being stigmatized for preaching a gospel. That was all so disingenuous in the first place.

    If there is one takeaway I would hope to leave with nck, it would be that not only is the topic of HWA's diplomatic and philanthropic endeavors irrelevant, it is also offensive to his victims who were conscripted to fund it. Perhaps for the future there is a better topic that would not make one into the proverbial skunk in the outhouse.


  20. Redfox, I enjoy and value our exchanges both on your own blog and at the other usual places. I also quote some of the ideas and expressions which you offer from time to time. We've established a firm basis of understanding that another poster could never disrupt or derail.

    This topic of HWA's philanthropy and legacy has been going on for months now. Nck has been universally rebuffed, and has not gained any supporters for his ideas, yet persists. I am optimistic that perhaps he has finally been made to realize why this is. Thanks for providing the time and space for this to happen.


  21. I realize this is as far as you can go and I appreciate it.

    To be as candid as you haven been, I once was one of those "one pair of new pants for the Feast per year" persons too.

    I personally have not witnessed the wcg percentages of victimization, that I offered in the past might have been higher in certain regions of the church because of the local perceptions of what Armstrongism entailed.

    (kind of like female mutilation that is largely attributed to Islam but is actually an Eastern African custom within Islam)

    And I believe at least 50% of the wcg people chose to remain in the same social grouping after 1994 despite their experiences.
    So the majority would not agree with you but I can see your point in being the skunk in the outhouse on blogs dedicated to the destruction of armstrongism.

    However, even if I hold that opinion I must learn to keep other peoples experience in mind. So I'll take that away.

    I have never commented on any topic regarding the mini me's. I'll leave that to the Jackall's and vultures circling in cyberspace. :-) I believe especially Gary is doing a great job in even only quoting from their own words. Merely the quoting or attributing of names they attributed to themselves are satire in itself.

    Now I apologize for the frequency of irritation I have caused. But I feel that the hobnobbing in no way redeems hwa. I have said numerous times that I feel they redeem my parents who chose to willingly support that system for the very reasons you abhor.
    I have even said that I disliked hwa very much for not acknowleding the fact that his endeavors were funded by the people who decided on the "one pair of new pants for the Feast". I do not believe they did this out of fear of God or HWA or the Lake of Fire. I believe they did this because they believed they were doing the right thing.

    Now apart from Armstrongism, even if we had not had our personal and differing experiences we still might have a different view of life.

    You know. There genuinely exist different views of life.

    I am quoting this movie because of your quoting of a movie and to support a possible divide in our thinking even apart from Armstrongism.

    I was however going to refer you to
    "Charlie Wilson's war" to support my point on private enterprise and American Foreign Policy.


  22. And if there is some "realization why this is" then it is only because of your clear explanation today. Not because of the months of denial of what truly expired.

    If you have read what I said than what truly triggers me is the attribution to "hwa's philantrophy". Again. It was your and my parents who provided that funding and they are both (perhaps to our personal dismay) still supporting that philosophy.

    I hate it when you attribute that to hwa.
    Even Steve Jobs did ackowledge the contribution of some of his co workers. You cannot contribute everything to the director.


  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

  24. While my experience with HWA has brought me to nearly every dot on the travel log (albeit without the red carpet) and it brought other relatives to "doing the work of God (quoting Lloyd Blankfein)" I do recognize that others cannot live to tell the experience.

    Does their experience negate mine? I will have to learn to consider that more though but I do not dwell on it.

    As a matter of fact. I am sometimes forced to have to deal with cog people who have let their kin die for afflictions that are treatable by modern medicine.

    I am able to look them straight in the eye and respectfully disagree with their position.

    The fact is they need to respect me.
    While I doubt that they have any inclination to associate with people who are in their face about "you know, the hollywood months".

    Are you wrong about "the hollywood months". Probably not. I'm just saying I deal with them if they like it or not. The in your face approach has zero effect. But I agree it might serve a purpose of informing new converts, if any.


  25. Nck, I'm not going to respond, although you have just made a number of new inaccurate statements. Correcting them would only prolong the discussion, and I already regret having wasted so much time.


  26. Always look at the bright side of thing Bob.

    You might want to try to look at it this way.

    1) I see splinters glaringly declare that Lady Diana was of to meet HWA.

    2) When people on blogs just let me ramble on blogmasters will have to face my factual statements that HWA was meeting Lady Diana. Same result but just the other way round and more true.

    3) Now suppose some splinter person is very enthusiastic about that and googles "Lady Diana meets the Great Herbert W Armstrong the bestest apostle ever." They will since 10 seconds also be directed to this blog. Because that is how google works.

    4) What will they see. They will see my babbling as to how and why the meeting actually came to pass, which is at least more accurate than how the splinters present it.

    5) But more and most importantly they will find the musings of one Byker Bob responding in his own particular manner. So in a way I am advertising for you.

    I hope we can agree on that. If not I will have to refer you to the folks at Mountain View and Palo Alto. Because by all authority that I have in my veins. That is how google works.

    Another benefit of that research is that the name "mountain view" must have extremely positive connotations for you, albeit that being a more southerly location.


  27. And I am in no way implying that you should see it that/my way. I am just offering an alternative way to look at it.

    And in the process you learn something or you don't. There is also no need to respond that you already know how google search works. I am in no way in the process of scoring points or trying to convert.


  28. I'm glad things seemed to have calmed down here.