Six decades on since the slaughter of World War II and the Nazi holocaust, the events of the 1930s and 1940s continue to haunt us. By warping our memory of the Shoah (the Hebrew word for the Holocaust), those who seek to use memory as a bludgeon miss the stark, vital message of the Holocaust and its heroes - those who displayed uncommon moral courage in the face of evil.

Holocaust blindspot

Too many Muslim and Arab intellectuals and leaders continue to fail in adequately addressing the Nazi holocaust and its implications for today in meaningful, humanitarian terms. Two recent examples include the Muslim Council of Britain's daft refusal to participate in Britain's annual Holocaust Memorial Day and the public indulgence in Holocaust revisionism and labeling of the Nazi holocaust as "myth" by Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood chief Muhammad Akef. Deep-seated, knee-jerk anti-Zionism and the continuing occupation of Palestine have unfortunately blinded many Arabs and Muslims to the historical reality and legacy of the Nazi holocaust.

An intelligent and compassionate regard for the victims of the Nazi holocaust - Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, the disabled, and others - on the part of contemporary Muslims is critical for preserving ethical and communal integrity, for a just resolution of the Palestinian question and for the future - if there is to be one - of Western Muslims. Instead, the Holocaust remains a historical blindspot in Arab and Muslim discourse, and as a result it has become a potent political weapon to be exploited at will by those who view Palestinians and Muslims as enemies.

Holocaust blame

A growing chorus of voices has been trying to smear Muslims - and Arabs in particular - with grand accusations of complicity in the Holocaust and support for the Nazis. These voices serve hawkish interests who wish to justify and legitimize continued war, violence, and yes - even genocide. Identifying Muslims with and as Nazis eases the task of selling continued bloodshed to war-weary publics. Reading the books, op-eds, and blogs of the smearers, one could almost conclude absurdly that the Nazi holocaust was an Arab Muslim and not a European Christian project. As evidence, the smearers usually trot out the pro-German Mufti of Jerusalem Amin Al-Husayni and the Bosnian Muslim SS "Handschar" division.

What these would-be historians, who even include Muslims, don't like to tell you: the Muslim role in World War II was much bigger and positive than the stories of the Mufti and the Bosnian division. The "Mufti" was actually an appointee of the Jewish administrator of British Palestine who completed one measly year at Al-Azhar and betrayed the Ottoman Sultan to join the British. A marginal figure, he accepted Hitler's hospitality in the naive hope that Hitler would eject the British from his homeland and grant the Arabs independence. To fool Arabs and Muslims into support for the German cause against their British rulers, the Nazis actually omitted Hitler's true dark vision for Arabs and Muslims from Arabic versions of Mein Kampf.

The much-vaunted Bosnian "Hanschar" SS division - disbanded after a few months due to mass desertions - was the only SS division ever to mutiny. The Nazis had hoped the Hanschar division would re-kindle the Bosnian-German alliance from World War One, which would have given the Nazis a force to counter Croatian and Serbian nationalism. However, to reduce the discussion of Muslims in the former Yugoslavia during World War II to the Hanschar division is highly simplistic. Bosnian Muslims found themselves trapped between the Nazi-allied Croatian Ustasha and the equally vicious Serbian ultra-nationalist Chetniks. With the conflict killing over one million in Yugoslavia, a few hundred thousand Bosnian Muslims, many of them civilians, perished. When Tito's Partisans emerged as a unifying alternative, Muslims joined them in large numbers. (For an extensive discussion of Bosnia during World War II, see Enver Redzic's "Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Second World War", Frank Cass: London, 2005).

The smearers don't like to talk about the Palestine Regiment, a British-organized volunteer force of Jews and Arabs that served in North Africa. They hardly mention the fact that hundreds of thousands of Muslim soldiers from Africa, India, the Soviet Union helped to defeat fascism at places like El-Alamein, Monte Cassino, the beaches of Provence, and Stalingrad. Historians and governments have only recently recognized the contribution of these soldiers to the war effort and to liberating Europe. The smearers aren't currently touting the American authorities' cruel, forced 1939 return from Miami to Nazi Europe of the Jewish refugee ship SS St. Louis. Or that elites in the Anglo-American sphere widely admired Adolf Hitler throughout the 1930s - George Bush's hero Winston Churchill first condemned Hitler only five years after he came to power. Or that elements of the Jewish and Zionist leadership collaborated with the Nazis - as documented by Hannah Arendt and other Jewish historians (who called their actions "the darkest chapter of the whole dark story"). Or that today, Israel ironically dangles the specter of Holocaust - in its Nuclear avatar - over the mostly Muslim peoples of the Middle East. The tragic history of World War II and the Holocaust is indeed a complex affair needing full context for understanding.

Holocaust heroes

In their perversion of memory, Holocaust zeroes share another moral ugliness. Both insult the memory of the countless Muslims who risked or gave their lives to rescue Jews threatened with extermination by the Nazis. The stories of the Muslim rescuers of Jews are largely unknown and unpublicized. Only in the past fifteen years have Holocaust researchers brought a few to the public's attention.

Several Muslims (whose stories of heroism and courage we know) have since been honored by Yad Vashem and other Holocaust memorial groups as Righteous Gentiles. They include: the Bosnian Dervis Korkut, who harbored a young Jewish woman resistance fighter named Mira Papo and saved the Sarajevo Haggadah, one of the most valuable Hebrew manuscripts in the world; the Turk Selahattin Ulkumen, whose rescue of fifty Jews from the ovens of Auschwitz led to the death of his wife Mihrinissa soon after she gave birth to their son Mehmet when the Nazis retaliated for his heroism; the Albanian Refik Vesili who - as a 16-year-old - saved eight Jews by hiding them in his family's mountain home.

Most Holocaust historians would agree that Muslim Europe - Albania, Bosnia, and Turkey - responded courageously and righteously, especially in comparison to Christian Europe. While there were Muslims who collaborated with the Nazis, they were the exception and certainly not the rule. In addition, in North Africa the Sultan of Morocco, the Bey of Tunis, and the Ulema of Algeria all lent support to their beleaguered Jewish countrymen.

Continental Europe's only independent Muslim country - Albania - was also the only European country to have a larger Jewish population at the end of the war than at the beginning, according to Miles Lerman, a former director of the US National Holocaust Museum. Harvey Sarner, a Jewish American in the Albanian Muslim response, penned the telling book "Rescue in Albania: One Hundred Percent of Jews in Albania Rescued from the Holocaust".

There were many Bosnian Muslims, especially in Sarajevo, who saved the lives of their Jewish compatriots. Indeed, the Jewish community in Sarajevo owed its very existence historically to the centuries-old Ottoman Muslim policy of providing sanctuary to Jews fleeing European Christian persecution.

Republican Turkey thankfully followed that same Ottoman tradition of rescue and sanctuary. Due to its neutrality during most of World War II, and its unique geographical proximity to both Europe and the Middle East, Turkey and Turkish diplomats living abroad played an important role for European Jews in danger during World War II and the Holocaust, according to the Anti-Defamation League. Muslim-majority Turkey rescued over 15,000 Turkish Jews and over 100,000 European Jews.

Like their Christian counterparts, the Muslim men and women who rescued Jews during the Holocaust are among history's true heroes, whose stories we should be telling our children and grandchildren. They represent the best of the Abrahamic and Islamic tradition and spirit. May God grant us true moral courage like the rescuers in the face of hardship and adversity. May God - the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful - free us of denying or exploiting the suffering of others.

Oh yeah, and, given that every single thing you have cited has been a lie, it should be no surprise that you are wrong about Churchill as well - he mentions the persecution of the Jews repeatedly - for example, in Volume IV of his history that you say says nothing of deaths of Jews at the hands of the Nazis. Take a look at page 597, where he quotes his own converation with his foreign secretary in 1944:

"There is no doubt that the persecution of the Jews is the greatest and most horrible crime in the history of the world, and it has been done by scientific machinery by a nominally civilized men in the name of a great State. It is quite clear that all concerned with this crime who might fall into our hands, including the people who only obeyed orders in carrying out those butcheries, should be put to death after there association with these murders has been proved."

So, again, you have just lied. Do you actually have Churchill's book, or are you just making this up? Are you getting tired of spewing hateful fiction, or do we need to keep this up over and over again - you quote material from some neo-Nazi site, I point out it isn't true, and then you ignore it. Very tiresome.

"And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when ye know (what it is)"

Tommy2: You are a talented exponent of the art of misinformation. Letís tackle some of your statements:

(1) "You said that there was no Nazi documentation of the Holocaust" I said "Although the German government kept extensive and detailed records of its wartime Jewish policy, not a single document has ever been found which substantiates or even refers to an extermination program or policy" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wannsee_Conference There is clear disagreement about this.

(2) "You said that Robert Evans supported Irving" Where did I say this?

(3) "No holes, no holocaust" You have presented no EVIDENCE other than a very loose BBC article. There are no links, no pics, no nothing.

(4) "You said the ash couldn't be disposed of" No I didn't. Where did I actually say this? What I did said was "How did the Germans dispose of 1.1 million corpses at Auschwitz"

(5) "You said that the Auschwitz plaque somehow challenges the number of Jews killed" YES it does! This is the 1990 PLAQUE http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/temp/TerrorTimeline/1990_AuschwitzPlaque.html This is the 1948 PLAQUE
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/temp/TerrorTimeline/1948_AuschwitzPlaque.html

http://www.barnesreview.org/auschwitz.htm

(6) "You said you didn't use VHO information" I didn't. I posted a link only.

(7) "Why won't you defend any of your points?" If you have read the above, I have.

(cont'd below)

There is no question that there was a persecution of Jews in World War 2; but some estimates put this figure as high as 7 million and some as low as 73,000. I find this interesting and worthy of debate. Auschwitz revised the 4 million figure down to 1.5 million in the 1990s. In spite of this, Holocaust proponents do not challenge the 6 million figure.

I am a simple chap with simple questions. I have not heard any convincing evidence dealing with:

1- the technical capacity of "killing" camps to exterminate millions.
2- the lack of forensic evidence
3- credibility of witness statements from tortured prisoners (tried and tested for Nuremburg and still used today in Guantanemo Bay)
4- how can any database of 3,000,000 alleged victims of Nazi extermination have names listed twice, some as many as five times
5- why there were no reconnaissance photos of the camps 'burning night and day'
6- how did the official number of Jews increase during the period of WW2
7- why did Eisenhower and Churchill not never mention the "gassing" of Jews at 'extermination' camps
8- there isn'tt enough coke or crematoria to cremate millions of corpses. Do the maths.
9- how can witnesses recall 'Sonderkommando' smoking cigarettes in a chamber full of explosive poisonous gas

I am not "spewing hateful fiction" but trying to stimulate a discussion which should of interest to many people out there. The problem is that if you try and hold this discussion you are shouted down called "Nazi, anti-semitic, right wing, holocaust denier etc".

Funnily enough it is often these same people who call Palestinian fighters and supporters "anti-semitic". The last time I checked Palestinians were Semites too! All I seem to be doing is tackling your misinformation. I would rather talk about the actual issues. One at a time if needs be. If I go through all of your misinformation (and there's a lot of it), I will be here all day. Itís a good tactic to hide the real issues. Truth be told, I was until recently a believer in the Holocaust. There are too many simple unanswered common sense issues that could not be resolved. The funny thing about the truth is that it wonít just 'go away'.

Tommy2: please stop trying to slam the door shut on an important debate. Stop being the thought police. There should be a free and open discussion

Avenger,

So, now your source is the Vanguard News Network, founded by Stormfront and the Aryan Brotherhood, whose slogan is: ""No Jews. Just Right?" Is this the credible source that you are drawing from? They don't seem to be friends of Muslims, either, as far as I can see, and it is no surprise that each point they produce is total BS.

Similarly, ths stuff about smoking cigarettes is equally silly. The minimal concentration of Zyklon B causing an explosion is 56,000 parts per million. A concentration of 300 parts per million kills humans within a few minutes. As a reference, one can look at "The Merck Index" and the "CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics," or consult any manual dealing with toxicity and flammability of chemicals. There would have been no real danger of explosion even if there were a bonfire burning in the gas chamber while the execution was taking place. The Nazis own documentation says this, you can check Nuremberg document NI-9912.

There is also plenty of forensic evidence, a quote from the archaeology team in Belzec: "The drill core brought to the surface putrid pieces of human remains, including pieces of skull with skin and tufts of hair still attached, and unidentifiable lumps of greyish, fatty human tissue. The bottom of the grave was lined with a layer of evil smelling black (i.e. burnt) human fat, resembling black soap." Belzec, which used open pits rather than crematroria, turned up over 33 mass graves.

The Nazis own estimates for the crematoria at Auschwitz gave the capacity of the two largest ones (out of five) at 1.7 million corpses from their installation in April 1943 to their decommissioning in November 1944. Modern historians think that the capacity was actually somewhat less, at just over a million corpses in that period, but there were three other crematoria and mass pit burnings as well.

When I point out that tons of Nazi documents exist, you ignore them. When i give you quotes from Churchill, you ignore them. When I link to wartime recon photos, you ignore them.

You keep saying you are being shouted down - I don't see you being shouted down, I see you asking questions verbatum you are finding on Neo-Nazi websites and then not listening to the answers. Are you starting to see a theme here?

(Because there is so much wrong with your statements that I need a second page)

On Churchill, I gave you quotes from his memoirs about the Nazi acts against the Jews being the worst crime in history, which you ignored.

On "no holes, no holocaust" - you can actually see the pictures of the induction tubes if you want, for example here, and there are plenty of others. But I find it interesting that you reject a well-footnoted BBC page as evidence. Boy, this conspiracy runs deep in your world.

On the number of victims - Which source lists 72,000 Jewish deaths? Remember that Nazi documentation alone lists at least 5 million deaths, so I am curious as to how this number was arrived at.

On Auschwitz, doesn't it cause you to doubt your sources at all that the Auschwitz number plaque is obviously designed to deceive? Yes, for many years, a memorial plaque placed at the camp by the Soviet authorities and the Polish communist government stated that 4 million people had been murdered at Auschwitz. This number was never taken seriously by Western historians, and was never used in any of the calculations of the death toll at Auschwitz (which have generally remained consistantly around 1-1.5 million for the last sixty years) or for the total deaths in the Holocaust as a whole. After the collapse of the Communist government, the plaque was removed and the official death toll given as 1.1 million. Holocaust deniers have attempted to use this change as propaganda, in the words of Nizkor: "Deniers often use the "Four Million Variant" as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent. If they can't keep their numbers straight, their reasoning goes, how can we say that their evidence for the Holocaust is credible? One must wonder which historians they speak of, as most have been remarkably consistent in their estimates of a million or so dead. In short, all of the denier's blustering about the "Four Million Variant" is a specious attempt to envelope the reader into their web of deceit, and it can be discarded after the most rudimentary examination of published histories."

There is no need for me to be the thought police, simply being an honest historian is enough.

Tommy2: ìsimply being an honest historian is enoughì
Neither have you answered my questions, nor have you brought anything new to the table. I re-iterate, until recently I was a believer in the Holocaust, just like you. Repeating the same discredited source material takes us nowhere (e.g. your Wikipedia references are clearly in doubt as I have shown you above). You have consistently misrepresented both my sources and my views. This is rapidly turning into a retrying of all Holocaust evidence. I trust neither of us will capitulate; we are at a stale mate.

By definition, any potential collusion by Governments to exaggerate the extent of the persecution, which in turn establishes a mandate for Israel and the world as we see it today, would be an extremely serious issue.

This would of course undermine the basis for current Middle Eastern policy but importantly the integrity of modern history vis-‡-vis, the whole house of cards would fall. In this light, we would expect there to be massive amounts of evidence, reporting and witness statements to offer faux-credibility to this revision of History.

Ultimately, it is a judgement call. Within jurisprudence "balance of probabilities" is used or alternatively in criminal cases "beyond a reasonable doubt". As the state of Israel is widely recognised as causing and perpetrating human rights violations and has breached scores of UN resolutions, we should use a strict burden of proof - "beyond a reasonable doubt".

The evidence to hand is clearly open to debate and questionable. Witness statements and confessions from tortured prisoners and claims of a revisionist history being propagated are not unusual and neither are they particular to this debate. Ultimately, itís a question of who you trust.

When you say ìBoy, this conspiracy runs deep in your worldî you show your true colours. There are enough people who know and stand witness to the crimes committed by the West. It is enough for me, the advice we have been given:

"Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine. (Al-Qur'an, 109.001-006 Al-Kafiroon [The Disbelievers, Atheists])

Interesting. So I haven't answered your questions? You mean the specifics I gave you on the flammability of Zyklon B, the Nazi documentation of their own crimes, the fact that the Auschwitz plaque was never used by anyone for death counts, the pictures of the "holes" you kept talking about, the quotes from Churchill, the forensic evidence at Belzec, the Nazi estimates of the crematoria's outputs, the fact that your links are from Muslim and Jew-hating websites -- all of that is "nothing new to the table?"

And your one response is that I used a Wikipedia reference, which was discredited how -- Because there was a talk page about it? Perhaps you can tell me how the Wannassee Protocols are discredited? Or how the Hoefle telegram is discredited? Or how the Eisantzgruppen reports are discredited? All of these are Nazi documents laying out the murder of millions of Jews. Please tell me who doubts them and why?

It sort of stretches belief that you are telling me that I misrepresented your views, I responded directly to your questions, which were incredibly specific - why did cigarettes not set off explosions - because the gas wasn't flamable. Where are the holes in the gas chambers? I showed you pictures and pointed you to information about it. What about the Auschwitz plaque? No historian has used it to calculate death totals, as reading any book on the Holocaust since 1945 would tell you. How could the crematoria handle so many bodies? Well, the Nazis own documentation says they were built to handle even more. And so on and so on and so on.

To show reasonable doubt you have to raise reasonable doubt. Not just reprint stuff from neo-Nazi websites and slink away as if you proved something. If you really "believed in the Holocaust before" surely the material I am presenting is at least answering some of your questions.

So, lay out your conspiracy for me - the Holocaust is faked or exaggerated by whom? Who coordinates the testimony of thousands of survivors? Who fakes what are literally several tons of documentation? Who coaches thousands of Nazi perpetrators on exactly what to say (many of whom were never tried, by the way, and were certainly never tortured, confessing out of their own free will)? Who plants the mass graves at Babi Yar, at Rumbula, at Belzec, at Chelmno? Who fakes the existance of the Warsaw Ghetto, the Lodz Ghetto, the Bialystock Ghetto? Who tattoos the arms of the concentration camp survivors? Who ensures that Hoefle fakes a telegram in January 1943 saying that over 1.7 million Jews had been killed at the 3 Aktion Reinhard camps? Who fakes the piles of human hair and shoes and bones that were found in liberated camps? Who volunteered for Nazi medical experiments? Who ensures that the Nazi railway records are faked, along with Jurgen Stroop's reports, and the General Government documentation?

I assume your answer is: the Jews. Very sneaky, those guys are, good of you to point it out - I hear they also run the banks and the media. Better watch out.

So, how did they do this, exactly?

"The evidence to hand is clearly open to debate and questionable. Witness statements and confessions from tortured prisoners and claims of a revisionist history being propagated are not unusual and neither are they particular to this debate. Ultimately, itís a question of who you trust.

When you say ìBoy, this conspiracy runs deep in your worldî you show your true colours. There are enough people who know and stand witness to the crimes committed by the West. It is enough for me, the advice we have been given:

"Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine. (Al-Qur'an, 109.001-006 Al-Kafiroon [The Disbelievers, Atheists])"

Avenger, you don't get off that easy. You asked questions, I gave you answers, many of which showed how the questions were not honest, but werely written to deceive (the Aschwitz Plaque, explosiveness of Zyklon B, Churchill never mentioning the Holocaust, etc.). Worse, these were questions you lifted verbatum from neo-Nazi websites.

If you were an honest man whose questions were more than rhetorical gambits, you would have at least had said "Yes, you are right, these answers make sense" to at least some of the dozen or so pieces of material I provided. Instead, you have decided simply to retreat to quoting the Koran. You asked for your questions to be taken seriously, so I did, hoping that you were misguided, rather than actively harvesting the neo-Nazi (and anti-Muslim) Vanguard News and related sites to find Holocaust denial material. I was, unfortunately, wrong.

"And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when ye know (what it is)," indeed.

Tommy2, you are wasting your time. Avenger and those like him are not interested in evaluating the mountains of evidence that support the existence of the Holocaust. They merely wish to portray a semblance of intelligent argument in order to erode the facts and arouse doubt and distrust. No amount of hard evidence will convince them, or distract them from their aim of undermining confidence in our scientists and historians. It is no wonder many governments have resorted to implementing tyrannical laws in order to prevent this sort of argument from gaining a foothold.

It seems to me wholly bizarre to have something as huge as the Holocaust happen and yet still deny it. The arguments remind me a great deal of the continuing effort to debunk the moon landings as a hoax. It is all too easy to invent holes and inconsistencies in historical fact when looking at it from the perspective of decades passed, especially when there is a vested interest in such denial. We cannot possibly answer every question about what happened as too much time has passed and too much evidence is lost. The point is, however, that we simply shouldnít have to.

It is my opinion that participating in such inflammatory arguments is counterproductive; it only serves to validate their arguments by conceding that there is a debate to be had on the issue. Yielding to this pressure just lends credence to their argument that the facts of the matter are there to be called into question.

The best we can do is to avoid being drawn into debate on the existence of the Holocaust and spend our time instead remembering what was lost and drawing lessons from the mistakes that led to this atrocity. After all, what difference would it make if 10 million, 1 million or ten thousand innocent people were slaughtered; at what point do you call it genocide? Any way you look at it would still be a crime against humanity on the grandest and most abominable scale.

This is the last I will say on this matter, and I hope the last you will too.

Gonzo, thanks for the sanity. My response was not so much for Avenger, it was for anyone who might take the garbage he is quoting seriously. Given that this is an article on the phenomenon of Holocaust denial, I felt it especially important to make sure that people knew that there was no basis in the stuff Avenger was throwing out. If at least one person has a little more information with reader to combat this kind of corrosive Holocaust denial, it was worth the raised blood pressure.

Avenger, you're so obviously full of crap:

You claim that you're "just posting something that you found interesting"; you're an open-minded person who found an "interesting" article... And when completely contradictory proof is given OF COURSE, you then say;

"Wow - interesting - my info could be dead wrong - thank for the feedback Tommy2, I'll have to check that stuff out."

You did say that, didn't you? Because that would be intellectually honest.

All,

I have made my position clear. I was a holocaust believer... like many of you; then I came across a number of questions - the sort of questions that just don't go away. Why is it that there are not only scholars but governments the world over who believe the extent of the Holocaust was exaggerated to further the Zionist cause?

Before you Judeo-Christian, republican Zionist Islamaphobes start ... that's a rhetorical question.

I'm shocked there's anyone out there who still believes in the moon landings. What kind of person swallows whole everything their government tells them. Gonzo types. Thanks Gonzo - you saved me about 700 words.

Up until my posts there was no debate on the issue of the Holocaust, just passive acceptance. Is it not OK to ask questions of the issue, to spark a debate?

Obviously not - just ask Irving who starts his 3 year sentence in Austria for comments made 20 years ago. Yes, yes he accepts new evidence since then but still he gets 3 years for excercising his freedom of speech 20 years ago. So why the galatically intolerant attitude to questioning history? Isn't there enough evidence in the world to suggest that the populous has been mislead by governments more than occassionally?

The questions are not answered.

No mention WHATSOEVER by Churchill or Eisenhower about 6 million missing Jews, gas chambers or mass genocide... not even a decade later. Yes persecution, yes poor treatment. I mean, we are not exactly talking Srebrenica where Dutch UN forces disarmed and then rounded up men, women and kids into a "safe haven" and then stood watching by while Ratko Miladic and his forces spent THREE DAYS killing them all.

I mean that was in the 1990s in the middle of a civilised country in Europe. Oh right... but it was Muslims... so we don't really talk about that. Miladic has been living peacefully in Belgrade for the last 15 years in his HOME, walking the dogs, doing his grocery shopping.. you get the picture.

[colour=green]Israel in Palestine? Why not Austria, Germany or Poland.. I mean none of those Jews were ever from the region anyway. Ashkenaz not Sephards. Kazars not Arabs.[/color]

I've looked at the evidence. Open your minds and try a bit of reverse engineering.

I guess you all still think Jesus was a Jew?