1
   

Cheney criticized for Auschwitz attire

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Jan, 2005 11:50 am
Line those attendees up and ask the Israelis--who were the ones most affected by the Holocuast--who they appreciate more--the well dressed of Europe or Dick Cheney in a parka and his political work for the protection of Israel.

As if anyone is even remotely interested in Israel's sentiments... Who the hell is Europe to criticise ANYONE on Israel's behalf.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Jan, 2005 02:10 pm
oh lash...a turd is a turd...with or without a stripe.....
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Jan, 2005 03:23 pm
Lash wrote:
Line those attendees up and ask the Israelis--who were the ones most affected by the Holocuast--who they appreciate more--the well dressed of Europe or Dick Cheney in a parka and his political work for the protection of Israel.

As if anyone is even remotely interested in Israel's sentiments... Who the hell is Europe to criticise ANYONE on Israel's behalf.


Actually, dear Lash, this wasn't a ceremony for Israel but for the killed (Polish) Jews in Auschwitz and a memorial of the Holocaust (the latter inluded some more groups than the Jews).
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Jan, 2005 04:54 pm
I don't think one should even attempt to extricate Israel --in any way--from the sufferers of the Holocaust.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Jan, 2005 11:08 pm
Lash wrote:
I don't think one should even attempt to extricate Israel --in any way--from the sufferers of the Holocaust.


of course you don't dear...it would completely remove the air from your last few posts Laughing
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 12:26 am
...and it would remove the truth from the Holocaust.

Israel exists because of the Holocaust. Many Israeli citizens are Holocaust survivors, or direct descendants.

I wrote a bit--and deleted. No sense in going down this path again.

It is much more than an argument about Dick Cheney's parka, and making points in an debate.

The Jews get the last word about the Holocaust. Its not necessary for me to have the last word in this thread--but I refuse to be a party to a conversation that denies them their due. Revisionist anti-Jew comments. Deplorable.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 12:45 am
where have you seen revisionist anti-jew comments? and no, it isn't more than about Dick Cheney's parka. it is exactly about his parka. you are making it into something else, without any ground.
Besides, Jews don't just live in Israel. Those that died in Auschwitz, were Polish, Czech, Slovak, Bulgarian, Italian Jews, and also Gypsies (over 20,000 of them died just in Auschwitz) and gays and handicapped. And political prisoners and Russian POWs. Using anti-semitism as a tautology really does not do you any favor. get the facts straight, lash.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 12:52 am
Yeah--who built the Berlin Wall, dag? Have YOUR facts straight.

We all know who was taken to the Death Camps. And we all know where the Jews originated.

Do you know what a tautology is? Doesn't appear so.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 12:54 am
sorry, you make no sense to me. and i do know the words i use. and use them for a reason.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 01:12 am
But you don't know who built the Berlin Wall....

...and I don't think you know what a tautology is...
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 01:15 am
think whatever you want. what the heck is berlin wall doing here anyway?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 01:21 am
It is another example of you arguing a fact with me--and you were WRONG about that so simple fact--who put up the Berlin Wall and why.

Of course, it is a little embarrassing arguing a point of fact and discovering you were wrong. You were more likely spouting misinformation and revisionist history-- There's no crime in that. We all do it from time to time. The saving grace for SOME of us, however, is that we either own up to our error--or apologise--or both--and at least thereafter don't act as though we are infallible.

Not when the evidence to the contrary is clickable.

You need to climb down off that horse.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 01:29 am
??? again, what the hell does berlin wall have to do with any of this? the only time we discussed berlin wall was about a year ago, where i talked about the book i read. if i was wrong, i was wrong. wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last. care to explain why are you bringing it here? and what does it have to do with the discussion on this thread?
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 01:57 am
Boring.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 02:21 am
Lash wrote:
We all know who was taken to the Death Camps.


Obviously, you don't.
Quote:

The first concentration camps in Germany were established soon after Hitler's appointment as chancellor in January 1933. The SA (Sturmabteilung; Storm Troopers) and the police organized concentration camps beginning in February 1933. Set up by local authorities on an ad hoc basis to handle the masses of people arrested as alleged political opponents of the regime, camps existed throughout Germany. For example, camps were located in Oranienburg, north of Berlin; Esterwegen, near Hamburg; Dachau, northwest of Munich; and Lichtenburg, in Saxony. Columbia Haus in Berlin held certain prisoners under investigation by the Gestapo (the German secret state police) and operated until 1936. Gradually, the Nazis disbanded most of these early camps and replaced them with centrally organized concentration camps under the exclusive jurisdiction of the SS (Schutzstaffel; the elite guard of the Nazi state.

[...]

The Germans established a series of detention facilities to imprison and eliminate "enemies of the state." Most prisoners in the early concentration camps were German Communists, Socialists, Social Democrats, Roma (Gypsies), Jehovah's Witnesses, homosexuals, and persons accused of "asocial" or socially deviant behavior.

[...]

Following the June 1941 German invasion of the Soviet Union, the Nazis increased the number of prisoner-of-war (POW) camps. Some of the camps were built at existing concentration camps, such as at Auschwitz, in occupied Poland. The camp at Lublin, later known as Majdanek, was established in the autumn of 1941 as a POW camp and became a concentration camp in 1943. Thousands of Soviet POWs were shot or gassed there.
Source
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 02:43 am
The existence of an article proves I don't know... how?

Do you see anywhere a statement of mine saying anything that contradicts the content of that article?
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 02:53 am
It is interesting, Walter, how much ignorance there is about the slaughter of the left, artists, intellectuals, feminists, gays - and, of course, the physically/mentally impaired.

Most folk seem to know about the gypsies, I find - which is interesting.

I was surprised to learn, as a teenager, about the numbers in the non-Jewish groupings (though, of course, many Jewish folk fell into other categories, as well) since, in my reading as a child about the holocaust - mainly through novels like The Last of the Just, Diary of Anne Frank etc. - I had not seen much about the other groupings.

Many people forget, or perhaps do not know, of the intense political diversity and progressiveness of the doomed Weimar Republic - and how the Nazis targeted the entire left - and even some christian groupings. Their targetting of feminism was extreme - and their horrible re-imposition of the Kinder, Kuche, Kirche mantra to circumscribe women's lives an oft-forgotten vendetta.

The enormous numbers of non-Jewish europeans who slaved and died of sickness, overwork and starvation in the forced labour camps ought also to be remembered on this sad anniversary.

I spoke last night to a Dutch woman, whose brother had reached the age of snatching for forced labour camps just as the Allies advanced towards Holland.

The equally young, newly drafted, German soldier who broke into the family "dinner" (people were already hungry - though THE Hunger was to come) looked with sadness on the young man he was to drag from his family to likely torment and death, and, when he noticed that no fellow soldier had happened to accompany him, called loudly to his superiors outside that no young man was there, and backed out, fingers to lips.

I think the lesson to be learned is that we are ALL capable of great inhumanity - Israelis included - and all capable of great courage and compassion.

Having said that, though I think Cheney's clothing choice showed ignorance of the behaviour expected, I think it no great drama to be a little ignorant - the only drama is if we do not learn - and there are far more important things to be learned about than clothes.

It seems sad that so much energy seems to being expended about criticisms of clothing, and defences of it, given the anniversary that was being marked.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 08:22 am
Lash wrote:
The existence of an article proves I don't know... how?


Not the bare existence of a single article, but the history of the KZ's and your above quoted response respecttively your before in this context given answer.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 08:24 am
dlowan wrote:
Having said that, though I think Cheney's clothing choice showed ignorance of the behaviour expected, I think it no great drama to be a little ignorant - the only drama is if we do not learn - and there are far more important things to be learned about than clothes.

It seems sad that so much energy seems to being expended about criticisms of clothing, and defences of it, given the anniversary that was being marked.


I totally agree.
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Jan, 2005 02:47 pm
In Europe, an unhealthy fixation on Israel

It may not have been apparent on the surface, but Europe's recent commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz was steeped in irony. Even while the Old World stirringly recalls the horrors of Hitler's death camps and vows never to forget the Nazi genocide of the Jews, it also embraces an increasingly -- and alarmingly -- antagonistic attitude toward the Jewish state that arose from the ashes of World War II.

As the Middle East conflict burns on, more and more Europeans are turning against Israel. A growing number subscribe to the belief that the impasse between the Israelis and the Palestinians is the wellspring of much of the world's ills today, and that the blame for all this lies squarely with Israel -- and by extension, with its staunchest ally, the United States. As President Bush seeks to find common ground with Europe in his second term, he might do well to acquaint himself more thoroughly with this reality. For as surely as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict divides Jews and Arabs, it also divides Europeans and Americans. If you're looking for root causes of the growing transatlantic split that go beyond the easy cliches about U.S. unilateralism, it's time to sit up and take notice.

Go to a dinner party in Paris, London or any other European capital and watch how things develop. The topic of conversation may be Iraq, it may be George Bush, it may be Islam, terrorism or weapons of mass destruction. However it starts out, you can be sure of where it will inevitably, and often irrationally, end -- with a dissection of the Middle East situation and a condemnation of Israeli actions in the occupied territories. I can't count how many times I've seen it. European sympathy for the Palestinians runs high, while hostility toward Israel is often palpable.

And the anger is reaching new -- and disturbing -- levels: A poll of 3,000 people published last month by Germany's University of Bielefeld showed more than 50 percent of respondents equating Israel's policies toward the Palestinians with Nazi treatment of the Jews. Sixty-eight percent of those surveyed specifically believed that Israel is waging a "war of extermination" against the Palestinian people.

Germany is not alone in these shocking sentiments. They have been expressed elsewhere, and often by prominent figures. In 2002, the Portuguese Nobel Prize-winning writer Jose Saramago declared, "What is happening in Palestine is a crime which we can put on the same plane as what happened at Auschwitz." In Israel just last month, Mairead Corrigan Maguire, the Irish winner of the 1976 Nobel Peace Prize, compared the country's suspected nuclear weapons to Auschwitz, calling them "gas chambers perfected."

Moreover, in a Eurobarometer poll by the European Union in November 2003, a majority of Europeans named Israel as the greatest threat to world peace. Overall, 59 percent of Europeans put Israel in the top spot, ahead of such countries as Iran and North Korea. In the Netherlands, that figure rose to 74 percent.

Perceptions of Israel in the United States, meanwhile, contrast sharply. A poll by the Marttila Communications Group taken in December 2003 for the Anti-Defamation League had Americans putting Israel in 10th place on a list of countries threatening world peace, just ahead of the United States itself.

What accounts for this transatlantic values gap?

Part of the explanation is that, despite all the Holocaust commemorations, the memory of that event really does appear to be fading in Europe. Increasing numbers of younger Europeans have no real sense of what the Nazis did. In Britain, Prince Harry isn't the only one who's oblivious to the realities of Nazi tyranny. A BBC poll of 4,000 people taken late last year, in the run-up to Holocaust Remembrance Day last Thursday, showed that, amazingly, 45 percent of all Britons and 60 percent of those under 35 years of age had never heard of Auschwitz -- the Nazi death camp in southern Poland where about 1.5 million Jews were murdered during World War II. Such ignorance compounds anti-Israeli feelings; for those who have no understanding of the Holocaust, Israel exists and acts in a historical vacuum.

This faltering awareness of the most vivid example of racist mass murder in the 20th century is accompanied by enduring anti-Semitism. A poll in Italy last year, for example, by the Eurispes research institute showed 34 percent of respondents agreeing strongly or to some extent with the view that "Jews secretly control financial and economic power as well as the media." The Eurobarometer survey quoted above also showed 40 percent of respondents across Europe believing that Jews had a "particular relationship to money," with more than a third expressing concern that Jews were "playing the victim because of the Holocaust."

Yet while the persistence of anti-Semitism is undeniable, it's not likely to be the chief explanation for European hostility to Israel. After all, surveys show that some anti-Semitic attitudes persist in the United States as well, but they don't translate into visceral animosity toward the Jewish state. Instead, the intense antagonism toward Israel appears to be a subset of the wider European hostility, emanating mainly from the left, toward the United States. It's unlikely to be a coincidence that the 2003 Eurobarometer survey put the United States just behind Israel as the greatest danger to world peace, on a par with Iran and North Korea.

Many European intellectuals see Israel, perhaps rightly, as one of the central pillars of U.S. hegemony in the modern world. European leftists implacably opposed to America are implacably opposed to Israel as well, and for exactly the same reasons. Over dinner in Berlin not long ago, a Frenchwoman told me emphatically that Israel was "America's policeman in the Middle East." Her companion, nodding in furious agreement, insisted that the two countries are partners in a "new imperialism," leading the world inexorably into war.

In the contorted universe of the chattering classes, Israel is at once America's servant and the tail that wags the dog -- doing America's bidding while forcing it into madcap adventures such as Iraq. As Peter Preston, the former editor of Britain's Guardian newspaper, put it in an op-ed last October, bemoaning both U.S. political parties' alleged servility toward Israel: "Republican policy is an empty vessel drifting off Tel Aviv, and the Democratic alternative has just as little stored in its hold."

The left-leaning antipathy toward Israel is moreover buttressed by deeper and wider pathologies in Europe's collective memory, particularly in our overriding sense of guilt about the past, a guilt that springs from the great 20th-century traumas of war and imperialism. The first has made Europeans, especially continentals, overwhelmingly pacifistic: In the German Marshall Fund's 2004 Transatlantic Trends survey, only 31 percent of Germans and 33 percent of the French could bring themselves to agree with the ostensibly tame proposition that "Under some conditions, war is necessary to obtain justice." Such attitudes do not mesh well with television pictures of Israeli helicopter gunships firing missiles at militant targets in the crowded Gaza Strip, whatever the justification for Israel's actions.

Europe is also awash in post-imperial guilt, and I frequently get the sense that Israel's claim to a piece of land in the Middle East revives guilt-inducing memories, among my English countrymen and others, of white Europeans carving up the Third World and subjugating "lesser peoples" in the 19th century. While the disturbing view that there's an equivalence between Nazi Germany and modern Israel is a relatively new development, another view equating Israel with apartheid South Africa and referring to Palestinians herded into "Bantustans" has been around for decades.

Mixed with the supercharged ideological hostility of the European left, the demons of the continent's past can make for an intoxicating cocktail of anti-Israeli sentiment There is undoubtedly room for criticism of Israel and its policies in the Middle East, but reasoned criticism appears to be giving way to emotional and irrational antipathy that is coloring the wider debate. And as that sentiment grows, American support for the Jewish state will continue to scratch raw nerves in the Old World.

There is much, of course, that the United States should be doing to improve its relationship with Europe. But repairing transatlantic relations is a two-way process. Americans should now be aware that on one crucial issue, at least, it is Europe, and not America, that needs to clean up its act.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 03:06:23