Ahmedinejad denies the Holocaust: so what?

[nashville_brook]

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/10119

Ahmedinejad: The New Boogeyman
by Cenk Uygur

Mahmoud Ahmedinejad denies the Holocaust. Let me ask this provocative question: so what?

Of course, I understand that people have a visceral reaction to that claim. It is grossly untrue, offensive and ignorant. But we are also told how dangerous Ahmedinejad is because he doesn't believe in the Holocaust. I fail to see that connection.

There are countless people all across the world that deny many things that are patently true - and we don't go to war with them over it. Senator Inhofe (R-OK) denies global warming. As far as I know we are not planning on invading Oklahoma over it. But Ahmedinejad is the leader of an important country in the Middle East. Well, so is Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Turkey. He denies the Armenian Genocide. Should we invade Turkey?

I bet I can find you at least half a dozen world leaders who deny one genocide or another. Should we suit up and restart the draft? We've got a lot of countries to attack.

If Ahmedinejad's views on the Holocaust are not being used as propaganda fodder for an attack against Iran, then I don't care. Condemn him all you want. He's earned it. But if this is being used - as we all know it is - to build a new boogeyman in the Middle East, then it is dangerous folly.

(more at link)

[monktonman]

1. But, but, but what about Israel.

Say something they dont like and the whole frickin world comes to a stop.

[nashville_brook]

2. it's a horribly dangerous game.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

15. Are Only Israelis Offended By Holocaust Denial?

It's an imprisonable offense in Germany...

I don't think any speech should be censured, even hateful and batshit fucken crazy speech, but the fact that Holocaust denial is an imprisonable offense in German puts a lie to the suggestion that is an issue of interest to only Israelis...

[monktonman]

36. No holocaust denial sucks for everyone

But I'm not gonna drop bombs on people over it.
Considering all the problems we face, is dumb-dumbs denial really that important
to American interest's? I think we have way more important things to worry about.

Also, I'm sick and tired of everyone Else's interests coming before Americas.
Every time someone says something bad about Israel, Washington goes into a tizzy
and we cant get anything else done until the Israeli's are happy again.
I've had it with them,let them fight there own wars.
besides, with friends like Israel, who needs enemies?

Sue me.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Who's Talking About Bombing Iran?

And don't light any fires near your strawman, you might immolate yourself.

And what does Israel have to with Holocaust Denial.


Israel has as much to do with Holocaust denial as the destruction of the American Indian has to do with casino gambling on sovereign Native American land...

[monktonman]

46. Huh? Have you been watching the news lately?

Whos talking about bombing Iran??????
Ok guy, go back to sleep.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. You Implied Those Who Call Ahmadinejad On His Inane Bullshit Want To Bomb Him

I was just disabusing you of that notion.

[monktonman]

62. let me start over.

Irans president is bat shit crazy. ok?
That being said, I dont think we should kill thousands or even millions of Iranians over it.

Thank god this guy is saying this shit. At least we know he's nuts and can act accordingly.
I'd encourage anyone who wants to talk crazy shit to blast away. Then at least I'll know to be afraid of you.

My point was that all we're talking about is holocaust denial.
Hasnt this guy done much worse things?
Cant we concentrate on that?

Of course not, everything in the M.E. is Israel, Israel, Israel.
Frankly, I'm sick of it.

[nashville_brook]

68. lets take this at face value -- lets say that...

"Those Who Call Ahmadinejad On His Inane Bullshit Want To Bomb Him" and lets also say that "those who don't want war with Iran are therefore Ahmadinejad groupies."

do either of these statements appeal to reason? do either of these statements get us where we need to be, which is to be a UNIFIED FORCE OPPOSING Bush's next war?

these statements are landmines designed to thin us out. some will be bombed by one, some by the other and only the lucky few will remain to fight the good fight.

[madeline_con]

184. It doesn't matter how much opposing to Duh-bya's next war

edtred 4 speeling

there may be. If he can get one going good before November, he probably will. Ahmadinejad's idiotic statements are the driving force behind the plan.

The nucular crap DUH-bya keeps spewing is just like the WMD crap about Saddam Hussein.

The statements don't have to appeal to reason. It seems that, on the contrary, the less reasonable something sounds, the more likely the current administration is to run with it.

These statements aren't meant to thin US out, but to reunify the dufuses that DUH-bya has fallen out of favor with. He needs to get everyone who once supported his party back on the same "Be afraid, be very afraid" page.

[Poll_Blind]

163. "Who's Talking About Bombing Iran?"

I don't get it either.

:shrug:

PB

[leveymg]

162. The threat of bombing Iran has everything to do with the controversy over M. Ahmadinejad

Cheney and Olmert's threats of first-use of nuclear weapons looms over everything having to do with Iran. Not a straw man.

Israelis and some American Jews make a great fuss about Mohmoud's alleged Holocaust denial. I really haven't spent a great deal of time onsessing about that subject because, frankly, it just doesn't seem to be amount to a whole lot, in and of itself.

Of course Ahmadinejad is hostile toward the current Israeli regime. It's entirely mutual. But, that could change. Regimes change - that should begin closest to home for maximum benefit.

[Megahurtz]

173. Totally WTF???

:wtf:

[Carolina]

109. totally agree with you

Israel is like a friggin sacred cow.

US aids Israel militarily and financially (our tax dollars). The UN never calls Israel on its many violations. Israel does what it wants with aggressive abandon against the Palestinians and other surrounding peoples. Israel bulldozes settlements, bombs at will and there's never any condemnation. But gee, let the palestinians strike back with sticks and stones (literally) or blow themselves up taking out some Israelis in revenge or let Iran, Iraq, Syria or those other Muslim boogeymen try to defend themselves and the politicos, bloviators and many on this board go nuts ... often screaming anti-Semiticism. Spare me, the inequity is mind blowing. The victims have become the victimizers.

Our unwavoring, unconditional, myopic support of Israel is the ROOT of our problems in the Middle East. So I hear ya, monktonman: Sue me, too!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

120. I Thought We Were Discussing The Holocaust

eom

[Carolina]

124. read

all of post 36; the one I am completely agreeing with.

[ima_sinnic]

165. amen, what you said -- talk about a disproportionate expenditure

of our tax dollars ....

[Megahurtz]

174. YES You Got It.

:thumbsup: Precisely. Took the words right out of my mouth.

[Little Star]

161. Amen!

[Megahurtz]

172. Ha Ha! Good Post!

:thumbsup:

[madeline_con]

183. I like you.

:hi:

[mhatrw]

155. Do you agree that questioning the extent of the Holocaust should

be punishable by imprisonment? That seems a bit thoughtcrime to me.

[txaslftist]

160. A bit? It's a slap in the face of freedom.

Make a crime out of one's interpretation of history? The absurdity of this law almost guarantees it will be passed in the US at some point.

[madeline_con]

181. True dat! n/t

[partylessinOhio]

3. That is NOT what I heard him say. He asked why should the Palestinians

suffer when they had nothing to do with the Holocaust in Europe. I haven't heard anyone give him an answer...

[Buzz Clik]

7. That's because the question is framed to make those who volunteer an answer look like an ass.

It was a cheap trick.

[nashville_brook]

8. yeah -- i DVR'd the speech and went thru it a couple of times to find Holocaust denial

if his point is that Palestinians shouldn't be held responsible for the genocide of the jews in WW2, then, it would seem that denying the holocaust doesn't follow.

i came away with the sense that he has hamfistedly used the HD (holocaust denial) stance in the past as a rhetorical device. He created a tarbaby and will carry it with him forever.

[pampango]

18. I heard him deny the Holocaust (at least as we know it) AND

he asked why the Palestinians suffer when they had nothing to do with the Holocaust in Europe.

The latter is a fair question and should be subject to debate. My guess is that international leaders after WWII felt very guilty and sympathetic due to what happened to Europe's Jews and agree to create Israel and put it where the Jews wanted it (especially since that was in "someone else's back yard"). The Jews in turn probably didn't want it in Germany (perhaps anywhere in Europe) for emotional reasons because of what had just happened to them and for religious reasons did want it in Palestine.

None of that makes much difference today, since Holocaust guilt has significantly diminished with time and the death of that generation and with the reality of the problems that have come with the decision to locate Israel in Palestine, including but not limited to, the displacement of the Palestinians.

[Bluerthanblue]

49. can you cite

where he specifically said that? (denied that the Holocaust happened)

I've been looking and asking, and so far there is no credible source for him denying the holocaust.

Denying that something happened is not the same as denying one's perspective of the incident.

I'll likely catch hell for saying as much, but there are and have been many sacred sufferings in this world.
The Holocaust was a terrible event in the history of humanity. The best way to keep it from happening is to remember it, learn from it.

The truth isn't going to be changed by being examined.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. His Thinking Has Evolved

At first he denied the Holocaust because he saw the Holocust as the antecedent to the establishment of Israel... In his mind if there was no Holocaust , "people" wouldn't have felt bad about what happened to the Jews and wouldn't have given them a homeland...Then , when he was getting hammered for denying the Holocaust he shifted tactics and said it may have occurred , but even if it did occur, it was no reason to give the Jews a homeland on somebody else's land...Never mind that the ownsership of that land has been disputed for thousands of years with different people laying claim to it...

It's all a mess...Folks need to learn to get along and solve their problems rationally but that's a pipedream...

[Bluerthanblue]

71. thanks for the inspired

reply- what you say makes sense.

Interesting factoid about * is that while he didn't deny the Holocaust he did believe that the people of the Jewish faith were going to hell- Rev. Graham straightened him out- And, didn't the bush family ...make big money as a result of the holocaust?? money that helped install the 'decider' himself???



ahhh- silly me, we were talking about the only real evildoers in the world, like them arabs:sarcasm:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

121. It's The Clash Of Absolutes...

That land has changed hands at least several times in the past couple of thousand years... I can see why so many groups think it belongs to them... It depends on whose narrative you believe and which status quo you want to go back to...

[madeline_con]

189. Wait, did GOD give to the Israelites?

Then, they outta kill all them pesky AY-rabs who dare to ugly it up with their houses, orchards and little kids! Them damned AY-rabs!

:mad:

[nashville_brook]

82. it's not a pipedream -- we've done it before, it was called The Enlightenment

[mhatrw]

157. I don't think he's ever gone on record as actually denying the Holocaust.

He definitely questions the Holocaust for his own political purposes (just like many Holocaust deniers do), but I haven't even seen a quote that quantifies the extent of his questioning.

[Carolina]

118. You pointed out the sad, really anti-Semitic truth

"My guess is that international leaders after WWII felt very guilty and sympathetic due to what happened to Europe's Jews and agree to create Israel and put it where the Jews wanted it (especially since that was in "someone else's back yard")"

Exactly neither Europe or America wanted the Jews in their backyards.

As for the Palestinians. They have suffered much more than is conveyed by the bland word displacement. The destruction of what was once PALESTINE with ongoing American financial and military aid is the root cause of why the US is hated over there.

[LeftishBrit]

197. A couple of important points:

(1) There were plans to create a Jewish state in the Middle East long before the Holocaust happened. The Balfour Declaration was in 1917. The Holocaust, and the realization that this would not have happened if that Jewish state had already existed, made the matter more urgent. But it's worth noting that many other countries also became independent states (sometimes also with disputed boundaries) after WW2, with the break-up of the British Empire.

(2) The Jewish state was in *their own* backyard - as well as that of the Arabs; hence the conflict. You make it sound as though Israel was just a convenient dumping-ground for unwanted Europaean Jews. In fact, there were already many Jews in Israel long before 1948: many of them voluntary immigrants; some of them natives to Palestine, who were descended from Jews who had been in the region for the last 2000 years. At present, over half of Israeli Jews are of Middle Eastern origin (mostly refugees from Arab countries, but some of them long-time natives of Palestine), rather than of Europaean origin.

Yes, the Palestinians should have an independent state too.

[Carolina]

exactly

because they can't answer that basic question of what Europeans and Americans did in establishing Israel in the first place.

[Zandor]

130. They suffer for their terror

not the Holocaust.

Give peace a chance.

[The Vinyl Ripper]

134. But who started the terror?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing

The King David Hotel bombing (July 22, 1946) was a bombing attack against the British government of Palestine by members of Irgun — a militant Zionist organization.

The attack, initially ordered by Menachem Begin the head of the Irgun and later Prime Minister of Israel, had members of the Irgun, dressed as Arabs, set off a bomb in the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which had been the base for the British Secretariat, the military command and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Division (police). 91 people were killed, most of them staff of the secretariat and the hotel: 28 British, 41 Arab, 17 Jewish, and 5 other. Around 45 people were injured. The attack was commanded by Yosef Avni and Yisrael Levi.<1>

[Zandor]

144. So the Hamas murderers

are avenging the bombing of the King David Hotel! Whodathunkit?

[Megahurtz]

177. That's Because It Was An A.I.P.A.C. Spin

on the interpretation of what he was actually saying. They said he completely denied the Holocost when that was not true. The Warmongering A.I.P.A.C. took that as an opportunity to Beat the War Drums really loud against Iran.

[qdemn7]

178. Probably because the Arab Muslims

Are not as innocent as they are made out to be by their apologists. Mohammad Amin al-Husayni

The notion that all the problems in the ME stem from the creation of the State of Israel, and the US support for Israel is utter rubbish. As this clearly shows the Arabs have been hostile to Jews for a very long time.

On 21 July 1937, Al-Husayni paid a visit to the new German Consul-General, Hans Döhle, in Palestine. He repeated his former support for Germany and "wanted to know to what extent the Third Reich was prepared to support the Arab movement against the Jews."

He asked Hitler for a public declaration that "recognized and sympathized with the Arab struggles for independence and liberation, and that it would support the elimination of a national Jewish homeland". Earlier, al-Hussayni submitted to the German government a draft of such a declaration, containing a clause:

Germany and Italy recognize the right of the Arab countries to solve the question of the Jewish elements, which exist in Palestine and in the other Arab countries, as required by the national and ethnic (völkisch) interests of the Arabs, and as the Jewish question was solved in Germany and Italy.<6>

Hitler refused to make such a public announcement, but "made the following declaration, requesting the Mufti to lock it deep in his heart:

1. He (the Führer) would carry on the fight until the last traces of the Jewish-Communist European hegemony had been obliterated.
2. In the course of this fight, the German army would - at a time that could not yet be specified, but in any case in the clearly foreseeable future - gain the southern exit of Caucasus.
3. As soon as this breakthrough was made, the Führer would offer the Arab world his personal assurance that the hour of liberation had struck. Thereafter, Germany's only remaining objective in the region would be limited to the Vernichtung des...Judentums <'destruction of the Jewish element', sometimes taken to be a euphemism for 'annihilation of the Jews'> living under British protection in Arab lands.."

Until the end of the World War II, al-Husayni worked for the Nazi Germany as a propagandist for the Arabs and a recruiter of Muslim volunteers for the German armed forces. Beginning in 1943, al-Husayni was involved in the organization and recruitment of Bosnian Muslims into several divisions of the Waffen SS and other units. The largest was the 13th "Handschar" division of 21,065 men which conducted operations against Communist partisans in the Balkans from February 1944.

Al-Husayni insisted that "The most important task of this division must be to protect the homeland and families (of the Bosnian volunteers); the division must not be permitted to leave Bosnia.", but this request was ignored by the Germans (German archives cited in Lepre, p34).

On March 1, 1944, while speaking on Radio Berlin, al-Husayni said:

Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you.

Adolf Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny testified during his war crimes trial in 1946 that ... "The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan... He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chambers of Auschwitz."

In his memoirs after the war, Husayni noted that "Our fundamental condition for cooperating with Germany was a free hand to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine and the Arab world. I asked Hitler for an explicit undertaking to allow us to solve the Jewish problem in a manner befitting our national and racial aspirations and according to the scientific methods innovated by Germany in the handling of its Jews. The answer I got was: 'The Jews are yours.'”

Recent Nazi documents uncovered in the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Military Archive Service in Freiburg by two researchers, Klaus Michael Mallmann from Stuttgart University and Martin Cüppers from the University of Ludwigsburg, indicated that in the event of the British being defeated in Egypt by Field Marshal Erwin Rommel's Afrika Korps the Nazis had planned to deploy a special unit called Einsatzkommando Ägypten to exterminate Palestinian Jews and that they wanted Arab support to prevent the emergence of a Jewish state. In their book the researchers concluded that, "the most important collaborator with the Nazis and an absolute Arab anti-Semite was Haj Amin al-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem." According to the German researchers Husayni was a prime example of how Arabs and Nazis became friends out of a hatred of Jews. Al-Husseini had met several times with Adolf Eichmann, Adolf Hitler's chief architect of the Holocaust.

After the Second World War, al-Husayni fled to Switzerland, was detained and expelled back to Germany, was captured by the French and put under house arrest in France after he was sentenced by the Yugoslav Supreme Military Court to three years imprisonment and two years of deprivation of civil rights as convicted war criminal. During the Nuremberg Trials, Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny testified that The Mufti was one of the initiators of the extermination of European Jewry and a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the initiation of the Final Solution. In 1948, Husayni escaped and was given asylum in Egypt. Jewish groups petitioned the British to have him indicted as a war criminal. The British declined because such a move would have added to their growing problems in Egypt and among Palestinians - where al-Husayni was still popular. Yugoslavia unsuccessfully sought his extradition.

[ChicagoRonin]

4. Republicans deny reality

An unlike Ahmedinejad and his denial of the Holocaust, the actions of the Republican party, through their President, is having drastic, immediate, world-wide consequences.

Let's see some things Republicans deny:

1) Homosexuality
2) Poverty relief
3) Equal access to health care
4) Religious freedom
5) Freedom of speech
6) Gender equality
7) Racial equality
8) Global warming
9) Income equality

[nashville_brook]

10. they "create" their own reality -- we just live in it.

[pink-o]

101. Let us not forget that quite a few Republicans denied the Holocaust as well

...and I didn't see anyone run to throw them out of the party.

David Dukes comes to mind immediately. But I know there are more.

[bpeale]

5. their are many people, americans included, that don't believe

the halocaust. so what? you're not going to change their minds with your arguments.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. I Have Never Met A Holocaust Denier In My Life

I have met several who thought it was a good thing...

God's truth...

[nashville_brook]

16. yikes, where?

[bpeale]

28. since this history is not taught in school anymore

most young people do not believe it. for them, there is no history of it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. Usually Remarks

Usually remarks like "Too bad Hitler didn't finish the job."

I remember one time when I was attending Daytona Beach Community College in the late seventies and this Lebanese exchange student said It was a shame Hitler didn't finish the job ... I was with my friend and we didn't say anything. It haunts me to this day I didn't call him on it.


Oh well, such is life...

[Grey]

63. Right in my (& your) home town......

My late father was one of them, along with a lot of his friends. Half the americans I knew at the time thought so.
They would sit ,over coffee, and say how smart the government 'of the time' was not to
let that riff-raff (Jews) in the country. How pleased they were when jewish immigrants were
refused entry. I remember a whole boat load that was sent back to Europe, but there were
more sent back, in smaller numbers that didn't make the newspapers.

[madeline_con]

186. I ride a special needs bus, and we have a little Nazi aboard.

He's been beaten up by black kids at school because of his use of the "N word.

[Buzz Clik]

6. I want to get in some comments before this is closed... and that will be very soon.

Cenk Uygur is a dick. Comparing the holocaust and its deniers to global warming and its deniers is shallow idiocy. No one wants to go to war with Iran because one of their leaders (or all of them) deny the reality of the holocaust.

Pure flamebait and not worthy of intellectual energy.

Get this bullshit out of here.

[nashville_brook]

13. so, why are we going to war with Iran? WMDs a decade from now?

i don't think that's persuasive enough -- but add to that, the batshit crazy rhetoric of a "petty dictator" and we just might have an argument.

[Buzz Clik]

24. That's a different question, though it was poorly packaged as part of the editorial.

We should be leaving Iran completely alone, other than normal diplomatic contact.

[nashville_brook]

60. it came across very clear to me, but i'm on my second cup of rot-gut coffee

and i might have entered some sort of hyper-consciousness -- :evilgrin:

my intention here is not to start a fight -- good lord we're having enough of that. we have to be steadfast in our refusal to be used as propaganda tools. we have to remember what's at stake here -- total war in the middle east is not an option.

[Buzz Clik]

67. Ok. If that's your intent, I'm 100% behind you.

[nashville_brook]

99. these difficult issues can't be addressed in pithy soundbytes --

there's no easy one-liner to get to this kind of understanding that we're getting to here.

we have to be committed to the discussion and not so much "winning" an argument or delivering a blistering attack.

i'm doing this because it's only going to get worse. Ahmadinejad and Bush both address the UN today -- there's going to be plenty for everyone to get emotional about, as if the last few weeks weren't emotional enough regarding speech issues. we are in DEEP, dangerous water.

[IndianaJones]

9. Yeah, and the whole hanging of gays...whats the biggie? nt.

[cboy4]

12. Why is it so difficult for people around here to get it

through their skulls that it's possible to loathe a world leader like Mahmoud Ahmedinejad (which I do), yet still oppose the bombing of his country?

I don't understand the disconnect.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. Because He's An Enemy Of Bush

It would be like embracing John Gotti or Ken Lay because you don't like some of the actions of the Department Of Justice...

[Yael]

26. Or in this case, David Duke...

[nashville_brook]

29. do you have any links to DUers embracing Ahmadinejad -- i mean REALLY embracing

him and not just saying basically what this writer says, which is, we're being manipulated by the spectacle of his address.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. C Boy4 Has Some Of The Fawning Threads Linked In His Thread...

I don't want to bomb the fella... I just have no truck for homophobic, misogynistic, anti-semitic theocrats...He's the late Jerry Falwell on steroids...

[Marrah_G]

70. The "does anyone else find Ahmadinejad attractive?" one was just plain creepy

[LostinVA]

168. Agreed

It reminds me of the photos of women fawning all over Hitler.

[ronnie624]

91. For me, the issue isn't really about Ahmadinejad.

It's about using misinformation in the advancement of a political goal. In this case, that goal is to increase the probability of US military action against Iran, in the advancement of much larger geopolitical aims, ie: exercising control over the Middle East by the likes of Exxon, Chevron, Haliburton, Blackwater and such. Other goals include preventing certain powers from gaining a foothold in the region.

As for the controversial remarks by Ahmadinejad, no one has yet provided sources that I would find credible. Credibility on this issue would, in my mind, exclude the Bush Administration, the New York Times, MEMRI, the CIA, 'defense' contractors or any other source that I suspect has a vested interest in the advancement of the current administration's policies.

Every time we 'catapult the propaganda', we are helping to lay the groundwork for future wars over energy. We would be much better off, focusing our own energies on weening the entire world off of the use of hydrocarbons as a source of energy, thereby removing the need to fight over oil.

[nashville_brook]

104. "catapulting the propaganda" lays the groundwork for future wars -- AMEN!

[Megahurtz]

182. >"no one has yet provided sources that I would find credible.

Exactly. They would rather blindly follow BFEE Propaganda!

[mhatrw]

158. We understand. We just think you are cutting it too fine whenever

you join in with the regularly scheduled Two Minute Hate with war drums beating in the background.

http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

Wirthlin's job, Alsop explained, was "to identify the messages that really resonate emotionally with the American people." The theme that struck the deepest emotional chord, they discovered, was "the fact that Saddam Hussein was a madman who had committed atrocities even against his own people, and had tremendous power to do further damage, and he needed to be stopped."

[LostinVA]

167. Nice Two Minute Hate, Damien

It's ALMOST unbelievable, isn't it???

[Tommy_Carcetti]

14. I'd be more concerned if he said the Holocaust did happen....

I'd be more concerned if he said the Holocaust did happen, and that it was a good thing that it happened. Now that would be scary.

But his mere denial of the Holocaust just makes him look like a fool. Not the next Adolph Hitler. Just an ignorant fool.

[Prophet 451]

17. Yep, he's a nutter

Sadly, the world is full of nutters. In itself, that's not a good reason to bomb him.

[nashville_brook]

21. Condi's interview on CNBC was very telling -- she was grinning from ear to ear

...very pleased that he was "allowed" to speak. well, no shit, it's going to make her job much easier (selling the war around the world, b/c really, when was the last time she actually did something "diplomatic"?)

[Prophet 451]

40. 2000, I think

When she finagled her way into the Cabinet.

I don't think anyone is denying that Armadinejad is an unpleasent man, a nutter or a tyrant (in the modern use of the word although not technically a dictator). So was Hussein (and he was a dictator) but the current anthems of loathing do carry an undertone of war drums.

[nashville_brook]

45. because, like drums, this propaganda is meant to charge emotions instead of reason

[Prophet 451]

55. Emotion misused

I'm Roma in part, a gypsy. As a culture, we are a people who love music and often use musical metaphors to describe the world. For example, a Roma expression to say an area is nice is "O manusha khelevan tut" which means "the people make you dance".

Music is a force which taps directly into the emotions, bypassing the brain. When done well, it ignores the mind and the brain and simply touches the soul. That can be used for the good, when that emotion is married with reason it can motivate, enoble or explain in a way that pure words cannot (for example, the ANC adoped Queen's "I Want To Break Free" as an unofficial anthem) but that emotional connection can also be turned to evil when it is married to anti-intellectualism, nationalism, militurism. We saw that in Hitler's Germany, we can see an echo of it in the music of Toby Keith.

A while ago, I wrote a eulogy for the loss of reason in political discourse. The US is currently going through one of it's periodic bouts of anti-intellectualism. And that is a great shame because where Clinton (for example) may have had an emotional connection to the people, if you asked him, he could also explain to you in scrupulously logical terms, why X was necessary. Bush has nothing but emotion to rely on. That necessitates that he tries to keep the nation operating on emotion alone.

[nashville_brook]

80. years ago i was having brunch in a restaurant that had a "gypsy" band playing

The Gypsy Hombres at Boscos in Nashville -- i found myself weeping over my eggs (seemingly) for no reason at all. i realized it was the gypsy violin. i was overcome with a sadness that was complete and perfect. i will never forget it -- and i'm still susceptible to gypsy violin. it turns my soul inside-out.

i think this post might be the most important in this whole thread -- that, there are ways to touch the soul thru the emotions and that that, in itself, is not evil -- but can very easily be used for evil.

when the civil rights movement used spirituals such as We Shall Overcome, that was using music and emotion for good. we have to get back to being able to use all the emotions swirling around us for The Good. i feel like it's our duty -- but that might just be me being overdramatic. :)

[Prophet 451]

113. I'm not sure about "duty"

but it would be an honour.

I was a great fan of the late Freddie Mercury (lead singer of Queen) and I vivedly remember the memorial concert that was held for him. Freddie Mercury died of HIV/AIDS and the proceeds from the concert were donated to the Terrence Higgins Trust. Thousands of people, dozens of performers, black, white, gay, straight and it didn't matter. No-one looked for what divided them, they were entertained, they sang and spoke in memory of a great artist and they donated money (by the million) to fight a disease. The aggressivly straight Axl Rose publically embraced the flamboyantly gay Elton John and no-one raised an eybrow. Live Aid did the same, Al Gore tried to do the same with his concerts for earth.

That's the power of music, to reach beyond words. You remember that scene in The Shawshank Redemption where Andy plays an aria over the PA system? A prison filled with hardened cons, none of whom understand the words, simply stare in awe. That wasn't fiction, not entirely. I have seen the same thing happen many times.

[Chovexani]

135. Opre Roma!

I have Roma heritage myself. :hi:

Too bad we can't nominate individual posts in a thread. Yours was profound and very true.

[Prophet 451]

137. Nais tuke

Gotta stick together, bro.

[Chovexani]

141. Hehe, it'd be "sis"

But that's ok. :hi:

[Prophet 451]

142. Ooops, sorry n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

20. The so what is that he's wrong

Thye Holocaust was a terrible thing, and denying it only serves to make it more acceptable.

That being said, we still don't need to attack Iran.

[nashville_brook]

23. there's a lot of stupid, wrong people in the world.

[EstimatedProphet]

32. They're certainly are

[Skidmore]

22. It serves the same purpose as the topic of Vietnam did in the 2004 election.

It diverts attention from the real issue which need to be addressed by focusing on emotionally charge fact from the past. It is not forward looking nor does it contribute to constructive dialogue. AND I'm getting well past sick of the idea that there is only one nation in the ME which deserves dignity and respect. It is high time that ALL nations there and elsewhere start realizing that all kinds of people live there, all with basic human needs and who ALL need to be treated with respect.

[nashville_brook]

33. the fact is, this is the repubs standard operating procedure -- we went to war in Iraq

over a bunch of emotionally horseshit. to *deny* that that is happening again is pure folly.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. Traeating All Nations With Dignity And Respect And Not Denying The Holocaust Aren't Mutually

Exclusive.

[Yael]

25. If you lost family in the holocaust as my family did -- you would fucking care

[nashville_brook]

35. does it do Holocaust victims' memory any good to start another war fueled on

this propaganda?

[cali]

39. You love you strawman there, don't you?

His holocaust denial is not the primary fuel for starting a war.

And if you can't see why your question is offensive- well, that says plenty.

[nashville_brook]

43. it's a propaganda device just like asserting Iraq did 911

it's not meant to be an out-and-out "reason." it's fuel for irrationality. the repubs will never get their war in Iran if we are having rational discussions about it.

[Yael]

42. Where did I ever hint that I support the war?

I am saying the guy is an asshat and the love fest DU has been throwing him makes me want to hurl.

Yeah -- you can say it pisses me off.

Blindly believing that the enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that.

What is it about the Great Satan that escapes people? He would kill everyone of us and not blink an eye in order to satisfy his religious beliefs and anyone who doesn't believe that simply isn't paying attention.

We can loathe the man without bombing his citizens. Is that too difficult to fathom?

<not pointed at you Nashville_brook -- just a rant I needed to let loose>

[nashville_brook]

50. no point taken personally by, yael --

we have to be clear about the emotionality of this. it shouldn't be difficult for smart, politically-savvy DUers to fathom the divide between loathing a man and bombing his citizens... but, that wasn't entirely the case here in the run-up to Iraq invasion. we actually ARE vulnerable to the short-circuiting of reason by emotion. we might not directly say it's the HD... maybe it's that plus the homosexual denial (another HD), the misogyny, the mullahs, etc etc... all of that will be used to divide and conquer those who would oppose 'the next war.'

the headlines will trumpet the emotional propaganda, and the voice of reason will be drowned out as it has over and over and over and over in the last 7 years.

[Yael]

59. We win nothing if we fight it as it is framed

If we say, "but we love, worship and adore him" then the right has all the fuel they need.

We need to change how the debate is framed. Something like this, "He is an asshat, but he is THEIR asshat. We have no business bombing his civilians".

Pretending like he is all peaches and roses just makes us look like lunatics who are so busy hugging trees that we can't see the forest.

[nashville_brook]

64. i haven't seen the Ahmadinejad love-fest that everyone talks about -- but, what

would be great is if those posts/threads were treated as an opportunity to reach out rather than divide. if you see a pro-Ahmadinejad post, work with the poster to untangle what they are saying. maybe they aren't articulating themselves well. maybe they are mis-directed.

our job right now needs to be to clean up the mess this address has caused and de-emotionalize the debate.

[makhno]

58. We can loathe the man without bombing his citizens.

We can, as in you and I can read, think and try not to let emotions cloud our political judgment.

Many citizens can't, as was amply demonstrated by Iraq: the 9/11 connection, the gassing of "his own people" mantra, the WWII and moral duty comparisons. Propaganda works on an emotional level, hence the shameless reactionary exploitation of the Holocaust to further the imperial political agenda.

[PDenton]

159. I'm not convinced

I don't believe Iran would go to war with the US just because of their religious beliefs. I see no proof of that at all. If anything, Iran has been trying to find better relations with the US for the past decade. They have dug themselves into a deep hole but they are trying. At the same time, they want the world to know they aren't a carpet to be walked over and bullied by superpowers (or ex-superpowers). Bush's harsh rhetoric against Khatami's government did nothing but sour the possible dialogue with Iran.

[Prophet 451]

47. Yes, he probably would

Look, I lost family in that madness too. We call it the Porjamos ("Devouring") and yes, some of my family died there along with around two million of our people. It is unpleasent when that is denied, it is offensive, no-one is denying that, me least of all.

But, there is always a but, it looks very much like this administration and the establishment press are trying to start a war with Iran. Your offence or mine is not enough to justify a war. Give the Iranian or those like him a good smack in the mouth perhaps but not start a war.

EDIT: I just saw your clarification. It seems we are agreeing on loathing the man without feeling the need to bomb his country.

[nashville_brook]

52. yep -- that's why this discussion is so damn important -- when the trumpets are

blaring (he's an anti-semite! DUers are giving comfort to him!) then we lose this CRUCIAL opportunity to recognize that YES WE CAN deal with the ambiguity. YES WE CAN hold multiple views of the man vs the nation. YES WE CAN (god, i hope we can) separate the two.

if we can't -- if we allow ourselves to be divided in this -- then, we lose and the WHOLE DAMN WORLD LOSES, because this is the fucking Falklands. we are looking at total war in the middle east.

[Bluerthanblue]

53. i didn't lose family in the Holocaust yet

i care about what was done.

I also care about what happened in New Orleans, even though i've never been there-

I also care about what is happening to the people of Iraq, directly because of the actions taken by this nation called "america"- and encouraged by other nations who harbored grudges and agendas that i neither support nor defend.

Every injustice against humanity should be cared about

Everyones sorrow is sacred.

[Prophet 451]

57. Bravo sir, bravo n/t

[cali]

27. simple is as simple does and this

is very, very simple.

On the left no one is advocating attacking Iran. Period. And the war mongers are not saying that his Holocaust denial is the casus belli. Find me one statement by anyone claiming that we should attack Iran because the President is dangerous because he's a Holocaust denier. Are they using that to paint him as evil? Sure, but that's not what the OP claims.

[makhno]

51. It's part of the package

Remember the "he gassed his own people" talking point used to drum up antipathy toward Saddam, and, by association, Iraq? The fact that the country you're invading is governed by an entirely unsympathetic individual, a Hitler figure, as reactionary commentators put it, makes the actual pretense for war far easier to swallow, as, again, witnessed in Iraq.

The OP doesn't claim that the Holocaust issue is the casus belli. Instead, he astutely points out that one needs to emotionally manipulate the population into supporting an eventual war: demonizing Ahmedinejad is one of the propaganda tools being employed.

Psyops at work. Again.

[nashville_brook]

72. well said. if the masses accept the emotional appeal, they won't need a casus belli --

or a casus belli that makes any sense.

if they can keep us at war with each via our emotions -- they won't need much else.

[Carolina]

122. exactly

How many times were we warned that SH had to be removed because golly gee, he was so horrible, such a threat because he had gassed his own people ... blah, blah, blah

No mention of course that said gassing took place in 1988 using WMDs provided by the USA with unspoken approval of US leadership: Reagan, Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell.

Psyops Redux, indeed.

[txaslftist]

154. That's understood. No one on "the left" will advocate bombing.

But if Aj is sold as a holocaust denying anti-Semite, many on the left will hesitate to come to their defense when we attack his people (who probably have no offensive opinions at all about the holocaust) for their oil. That hesitation is all the people who want to bomb him need. A period of non-protest just long enough to get the bombers going.

After that, you can protest all you want.

[slackmaster]

30. His denial of the Holocaust is all I need to know about him

It puts him in the same class as David Irving, Ernst Zundel, and David Duke.

[mhatrw]

151. Great. He's in ass class.

So what?

[bunkerbuster1]

37. And then there are the evolution deniers...

I think about as much of them as I do the Holocaust deniers. Complete, blithering idiots all.

[cali]

41. evolution deniers are not endorsing genocide. Significant dif. n/t

[mike_c]

73. believing that something didn't happen is not endorsing it....

Just the opposite, in fact-- I mean, he denies that the holocaust occurred, so why do folks leap to the illogical conclusion that he's applauding it having happened? That makes no sense at all.

So he's wrong. Lots of folks find that offensive. That's fine-- and totally appropriate. But to use that as the basis for anything other than judging his historical acumen seems pretty ridiculous.

[Megahurtz]

185. Wow.

Talk about gossip going awry.

[Fresh_Start]

56. He said that 58 million civilians died in WWII

he didn't deny the Jewish deaths.

He asked why is the takeaway from WWII a "Jewish Holocaust".
The Germans killed lots of people for not only the Jewish.
They killed the handicapped.
They killed communists.
They killed Slavs because they were an inferior race.
They killed other religious sects besides the jews.
They killed intellectuals.
They killed homosexuals.
They killed political dissidents.

So why are only the Jewish victims recognized in the Holocaust?

Wouldn't we ALL be better off if the lesson from WWII was that wars of aggression are the worst crime against humanity rather than that the Jewish Holocaust was a sin against mankind?

10% of the victims of WWII were Jewish.
He asked didn't the 50++ million other people matter?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. "If You Save One Person You Save The World Entire"

All suffering is to be pitied...

That being said what made the killing of six million Jews unique was Hitler's desire to erase European Jewry... Most of the others killed were opponents of the regime... Doesn't make their suffereing less real but the fact that Hitler killed Jews for nothing more than the fact that they were Jews is what makes his killing of them unique... In fact so great was his hatred of the Jews that he ordered the execution and deportation of many WW 1 Jewish veterans who had fought valliantly and gloriously in defense of Germany... That fact... That Hitler wanted to kill Jews because they were Jews , and for nothing else, is what makes his war against the Jews unique...

[Prophet 451]

69. Not unique

He hated us (the Roma) for exactly the same reasons, he also wanted to erase us from the world.

[Megahurtz]

188. Also He Hated The Serbs And Fried Them In Ovens.

My relatives. But you don't hear the Serbs whining and hearing them getting any special favors!

[Fresh_Start]

75. He killed the homosexuals, the Gypsies, the Slavs

the handicapped for the same reasons he killed the jews.
Because they were an inferior race to be erased.

The Jews were NOT unique in being singled out.

Apparently the myth of the holocaust worked.
You didn't realize that the Jews weren't unique.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. The Scope Of It Is What Makes It Unique

The Nazis conquered nation after nation with one of their basic goals to enlist the help of the local populace in rounding up and killing Jews... The fact that most of them were more than willing to comply also is unique, and also is well documented...

Back to the Gypsies...Aryans were not singled out unless they chose to single themselves out... So I'll make the concession Hitler wanted to exterminate Jews and Gypsies because they were Jews and Gypsies, and for no other reason....

[Fresh_Start]

85. You continue to ignore that the extermination program

was not limited to Jews.

In fact, the extermination program started with non-Jewish populations which were not enemies of the state.
They were people who the Germans viewed as inferior.

What percent of the homosexuals did the Germans kill?
What percent of the handicapped did the Germans kill?
What percent of the gypsies did the Germans kill?

You don't know the answer.
So you don't know if the scope of the horrors to the Jews was in fact any worst then the scope of the horrors to these other populations.

You've bought the myth.

[Warren DeMontague]

97. Who, precisely, is responsible for this "myth" of the Holocaust?

And why?

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nashville_brook]

119. it's the simplification of history -- there's no "who" to it.

[ecstatic]

106. Thousands of blacks were killed and/or sterilised too nt

[Fresh_Start]

110. you're correct

eom

[Swede]

179. They almost exterminated all the Jews of Europe..

All of them.

[Megahurtz]

190. THANK YOU!

:applause:

[Bluerthanblue]

111. Well, you've neglected to mention a portion of

the population that is still suffering-

And who very often have no choice about being 'singled out'.

http://www.nathanielturner.com/hitlerandnegro.htm

not only singled out, but oppressed and denied opportunities right here in this country today-

Neither * nor blair would even apologize to the victims of their holocaust.


that to me is unconscionable

[Fresh_Start]

115. There are many groups that are still targeted

the homosexuals are still discriminated against
the handicapped are still discriminated against
just to name a couple.

[Warren DeMontague]

88. Er, what "myth of the holocaust"?

Please explain. I'll wait.

[Fresh_Start]

94. Look up Holocaust

its been pretty much redefined to be the Jewish deaths at the hands of Germany.
Ignoring the fact that there were as least as many non-Jewish deaths in those same camps.
Ignoring the fact that the Jews weren't the only targetted population.

[Warren DeMontague]

96. Have you ever been to any of the Holocaust Museums? Perhaps the one in L.A.?

Because what you say is utter bullshit, Jack. "It's been pretty much defined".. who told you that? Did you read it on a website? Got a link?

(I'd be really curious to see where you're getting your resource material, here.) :eyes:

If you take the time to actually peruse material pertaining to the Holocaust- it is made very clear by everyone concerned that Jews were not the ONLY ones to die in the camps. But they WERE specifically targeted, and 6 million Jews- men, women and children- DID die in the camps.

And the motivations of anyone who wants to minimize that are extremely suspect, to me.

[Fresh_Start]

103. I had family in the camps. Most of them died there.

I'm not minimizing that 6+ million Jewish people died there.
I'm not minimizing that 6+ million non-Jewish people died there.
I'm not minimizing that more than 40 million other civilians died either.

And while the museums indeed recognize the other deaths, the world did not recognize the other populations targetted for extermination.

Search on the web and you'll see that the jewish holocaust references are a multiple of the non-Jewish ones.

[Bluerthanblue]

117. --

i didn't want to leave your post silent-

just want to thank you for working to stop humanity's inhumanity to itself.

The best way to honor those who have died like this is to encourage people to look for our connections to one another not at ways to divide and conquer (imoutthereo)

:hug:

[Fresh_Start]

126. the holocaust is only one of the many many horrors of WWII

its not more horrible than the others.

The good thing is that the Germans were defeated.
They had a 30 year plan to exterminate or enslave many other populations.

The worst horror was the mindset that let the Germans think that they were a superior race which needed to be elevated above other populations.

They created an elaborate scheme for the value of people.
The German borne Aryans were the top of the pyramid.
The Gypsies were subhumans below even the Jews.

[Warren DeMontague]

123. I had family that died in the camps, too.

And I think it's been made very clear that non-Jews died in the camps, as well. The fact that pink triangles are used as a sign of solidarity by gay people and their allies is a direct reference to the fact that gays were targeted- and forced to wear pink triangles- by the Nazis. How should "the world" be dealing with these facts differently, to your mind?

I'm really not sure what the purpose is of going on about some "myth" of the Holocaust pertaining to the specific targeting of Jews. I'm not sure what the specific problem is.

Do you think the Jews are getting too much Holocaust-related attention? :shrug:

[Fresh_Start]

133. Do you know that they don't even know how many Romany

were killed?

The Germans went out into the countryside and slaughtered them in place.

[Prophet 451]

139. Officially, it's between 500,000 and two million

Our own recollections place the total toward the higher end of that but the Nazis thought do little of us, they didn't even bother keeping records.

By the way, the plural of Roma is "Romanii" or "Romany".

[Fresh_Start]

140. Thanks for the information.

I think I knew Romany....I just didn't recall.
(Though I admit I knew my plural was wrong and I was too lazy to check).

[LeftishBrit]

199. So what is your point?

That the suffering of others in the Holocaust - gays, Gypsies, disabled people, etc. - also needs to be recognized?

That genocide can happen to *anyone* - cf. Armenia, Bosnia, Rwanda, Darfur... and that we have to constantly guard against it?

Or that Ahmadejinad is quite a nice guy?

Or that those tiresome Jews really weren't that badly treated, and antisemitism is perfectly all right really?

If it's one of the first two points, I'd agree fully! If it's the third or especially the fourth, I would most emphatically disagree!!!

[nashville_brook]

107. the poster is referring a collective ignorance that other groups were also targeted

gypsies, homosexuals, handicapped, immigrants, etc.

[Fresh_Start]

108. yes,

by focusing on the Jewish part we're ignoring the larger lessons.

[Warren DeMontague]

125. And like I said. If there's a "collective ignorance", it doesn't show up in the Holocaust Museum,

for instance.

I don't get the feeling the poster is concerned so much that other groups haven't also been included when people talk about the Holocaust, actually. I get the feeling the poster is arguing that Jews have collectively received "too much" sympathy for the Holocaust.

:eyes:

[Fresh_Start]

127. No I don't think the Jews have too much sympathy.

I think the other victims have been largely ignored.
I don't think that its possible to have too much sympathy for the Jews.

I think it is possible that we're not paying enough attention to the other victims.
I think we're not discussing the other more likely to be repeated horrors.
For example, war of aggression!

And I think by focusing on the Holocaust instead of mindset where the Germans declared others inferior and worthy of extermination or enslavement we're able to repeat the mistake by allowing others to be viewed as inferior.

[nashville_brook]

148. that's unfortunate, because that essentially makes a fight where there is none

that's called "putting words into" another's mouth and it escalates the tension.

which would you rather do -- find common ground where plenty is being offered; or stand fast with misplaced umbrage?

[cali]

187. Why the Jewish part of the Holocaust was unique.

Yes the destruction of European Jewry was unique. That's right, I said it. Why? Because facts count. Accurate hisory counts.

The Jews were targeted by Hitler and the Reich in a a way no other group was. And the historical evidence for that is vast; starting with Mein Kampf- no you won't find references to the Roma or the Slavic peoples or Homosexuals in Mein Kampf. The incitement to hate was directed toward the Jews. The same thing is true Der Sturmer.

From Mein Kampf:

"Once I really am in power, my first and foremost task will be the annihilation of the Jews. As soon as I have the power to do so, I will have gallows built in rows—at the Marienplatz in Munich, for example—as many as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink; they will hang there as long as the principles of hygiene permit. As soon as they have been untied, the next batch will be strung up, and so on down the line, until the last Jew in Munich has been exterminated. Other cities will follow suit, precisely in this fashion, until all Germany has been completely cleansed of Jews."

Moving on some years, there were the Nuremberg Laws which you can find here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws
Those laws went into effect in 1935 and codified discrimination solely against the Jews. There effect was devastating.... and petty and ugly.
The laws ranged from stripping Jews of citizenship to banning Jews from hiring German women under the age of 45 as domestic servants. Punishments were harsh.

Krystallnacht took place in 1938, unleashing a planned wave of violence directed toward the Jews- and no other group. Throughout Germany and Austria, homes businesses and synagogues were destroyed. People were dragged from their homes and beaten. It wasn't spontaneous, it was state sponsored. Again from wiki:

Jewish homes were ransacked in numerous German cities along with 8,000 Jewish shops, towns and villages,<2> as civilians and SA stormtroopers destroyed buildings with sledgehammers, leaving the streets covered in smashed windows — the origin of the name "Night of Broken Glass." Jews were beaten to death; 30,000 Jewish men were taken to concentration camps; and 1,668 synagogues ransacked with 267 set on fire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_night

Throughout the nightmare of the death camps, Jews were singled out for special "treatment". The amount of primary source documentation for that claim is overwhelming. It was largely Jews who were transported in cattle cars, and then on arrival, separated into two lines at the Death camps; one line for those to be sent immediately to their deaths, another for those to be worked until they no longer had slave value. The victims of the gas chambers were Jews. The obsession was with finding an efficient way to kill Jews.

Finally, the Nazis came incredibly close to completely destroying an entire people; and its culture was equally targeted for extermination. 90% of Poland's Jewish population was exterminated. In Czechoslovakia, Greece, the Netherlands and Yugoslavia, over 70 percent were killed.

None of these facts diminishes in the slightest the other victims of the Holocaust, particularly the Roma who were, starting in 1942 targeted in a similar, if less organized way as the Jews, and killed in large numbers both by Death squads and in camps. The Roma that were targeted were those who lived a nomadic life and the Roma peoples of the Balkans.

The persecution of homosexuals, the 600,000 Serbs who died in camps, the slaughter of Soviet POWs, the early killing of the mentally disabled, Jehovah's witnesses and others are all tragic, and contrary to statements on this thread, well documented, and not ignored by the academic world. Each of those deaths is every bit as tragic as every Jewish death.

There was no 'final solution' for any other population, no Wansee Conference where the extermination of every Jew in every country in Europe, including England, was planned. Therein lies one reason historians almost unanimously consider it a unique feature of the slaughterhouse of WWII.

There's much more, but people can take these facts- and they are easily verified facts- and do with them what they will.

History is too important for meritless revisionism. Particularly when the documentation for the When, where and who, is so available and widely known.

[Bluerthanblue]

84. why did he want to kill homosexuals?

because they somehow 'deserved it'?

or Gypsies? Or the mentally ill? or the disabled?

All suffering is unique-

not having a penis has cost many a woman her life-

Being old has too, or very young,

All suffering is sacred and unique

so how about we be outraged that we are party to it's promotion, rather than letting those who are ordering it be done on our behalf stir up the flames of hatred to roast our newest offerings upon.?

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ariana Celeste]

116. self delete

useless w/out context.

[Prophet 451]

66. Na bista Roma

People always forget about us...

[makhno]

76. You need a PAC

Took you all what, a good 50 years to get acknowledgment and monetary compensations from the Germans?

[Prophet 451]

93. Forty years

The acknowledgment came in 1985. As for reparations, we're still waiting. The last public statement on that was in 1950 when the German government said they owed nothing to the Roma. Hell, in 1992, the German government sold Romanii asylum seekers back to Romania (where pogroms were still going on) for $21 million. They were deported in handcuffs and a fair few comitted suicide rather than face it.

[LeftishBrit]

198. 1992? Good God!

But why am I surprised; our own government constantly sends asylum seekers back to places where they could face prosecution. And the tabloid newspapers seem free to spread all sorts of hate about both asylum seekers and 'gypsies'.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. Why Did He Hate Gypsies?

I kmow he hated Jews because he saw them as an economic threat and a potential fifth column... Gypsies were a mostly powerless group...

[Prophet 451]

83. The old cliches

- As a culture, we have always resisted integration into "the system"
- The old myths about our being thieves (true, we have a different concept of ownership to the West but the Rominaya still makes it explicit that stealing from want, rather than need, is a crime)
- The myths of baby-stealing
- The myths of being dirty (we actally have strict cleanliness and hygene laws)
- Poor, mostly powerless and usually unpopular, we make for easy victims if you can catch us.

Take your pick. There's never been a shortage of people who hate us mainly for being who we are. Pogroms were still commonplace in Eastern Europe less than a decade ago. Romania only stopped because they wanted to get into the EU. There was an anti-Roma rally in Germany in 1992 where one questioned woman actually said "We are not racist, we are just against gypsies".

[nashville_brook]

86. the gypsies were an effective boogeyman -- they eschewed the dominant culture

making them "The Other." same as homosexuals were The Other. same as the Jewish population was smeared as The Other. same as the mentally/physicially handicapped were branded The Other.

on another level they were seen as interloping immigrants -- sapping resources from "the homeland."

[Fresh_Start]

78. Yes, the Jews were not the only victims

of Germanies extermination program.

And thats one of the points that he's making.

[Megahurtz]

191. The Slavs ARE The Forgotton Peoples.

Didn't you know? :sarcasm:

We're reminded everyday to think of other Peoples instead of ourselves.:grr:

I feel like a Ghost!!!

[LanternWaste]

138. I don't think that's the case--

"So why are only the Jewish victims recognized in the Holocaust?"

I don't think that's the case-- I've read many books on the subject and as far as I can recall, none of them implied that only the Jewish people suffered under Nazi rule. Every person I discuss this readily admits that it not merely the Jewish people, but Gypsies, homosexuals, intellectuals, artists, the mentally ill, etc.

As to why the Jewish people are used to illustrate the holocaust more than other victims-- I think it's because the Jewish people were the largest single group of civilians specifically targeted, (possibly also that the Holocaust was a "crowning achievement" of the world-wide racism and scapegoating they've had to endure for over a thousand years.

[Fresh_Start]

143. I took a quick look at holocaust definitions on the web

looked at about 20 definitions.

Most of them refer only to Jewish victims.
A couple said 'Jews and other civilians'.
A couple said Jews and listed some of the other targetted populations.

So I'll stick with my assessment that the others are a largely ignored victim population.
You and I are already different than average because we read books about the topic.
The average American didn't read any books about it.

I'd also say that I've gone to 80% of the museums in a 50 mile radius of where I live.
Most of my neighbors (who are also well educated) haven't made the time to do so.

[LanternWaste]

145. you could qualify it by stating

I can't address who the internet may or may not define as I never use it for research. I stick with peer-reviewed text publications for that-- but don't most people who actual want to read about a particular topic still use books?

Maybe rather than stating "...others are largely ignored" you could qualify it by stating, "others are largely ignored by particular demographics..." as it appears more apt. Or if you said, "the others are largely ignored by those who don't have any interest in it..." that would seem valid, too.

[Fresh_Start]

153. I think colloquially, Holocaust is synonymous with

something like the Jewish "final solution" ignoring the breadth and depth of the Nazi extermination programs and future plans.

Do you have any facts to show that the average person is aware of the breadth of the extermination program? You seem to think that the problem is limited to specific demographics. Which demographics are those?

[LostinVA]

169. Wow. Unreal.

[LeftishBrit]

196. Not *only* Jewish victims are recognized...

though I note that your own post leaves out the Gypsies/ Roma.

I think the lesson to be learned is that hatred against any group can so easily lead to genocide. And genocide is utterly evil.

And I do think that there's a difference between a war and a genocide where a group is targeted through pure hate. Yes, whether I get killed in a war, or by a drunk driver, or because of genocidal hatred of my ethnic group, I'm just as dead either way. But there is something peculiarly terrifying about the pure evil of genocide.

And it can happen to any group. Right now, the people of Darfur are being targeted.

[Cha]

61. Good ol' buSHITs..they just conned

this country into a horrible OIL War On Iraq and now they're doing it again when the blood is still flowing and the billions are flowing rapidly down the drain. And the corporatemediawhores being the cannibalistic jackals that they are..are right there assisting them.

[Poll_Blind]

74. Indeed. n/t

PB

[Kelly Rupert]

79. Ironically, this is the exact same for-or-against-us logic Bush used before Iraq.

Thinking Ahmadinejad's views are recklessly incorrect is not the same as believing that military action against Iran is justified. I don't believe it's a good precedent to avoid criticizing those who deserve it, simply because others who engage in the same criticism do so with an ulterior motive. It is possible to be against anti-intellectual tyranny both home and abroad.

Don't say we have to pick sides when presented with two evils that stand in potential conflict. It was wrong when Bush said it, and it's wrong when you say it, because it is possible to stand against both the two evils and the conflict itself all at once.

Ahmadinejad's failure to recognize the Holocaust is indeed dangerous; failure to understand the inevitable outcome of state-sponsored and fully institutionalized political racism, violence, and xenophobia is a dangerous gap in knowledge for a leader to have--especially one in M.A.'s position. The insistence some American hawks have that Iran must be "solved" through military means is dangerous as well. I do not understand why I must ignore the one to oppose the other.

[Warren DeMontague]

87. Have you found ONE PERSON on DU who supports war with Iran?

I'd be highly surprised if you have.

So it's not a question of people who call Ahmedinejad on his shit being "led into" supporting war, or "surreptitiously cheering" war with Iran. They are not the same thing.

Ahmedinejad is an ASSHOLE. He's an ASSHOLE. ASSHOLE, ASSHOLE, ASSHOLE.

I don't want war with his country, but he's an ASSHOLE.

Should I say it again?

Why is Holocaust denial such a "big deal"? Others in this thread who, like myself, lost family members in the camps have tried to explain. Or, you can go to Yad Vashem and look at the toddler's shoe for yourself. See what you think.

Anyone who denies the Holocaust can go fuck themselves. That's not justification for a war, but merely re-iterating that we shouldn't go to war with Iran isn't justification for papering over this shitwit's Holocaust denial, either.

[distantearlywarning]

92. I want to recommend this post.!

I couldn't have said it better.

[goodgd_yall]

131. Hear, hear!

[nashville_brook]

95. the OP doesn't negate the enormity of the holocaust -- he's saying, our emotions regarding

the holocaust are being manipulated. the first/best thing * administration can do to promote their next war, is to get us all emotionally lathered-up so they won't need to have a RATIONAL casus belli.

he's an asshole. our leader is an asshole. the whole world has an enormous emotional stake in the next war. this needs to be recognized for what it is -- war drums.

[Warren DeMontague]

98. Like I said. Have you found ONE PERSON on DU who actually supports war with Iran?

Despite all this "manipulation", none of this is new news. If we were going to be brainwashed by, for instance, Ahmedinejad's Holocaust Denial, we've known about it for a while.

Funny, I don't hear any drumbeat for war with Iran. Still.

Everybody here, AFAICT, thinks it's an incredibly bad idea. Even the trolls know not to suggest it.

So who is being "manipulated"?

[Zandor]

100. Not at this point, but it's not out of the question n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

102. Yeah, and monkeys could still fly out of my butt.

Why don't we deal with this hypothetical support for hypothetical war when it rears its hypothetical head, and stop making apologies for this turd's noxious fucking Holocaust Denial in the meantime?

[Zandor]

105. That

sounds good to me.

[Zandor]

89. But...but...but...

Ahmedinejad doesn't deny the Holocaust, according to his apologists.

I'm confused.

[slackmaster]

112. His position is remarkably similar to that of David Duke

http://www.davidduke.com/?p=1530

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB3mq7qzxDI

[nashville_brook]

114. his rhetoric has evolved -- he didn't deny the holocaust in his address yesterday

Ahmadinejad hasn't been fettered by logic as he pursues his ideological goal.

his ideology is that the Palestinians are being persecuted and he's used a number of illogical and conflicting "arguments" to make a case against the settlements and the larger conflict in the west bank and Gaza.

you're not going to find a rational thread there, so, confusion is logical.

[Zandor]

129. His apologists grope for ways to explain him

and often end up contradicting themselves, given that he is really not defensible.

[goodgd_yall]

128. Ok, I see where the OP argument is going

If you dare criticize Ahmadinejad's view of the Holocaust, you are for war against Iran, or at least you are encouraging it.

Hogwash, I know the difference between critiquing a world leader and going to war. I'm sure other DUers do too.

[nashville_brook]

146. this is about calling off the posturing

we don't need to declare ourselves either way vis a vis Ahmadinejad. "so what" means that you DON'T have to support a war by not supporting Ahmadinejad.

it's like this -- there's a kid on the school bus who calls you a punk every day. you can't stand him. he's a bully and he's posturing for a fight. a responsible parent is going to say "so what" if he calls you a punk. don't escalate the tension. don't give him what he wants. walk away.

[bullwinkle428]

132. Uygur happens to be a denier of the Armenian Genocide - look what I found

in a letter to Salon back in 1999!

"As far as I could see from the article, every non-Armenian scholar in the field believes it is an open question whether this event was a genocide. Is it the claim of the article that all of these people are tainted by the tentacles of the Turkish government? If not, then why is it not pointed out that no one outside of the "Armenian position" believes it is a genocide? Why is it assumed that the "Turkish studies side" has the burden of proof in overturning the verdict of Turkish guilt? It is because of the underlying assumption that despite what these people in "Turkish studies" say, there must have been a genocide."

http://www.salon.com/letters/1999/06/16/punk/index1.html

[Semper_FiFi]

136. I deny the existence of mOhammad. And I deny the existence of iSlam.

I guess we are all entitle to our own beliefs.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

147. That Would Be Silly Since There Is A Historical Record

It would be akin to stating the Earth is flat...

[Semper_FiFi]

164. It's no sillier than denying that the Holocaust happened

or believing that the Holocaust was not really as horrible as Jews say it was (as Ahmadinijad implies). There is an historical record of the damage done to the Jews by the Nazis. To deny it is offensive to all the Jews who were slaughtered and to all those who died fighting the Nazis. Ahmadinijad does so because it is provocative. He is an anti-Semite and he appeals to all the anti-Semitic muslims of the world. Those people (the anti-Semites) will not be happy unless Israel ceases to exist.

[txaslftist]

149. It doesn't matter what he says.

His country nationalized their oil and sold in in Euros. The multinational corporations and the Israeli Hawks and dollar hawks want us to bomb Iran until we have access to the oil (in a US dollar bourse) and they are no longer militarily able to rival Israel.

He makes a convenient bogeyman, a "new Hitler!!!!!"

It's all smoke and mirrors. Remember the last "New Hitler?" Saddam Hussein?

A million dead in a country of eighteen million, and over 2 million refugees just to hang the dumb sumbitch, and all based on a thin tissue of lies.

Just think what we can do to a country of 70 million!

[nashville_brook]

152. it's deja vu all over again, is it not?

[mhatrw]

150. Above and beyond this is the fact that Ahmadinejad has never actually denied anything.

Anti-semitic Hitler admirers love to deny the scope of the Holocaust.

Ahmadinejad appears to have much in common with these jerks in that he questions the Holocaust to further his own political agenda.

But what does Ahmadinejad actually think happened? How many Jews does he believed were exterminated and in what manner? He has never answered these questions as far as I can tell. Nor has he ever tried to defend any of Hitler's anti-Jewish measures as far as I can tell. So what level of crime against humanity his "Holocaust denial" amounts to is not perfectly clear.

[nashville_brook]

156. clarity has never been a prerequisite for outrage.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

166. The guy's not stupid.

My guess is he fully believes 6 million jews died in the holocaust, and he simply plays around with the idea of holocaust denial to piss off Israel and Israel supporters. Which would make him worse, IMO, then the paranoid schizophrenic who actually believes in holocaust denial.

"So what level of crime against humanity his "Holocaust denial" amounts to is not perfectly clear."

It's perfectly clear there's no crime. It's protected speech. You don't see anybody threatening war with Idaho.

[renie408]

170. This would be my take, also.

I also think he is a smart guy. Which means we should deal with him very carefully. I was talking to a friend of mine today and she said that all she could see that we had accomplished by attacking Ahmadinejad was making him MORE popular in Tehran.

[scarletwoman]

193. "So what level of crime against humanity his "Holocaust denial" amounts to is not perfectly clear."

Well, it certainly appears to be a very serious thought crime.

sw

[Megahurtz]

171. Agreed.

I could care less. Just because someone mouths off their opinion means nothing.
Obviously everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

And I do agree it's being used by BushInc. to beat the War Drums for a Hate Iran
and bomb them to "liberate them" campaign.

And then steal their Oil.

Anyone who can't see through this game is blind.

[malaise]

175. I had a thread locked on this subject n/t

[renie408]

176. Was yours the 'bullshit' thread? Cause they are slightly different.

The other one said that Ahmadinejad wasn't really a holocaust denier. This one says he IS a holocaust denier, but so what. So apparently it isn't OK to say he isn't really a holocaust denier, but it is OK to not get really worked up about the fact that he is a holocaust denier.

[candymarl]

180. Are you insane?

After a post like this, flee, flee for your life!
/snark

[ozone_man]

192. Holocaust Denial or Smart Move?

I think what he is doing is turning the tables on the West.

By Chris Voidis

12/12/06 "Information Clearing House" --- -- Why would a man of obvious intelligence, as President Ahmedinejad of Iran surely is, want to provoke the West by inspiring a conference meant to look at the Holocaust? What is really behind the 'Review of the Holocaust: Global Vision' conference?

Throughout Western media, from the day this conference was announced until today, and for many more days to come I am sure, nowhere is this question asked: Why is this conference being held? Rather, we see a lot of fingers pointing at Mr. Ahmedinejad's 'obvious' anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. Furthermore, it is taken for granted that this is the case. President Ahmedinejad cannot be anything else other than an anti-Semite who is bent on exterminating the Jews living in Israel.

Yet, no one has bothered to ask why he doesn't start with the 30 000 or so Jews living in Iran. Why doesn't he start, for example, with Moris Motamed, an Iranian Jew who just happens to sit in Iran's Parliament. How did he get to be a member of the Iranian Parliament, anyway? Was he elected? I thought there was no democracy in Iran. Hmmmm.

Could it be that Mr. Ahmedinejad is not interested in picking up where Hitler left off? After all, it wouldn't be all that difficult to kill 30 000 people. Look at Iraq. Unless of course he is afraid that the whole world would spring into action. After all, we all know that the life of one Jew is worth the life of a thousand Muslims. Right? To kill 30 thousand Iranian Jews would mean killing the equivalent of 30 million people. The world would most certainly not allow that. Right?

What if Mr. Ahmedinejad is doing one of the most sane things in the world? What if he is merely calling the West's bluff? Remember a while back, how the Islamic world was up in arms over the publication of a cartoon depicting the prophet Muhammed? People in the West pointed to Islamic reaction and said "See, these people are backward. Look at how they react to something as self evident as freedom of speech."

Well, it seems to me that Mr. Ahmedinejad has made a fool of the West by tricking us into behaving in the same way. Mr. Ahmedinejad pinpointed the one thing that would stir up controversy in the West. Just as it is a sacrilege to depict the prophet for Islam, so it is a sacrilege to question the Holocaust in the west. Being an intelligent man, and knowing full well that the Holocaust happened, Mr. Ahmedinejad has not questioned the Holocaust itself. Rather, he questioned the myth that has grown around it and how it has been used by Israel and the West in order to deny the rights of the Palestinians. A smart move by the President of Iran.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15884.htm

Personally, my own view is that we have so many holocaust skeletons in our closet like our genocide of the American Indians, or the present holocaust of a million Iraquis. So, before we cast too many stones, let's shine some light on all of our skeletons in the closet.

I suspect he is not so much denying the holocaust happened as denying that Israel should exist as a result, in particular, by the seizing of Palestinian lands. Coupled issues at several levels. Criticism of Israel and Zionism in general is often met by claims of antisemitism. How much of this is to play at home in Iran, I can only speculate.

Locally, we have an art exhibit that looks interesting:

“Independence Paintings: Inspired by Four Stories” was pro-mpted by Schumann’s recent trip to the Palestinian West Bank, as well as his reading of John Hersey’s The Wall, about the Warsaw Ghetto. In the paintings, Schumann compares the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israel Defense Force to the Nazis’ treatment of the Jews of Warsaw during the Holocaust.

And a response from a local rabbi.

“I readily accept that not every criticism of the policies of the State of Israel is anti-Semitism,” Chasen writes. “But attempts to de-legitimate the existence of a Jewish State within living memory of the Holocaust send shivers down the spine of many of us Jews who . . . know in the sinews of our souls that we still live in the lifeboat that the State of Israel provided for the Jewish people in 1948.”

http://www.sevendaysvt.com/nc/columns/state-of-the-arts-art/2007/peter-schumanns-art-hop-exhibit-sparks-controversy.html

It always seems to go this way, that the rights of Palestinians are worthless, or Iraquis at present. Anyway, I agree with Peter Schumann. It's tough to criticize Israel without being called an antisemite. But, it has to be done.

[Harper_is_Bush]

194. But, he's NOT the leader of Iran. n/t

[LeftishBrit]

195. The difference between him and Erdogan

is that no one thinks that Erdogan is using his Armenian genocide denial (which is indeed disgusting) as a pretext for attacking Armenia, or any other country. And I don't know that he's even anti-Armenian; he just doesn't want to admit that Turkey has ever done anything wrong. Whereas Ahmadejinad's Holocaust denial is part of a general antisemitism; and some people think that he is likely to attack Israel as a result.

That's only a part of it; American governments have regarded Iran and its leaders as enemies for a long time. If Iran is invaded it won't be because of the Holocaust denial, and Israel would be just an excuse IMO. It would be because Iran is seen as one of the Bad Guy countries that threatens America's interests; and is suspected of fomenting terrorism. Besides, it's got oil.

I am strongly against attacking Iran; but I also don't think that Holocaust denial is just 'so what'. E.g. there are many countries that are racist and/or oppressive to women and/or homophobic and/or brutal towards poor people. I don't think that invading or bombing these countries is generally a solution or the right thing to do; but still it doesn't make their attitudes and actions just 'so what'.