response 150 of 197:

Oct 15 08:53 UTC 2003

sj2 has a point about hollywood outsizing some tragedies compared to others.
the holocaust was horrible and by some accounts six million people died,
maybe more.  You see plenty of movies and documentaries about that.  But it
is also true that Stalin killed 20 million people in Russia during the great
Purge in the thirties.  In fact even by conservative estimates, Stalin and
Mao both killed at least twice as many people as Hitler.  Also, Pol Pot, the
ruthless and barbaric leader of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia killed millions
of his own people.  I have been to the "killing fields" in Cambodia and seen
stacks of skulls, and pictures of fields littered with human bones for miles
and miles.  It happened.  And how many millions did Pinochet torture or kill
in Chile?

The fact is that what Hitler did was horrifying, but it always gets singled
out in the media as this "ultimate evil", when there was clearly a lot of
barbarism in different places in the twentieth century that was just as
despicable, just as horrifying.  There is no museum in D.C. to memorialize
the Purge, or the Killing Fields, or the 19th century massacre of the american
indians for that matter, but there is for the holocaust.  And that isn't
because those tragedies weren't just as bad, but because the u.s. media
focuses on the holocaust-- it happened in europe and affected a lot more
people in this country than what happened in Russia or China.  And who in the
U.S. really cares that millions of cambodians or chileans got massacred?

What you can ask those who say Hitler was Satan, is if he was, who were
Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, Satan's older brothers?  

response 152 of 197:

Oct 15 15:30 UTC 2003

The point, David, is that you repeatedly stated that Israel was evil due
to its UNIQUE immigration laws when the fact of the matter is that Israel's
laws are similar to most countries; it is US laws which are different.
(I'm glad to see that after literally 4 or 5 iterations of this you've
finally modified your position, but why were you so willing to accept
the falsehood in the first place and yet so reluctant to abandon it?).

The point in general is that no one is "shocked" that Germany has
immigration policies which favor ethnic Germans or that France gives
preferred citizenship to those of French ancestry (blood). Yet mention
that Israel, the Jewish state, provides preferrential immigration to Jews
and we have certain people screaming about "races", racism and apartheid.


sj2: we're getting off topic, but you can read on in that thread about
the specific points raised by Joe. You might be interested in other
statements that this Joe has made about Jews:

http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2003/08/62341_comment.php#63060

        prehistoric tribespeople who haven't progressed beyond militaristic
        plunder, rape, and enslavement of anyone who isn't a member of their
        blood sacrifice tribal cult. 
        ...
        From my reading of the literature of the Jews, they make the killing
        of animals and the burning of the corpses a central ritual of their
        social life. ...attacking and exterminating all living beings in the
        cities of other tribes seems to be another major focus.
        ...
        The common thread is that underlying all of this factionalism and
        nonsense is the generally separative, paranoid, self-centred Jewish
        culture. 

Just today Joe argues that the existence of "Jewish snakes" is what causes
the entire group to be hated. Even if his "Jewish snakes" actually exist,
all he's doing is rationalizing prejudice and hatred, no different than
someone who says that blacks are hated because "black snakes" steal, or
that gays are hated because "gay snakes" are child molesters. This is the
logic of hate.

http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2003/10/72789_comment.php#73280

My point re the Holocaust period was that even when it was possible for
Jews to flee nazi Europe to other countries, no country would take them
in -- despite Jewish immigration quotas being unfilled in those countries.
One could almost think that even had the US accepted several hundred thousand
Jewish immigrants (rather than sending them back to their deaths) that the
US would have been flooded by Jewish immigrants. (Consider that Israel, a
country of 5 million, just absorbed 1 million Jewish immigrants from the
former USSR.  Israel also took in, per capita, more "boat people" than
any other country.)  Simply put, the reason no one was willing to accept
Jewish refugees is because no one wanted Jews and many were happy to
leave them locked in with their nazi executioners. Yes, there were exceptions
such as Raoul Wallenberg and a Japanese diplomat whose name eludes me, but
the glaring reality is how few of these there were.


Richard should consider if the existence of a Holocaust museum (which
recognizes more than just the Jewish victims) deprives any other group of
"victimhood".

response 154 of 197:

Oct 15 18:17 UTC 2003

Because the war would've reached their doorsteps after the germans were 
done with other europeans?? And Japan was already bombing the US?

Besides, what I said is a general rule. I also said that if someone 
does come to your help, be thankful for it but don't whine if no one 
helps you. My point is that don't expect others to sarifice their loves 
ones for you. Even we liberated Bangladesh and send peace-keeping 
troops to other nations.

response 156 of 197:

Oct 16 01:56 UTC 2003

re: a few responses back...lk, I've been to malaysia.  If you are an
american citizen, they stamp your passport, they don't ask you what
religion you are.  They don't allow citizens of Israel, whether they are
jewish or not, into their country.  You could be a catholic citizen of
Israel with an Israeli passport and not get into Malaysia.  But you could
be a jewish citizen of the U.S. with a U.S. passport and you would get in.
That makes what Malaysia does political in nature, not racist.  In fact
one of the persons whom I met up with in Kuala Lumpur was jewish.  He had
a great time there.  lk you have a victim complex, you react to every
viewpoint that you see as anti israel as being racist.  you are being
naive and showing the nature of how radical you really are.  

response 158 of 197:

Oct 16 09:20 UTC 2003

Having an Israeli visa stamp on your passport means you are disallowed 
entry into GCC nations.

"The fact of the matter is that the US State Department ....."

I would've accepted your *fact-of-the-matter*, if you were an 
impartial commissioner or judge investigating the issue. Since you are 
not, I cannot accept your *fact-of-the-matter*.

What I was saying is that the US not wanting immigrants by the boat-
loads might be a better explaination than the one that says they hated 
jews. A few individuals might've turned down immigrants on the basis 
of their religion, but the whole state department? Now thats a little 
hard to believe.

Ummm ... well .... its been almost half a century since the WW-II 
ended. Is that a short period of time to be labelled quick? I guess 
thats debatable. I did not say there has been a *total* change.

I agree change can be undone very quickly but I was just stating my 
belief that a lot has changed since WW-II. And for the better.

You can continue to believe that jews are the most hated community in 
the world. Nothing can stop you from believing that. But I would 
humbly suggest that have a little more faith in your fellow beings and 
take a more optimistic view.

response 160 of 197:

Oct 16 18:19 UTC 2003

yeah if you have an israel exit/entrance stamp in your u.s. passport, you
could be turned away at the Malyasian border.  But is regardless of
whether you are jewish or not.  A catholic who visited Israel and had the
stamp in his passport might get turned away.  It is a political ban.  We
don't do the same thing?  The U.S. has plenty of entrance restrictions,
and had even more in the past, including often blocking people from arab
countries in the past from entering.  But what we did and have done in the
past to not give tourist visas to suspected terrorists or people we
suspect might not leave if we let them in, is called racist when another
country does it?  Could a muslim from Malaysia visit Tel Aviv?

I don't agree with Malaysia's policy, but if we reserve the right in the
U.S. to do what we have to do at the borders-- including turning people
away-- in the intersts of national security, and if Israel does the same
thing to protect their borders--- who are we to argue about what Malaysia
or other muslim countries do on their borders.  We'd sound hypocritical.

response 162 of 197:

Oct 16 20:19 UTC 2003

Given the Malaysian Prime Minister's comments, I think that's extremely
likely.

response 164 of 197:

Oct 16 22:52 UTC 2003

"blah blah blah... and IF Israel... blah blah blah".

See? These are the type of assumptions that I think Dan is concerned about.
(And I know I am. (: )

I know the word "if" is included, but the reality is that this assumption
is a formality and an argument and belief follows. No checking is made into
that assumption, but if one were to suggest that it is wrong then suddenly
there is a demand for tons of proof.

As it is, Richard's assumption is (again) wrong.  Tens of thousands of
Muslims tourists visit Israel each year.

Here is some more of what Mahathir Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia,
said yesterday:

        We are up against a people who think. They survived 2000
        years of pogroms not by hitting back but by thinking,"
        Mahathir said. "They invented Socialism, Communism, human
        rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear
        to be wrong, so that they can enjoy equal rights with others.

In other words, equal/human rights don't apply to Jews; persecuting
them is OK.

        He urged Muslims worldwide to ignore teachings by religious
        fundamentalists that scientific studies are somehow un-Islamic. 
        We need guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships
        for our defense."

response 166 of 197:

Oct 16 23:54 UTC 2003

That's true, but sad.

response 170 of 197:

Oct 17 04:35 UTC 2003

Yeah, except the principle isn't what it used to be.

response 172 of 197:

Oct 17 09:45 UTC 2003

Re #169, Like the Bay of pigs?? Some principle!!! Or training the 
taleban?

Realpolitik drives every nation. Its sold as principle. Thats what PR 
is for.

response 174 of 197:

Oct 18 06:51 UTC 2003

I wish the US stopped deciding whats good for others and whats not.