[Oswald DL]

I was banned for the THIRD time yesterday. I was told in a private message that I was banned for the Orwellian reason of discussing why I was banned! In fact, I still haven't recieved a real reason why I was (and will) be banned. So I can only assume it's because of my political views.

Here's a couple of tips for people who don't want to be banned:
� Always agree that Israel is a wonderful country which has never harmed anyone, and it's motives are completely pure.
� If a moderator is a bigot, don't call them a bigot. They don't like to be reminded.

And so I will be banned after posting this. Therefore, as much as I'd like to, I cannot respond to any of the posts in this thread about slavery reparations.




Here's a rough list of 5 of the worst atrocities of the last few hundred years:

� China (under Mao): 48-53 million
� Slavery (died during shipment to US): 10-20 million
� Congolese killed by Belgium - 8.5 million (upper limit 21.5 million)
� Ukrainians by Soviets: 8 million
� Soviet killed by Nazis: 7 million

Of course, these are only recent genocides. The Israelites of the Bible brag about exterminating whole peoples - including the Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. Additionally, they destroyed the cities of Makkedah, Libnah, Lachish, Gezer, Elgon, Hebron, Debir and Hormah. And of course, murdered all the firstborn of Egypt during the time of Moses. No other tribe can beat the genocidal fervour of the ancient Israelites.

The Holocaust resulted in the deaths of around 6 million Jews. Despite being far from the worst genocide in history, the word Holocaust has become synonymous with genocide. Movies are released regularly depicting it's horrors. But how many films have dealt with the genocides in Mao's China, or the Congo, or the Ukraine? Not many. Museums are built around the world in memorial of the Holocaust - where are the memorials to the other atrocities? It's as though they don't exist.

Jewish supremacists would argue - as they have done on these forums - that the Holocaust is qualitatively different. What they mean of course is that Jewish lives are worth much more than non-Jewish lives. But that can't be said openly. Instead these racists use the following arguments:

� The holocaust is unique because it was a cultured, western people who did the killing
Why does this matter? And aren't the Belgians cultured and western?

� The story of the holocaust can never be overtold
Endless repetition of the subject is just trivializing it, rendering it meaningless. At least the younger generation are starting to get sick of people using the Holocaust for political and financial gain.

Novick writes, "Jews were intent on permanent possession of the gold medal in the Victimization Olympics," concluding that the "memory of the Holocaust is so banal ... precisely because it is so uncontroversial, so unrelated to real divisions in American society." The Holocaust isn't used by Jewish organizations to demand action preventing other genocides -- rather, mainstream Jewry contends that it trivializes their suffering to compare Bosnia or Rwanda to Hitler's charnel houses.

Meanwhile, professional survivors in America have created endless museums and education programs that take the uniqueness of Jewish suffering for granted. They've also created a whole host of advocacy organizations whose fundraising depends on keeping the memory of the Holocaust alive. It has indeed become an industry -- as former Israeli foreign secretary Abba Eban quipped, "There's no business like 'Shoah' business."

� Being Jewish, I'm concerned for my people. The rest can jump off a cliff.
I see.

Some cynical and dishonest people also use the death of 6 million people as a kind of excuse for the treatment of the Palestinians, or as a form of moral blackmail. Of course, by doing this, they show they have no morals. A recent example is Israel banning the BBC because they dared to show a program about Israel's nuclear and chemical weapons program. Israel compared the program to 'Nazi propaganda'. This is an all too familiar pattern of Israel wrapping itself in the rhetoric of victimhood in order to divert attention from what they're doing. In this specific example, they are sending the message - "If you are a journalist who reveals anything about Israel's WMDs, you AND YOUR ORGANISATION will be banned from Israel, AND accused of being Nazis". Israel are now trying the same tactics on Australia's ABC. Iraq can be invaded even when it has no WMDs, but Israel's WMDs are beyond criticism.

Unfortunately, there are still some disgusting supremacists who believe that that some humans, because they belong to a certain race or tribe, are worth more than others. I believe in the fundamental equality of humanity. No doubt I will get banned, again, and this thread will be immediately locked, for this heretical viewpoint.


Oswald Defense Lawyer

[BasketofPuppies]

Propaganda, anyone?

[voodoo]

I for one am quite tired of the political use of the Holocaust. I am more sympathetic with the Russians if we are talking about the genocides of the WWII.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Oswald DL:

� Slavery (died during shipment to US): 10-20 million

This stat is utter nonsense.

Virtually any *legitimate* source estimate of the slave trade puts the TOTAL numbers (not just to North America, but worldwide) at around 10-28 million, with around 20% being killed in transit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1523100.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/af...chapter6.shtml

Of course, not a good thing by any means, but since you're playing the 'my atrocity had a greater headcount than your atrocity' game, at least get the numbers straight.

[maxelson]

1)I don't see why one has to be more sympathetic of one mass murder over another.

2) ODL: quit your friggin whining. You spout more propaganda than the American Government.

3... and I say this only because ODL DESPERATELY wants some kind of comment on this, being at LEAST the second time he's posted this drivel:
WHY remember? Simple. It has happened again and again and again throughout human history. Because humanity has PROVEN time and again that it is capable of committing these acts, because Lord of the Flies is true, because we have a lovely propensity for disrespect of life, because "get the other" seems to be deeply ingrained in the human condition, because mankind does not learn. THIS is why these stories should be told again. And Again. And FVCKING AGAIN until they are KNOWN VERBATIM by EVERY man, woman and child on the planet, because to forget is to deny culpability. And open the friggin door to it happening AGAIN. TRIVIALIZING IT? Then we need to get MORE DETAILED. AND SHOW PICTURES. If you can get desensitized to genocide, well, then, you are NOT human.

And what. Blame the Jews because they are being RESPONSIBLE CHRONICLERS of the event?

Now. Quit it with this friggin derivative, HOPELESSLY unoriginal CRAP- start actually USING your oh so "rage against the machine" brain because this rancid air is just TIRED.

THIS. Is a FRIGGIN INTERNET FORUM. It is a trivial toy. It is a source of AMUSEMENT. PICK a WORTHY MACHINE to rage against. Because, I gotta tell you, this is PATHETIC. "MacNN is the machine which conspires to silence me! Well, I WILL be heard! I will be heard, I tell ya!" Are you KIDDING me? You gonna put on fake hair and a mustache every time the local coffee shop throws you out?

Coward. If you think your friggin message is SO bloody important, stop hiding behind this little ASCII shield, print up you tirade and go to the NEAREST CITY CENTER and start spouting it. LIVE. In person. And don't forget to send us invitations.

You will never believe why you are banned. You will ALWAYS assume it is a conspiracy to shut you up. You will ALWAYS decide that there is some organized plot to squash the "truth". You refuse to even LISTEN to WHY you have been banned- so what the frig is the point of telling you? You are the WORST kind of hypocrite: you close your mind off and then rail at others because they "cannot... or WILL not see it."
Paint your reality elsewhere.
Go sell crazy somewhere else. We're all stocked up here.
Take you cheap, unoriginal, poorly thought out and ugly propaganda somewhere else. YOu obviously feel this is some great manifesto you have created; that you weild the great sword of "I'll Show You." Go preach to a choir. Much bigger idiots than you have already compiled and spouted this meaningless and above all POINTLESS refuse.

To put it more simply and in monosyllabic terms:
Hast seen the white whale?

Let me know if you need the allusion explained to you.

[Oswald DL]

WHY remember? Simple. It has happened again and again and again throughout human history. Because humanity has PROVEN time and again that it is capable of committing these acts, because Lord of the Flies is true, because we have a lovely propensity for disrespect of life, because "get the other" seems to be deeply ingrained in the human condition, because mankind does not learn.

Read again the quote form the link I gave - [i]"The Holocaust isn't used by Jewish organizations to demand action preventing other genocides -- rather, mainstream Jewry contends that it trivializes their suffering to compare Bosnia or Rwanda to Hitler's charnel houses."[/i}

THIS is why these stories should be told again. And Again. And FVCKING AGAIN until they are KNOWN VERBATIM by EVERY man, woman and child on the planet, because to forget is to deny culpability. And open the friggin door to it happening AGAIN. TRIVIALIZING IT? Then we need to get MORE DETAILED. AND SHOW PICTURES.

Heres a picture:

Horrific isn't it? I guess some people are more 'chosen' than otherrs.

[maxelson]

Again. Lovely bit of op ed. Or propaganda.
One groups says this, another says, "yeah, well this trivializes MY pain!"
Comparison of pain. Useless.

Mainstream Jewery? OK. Interesting quote. Back it up. This is still nothing but someone's opinion on the issue. Again: what is your point? What are you trying to show, here?

I'm certain they wouldn't have let the pink triangles in either. What's your point? What are we trying to prove? And what point are you trying to make by proving it?

[Millennium]

I have been silent on this debate for a long time. I've had no part on the debated on whether or not you should be banned, ODL. I think it's time I clarified a few things, however. You have not been banned for your views.

You have been banned because you are being an �sshole. Trying to hide behind your views will not save you from that, because while your views deserve to be respected, that doesn't give you the right to be a complete and total jerk about it.

Yes, it is true that the Holocaust is, at times, overplayed (and it's really a sad commentary on humanity in general that it's even possible to overplay something as horrific as the Holocaust). However, you have gone well beyond simply pointing out that fact, to making some very serious accusations that you can't even back up for the most part. That is the "hateful" speech for which you have been banned, not the facts which you have presented.

You are a zealot. I can say this with confidence, because you have systematically accused anyone who disagrees with you of being a zealot. Case in point: vmarks, who you have lied about multiple times over the course of this debacle. Simply because he disagrees with you, you call him bigoted and racist, when he has said nothing whatsoever to lend any credence to that claim.

No one here is saying that Israel can do no wrong. Even a cursory look into the history of modern Israel shows how it was won through underhanded tactics that aren't any better than what Hamas does now in an attempt to win the land back. No worse, but no better either; Israel and Palestine are brothers in the truest sense of the term. No one who knows the history of that parcel of land can argue with that. However, to claim superiority for one side or the other is wrong no matter which side you pick. There is no moral high ground anymore, not because it doesn't exist but because all sides abandoned it long ago, likely before you were even born. True to your name, I suppose that you may be trying to play Devil's Advocate, taking the side that you don't see most of us taking. There is nothing wrong with that, except that if Devil's Advocate was what you were going for then you have failed; instead of rationally arguing for The Other Side by drawing conclusions from facts, you have jumped from facts to accusations.

You are not welcome here, as long as you continue to make these accusations. Come back with some actual proof to back up your claims, or just stick to the facts. Either way, I think you'll find yourself taken much more seriously once you do this.

[Oswald DL]

Mainstream Jewery? (sic) OK. Interesting quote. Back it up.

Please count the number of Holocaust museums/memorials, and then count the number of museums/memorials for the genocides mentioned at the top of this thread. Get back to me when you have the numbers

I have been silent on this debate for a long time. I've had no part on the debated (sic) on whether or not you should be banned, ODL. I think it's time I clarified a few things, however. You have not been banned for your views.

Let me get this straight. You had no part in the debate on whether I should be banned, yet you know I haven't banned for my views. A strange contradiction.

Who has banned me three (soon to be 4) times and for what? Not once have I received a straightforward answer.

You have been banned because you are being an arsehole. Trying to hide behind your views will not save you from that, because while your views deserve to be respected, that doesn't give you the right to be a complete and total jerk about it.

If I have been tenacious in getting my point across, then what's wrong with that? That's no reason to call me an arsehole.

That is the "hateful" speech for which you have been banned, not the facts which you have presented.

If saying that 'I believe in the fundamental equality of humanity' is hateful speech, then what are you going to do when there is some real hateful speech? Burn them at the stake?

You are a zealot. I can say this with confidence, because you have systematically accused anyone who disagrees with you of being a zealot.

So that makes you a .... well, you work it out.

Case in point: vmarks, who you have lied about multiple times over the course of this debacle. Simply because he disagrees with you, you call him bigoted and racist,

Er, have I mentioned vmarks in this thread? Please show me where I have lied about him. Whether he disagrees with me or not, he certainly believes, and has clearly stated, that one genocide is more important than all of the ones mentioned at the top of this thread - a personal insult to more than 80 million people. And if I think someone is a bigot, why can't I say they are? Does it make a difference if they are a moderator?

[maxelson]

Memorials? You are basing your case on the number of memorials?

Let me draw you a little parallel: If my child dies, should I erect a monument to dead children everywhere?
Surely, the death of a child is lamentable, but will I be pilloried if I only memorialize MY child?

So. In order to come into legitimacy on this point, you feel that the Jews should erect museums and memorials to... what... genocide everywhere? Otherwise they are being "insensitive?"

Again: What is your Point? What case are you trying to make? Where is this argument going? See, now I am curious. I want to know WHY this bothers you. I REALLY want to know what the point is.

To the Mods: I would ask that if there is going to be a banning, could we please hold off until I see an answer to these questions?

[ThinkInsane]

I'm sure a banning there will be. And since this same topic was locked yesterday, it's safe to say it'll be locked again. But we'll wait a little while to see if you get your answer Max.

[theolein]

I somehow tend to think of Oswald DL (aka OswaldDefenseLawyer) as being what used to be called a "jew-baiter". One seriously gets the impression that you are anti-semitic, or have something personal against the Jews. I suspect that has something to do with why you were banned. Be thankful that you're not in Germany, where "Jew-baiting" or any form or stiiring up of hatred based on racial or ethnic grounds (Volksverhetzung) can get you arrested. They take it quite seriously.

I think the sad and ironic thing is that you do, as millenium pointed out, have some points, but manage to wreck them all on your own.

I personally find it somehow questionable and sad that the Holocaust is given such attention internationally, while other genocidal acts in recent history, Armenia, Cambodia, Rwanda etc, go almost unreported.

[maxelson]

Guys, I ain't accusingf him of being anything. "Jew baiter", "anti semite", whatever.
I simply want to see WHY he is posting this information? I want to know what the argument is because I cannot find one. All I see is incendiary rhetoric backed by some seriously flawed logic.
I want to understand what the point of all this is.

And I do thank the Modership for allowing the thread to remain open long enough for me to see an answer.

I appreciate it, gents!

As for other acts of genocide seeing less airtime: well, perhaps one should ask the victims? As I stated before: the event in question- the attempted eradication of the Jews during the 30s and 40s is important to the identity of the Jews. They feel it is their responsibility to make sure the world does not forget. Is it their responsibility to make sure the world also remembers Pol Pot? I mean, that is the issue here, is it not? Is there something else?
Now, If the Genocidewatch organization (www.genocidewatch.org) failed to make mention of the other events, I'd say you got a case.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by Oswald DL:
Let me get this straight. You had no part in the debate on whether I should be banned, yet you know I haven't banned for my views. A strange contradiction.

Just because he didn't take part in the discussion to ban you, doesn't mean that he couldn't read the conversation about whether or not to ban you. What, do you think we bang up our phone bills with conference calls to discuss who gets banned? All the magic happens right here, in our little forum. And he's not lying, I just checked. He never offered an opinion on the subject. Adjust your tin-foil hat.

Who has banned me three (soon to be 4) times and for what? Not once have I received a straightforward answer.

I told you yesterday exactly why you were being banned. The fact that you continue to libel vmarks (at this point, it doesn't matter if you mention his name, you've made it clear who you are referring too). You were told that your banning was due to violating the TOS, specifically: "knowingly false and/or defamatory, hateful, harassing, abusive, inaccurate,"

I also told you to contact an admin for further clarification. As of yet, you have not. and I don't think it would matter, because no matter what we tell you, you've got your mind made up and nothing we say is going to convince you this is anything but a vast zionist conspiracy.

[BasketofPuppies]

Originally posted by theolein:
I personally find it somehow questionable and sad that the Holocaust is given such attention internationally, while other genocidal acts in recent history, Armenia, Cambodia, Rwanda etc, go almost unreported.

The Holocaust Museum wanted to add a WWI section covering what happened between Turkey and Armenia, but the Turkish government threatened to raise a stink if something like that happened and implied that doing something like that would hurt relations between Turkey and Israel (yes, Israel has allies other than the United States) and that Jewish people living in Turkey might not be treated so well.

[DeathToWindows]

I wonder if a gag order is a good idea in Oswald's case... or possibly a vow of silence.

[Millennium]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oswald DL:
[B]Please count the number of Holocaust museums/memorials, and then count the number of museums/memorials for the genocides mentioned at the top of this thread. Get back to me when you have the numbers

Let me get this straight. You had no part in the debate on whether I should be banned, yet you know I haven't banned for my views. A strange contradiction.

The debates are on record.

Who has banned me three (soon to be 4) times and for what? Not once have I received a straightforward answer.

You were banned by a consensus of the moderators and admins. Who physically performed the act of banning you, I do not know.

If I have been tenacious in getting my point across, then what's wrong with that? That's no reason to call me an arsehole.

Certainly you are being tenacious, but that is not why you were banned. I would have spoken in your favor, had that ever been cited as a reason for banning you.

If saying that 'I believe in the fundamental equality of humanity' is hateful speech, then what are you going to do when there is some real hateful speech? Burn them at the stake?

"I believe in the fundamental equality of humanity" is not hateful speech, no. I find it interesting, though, that this is just about the only sentence you ever quote in your own defense. What about the rest of your posts? Perhaps you should re-examine the rest of the posts that you have written.

So that makes you a .... well, you work it out.

I am not calling you a zealot based on what you believe. I am calling you a zealot because of a very specific pattern of behavior you exhibit, namely, automatic vilification of anyone who appears to disagree with you.

It should be noted that I agree with a few -even many- of your points. I do not take it to the same extremes that you appear to, but we agree on many fundamental issues. Yet, because I've worded my arguments in a manner that is critical of you, you automatically see me as some kind of grand arch-enemy.

Perhaps I'm a zealot too. Maybe it really does take one to know one. I don't claim to know.

Er, have I mentioned vmarks in this thread? Please show me where I have lied about him.

In this thread, you have not mentioned vmarks; that is true. Your remarks in other threads, though, are a matter of public record.

Whether he disagrees with me or not, he certainly believes, and has clearly stated, that one genocide is more important than all of the ones mentioned at the top of this thread - a personal insult to more than 80 million people.

Where did he state that?

And if I think someone is a bigot, why can't I say they are? Does it make a difference if they are a moderator?

You can say that you think they are a bigot. Unless you can provide facts to back it up, saying that they are -in other words, presenting opinion as fact- is another matter entirely. You have failed to provide those facts.

[theolein]

Originally posted by maxelson:
Guys, I ain't accusingf him of being anything. "Jew baiter", "anti semite", whatever.
I simply want to see WHY he is posting this information? I want to know what the argument is because I cannot find one. All I see is incendiary rhetoric backed by some seriously flawed logic.
I want to understand what the point of all this is.

And I do thank the Modership for allowing the thread to remain open long enough for me to see an answer.

I appreciate it, gents!

As for other acts of genocide seeing less airtime: well, perhaps one should ask the victims? As I stated before: the event in question- the attempted eradication of the Jews during the 30s and 40s is important to the identity of the Jews. They feel it is their responsibility to make sure the world does not forget. Is it their responsibility to make sure the world also remembers Pol Pot? I mean, that is the issue here, is it not? Is there something else?
Now, If the Genocidewatch organization (www.genocidewatch.org) failed to make mention of the other events, I'd say you got a case.

You don't think posting a URL to a dotorg which nobody knows about (first for me today) is a bit stunted then?

I think, in the West at least, it would be difficult to avoid references to the Holocaust, considering that there have been literally thousands of documentaries, movies and books on the subject . Some of them are by Jews wanting the world to know (Spielberg is Jewish for instance, so was Uris) and some by gentiles. However, a lot of somewhat underhanded handling of the Holocaust by the US and the UK never gets much airtime (both knew about it but never mentioned it much in the war, UK's treatment of Palestine) and one would really have to look hard to find documentaries on the massacre of the Armenians, and digging up much on Pol Pot's terror Regime or Idi Amin's murdering is not that easy as information on the Holocaust.

This might be to due to thousands of Jewish authors, webmasters, producers etc producing material on it, but one asks oneself (at least I do) why Armenians of which there are many in the USA don't get to produce or write about as much the Armenian massacre as the Jews do. I wonder if there isn't in fact a modern bias towards Israel to an certain extent?

[DeathToWindows]

Originally posted by Millennium:
You can say that you think they are a bigot. Unless you can provide facts to back it up, saying that they are -in other words, presenting opinion as fact- is another matter entirely. You have failed to provide those facts.

And without proof, the statements are simply libelous

[BasketofPuppies]

Originally posted by theolein:
This might be to due to thousands of Jewish authors, webmasters, producers etc producing material on it, but one asks oneself (at least I do) why Armenians of which there are many in the USA don't get to produce or write about as much the Armenian massacre as the Jews do. I wonder if there isn't in fact a modern bias towards Israel to an certain extent?

There's plenty; it just doesn't get anywhere near the publicity that the Jewish stuff gets. I suspect this is, in part, because the Turks threaten to raise a stink whenever the issue comes up.

And then there's the big difference between what the Germans did in WWII and what the Turks did in WWI: the Turks gave the Armenians a choice: leave or die; the Jews didn't have a choice - they were forced into camps.

Still what the Turks did in WWI was terrible and should get far more coverage than it does.

[theolein]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
There's plenty; it just doesn't get anywhere near the publicity that the Jewish stuff gets. I suspect this is, in part, because the Turks threaten to raise a stink whenever the issue comes up.

And then there's the big difference between what the Germans did in WWII and what the Turks did in WWI: the Turks gave the Armenians a choice: leave or die; the Jews didn't have a choice - they were forced into camps.

Still what the Turks did in WWI was terrible and should get far more coverage than it does.

My fvck!!! You and I not fighting!!! We must have a beer over this moment.

::opens beer, hands sixpack around

Cool!

Back OnT: I suppose the fact that Turkey has been a close ally of the States makes it a more difficult situation politically as well.

[maxelson]

Originally posted by theolein:
You don't think posting a URL to a dotorg which nobody knows about (first for me today) is a bit stunted then?

Be serious, will you? It was an example and you know it. What about knowledge of history? Should I be raising a ruckus because not 3% of the people in this country I live in realize that had Joseph Warren lived HE probably would have been the first president of the US? More's the point, should I feel it unjust? Lack of knowledge of the history of other peoples is lamentable, surely, but I don't think it points to some greater conspiracy.

I think, in the West at least, it would be difficult to avoid references to the Holocaust, considering that there have been literally thousands of documentaries, movies and books on the subject . Some of them are by Jews wanting the world to know (Spielberg is Jewish for instance, so was Uris) and some by gentiles. However, a lot of somewhat underhanded handling of the Holocaust by the US and the UK never gets much airtime (both knew about it but never mentioned it much in the war, UK's treatment of Palestine) and one would really have to look hard to find documentaries on the massacre of the Armenians, and digging up much on Pol Pot's terror Regime or Idi Amin's murdering is not that easy as information on the Holocaust.

This might be to due to thousands of Jewish authors, webmasters, producers etc producing material on it, but one asks oneself (at least I do) why Armenians of which there are many in the USA don't get to produce or write about as much the Armenian massacre as the Jews do. I wonder if there isn't in fact a modern bias towards Israel to an certain extent?

Don't GET to? Once again: what disturbs me here is not so much the thought as the wording. You seem to be alluding to the idea that there is some kind of conspiracy brerwed up.
If Armenienas want to produce something, they'll do it.
If gays wish to produce something outside of the documentary "The Pink Triange", well, they will. I simply fail to see how this amounts to a bias toward Israel. How does it? Once again: If these other groups wish to tell a story, They can and they WILL. If they want to erect monuments and museums, THEY WILL. How does any of this point to some grand American bias toward Jews? Honestly, I don't understand how it is you are drawing this conclusion.

[Oswald DL]

Memorials? You are basing your case on the number of memorials?

The lack of memorials is a symptom of the issue. The cause is the veneration of the Holocaust above all other genocides. There is a prominent Holocaust Memorial in Washington. A memorial to an episode which happened on another continent. There is no such memorial to Native Americans, to African Slavery - events which happened within the US! Books, movies, documentaries - all remember the holocaust above all else. Again - the cause is the veneration of the Holocaust above all other genocides. This perversion and exploitation of suffering is now being brazenly used by Israel and it's supporters to justify it's actions. Peter Novick's book The Holocaust in American Life describes the evolution of this phenomenon.

Be thankful that you're not in Germany,

I think they (and France) also have a law against holocaust denial. No sane person believes there wasn't a holocaust, but why is there no law in Belgium against denial of the genocide in the Congo? (Why is their no law against the belief that the moon is made of green cheese.) Again, because the holocaust is seen as 'qualitatively different' and more important than other atrocities. It's almost a thought-crime to think otherwise.

Where did he state that?

here
The holocaust was the greatest crime "in the history of humankind". I guess Slavs and Africans aren't human.

because the Turks threaten to raise a stink whenever the issue comes up

Just imagine - "Documentary which mentions Holocaust shelved after Germans raise stink". Not likely.

[maxelson]

A massive amount of Holocaust mem orials:
I've already answered to that. Why would a Jew erect a memorial to a Cambodian Genocide? Why would a Turk create the Stalin Pogrom Museum.
If you want Belgium to create a law concerning the Congo's troubles, well, write one and submit it to their legislature!
You point to one person's opinion of the Holocaust and take it as wrote? Use it as evidence of a conspiracy?
Seriously. I have No idea what it is you are raging agains and, more importantly, WHY.
I do not understand your point and I want to. What is it you want to accomplish by arguing this? I want your MOTIVE.
I have asked the mods to keep this thread open for that.

[itai195]

Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
The Holocaust Museum wanted to add a WWI section covering what happened between Turkey and Armenia, but the Turkish government threatened to raise a stink if something like that happened and implied that doing something like that would hurt relations between Turkey and Israel (yes, Israel has allies other than the United States) and that Jewish people living in Turkey might not be treated so well.

I've heard this as well. I also think the Holocaust Museum has exhibits on Rwanda now. A lot of Jews also think that remembrance of the Holocaust has lost its focus and are attempting to remedy the situation.

But to go out of your way to try to argue that this means Jews think they're superior to other races -- that's just ridiculous. Can I also say that African Americans think they're superior to other races because most of the money they donate to medical research goes to Sickle Cell research?

I also think harboring on the movie industry is a little misguided. Most war movies that Hollywood puts out take place during WW2 or Vietnam -- does that mean that Hollywood thinks those two wars are more important than any other wars? No, serious movies only use setting as a context in which they can portray some more meaningful observations regarding life, war, love, genocide, etc. One would have a hard time, for example, arguing that The Thin Red Line is just a movie about WW2 even though it's set in Guadalcanal. Similarly, one would have a hard time arguing that The Pianist is just a movie about the Holocaust.

Finally, it's also somewhat humorous that ODL seems to think it's possible to objectively rate genocides. When the numbers are that large, anyone is entitled to their own subjective opinion, and these opinions are often emotional (and thus illogical). vmarks never said the other genocides weren't awful, he merely said that he finds the Holocaust to be the worst. Who are you to judge his personal beliefs? Maybe he lost family members?

[maxelson]

Yes, yes, and Mr. Shindler was, by all accounts, even his wife's, caught up in saving Jews because it was a means to a business end and WHAT OF IT, I continue to ask?
Raoul Wallenberg saved Jews in Budapest because he thought it was the RIGHT THING TO DO. Shindler saved dozens. Wallenberg saved THOUSANDS- not for profit, but because it was the RIGHT THING TO DO. He got in Eichman's FACE because it was the RIGHT THING TO DO. His motive was SAVING PEOPLE as opposed to profit and my bet is you have NO idea who he is ... and yet... am I claiming there is some conspiracy to keep his memory down because Spielberg wrote a movie glorifying one who did FAR less than others and for FAR less pure motives? SHould we also accuse Mr. Wallenberg of bigotry because he saved Jews as opposed to Cambodians? Or Russians?
WHAT OF IT?!? AGAIN, I ask... WHAT IS THE ARGUMENT YOU ARE MAKING?

[thunderous_funker]

As someone who mostly agrees with your position, ODL, I hope you'll listen to me when I say this.

It is not your politics that is the problem, its your tactics. You have leveled very hateful accussations at the person for not seeing the world as you do. I read your posts in the most recent flamefest and I even posted as much.

By attacking vmarks personally, you engaged in activity that both hurts your credibility and lowers the level of discourse on the topic.

Your desire to bring attention to the forgotten genocides of history is noble. Your attempts to elevate those atrocities by tearing down people's sense of horror at the Holocaust is hateful. People do not need to feel less repulsed by the Holocaust in order to lament other atrocities. The cosmic supply of remorse and anger at injustice is not diminished by the Holocaust being more widely acknowledged.

[Zimphire]

This forum is hardly PRO-Jewish,

It seems to me you have a chip on your shoulders about the Jews, and their history.

But hey, that is just MHO.

[Logic]

Originally posted by maxelson:

Raoul Wallenberg saved Jews in Budapest because he thought it was the RIGHT THING TO DO. Shindler saved dozens. Wallenberg saved THOUSANDS- not for profit, but because it was the RIGHT THING TO DO.

Wallenberg who mysteriously vanished, and no one knows yet what happened. Well, it is known that the russians had something to do with it, but still nothing is official. Why has no one made a movie about him? Why hasn't there been a quest to find out the Truth� about him? Where are the monuments about his sacrifice in saving Jews? I'll stop here since I don't know if this has anything to do with the ongoing topic. But yes, I do know who he is.

I understand ODL's point but how he brings it to these boards I do not agree with.

[Oswald DL]

Yes, yes, and Mr. Shindler was, by all accounts, even his wife's, caught up in saving Jews because it was a means to a business end and WHAT OF IT, I continue to ask?

The spelling is Schindler. And wipe the foam off your mouth.

Raoul Wallenberg saved Jews ... and my bet is you have NO idea who he is

Ha! Funny you should mention Wallenberg, since I'm distantly related to him! Another victim of the Soviets.

WHAT IS THE ARGUMENT YOU ARE MAKING?

Writing in capitals doesn't seem to improve your comprehension skills. So I'll say it again -
The holocaust has become venerated above all other atrocities - this has led to it being used as moral and political weapon in a way that is an insult to the 6 million who died.

Your attempts to elevate those atrocities by tearing down people's sense of horror at the Holocaust is hateful.

I haven't meant to do that at all. The sense of horror has become been banal and meaningless with repetition.

People do not need to feel less repulsed by the Holocaust in order to lament other atrocities.

I wish people were more repulsed by all atrocities.

[maxelson]

Actually, there have been two movies made about him.
I'll recommend the Swedish flick, "Good Evening Mr. Wallenberg".

Big Raoul is pretty much one of my heros. All Russia has ever done of late is confirm that he died. The files have not been opened to say how, where, why or when.

And there ARE quests to find out the truth concerning his life after he was taken by the Soviets. Quite a few, in fact. Very active quests. Still active- although most hit a wall in 1991. The state prison archives were opened to the Wallenberg foundation and numerous documents were found, but none pertaining to his current whereabouts. The Raoul Wallenberg Foundation is but one such organization dedicated to his memory. There are others. Raoul Wallenberg is (or was, last time I knew), the only person to have honerary American Citizenship. He is also highly honored in Israel, and has honorary citizenship there as well as in Canada. There is a very impressive monument in Budapest.

Wallenberg ROCKS. And if you do not know his story, you need to.
Start here:
http://www.raoul-wallenberg.org.ar/e...lldefauing.htm

[maxelson]

Right. The guy is getting insulting and he still only half answers the questions.

Ban, lock, whatever. I'm done with him.

[Logic]

I forgot "God Kv�ll, Hr Wallenberg"(or something like that IIRC).

I read quite a bit about him in school in Sweden but I didn't know some of the things you mentioned. Forgot about the foundation Sweden set up(also IIRC) . Interesting indeed. See Sweden wasn't all that bad in WWII

I must also go back to Sweden soon but that is a completly different story

[DeathToWindows]

Ok... time to dump ODL like the ton of bricks he is.

Mods : go get him

[Millennium]

Originally posted by DeathToWindows:
Ok... time to dump ODL like the ton of bricks he is.

Mods : go get him

The appropriate authorities have been notified. As soon as strechyanus is taken care of, it's probably not much of a stretch to say that ODL is next.

[Oswald DL]

Ban him! Ban him! Listen to the mob!

When I'm banned, can you lock this thread and my slavery one - otherwise I'll have to re-register in order to reply to any posts.
Thanks

[thunderous_funker]

I'm reading this thread and I don't see a reason for banning him based on what I read here.

He has kept his arguments to the issue (why is the Holocaust venerated above all other atrocities and does this phenomenon help or hinder the cause of preventing future genocide) and refrained from personal attacks.

Am I missing something?

Surely its controversial topic and he's taken a controversial position, but as long as its debated topically (although heatedly) I don't see a reason for banning.

This certainly isn't the kind of namecalling, mudfest spectacle that often occurs between Zimph and some of his favorite baiters on this board.

Am I crazy?

I criticized ODL when he openly insulted vmarks for his opinion in the other thread. There was no call for it. Other than references to the other thread and what was said, I don't see the same thing happening here.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

One thing ODL is being disingenuous about is that it's overly common for anyone to tout that talking about the horrors of slavery, or any other historical tragedy is 'dumping on the holocaust'. That's not generally what anyone talking about by 'cheapening' the memory of the holocaust is saying.

What they are more often (by far) referring to is things like people shamelessly comparing the holocaust to a FREAKIN' TAX CUT. Or pretending in the worst sort of blatant intellectual dishonesty that Bush or (name whatever politician you dislike) is in anyway comparable to Adolph Hitler.

Don't roll your eyes and pretend no one makes such lame comparisons, I've seen them more times than I've cared to, and often by otherwise intelligent/rational people.

It's by the way equally disgusting to compare slavery, or other genocides with current political events one disagrees with that absolutely PAIL in their triviality of comparison, which I dare say we've all witnessed as well.

THAT is the kind of thing people are talking about when they say someone is 'cheapening' the holocaust or politicizing it in a negative way, nine times out of ten- not making comparisons to historic events that really are anywhere near on any sort of comparable scale of horrific.

[Demonhood]