Trending Topics:

‘NYT’ publishes Holocaust trivia on front page

Israel/Palestine
on 235 Comments
"Book" with word Jew printed 6 million times

“Book” with word Jew printed 6 million times

There’s a lot going on in the Middle East, but what is important for readers in the engine-room of the American empire? The New York Times ran a frontpage story yesterday by Jodi Rudoren titled “Holocaust Told in One Word, 6 Million Times”on a “book” published in Israel that seeks to memorialize victims of the Holocaust by printing the word “Jew” 6 million times over 1250 pages.

The Times’ Jerusalem correspondent flashes shoe-leather:

The book, more art than literature, consists of the single word “Jew,” in tiny type, printed six million times to signify the number of Jews killed during the Holocaust. It is meant as a kind of coffee-table monument of memory, a conversation starter and thought provoker….

“That’s how the Nazis viewed their victims: These are not individuals, these are not people, these are just a mass we have to exterminate.

“Now get closer, put on your reading glasses, and pick a ‘Jew,’ ” [originator of book, Phil] Chernofsky continued. “That Jew could be you. Next to him is your brother. Oh, look, your uncles and aunts and cousins and your whole extended family. A row, a line, those are your classmates. Now you get lost in a kind of meditative state where you look at one word, ‘Jew,’ you look at one Jew, you focus on it and then your mind starts to go because who is he, where did he live, what did he want to do when he grew up?”

Had enough? We read it so you don’t have to.

No Norman Finkelstein or the late Peter Novick on the sacralization/commercialization/trivializing of the Holocaust. No Avraham Burg, The Holocaust Is Over, We Must Rise From Its Ashes. No Hannah Arendt on the Holocaust being a European crime for which Israel had to conduct a show trial of a Nazi leader.

Yes Abraham Foxman. (He wants one in the Oval Office… “It’s haunting.”) Yes a cute last paragraph.

No Roma. No homosexuals. No news.

Thanks to James North.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

235 Responses

  1. OlegR
    OlegR
    January 27, 2014, 11:17 am

    The only time me and my father went to the Shoah museum in Jerusalem
    we added six names of our relatives to the list. Shoah is not some abstract collective
    wound in the memory it’s personal.

    You don’t want to remember the Shoah or have your own way Phil that’s fine but don’t go lecturing people about the “right” way to do it.Neither you nor any of the names you mentioned have the right to do so.

    • ziusudra
      ziusudra
      January 27, 2014, 11:51 am

      Greetings OlegR,
      Philosophy of WWI :
      One human death is a tragedy, 1 mn. a statistic.
      Genocide in history shows various numbers big
      & small of different peoples, all tragic.
      Who personally tabulated 6 mn?
      How many Sinti & Roma were killed?
      How many Homosexuals, Mentally ill were killed?
      How many P.o.w. of Polish, Russian, Americans
      were killed?
      Is World Jewry so solipsistic, narcissistic & unreflecting
      to continuosly always print their own, non official,
      undocumented tallly to the world?
      ziusudra
      PS Get off de profit Potti!

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 27, 2014, 12:10 pm

        Are these groups incapable of printing their own books?

        You should thank us Jews. We are the ones who put our time and money into remembrance, for all. I’m not aware of your efforts.

      • Eva Smagacz
        Eva Smagacz
        January 27, 2014, 12:20 pm

        The reason why you put your time and money into remembrance of Jews exclusively is repellent, hopmi.

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 28, 2014, 3:33 am

        The reason why he invests time and money in remembrance is even more repellent. He is packaging the suffering and murder of his parents’ or grandparents’ generation for sale as “The Holocaust(R)”. “Give us other people’s land, the reparations due to individuals and your own tax money and buy yourself a fresh conscience!”

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 27, 2014, 12:34 pm

        hophmi “We are the ones who put our time and money into remembrance, for all.”

        My family and I have no problem remembering without the need for any of the superfluous props or Holocaust industry that suck up your money and time.

        ” I’m not aware of your efforts”

        Judging by your posts, you’re just not aware.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 27, 2014, 12:44 pm

        >> You should thank us Jews. We are the ones who put our time and money into remembrance, for all.

        Not only is this comment incredibly arrogant, but it’s completely laughable, coming from a hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 27, 2014, 12:47 pm

        “We are the ones who put our time and money into remembrance, for all.”

        HA!! Yeah, how magnanimous…

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        January 27, 2014, 1:55 pm

        Aw shucks, hophead, thanks for looking out for us goys.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 27, 2014, 3:56 pm

        “We are the ones who put our time and money into remembrance, for all. I’m not aware of your efforts.”hopmi

        And when you are not doing that you are busy aiding and abetting in the extermination of Palestinians.

        What the hell thanks do you deserve.

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        January 27, 2014, 4:31 pm

        Here’s hophmi’s thoughts on the Nakba and Palestinian remembrance of THEIR tragedy:

        Cliff:

        This character who is agreeing with you has said that our fixation (his characterization; because we were just discussing a topic that arose organically in the comments section) on the history of the Mandate and Jewish terrorism is not ‘helpful’ to the Palestinian cause.

        hoppy:

        Yes, I definitely believe that talking about a Jewish guerrilla group that ended in the 1940s, condemning everything they did as if you were Ernest Bevin, and asserting that they were crypto-Nazis (while condemning any reference to the Mufti’s relationship with Hitler) is not especially helpful to the Palestinian cause. People are generally sympathetic to the facts on the ground. They don’t especially enjoy hearing the entire conflict relitigated. That’s true whether you’re pro-Palestinian or pro-Israel. Angry, rabid, hating people like you do not tend to help the downtrodden. They hurt them by identifying their cause with angry rabid hating people.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/04/hiroshima-epiphany.html#comment-554926

        See guys? Remembering the Holocaust and ‘relitigating’ the Nazis crimes is ‘unhelpful’ – because ‘people’ (which people?) are ‘generally sympathetic to the facts on the ground’.

        Yet another example of what a Judeofascist hophmi is.

        In fact, I challenge Phil/Adam/annie to prove me wrong or to prove that the other Zionist Jews here @MW aren’t also Judeofascists.

        I suspect this comment will be censored because Phil is more sensitive to comments that harangue Jewish identity.

        But he has no apparent issue with allowing a religious fanatic and illegal Jewish colonist, giladg or yrn to insult non-Jews with a hateful definition they mock up of the term ‘goy’.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 28, 2014, 1:34 pm

        “See guys? Remembering the Holocaust and ‘relitigating’ the Nazis crimes is ‘unhelpful’ – because ‘people’ (which people?) are ‘generally sympathetic to the facts on the ground’.”

        See guys? Cliff can’t understand the difference between a land conflict and the Holocaust. Nor does he understand irony, because people here clearly have no interest in considering why the Holocaust might be a reason that Jews need a sovereign space. Nor does he understand my point above, which is that most people in the American middle (and the research shows this) are turned off by fighting over the history of the conflict. Cliff only confirms my point, which is that Cliff cares much more about finding an outlet for his own anger than he does about Palestinians.

        “Yet another example of what a Judeofascist hophmi is.”

        Yet another example of how Cliff can’t get through an argument without a nasty ad hominem attack.

        “In fact, I challenge Phil/Adam/annie to prove me wrong or to prove that the other Zionist Jews here @MW aren’t also Judeofascists.”

        Yet another example of how Cliff thinks he helps the Palestinians get justice for themselves by hating other people on their behalf.

        “I suspect this comment will be censored because Phil is more sensitive to comments that harangue Jewish identity.”

        Yet another example of how Cliff is wrong.

        “But he has no apparent issue with allowing a religious fanatic and illegal Jewish colonist, giladg or yrn to insult non-Jews with a hateful definition they mock up of the term ‘goy’.”

        Yet another example of how Cliff lives in his own fantasy land.

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        January 29, 2014, 5:41 am

        hoppy said:

        See guys? Cliff can’t understand the difference between a land conflict and the Holocaust. Nor does he understand irony, because people here clearly have no interest in considering why the Holocaust might be a reason that Jews need a sovereign space. Nor does he understand my point above, which is that most people in the American middle (and the research shows this) are turned off by fighting over the history of the conflict. Cliff only confirms my point, which is that Cliff cares much more about finding an outlet for his own anger than he does about Palestinians.

        1. ‘People’ here understand the mentality of Jewish nationalists. They understand – without condoning or agreeing with the methods and conclusions.

        The Holocausts is not a justification to destroying another community that existed before Jewish immigrants flooded into their homeland and began planting the seeds of conflict.

        2. Your ‘point’ has nothing to do with ‘the middle’.

        You speak only for yourself and other fanatics in thr major hubs of American Jewish life. You speak – more or less (unfortunately) – for the organized Jewish community.

        You do not speak for ‘the American middle’. There are 300+ million Americans. You don’t know what their grasp is on the historical record of this conflict.

        Nor does that matter since Americans can’t grasp their own history.

        Relitigating the Holocaust is of course not analogous to relitigating the Nakba. The former is not disputed except among the deniers.

        Whereas the latter has been denied in the mainstream. Denial has been the mainstream perspective with the Nakba since ‘time immemorial’. Hence, relitigating the crimes of the Jewish terrorists (which you and other fascist ethnonationalists support) is of the utmost importance

        You want Palestinians to move on.

        You – disgustingly – told Susan Abulhawa that she was very ‘angry’.

        This condescension and two-facedness is systemic in your political cult. You think its ‘unhelpful’ that Palestinians never forget. But when it comes to the Holocaust – which no one has forgot (or can apparently, with the Holocaust Industry continually exploiting the memory of Jewish suffering for Zionism) – you are content to bash people’s heads in with your ideological bludgeon.

        Virtually no one denies the Holocaust in comparison to the Nakba – when we put this in the context of the general public.

        The audience here is America or European. Holocaust denial is a non-issue.

        Maybe if you were on some blog that promotes Holocaust denial, the general tone of your bullshit would be understandable.

        So yea – you’re the hypocrite, not me.

        Yet another example of how Cliff thinks he helps the Palestinians get justice for themselves by hating other people on their behalf.

        I think relitigating the Israel/Palestine conflict is a very small step in the right direction.

        I know how you Nakba-deniers want to sweep Jewish terrorism under the rug but no one who truly cares will allow that to pass.

        That doesn’t make me angry. It makes me a decent human being.

        Yet another example of how Cliff lives in his own fantasy land.

        @Phil, since hophmi is in denial about things that are easily verifiable with a couple of search queries, is it safe to assume you moderators are as well?

        I will assume that once again, you guys keep Jewish KKK like hophmi or the other trolls around to show the visitors of MW (who do not comment) what the organized Jewish community’s footsoldiers are truly like.

        Here are the comments in-question, hoppy:

        “goy” = someone who will do damage to a Jew for no other reason apart from that fact that the person is Jewish and identifies as being Jewish. In case you are wondering, by my definition, Jews can also be goys as confirmed by some of their comments on this website and action taken, like supporting the Turkish anti-Semitic, Muslim extremist lead flotilla to Gaza.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/deconstructing-johanssons-sodastream.html/comment-page-1#comment-634506

        Your track record Sumud is clearly laid out before us. We have 2000 years of recorded persecution you goy you.

        http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/reporter-assign-israelpalestine.html/comment-page-1#comment-632519

        Par for the course for you hateful cultists.

      • Qualtrough
        Qualtrough
        January 28, 2014, 1:00 am

        I wasn’t aware that the many war graves in Europe and around the world, the countless war monuments and museums, the Armistice/Memorial Day ceremonies, and the myriad more examples of remembrance were due to Jews. Thank you, and apologies for my ignorance.

      • American
        American
        January 28, 2014, 6:40 pm

        hophmi says:
        January 27, 2014 at 12:10 pm
        Are these groups incapable of printing their own books?

        You should thank us Jews. We are the ones who put our time and money into remembrance, for all. I’m not aware of your efforts
        >>>>>

        No you dont.

        ”With an operating budget of just under $78.7 million ($47.3 million from Federal sources and $31.4 million from private donations) in 2008, the Museum had a staff of about 400 employees, 125 contractors,

        washington-report-archives-2000-2005/december-2003/4919-the-us-holocaust-memorial-museum-a-decade-of-increasing-taxpayer-funding.html
        The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum: A Decade of Increasing Taxpayer Funding
        By Janet McMahon

        Created by a unanimous Act of Congress in 1980, the Museum describes its primary mission as “to advance and disseminate knowledge about this unprecedented tragedy; to preserve the memory of those who suffered; and to encourage its visitors to reflect upon the moral and spiritual questions raised by the events of the Holocaust as well as their own responsibilities as citizens of a democracy.”
        
        As its Web site, , explains, the museum was “built on land donated by the federal government and funded with more than 200,000 private donations…As required by law, all funds for planning, constructing and equipping the museum were raised exclusively from private, tax-deductible contributions.”

        That was then, however. Now American taxpayers provide some 67 percent of the Holocaust Museum’s annual budget, this year to the tune of $38.4 million. Its funding for fiscal year 2004 was increased to $39,997,000. By comparison, this year the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts received less than $34 million in federal funding. That figure was cut to $32,560,000 for fiscal year 2004.
        On Oct. 12, 2000, moreover, then-President Bill Clinton signed legislation granting the museum permanent status as a federal agency, in effect locking in federal support. As a museum press release explained at the time, “Permanent status permits Congress to provide funding without having to review the federal role. Every U.S. government entity requires congressional authority before funds can be allocated; but not every federal institution is given permanent status.”
        It is Congress, of course, which allocates taxpayer dollars—specifically, in the case of the Holocaust Memorial Museum, the House Appropriations Committee’s subcommittee on interior and related agencies. In addition to the Department of Interior, “other agencies” for which the subcommittee is responsible include the National Endowments for the Arts and for the Humanities, the National Gallery of Art, the Smithsonian Institution, the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and the Kenndy Center.
        Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, readers who wish to keep track of how many of their tax dollars go to support the Holocaust Museum are therefore advised to pay attention to news reports on federal arts and humanities funding—and to continue reading beyond the first few paragraphs.
        It’s not only the legislative branch which supports the Holocaust Memorial Museum, however. On Sept. 3 the Anti-Defamation League—which a few years ago was ordered to cease spying on American citizens—proudly announced that it had been awarded a $100,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) to support a joint ADL/Holocaust Memorial Museum training program for law enforcement professionals.
        According to the ADL press release, the program “brings law enforcement officers to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, DC for an intensive program that challenges them to examine their relationship with the public and to explore issues of personal responsiblity and ethical conduct.”
        Americans well might wonder why, at a time when a memorial to World War II veterans who died for this country only now is being undertaken, when a national museum dedicated to Native Americans is just being completed, and when ground is far from being broken for a museum devoted to African Americans—the latter two groups having suffered here, at the hands of this country—the U.S. government places a higher priority on a museum dedicated to the victims and survivors of a European horror.”

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 29, 2014, 11:10 am

        “No you dont.”

        Of course, in the real world, demagogic articles like this are seen for the dreck that they actually are.

        USHMM is a center for studying genocide in general, and its exhibits on the Holocaust certainly are not limited to just the Jewish part of the story. Have you visited? Most people find it quite a moving experience.

        There is a National Museum of African-American History and Culture slated to open in Washington DC on the National Mall next year. Oprah put up a lot of the money for it. I hope to visit it as soon as it opens. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Museum_of_African_American_History_and_Culture

        There is another nonprofit dedicated to raising money for a National Slavery Museum, but it has had trouble raising sufficient funds, and right now, the project is on hold.

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

    • ziusudra
      ziusudra
      January 27, 2014, 11:53 am

      Greetings OlegR,
      How many Sinti & Roma were killed?
      How many Homosexuals, Mentally ill were killed?
      How many P.o.w. of Polish, Russian, Americans
      were killed?
      ziusudra
      PS Get off de profit Potti!

      • bilal a
        bilal a
        January 27, 2014, 8:09 pm

        How many civilian ethnic German women and girls were systematically raped and murdered in the Allied official post war gynocide , how many men, women and children died in the British fire bombings, or in the post war starvation or Allied concentration camps?

        Where is their book of names? Where is their holocaust museum?

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 28, 2014, 9:58 am

        @ bilal a
        Millions of German, Austrian, and Hungarian women age 8 to 80 were raped and repeatedly raped in ’45 & ’46, many repeatedly. See: http://justice4germans.com/2012/11/13/a-memorial-for-the-millions-of-german-women-and-girls-who-were-raped-and-pillaged-by-the-wwii-allied-liberators/

        Also more than two million ethnic Germans died when that group were transferred out of eastern Europe 1945-1950, their home for centuries. 15 million more were ethnically cleansed.

      • Qualtrough
        Qualtrough
        January 28, 2014, 1:02 am

        You forgot the communists…

    • amigo
      amigo
      January 27, 2014, 12:22 pm

      “You don’t want to remember the Shoah or have your own way Phil that’s fine”oleg r

      And how do you remember the Nakba or is there a right way to ignore it.

      You are a zio and surely have a view on the subject.

    • January 27, 2014, 1:55 pm

      Meanwhile, the Hell with all the non-Jews killed by the Nazis.

      You are a sick man OlegR

    • annie
      annie
      January 27, 2014, 4:24 pm

      it’s personal

      the book doesn’t seem very personal. everyone is all condensed into the same word, the same descriptor, reduced to a word. one can rationalize by saying That’s how the Nazis viewed their victims, but the book ..well, i really don’t see the need to reinforce that idea which is what this looks like to me:

      JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew JewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJewJew

      it’s just a tad too obsessive for my taste.

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        January 27, 2014, 4:27 pm

        Did i say a word about this book ?

      • annie
        annie
        January 27, 2014, 7:31 pm

        do not be disingenuous with me oleg, i’m no fool.you very much referenced the book and did it in a way that was dishonest.

        it’s personal.

        You don’t want to remember the Shoah or have your own way Phil that’s fine but don’t go lecturing people about the “right” way to do it.Neither you nor any of the names you mentioned have the right to do so.

        anyone here using a simple search tool and see phil never even referenced the word you have in quotes. and if this person wants to make a book fine, let him. but publishing this on the front page of the nyt and giving it that kind of recognition takes it to another level, it sanctifies this form of remembrance. one that very much looks to me like (quoting you here) “some abstract collective wound.” it raises it up as an ‘art form’. and when the paper of record does that then it makes it fair game for others to criticize. there’s nothing personal about this ” abstract collective” ( see “abstract collective wound” graphic ) of one word repeated over and over.

        but to get back to your claim, phil never said or implied he ‘didn’t want to remember the Shoah’, ever. so why say that. why put a word in quotes he never used?

        and you’re building a strawman wrt your “right to do so” because phil is not making that claim. why don’t you go back and read the article and stop putting words in peoples mouths by using quotemarks where no such quote exists. if you can’t even build an argument based on what a person says, without fabricating and misconstruing, maybe you’re point is not worth making.

        and i did read about what you and your father did as being what’spersonal, which i agree sounded very personal. but it was connecting that and the way you connected it to the review and used it to criticize. your experience with your dad is not the same thing as what’s being reviewed. it becomes public when you make it into a book like this.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 28, 2014, 12:15 pm

        “but publishing this on the front page of the nyt and giving it that kind of recognition takes it to another level, it sanctifies this form of remembrance”

        Oh please. Phil’s entire post is disingenuous. First of all, the story is not about the “Middle East.” It’s about the book. Second of all, there is no rule that everything published on the front page of a major newspaper must be hard news. It’s a human interest story. The Times puts them on the front page or near the front page all the time, and the Wall Street Journal has one every day in column four. The Letters from features are all human interest stories, and this fits that rubric.

        This is another example of Phil’s obsession with diluting Holocaust remembrance to de-emphasize the Holocaust’s Jewish victims in order to dilute any case that may be made that Jewish refugees deserved some kind of consideration after the war, and once again, the people here have used it as an opportunity to promote their antisemitic views about how Jews are somehow suppressing the fact that others died in the war besides them, whether it’s Ukrainian soldiers or Polish intellectuals or Roma or homosexuals. Someone prints a damn book, and it’s somehow a denial of everybody else who died.

        These views have nothing whatsoever to do with the conflict in the Middle East and everything to do with garden-variety antisemitism, usually of the extreme right variety, garbage that is easily found on the neo-Nazi websites some people here clearly subscribe to, and Phil, whether fecklessly or not, never misses an opportunity to parrot.

      • annie
        annie
        January 28, 2014, 3:03 pm

        This is another example of Phil’s obsession with diluting Holocaust remembrance to de-emphasize the Holocaust’s Jewish victims

        give us a break hops, we’re not all idiots. don’t pretend this was just another “human interest story” like the ones they run all the time. not when it just so happens to be holocaust remembrance day! people expect a human interest story on the front page on holidays or remembrance days/anniversaries. so what a publication chooses to highlight on those kinds of days on the front page makes a difference. and amazingly you accuse phil of “diluting Holocaust remembrance to de-emphasize the Holocaust’s Jewish victims” when the paper of record chooses to highlight, on remembrance day, a book that intentionally “de-emphasize the Holocaust’s Jewish victims” as an art form! seriously, what do you think this is?:

        “These are not individuals, these are not people, these are just a mass we have to exterminate.

        that is from the ‘authors’ own mouth. this is the intent of the author as a way to educate or remember. your hypocrisy is stunning. and the nyt didn’t run this just any day as a human interest story, they did it on the one day people expect to read something about the holocaust. it was not phil diluting Holocaust remembrance to de-emphasize the Holocaust’s Jewish victims, it was him reporting on it. big duh.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 28, 2014, 12:45 am

        @ OlegR “Did i say a word about this book ?”

        Was the post to you? Lemme see now … http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/publishes-holocaust-trivia.html/comment-page-1#comment-634992 … seems not

      • marc b.
        marc b.
        January 28, 2014, 2:15 pm

        Did i say a word about this book ?

        beautifully done, olerg. just like it was drawn up in the fredman handbook on rhetoric. no, you never said ‘a word about this book’, you just happened to be the first person to post a comment in response to a post ‘about this book’. I have to admit it, you do have a wry sense of humor.

      • libra
        libra
        January 29, 2014, 4:12 pm

        Marc B: …you do have a wry sense of humor.

        Surely brazen chutzpah?

  2. eljay
    eljay
    January 27, 2014, 11:53 am

    It’s time for a Palestinian “Nakba Book”: Just the world “Arab” for each of the Palestinians displaced, abused, tortured or killed by Zio-supremacist Jews who stole, occupied and colonized Palestine in pursuit of a supremacist “Jewish State”.

    “That’s how the Zio-supremacist Jews viewed their victims: These are not individuals, these are not people, these are just a mass we have to wipe off the map lest they taint the purity of our ‘Jewish State’.”

    • eljay
      eljay
      January 27, 2014, 12:10 pm

      >> Just the world “Arab” …

      Correction: Just the word “Arab” …

    • Semiotic Observer
      Semiotic Observer
      January 27, 2014, 12:33 pm

      Rana Bishara created a similar book some time ago, with the names of the Palestinian villages destroyed. I couldn’t find the original page, with more photos and a longer description. I only found this at Bir Zeit’s virtual gallery:

      http://virtualgallery.birzeit.edu/media/photo?photo_id=76637

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 28, 2014, 10:06 am

        Listing the name of each Palestinian village destroyed is not the same as listing a single abstract noun 6 million times and putting book covers around it. A better comparison is the famous Vietnam war wall memorial.

  3. Krauss
    Krauss
    January 27, 2014, 11:56 am

    Phil, have you heard about Yair Netanyahu’s romance with a Norwegian girl?
    I saw it in Haaretz. I googled his name and I thought to myself, “I’m going to read the words shiksa at least once on the front page of results”.

    What do you know?
    http://www.jewishjournal.com/hella_tel_aviv/item/sandra_leikanger_and_yair_netanyahu_who_is_the_mysterious_shiksa_girlfriend

    Written by a girl who apparently has self-hatred issues too(or at least absorbed the racism directed at her and made it “fun”, like a lot of people who face bigotry try to cope with it).

    I wonder how Israel react if Bibi had a blonde daughter who was Yair’s age(he has an older daughter who has already married) and who dated a non-Jewish black guy. Maybe one of those asylum seekers in Tel Aviv.

    I wonder if Bibi would be so sanguine about it, too.
    (Of course, I don’t wonder about neither of these topics).

    • Krauss
      Krauss
      January 27, 2014, 12:02 pm

      P.S.

      This reminds me of the YouTube clip I saw on +972 a year ago or so when a woman affiliated with a social justice organization asked Israelis on the street if they’d sign up to grant a Danish girl in Israel asylum. Everyone she asked said yes and signed. Right after they signed, she gave them a picture of a young Sudanese boy. Just about everyone declined to sign, often with violent reactions.

      Here’s a photo of his kids when they were smaller(via Wikipedia):

      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Flickr_-_Government_Press_Office_%28GPO%29_-_P.M._BENJAMIN_NETANYAHU_LIGHTING_HANUKA_CANDLES_WITH_HIS_WIFE_AND_SONS.jpg/1280px-Flickr_-_Government_Press_Office_%28GPO%29_-_P.M._BENJAMIN_NETANYAHU_LIGHTING_HANUKA_CANDLES_WITH_HIS_WIFE_AND_SONS.jpg

      That girl could easily have been his own daughter, from the looks of his own kids.
      I sometimes wonder if some American Jews would have preferred their children to marry a white gentile over a black Jew. I’m sure very few would admit it, but considering how black Jews are treated with alienation, I have a suspicion many would. And Netanyahu is probably in that category, too.

    • Maximus Decimus Meridius
      Maximus Decimus Meridius
      January 27, 2014, 1:10 pm

      ”The scandal? The First Girlfriend is (allegedly) a white-hot Norwegian shiksa.”

      Can you imagine if anyone were to write an article about the ‘scandal’ of the Norwegian PM’s son dating a Jewish girl? President Obama would make a statement on this obscene anti-semitism, and the Norwegian king would be required to make a formal apology to the Jewish People.

      But when it’s the other way round, well, it’s all just a bit of fun, innit?

    • January 27, 2014, 1:57 pm

      Look at Bibi. He is not a Semite. He probably is Polish.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      January 27, 2014, 2:03 pm

      “shiksa”

      I wonder if the Author of the article tosses around equally offensive words like “kike” or “nigger”?

      • Ecru
        Ecru
        January 27, 2014, 5:02 pm

        I wonder if the Author of the article tosses around equally offensive words like “kike” or “nigger”?

        Well probably not “kike” but the latter? Given the casual racism on display I can only think – probably.

  4. Eva Smagacz
    Eva Smagacz
    January 27, 2014, 12:13 pm

    I guess my relatives in Auschwitz were just chopped liver, not worthy of mention. You know, even saying Goy, Goy, Goy, Goy, Goy, Goy, Goy, Goy, Goy ……….(how many millions???!!!) is just too much waste of time for Chernofsky.

    How the hell is this different from being treated like subhumans by Nazis and other Aryan supremacists?

  5. Shmuel
    Shmuel
    January 27, 2014, 12:26 pm

    What a revolting anti-commemoration (contrast with Yad Vashem*’s “Name Recovery” project and “Everyone has a Name” campaign). Why on earth would anyone want to perpetuate the Nazi dehumanisation?

    The concept of “Holocaust – The Coffee Table Book” is simply grotesque.

    *Yad vashem means “a memorial and a name”.

    • James North
      James North
      January 27, 2014, 12:49 pm

      Shmuel: My impression, based on a visit to Yad Vashem and some reading, is that the organization does important and dignified work on Holocaust remembrance — unlike this trivializing effort that Phil skewers here. I’ve been impressed by scholars like Yehuda Bauer. My only objection to the Yad Vashem memorial itself was that photo of the Mufti of Jerusalem, meant transparently to link Hitler with “the Arabs.” But I found the rest of it moving and informative.
      Are my impressions accurate?

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 27, 2014, 12:57 pm

        James,

        I think there is far more to the politicisation of Yad Vashem than the crass link to the Mufti, but yes, they also do important work – both in terms of scholarship and in terms of commemoration.

      • jon s
        jon s
        January 28, 2014, 4:35 am

        James, was your visit to Yad Vashem before or after the new museum was opened, in 2005?

      • James North
        James North
        January 28, 2014, 9:42 am

        Before.

      • jon s
        jon s
        January 28, 2014, 3:11 pm

        James, in that case I definitely recommend a return visit.

  6. amigo
    amigo
    January 27, 2014, 1:01 pm

    “The book, more art than literature, consists of the single word “Jew,” in tiny type, printed six million times to signify the number of Jews killed during the Holocaust. It is meant as a kind of coffee-table monument of memory, a conversation starter and thought provoker….”

    It certainly invokes some thought.What if someday they find out there was three hundred more than 6 million.Will they have to re issue the Book or are there extra pages and necessary logistics in place for a recall.

    Personally , I do believe there must be a far more enlightened way to achieve the desired outcome.

    I cannot imagine having a book on my coffee table in which the words “Famine Victim” appeared 1 million times (plus or minus).The thought of reducing all that suffering to a book some what disgusts me.

    Besides, it would negate the need for speed reading.

    • Ellen
      Ellen
      January 27, 2014, 2:30 pm

      Only one million ? Ok an estimated number of direct starvation deaths under British rule during the most intense phase of the famine years.

      How many died in the forced starvation in the Ukraine? 14, 15 million? Where is their coffee table book for sale?

      • lysias
        lysias
        January 27, 2014, 3:03 pm

        As Madhusree Mukerjee documents in Churchill’s Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II, between 3 and 5 million people died in the Bengal famine of 1943. The famine happened because Churchill rejected the pleas of the British authorities in India, notably Viceroy of India Lord Linlithgow, his successor Wavell, and Secretary of State for India Leo Amery, to send food to Bengal because he considered it more important to maintain the standard of living in Britain, and he was notorious for his prejudice against Indians..

        About 10 million people died in the Bengal famine of 1770 (soon after the British East India Company took control of Bengal). Those 10 million amounted to about a third of the population of the affected area.

        In the Irish Potato Famine, an estimated 1.5 million people died and a further 1 million emigrated out of a population slightly exceeding 8 million.

        Some scholars estimate that the population of Ireland was reduced by 20–25%.[130] All of this occurred while taxes, rents, and food exports were being collected and sent to British landlords, in an amount surpassing £6 million.[131]

      • lysias
        lysias
        January 27, 2014, 3:26 pm

        I should have added, with respect to the Bengal famine of 1943, that Germany was not the only country that committed mass atrocities in World War Two.

        (And we Americans, with our atom bombs, are not so innocent either.)

      • Keith
        Keith
        January 27, 2014, 4:15 pm

        LYSIAS- As you correctly point out, the British are responsible for several historical ‘holocausts.” Is this taught in British schools? I suspect not. But they do teach about the Nazi Holocaust, something not caused by the British. Focusing on the crimes of others standard fare. Has this dwelling on the Holocaust saved any lives? I doubt it. In fact I recently read that an estimated 9 million children a year die from poverty related causes. Also, focusing on this one event tends to diminish the more than ample history of mass murder. A couple of quotes and links.

        “The teaching of the Holocaust was and remains compulsory in English schools. (Indeed, a long-running scheme in operation then and now ensures two seniors from every high school in the country visit Auschwitz on trips subsidized by the U.K. government.)”
        http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/14/what-u-s-jews-don-t-get-about-european-anti-semitism.html

        “…Israel Studies programs, Holocaust Studies programs, Jewish Studies programs, all of which sprung up to justify Israeli policy (none has any real academic content, and most were subsidized by wealthy Jews)….” (Norman Finkelstein)
        http://normanfinkelstein.com/2014/the-end-of-palestine-an-interview-with-norman-finkelstein/

      • Djinn
        Djinn
        January 27, 2014, 5:32 pm

        I learnt about the Highland Clearances at school but then each country in the UK has it’s own education system. I doubt it’s taught much in English schools. Australian schools weren’t much better at discussing indigenous genocide. The Nazi Holocaust was taught in both systems I have experience with, although I didn’t learn that millions of political activists and trade unionists had been targeted and murdered from my school, that came later from reading for myself.

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 27, 2014, 9:32 pm

        lysias:

        As Madhusree Mukerjee documents in Churchill’s Secret War: The British Empire and the Ravaging of India during World War II, between 3 and 5 million people died in the Bengal famine of 1943.

        See also: Mike Davis, “Late Victorian Holocausts”

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

        This book explores the impact of colonialism and the introduction of capitalism during the El Niño-Southern Oscillation related famines of 1876–1878, 1896–1897, and 1899–1902, in India, China, Brazil, Ethiopia, Korea, Vietnam, the Philippines and New Caledonia. It focuses on how colonialism and capitalism in British India and elsewhere increased rural poverty & hunger and how economic policies exacerbated famine.

        The book’s main conclusion is that the deaths of 30–60 million people killed in famines all over the world during the later part of the 19th century were caused by laissez faire and Malthusian economic ideology of the colonial governments.

      • amigo
        amigo
        January 27, 2014, 3:25 pm

        Ellen,The 1 million figure is obviously an estimate as people died in ditches and in the streets.There was no way to record all the names correctly.It is thought that an additional 500,000 died from directly connected diseases.

        Can you imagine reading the Jewish H book out loud in Public whereby you keep repeating “Jew, Jew, Jew, Jew etc etc ,How soon before you would be arrested for antisemitism and Jew hatred.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 28, 2014, 12:16 pm

        “How many died in the forced starvation in the Ukraine? 14, 15 million? Where is their coffee table book for sale?”

        Feel free to produce one. In the meanwhile, you’re welcome to read about it in any one of the several books available on the topic.

      • Ellen
        Ellen
        January 29, 2014, 2:52 pm

        Hop, not all societies and groups desire to take on the cloak and identity of victim of others.

        This hit home when working in the Balkan region after that recent ugly war. A well meaning group from Western Europe made a memorial plaque for placement outside of the stadium where many women and girls were held prisoner, brutalized and raped over a period of weeks.

        The survivors had this quietly taken down as this was not their self understanding, not what they wanted to cultivate and pass onto their children.

        In your world should they have written a book for coffee tables for their children to grow up with: rape a Muslim, rape a Muslim, rape a Muslim, kill a Muslim, kill a Muslim, Muslim, Muslim, Muslim.

        Is this what healthy societies or groups do to understand crimes against them?

    • Stephen Shenfield
      Stephen Shenfield
      January 27, 2014, 6:26 pm

      The figure of six million was a rough estimate formed just after the war. Research done since then makes a more accurate estimate possible, but the initial estimate stuck and has been endlessly repeated. The biggest error concerns the former Soviet territories, for which adequate data were not available until recent years. The six-million estimate assumed one million Jews killed in occupied Soviet territories. It has now been established that the true figure is about two and a half million, including one and a half million in Ukraine alone. So the total is not six million but about seven and a half million.

      • Eva Smagacz
        Eva Smagacz
        January 27, 2014, 8:11 pm

        When I studied in Poland the figure of Jewish deaths taught was 5.4 million – I assume Russian researchers had access to Ukrainian figures and 5.4 million included these.

      • Philip Munger
        Philip Munger
        January 27, 2014, 9:13 pm

        There was always reluctance in the USSR to put the Jewish Holocaust on some sort of a pedestal, so to say. Alexander Werth, in his book Russia at War, touched upon this. Essentially, several major works on the 3rd Reich, dating back to the 1950s assert that had the Nazis managed to win their war, the Jews would have been followed immediately by others deemed unfit to live with the master race.

        This comment is not meant to criticize awareness of how truly awful the Jewish Holocaust was, but one might consider a coffee table book with the word “Russian” or Soviet citizen” written somewhere between 21.8 and 28 million times. It might break the table. Had the Nazis won, the book would probably have had the word “Soviet citizen” written 45 million times. Or more.

      • tree
        tree
        January 28, 2014, 12:22 am

        Essentially, several major works on the 3rd Reich, dating back to the 1950s assert that had the Nazis managed to win their war, the Jews would have been followed immediately by others deemed unfit to live with the master race.

        Actually, the Nazi plans (Generalplan Ost and the Hunger Plan) envisioned the planned German extermination of the Slavs, prior to envisioning the Nazi’s “Final Solution” for the European Jews.

        From Timothy Snyder’s “Bloodlands”, page 159-160:

        Hitler intended to use the Soviet Union to solve his British problem, not in its present capacity as an ally but in its future capacity as a colony. During this crucial year, between June 1940 and June 1941, German economic planners were working hard to devise the ways in which a conquered Soviet Union would make Germany the kind of superpower that Hitler wanted it to become. The key planners worked under the watchful eye of Heinrich Himmler, and under the direct command of Reinhard Heydrich. Under the general heading of “Generalplan Ost,”SS Standartenfuhrer Professor Kondrad Meyer drafted a series of plans for a vast eastern colony. A first version was completed in January 1940, a second in July 1941, a third in late 1941, and a fourth in May 1942. The general design was consistent throughout: Germans would deport, kill, assimilate, or enslave the native populations, and bring order and prosperity to a humbled frontier. Depending upon the demographic estimates, between thirty-one and forty-five million people, mostly Slavs, were to disappear. In one redaction, eighty to eighty-five percent of the the Poles, sixty percent of the west Ukrainians, seventy-five percent of the Belarusians, and fifty percent of the Czechs were to be eliminated.

        …The East was the Nazi Manifest Destiny. In Hitler’s view, “in the East a similar process will repeat itself for a second time as in the conquest of America.” As Hitler imagined the future, Germany would deal with the Slavs much as the North Americans had dealt with the Indians. The Volga River in Russia, he once proclaimed, will be Germany’s Mississippi.

        As it turned out, the Nazi plans were a “genocide too far” and they did not have the resources to accomplish what they had planned and attempted in the East. It was only after the real possibility of Nazi Germany losing the war that the planned ethnic cleansing of Jews from Europe was changed into the planned genocide of European Jews. This is the history that is lost in “remembering” only the Jewish victims of World War II.

      • marc b.
        marc b.
        January 28, 2014, 9:24 am

        Eva, Timothy Snyder, quoted below, uses the figure 5.7 million. (Snyder used a variety of sources for his book ‘Bloodlands’ including Soviet, Polish, Belorussian, Ukrainian, etc. although his goal was not the recounting of victims of the Holocaust.) Raul Hilberg used the figure 5.3 I believe. If Stephen can point to a historian who has calculated that the number of European Jews who were murdered during WWII was 7.5 million, I would appreciate the reference. At the very least it is a historical certainty that precisely 6 million European Jews were not murdered, and that the round figure has been turned into a symbol, or a weapon, depending on how it is used. (when I took my daughter to a local school for one of her basketball games a few years back, there was a huge glass case in the lobby of the school holding over a million pennies. as I approached it to read the plaque I was told by an older gentleman standing there that each penny represented a ‘Jewish child murdered by the Nazis’. at that point my daughter could see my shoulders clenching, and she started to lead me away as I began to ask about the non-Jewish children murdered in the war. needless to say, I didn’t get a response.)

        As for this whole ‘controversy’, the hysterical reaction that Weiss’s post is receiving is beyond bizarre. the author of this non-book and his backers refer to it as a ‘gimmick’ and ‘shtick’.

        The book’s backers do not deny its gimmickry — Mr. Chernofsky used the Yiddish word “shtick” — but see it as a powerful one.

        and yet it’s Weiss who is being disrespectful by questioning the use of this stage prop as an appropriate reminder of mass murder.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 8:41 am

        “So the total is not six million but about seven and a half million.”

        Do you have a cite for this claim? Because the scholarly consensus in just under 6 million Jews.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 28, 2014, 12:28 pm

        I agree that the scholarly consensus is just under six million Jews, but there’s actually very little known, for instance, about the Jews killed in the Ukraine, many of whom were summarily shot and buried in mass graves.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/28/world/europe/a-light-on-a-vast-toll-of-jews-killed-away-from-the-death-camps.html?ref=world

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 2:38 pm

        Well, I think to say that “very little” is known about those events is mistaken. We know a lot, but we don’t know everything. I think it’s possible that there may be more deaths, perhaps a few score thousand, but I think that 1.5 million is extremely unlikely.

        I found the article interesting, but the idea that these professionals even questioned whether to include the non-Jews murdered by the Nazis is mind-boggling and has the effect of confirming the notion (whether fair or not) that some people are trying to turn the Holocaust into an exclusively or near-exclusively Jewish event. There is absolutely no justification that I can imagine why one would only concentrate on Jews killed while ignoring the Ukrainians killed right next to them.

  7. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870
    January 27, 2014, 1:18 pm

    RE: No Avraham Burg, “The Holocaust Is Over, We Must Rise From Its Ashes”. ~ Weiss

    REGARDING BURG, SEE: “Avraham Burg: Israel’s new prophet” ~ By Donald Macintyre, The Independent, 1 November 2008
    Avraham Burg was a pillar of the Israeli establishment but his new book is causing a sensation. It argues that Israel is an “abused child” which has become a “violent parent”. And his solutions are radical, as he explains to Donald Macintyre.

    [EXCERPTS] . . . The son of a long-serving government minister, from the time of David Ben-Gurion’s government, he has a classic top-drawer Israeli profile.
    True, he was on the left: after army service as a paratroop officer and graduating from Hebrew University he was a star of the movement against the first Lebanon war – his charisma if anything enhanced by the fact than unlike many of his comrades he was religious. He was injured in the grenade attack by a right-wing fanatic on a Peace Now protest in 1983 which killed another demonstrator, Emil Grunzweig. But he was quickly swept into mainstream public life, becoming first an adviser to the then Prime minister Shimon Peres, then a Knesset member, then Speaker of the Knesset, head of the Jewish agency and the World Zionist Organisation and the almost-victorious candidate for the Labour Party leadership in 2001. . .
    . . . But his book “The Holocaust is Over: We Must Rise from its Ashes” – published this week in Britain – caused a much bigger sensation when it came out last year in Israel, at once becoming a best-seller and provoking a furious reaction not only from the right but from many of Burg’s former colleagues on the political centre-left. In the book – a compelling mix of polemic, personal memoir, homage to his parents and meditation on Judaism – Burg argues that Israel has been too long imprisoned by its obsessive and cheapening use – or abuse – of the Holocaust as “a theological pillar of Jewish identity”. He argues that the living role played by the Holocaust – Burg uses the regular Hebrew word Shoah or “catastrophe” for the extermination of six million Jews in the Second World War – in everyday Israeli discourse, has left Israel with a persistent self-image of a “nation of victims”, in stark variance with its actual present-day power. Instead, the book argues, Israel needs finally to abandon the “Judaism of the ghetto” for a humanistic, “universal Judaism”.
    The implication of Burg’s analysis, one that perhaps only an Israeli would have dared promote, is that the fostered memory of the Holocaust hovers destructively over every aspect of Israeli political life – including its relations with the Palestinians since the 1967 Six Day War and the subsequent occupation. “We have pulled the Shoah out of its historical context,” he writes, “and turned it into a plea and generator for every deed. All is compared to the Shoah, dwarfed by the Shoah and therefore all is allowed – be it fences , sieges … curfews, food and water deprivation or unexplained killings. All is permitted because we have been through the Shoah and you will not tell us how to behave.”
    For Burg, whose own father Yosef was a German Jew, and for many years leader of Israel’s National Religious Party, the “real watershed moment” in this deforming process was the trial and subsequent execution in 1962 of Adolf Eichmann, which Yosef Burg vainly opposed from inside the Cabinet. Instead of Eichmann’s death symbolising, as it was meant to do, “the end of the Shoah and the beginning of the post-Shoah period,” he says, in reality “the opposite happened… The Shoah discourse had begun.” . . .

    ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21133.htm

    • lysias
      lysias
      January 27, 2014, 3:28 pm

      German wallowing in self-pity over the supposed injustice of the Versailles Treaty played a major role in bringing the Nazis to power.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 28, 2014, 10:24 am

        @ lysias
        And now we can read about certain Israeli leaders shouting Obama (Iran Deal, Cairo Speech) and Kerry (I-P peace process on-going) are trying to “stab Israel in the back.”

    • Nevada Ned
      Nevada Ned
      January 27, 2014, 5:12 pm

      Thank you Dickerson. The political transformation of Avraham Burg is really amazing, considering where he started.

  8. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870
    January 27, 2014, 1:28 pm

    RE: “The New York Times ran a frontpage story yesterday by Jodi Rudoren titled ‘Holocaust Told in One Word, 6 Million Times’ on a ‘book’ published in Israel that seeks to memorialize victims of the Holocaust by printing the word ‘Jew’ 6 million times over 1250 pages.” ~ Weiss

    MY COMMENT: I am looking to buy a genuine Pet Rock. Does anyone still have one?
    It must come with its original Pet Rock “Pet Carrier”.

    Pet Rock – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pet_Rock

    • German Lefty
      German Lefty
      January 27, 2014, 2:07 pm

      I am looking to buy a genuine Pet Rock.

      Wow. I just looked up what a “Pet Rock” is. Sounds really crazy. Why don’t you get a “Tamagotchi” instead?

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 27, 2014, 2:33 pm

        >> I just looked up what a “Pet Rock” is. Sounds really crazy.

        “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 27, 2014, 3:59 pm

        eljay, did you just call Dickerson a sucker? Please don’t do that.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 27, 2014, 5:37 pm

        >> eljay, did you just call Dickerson a sucker? Please don’t do that.

        German Lefty, if DICKERSON3870 is indeed looking to buy a Pet Rock, the epithet “sucker” applies and he’ll just have to bow his head and accept it.

        ;-)

        I could be mistaken, but I believe that his comment was simply a more subtle way of saying the same thing as the phrase I quoted.

      • DICKERSON3870
        DICKERSON3870
        January 28, 2014, 12:17 am

        I absolutely deny being a sucker. I am strictly a suckee!

      • Eva Smagacz
        Eva Smagacz
        January 27, 2014, 8:41 pm

        German Lefty,

        I think Dickerson is saying that the relation between the this particular Holocaust “book” and a book (or a memorial) is the same as the relation between “pet rock” and a pet.

        A joke. With someone making money from it. And thousands thinking – if only I could market something like that and make millions.

      • DICKERSON3870
        DICKERSON3870
        January 28, 2014, 12:24 am

        Eva Smagacz has pretty much got it right. I was hinting that this absurd book reminds me of the idiotic Pet Rock craze of the 70s.
        I certainly have no interest in buying either one.

        FROM WIKIPEDIA: Dahl sold 1.5 million Pet Rocks and became a millionaire.

      • Philip Munger
        Philip Munger
        January 28, 2014, 1:01 am

        Coming up on Christmas 1975, I was crab fishing in Alaska. Headed down to Seattle for the Holidays, three or four friends asked me to get them pet rocks down there, and bring them back for girl friends, sisters or moms. Guys didn’t buy pet rocks for other guys, and women did not buy them for men. It was so fucking stupid, vapid and time sensitive. By the time I got back to Cordova, the craze was over, and nobody bothered to ask why I hadn’t gotten a rock for their whatever.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 5:07 am

        @ Dickerson, eljay, Eva: Thanks for the explanations. I tend to take too many statements literally.

        I absolutely deny being a sucker. I am strictly a suckee!
        LOL.

  9. German Lefty
    German Lefty
    January 27, 2014, 1:58 pm

    The Times’ Jerusalem correspondent flashes shoe-leather:

    What does “flashes shoe-leather” mean?

    I just watch the Snowden interview online on a state channel website. On the frontpage, there’s also a half-hour segment titled “Remembrance must not end”. This title is a quote from a former Federal President.
    In the segment, some German pupils were interviewed. They stated that the Holocaust is treated too much and too often at school. They believe that this is counterproductive. They also said that we should let bygones be bygones and focus on the future. They think that remembrance is important. However, they believe that remembrance is the task of the state, not the task of the people. The state should not force remembrance on the people. Whether or not the people want to participate in the state’s commemoration of the Holocaust should be up to them.
    I didn’t watch the entire segment yet, but so far only the Jewish victims were mentioned.
    My impression is that (very) old Germans do indeed feel guilty about the Holocaust. And now they want to ease their own conscience by trying to pass their guilt pangs on to the innocent successor generations. Also, I have to think of these mothers in the USA who send their little daughters from one beauty pageant to another. When these mothers are asked about their motive, they often reply that they themselves would have liked to take part in such contests when they were younger. So, in both cases, the older generation takes it out on the younger generation. Children should not be misused like that.

    • German Lefty
      German Lefty
      January 27, 2014, 2:38 pm

      There was also an interview with a German-Jewish author. She talked about her experiences with non-Jewish Germans. She said that she heard “very anti-Semitic comments” on events she attended. As example, she stated that once she was asked: “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?”
      Question: Would anyone else here categorise this statement or question as “very anti-Semitic”?

      • OlegR
        OlegR
        January 27, 2014, 4:03 pm

        It’s a more or less pc equivalent of Juden Raus.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 27, 2014, 4:19 pm

        It’s a more or less pc equivalent of Juden Raus.

        Seriously, Oleg? Considering that Germans committed the Holocaust and that Israel is marketed as “the state for the Jewish people”, I think that it is totally legitimate to ask a German Jew why he or she chooses to live in Germany instead of Israel. To me, that’s just an innocent inquiry. Asking someone why he or she lives in Germany does NOT imply that the asker wants this person out of Germany.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 27, 2014, 4:41 pm

        “Seriously, Oleg?”

        Oh, the likes of Oleg and Dimodock have to pretend like this is some horrific thing, because they understand the implications of going down that path.

        The German Jew doesn’t leave because that land is his home, where his family has been for hundreds if not thousands of years and no one has the right to remove him from that land out of some ethno-religious based bigotry.

        They understand that these are the same reasons why Palestinians refuse to yield Palestine to the zionists. So instead of facing those facts and perhaps gaining a teaspoon of humanity in the process, they reflexively object, and paint all Arabs as terrorists and any question of a non-israelsi Jew to be antisemitic. It’s easier than thinking.

      • yrn
        yrn
        January 28, 2014, 8:08 am

        Is German Lefty way of asking the innocent inquiry Antisemitic.

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        January 27, 2014, 4:21 pm

        So why don’t you let the Palestinian refugees return to their homeland (stolen by IsraHell), OlegR?

      • yrn
        yrn
        January 27, 2014, 4:24 pm

        German Lefty

        It is exactly “Juden Raus”
        Now answer is it Very Antisemitic.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 9:42 am

        “It is exactly “Juden Raus”
        Now answer is it Very Antisemitic.”

        Q.E.D.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 28, 2014, 6:52 am

        As example, she stated that once she was asked: “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?”
        Question: Would anyone else here categorise this statement or question as “very anti-Semitic”?

        GL,

        Based on the information you have given us, the implication of such a statement is that “people like you” (i.e. Jews) aren’t “real” Germans and don’t belong in Germany, but rather somewhere else.

        Historically, this kind of attitude was the impetus for the development of Jewish nationalism in general and Zionism in particular — if we do not belong to the “nations” of the countries in which we were born and where we have lived all our lives, we must belong to another nation.

        There is so much talk here at MW about “dual loyalty”, the existence or non-existence of a Jewish people/nation, the difference between Jews, Zionists and Israelis, and here we have someone who told a fellow German — apparently for no other reason than the fact that she is Jewish — that her national identity is inconsistent with being a German, that she does not belong in Germany.

        Would I consider it “very anti-Semitic”? Certainly anti-Semitic. I’ll leave the quantifiers to others.

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 28, 2014, 7:24 am

        Shmuel:

        There is so much talk here at MW about “dual loyalty”, the existence or non-existence of a Jewish people/nation, the difference between Jews, Zionists and Israelis, and here we have someone who told a fellow German — apparently for no other reason than the fact that she is Jewish — that her national identity is inconsistent with being a German, that she does not belong in Germany.

        Some argue that that kind of view derives logically from the deeply-rooted notion that Israel is the nation state of the entire Jewish people.

        “Denying ‘Israeli nationality’ only perpetuates discrimination”
        http://972mag.com/denying-israeli-nationality-only-perpetuates-discrimination/81597/

        The [Israeli Supreme Court’s] refusal to recognize the Israeli nation is derived from the correct assertion that a person cannot belong to two nations. Therefore, according to the court’s logic, a Jew in Israel cannot be a member of the Israeli nation because they already belong to another nation, the Jewish nation.

        That, however, leads to a grave conclusion: if there exists a “Jewish nation,” to whom the State of Israel belongs, and that nation is made up of all Jews across the world, then all those Jews are in danger! Jews across the world are loyal citizens of their home countries, belonging to various nations.

        Therefore, according to the verdict, an American Jew, who is already part of the “Jewish nation,” cannot also be a loyal member of the American nation. Not only does the “Jewish nation” verdict disregard Israelis, it is also a dangerous verdict for the diaspora.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 28, 2014, 8:47 am

        Shmuel, I basically feel it would be best to ignore GL as much as is possible . But:

        On the frontpage, there’s also a half-hour segment titled “Remembrance must not end”. This title is a quote from a former Federal President.

        It is a quote from Roman Herzog, who in 1996 used the phrase in the context of his proclamation of the official day of remembrance of the liberation of Auschwitz on Jan 27, 1945.

        That was 51 years after the event and 33 years after the big Auschwitz Trial in Frankfurt in 1963. Where we encountered a multitude of people who had been present there and still claimed to not have known what was going on.

        I watched part of a long day of remembrance in parliament in that context, but not the half hour program she alludes to. I cannot find it either on the ARD website for yesterday in what we call the “Mediathek” over here, where you can watch programs you missed. It must have been the ARD, the first public channel, since on of the group’s local channels NDR (North) they did the interview with Snowden.

        There was also an interview with a German-Jewish author. She talked about her experiences with non-Jewish Germans. She said that she heard “very anti-Semitic comments” on events she attended. As example, she stated that once she was asked: “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?”

        Since she mentions the Snowden interview which was initially broadcast in a talkshow which had Marina Weisband as one of it’s guests, I wonder if she alludes to her? The “Pirates” a German left party in which she was a leading figure, had troubles with former NPD members (national democratic party Germany) pretty similar to the Green party a couple of decades ago, and she spoke out against it. Marina Weisband is an interesting “youngster” on our political scene, if you ask me. We call it Politics: ideas for an up to date democracy.

        If I leave out politics and concentrate on female authors only these come to mind: Lea Fleischmann, Barbara Honigmann, Ronnith Neumann, Viola Roggenkamp. Interestingly the author is nameless.

        Strictly the type of argument seems to be a standard. In my generation critique of the German political system often resulted in the argument: Why don’t you go over there, meaning East Germany. But obviously it triggers a very different chain of associations in our context here: the larger “State within the State”, argument, and in the Jewish context gets a special twist.

        But I guess one shouldn’t assume too much education and reflection in her case, which leads us back to the start of this comment.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 28, 2014, 9:59 am

        In my generation critique of the German political system often resulted in the argument: Why don’t you go over there, meaning East Germany. But obviously it triggers a very different chain of associations in our context here

        It’s not just a matter of triggered associations. The analogy itself is flawed, because those told to “go over there” were being judged (or misjudged) for things they had said or done, while the author in the above story was being judged for who she is (as well as who she is not).

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 28, 2014, 11:01 am

        Shmuel, I can understand that her comment makes you mad, and strictly she keeps making me feel ashamed due to the tag: “German” Lefty. I can also assure you that her statements concerning Germany have to be taken with a grain of salt, generally. If I were in a context where this argument would be used by anybody, I would respond furiously. I also think that any of the above cited ladies deserve my respect much more than GF will ever.

        It wasn’t my intention, by the way, to in any way defend her comment, by suggesting there is a larger pattern of a mentality that seems to assume to have the authority to decide on who does and who does not belong. That’s strictly a very simple legal issue. But there seems to be a larger basic pattern, and I observed variants in the States too. …

        There are two things I wonder about: Lefty? Her argument concerning Roma not too long ago, wasn’t a left but a rigidly right perspective. This is not the only thing that makes me wonder about this lady. And my working hypothesis is that she is simply not well read or very intelligent.

        But back to the point of this article, concerning art dealing with the Holocaust I have seen much worse ideas than this one. The coffee table idea, can easily give you an idea why that may be. And no, I did not pay much attention on the larger debate, your comment drew my attention. I tend to occasionally take a closer look occasionally when either your name or Hostage’s appears in the recent comment bar, not always, but sometimes. Who was it that you felt was stalking you? Oleg-whatever? Well maybe I have partly the same flaw, or human stain. ;)

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 1:17 pm

        @ LeaNder
        Here’s the segment: http://www.ardmediathek.de/hr-fernsehen/horizonte/erinnerung-darf-nicht-enden?documentId=19264116

        Since she mentions the Snowden interview which was initially broadcast in a talkshow which had Marina Weisband as one of it’s guests, I wonder if she alludes to her?
        It never ceases to amaze me what kind of stuff you read into my comments.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 28, 2014, 3:33 pm

        Who was it that you felt was stalking you? … Well maybe I have partly the same flaw

        I was just joking, but the person in question (not Oleg) was getting kind of creepy. No creepy no stalking :-)

      • yrn
        yrn
        January 28, 2014, 12:53 pm

        Woody Tanaka

        “It is exactly “Juden Raus”
        Now answer is it Very Antisemitic.”

        Read the answer from your comrade Shmuel .
        It is Certainly anti-Semitic

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 2:41 pm

        @ Shmuel

        Based on the information you have given us, the implication of such a statement is that “people like you” (i.e. Jews) aren’t “real” Germans and don’t belong in Germany, but rather somewhere else.

        First of all, thanks for your assessment.
        The author, Julia Franck, didn’t give further information on the incident. You interpret the inquiry in the most negative way that is possible. In my opinion, this is unfair. Don’t you think that people deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt?
        The statement “For people like you there’s Israel.” doesn’t necessarily mean “You don’t belong here.” It might as well mean “Israel was founded as the state for the Jewish people.” Sadly, we don’t know in what tone of voice the statement was said. This would have been a good indication. However, I think that the second meaning is more likely. That’s because the statement was followed up by the question: “Why do you live in Germany?” Someone who believes that Jews don’t belong to Germany probably wouldn’t bother to inquire WHY some Jews prefer Germany to Israel. To me, it sounds like an honest question.
        I totally agree that “people like you” is an unfortunate expression. However, I think that most non-Jewish Germans try to avoid the terms “Jew” and “Jews” because they are kind of taboo and could be taken the wrong way, i.e. misinterpreted as insult. Therefore, I think that “people like you” is simply a failed attempt at using a euphemism.
        On the one hand, Jewish Germans complain that many non-Jewish Germans are reserved and don’t dare to approach them. On the other hand, as soon as we dare to approach them, tell them stuff and ask them things, our statements and questions are construed as anti-Semitism. So, no matter what we do, it’s always wrong.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 28, 2014, 2:58 pm

        GL,

        The facts before us are that a statement that appears to be negative (if only based on the “people like you” generalisation, although there is more), but could conceivably be interpreted positively, is reported as very negative by Ms. Franck.

        In your haste to give the unknown speaker the “benefit of the doubt”, you judge Ms. Franck very harshly indeed, painting her as either hysterical or a liar.

      • annie
        annie
        January 28, 2014, 3:29 pm

        The statement “For people like you there’s Israel.” doesn’t necessarily mean “You don’t belong here.”

        perhaps on some rare occasion, but that’s the overwhelming implication.

        It might as well mean “Israel was founded as the state for the Jewish people.” Sadly, we don’t know in what tone of voice the statement was said. This would have been a good indication. However, I think that the second meaning is more likely. That’s because the statement was followed up by the question: “Why do you live in Germany?” Someone who believes that Jews don’t belong to Germany probably wouldn’t bother to inquire WHY some Jews prefer Germany to Israel. To me, it sounds like an honest question.

        it sounds to me like you’re really grasping at straws to give this person the benefit of the doubt. Someone who believes that Jews don’t belong to Germany is precisely the kind of person who would inquire WHY some Jews prefer Germany to Israel.

        it’s perfectly logical why lots of jews might want to live in germany…like for instance their heritage. i mean, you can drum it into someones head since birth that their ‘homeland’ might be israel, even to the point of someone believing it. but if their parents and grandparents and greatgrandparents were all from germany they just might internalize (feel) their origin is european and there homeland is in fact..germany.

        but more to the point, it would not occur to me to ever ask an american jew why they live in america unless they showed signs of prioritizing life in israel over that of the US, they insulted america to the point i might want to defend my heritage, or some other infraction i felt was insulting.

        asking someone why they live at home implies it is not their home or they are foreigners in a strange land. it’s not welcoming and implies their presence is out of the ordinary. german jews are ..german!

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 4:26 pm

        @ Annie (no reply button)

        perhaps on some rare occasion, but that’s the overwhelming implication.
        If the statement were made without the follow-up question, I would probably agree with you.

        Someone who believes that Jews don’t belong to Germany is precisely the kind of person who would inquire WHY some Jews prefer Germany to Israel.
        Nope. People who believe that Jews don’t belong to Germany don’t bother to ask any question at all.

        it’s perfectly logical why lots of jews might want to live in germany…like for instance their heritage.
        Yes, it’s logical … to people like you and me who see through the Zionist propaganda. I would not ask such a question. However, I can see why other Germans would ask it.
        You need to consider that our politicians and MSM constantly claim that anti-Semitism is widespread in Germany. Also, they keep referring to Israel as “the Jewish state”. Zionists always proclaim that Israel is the only safe place for Jews in the world. To a German who grows up with such information, the inquiry makes perfect sense.

        asking someone why they live at home implies it is not their home or they are foreigners in a strange land. it’s not welcoming and implies their presence is out of the ordinary.
        I can see what you mean. However, you have to consider the circumstances. Non-Jewish Germans are fed Zionist propaganda since birth, too. For example, that Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people. Also, we are constantly told that negatively criticising Israel is anti-Semitic. And if negatively criticising Israel is anti-Semitic, then “Jews = Israel”. Pure logic. Therefore, it is not surprising when a non-Jewish German associates Jews with Israel and wonders why a Jew prefers Germany to Israel.
        I assume that the non-Jewish German based his inquiry on the information provided by the media and NOT on his own belief. One can believe that German Jews belong to Germany and still wonder – given the information provided by the media – why a German Jew prefers Germany to the self-declared “Jewish state”.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 28, 2014, 4:32 pm

        I wondered if this was the programme/feature you mentioned, but strictly it feels you have to dig through the ARD “Mediathek” quite a bit if you want to find a program from the local channel in Hesse /Hessen.

        Besides, your summary of the statements by the class was quite interesting, or more precisely what you pick out respectively the much larger group you simply ignore.

        First of all, thanks for your assessment.
        The author, Julia Franck, didn’t give further information on the incident.

        Yes, she did. She told us that this comment happened during a public reading of the author.

        You interpret the inquiry in the most negative way that is possible. In my opinion, this is unfair. Don’t you think that people deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt?

        Considering her summary of the half hour programme, I can assure you, Shmuel, that you cannot interpret her comment negatively enough. It is in fact interesting how selectively she recalls matters, or more interestingly what she leaves out.

        Hmm? Julia Franck, yes there may be more female writers with a Jewish background then the ones that came to mind. On the other hand that is usually not the most interesting thing for me about an author.

        In Franck’s case I wouldn’t even have immediately associated Jewish, but I haven’t read any of her books, maybe I will. Interesting documentation, interesting accompanying interview. I can assure you what GL wrote about it, wasn’t a fair summary. What a pity the students she cites, rather selectively, cannot read her summary. ;)

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 5:24 pm

        @ Shmuel

        In your haste to give the unknown speaker the “benefit of the doubt”, you judge Ms. Franck very harshly indeed, painting her as either hysterical or a liar.
        My interpretation is based on previous incidents where German Jews made false accusations of anti-Semitism. I do think that most German Jews are oversensitive in this respect. This is not necessarily their own fault. They, too, are victims of Zionist propaganda. They are taught that non-Jews are hostile to Jews. That’s why they tend to misinterpret normal statements as anti-Semitic.
        Considering that there have been so many false accusations of anti-Semitism in the past, it is only logical that I am not willing to take an accusation of anti-Semitism at face value anymore. No matter if the accuser is a Jew or a non-Jew.
        If a woman claims that she was raped by someone, then there must be sufficient evidence of this rape in order to convict the alleged rapist. The police can’t simply believe an accuser without any evidence. How can they be sure if the accuser tells the truth? Without proof, the word of the accuser is not worth more than the word of the accused.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 5:56 pm

        @ LeaNder (no reply button)

        it feels you have to dig through the ARD “Mediathek” quite a bit if you want to find a program from the local channel in Hesse /Hessen.
        As I said, when I went to the Mediathek to watch the Snowden interview, that segment was featured on the frontpage. I stated the title of the segment. Therefore, it should have been easy for you to find.

        Besides, your summary of the statements by the class was quite interesting, or more precisely what you pick out respectively the much larger group you simply ignore.
        Again, you make stuff up. My statements were NOT a summary of the entire segment. I clearly wrote that I did NOT watch the entire segment. As I wrote, I went to the Mediathek with the intention of watching the Snowden interview.

        She told us that this comment happened during a public reading of the author.
        No, she didn’t. She just said “at events”.

        Considering her summary of the half hour programme, I can assure you, Shmuel, that you cannot interpret her comment negatively enough. It is in fact interesting how selectively she recalls matters, or more interestingly what she leaves out.
        What the fuck are you talking about? My comment “You interpret the inquiry in the most negative way that is possible.” refers to the example of supposed anti-Semitism that Ms. Franck gave.
        Stop your ridiculous crusade against me.

        yes there may be more female writers with a Jewish background then the ones that came to mind.
        Oh wow! You admit that you are not omniscient!

        I can assure you what GL wrote about it, wasn’t a fair summary. What a pity the students she cites, rather selectively, cannot read her summary.
        Again, my comments were NOT a summary. You really need to read properly what I wrote before you comment.

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 28, 2014, 6:23 pm

        LeaNder:

        Considering her summary of the half hour programme, I can assure you, Shmuel, that you cannot interpret her comment negatively enough…

        I don’t understand that argument at all. You seem have something against German Lefty which is not fully explained in your remarks.

        And my working hypothesis is that she is simply not well read or very intelligent.

        That seems quite uncalled for (and using the third person when she is right here in the conversation!), which makes me question any “assurances” you want to give us about her.

        I’ve had very strong disagreements with German Lefty myself on specific issues, but I she always presented her arguments with intelligence, integrity and admirable persistence . -:)

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 28, 2014, 6:36 pm

        My interpretation is based on previous incidents where German Jews made false accusations of anti-Semitism.

        Excuse me, GL, but that sounds like prejudice. Julia Franck (who is not even described on the programme as Jewish, btw, but has “having Jewish roots”) is her own person, who should be judged solely on the basis of her own actions and statements. Do you have any reason not to give Julia Franck the “benefit of the doubt” that you are so eager to give whoever asked her those questions that she found offensive?

        If a woman claims that she was raped by someone, then there must be sufficient evidence of this rape in order to convict the alleged rapist.

        A TV studio is not a court of law, nor was anyone implicated by name. Ms. Franck was recounting an anecdote, not presenting evidence at a trial. Believe her or not, but she does not need to bring “evidence” of anything.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 29, 2014, 4:57 am

        Unfortunately, there have been so many demonstrably false accusations of anti-Semitism, so much crying wolf, that any accusation of anti-Semitism must now be looked at with suspicion. … That’s not prejudice; that’s a sober judgment based on facts.

        Feel free to substitute Arabs and “oriental fantasy”. Individuals are still individuals, and unless the statement itself or the person who made it are suspect, exercising judgement on the basis of what others have said or done – simply on the basis of some common marker – is prejudice (GL: “My interpretation is based on previous incidents where German Jews made false accusations of anti-Semitism.”)

        It’s impossible now to give any accusation of anti-Semitism the benefit of the doubt as long as there is reasonable doubt.

        There is reasonable doubt and there is bending over backwards.

        Now, if asking such a question is objectively anti-Semitic, then so must be the Zionist notions that inevitably give rise to such a question. But Zionism is a quintessentially Jewish phenomenon, therefore Zionism cannot be anti-Semitic, and neither can the questions inevitably arising from Zionist notions –or can they?

        Zionism is a product of anti-Semitism — specifically the idea that Jews are an alien presence. This is not the only anti-Semitic trope embraced by early Zionists (Jewish “abnormality”, “parasitism”, etc.). Although there is a difference between ‘You don’t belong there; come live with us’ and ‘You don’t belong here; go live with them’, they do have more than a little in common.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 29, 2014, 6:21 am

        Why do you insert the qualifier “early”? The core Zionist notions I listed are as strong today as they have ever been.

        The qualifier “early” refers primarily to the concepts of Jewish “abnormality” and “parasitism” which are no longer particularly relevant in Zionist thought (if only because the Jews have already been “normalised”), although negation of the diaspora remains a core Zionist value.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 29, 2014, 7:25 am

        Again, you make stuff up. My statements were NOT a summary of the entire segment. I clearly wrote that I did NOT watch the entire segment. As I wrote, I went to the Mediathek with the intention of watching the Snowden interview.

        The segment that drew your attention starts at slightly over 0:26 in and ends at 0:27:20. The whole feature is 0:29:20 long. Thus you watched 93,20% of the whole feature. So why did you stop at that point, two minutes before it was over anyway?

        If you watched that far, why not listen to her final statement about why preserving the memory of our past may be important? That is a pity, since her final statement is not at all “ethnocentric”. Memory and knowledge about our history she says, is important to realize how easily we all can move towards inhuman behavior towards others, and she gives a wide array of how and why exclusion, marginalization and ostracism can and does happen. She does never once mentions Jewishness in this context, as I recall it, but even age. Maybe since it was a topic. What did you call me once: Old bag?

        Now, yes, she talked about “events” but since she is asked about her experience as a “Jewish writer”, not as “a Jewish German” and the context suggests that she is asked questions, I assume that she alluded to official events around her books. She clearly does not talk about ordinary everyday meetings.

        Fast transcription and translation of the passage:
        Question: This sort of fear of contact , do you encounter it as writer, when you as Jewish writer speak about the topic?

        Answer: Of course, I have probably heard anti-Semitic or anti-Jewish comments at events where it became an issue. For example, I was asked: For people like you there is Israel, why do you live in Germany at all. But there are also others, who deal with the topic in a much more differentiated way. Because being a Jew does not mean, yes one has to be Israeli, does not even mean one has to be a believer or belonging to “the Jewish people”. There can be very different reasons why one happens to be Jewish, resulting in all type of shapes and very different appearances.

        The last sentence may sound odd to you, but back to our topic here it does not support your misinformed-by-Zionist-propaganda-perspective. At least not for me.

        One thing this woman definitively is not: Ignorant.

        Your misuse of her for me is even more striking since she clearly differentiates between responsibility and guilt, maybe you try to grasp that occasionally.

        Strictly no comment Sibiriak, my problems with GL run deep. In a nutshell: “her Germany” is not at all “my Germany”, and occasionally I find her mindset disturbing, for instance concerning the supposed plague we have over here by “criminal Romas”. This is not the first time we clash, and it surely won’t be the last time.

      • irishmoses
        irishmoses
        January 28, 2014, 5:59 pm

        Shmuel,

        That comment didn’t pass my smell test either.

        “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?”

        Definitely antisemitic even though couched in seemingly polite language not untypical of those who know that comments exhibiting direct bias are no longer acceptable in polite company. Not even a close call. Comments like that are not inadvertent slurs.

        “Mr. Hernandez, for people of your persuasion there’s Mexico (you are from Mexico aren’t you?), so why would you choose to live in the USA?”

        Wouldn’t pass any reasonable smell test.

        Shmuel, your next to last paragraph seems more problematic:

        There is so much talk here at MW about “dual loyalty”, the existence or non-existence of a Jewish people/nation, the difference between Jews, Zionists and Israelis, and here we have someone who told a fellow German — apparently for no other reason than the fact that she is Jewish — that her national identity is inconsistent with being a German, that she does not belong in Germany.

        Are you suggesting that comments about the “…much talk here at MW about ‘dual loyalty’…”, (and the other subjects you mentioned), are evidence of anti-Semitism?

        This is a difficult area because anti-Semites (a la David Duke) typically glom on to comments or threads that are critical of Israel or Zionism. But surely that doesn’t mean those subjects are pe se anti-Semitic, or all who comment on these subjects are anti-Semites?

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 28, 2014, 6:23 pm

        Are you suggesting that comments about the “…much talk here at MW about ‘dual loyalty’…”, (and the other subjects you mentioned), are evidence of anti-Semitism?

        On the contrary. The point I was trying to make was that the dominant view at MW (apologies for the generalisation) seems to be that Jews are an integral part of whatever societies in which they happen to live, and that they do not “belong” anywhere else, simply by virtue of being Jews.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 6:27 pm

        “Mr. Hernandez, for people of your persuasion there’s Mexico (you are from Mexico aren’t you?), so why would you choose to live in the USA?”
        Wouldn’t pass any reasonable smell test.

        That’s not comparable.

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 29, 2014, 4:04 am

        @Shmuel/German Lefty

        [German Lefty:]My interpretation is based on previous incidents where German Jews made false accusations of anti-Semitism.

        [Shmuel:] Excuse me, GL, but that sounds like prejudice. Julia Franck (who is not even described on the programme as Jewish, btw, but has “having Jewish roots”) is her own person, who should be judged solely on the basis of her own actions and statements. Do you have any reason not to give Julia Franck the “benefit of the doubt” that you are so eager to give whoever asked her those questions that she found offensive?

        Unfortunately, there have been so many demonstrably false accusations of anti-Semitism, so much crying wolf, that any accusation of anti-Semitism must now be looked at with suspicion. It’s impossible now to give any accusation of anti-Semitism the benefit of the doubt as long as there is reasonable doubt. That’s not prejudice; that’s a sober judgment based on facts.

        In regard to the case at hand, there IS reasonable doubt. If we define anti-Semitism as hatred or hostility toward Jews, we have no way of determining, without further evidence, whether the accused person actually felt such subjective hatred or hostility. No doubt that is a distinct if not likely possibility, but it is by no means a certainly.

        If, on the other hand, we say the statement was objectively anti-Semitic, i.e., anti-Semitic independent of the speaker’s personal feelings, because it involves a discriminatory attitude toward Jews (e.g., “Why don’t Jews live in Israel? Germany is not their homeland.”), then another problem arises. The core Zionist notions that all Jews are part of a distinct Jewish nation (and people can only belong to one nation); that Israel is the nation-state of the entire Jewish people (Netanyahu is” the prime minister of Israel and the Jewish people”); that Israel is the homeland of all the Jewish people (and a person can have only one homeland); that Israel was created for the sake of the ingathering of exiles into Eretz Israel –these Zionist notions lead logically to the question of why a particular Jew might choose not to live in his/her only homeland .

        Now, if asking such a question is objectively anti-Semitic, then so must be the Zionist notions that inevitably give rise to such a question. But Zionism is a quintessentially Jewish phenomenon, therefore Zionism cannot be anti-Semitic, and neither can the questions inevitably arising from Zionist notions –or can they?

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 29, 2014, 6:03 am

        Shmuel:

        Individuals are still individuals, and unless the statement itself or the person who made it are suspect, exercising judgement on the basis of what others have said or done – simply on the basis of some common marker – is prejudice

        I’m not persuaded. If a person makes an allegation of anti-Semitism, it is not a matter of prejudice to look at that allegation with some degree of skepticism–that’s simply common sense born of experience.

        Zionism is a product of anti-Semitism — specifically the idea that Jews are an alien presence. This is not the only anti-Semitic trope embraced by early Zionists

        Why do you insert the qualifier “early”? The core Zionist notions I listed are as strong today as they have ever been. And they are not merely “tropes”; they are fully elaborated arguments.

        In any case, you apparently agree that there is no way of determining, without further evidence, whether the person accused of anti-Semitism subjectively felt hatred or hostility toward Jews.

        That leaves us with the claim that the statement was objectively anti-Semitic. But the statement could simply derive from mainstream Zionist notions of Israel as the nation-state for the entire Jewish People– the singular homeland for all Jews re-created for the sake of the ingathering of exiles into the land of Israel etc. (That’s the danger of the Zionist refusal to recognize an Israeli nationality, discussed in my earlier post.)

        So unless you consider these core, enduring Zionist notions and their corrollaries to be inherently anti-Semitic, there remains the distinct possibility that the person was, as American put it, “just dumb and heard all the zionist propaganda but doesnt really know whats going on.”

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 29, 2014, 6:29 am

        Shmuel:

        The qualifier “early” refers primarily to the concepts of Jewish “abnormality” and “parasitism”

        But I never mentioned the concepts of “abnormality” or “parasitism”, so I don’t see how your reference to them is relevant to my point.

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 29, 2014, 6:35 am

        But I never mentioned the concepts of “abnormality” or “parasitism”, so I don’t see how your reference to them is relevant to my point.

        But I did, when I wrote “early Zionists”. You asked why I added the qualifier “early” and I explained.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 29, 2014, 8:05 am

        irishmoses: “Mr. Hernandez, for people of your persuasion there’s Mexico (you are from Mexico aren’t you?), so why would you choose to live in the USA?” Wouldn’t pass any reasonable smell test.

        GL: That’s not comparable.

        Is this a challenge to my thesis that there could be a larger pattern, or that there could be basic pattern of exclusion of “Others”, like Roma in Germany, for instance? Even if they are Bulgarian who have the same right to move anywhere in the EU as we have?

        It is only a valid statement about “the Jews” collectively, because there is Zionism? This seems an rather abrupt turn considering our earlier debates about that topic. Remember?

        Or am I recalling this incorrectly, maybe even–as you suggest above–am “lying” again?

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 29, 2014, 10:39 am

        @ LeaNder (no reply button)

        The segment that drew your attention starts at slightly over 0:26 in and ends at 0:27:20. The whole feature is 0:29:20 long. Thus you watched 93,20% of the whole feature.
        Nope. Just because I watched a few short parts in the middle and then a part at the end doesn’t mean that I watched the entire video. The internet is not like a video cassette. It doesn’t take long to fast-forward. I clicked through the video and watched a few random parts in order to get a general impression of the video’s content.

        Memory and knowledge about our history she says, is important to realize how easily we all can move towards inhuman behavior towards others
        First of all, the Holocaust is not MY history, because it happened before I was born. It is not even my country’s history, because my home country is the GDR. Besides, I don’t need to learn from history, because my sense of justice has always worked properly. Learning from history doesn’t work anyway. As Oliver Pocher once said, “The only thing that you can learn from history is that people don’t learn from history.”
        Second, we don’t need to resort to history in order to find an example of how easily people can move towards inhuman behavior towards others. There are enough examples of inhuman behaviour in the present. Instead of obsessing about past injustice, we should focus on present injustice. Present injustice can still be stopped. Commemorating past injustice keeps people from fighting present injustice.

        What did you call me once: Old bag?
        Well, you made a negative remark about my young age. That’s why I jokingly replied, “Don’t diss me for my age, you old bag.”

        One thing this woman definitively is not: Ignorant.
        I have never claimed that she is ignorant. Stop making stuff up.

        Your misuse of her for me is even more striking since she clearly differentiates between responsibility and guilt
        I have no idea what you are talking about. Your accusations are totally ridiculous.

        In a nutshell: “her Germany” is not at all “my Germany”
        So, it’s true that you are prejudiced against me because I am East German.

        I find her mindset disturbing, for instance concerning the supposed plague we have over here by “criminal Romas”.
        I have never claimed that the Romani people are a plague or that they are more criminal than other people. You simply read this kind of stuff into my comments because you are prejudiced against me.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 29, 2014, 11:44 am

        @ LeaNder
        Would you be so kind to find the passage, and either tell me where exactly I can will find it?
        It starts at 25:40.

        With what you write you give the impression she somewhat paraded the “German’s victims” side
        No, not at all. You misinterpret my comment. I clearly wrote “FORMER victim group”. I think that Ms. Franck’s assessment is quite correct.
        Many non-Jewish Germans have never met a Jew and have a “fear” of contact, because they are unsure about what is safe to say and what would be (mis)interpreted as anti-Semitism.
        However, being reserved towards Jews is not the same as hating Jews. Therefore, I don’t understand why Ms. Franck gave an example of “anti-Semitism” when actually the interviewer asked her about fear of contact.

        Remember were she said, that it seems to be a basic insult among kids by now to call someone “a Jew/or a victim”
        Whenever I hear this claim, I always wonder what German schools they talk about. In my school days, I have never heard that the word “Jew” was used as insult. One boy was made fun of because he looked like Jesus. A Russian immigrant was nicknamed “vodka”. The word “gay” was used as insult a few times. That was all.
        Besides, if it is true that in some schools the word “Jew” is actually used in an insulting way to mean “victim”, then this usage is probably caused by TOO MUCH teaching about the Holocaust. All this well-meant Holocaust education makes pupils view Jews as weak victims, not as normal and equal people with an everyday life.

        Reminds me of a really horrible scene in the East, where kids did this to each other, it ended with one dead.
        The East? Is that supposed to mean the eastern part of Germany, where I live? Why do you say “in the East”? Why don’t you say “in Germany”? Germany has been united for over 20 years. So, don’t talk about “the East” as if it were a different country or as if there were no differences within “the East”.

        I actually know and met quite a few in all these categories. Did you ever? Or do you assume to know about German Jews in an abstract way?
        I met a few. There are also articles and documentaries about Jews in Germany.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 28, 2014, 3:49 pm

        There was also an interview with a German-Jewish author. She talked about her experiences with non-Jewish Germans. She said that she heard “very anti-Semitic comments” on events she attended. As example, she stated that once she was asked: “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?”
        Question: Would anyone else here categorise this statement or question as “very anti-Semitic”?

        IMO, it depends:
        – If it was asked simply because she’s Jewish, I would consider the question to be anti-Semitic (or, at the very least, highly offensive).
        – If it was asked because she expressed Zionist sentiments about the “Jewish State” (the true Jewish homeland, the only safe place in the world for Jews, etc.), I wouldn’t consider it to be inappropriate.

      • American
        American
        January 28, 2014, 5:40 pm

        eljay says……

        IMO, it depends:
        – If it was asked simply because she’s Jewish, I would consider the question to be anti-Semitic (or, at the very least, highly offensive).
        – If it was asked because she expressed Zionist sentiments about the “Jewish State” (the true Jewish homeland, the only safe place in the world for Jews, etc.), I wouldn’t consider it to be inappropriate.”

        I agree—- and would add a third possibility—–someone who is just dumb and heard all the zionist propaganda but doesnt really know whats going on.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 6:29 pm

        someone who is just dumb and heard all the zionist propaganda but doesnt really know whats going on.

        Yes, that’s it. Although I wouldn’t necessarily use the word “dumb”. “Ignorant” is better.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 29, 2014, 4:51 am

        eljay, American, since Julia Franck refers to an event in which she read from one of her books and probably answered questions by the audience, I consider it highly unlikely that the topic was Zionism. I took a look into her publications. The question is–if someone brought up Zionism–for me would be why in and in what context?

        In her recent books Julia Franck deals with 20 century German maybe indirectly playing with family history. She has Jewish characters too. Her grandmother, a sculptress, was Jewish, returned to Germany in 1942 and survived somewhere in the blackforest, strictly “high black forest”/Hochschwarzwald, which drew my attention, since that is the region were I am born. So it is much more likely the audience was confronted indirectly with its own country’s past. The question is what exactly triggered Israel in this context?

        There is an interesting little passage in the feature GL refers to. Much of the context and documentation that accompanies the interview with Julia Franck is about the big Auschwitz Trial in Frankfurt (1963), the reasons why not many were prosecuted, but that never mind too late some still are. My personal obsession. One of the people doing research in this context, a retired lawyer, is shown for instance.

        There you have a little scene were the TV crew tries to contact one of these guys who in the place he lives as ordinary citizen claims he was only a cook in Auschwitz. The guy is pretty old by now obviously. They talk to the son of his landlord shortly, who is older himself. The moment he is asked about the guy he blurts out that what the Israelis do is hardly any better, and slams the door shut. So over here alluding to Israel or Zionism may well be an attempt to deflect guilt.

        The vast majority of the students that are interviewed and that includes the ones that do not even have German ancestors, consider it highly important to study and remember the topic, if only to make sure it can never happen again. That is for me the whole point. I took a look at the curricula in Hesse, I cannot see it is too much. I wish we had as much in the late sixties.

        irishmoses, the “dual loyalty” issue, is pretty burdened for me too. The core problem surfaced in the debate between Alex Kane and Jerome Slater not long ago. What reliable statistics do we really have, beyond assumptions? The Jewish establishment, or the lobby, seems to be pretty closely aligned with the GOP establishment generally. What about larger economical and military complex ties, not only with the US but too over here?

        Look at GF’s argument closely. All she needs to know is that the author is Jewish to decide she must “falsely claim” there are antisemitic Germans. of course there are. I have met loads of uninformed people all my life, occasionally family traditions too. She does not bring up the topic, she is asked if she was ever confronted with this type of prejudice and that is when she responds with the example from one of her book readings.

        Something interesting in this context is that she says, the moment we are outside Germany we obviously are confronted with that history, she does include herself as German. I never spoke German, if I was, and I remember that feeling vividly, just as the German stereotypes I was occasionally confronted with, admittedly. She obviously is German too, even with roots in the original centuries old German Jewish community, and that is what makes GF’s support of the highly stupid comment quite interesting. She doesn’t even need to know the context, or need to know who Julia Franck is, even without she knows “this lady” cannot be trusted.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        January 29, 2014, 6:56 am

        And a fourth possibility, I think, that the questioner was hoping and expecting to elicit something like what Shmuel mentions as the standard MW view – ‘Though I note the opinion of some Jewish people that they need a refuge elsewhere, I am convinced that this is a society where Jewish people who wish to live here are secure and integrated; I enjoy my life here’, that is a degree of polite dissent from the Zionist critique of western society. That view is current and vigorously expressed and reference to it, explicit or implicit, is not in itself offensive. The question could be asked from the point of view of one anxious, like many of us on Mondoweiss, to keep, not anxious to remove, the Jewish presence in the West. I mention that as a possibility. Perhaps a fuller account of the exchange would eliminate it.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 29, 2014, 7:09 am

        @ LeaNder
        She does not bring up the topic, she is asked if she was ever confronted with this type of prejudice and that is when she responds with the example from one of her book readings.
        This is NOT true. She said that there are so few Jews in Germany that many non-Jewish Germans don’t know how to deal with Jews (considering that they are a former victim group). Then, the interviewer asked her if she “as Jewish author” noticed any reservations or fear of contact on the part of non-Jewish Germans. For whatever reason, she replied by saying that she had heard “very anti-Semitic comments”.
        Being reserved and being anti-Semitic are two completely different things. Non-Jewish Germans are reserved precisely because we fear accusations of anti-Semitism.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 29, 2014, 7:31 am

        @ MHughes976 (no reply button)

        And a fourth possibility, I think, that the questioner was hoping and expecting to elicit something like what Shmuel mentions as the standard MW view

        I totally agree. Either the asker was truly ignorant or s/he only pretended to be ignorant in the hope of getting a certain response.
        Question: “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?”
        Anticipated answer: “Because I am not a Zionist. Contrary to what the Zionists claim, Israel does NOT represent all Jews.”
        Perhaps the statement and follow-up question were just a clumsy attempt to ask the author’s opinion on Zionism without actually using the words “Jews” and “Zionism”.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 29, 2014, 8:46 am

        I have troubles finding a reply button, it seems:

        She said that there are so few Jews in Germany that many non-Jewish Germans don’t know how to deal with Jews (considering that they are a former victim group).

        GL, I listened to it twice by now, last to transcribe the passage you mention and do not remember this passage. I would be at a loss where it would fit in the whole train of talk. Would you be so kind to find the passage, and either tell me where exactly I can will find it?

        If she said that it’s interesting, since I did not notice it. It is also completely opposite my own general impression. I can see that it is not so easy to deal with belonging categorically to the group of perpetrators versus the victims, to put it that generally, that’s why I find it interesting that it surfaces or that you remember it like that. My impression was she actually avoided adopting this position, by constantly talking of “our history”, about her German experience when traveling to foreign countries, not her different Jewish experience. With what you write you give the impression she somewhat paraded the “German’s victims” side, I cannot see where she did, so please help me. She even stated that she could understand that some of the kids felt it took just too much space in school, and that it could get occasionally too much.

        On the other hand: Remember were she said, that it seems to be a basic insult among kids by now to call someone “a Jew/or a victim” and that was the only context I remember she made a difference. Obviously this custom feels differently to her own kids. (Reminds me of a really horrible scene in the East, where kids did this to each other, it ended with one dead. None of these kids was Jewish, they only choose one among them as artificial Jew so to speak.)

        But yes, I guess it is probably true that not many Germans actually met Jews no matter if survivors or Jews from other countries or more recent Jewish immigrants from Russia, or strictly non-Jews with a German Jewish father who survived. I actually know and met quite a few in all these categories. Did you ever? Or do you assume to know about German Jews in an abstract way?

      • American
        American
        January 29, 2014, 10:22 am

        @ Shmuel
        That sounds like prejudice. Julia Franck is her own person, who should be judged solely on the basis of her own actions and statements.”>>>

        Whats left out of this argument —is we know nothing about the person accused of being anti semitic by asking that question.

        Did Franck describe the woman’s ‘tone of voice’ to indicate if this was a ‘hostile’ question or not?

        There isnt enough information in what Franck related about the question being asked imo for anyone here to be able to conclude it was or wasnt motivated by anti semitism.

        Also.
        “Do you have any reason not to give Julia Franck the “benefit of the doubt” that you are so eager to give whoever asked her those questions that she found offensive?’

        That should be a two way street. I have said before that Jews and non Jews have different ideas about what is really anti semitic. You can accuse non Jews of being insensitive but you can also accuse Jews of being overly sensitive about being Jewish.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 29, 2014, 6:37 am

        @ Sibiriak (no reply button)
        Unfortunately, there have been so many demonstrably false accusations of anti-Semitism, so much crying wolf, that any accusation of anti-Semitism must now be looked at with suspicion. It’s impossible now to give any accusation of anti-Semitism the benefit of the doubt as long as there is reasonable doubt. That’s not prejudice; that’s a sober judgment based on facts. The core Zionist notions […] lead logically to the question of why a particular Jew might choose not to live in his/her only homeland.

        I agree with your entire comment. It expresses my thoughts exactly. Sadly, as I am not a native English speaker, I am not as eloquent as you.
        Besides, thanks for defending me.

        @ Shmuel
        That sounds like prejudice. Julia Franck is her own person, who should be judged solely on the basis of her own actions and statements.

        You completely ignore the other part of my comment. I clearly wrote: “Considering that there have been so many false accusations of anti-Semitism in the past, it is only logical that I am not willing to take an accusation of anti-Semitism at face value anymore. No matter if the accuser is a Jew or a non-Jew.
        This shows that I am not prejudiced against Julia Franck because of her Jewishness. I agree that she should be judged based on her actions and statements. However, I have never heard of her before. As she is a complete stranger to me, I can’t judge her based on her actions and statements. I don’t know whether she is a paranoid Zionist or a rational anti-Zionist. Therefore, I am not willing to blindly trust her assessment and to simply agree with her accusation. Besides, you need to consider that our MSM are Zionist and tend to ignore the existence of anti-Zionist Jews. That’s why it is more likely that she is one of those paranoid Zionists.

        Do you have any reason not to give Julia Franck the “benefit of the doubt” that you are so eager to give whoever asked her those questions that she found offensive?

        I already told you why. Although a TV studio is not a court of law, the principles of justice should be applied universally. Julia Franck is the accuser, not the accused. “Benefit of the doubt” is for the accused. If she were accused of antigoyism, then I would give HER the benefit of the doubt.

        Believe her or not, but she does not need to bring “evidence” of anything.

        WHAT? So, you think it’s okay to simply accuse people of racism without proper evidence?

      • Shmuel
        Shmuel
        January 29, 2014, 7:04 am

        WHAT? So, you think it’s okay to simply accuse people of racism without proper evidence?

        When one is recounting one’s experiences and impressions, one generally does not present documents or call witnesses — especially when a specific individual is not named.

        Feel free to suspect Ms. Franck’s account. You asked whether the statement itself sounded anti-Semitic and I answered that based on the information provided it does indeed sound anti-Semitic. I really have nothing further to add.

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 29, 2014, 7:21 am

        LeaNder:

        Look at GF’s argument closely. All she needs to know is that the author is Jewish to decide she must “falsely claim” there are antisemitic Germans.

        Where do you find the expression “falsely claim”? I can’t find any post where German Lefty made such a statement. Not taking something at “face value” is far different than saying something is a “false claim”. And didn’t German Lefty make it clear that it doesn’t matter to her “if the accuser is a Jew or a non-Jew.” With all due respect, I believe it is you who needs to look at GL’s arguments more closely.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 29, 2014, 7:34 am

        German Lefty, in my most humble opinion, you’ve lost sight of your initial question (“Would anyone else here categorise this statement or question as ‘very anti-Semitic’?”) and are now waging a losing battle.

        Shmuel provided an honest and thoughtful reply based on his experiences. But you appear to have been expecting a different reply, one based on your experiences. And, so, here you are taking Shmuel to task for his honesty and thoughtfulness.

        Please stop.

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 29, 2014, 8:19 am

        LeaNder:

        One thing this woman definitively is not: Ignorant.

        You are misrepresenting things again: the “ignorant” label was suggested as a possibility for the person making the alleged anti-Semitic remark, not the Jewish writer.

        Strictly no comment Sibiriak, my problems with GL run deep. In a nutshell: “her Germany” is not at all “my Germany”, and occasionally I find her mindset disturbing, for instance concerning the supposed plague we have over here by “criminal Romas”. This is not the first time we clash, and it surely won’t be the last time.

        Well, you might want to consider the possibility that your hostility toward German Lefty is causing you to misconstrue some of her remarks. In my opinion, her views are a lot more nuanced than you make them out to be.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        January 29, 2014, 10:16 am

        Let me deflect some blame for incautious words on to myself. I was in a social setting recently with three others, all academics. The conversation turned to nationalism and I asked one of my companions, a German, about Zionism in that context. The reply was that it was undesirable for a German to comment on that topic, but some rather stronger words were used which I heard as ‘so Jewish people can do what they like as far as I’m concerned’. I’m not sure now that my memory is accurate but I was rather shocked and replied ‘That’s inverse racism’, which was stronger language than I should have used. The others then said ‘Don’t pick on Germans!’ I said that I thought that Zionism is a terrible thing. The reply to that was ‘Don’t pick on Jews!’ with real anger in their eyes. I said that I wished to stand up for Palestinians, eliciting a very firm statement from the person who was in some sense the host that ‘we are not going to discuss the Middle East’. So it ended. I was left thinking that if British humanities departments had more Palestinian students the negative ‘picking on Jews’ would not be so completely dominant over the positive ‘standing up for Palestinians’. And I think that Germans have as much right and duty as anyone else to stand up for them. Still, I had let some words that were at least too strong for a social context slip out, so was somewhat to blame, had achieved nothing and had made some people whom I quite like suspicious of me. Perhaps someone involved in the Julia Franck conversation was to blame in the same way.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder
        January 29, 2014, 10:40 am

        Where do you find the expression “falsely claim”? I can’t find any post where German Lefty made such a statement.

        go back to the start:

        German Lefty says:
        January 27, 2014 at 2:38 pm

        There was also an interview with a German-Jewish author. She talked about her experiences with non-Jewish Germans. She said that she heard “very anti-Semitic comments” on events she attended. As example, she stated that once she was asked: “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?” Question: Would anyone else here categorise this statement or question as “very anti-Semitic”?

        As self-declared nitwit, I read that as she claimed Franck called the statement “very”–an emphasis Franck does not use by the way–antisemitic, which according to GF every reasonable person would never consider antisemitic.

        You are correct she eagerly seized the “ignorant” along the way, so she dropped her earlier question. And yes, I misread that.

        In any case it leaves to the Germans the benefit of doubt. They are either “ignorant” or “falsely accused as antisemites” by ignorant Jewish writers like Franck.

        I wouldn’t want to stand up for every single dimwit or ideologue in my country. Why does she feel she needs to???? Why does she feel we “German victims”, collectively speaking, have to be defended against overbearing Jewish Germans, who accuse us as antisemites?

        Now I am gone, no need to reply GF, I found the passage.

        Besides Julia Franck will be in Cologne on book tour with her new publication soon, I will ask her about the context of the statement.

        I try to shut up again for a while. ;)

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 29, 2014, 12:09 pm

        @ LeaNder (no reply button)

        I read that as she claimed Franck called the statement “very”–an emphasis Franck does not use by the way–antisemitic
        OMG! You must be kidding. Franck called the statement “VERY anti-Semitic” twice. Are you hard of hearing?

        In any case it leaves to the Germans the benefit of doubt. They are either “ignorant” or “falsely accused as antisemites” by ignorant Jewish writers like Franck. […] Why does she feel we “German victims”, collectively speaking, have to be defended against overbearing Jewish Germans, who accuse us as antisemites?
        OMG! While reading this, I shook my head in disbelief. You deliberately misinterpret my comments about individual cases as generalisations and then you accuse me of xenophobia. What’s wrong with you?
        You use the same tactic as Zionists. When someone negatively criticises Netanyahu’s policies, the Zionists reply: “Netanyahu is a Jew. Bashing Jews is anti-Semitic.”

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 29, 2014, 12:57 pm

        @ MHughes976 (no reply button)
        That’s an interesting story. Thanks for sharing.

        I asked one of my companions, a German, about Zionism in that context.
        How well do the German companion and you know each other? If you want an honest answer from a German on the I-P conflict, then you need to build trust first. Also, it would be good to tell him your opinion first. Then he can assess in advance how you will react to his opinion.

        The reply was that it was undesirable for a German to comment on that topic, but some rather stronger words were used which I heard as ‘so Jewish people can do what they like as far as I’m concerned’.
        Here we have the same problem as with the person who asked: “For people like you there’s Israel. Why do you live in Germany?” Did he actually say this because it’s his personal opinion? Or did he merely paraphrase the “official” opinion of the German politicians and MSM? I don’t remember where I read it but a German politician once said that he would never negatively criticise Israel publicly, only privately behind closed doors. He gave German history as the reason.
        So, yes, we are constantly told by our politicians and our media that – because of history – we should not criticise Israel that much. We have talk shows and articles that deal with topics such as “Are Germans allowed to criticise Israel?”, “How far can Israel criticism go?”, or “When does Israel criticism turn into anti-Semitism?”. That’s why many Germans are intimidated and don’t dare to give their honest opinion.

        I was rather shocked and replied ‘That’s inverse racism’, which was stronger language than I should have used.
        Nope. This “strong language” was totally appropriate. It IS reverse racism. However, this reverse racism is propagated by the German state. Most Germans disagree with it and are frustrated about the state’s cowardice. I assume that the statement “so Jewish people can do what they like” is an expression of this frustration. It depends on how it was said.

        The others then said ‘Don’t pick on Germans!’ I said that I thought that Zionism is a terrible thing. The reply to that was ‘Don’t pick on Jews!’ with real anger in their eyes.
        Are you sure that these people are academics?

        I think that Germans have as much right and duty as anyone else to stand up for them.
        Correct! Please don’t hesitate to spread the word.

  10. Cliff
    Cliff
    January 27, 2014, 2:14 pm

    The Holocaust remembrance of this sort is empowering for Zionist Jews.

    It makes them feel like they have the moral high-ground as they destroy the Palestinian civilization.

  11. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 27, 2014, 2:17 pm

    Again the Bloody New York Times demonstrates who and what they are devoted to. This is a bloody rag of a newspaper who sold the Iraq war with no guilt for those who were going to die in that unnecessary war.

    Yep once again an MSM outlet validates that six million Jews were murdered in that horrific war. Yep once again the 3 million Poles, million Gypsies, gays not even whispered about. The 40 million Russians who died during that war just dust in the wind to the New York Bloody Times and so many other MSM outlets. As well as many Jews who have been more than willing for decades to go along with ignoring…”the others” who were brutally murdered in that war.

  12. Balfour
    Balfour
    January 27, 2014, 3:45 pm

    What about the 5 million Slavs, Roma, Gays and mentally disabled people also killed by the Nazis?…I guess that volume would be too hard to write.

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew
      January 27, 2014, 10:15 pm

      Balfour- I have also heard that figure of 11 million including the 6 million Jews, which would equal 5 million. But I have also heard that this figure is a made up number.

      • tree
        tree
        January 28, 2014, 12:38 am

        Yonah, the estimates of civilian deaths from World War II range from 25 million to 45 million.

        http://warchronicle.com/numbers/WWII/deaths.htm

        http://www.nationalww2museum.org/learn/education/for-students/ww2-history/ww2-by-the-numbers/world-wide-deaths.html

        http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/civilian_casualties_of_world_war.htm

        The eleven million number that you cite is, as I recall, the number of deaths in concentration and labor camps, of which 3 million or so were Jews, meaning that 8 million of those killed there were of non-Jewish origin. Half of the 6 million Jewish civilian deaths happened where they lived, not in concentration or death camps.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 28, 2014, 1:51 am

        tree- The internet sources that I have superficially looked at seem to indicate a much smaller death toll at the concentration camps.

        Regarding Snyder’s Bloodlands, it certainly is important to study the deaths at the hands of the Soviets in that area that Snyder has given the name of his book and it is important to realize or attempt to fathom what the Nazis game plan was before their invasion of the Soviet Union went quickly awry. Those who discourage a complete study of all organized murder campaigns whether by the Nazis or by the Soviet Union are doing a disservice to history and to all those who died at the hands of Hitler’s executioners or of Stalin’s.

        Those groups who were singled out for genocide, as in: “kill every man woman and child” are in a different category than those who suffered a different type of slaughter- Killing of the elites of their societies or those who suffered from bombardment and siege. The mass deaths of Soviet prisoners of war is in a different category than those selected for genocide. This differentiation between types of murder is valuable for historical purposes.

      • tree
        tree
        January 28, 2014, 7:44 am

        The internet sources that I have superficially looked at seem to indicate a much smaller death toll at the concentration camps.

        That could very well be. My remembrance of the 11 to 12 million figure is an old one, I think most likely from William Shirer’s “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”, read many, many moons ago, in my early teens. Since the figures for the number of Jews killed in the camps have been revised downward I think it’s just as likely that camp death numbers of all ethnicities have been revised down.

        Those groups who were singled out for genocide, as in: “kill every man woman and child” are in a different category than those who suffered a different type of slaughter- Killing of the elites of their societies or those who suffered from bombardment and siege.

        No group was singled out for “kill every man woman and child” by the Nazis, and that includes Jews. However, the Nazi attitude towards those they considered subhuman, which included Slavs as well as Jews, meant that those who were not killed were to be exploited for labor with little or no regard for whether they lived or died as the result. If the Jews had indeed been singled out for killing “every man woman and child” there would have been no forced Jewish labor, no Holocaust camp survivors, no deaths from disease in the camps rather than intentional killing. Yes, intentional killing of course existed in the camps, but those who were considered fit and needed for labor were spared a quick death. This most certainly does not excuse or justify any deaths in any way shape or form. My point is solely to illustrate that the genocide was one step less than “every man woman and child” even for the Jews after the Final Solution.

        As I pointed out above, the Nazi plan for Eastern Europe called for the intentional death of over 30 million people, the vast majority of them Slavic in origin, not as the byproduct of military conquest, but as the primary objective of the Nazi war machine. That’s genocide. These Nazi envisioned deaths were also not “every man woman and child” but the intent was the same as the Nazi intent towards Jews – to eliminate the vast majority of the perceived Slavic “subhumans”, and to exploit and persecute the rest. We are not just talking about the “killing of elites” or those killed as a byproduct of “bombardment and siege”. To illustrate a small example of what the Nazis did to Slavs, I’ll quote again from “Bloodlands”:

        In the second half of 1942, German anti-partisan operations were all but indistinguishable from the mass murder of Jews. Hitler ordered on 18 August 1942 that partisans in Belarus be “exterminated” by the end of the year. It was already understood that the Jews were to be killed by the same deadline. The euphemism “special treatment,” meaning shooting, appears in reports about both Jews and Belorussian civilians.
        …..
        By the middle of 1942, the number of Jews was in rapid decline, but the number of partisans was in rapid ascent. This had no effect on Nazi reasoning, except to make the methods for dealing with Belorussian civilians ever more similar to the methods of dealing with Jews. As partisans became difficult to target because they were too powerful, and as Jews became difficult to target because they were too scarce, the Germans subjected the non-Jewish Belorussian population to ever more extraordinary waves of killing. From the perspectives of the German police, the Final Solution and the anti-partisan campaigns blurred together.

        To take a single example; on 22 and 23 September 1942, Order Police Battalion 310 was dispatched to destroy three villages for ostensible connections to the partisans. At the first village, Borki, the police apprehended the entire population, marched the men, women, and children seven hundred meters, and then handed out shovels so that people could dig their own graves. The policemen shot the Belorussian peasants without a break from 9:00 in the morning until 6:00 in the evening, killing 203 men, 372, women and 130 children. … The battalion reached the next village, Zabloitse, at 2:00 in the morning and surrounded it at 5:30. They forced all of the inhabitants into the local school, and then shot 284 men, women, and children. At the third village, Borysovka, the battalion reported killing 169 men, women and children.

        ………………………

        In Belarus, Dirlewanger and his hunters did engage partisans. Yet more often they killed civilians whose villages were in the wrong place. Dirlewanger’s preferred method was to herd the local population inside a barn, set the barn on fire , and then shoot with machine guns anyone who tried to escape. The SS Special Commando Dirlewanger killed at least thirty thousand civilians in its Belorussian tour of duty.
        …….
        In May 1943 in Operation Cottbus, The Germans sought to clear all partisans from an area about 140 kilometers north of Minsk. Their forces destroyed village after village by herding populations into barns and then burning the barns to the ground. On the following days, the local swine and dogs, now without masters, would be seen in villages with burned human limbs in their jaws. The official count was 6,087 dead: but the Dirlewanger Brigade alone reported fourteen thousand killed in this operation. The majority of the dead were women and children; about six thousand men were sent to Germany as laborers.

        Operation Hermann, named for Hermann Goring, reached the extreme of this economic logic in summer 1943. Between 12 July and 11 August, German battle groups were to choose a territory, kill all of the inhabitants except for promising male labor, take all property that could be moved, and then burn everything left standing. After the labor selections among the local Belorussian and Polish populations, the Belorussian and Polish women, children and aged were shot.

        The Nazis destroyed 209 of the 290 cities in Belarus and killed somewhere around 3 million Belorussians, nearly a third of the population. (800,000 Jews were among that total-90% of the Belarussian Jews.)

        The main difference between what happened to the Slavs and the Jews were that the Slavs existed in much greater numbers, making them much harder to exterminate , whereas the Jews were both much smaller in number and were more easily rounded up since they usually lived in distinct and separate communities.

        The mass deaths of Soviet prisoners of war is in a different category than those selected for genocide.

        No, it is not. The Soviet prisoners were intentional starved. Their death rate was around 60%, as compared to the death rate of around 3% for Western POWs who were not considered subhuman by the Nazis like the Soviet POWs. The first victims of the gas chambers were Soviet POWs, and the earliest victims of the horrid medical experiments were Soviet POWs. In a period of eight months in 1941-42, an estimated 2.8 million Soviet POWs were killed through intentional starvation, exposure and summary execution. (And in many cases the Nazis considered any Soviet male of military age to be a POW if captured, regardless of whether he was a combatant or not.) They were being killed because of their ethnicity, same as for the Jews.

        http://www.gendercide.org/case_soviet.html

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 10:32 am

        “No group was singled out for “kill every man woman and child” by the Nazis, and that includes Jews. However, the Nazi attitude towards those they considered subhuman, which included Slavs as well as Jews, meant that those who were not killed were to be exploited for labor with little or no regard for whether they lived or died as the result. If the Jews had indeed been singled out for killing “every man woman and child” there would have been no forced Jewish labor, no Holocaust camp survivors, no deaths from disease in the camps rather than intentional killing. Yes, intentional killing of course existed in the camps, but those who were considered fit and needed for labor were spared a quick death. This most certainly does not excuse or justify any deaths in any way shape or form. My point is solely to illustrate that the genocide was one step less than “every man woman and child” even for the Jews after the Final Solution. ”

        This is not completely true. The camps built as part of Aktion Reinhard — Bełżec, Sobibór, Treblinka, Chełmno and Majdanek — were extermination centers, nothing more. They were designed and built to murder Jews by the millions. The number of survivors from these camps are very small. For example, from 400-600,000 people were killed at Bełżec and only 1 or 2 people are known to have survived. From 180,000 to 300,000 people were killed in Chełmno and only 3 are known to have survived. At Sobibór, there was a revolt. So while 250,000 were killed, 59 people survived that camp.

        The picture you paint of the concentration camps being the source of slave labor, etc., is true of those camps in Germany itself (and in some ways Auschwitz, which on the whole was a combination concentration camp and death camp) but are decidedly untrue with regard to the death camps in the east, in occupied Poland.

      • tree
        tree
        January 29, 2014, 6:22 am

        No reply button, but this is in response to this, yonah,

        I will not parse this statement line by line, but your comment is wrong. Men, women and children were sent to the camps and the strong were selected for labor and those who were weak were sent to die. Because the Nazis did not kill all able bodied men and were willing to exploit their labor, this somehow means that this was not a genocide of “men, women and children”?

        You misstate what I wrote, but in doing so actually prove my point. In reference to my quoting from Snyder on the Nazi plan to exterminate the vast majority of Eastern Europeans, and enslave the rest of them to support the needs of Germany you insisted that the genocide perpetrated against Jews was of a “different category” than that planned by the Nazis in advance for the Slavs and other Eastern Europeans, and from what I know of your biases I think I can safely assume that you think the genocide of the Jews was somehow more heinous than that planned for the Slavs. You sought to reinforce this sense of yours by referring to a genocide of “every man, woman and child” (i.e., Jewish only, in your mind) in contrast to one where a limited number of the victim group are kept alive to serve the interest of the perpetrators (the planned Slavic genocide). My point was that the planned Slavic genocide was of the same category and heinousness as the Jewish one, and the only important difference between the two was the Nazi inability to accomplish the former due to the much more vast numbers involved and the resultant logistical problems in killing off the Slavs, not a difference in “category” or evilness of intent.

        Because the Nazis did not kill all able bodied men and were willing to exploit their labor, this somehow means that this was not a genocide of “men, women and children”? The einsatzgruppen killings described in Bloodlands killed “men, women and children” and had nothing to do with labor.

        I did not say this was not a genocide. I’m simply pointing out that in plan and intent the genocide of Slavs and Jews were no different, whereas you seem to think that where Slavs are concerned the fact that the Nazi plan did not envision killing them all off at once, but planned to use some of them as slave labor, makes it a lesser form of genocide, and yet you argue otherwise when it comes to the treatment of Jews. You believe that the use of some Jews as slave labor does not diminish the fact that it was genocidal. I agree with your assessment regarding the genocide of the Jews: I simply find it depressing, though not surprising ,that you don’t accord the Slavic victims the same consideration. Just because the Nazis planned in detail to keep a small percentage Slavs alive as slave labor you tried to make the point that it wasn’t a genocide of “every man, woman and child” but you dismiss the use of a small percentage of Jews as slave labor as not relevant to the whether it was a genocide of “every man, woman and child”. Two different standards based solely on the ethnicity of the victims.

        Maybe your misstatement is just ignorance, but I fear it betrays some malice towards historical fact.

        I could say the same about your statement and your unwillingness to acknowledge the genocidal intent of the Nazis towards the Slavs.

        As the example I provided illustrates, Slavic men, women and children were murdered in the most horrific and criminal ways en masse for no other other reason than their ethnicity. This was genocide. It was not simply “death” in “siege and bombardment” of which you feel some emotional need to diminish.

        The murder of prisoners of war even based upon ideological racial theory is still different from the killing of men, women and children. Prisoners of war are not to be murdered and doing so is a war crime. But the nature of the crime is different from rounding up all the population and shooting them. If you can’t see the difference, I suspect it is ideology that is causing your thickness.

        The murder of specifically Soviet POWs, based solely on their ethnicity, was just one element of the Nazi genocidal intent towards the Slavs, which of course also included rounding up large groups of Slavs (men, women and children) and shooting them all, or forcing them into a barn and setting it on fire, etc. Would you insist that the singling out of Jewish POWs for murder by the Nazis would not qualify as part of the genocide against Jews? I think not. You are trying too hard to find some reason to rank the deaths of millions of Slavs as somehow less horrific and inexcusable than the deaths of millions of Jews.

      • marc b.
        marc b.
        January 28, 2014, 9:43 am

        tree, this is in response to a post of yours that does not have a reply icon for some reason, but your reference to Snyder’s ‘Bloodlands’ hits the mark. essentially the Germans’ primary goal was the mass extermination of Russians/Slavs, tens of millions necessary to clear the way for ethnic Germans who would become the masters of the new agriculture in the East. the original plan for European Jews was their expulsion to Siberia or elsewhere. and this is where the German murder of Jews is analogous to Turkish treatment of Armenians: the periodic pogroms and mass murder prior to the extermination plans were meant to ensure loyalty or at least subservience of a potentially disloyal population, not the complete annihilation of a people. so for example, hundreds of thousands of Armenians, Greeks and other Christians were murdered by Turks or ethnic Kurds in the late 19th/early 20th century. it was only as the Germans/Turks began to recognize the weakness of their positions (i.e. the inevitable decline of the Turkish empire/the inability of the Germans to carry out their plan to murder tens of millions of Russians and other Slavs) that the extermination of the Armenians/Jews became the goal.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 10:42 am

        marc b.,

        I disagree with this assessment. I think that there is no doubt that the Jews were slated for extermination. Had the Nazis won the war, it would have happened then, during the implementation of Generalplan Ost, but when it was clear that Generalplan Ost was not going to happen, after the drive to take Moscow failed, Hitler decided that he was going to at least murder all the Jews under his control while he had the power to do it.

      • marc b.
        marc b.
        January 28, 2014, 11:50 am

        woody, that’s not exactly my assessment. undoubtedly the Germans would have killed millions more, Jew and gentile alike, had they won the war. my point, Snyder’s point, is that the extermination programs were not part of the methodical implementation of a detailed plan. it was ad hoc murder from early on, as soon as the German offensive stalled. frankly it’s the whole ideology that proposes that the murder of European Jews is the ne plus ultra of genocides, going as far as attempting to yank it from the greater context of the war in the East, that is galling. the segregation of the holocaust from its context is propaganda, not history. and I know it’s not your position, but repeated references to the special status of Jewish victims of the war is absolutely grotesque. (I frankly see no practical or moral difference between the death of a child by starvation and disease during the siege of Leningrad from the death of a child from exposure on a box car to a concentration camp.) the quotation of Foxman’s deicide commentary on the holocaust is just one example of this phenomenon. and contrary to comments above, the propagandizing of the holocaust is not simply part of the promotion of consciousness of the death of millions of Jews, it is also used to denigrate the suffering of others. ask an Armenian American what they think of Foxman, and you’ll get an earful, in my experience at least.

        ps woody, most of this is not directed at you. just a bit of steam being released in general.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 12:47 pm

        marc b.,

        I get your point, and especially on the use of genocide and this genocide.

        My point is simply to disagree with Snyder’s thesis regarding the Jews. I think that there were ad hoc elements to it, but the only thing ad hoc, as far as the destruction of the Jews go, was the timing.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 28, 2014, 1:27 pm

        “frankly it’s the whole ideology that proposes that the murder of European Jews is the ne plus ultra of genocides, going as far as attempting to yank it from the greater context of the war in the East, that is galling.”

        Should we review the numbers AGAIN?

        60% of the Jews in the Ukraine lost their lives in the Holocaust. 900,000 out of 1.5m. The overall casualty rate in the Ukraine was around 16.3%. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

        So, again, no, it was not the same thing, and Jews, many of whom were killed in killing fields by machine-gun, into mass graves, an atrocity about which we still know relatively little, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/28/world/europe/a-light-on-a-vast-toll-of-jews-killed-away-from-the-death-camps.html, were not just another form of Ukrainian casualty.

      • marc b.
        marc b.
        January 28, 2014, 3:43 pm

        Should we review the numbers AGAIN?

        apparently I’m not clever enough to follow you hophmi. since you seem to have worked out an atrocity calculus, why don’t publish the formula here so that I can work out the mathematical comparison, for example, between the mass murder of Armenians and the mass murder of Cambodians and see who comes out on ahead and properly rank them on the suffering index. or is that ‘the Armenians’ have greater net household worth and greater leisure time than ‘the Cambodians’ to invest “in remembrance” on the front page of the NYT? you are certainly operating on a higher plane than I am hophmi, but then I wouldn’t expect anything less from you. and I mean you in the superlative collective plural. I thank you. we all thank you.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 28, 2014, 11:00 pm

        tree- You wrote

        “No group was singled out for “kill every man woman and child” by the Nazis, and that includes Jews. However, the Nazi attitude towards those they considered subhuman, which included Slavs as well as Jews, meant that those who were not killed were to be exploited for labor with little or no regard for whether they lived or died as the result. If the Jews had indeed been singled out for killing “every man woman and child” there would have been no forced Jewish labor, no Holocaust camp survivors, no deaths from disease in the camps rather than intentional killing. Yes, intentional killing of course existed in the camps, but those who were considered fit and needed for labor were spared a quick death. This most certainly does not excuse or justify any deaths in any way shape or form. My point is solely to illustrate that the genocide was one step less than “every man woman and child” even for the Jews after the Final Solution.”

        I will not parse this statement line by line, but your comment is wrong. Men, women and children were sent to the camps and the strong were selected for labor and those who were weak were sent to die. Because the Nazis did not kill all able bodied men and were willing to exploit their labor, this somehow means that this was not a genocide of “men, women and children”? The einsatzgruppen killings described in Bloodlands killed “men, women and children” and had nothing to do with labor.

        Maybe your misstatement is just ignorance, but I fear it betrays some malice towards historical fact.

        (The murder of prisoners of war even based upon ideological racial theory is still different from the killing of men, women and children. Prisoners of war are not to be murdered and doing so is a war crime. But the nature of the crime is different from rounding up all the population and shooting them. If you can’t see the difference, I suspect it is ideology that is causing your thickness.)

  13. dimadok
    dimadok
    January 27, 2014, 4:01 pm

    Today is the Holocaust remembrance day, January 27th of each year, recognized by UN. Only one day, and I say here in the name of my 15 relatives burned and killed by Nazis and their European collaborators- damn you Mr. Weiss and your followers. Every life is as important as the whole world, and who you to tell us how to remember and how to make others feel more comfortable about the atrocities done against us? There is the remembrance for all people killed during WWII, but you are particular about Jews and their annoying ways?
    Morons here, like German Lefty, ask innocently: “is it antisemitic to tell a Jew to go live in Israel, for there is his place?”. After that Holocaust remembrance is needed more than ever.

    • Cliff
      Cliff
      January 27, 2014, 4:17 pm

      @dim duck

      damn you Mr. Weiss and your followers.

      How does this latest hysterical outburst of yours differ from any of the previous ones?

      How does this day of Holocaust Remembrance differ from any other day when Zionist Jews and the careerists/sellouts/sycophants who pledge their loyalty to Israel, invoke the Holocaust to justify endless war and ethnic cleansing and apartheid?

      You are not a Holocaust survivor. You have not suffered a fraction of how much suffering you and your government and your political inflict upon the Palestinian people.

      Damn YOU, dim duck – and all other Holocaust Industry cultists.

      Damn you and whoever else exploits the memory of the Holocaust to justify Zionism and continued Jewish colonialism and continued apartheid.

    • amigo
      amigo
      January 27, 2014, 4:21 pm

      “Morons here, like German Lefty, ask innocently: “is it antisemitic to tell a Jew to go live in Israel, for there is his place?”. After that Holocaust remembrance is needed more than ever.”Dumadoc

      Well, Your Zionist entity is always telling us it is the state for all Jews.

      And you and many of your fellow Zionists are busy telling us that Palestinians should live in Jordan and have no right to be in “Israel”.

      Not so sure you and your fellow zios have the right to complain.

      Hypocrisy anyone.

    • OlegR
      OlegR
      January 27, 2014, 4:22 pm

      Did you expect any better of them here ?

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      January 27, 2014, 4:37 pm

      ” I say here in the name of my 15 relatives burned and killed by Nazis and their European collaborators- damn you Mr. Weiss and your followers. ”

      Pretty pathethic that you would drag 15 dead people into it just so you can express an ill-aimed rage at someone simply because they disagree with a project that ignores half of the people who were murdered.

      “Every life is as important as the whole world,”

      Too bad your shittly little state doesn’t seem to think so.

      “and who you to tell us how to remember and how to make others feel more comfortable about the atrocities done against us?”

      And who are you to say that someone should be given a pass for their callous disregard of half of those directly murdered by the Nazis?

    • seafoid
      seafoid
      January 27, 2014, 4:37 pm

      Yeah dim

      Phil ran the trains to Auschwitz.
      If you really feel like making a point tell Germany to stop sending Israel submarines.
      And atrocities from Beirut to Gaza will never heal the trauma of the atrocities done to the Jews in ww2.

    • annie
      annie
      January 27, 2014, 4:39 pm

      dim, who forces you to be here? is it not true, that on this January 27th, Holocaust remembrance day, in the name of your 15 relatives burned and killed by Nazis and their European collaborators, you are choosing to spend here on this site? why? if it is so holy to you what are you doing here?

      who you to tell us how to remember and how to make others feel more comfortable about the atrocities done against us?

      please explain to me how you ‘remember’ the atrocities done against you on this day of remembrance, by blogging on mondoweiss. i didn’t even knowit was holocaust remembrance day until i visited this comment section. that even makes the nyt publication of this weird book even more sacreligious. is there no end to this ‘creativity’ wrt to making the holocaust fresh for us? crazy weird.

      let us hope and pray what’s been done to the meaning of anti semitism thru a constant barrage propaganda, is not done to the holocaust. is nothing sacred? i guess the answer is ‘no’.

      • dimadok
        dimadok
        January 27, 2014, 6:41 pm

        @Annie- because this is my way to remember, shoving the Holocaust down the throats of all haters. Your lack on knowledge about this date is only a symptom of a bigger problem, Annie.

      • annie
        annie
        January 27, 2014, 7:17 pm

        why would you think you have the ability to shove the holocaust down anyones’ throat? millions of living americans have family who died in that war, do you really think we would relish them dying in vain so you could turn the holocaust into a weapon of your choosing. no one needs this book to remember the holocaust, no one needs a ‘day‘ to remember the holocaust and no one even needs museums to remember it either. we have our own histories, those who sacrificed when our country went to war. you don’t own the holocaust and you can’t cheapen it for me with this silly talk about shoving it down throats.

        it’s sad, you’re sad. you should be more respectful of the dead, they are not your weapon.

      • tokyobk
        tokyobk
        January 27, 2014, 8:05 pm

        We do need days of remembrance and museums and textbooks and art etc…

        In Japan most young people have no idea about Japanese crimes in Asia, which by the way helped contribute to nearly 20 million civilian deaths.

        How many people know about the clearing of the Belgian Congo which also was a death toll of millions.

        As for this topic, its actually not so hard to remember the specificity of how and why Jews (and Roma) were murdered -Homosexuality is a slightly different category- as well as the millions of others who were murdered in the course of war and who starved, died of disease or were killed for political reasons.

      • Mayhem
        Mayhem
        January 27, 2014, 10:08 pm

        no one needs a ‘day‘ to remember the holocaust and no one even needs museums to remember it either

        By corollary Annie no one needs a a day to remember your sacred cow the Nakba and let’s not create any museum exhibits about it either. And most of all don’t try shoving it down the throats of people for the sake of the ‘Palestinian’ cause.
        Hypocrisy reigns supreme at Mondoweiss!

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 28, 2014, 6:59 am

        tokyobk:

        We do need days of remembrance and museums and textbooks and art etc…

        Indeed, we need memory days for all official Holocausts–and memory holes for all the others.

      • annie
        annie
        January 28, 2014, 4:04 pm

        i didn’t mean we shouldn’t have days of remembrance, or days we celebrate things, that was not my point. i was responding to dim’s weird idea of having the holocaust ‘shoved’ down throats, as if that is what it would take for us to remember it (for what else could he possibly have meant?).

        and besides i am right. can one person, just one, tell me they would not remember the holocaust if there wasn’t a remembrance day for it? mayhem, what about you? would you forget the holocaust if not for jan 27? and no, i certainly do not need a date to ‘remember’ the nakba. it is absurd. that was my point. just like we don’t need a memorial day to remember our relatives who died in war.

      • bintbiba
        bintbiba
        January 29, 2014, 8:06 am

        Well said, annie.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 27, 2014, 8:00 pm

        dimadok “shoving the Holocaust down the throats of all haters”

        LOL. The only hatred here is against a brutal and un-necessary occupation in order to grab non-Israeli territory and it has poisoned the minds and blackened the hearts of people like yourself.

        “Your lack on knowledge about this date is only a symptom of a bigger problem, Annie”

        What lack of knowledge? You really take the cake pal.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 27, 2014, 9:32 pm

        “You really take the cake pal.”

        27 January is Chocolate Cake Day.

      • Djinn
        Djinn
        January 28, 2014, 2:06 am

        @tokyobk “As for this topic, its actually not so hard to remember the specificity of how and why Jews (and Roma) were murdered -Homosexuality is a slightly different category- as well as the millions of others who were murdered in the course of war and who starved, died of disease or were killed for political reasons.

        I can understand why you would categorise deaths from starvation or disease separately but what was non specific about murdering people because they were gay? Or socialists, anarchists or unionists?

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 5:17 am

        this is my way to remember, shoving the Holocaust down the throats of all haters.

        All the haters? What haters? So, you accuse all German school kids of being (born) haters?
        The opposite is true: People could one day turn into haters when you constantly hold crimes against them that they didn’t commit.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 28, 2014, 11:31 am

        @ German Lefty
        Seems clear from dimadok’s comments he thinks “Phil and his followers” are all subject to his damnation and it’s his tangential job “to shove The Holocaust down the throats of all haters.” I have no clue why he thinks so. I’ve been a commenter on this blog since 2007, and I’ve never seen the slightest indication that the posters and commenters are ignorant of The Holocaust, or that “Phil and his followers” are haters. I have the contrary conclusion. Further, just as in Germany, we Americans get educated in K-12 about The Holocaust, and we have many museums devoted to The Holocaust scattered across the country. And we have many Hollywood movies and TV movies about it as well as a plethora of documentation about it on cable channels such as the History and Military channels, and as well, our politicians remind us of the Holocaust constantly whenever they talk about foreign policy related to the state of Israel. OTOH, very few Americans have ever heard of The Nakba or seen any film or video on that catastrophe, despite the fact it’s on-going and our taxpayers fund it. Our politicians never mention The Nakba or the on-going plight of the Palestinians.

        And I see no evidence anyone who comes here regularly thinks you are a moron, as dimadok thinks. Again, on the contrary, I think your comments are very intelligent and evidence of a very educated, logical and fair mind. As you’ve said, sometimes you take comments here too literally, but that’s just because although you read and write English better than many American natives I know, the pop English usage and cultural associations cannot be learned except by living here.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 2:56 pm

        @ Citizen (no reply button)

        I think your comments are very intelligent and evidence of a very educated, logical and fair mind.
        Thanks. You are very kind. I can only return the compliment.

        I see no evidence anyone who comes here regularly thinks you are a moron, as dimadok thinks.
        Clearly, you haven’t become acquainted with LeaNder yet. My assumption is that she is prejudiced against either East Germans or young people. I don’t know how else to explain her constant misinterpretations of my comments.

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 27, 2014, 4:49 pm

      dimadok ” Only one day”

      Just like Xmas … Oh and Easter, when th’ SoG gets an extra few days….because he was the Son of G-d apparently. A Palestinian too. Just like all the folk who lived in Palestine at the time, Arab and Jew alike. In fact, they could live anywhere in the historic homeland. Not like today, after the Zionist Movement demanded a state Israelis Arab and Jew alike are prohibited from living anywhere in Palestine unless they become Palestinian citizens.

      If Israel would only p*ss off outta Palestine, end the stupid land grabbing occupation, Jews would again be able to live anywhere in Palestine, as Palestinians

      ” I say here in the name of my 15 relatives burned and killed by Nazis and their European collaborators- damn you Mr. Weiss and your followers”

      A)You’re out of line pal. None here killed any of your alleged relatives or support the slaughter of any innocent human being. If people want to take up arms in order to usurp the Palestinians, its their problem for making themselves military targets

      B) You’ve told so much bullsh*t here I seriously doubt anything you say

      “Every life is as important as the whole world..”

      Yes. Even Arab lives!

      “There is the remembrance for all people killed during WWII”

      Do you know what day that is?

      “Morons here, like German Lefty, ask innocently: “is it antisemitic to tell a Jew to go live in Israel, for there is his place?”

      Read the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel you silly person.

      “After that Holocaust remembrance is needed more than ever”

      Why should everyone have the Holocaust rammed down their throats at every chance? Other folk have their own to remember for having been slaughtered, often in far greater numbers than our Jewish fellows.

      • dimadok
        dimadok
        January 27, 2014, 5:34 pm

        @Talknic- I am certainly not your pal.
        Aren’t you supposed to be “an old Jewish guy from Oz”? Then maybe you can remember those days when Jesus was not some Palestinian but a Jewish rabi going against the establishment. And yes, I’ll stuff the Holocaust down every single anti-semitic throat here and anywhere else.
        I am young enough to do it for a very long time- long after most of folks here will be gone and forgotten.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 27, 2014, 8:31 pm

        @ dimadok “I am certainly not your pal”

        You got that right pal!

        Aren’t you supposed to be “an old Jewish guy from Oz”?”

        No supposed to be about the fact

        ” Then maybe you can remember those days when Jesus was not some Palestinian but a Jewish rabi going against the establishment”

        LOL. I’m not that old pal. Unlike some mythical Jews who have lived for thousands of years in the diaspora to now return to Israel. When in fact they could have for the majority of the 3,000 years they didn’t!

        If he existed at all, like all people who lived in Palestine, Jesus would have been a Palestinian, Jewish or not.

        “And yes, I’ll stuff the Holocaust down every single anti-semitic throat here “

        Good luck finding one here pal.

        “I am young enough to do it for a very long time- long after most of folks here will be gone and forgotten”

        Strange I used to say almost the same thing until I checked some of the ‘facts’ I was being fed. Oddly enough to try to prove the Israeli narrative. LOL

        You’re just an apologist for Israel’s illegal policies in non-Israeli territories, cheapening the Holocaust by using to attack people who’re opposed Israel’s continued and un-necessary belligerence.

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 28, 2014, 2:09 am

        @dim dok – At least get your facts right, even if your thinking is dimmed.
        Jesus, provided there was a person so described, was nothing but a Jewish Palestinian, which is some Palestinian, given that Galilee has always been in Palestine, not transported there from Kamchatka.
        As for stuffing, you are really itching to told to stuff your Holocaust(TM) money-extorting commercialization up your bowels, seeing that almost all people here lost family in the Genocide and none of us needed a narrow-forehead racist to get maudlin and patronize us.
        Finally, to exchange recommendations, I unfortunately can’t share your optimism about survival if you insist in residing anywhere in Palestine or even traveling to it: Zionist warmongering is a real limiting factor, as is the so-called Samson option.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 28, 2014, 11:46 am

        @ dimadok
        Many of us here have children, and grandchildren, so our POV will live on after us, or do you think we haven’t made sure our kids are educated and aware? You won’t live forever either. Haven’t you been reading here on this blog about the generational shift among Jewish Americans regarding Israel?
        You think that’s not mirrored in Gentile Americans as well? You’re the dinosaur and “Never Again” is a universal principle, paid for by the millions who died in WW2. The last thing that present and future generations should support is a colonial ethno-religious state with separate but unequal citizenship groups under law and running a military occupation on stolen land.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 28, 2014, 5:23 am

        @ talknic
        If Israel would only p*ss off outta Palestine, end the stupid land grabbing occupation, Jews would again be able to live anywhere in Palestine, as Palestinians
        Exactly.

        I checked some of the ‘facts’ I was being fed. Oddly enough to try to prove the Israeli narrative.
        Same here.

        I am certainly not your pal.
        Perhaps, dimadok doesn’t want to be called “pal” because this word reminds him of “Palestinian”.

    • Kathleen
      Kathleen
      January 27, 2014, 4:49 pm

      Hey Dima when the NYBloody Times pays as much to all of these other genocides as they pay to that genocide. That is when I will stop noticing http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html

    • Djinn
      Djinn
      January 27, 2014, 5:09 pm

      How do you feel about Nakba commemoration? I assume you actively fight against laws criminalising it because you wouldn’t want to tell Palestinians how to remember right?

    • Ecru
      Ecru
      January 27, 2014, 5:14 pm

      @ Dim

      Morons here, like German Lefty, ask innocently: “is it antisemitic to tell a Jew to go live in Israel, for there is his place?”

      Except that’s not what was said is it? What was said was this,

      Why do you live in Germany?

      Not telling someone to do anything just asking a question. Now here’s a question of my own (oohh but it’s anti-semitic to ask questions isn’t it.)

      Why do Zionists feel this overpowering urge to lie about everything even when they must know their lies will be seen as such within a millisecond?

    • Bumblebye
      Bumblebye
      January 27, 2014, 5:33 pm

      dimduck
      When the UN decided on Jan 27 I was upset, as it’s my son’s birthday. I have been further angered by its focus ONLY, and EXCLUSIVELY on one brand of victim. There were so many others. But we are only permitted to have remembrance for ONE kind. That obliterates ALL the other victims from Holocaust history, don’t you think? As well as all the other holocausts of the 20th century, from the Herrera (also a German atrocity, in Namibia) 1904 onwards. Or maybe we should start with the Boer War concentration camps if we start in the 20th? It was a horrifying century.

      • dimadok
        dimadok
        January 27, 2014, 5:35 pm

        @Bumblebye- I am upset about the whole year of solidarity with my sworn enemies, do you see me complaining about, except here?

      • Bumblebye
        Bumblebye
        January 27, 2014, 6:56 pm

        dimduck
        What are you blathering about? What “solidarity” with which “sworn enemies”?

      • dimadok
        dimadok
        January 27, 2014, 7:00 pm

        @Bumblebye.
        Haven’t you heard- this is the year of solidarity with Palestinian people and their struggle. You should be more informed.

      • Djinn
        Djinn
        January 28, 2014, 2:11 am

        He is talking about this:

        http://un.org.au/campaigns/international-years/international-year-of-solidarity-with-the-palestinian-people-2014/

        He believes all Palestinian people are his sworn enemies, but he’s not a massive bigot, it would be very anti-Semitic to even think that.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 28, 2014, 1:06 am

        @ dimadok “I am upset about the whole year of …”

        A whole year. WOW !!!

        The Palestinians have been under occupation for hundreds of generations. In fact far longer than the Kingdom of David ever existed or the rogue state of Israel.

        Since the Roman era they have under occupation in part or completely by some regime or another. Israel being the latest in a long long list.

        They’ve never had the opportunity in over two thousand years to declare themselves independent. (One can’t if one is under occupation, that’s why the the Mandate expired May 14th 1948 at midnight, so the two parties could declare themselves independent if they wished).

        Unfortunately, some scumbag terrorist irgunizations (sic) already had forces in control of territory outside that slated for the Jewish state by the 14th may 1948 at midnight, depriving the Palestinians the ability to declare independence if they had wanted to.

        Unfortunately those scumbag terrorists have never left the non-Israeli territory 65 years on. The Palestinians of today have been under occupation ALL THEIR LIVES and you moan about 1 year on a blog!!!

        ‘scuse me, but you’re completely stark raving ^&*&%$ insane!!!

        “do you see me complaining about, except here?”

        Well there are plenty of place you could go make pathetic complaints and nonsense excuse for Israeli belligerence. Off you go…. bye. Have fun! Don’t remember to forget to write

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 8:43 am

        “@Bumblebye- I am upset about the whole year of solidarity with my sworn enemies, do you see me complaining about, except here?”

        Hey, speaking of sworn enemies… Did you see that Abe Foxman was in an alien state (well, not really, he was in al-Quds, which is legally not part of any state…), making libelous statements in support of the sworn enemy of the US, the traitor Pollard?? I’d say that makes Foxman a traitor, too, frankly.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 27, 2014, 5:49 pm

        the Herrera (also a German atrocity, in Namibia) 1904

        Never heard of it.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_Genocide

      • Stephen Shenfield
        Stephen Shenfield
        January 27, 2014, 6:31 pm

        The correct spelling is Herero.

        See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herero_and_Namaqua_Genocide

      • Sibiriak
        Sibiriak
        January 27, 2014, 10:10 pm

        Bumblebye:

        I have been further angered by its focus ONLY, and EXCLUSIVELY on one brand of victim.

        Please understand that the Holocaust was a uniquely horrific event in human history:

        http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070104164339AAU0KZb

        The Holocaust is something different. It is a singular event. It is not simply one example of genocide but a nearly successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and, thus, on God himself.

        Please also understand that anyone who includes the Holocaust among other great tragedies in human history may be considered an anti-Semite.

        See:
        http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/international-forum-declaration-regulates-holocaust-denial/2013/10/31/

      • Eva Smagacz
        Eva Smagacz
        January 28, 2014, 11:11 am

        “The Holocaust is something different. (…) nearly successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and, thus, on God himself.”

        Shorter:
        Holocaust is nearly successful attempt ( attempt on the life) on God himself.

        So there you have it. It was attempted deocide! And it was nearly successful but for rebirth of “chosen”. So we have new, growing, Deus – presumably split in body between Florida and Israel.

        Certifiable delusions of grandeur, anyone?

        What proportion of people believe this step up on the concept of “chosen?”

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 28, 2014, 11:56 am

        @ Eva S
        Hey, I resent that! I live in Florida and don’t feel I’ve been chosen by God or that I’m one of the living collective cells in human form making up God on Earth, generation after generation.

      • Ellen
        Ellen
        January 28, 2014, 12:02 pm

        Eva, with the Holocaust of Germany that claimed victims from all walks of life from the disabled to the disliked to those of the Jewish faith, but those who were not Jewish ate only chopped liver, as you say.

        “It is not simply one example of genocide but a nearly successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and, thus, on God himself.”

        With beliefs like that above, it means that human beings who are not Jewish are untermenchen, not deserving of honor, memory or life.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 28, 2014, 12:42 pm

        “Hey, I resent that! I live in Florida and don’t feel I’ve been chosen by God”

        If you’re living in Florida, there’s a good chance the other guy is to blame. (Absolutely so, if you’re North of I-4) LOL.

      • MHughes976
        MHughes976
        January 28, 2014, 1:31 pm

        I think that if we look at the general history of ideas we see that Chosen People was originally an interesting and understandable idea.
        Humanity is alienated from God, morally degenerate, a flawed thing. We cannot return to God, or to a better life truly suited to human flourishing, by a change of heart affecting everyone in a brief span of time. Someone, an apparently arbitrarily selected group, must take the first steps. But those steps are so important that we cannot regard the selection as truly arbitrary but as election by some marvellous providence. This makes quite a bit of sense to me. I think it was worked out from earlier materials by Jewish around 300-ish BCE thinkers working in an international context, with Plato’s ideas about progress widely known. It was also in a context where conversion to Judaism was beginning to happen.
        The problem, for my money, was the apparent trivialisation of the moral struggles of the non-elect. To deal with this, a group of Jewish intellectuals – well, if the famous Historical Jesus founded a group, he was also a member of it – created Christianity: Paul’s crucial Letter to the (substantially Jewish) ‘Romans’ was in part an attempt to rework the doctrine of the Election of Israel so that everyone’s moral struggles count. Christians forgot the Jewish basis of Paul’s thought and Jews saw it as an attack on them and their precious traditions and the balloon went up. All versions of the doctrine of Election began to take dangerous, violent, arrogant and ridiculous forms, but I still don’t think that the original idea was like that. But our efforts to be good and enlightened are often counterproductive.

      • Eva Smagacz
        Eva Smagacz
        January 28, 2014, 2:49 pm

        MHughes,

        I really do not get irksome about purely religious beliefs, having few, highly irrational ones, myself. And I do find development of various theologies fascinating.

        It is spillover of irrationality of religious beliefs into social (and political) milieu, with dire consequences for real folk, that raises my hackles.

      • American
        American
        January 28, 2014, 11:29 am

        ”’….. It is not simply one example of genocide but a nearly successful attempt on the life of God’s chosen children and, thus, on God himself. ”’

        Believing themselves to be unique people and God’s Chosen was the first mistake.
        The world keeps telling people who think they are unique and chosen that theres no such people on earth , but they dont listen.

      • Ellen
        Ellen
        January 28, 2014, 12:40 pm

        Others ARE only chopped liver…..I mean .

    • eljay
      eljay
      January 27, 2014, 5:42 pm

      >> Every life is as important as the whole world …

      Your indignation fails to disguise your outrageous hypocrisy, Mr. “Jewish State” Zio-supremacist.

    • eljay
      eljay
      January 27, 2014, 9:56 pm

      >> Morons here, like German Lefty, ask innocently: “is it antisemitic to tell a Jew to go live in Israel, for there is his place?”

      Morons like dimadok and his Zio-supremacist co-collectivists tell Jews that all the time. Does that make them anti-Semitic Jews, or merely self-loathing Jews?

    • just
      just
      January 28, 2014, 5:47 am

      ” Nazis and their European collaborators- ”

      So why are the Palestinians paying for it with their lives?

      You have no conscience, dimadok. If “Every life is as important as the whole world why” do you condone what is done in your name (with your vigorous support) to your semitic brothers and sisters? Why don’t you insist that the ongoing Nakba end?

      Hypocrite.

    • American
      American
      January 28, 2014, 12:12 pm

      dimadok says:
      January 27, 2014 at 4:01 pm
      Today is the Holocaust remembrance day, January 27th of each year, recognized by UN. Only one day, and I say here in the name of my 15 relatives burned and killed by Nazis and their European collaborators- damn you Mr. Weiss ”

      Having relatives killed by nazis doesnt make you special or entitled to any respect or deferential treatment because of it….you werent the victim.
      All your holocaust rants do is make people regard you as a loser –”stealing the thunder of the dead”– and trying to make himself important and get attention on the backs of dead people.

  14. Kathleen
    Kathleen
    January 27, 2014, 4:48 pm

    Now when oh when will the New York Bloody Times take the time remember these other genocides? What did you say? Oh that the NYT has been dominated by Jewish interest since its inception?

    http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html

  15. talknic
    talknic
    January 27, 2014, 4:55 pm

    Say ….. does anyone know how many Holocaust Memorials there are in the USA compared to the rest of the world?

  16. yrn
    yrn
    January 27, 2014, 5:06 pm

    “Say ….. does anyone know how many Holocaust Memorials there are in the USA compared to the rest of the world?”
    Phil I bet you have the answer and a mental input to the issue.

  17. palijustice
    palijustice
    January 27, 2014, 10:44 pm

    Between 65 and 85 million people were killed during WWll, on all sides, making it the bloodiest war in world history. About four million non Jews were exterminated in the death camps. I wonder if the publishers of the Israeli book will have at least one other coffee table book, with 4 million goy words printed in it. I doubt it. All of these deaths should be kept in mind when thinking about WW ll and the death camps.

    • wondering jew
      wondering jew
      January 31, 2014, 12:43 am

      palijustice- Please link to the source of four million nonJews exterminated in the death camps.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 31, 2014, 1:37 am

        Who Were the Five Million Non-Jewish Holocaust Victims? http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/NonJewishVictims.html

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 31, 2014, 1:52 am

        talknic- Jewishvirtuallibrary is a good starting point, but it is not quite as reliable as wikipedia. But this does not state that the five million nonJews were killed in death camps. I would seriously like to read something more reliable regarding the five million nonJews and anything stating the death toll of nonJews in the camps.

        (Wikipedia reports the number of Roma killed as estimated between 220,000 and 1.5 million and JVL reports it as half a million. Just an example of JVL’s reliability versus Wikipedia’s.)

      • Ellen
        Ellen
        January 31, 2014, 2:40 am

        …not quite as reliable as Wikipedia Yonah, you must be jesting! Wikipedia is often infested with revisionism, inadequacies, and lies. Citing Wikipedia is about as reliable as citing the National Enquirer.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 31, 2014, 4:42 am

        WikiPedia’s policy is not truth or even facts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#cite_note-1

        It is policy to base articles on third-party opinion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#What_counts_as_a_reliable_source

        One cannot quote an original document http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary.2C_secondary_and_tertiary_sources

        Wikipedia can be written by anyone. Anything to do with Israel changes from day to day and is infested by propagandists.

        “Wikipedia reports the number of Roma killed as estimated between 220,000 and 1.5 million and JVL reports it as half a million. Just an example of JVL’s reliability versus Wikipedia’s”

        Exactly how is this an indication of Wikipedia’s reliability?

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 31, 2014, 12:30 pm

        yonah,

        Are you denying that 5 million non-Jews died or that they died in the camps?

  18. American
    American
    January 27, 2014, 11:03 pm

    I thought I had seen every ‘use’ of the holocaust and exploitation of the dead someone could dream up….but I guess not.
    Such bad taste I cant think of what to say about it.

  19. Ecru
    Ecru
    January 28, 2014, 1:34 am

    Kind of sad that this thing tries to commemorate some of the victims of the Nazis by buying into the Nazi view of things, dehumanising the victims by reducing their humanity to an ethnic label. But then it’s also not too surprising considering Zionism itself dehumanises not only Palestinians but also Jews by insisting on continuing the Nazi obsession with ethnos above all else.

  20. Daniel Rich
    Daniel Rich
    January 28, 2014, 3:21 am

    My [biological] dad told very little about his years on the run. Most of what I know [to date], I learned from interviewing/talking to others. One thing I’ll never forget though, and that is his answer to my question: “Weren’t you afraid to get caught?”

    His answer [with his eyes staring a million miles away]: “No. Not really, because then it would be finally over. It was the sound of German boots coming up the staircase, with the three of us stuck behind a double wall at the end of it, that scared me more than anything else… no place left to run… no place…”

    RIP, dad [and all others].

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      January 28, 2014, 12:15 pm

      @ Daniel Rich
      Thanks for sharing that personal information–it captures a lot.

    • Eva Smagacz
      Eva Smagacz
      January 28, 2014, 12:19 pm

      Thank you, Daniel,

      What a moving story and one that touched my heart.

      It resonates with a story my great aunt told me. In my great aunt’s apartment there was a pair of doors (due to the thickness of the wall) between two rooms, with a space in between where weapons were hidden, and the handles were rigged to move together. Once, during “kociol”, with Germans searching the building, one of my mother’s cousins hid in there. They did not find him then, but he died in Auschwitz not long afterwards.

      Thank you for sharing that memory.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 28, 2014, 12:28 pm

        Daniel & Eva: Thanks for sharing. And for not hating.

    • American
      American
      January 28, 2014, 5:25 pm

      Yes, thanks for sharing that Rich.

      • bintbiba
        bintbiba
        January 29, 2014, 8:38 am

        Thank you, Daniel.. very moving evocation.

  21. kalithea
    kalithea
    January 28, 2014, 3:29 am

    My version:

    That’s how the Zionists viewed their victims: These are not individuals, these are not people, these are just an Arab mass we have to cleanse.

    It’s called “the final solution”– reinvented in Zionism.

    Rip a page from that “book”, plaster it in a public place and some Jew who walks by and doesn’t know this book or its intention will scrawl “anti-Semite!” across it. What’s sacred to one person will be felt as offensive to another in a different time and place. Maybe the contrasting interpretation proves it’s art after all, but more likely it proves that this level of repetitive self-indulgence does Jews a disservice and rightly so.

    The Olegs and dimadoks of the world obsess over everyone’s opinion of the Zionist state and Jews that support it and they lay in wait to pounce on anyone who refuses to pander to the endless need for acknowledgement that victimhood demands.

    There’s only one way to honor the memory of ALL the victims of the Holocaust: building towards a just society in the present and for the future for ALL people, Palestinians not excluded or left behind. But what a meaningful and ironic place to start creating such a just society than in the occupied Palestinian territories; refugee camps and Apartheid ghettos that are the unjust by-product of the “Jewish State”, by returning to these wronged Palestinians land stolen from them and by restoring their dignity and making amends for the crimes committed against them. Should the world ignore the suffering of Palestinians just because doing so singles out the Jewish people who are committing these crimes? When it comes to justice, using the fear of anti-Semitism is the sorriest most hypocritical and manipulative excuse in the book for DENYING it!

    What purpose does never forgetting the past serve if it only causes others to suffer neglect, tragedy and injustice in the present? If Zionism has become the right hand of the Jewish people and it is causing them to lose their collective soul, then the obligation is to “cut this hand off and throw it away”. Yes I paraphrased NT scripture on this one and IMHO, it fits perfectly.

  22. kalithea
    kalithea
    January 28, 2014, 4:07 am

    A New Palestine where Palestinians are restored their rights, land and dignity will be a memorial that will in DEED honor the victims of the Holocaust.

    Oh yes, no doubt this sounds like blasphemy to the majority of Jews today, but as Bernard Shaw stated: “All great truths begin as blasphemies.”

  23. dimadok
    dimadok
    January 28, 2014, 12:23 pm

    @Talknic
    Thanks for confirming that there was no Palestinian state throughout the 2000 years of modern history. Their nationalistic struggle goes against our, and we are winning. That what is called civil war and national conflicts.
    Keep digging.

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 28, 2014, 8:19 pm

      @dimadok …. Thanks for confirming you’re an idiot for Israel propagandist troll.

      “Thanks for confirming that there was no Palestinian state throughout the 2000 years of modern history”

      Slight problem with your smelly ziopoop theory.. A) There was no Jewish state either B) Lon Covenant Art 22 .. still no Jewish state, but Palestine was a state. C) Art 7 LoN Mandate … still no Jewish state but a Palestinian state where Jews could get PALESTINIAN citizenship
      D) I didn’t mention Palestinian statehood because from the moment Israel was declared and recognized it is irrelevant. Israeli sovereignty has never included any of what remained of Palestine. It is quite simply NOT Israeli

      “Their nationalistic struggle goes against our …. “

      …ILLEGAL acquisition of non-Israeli territory

      ” and we are winning”

      According to the basic tenets of Judaism against stealing, lying and coveting other folks property, you’re not winning anything except a place in hell

      “That what is called civil war”

      Civil war is between the legitimate citizens of one state. No education where you live? Just ziopoop for morons to wade around in

    • Shingo
      Shingo
      January 28, 2014, 8:49 pm

      Thanks for confirming that there was no Palestinian state throughout the 2000 years of modern history.

      Pierre Orts, chairman of Mandate Commission of the League Of Nations:

      “Palestine, as mandate clearly showed, was a subject under international law. While she could not conclude international conventions, the mandatory Power, until further notice, concluded them on her behalf, in virtue of Article 19 of mandate. The mandate, in Article 7, obliged Mandatory to enact a nationality law, which again showed Palestinians formed a nation, & that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship. It was, moreover, unnecessary to labor the point; there was no doubt whatever that Palestine was a separate political entity.”

      Their nationalistic struggle goes against our, and we are winning.

      So was the USSR until it wasn’t.

  24. eljay
    eljay
    January 28, 2014, 12:34 pm

    >> Their nationalistic struggle goes against our …

    Their nationalistic struggle is for a nation built around the indigenous population of a geographic region. Your nationalistic struggle is for a supremacist state of and for people of the Jewish faith. And, unlike their struggle, your struggle comprises past and on-going acts of ethnic cleansing, oppression, land theft, occupation and colonization.

    >> … and we are winning.

    If being the most unjust and immoral is what constitutes “winning” then, yes, you are most certainly winning.

  25. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    January 28, 2014, 10:48 pm

    There are three dates to commemorate the churban (shoah): the ninth of Av, when all the travails of the exile are commemorated, the 27th of Nissan, when Yom Hashoah is commemorated in Israel and January 27th, when the UN and other nations beforehand have commemorated the victims of the Shoah.

    The “book” on offer here is kitsch, as in not an attempt to deepen understanding, but instead an attempt to shock. I guess its “publication” is a trivial event, but I would have used the term kitsch in a headline rather than trivia. (Le Pen famously dismissed the churban as a footnote of history and the use of the term trivia reminded me of his statement.) The publication of Shoah kitsch may be a trivial event, but kitsch is the key word rather than trivia.

    The enormity of the number 6 million is a bit difficult to comprehend and that I suppose is the point. But certainly I think Abe Foxman is disconnected from reality if he really thinks that trumpeting this “book” helps the Jewish people at present, the world at present or even the memory of the dead.

  26. jayn0t
    jayn0t
    January 29, 2014, 11:12 am

    This is a bit 0/t, but you-all might find it interesting:
    A Holocaust book for young children
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25843788

Leave a Reply