Did You Hear That Hitler Was In Town?

Does all that translate into war support against Iran? I cannot imagine what it must have been like to be Ahmedinejad’s translator last night! Yes, I remember that early posting on the hostage photos that proved to be untrue. Michael, thank you for being so lucid.

‘language-as-gesture’():()”remembertheMime”

It’s so depressing. It’s all about Bad Words. People are acting like little cry-babies, over speech.
What makes Ahmenijihad a Demon? the fact that he said Bad Things. Of course, those Bad Things were no worse than Bad Things said by our Preznit, but, hey, he’s our Preznit.
So what do we do in response to the Bad Things Admenijihad said? Well, we call him Names, like Dictator and Demon and Crazy and Terrorist.
And when someone says, hey, wait a minute, let him talk, that person is called Bad Names, like Appeaser, Traitor, Terrorist-supporter.
Of course, if someone uses a Bad Word to talk about our generals, we get upset and denounce them by calling them Bad Names, or demand that other people call them Bad Names, because if you don’t it means you’re a Bad Name too.
Fucking babies. We’ve become reduced to schoolchildren fighting on a playground. It is really depressing.

Hitler was elected too, in a free and fair democratic election. Just because a nation elects a person president does not automatically make him or her a democrat. Moreover, the presidency does not wield nearly as much power in Iran as it does here. The Mullahs are in charge and the president can (though not always) act as their political spokesman. Do we want to honor the men who are the heirs to the hostage crisis?
Also, just because one raises the most amount of money does not automatically mean that the election is won. If that was true, Dean would have been the Democratic nominee.
Ahmadinejad did not just say “Bad Things” – he called for Israel to be “wiped off the map,” he denies the Holocaust, and he sponsors Hezbollah. Why should Bloombery, as an American, New Yorker, or a Jew (pick among them), allow him to visit 9/11 to make a “concillitaory” gesture toward the victims of 9/11? He’ll only turn it into an opportunity to hurt us and our allies, not to mention offending the victims and their families. Ahmadinejad did not authorize those terrorist acts, but that does not mean he does not embrace terrorist tactics. He sponsors terrorism against our allies and our interests.
Is the press labelling him a terrorist? Yes, but that is because he is.

I have a feeling the Columbia President was talking to his donors and critics but, whatever the reason, that was a national embarrassment.

This may not be precisely fitting for the situation , i was looking for the quote that goes something like most people can only be happy when hating something . Granted huxley said it better , oh well .
One of the great attractions of patriotism – it fulfills our worst wishes. In the person of our nation we are able, vicariously, to bully and cheat. Bully and cheat, what’s more, with a feeling that we are profoundly virtuous.
Aldous Huxley

Superman would be pretty boring without Lex Luthor.

A big red “EVIL” and even a direct labeling: “Hitler” – WOW. That’s pretty strong stuff.
David from above: I know Ahmadinejad is an unpopular guy, and mostly because of his anti-Isreal stance, but isn’t he just standing up for the Arabs who are taking a decades long beating in the holy land? He’s pissed that the Palestinians are being treated as sub-human. I don’t want to put myself on either side of that fight, but I’m not surprised that different countries and different people support one side or the other – both sides are fighting an ugly war, full of oppression and violence.
If you read Juan Cole at all, he seems to have a pretty good grip on the middle east. I’ve read his take on Ahmadinejad’s “wipe them off the map” comment, and he says it’s a bad translation. Ahmadinejad does want to see Isreal out of the Holy Land, but isn’t that obvious? He thinks they don’t belong there. Let him say that. Then counter with the other point of view. Ask him how he’d like to “remove” Isreal. Is he talking about killing the Jews or not? Where should they go? Is there a way for the Holy Land to be co-occupied? If he’s belligerent in his responses, then he’ll be digging his own hole. If he’s reasonable, then maybe there will be some progress diplomatically. This is a huge problem in the world, and it’s going to take a lot of work to solve it. Bombing, walling, threatening and lobbing missles isn’t going to solve the Isreal/Palestine issue – ever.
Instead of discussing any of this, we label “them” “evil” and jump right into a non-discussion mindset. Until someone starts to take diplomacy, discussion and peace seriously – this issue will never be resolved. It is an open sore in the political world that needs care, not salt. Can’t we let each other talk and actually listen, then respond, then listen, then respond… until we understand each other??
I know I’ll be dismissed as a peace-freak. A dreamer. Well, some of us better start dreaming.. because until we can talk and listen in this world at the highest levels, we are SCREWED.

Right now, Iranian television is running a serial documentary called Zero Degree Turn about the Holocaust which is receiving a great deal of attention. You can see this program via Youtube. It’s really well done and pretty sane. And it’s also true that during WWII, the Iranian embassy in France saved a fairly large number of Jews who would otherwise most likely have perished at the hands of the German occupiers.
This is just to say that relying on one quote from the Devil to argue that everyone in Hell is a Holocaust denier or denigrator is a bit much.

Aunt Deb,
Yes, putting something in the context of fantasy obscures the fact that the presumably “logical” alternative can be just an opposing fantasy. Your comment — and maybe this is part of what 124C41+ is also getting at — is particularly appreciated in light of the death, this week, of Marcel Marceau. I didn’t know, btw, Marceau escaped deportation to a concentration camp and later, due to his excellent English, became a French liason officer to General Patton’s forces.
http://disembedded.wordpress.com/2007/09/23/silence-is-golden-marcel-marceau-died-in-paris-at-the-age-of-84/
And to Chris: I was trying to play off yesterday’s Georgette post, but your point is more than well taken.

‘Holocaust denier’ is a convenient and effective label. What was expressed at the time, was intended to correct the claims of 12 million to 15 million murdered that have increased over time just like Georgette’s grade in economics. What is the true WWII total? Many less than Russia’s loss in WWI.
I agree that Israel is going to strike first, and soon.

To the head cheese of CBS
the Columbia Chancellor
our sundry luminaries
and theirs:
The finest plans
have always been spoiled
by the littleness of them
that should carry them out.
Even emperors can’t do it all
by themselves.
- Bertolt Brecht

Ahmadinejad/Bush cage match.
It would be awesome….

At first I thought it would be better all around for the U.S. to deny him entry, which would be ammunition for our side about all number of things. But this is backfiring in what may be even a better way.
Perhaps by “dictator” being applied to an elected head of state, Bollinger was subtly comparing him to Bush, also an “elected” dictator. No? Okay, just a thought.
Yale’s next up to show what a fool of a president it has (well, Summers is an ex-president). Can’t wait to see that show perform.

RE: President Ahmedinejad and Lee Bollinger
For the most part, the phenomenom of “holocaust denial”, or “holocaust minimizing” doesn’t have it’s origins in “anti Semitism”. It arose as a (admittedly illogical) reaction to the way that Israel, in the wake of the 1972 war, started a deliberate campaign to elevate the nazi holocaust to sacred status, and the Jews and only the Jews (gypsies, Gays, socialists, slavs need not apply) the Eternal Victims of which no other victims in history can hold a candle to. (never mind the native americans, the african middle passage, the Armenians etc…)
Then, with the nazi holocaust elevated to epic status (”The Holocaust”), it is used to justify every crime against humanity Israel commits and to bludegeon anyone who dares to criticize the state of Israel.
Holocaust denying nuts like Irving and David Duke are easy to, and worthy of, ridicule. But those making an entirely principled criticism of the holocaust-elevation, and holocaust bludgeoning, like Norman Finkelstein, get smeared and their careers ruined by the Israel-lobby just the same.
From a strickly business point of view, The ‘Holocaust Industry’ is a lucrative global marketing tool for Israel.
David Jakupca
President,
Ohio German American Business Assoc.
http://www.OhioGABA.com

Johanna, I’m neither German or Jewish just someone who lost a father in the liberation of Holland in WW II. Perhaps this is why I have a keen interest in this historical period and the multiple narratives which are being written about it.
I was pleased to see David Jakupca’s comment.
I imagine you will write Norman Finkelstein off but how do you deal with Raul Hilberg’s work.
The Holocaust Industry has designated “Holocaust education” the main beneficiary of compensation monies. In my book, I wrote that much of Holocaust literature is “worthless as scholarship.” Deploring that “American publishers put out a multitude of worthless books, like the testimonies of Holocaust survivors who were seven years old at the time,” Hilberg goes on to observe that “in the United States no one is really interested in learning anything new about this historical epoch,” and that “today the really serious Holocaust scholarship comes out of Germany.” – Finkelstein quoting Hilberg
Raul Hilberg (June 2, 1926 – August 4, 2007 in Williston, Vermont) was one of the best-known and most distinguished of Holocaust historians. His three-volume, 1,273-page The Destruction of the European Jews is regarded as the seminal study of the Nazi Final Solution. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences on April 26, 2005. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raul_Hilberg

Joanana, I was not linking Jakupca’s comments to German scholarship simply noting that he referred to Finkelstein, I then added Hillbergs comments surrounding the holocaust as referenced by Norman Finkelstein. For your interest in scholarship here in his own words is the distinguished Professor Hilberg – Swiss National Radio (SBC-SSR) on 31 August 2000 translated by Roberto Antonini
Excerpts from the interview :
Q: Professor Hilberg, you are one of the most prominent historians on the Holocaust. Your book, “The Destruction of the European Jews,” is unanimously considered a masterpiece. So it would be very important for our listeners to have your comment on Professor Finkelstein¹s book, since it is pretty controversial.
Raul Hilberg: Well, to be honest I wish it were longer. It’s a very small book. It may not be apparent but one needs a background to understand what it says. Consequently I think it is very useful but not very easy reading for those who are not familiar with what he is writing about.
Q: Professor Hilberg, generally speaking would you agree with Professor Finkelstein when he denounces the American Jewish organizations and some class-action suit lawyers for “extorting” money from Europe in order to let’s say “make a killing”?
Raul Hilberg: I would in substance agree with what he says because I have said much the same things myself and the methods of the World Jewish Congress and some other organizations or people allied with it in his campaign I feel are detestable. I don’t subscribe to them. In sum and substance I agree with what Finkelstein says.
Q: Don’t you believe that this book could be dangerous, that it could be used by some anti-Semitic extremists, by some neo-Nazi groups for anti-Semitic purposes?
Raul Hilberg: Well, even if they do use it in that fashion, I¹m afraid that when it comes to the truth, it has to be said openly, without regard to any consequences that would be undesirable, embarrassing. The fact is that we have now crossed a line, we have seen an action that I personally cannot defend in terms of the tactics and also of the sums of money involved in the claims against not only the Swiss Banks but now extensively in other matters as well.
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=3&ar=202 -

Johanna, with the major of Canadians I detested Ernst Zundel and rejoiced with his deportation to Germany, however I don’t see what he has to with the truth which Paul Hilberg acknowledges.
Raul Hilberg: Well, even if they do use it in that fashion, I¹m afraid that *when it comes to the truth, it has to be said openly,* without regard to any consequences that would be undesirable, embarrassing.
Shlaom, jt

From what you have quoted of Hilberg, he seemed to be involved in contentious issues, not about what happened to the Jews during the war, but about restitution, the behavior of the World Jewish congress , the demands that Swiss banks be held responsible, etc. About postwar issues I can believe that there would arise complaint about people asking for and getting what others might, reasonably, see as too much. I have not seen , so far, any evidence that Hilberg thinks the Jews were treated any better in the war years than is commonly thought, or that their treatment was no worse than that of the Slavs, who were disdained but not targeted for extermination. The claim of so many people that, while they object to the policies of Israel, they have no quarrel with the Jews as such, is undermined by these same antizionists having such strong, contrarian views of the holocaust.