ADL Calls On Politicians To Refrain From Using Holocaust Imagery

[bones_IV]

Foxman is such a religious bigot isn’t he?

“The Holocaust was a unique tragedy in human history – an attempt by the Nazis to exterminate the Jewish people that led to the deliberate murder of six million Jews. We find the use of analogies to the Holocaust in other contexts deeply painful, disturbing and offensive. Such analogies can only trivialize and diminish the horror, and cause further pain to Holocaust survivors and to those alive today who lost friends and loved ones.”

Apparently the ADL does’t recognize the murder of unborn children as a violation of human rights. May God remove the gunk and filth from the hearts of these perfidious people!

Link

 

[WanderAimlessly]

I find it offensive that some want exclusivity for the term “Holocaust” and use it as a sledge hammer agaiinst others. That is exactly what Foxman is doing.

 

[bones_IV]

I find it offensive that some want exclusivity for the term “Holocaust” and use it as a sledge hammer agaiinst others. That is exactly what Foxman is doing.

He gives the Jewish people a bad name. Jewish supremacists are alive and well, they love to play the victim. Pope John Paul II referred to abortion as worst form of execution! I’d like to give him a piece of my mind! Not to mention the ADL referred to HLI headed by Father Euteneuer as a “right wing” organization.

 

[didymus]

Foxman is such a religious bigot isn’t he?

. . . . .

Apparently the ADL does’t recognize the murder of unborn children as a violation of human rights. May God remove the gunk and filth from the hearts of these perfidious people!

Link

And you’re not? Check your own gunk detector.

 

[bones_IV]

And you’re not? Check your own gunk detector.

Do you even know what perfidious means? Typical liberals.

 

[didymus]

Do you even know what perfidious means? Typical liberals.

Do you?

per·fid·i·ous adj. 1. Of, relating to, or marked by perfidy; treacherous. See note at faithless . per·fid “i·ous·ly adv.

per·fi·dy n. pl. per·fi·dies 1. Deliberate breach of faith; calculated violation of trust; treachery. 2. The act or an instance of treachery

Synonyms: faithless unfaithful false disloyal traitorous treacherous perfidious recreant These adjectives mean not true to duty or obligation. Faithless and unfaithful are approximately interchangeable and imply failure to adhere to promises, obligations, or allegiances: has never been faithless to her ideals; an unfaithful spouse. False emphasizes a tendency to be faithless or deceitful: a false friend. “ To thine own self be true,/And it must follow, as the night the day,/Thou canst not then be false to any man ” (Shakespeare). One who is disloyal is false to persons or things that are due allegiance: Disloyal staff members exposed the senator’s indiscretions to the press. Traitorous most commonly refers to disloyalty to a government or nation: a lying, traitorous insurrectionist. Treacherous suggests a propensity for betraying trust or faith: “ She gave the treacherous impulse time to subside ” (Henry James). Perfidious applies to what is abominably treacherous; it suggests vileness of behavior and often deceitfulness: the victim of a perfidious murder. Recreant implies a reprehensible, often cowardly disloyalty: “ while [Holland’s] sister provinces had proved recreant to [William of Orange] ” (John Lothrop Motley).

 

[tomarin]

Not to mention the ADL referred to HLI headed by Father Euteneuer as a “right wing” organization.

when did he say that, and why? just curious.

 

[bones_IV]

Do you?

Synonyms: faithless unfaithful false disloyal traitorous treacherous perfidious recreant These adjectives mean not true to duty or obligation. Faithless and unfaithful are approximately interchangeable and imply failure to adhere to promises, obligations, or allegiances: has never been faithless to her ideals; an unfaithful spouse. False emphasizes a tendency to be faithless or deceitful: a false friend. “ To thine own self be true,/And it must follow, as the night the day,/Thou canst not then be false to any man ” (Shakespeare). One who is disloyal is false to persons or things that are due allegiance: Disloyal staff members exposed the senator’s indiscretions to the press. Traitorous most commonly refers to disloyalty to a government or nation: a lying, traitorous insurrectionist. Treacherous suggests a propensity for betraying trust or faith: “ She gave the treacherous impulse time to subside ” (Henry James). Perfidious applies to what is abominably treacherous; it suggests vileness of behavior and often deceitfulness: the victim of a perfidious murder. Recreant implies a reprehensible, often cowardly disloyalty: “ while [Holland’s] sister provinces had proved recreant to [William of Orange] ” (John Lothrop Motley).

Do you want us to pray that God prevent them from coming to His saving grace, and instead that He damn them all to Hell?
May I remind you Einstein that THAT would be anti-semitic. Praying that they receive the greatest good ever is pure charity.

 

[TMC]

I don’t know, I think maybe the ADL has a point. The term Holocaust originally meant sacrifice by fire, but by the 18th Century or so became used to mean slaughter or destruction. Since WWII most people think of Holocaust as referring to the specific slaughter of Jews and others by the Nazis.

When Jews tell me that they find it hurtful and offensive for people to use this term to refer to other events, even equally horrific events, I believe they really mean that. There are two reasons, I think. First, right or wrong they feel it is an attempt to ‘highjack’ the strong feelings that people have for the Holocaust. They would say that if the events being referred to are as horrific as the Holocaust that can be shown without appealing to the emotions attached to Nazism. Second, they believe that when done it a political setting it is an attempt to use suffering to promote a political cause, even if it is one they otherwise agree wth.

So I guess I am a bit on the fence here. When an individual says something like “abortion has killed many times more people than the Holocaust” in a private setting it doesn’t bother me. Its something worth thinking about or challenging others to think about. But everytime the word “Hitler” “Nazi” or “Holocaust” come out of any politician’s mouth I cringe. I just find it inappropriate and tasteless.

Although I disagree with the ADL’s stance on a myriad of issues, it may be worth pointing out that they are very uniform on this and have condemned politicians on the right and the left for comparing the Holocaust to any other event or action regardless of the ADL’s stance on the underlying issue.

 

[bones_IV]

When Jews tell me that they find it hurtful and offensive for people to use this term to refer to other events, even equally horrific events, I believe they really mean that.

Murder is murder!

There are two reasons, I think. First, right or wrong they feel it is an attempt to ‘highjack’ the strong feelings that people have for the Holocaust.

Nobody is hijacking anyone’s feelings here.

They would say that if the events being referred to are as horrific as the Holocaust that can be shown without appealing to the emotions attached to Nazism.

It’s the worst form of execution there is.

Second, they believe that when done it a political setting it is an attempt to use suffering to promote a political cause, even if it is one they otherwise agree wth.

Abortion is not a political issue.

I just find it inappropriate and tasteless.

In other words you don’t recognize abortion as a violation of human rights.

 

[TMC]

In other words you don’t recognize abortion as a violation of human rights.

Can we not discuss this issue without ad hominem attacks?

Nothing in my post suggesed that I don’t think abortion is a violation of human rights, of course I do. This discussion is not about whether abortion is an abomination, its about whether its appropriate for a politician to use the language and imagery of the Holocaust.

So I agree that murder is murder, I am just saying that the ADL has a point about political use of the Holocaust, those positions are in no way at odds.

And while I agree that abortion is not **merely **a political issue, it is a political issue because its use or ban is controlled by the political bodies. Convincing them to change that standpoint is a political issue. When Huckabee says you should vote for him because he is pro-life that is a moral stand, but it is also a political one. When **** Durbin compares the torture in Guantanamo to the concentration camps he is taking a moral stand, and a political one.

Is there any doubt that both made the reference because they knew the comparison would made a strong emotional impact on some people? The ADL said both uses of the Holocaust and Nazism are inappropriate. I can agree with that, without disagreeing with either Huckabee or Durbin.

 

[TMC]

Funny, the software won’t let me post Sen. Durbin’s first name. Its a diminuitive form of Richard.

 

[manualman]

I find it sad that the ADL wants to minimize the larger historical lesson of the Holocaust in favor of making it a parochial issue.

Perhaps not being Jewish myself makes it impossible for me to know how it feels to have it compared to other atrocities. But from this vanatage point, I would think that if MY ancestors had been the specific victims, then I would want their deaths to COUNT for something after the fact. Not just a warning against future attacks on a specific group, I would want the lesson to be learned that ANY time a group comes to power and places the blame for much of society’s ills on a particular group, makes language distinctions that imply that group is somehow less human than ‘the rest of us’ and systematically creates an apparatus to slaughter that group in huge numbers, I’d want the history lesson shouted from the rooftops!

Abortion, by the way, MEETS that criteria. Indefinate detainment of people suspected of terrorist activities (a behavior) does not meet it.

 

[Richardols]

Funny, the software won’t let me post Sen. Durbin’s first name. Its a diminuitive form of Richard.

Not funny. It’s a function of the particular software to prevent posting words with vulgar meanings. Similarly to your example, I’m a fan and modeler of British railways, and there’s a well known P2 Class locomotive that once ran on the London & North Eastern Railway (the Brits gave names to all their locomotives) named “#### o’ the North,” the non-printed word being a synonym for a rooster. Can’t get that printed even on the LNER fan website!

 

[Richardols]

I don’t know, I think maybe the ADL has a point. The term Holocaust originally meant sacrifice by fire, but by the 18th Century or so became used to mean slaughter or destruction. Since WWII most people think of Holocaust as referring to the specific slaughter of Jews and others by the Nazis.

When Jews tell me that they find it hurtful and offensive for people to use this term to refer to other events, even equally horrific events, I believe they really mean that. There are two reasons, I think. First, right or wrong they feel it is an attempt to ‘highjack’ the strong feelings that people have for the Holocaust. They would say that if the events being referred to are as horrific as the Holocaust that can be shown without appealing to the emotions attached to Nazism. Second, they believe that when done it a political setting it is an attempt to use suffering to promote a political cause, even if it is one they otherwise agree wth.

So I guess I am a bit on the fence here. When an individual says something like “abortion has killed many times more people than the Holocaust” in a private setting it doesn’t bother me. Its something worth thinking about or challenging others to think about. But everytime the word “Hitler” “Nazi” or “Holocaust” come out of any politician’s mouth I cringe. I just find it inappropriate and tasteless.

Although I disagree with the ADL’s stance on a myriad of issues, it may be worth pointing out that they are very uniform on this and have condemned politicians on the right and the left for comparing the Holocaust to any other event or action regardless of the ADL’s stance on the underlying issue.

I agree totally! I’m with the ADL about condemning people appropriating a term that has come to be a synonym for the Shoah.

It’s the same as with those who have encountered something **really **unpleasant like being stuck in a crowded airplane for a couple of hours on a runway saying, “It was like being a concentration camp!” No, it isn’t like being in a concentration camp regardless how uncomfortable your experience was. Not at all the same.

 

[Richardols]

bones_IV:

Abortion is not a political issue.

Not exclusively, but it is somewhat. One of the reasons promoted to overturn Roe v Wade is to remove it from being considered as a “constitutional right” so as to put it into the arena of politics so that the individual states can choose to abolish or allow it. Unless it returns to being political, it can’t be voted out.

 

[Riley259]

Foxman is such a religious bigot isn’t he?

“The Holocaust was a unique tragedy in human history – an attempt by the Nazis to exterminate the Jewish people that led to the deliberate murder of six million Jews. We find the use of analogies to the Holocaust in other contexts deeply painful, disturbing and offensive. Such analogies can only trivialize and diminish the horror, and cause further pain to Holocaust survivors and to those alive today who lost friends and loved ones.”

Apparently the ADL does’t recognize the murder of unborn children as a violation of human rights. May God remove the gunk and filth from the hearts of these perfidious people!

Link

This makes my blood boil - as if the loss of an unborn human life is any less worthy than a more developed human life.

 

[Bennie_P]

I understand his point, but it would be easier to listen to his reasoning if he would speak-up for the all the unborn Jews that have suffered under the abortionist’s knife since 1973.

 

[LRThunder]

And you’re not? Check your own gunk detector.

Please don’t start this “tit for tat” nonsense. That’s an easy way to get threads closed.

To the topic, Foxman needs to realize that the Jews weren’t the only ones killed during the Holocaust. There were many “undesirables” in the eyes of the Nazis killed. So his outrage tends to ring a bit hollow.

 

[Richardols]

Please don’t start this “tit for tat” nonsense. That’s an easy way to get threads closed.

To the topic, Foxman needs to realize that the Jews weren’t the only ones killed during the Holocaust. There were many “undesirables” in the eyes of the Nazis killed. So his outrage tends to ring a bit hollow.

The number of Jews murdered by the Germans is proportionately way higher than the deaths of the others and so it is more than appropriate that they can claim the Holocaust as their own. One might note that the Poles, who saw 3 million Catholics killed by the Germans, do not use the term Shoah or Holocaust to refer to those deaths.