Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - sinjection

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 67
Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 29, 2008, 07:38:01 pm »
Most likely scenario:  Obama gets the nomination, Hillary runs as VP.  That helps unite the party, and hopefully, they defeat McCain in November.  That's my prediction.

I agree, but only flipped. I have this suspicion that the Superdelegates will make the determination that even though her negatives are extremely high, Clinton is the more electable candidate. She has won the traditional Democratic states with Obama's most significant wins being Illinois and Missouri. My prediction is Clinton will be chosen the nominee and after much pleading, Obama might consent to run as VP.

That, in itself, is flawed thinking.  It's not like California and New York aren't going to vote Democrat anyway.  That's was Hillary's argument for her electibility and it was a weak argument for her as well.   If the superdelegates deliver the nomination to her on a silver platter, we'll see some people stay home during the general election.  If Obama has more states, delegates and votes, it'll make a lot of black folks feel like neither party respects us.  This country is in dire need of a viable third party candidate. 

I would love to be able to agree with you, Catch...but I just keep having these "Tom Bradley effect" flashbacks. Remember, Tom Bradley was immensely popular in California. During his gubernatorial run against George Du...there is no way I'll be able to spell that man's name without looking it up...many white Californians swore that Tom Bradley was their choice and pledged to vote for him. As it turns out, they did not. Later, following to the election, two white males who actually worked for the Bradley campaign admitted that when they were alone in the voting booth and faced with the two choices for California's next governor, there was no way they could bring themselves to vote for a black man over a white man. Recently, PA. Governor Rendell said that in his state anyway, many whites are not ready to vote for a black man for high office in explaining why he was able to defeat Rep. challenger Lynn Swann, the very popular former Pittsburgh Steeler wide receiver, in their campaign.

I say again, I'd love to be able to agree with you and see with my own eyes, the nomination go to Obama. At this point however, I just can't see it. And I wonder....who had more blacks in their administrative Cabinet, Bill Clinton or George Bush? Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice certainly held more significant offices in the Bush administration than Ron Brown held in the Clinton administration.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 29, 2008, 07:02:27 pm »
Most likely scenario:  Obama gets the nomination, Hillary runs as VP.  That helps unite the party, and hopefully, they defeat McCain in November.  That's my prediction.

I agree, but only flipped. I have this suspicion that the Superdelegates will make the determination that even though her negatives are extremely high, Clinton is the more electable candidate. She has won the traditional Democratic states with Obama's most significant wins being Illinois and Missouri. My prediction is Clinton will be chosen the nominee and after much pleading, Obama might consent to run as VP.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 29, 2008, 06:48:29 pm »
Redjack, don't take this personally, but I didn't even bother to read your latest response to me. Your psuedo-sophisticated sophistry bores me. Your thinly-veiled antisemitic attitude appalls me.

The United States bears its fair share of the responsibility for the Holocaust. This, you cannot deny. I have provided firm evidence that the Allies knew of the existence of the death camps and what was transpiring in those camps when all you can do is parrot the government's lie that "they did not know" and that their intelligence was "fragmented". The Allies knew as early as 1941 and very likely, as early as 1939 shortly after the camps were up and running, that nazis were murdering Jews and others in those camps. When faced with irrefutable evidence provided them by Soviet liberators of Majdanek, the Allies - probably wanting a means to claim ignorance and deniability - found themselves in alliance with hitler himself when they agreed with him dismissing the Soviet intelligence as "communist propaganda". Today, you probably lap up that lie the same way you cling to your indefensible claim that the Allies didn't know about the camps until the actual Allied liberation of those camps.

Black Americans didn't have to "bang on" anybody's door, Redjack. One of the most oft-repeated cries of the Civil Rights Movement was "The world is watching!" Black Americans didn't have to travel hither and yon with our sad tales of racial persecution in the U.S. If we wanted to emigrate from the land of our birth to escape the persecution, there was always Liberia, the African state created specifically for the progeny of America's former slaves. The world was shrinking even then. We lived in a smaller, more closely connected world than what existed in the late '30's and '40's. The world could see, hear and read about the plight of the black American and our righteous fight for justice and equality and the world was moved in a way they weren't where the Jews were concerned. Possibly taking an example from the Civil Rights Struggle, Desmond Tutu and those fighting the South African white racist apartheid government adopted the same tact, "The world is watching!" In both struggles, the world did its part to help - in its own way - to bring appropriate pressure to bear on those racist institutions effectively weakening U.S. segregation/persecution and destroying the racist nation of rhodesia and the white racist government of South Africa.

In the case of the German and Eastern European Jews, the western world knew what was happening to them and couldn't have cared less. They were only Jews afterall. You haven't disproved anything I've said. There was more at work against the Jews than immigration policies and the machinations of "nation states". There was antisemitism, world-wide antisemitism which polluted the better angels of the heads of national governments and their populace, our United States included. It was in that environment that the Holocaust was allowed to proceed unchecked resulting in the deaths of millions of innocents, Jewish and others. I stand by my statement and none of your long-winded loopy nonsense has budged me an inch.

You weren't debated. You were provided facts in the face of your fallacy. You weren't debated. You were corrected. You said earlier that you didn't bluster, that you were cold. I didn't even feel a hint of a breeze. Your furious flurry of pompous words were mere fluff and foolishness laced with a sense of pathetic entitlement which believes the black American needs something from the white American to make us whole, as if Affirimative Action, Welfare, the "Great Society", the Civil War, the 14th Amendment were as nothing.

If that's all you've got, then you haven't got anything. The United States was directly responsible for the deaths of Anne Frank, her family and those who traveled with them when they were turned away from these shores and from sanctuary. When a suicide victim leaps from a high point, it isn't his ascension to that point that kills him, but it precipitates it. When he leaps, it isn't the falling that kills him, but he has irreversibly taken the action that will lead to his death. The direct cause of death is the impact the victim makes with the ground when he hits it. So, do you blame the ground for the victim's death or the actions the victim took that led to his death? Had the suicide victim turned away and not taken the leap, he wouldn't have been a suicide victim.  When a person is fatally shot, it is the bullet ripping through the body that causes death. I've never seen a bullet stand trial for murder, Redjack. I've never seen the gun from which the bullet was discharged stand trial for murder. It's always the human being whose finger pulled the trigger of the gun which fired the bullet who is charged and stands trial for murder. In turning away those Jews seeking sanctuary in this nation when it was within our immigration quota to accept them, we were in essence the "high point". When the Jews returned to Europe, they "impacted" with a murderous nazi regime which caused their deaths, deaths that need not have happened had the U.S. provided those victims sanctuary.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 11:40:19 am »
We did not get in early and that, ultimately, is why we turned the tide when we did get in. Before we joined in we revamped our entire economy in an impossibly short period of time. We shattered the traditional social structure in ways that led directly to the civil rights victories for women and blacks over the next decades and, oh yes, SAVED THE f*ckING WORLD.

 :) Oh, so melodramatic.

"...and, oh yes, SAVED THE F*UcKING WORLD."

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

And he called me "shrill"?

"..the f*ucking world."

...reminds me of the x-men for some inexplicable reason.

oh well  :D

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 10:47:02 am »
From A History Of The Holocaust, Revised Edition
Yehuda Bauer

Excerpt from: "The Attitudes Of The Major Powers; The United States"

Throughout most of the war, the American government, as well as most non-Zionist Jewish groups, clung to the delusion that the Nazis were persecuting the Jews because of their political or religious beliefs. The basic misinterpretation was, of course, rooted in the fear of identifying the struggle against Nazism with a "Jewish" cause. Widespread antiSemitism in the United States and strong remnants of isolationis sentiment may help to explain this position, which resulted in American policies lagging several steps behind the Nazi onslaught.

Whereas the Nazis talked openly of their anti-Jewishness, the Anglo-Americans were hiding shamefacedly behind such euphemisms as "persecutees", "political and religious refugees", and the like. The Nazis persecuted and killed Jews. The Allies protested against Nazi persecution of "perscutees"

There was no need to know of the mass murder (up to 1942), in order to save as many European Jews as possible by bringing them into the New World. What was published in the American press was quite sufficient: the persecutions and deportations of German Jews until 1938; the pogroms of November 1938; the mass arrests of Jews and their murderous treatment in the Nazi concentration camps in 1938 and 1939; the establishment of the ghettoes, and the attendant waves of hunger, epidemics, and death, all this was presented in the press, photographed by newsmen who until 1941 could still visit Eastern Europe. The suffering of hundreds of thousands, soon of millions was evident for consciences to be aroused, for steps to be taken. Nothing was done. - Bauer, ibid; pp 80 - 81.

The United States in effect closed its gates to emigration from Europe in 1940 - 41, when German and West European Jews were still allowed to emigrate. Although the country was neutral, antisemitic tendencies were strong. In five polls between March 1938 and April 1940 some 60 percent of those responding thought Jews had objectionable qualities. In 1940 - 41, 17 to 20 percent of the population saw the Jews as a menace to the United States. They were believed to be more of a threat than the Germans and far more dangerous than Catholics or Blacks.

In ten surveys between 1938 and 1941, 12 to 15 percent were ready to support a general antisemitic campaign. An additional 20 percent were sympathetic to such a policy and 30 percent opposed it. The remainder did not care either way. Antisemitism actually increased during the war and started to decline at the end of it. The accusation generally leveled against the Roosevelt administration for its lack of action to save the Jews must be seen in the context of American public opinion: Could a democratic government go far beyond an intolerant, prejudice-ridden, antisemitic public? Could the American government run the "danger" of being accused of fighting a war for the Jews as the Germans said in their propoganda? Could a liberal President intent on mobilizing his people for a tremendous war effort risk unpopularity because of a minority against such prejudices were held?

Everything I've posted this morning, including this excerpt only serves to buttress my position even more firmly. I have supported my statement. I have made my case.

And now, I bow  :)

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 10:15:59 am »
Since you seem to need a reminder.....

America isn't responsible in any way for the Holocaust so we don't owe anything on that score. Take it up with Germany.

Essentially ignoring what was happening to the Jews in nazi germany.

Turning away Jews seeking to emigrate to the U.S. in an attempt to escape the holocaust.

I'd say that those things are as bad as our government supplying Sadaam Hussein with chemcal weapons which he used on his own Kurdish citizens while our government turned a blind eye to that crime against humanity.

If the story attached to this link is any indication, I'd say America does bear some responsibility for the Holocaust.

And let's not forget that this nation made it possible for many nazi scientists who participated in nazi germany's rocket program to escape justice so that their expertise could be exploited for our own outer space aspirations.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 10:10:36 am »
What's sad, Redjack is your attempt to squiggle and squirm in an attempt to snatch victory from an exchange of opinions that you want to see as a debate.

I made a statement and stood by it. Clearly I don't care about "one group" as I have said more than once that human suffering is human suffering. Period.

The examples I have provided absolutely supports my position that America essentially ignored what was happening to the Jews in Europe as I stated in my initial post of our exchange. Not only did the U.S. ignore what was happening to the Jews, they were spiteful about it as well. For many Americans of that era, I'm sure they believed that hitler was doing them a favor.

You said "American blacks aren't banging on England's door saying how rough we have it here." And I respond with an example of a legendary black American Abolitionist who spent two years in England doing just what you said American blacks aren't doing.

The point is absolutely relevant.
The only "bow" I'll be taking is one acknowledging the satisfaction of being able to navigate through all of your verbiage and attempts to make our exchange something it was not. My point, the U.S. essentially ignored the Jewish Holocaust. That point has been firmly driven home.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 09:47:07 am »
sinjection, I'd argue that your contention is at least somewhat exaggerated. In your hypothetical, the US would bear at most indirect responsibility. In order to be an accessory to a crime, for instance, one must generally have knowledge that a crime is being, or will be committed. Even that seems questionable in the context of WWII to say the least. Direct responsibility clearly belongs to those who committed the murders.

With South Africa being mentioned, I remember something PW Botha said during a television interview in which he was defending the apartheid government and the attractive quality of life enjoyed by both white and black South Africans. He cited the number of black Africans from neighboring nations applying for immigration into South Africa. Botha said (paraphrasing him from memory): "It's said life is terrible for blacks in South Africa. If that's so, why then are there so many blacks from other nations wanting to come to South Africa? Do people want to immigrate to hell?"

In late 1930's -40's Europe, we seen the reverse taking place where the European Jews are concerned. The attempts of those people to leave Europe was frantic and desperate. They exhibited the type of behavior associated with people fearing for their very lives. You have posted a link which states "In order to be an accessory to a crime, one must generally have knowledge that a crime is being, or will be committed."

I submit the following as proof the Allies meet the criteria given in the statement:

There is no doubt that the Allies knew about the death camps long before the Russians liberated Majdanek. Some prisoners did escape from the camps and told the Polish resistance movement exactly what was going on in the camps and this information was sent to London to the Polish Government in exile who accordingly informed the Allies.

The information about the camps was dismissed by the allies to be exaggeration at the time the Allies received it, when it was still early enough to do more to help those Jews not yet captured and imprisoned in the camps. After the Soviet Red Army put Majdanek out of business, they provided eye-witness testimony and filmed evidence to the Allies who dismissed the information as Communist propaganda. The Allies ignored the frantic attempts by European Jews to escape certain death and in many instances, turned asylum-seeking Jewish refugees away only to be captured and destroyed in the death camps the Allies knew about as early as 1941 but dismissed as exaggeration and later with solid evidence about the death camps in their hands, as communist propaganda.

The U.S. government in my opinion, is directly responsible for the death of Anne Frank, her family and those who traveled with. There was knowledge at that time, not shared by all perhaps, but by those "who needed to know", what faced those Jews when they returned to Europe. This satisfies the criteria of the linked statement.

If I'm standing alongside a member of the LCB-R D outside an open enclosure of a lion exhibit in a zoo and I shove that member of the LCB-R D into the open enclosure which results in his being torn apart by the lions within, who is directly responsible for the demise of that individual, the lions who mauled him or the person who pushed him into the lion exhibit?

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 08:33:21 am »
The implication, and it's a fairly constant and strong one, that the single worst thing ever to happen to a group of humans happened to jews, gypsies, slavs, poles, homosexuals and the handicapped in in Nazi germany is not only massively insulting to our struggles here, it's numerically and temporally false.

Okay, so you did mention the Poles, Slavs, Gypsies, even the homosexuals and the handicapped. I must have overlooked or forgotten this part of your posting. My apologies.

I do believe that you are overly sensitive to this issue however. Just as we blacks still have unresolved issues resulting from our brutal chattel slavery experience, Jewish people - a minority wherever they have existed outside of Israel - have a long and brutal history of persecution. You seem to be insulted when Jews react warily of anything or any circumstance that hints at antiSemitism. Why? Surely most American Jews are aware of the slavery experience our ancestors and great elders suffered. Our experience was not theirs. Their experiences from the Spanish Inquisition to the Holocaust to Israel's turbulent history is not ours. Blacks and Jews can be aware of each other's painful experiences. We can recognize each other's experiences. And while painful, Blacks may not be able to fully appreciate the pain of the Jewish Holocaust experience just as Jews may not be able to fully appreciate the pain of the chattel slavery experience of black Americans. This does not mean that either group gets to "compare scars" and argue about who had it worse. We don't dismiss each other's horrific past experiences. We recognize them for what they are, examples of man's inhumanity to man and since we are two groups who suffer the ramifications of such experiences, we join together and with others who have suffered their own holocausts and remind the world that these horrible things must never happen again.

As for the American Jews history with respect to American strife, they weren't beaten, they weren't subjected to the same tactics used against Blacks intended to dehumanize us, but American Jews did face withering antiSemitism which actually increased in intensity during the WWII years. American Jews were affected by the knowledge that German and Eastern European Jews were undergoing systemic persecution and propaganda designed to strip them of their humanity. Fearful of agitating an already intolerant, antiSemitic American public, American Jews couldn't be as outspoken as they could have been and wanted to be for fear of unleashing that intense intolerant antiSemitic American sentiment against themselves, removing any slim chance they had at that time for advocating for their fellow Jews facing death in Europe. This nation put Japanese-Americans in American concentration camps. Even some German-Americans were looked upon with suspicion and hatred. In one instance, this hatred caused German-Americans to lynch a young male, one of their own, to demonstrate to their Anglo-American neighbors and peers that they were "loyal German-Americans".

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 07:23:31 am »
From the Holocaust Chronicle, A Study In Words And Pictures:

- June 2, 1939: The Boston, Massachusetts, newspaper of the Christian Science Church attacks Jewish refugees as causing their own troubles, a position taken by many important Protestant journals of the time.

- June 1939: The German refugee ship St. Louis reaches Cuba. But after extortionate demands for money are made by the Cuban government, the St. Louis departs Cuba and sails along the east coast of the United States. President Roosevelt orders the Coast Guard to prevent any of the passengers from landing in the U.S., even should they jump.

- June 17, 1939: After being denied access to Cuba and the United States, the German refugee ship St. Louis docks at Antwerp, Belgium. Belgium offers to take 214 passengers, the Netherlands 181, Britain 287, and France 224. Ultimately, the Nazis will murder jmost of the passengers except for those accepted by Great Britain.

And now, a little antiSemitism from the U.S. cousins across the pond. Hide your eyes, Wise Son.

- July 30, 1939: Reacting to German anti-Jewish policies and reflecting the attitude of many other officials in Great Britain and Western Europe, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain writes: "No doubt Jews aren't a lovable people; I don't care for them myself. But that is not sufficient to explain the pogrom."


- 1940: President Franklin Roosevelt puts the question of Jewish immigration into the United States into the antisemitic hands of Asst. Secretary of State Breckinridge Long and associates in the State Department. A political ally of the President, Long opposes "excessive humanitarianism" in regards to the Jews. Tainted by a general xenophobia and a predilection for Mussolini and Italian facism (Long was ambassador to Italy), Long seems particularly distressed at the prospect of more Jews entering the United States.

- 1941: Charles and Anne Lindberg, members of the America First Committee, attend a rally in Des Moines, Iowa, at which Lindberg blames the Jews for "agitating for war...for reasons that are not American...Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our radio, and our government.

Now I'm wondering if I remember seeing a similar sentiment expressed by someone in this thread. I'll have to examine the posts very carefully to see if I might have.

- 1941: United States Senator Gerald Nye denounces the "yiddish controllers" of American theater and movies. U.S. Senator Burton Wheeler attacks Jews in the movie business as "Hollywood hitlers". Senator Champ Clark sponsors an investigation into Hollywood's "unpatriotic" Jewish filmakers ("unpatriotic" because their films advocate involvement in the European war) Other congressmen express antiSemitism. Many Americans agree with these sentiments. Many Americans also believe that should the United States go to war, it must be against the Soviet Union, not against Germany.

New York Congressman, Emanuel Celler, a Jew, submits legislation to allow French Jews about to be deported to their deaths in Eastern Europe to immigrate to the United States. The bill is killed by the House.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 07:02:29 am »
No legs.
Polls slow Obama is made of teflon so far.
Sorry, haters. Do better.

Haters?  It appears that Reverand Jerimiah Write is the hater, Redjack.

Don't forget the Reverand James D. Manning: Harlem, NY. He who emphatically stated that Obama was a long-legged mac daddy pimp and other things even worse.

At least in Reverend Wright's case, while how he said what he said was aggressive and abrasive, everything he said was not necessarily wrong. Reverend Manning is the "Reverend all the way wrong" compared to the Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 06:40:53 am »
I sympathize with sinjection's point of view.

Why thank you, Mike. I sympathize with my point of view, too  ;) 

It troubles me that the greatest powers in the world can't get it together to stop repeated instances of major genocide.

You and me both. In an earlier posting, my "right honorable opponent"  ;D suggested that I might have given the Sullivan Principles and international sanctions against the white racist apartheid government of South Africa too much credit for the strangulation and the ultimate dissolution of that government. He seems to believe that youth "writing on the wall" the message that the black majority would "win" one way or the other, in a sense giving the white racist government a warning and ultimatum, is what really unnerved that racist government. No sir.

 The black majority certainly outnumbered the white minority, but as far as firepower was concerned, they would not have stood a chance against the white minority and I don't care if the Soviet Union, Cuba and whoever else was supplying arms. The Arab states outnumbered tiny Israel too and how did that "Six Day War" turn out? I was a huge fan of C-Span during the climax of the South African situation. I saw a South African foreign minister interviewed. When asked about an armed conflict with S. Africa's black population and any neighboring black nations who might want to join in to help, this foreign minister said, and I'm paraphrasing from memory, "We have the sufficient firepower that we could put down an internal rebellion and capture the capitals of any aggressive neighboring African nations and still be home in time for dinner." It made me angry to hear that, but I would not have liked to see the black South Africans and their neighbors try to prove the minister wrong.

South Africa's blacks were well represented by the lovely Winnie Mandela and the eloquent and majestic Archbishop Desmond Tutu and that was the best thing S. Africa's blacks had going for them internationally. Tutu kept the issue of apartheid before the world and his patience insistence culminated in the sanctions package that eventually brought the apartheid government to its knees. South Africa's blacks? As I told Curtis, what sticks out most prominently in my mind is Inkatha vs ANC, Zulu vs Xhosa, potential animosity between Buthelezi and Mandela, Winnie Mandela ordering traitors to be "necklaced". I didn't see a concerted, directed effort of blacks in South Africa against South African whites. I didn't see any of those youth Redjack talked about making life difficult for whites. I didn't see blacks killing whites at all. I saw too much of whites killing blacks and blacks killing blacks. I'm afraid that had not the sanctions forced the S. African government to surrender, there would have been a bloodbath and genocide, just as we see the Arabs committing genocide against Africans in Darfur.

But my words too are just "talk, talk, talk."  The reality is, nobody is really "winning this debate" except the brutal butchers of the world.

What my "right honorable opponent" calls a debate really isn't a debate at all. Oops. I guess since that is the case, I'd better stop referring to him as my "right honorable opponent"  :)

I'm not attempting to "beat him" at anything. I am communicating the reasons why I believe that the United States IS culpable for the Holocaust, that American Jews have faced American strife, that there is "no line of greater to lesser" when there is evidence of human misery. I will provide my friend with facts which lead me to believe that the antisemitic climate which existed in the U.S. at that time essentially dictated American immigration policies and other decisions where Jewish people and their plight was concerned.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 06:16:56 am »
Having begun my response, I've returned to your, I mean your post to see what all the hub bub is about, bub.

MY position is to show you that the pattern of exclusion of people who "deserve" to be let into the US based upon brutal treatment at home is meant to favor the US, not the various incoming peoples. It always has been so and it alway will be. Moreover that is how it SHOULD be. And it's how every nation in the world operates. I have supported my positions with facts. Actual statistics and the analyses they support.

Your initial position was to attempt to contrast the plight of Jews IN AMERICA against that of blacks in America when nobody else but you was interested in that topic. Mike didn't bring up the holocaust. karaszero mentioned it once and then it was done. You brought up the holocaust, said the United States didn't have anything to do with it and that the Jews should "take it up with germany" or some such nonsense. Lion admonished you not to go down that course, but you've got a hard head under those naps (you're not bald are you?  ;D ), and off you went on this course. I disagreed with your assertion that the U.S. was not culpable for what happened to 6 million Jews and supported my position with facts, facts that you try to dismiss as "pandering" and whatever else creeps into your noggin. So now, I will give you more facts about my position than you can handle. Just remember, you asked for it. I do believe that many of those Cuban refugees who were part of the Mariel Boatlift would not qualify as being a benefit favoring the U.S. I'm sure you would concur.

Far from treating everyone equally, as I have, you have taken the position that the plight of the Jews (rather than the Jews and all the others the Nazis persecuted) merited some extra moral observance from the US. You're not whining about the Gypsies that were turned away or the Poles. Only the Jews. It is me that has to consistently remind you of 12 million victims rather than the 6 you care about. It is YOU who has created a hierarchy and me who has proven no such hierarchy exists. Proven. Not argued. Not asserted. Proven.

I only discussed the Jews because up until this posting, that's the only group you've been discussing. I mentioned Haitians and Cubans - Castro's convicts, crazies and kooks - but I don't remember you mentioning the Poles. I don't remember you mentioning the Gypsies. I remember you harping about the Jews and how they have to "get in line" behind us. I will demonstrate to you exactly what I've been asserting all along. It was America and the antisemitic attitudes at the highest level of government and social strata that enabled the nazis to murder thousands of Jews who otherwise might have been safely sheltered in our nation.

Some folks get let in, some don't and we take LOTS and LOTS of them.

During the nazi war years, we barely took in any because most if not all of those desperately wanting admittance and refuge were Jews and the antisemitic U.S.A. didn't want any Jews. Those antisemitic Americans of that day didn't want the Jews who were American citizens. It was this climate that dictated not only America's decision to turn so many Jews away and back to their deaths in concentration camps, but that of other nations as well. But here and now, I'm only concerned with America who I have asserted was directly responsible for the death of Anne Frank, her family and the party traveling with her when they turned her boat away and sent it back into the hands of murderous nazi beasts.

As you might have guessed by now, I don't give a goddamn about immigration policies and how a nation state operates. I'm focused on the racist and antisemitic attitudes of those who made the decisions about such things, people who might have harbored some of the attitudes that some of our most respected contemporary citizens have let seep through; Billy Graham and his private conversation with then President Richard Nixon exchanging their views about Jews (that rhymes); Jesse Jackson who believing he was with "the brothas" and could speak freely, made the remark that he was going to "Hymietown" to see the "hymies". The type of people whom Mike and other American Jews might be concerned about if they were running for President or associated with people running for President.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 05:53:52 am »
It was in this foul national climate, desperate Jews fleeing nazi germany were turned away, turned back and sent to their deaths in nazi concentration camps:

- April 7, 1934: Several thousand Americans attend a pro-Nazi rally in Queens, New York.

- July 6 - 14, 1938: An international conference at Evian-les-Bains, France, is called by U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt to deal with the Jewish refugee problem. Roosevelt's aims, some say, are to deflect American Jewish appeals to help German Jews. Aside from Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic, which want enormous sums of money to allow a small number of Jews to immigrate, the 32 nations attending the conference decide they will not permit large numbers of Jews to enter their countries.

Recognizing the intent of the Evian Conference nations in regard to the Jews, a Nazi newspaper headlines: JEWS FOR SALE AT A BARGAIN PRICE -- WHO WANTS THEM? NO ONE.

- 1939: An anti-Semitic film comedy Robert und Bertram is produced in Germany. In the United States, an Elmo Roper Gallup poll claims that 53% of Americans feel Jews are "different" and require "social and economic restrictions". A Gallup poll reports that 83% of Americans oppose the admission of a larger number of Jewish refugees.

- 1939: Based on instructions coming from the State Department, a United States consular official in Stuttgart, Germany tells Ernest Michel, a German Jew who has an American sponsor, that all United States immigration quotas are filled and that he should reapply for admission to the United States in three years. Ironically, 1939 was the only year in which U.S. quotas were filled.

- Feb - June, 1939: New York Democratic Senator Robert F. Wagner, a German-American, and Massachusetts Democratic Representative Edith Nourse Rogers jointly propose the Wagner-Rogers Bill to permit 20,000 German children (specifically Jewish children), into the United States over a two-year period. The bill is tagged with so many amendments that, after hearings, it never leaves the House or the Senate. The bill does receive considerable support from the press and certain churches, and many individuals and organizations testify for or against the bill. But the antisemitism rife in the American public and Congress - and the lack of support from President Franklin Roosevelt - sink the bill. The Wagner-Rogers Bill's foremost opponent, Senator Robert Reynolds of North Carolina, has a secret relationship with German-American Nazi agent August Gausebeck. Gausebeck's partner is Walter Schellenberg, the coordinator of Gestapo activities in the United States.

Asked her opinion on the bill, Mrs. James Houghteling, wife of the commissioner of immigration, whispers that the only problem with the Wagner-Rogers bill is "that 20,000 ugly [Jewish] children would all too soon grow up into 20,000 ugly adults." Mrs. Houghteling is Laura Delano Houghteling, President Roosevelt's cousin.

As a result of Roosevelt's administration's policies, the United States offers refuge to fewer Jewish children - about 1,000 from 1934 to 1945 - than Belgium, France, Britain, Holland, or Sweden.

The foregoing from the book: The Holocaust Chronicle.

Vox Populi / Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« on: March 28, 2008, 05:49:23 am »
You're "getting off" because you got your metaphoric ass whipped.


I didn't bother with reading the body of the post attached to the first sentence, too wordy; too full of hot air and bluster. By the way...

American blacks aren't banging on England's door saying how rough we have it here. We don't blame Spain for Jim Crow. Learn the lesson we teach.

Since American blacks have never banged on "England's door saying how rough we have it here", have you been able to discover just what black America's most eloquent Abolitionist, Frederick Douglass was doing while he spent 2 full years in England? You know, it would come as a shock and would truly be a shame if Frederick Douglass failed to utilize his oratorical gifts to take the plight of his enslaved brethren to those who might carefully listen to and consider his words since he was received there not as a black man, but as a man. What was he doing while there since you have said "American blacks aren't banging on England's door saying how rough we have it here"...was he playing croquet and enjoying tea and crumpets with Her Majesty? I ask you because well, you seem like you know it all and I think I might benefit from the teachings of a know-it-all in this very strange case. I didn't mean to offend you by referring to you as a know-it-all. Just pretend I just called you "bunky"  :)

You now have my undivided attention. Let's talk Holocaust and how American antisemitism aided and abetted the nazi cause.

For starters, a bit of information from near WWII's end. On July 23, 1944, forces of the Soviet Red Army were the first to encounter and liberate a Nazi death camp. The camp was called Majdanek. As they entered the camp, the Soviet soldiers discovered SS militia men hurriedly attempting to burn, bury or hide as many corpses as they could in an attempt to conceal the evidence of their attrocities. The shocked Soviets shot film of the camp which was then sent to the U.S. and the western allies. The film evidence and the Soviet account of what their soldiers discovered was dismissed as Communist propaganda by hitler and by the allies. The British had received information about what was happening in nazi death camps as early as 1941. My suspicion is that at the highest most secretive levels of the U.S. government, they had this information as well. The British and quite probably the U.S. dismissed those reports as "exaggeration". Now here, faced with visual proof and eyewitness accounts from Soviet forces, the U.S. and our western allies dismiss what they already knew was happening - what they had dismissed as "exaggeration" as early as 1941 - as Communist propaganda.

The sinjection correction will now commence.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 67