Author Topic: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!  (Read 88805 times)

Offline Redjack

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2008
  • i've never had a hero. i don't worship people.
    • View Profile
    • a dreamnasium
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #105 on: March 27, 2008, 08:26:41 pm »
You're "getting off" because you got your metaphoric ass whipped.

As much as I respect the other posters here (you included), nobody gets to dictate which way a conversation goes. You have expressed a binary opinion in order to support your moral outrage. Your own words undercut any true validity in your opinion as even you admit that the largest portion of your analysis is simply conjecture and moral posturing. IOW: not actually analysis.

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.

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.

Some folks get let in, some don't and we take LOTS and LOTS of them. It sucks for those we don't take but the trouble they face at home is not our problem to solve. And we're not required, morally, to do that or to take everyone. Certainly not to prevent from offending your delicate sensibilities.

Perhaps you should get a better handle on the concept of nation state before entering into this sort of discussion in future.

And figure out how to walk a straight line in a debate as well.


« Last Edit: March 27, 2008, 08:31:17 pm by Redjack »
Soon you will come to know. When the bullet hits the bone.

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #106 on: March 27, 2008, 10:17:00 pm »
karaszero makes the point that Mike never seemed to be as critical of Republicans as Democrats ...

Well, at least I should be able to refute one allegation to everyone's satisfaction:

Buchanan is a bigoted asshole.
As an aside, you might be interested to learn that he is also an antisemite. 
       
He is also a highly-respected political commentator and influential conservative and Republican.  So what does that say about the people and organizations that embrace him?

What that "says" is that there are schmucks on both the Left and the Right.   >:(  ...   ;D
         As seen in the "You Negroes should be more grateful" thread

HoHoHoHoHo!!!  ;D

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #107 on: March 27, 2008, 11:19:24 pm »
Oh my ... here is something else that just came to my attention ... and just when I was in a good mood:

Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Another Israel Bashing Newsletter From Obama's Church
 
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59884
"Sen. Barack Obama's Chicago church published an open letter from a Palestinian activist that labels Israel an 'apartheid' regime and claims the Jewish state worked on an 'ethnic bomb' that kills 'blacks and Arabs.'...The June 10, 2007, newsletter, which is still available at Obama's church's website, identifies Baghdadi as an Arab-American activist, writer and columnist who 'acted as a Middle East advisor to the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, the founder of the Nation of Islam, as well as Minister Louis Farrakhan.' The piece is titled 'An open letter to Oprah,' referring to talk show giant Oprah Winfrey, who last year accepted an invitation to visit Israel offered to her by Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel."

Original Letter As It Appears On The Church's "Pastor's Page": http://tucc.org/upload/tuccbulletin_june10.pdf

I imagine Barak Obama wasn't in church that Sunday either ...   :P

Offline Tanksleyd

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1702
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #108 on: March 28, 2008, 12:24:26 am »
What Hamas story?

I've been looking at the news all day and 20 minutes of Fox last night. What Hamas story?

In fact Obama came out today with another statement DIRECTLY supporting his church:

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/obama_on_wright_this_is_not_a.php

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

When I googled the above link I found this one from some paper, the  Jerusalem Post

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1205420759325&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

(ex)Mayor Koch is a SUPER liberal but on the subject of mid-east war, like Lieberman he is SUPER pro-war.



Well this story has finally hit the AMERICAN msm (So far it's only been noted in the Israeli press). There are also stories that Rev Wright said that Italians have long noses (Heard it on CNN).

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/28/church_newsletters_fuel_controversy_over_obamas_former_pastor/

Let's see if this story has legs...Either way the participants of this thread should be well prepared, right?

Offline Redjack

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2008
  • i've never had a hero. i don't worship people.
    • View Profile
    • a dreamnasium
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #109 on: March 28, 2008, 02:05:19 am »
No legs.

Polls slow Obama is made of teflon so far.

Sorry, haters. Do better.


Soon you will come to know. When the bullet hits the bone.

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #110 on: March 28, 2008, 05:49:23 am »
You're "getting off" because you got your metaphoric ass whipped.

 ;D

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.
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #111 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.
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #112 on: March 28, 2008, 06:16:56 am »
Having begun my response, I've returned to your bluster...er, 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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 08:40:08 am by sinjection »
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #113 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  ;) 

Quote
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.

Quote
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.
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

michaelintp

  • Guest
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #114 on: March 28, 2008, 06:49:55 am »
No legs.
Polls slow Obama is made of teflon so far.
Sorry, haters. Do better.

Haters?  It appears that Reverend Jeremiah Write is the hater, Redjack.

Edited to correct the spelling of the good Pastor's name.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 07:16:00 am by michaelintp »

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #115 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.
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #116 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."

IS IT ANY WONDER HOW THE BRITISH AND LIKELY THE U.S. WOULD DISMISS OMINOUS REPORTS OF ATTROCITIES TAKING PLACE IN NAZI CONCENTRATION CAMPS AS "EXAGGERATION" GIVEN THE LEVEL OF ANTISEMITISM THEY'VE DEMONSTRATED?

- 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.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 07:27:59 am by sinjection »
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #117 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".
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

Offline sinjection

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
    • View Profile
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #118 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.

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

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?
« Last Edit: March 28, 2008, 09:52:13 am by sinjection »
Reginald Hudlin's Black Panther IS THE Black Panther

Offline Redjack

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 2008
  • i've never had a hero. i don't worship people.
    • View Profile
    • a dreamnasium
Re: Obama's Church Endorsed Terrorist Organization HAMAS!
« Reply #119 on: March 28, 2008, 09:53:07 am »
Sin

As I said. You only seem to care about one group and the group is, apparently, not Americans. I don't bluster. Nothing I said was remotely blustery. I was cold, if anything. I asked you to bow out with grace instead you shoved a mountain of irrelevant facts down our throats.  Nothing, not one thing you wrote refutes my analyses and, once again, your conclusions and assertions are just your own.

Even if all of Europe had agreed with Hitler, the US would not have been under any obligation to accept more refugees than it wished to and would not have been responsible for any negative treatment visited on foreign nationals by other foreign nationals within the borders of those other countries. That is the end of the story. What you have written is bluster. It's chaff.

Please stop with the Frederick Douglas crap; it's not relevant. It doesn't even count as a response to the sentence I wrote that it means to attack. If you READ what I wrote you'll see why. It is, however, an example of you jumping around in time to find random beads to add to your string off erroneous assertions.

You have an opinion. You have emotion. You have a few, mostly unrelated, facts. You do not have a point. You lost this argument pages ago and still can't see it. And you don't even have the balls to own the fact that this was a debate. Sad.

I didn't obviate the effect of the sanctions. I minimized them. As I said, I was present, you were not. If the sanctions had any effect on the day-to-day lives of South Africans, even a slight one, there was literally no evidence. They did everything just as they always had done. What changed was internal politics and that has to do with a shift in generations.

Just as Israel will never beat the Palestinians and the US would NEVER have beaten the Vietnmese and the Chinese will never beat the Tibetans, White South Africa would never have beaten the various black nations (the Xhosa are a nation, just like the Sioux) that had been there forever. The blacks had nowhere to go. They were already home. And they outnumbered their oppressors 20 to one. Each successive generation became more militant and more violent in their struggle to regain their country and ALL PROJECTIONS AT THE TIME had the place descending into an orgy of blood. There was no foreign nation for the South African war machine to move against. They would have been destroying their own infrastruture. There was no way to partition the country because blacks were all over it and too much of the economy depended on their nearly free labor. They tried to partition it wth townships but couldn't take it farther than that. You think the Israelis have a rough time with the PLO and  HAMAS? I think, in Rwanda, you've seen what a committed population armed only with knives, can do. As I said, the world was SURPRISED when South Africa didn't explode. Literally. There was real concern that the apartheid government would nuke the place rather than hand it back to its owners.

But, in treating the past as if it's all one era, the same era, as you seem to want to do, you have conveniently missed this and other facts that undercut all of your assertions and conclusions.

It was math that killed Apartheid. If you were capable of making a clean analysis, one without the filter of your prism, you would see this. But, sadly, I'm guessing that's not possible.

As for your increasingly shrill pronouncements about what the US owed those refugees, this despite the obvious and well documented pattern of equivalent treatment for all refugees inside the framework of our politics here, I just shake my head. Horse, there's the water. Figure it out.

You did come up with facts, yes. Lots of them. Thanks. But those facts do not support your conclusion which was already handily refuted by me. The US is, in NO WAY, responsible for any part of the WW2 Holocaust. Zero percent. We stopped it and killed or imprisoned the people who actually were responsible. That's the US participation.

You feeling otherwise is your right but it is a delusion. It's certainly not proof.

This isn't a hot button issue for me. It's just the theme of the thread.

"We" blacks do not have unresolved issues from slavery. WHITE people say that. "We" blacks have REAL, CURRENT, life altering issues that stem from a constant racist attack from our own country. That attack began with slavery but slavery is not something that influences the current discussion. Again, that is something WHITE PEOPLE float to infantilize the complaints.

Michael.

As much as I enjoy our fencing matches and think you're a basically good guy, you also have one test by which you determine the worth of a candidate or other public figure.

All this hand wringing about Wright being done by right wing whites is bullsh*t. One, if you're surprised that blacks in this country have ambivalence or even anger about how this place has treated and continues to treat us, you've been living in a box. Or you think we have. For hundreds of years before this country was founded and for hundreds after this nation has given us the second worst deal it has had to offer and, SURPRISE, we noticed. Now some whites have the audacity to pretned there's something out of school being said by the Reverend? Bullsh*t.

Two, Wright has been a pillar of his community for decades, doing good works, being a solid example of Christin fellowship, uplift and bridge building. The church he built is filled and it's not becuase he preaches hate rhetoric. Those whites who are claiming shock and "disgust" at his words are completely full of sh*t. They are behaving as if there is som parity of experience between the two groups and that, by speaking the way he does on occassion, the Reverend is somehow being unfair. Again, bullsh*t.

Three, this other guy that has been recently YOUTUBED is a joke. A meaningless aberration that makes racists feel good and secure in their feeling about us. Not even worth the time it took to type these last three sentences. More, bullsh*t.

Rev. Wright has done more, considerably more, than give these few isolated speeches and the text of the speech that started this ball rolling DOES NOT in fact, say what so many in the media have claimed. I've really had it with this crap.

Let me be very clear on this.

Nothing he has said that I have read, including the big "Damn America" speech is in any way hateful or even bothersome. And you'll find that most black Americans feel the same. And you'll find that most honest white Americans do too if they bother to actually read it instead of listening to pundits. If they let their minds be guided by the likes of Hannity and Limbaugh then, frankly, I can't describe them as having minds at all. They're just skin bags taking up space. Useless.

How a candidate feels about Israel or Hamas or the PLO is meaningless because that region is meaningless to the future existence of this nation. They don't produce goods we can't get elsewhere. They don't have any oil. They draw billions of dollars out of our economy annually with absolutely no return. They are a tick on the American economy. A candidate's opinion on CHINA or INDIA dies have deep and last impact on how things work here does matter because it is our companies giving our jobs to those countries and selling our economy to them that is having impact on all our lives.

Israel means a lot to you. Hamas is high on your radar. You have a reason for that that I understand. But those entities are meaningless to the mass of us here because they are meaningless to life in this country. Literally. If the whole region went away tomorrow, no one here (in the US) would notice. If China vanished, we'd feel it.

Bottom line: Don't talk all this peace and love stuff just so you can feed me your personal party line. I'm not buying it and I don't think the mass of black Americans are either. We live here, remember? We know exactly where we are and always have.

Barack Obama is smart. Articulate. Sober. Passionate. He apparently seeks the high ground whenever possible and has, at least he's campaigning on, a deep desire to fix a good many of the things that are troubling Americans in their millions. If he can make his case for that, he gets the job. End of story. And that, my friends, is a VERY good thing. If you really think his opinion, good or bad, about Hamas, or rather the opinion of his former pastor about Hamas, is even a tiny bit relevant to whether or not he deserves to be president, I submit that you think of yourself not as an American first but as something else.  If you don't think of yourself as an American first, you have no place in a discussion about America's future because, ultimately, you don't really give a damn about it. I further submit, if Wright's opinion, good or bad, on Hamas sways your vote, that you weren't voting for Obama in the first place, despite any protestations to contrary. You can't vote for a black candidate in the US and not appreciate a little of the life experience that is a consequence of being black here.

Black America has earned the right, in perpetuity, to be as critical as we like about this nation and any policy this nation takes. It's been kicking our assess since it dragged us here in spite our service and affection. When the kicking stops, after a short rest and maybe a party, we'll scale back the crits.

Until then, expect more of the same.


« Last Edit: March 30, 2008, 09:36:54 am by Redjack »
Soon you will come to know. When the bullet hits the bone.