MICHAEL O. ALLEN

Tag

Holocaust

Olbermann's SPECIAL COMMENT

By HomepageNo Comments


Finally as promised, a Special Comment tonight on the inaccurately described “Ground Zero mosque.”

“They came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

Pastor Martin Niemoller’s words are well known but their context is not well understood. Niemoller was not speaking abstractly. He witnessed persecution, he acquiesced to it, he ultimately fell victim to it. He had been a German World War 1 hero, then a conservative who welcomed the fall of German democracy and the rise of Hitler and had few qualms the beginning of the holocaust until he himself was arrested for supporting it insufficiently.

Niemoller’s confessional warning came in a speech in Frankfurt in January, 1946, eight months after he was liberated by American troops. He had been detained at Tyrol, Sachsen-hausen and Dachau. For seven years.

Niemoller survived the death camps. In quoting him, I make no direct comparison between the attempts to suppress the building of a Muslim religious center in downtown Manhattan, and the unimaginable nightmare of the Holocaust. Such a comparison is ludicrous. At least it is, now.
But Niemoller was not warning of the Holocaust. He was warning of the willingness of a seemingly rational society to condone the gradual stoking of enmity towards an ethnic or religious group warning of the building-up of a collective pool of national fear and hate, warning of the moment in which the need to purge, outstrips even the perameters of the original scape-goating, when new victims are needed because a country has begun to run on a horrible fuel of hatred — magnified, amplified, multiplied, by politicians and zealots, within government and without.

Read More

His cold, now dead, hands

By HomepageOne Comment

(Photo by the Associated Press) Mr. Heston was always able to channel some energies into the public arena. He was an active supporter of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., calling him “a 20th-century Moses for his people,” and participated in the historic march on Washington in 1963. Left, he joined civil rights protesters picketing a whites-only restaurant in Oklahoma City in 1961.

Charlton Heston wasn’t always destined to be kook. He had one of those legendary Hollywood careers. He was a moderate who supported Adlai Stevenson in 1956 and John F. Kennedy in 1960. And, more importantly, he used some of his Hollywood cred to back civil rights. He fought for good causes and was, even when he became more conservative, a truly compassionate one.

Heston even supported gun control, especially after the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. Which was why it was so jarring when he later emerged as the face of the National Rifle Association.

Heston has died at 84 and all most people will remember him for was holding that rifle aloft and screaming.

But, even at his most strident, true gun nuts questioned how truly committed he was, citing his earlier desire to rip guns out from their cold, dead hands after his buddies MLK and JFK were killed. I mean just because a couple of patriots (what else would you call people who know how to shoot guns?) killed your buddies isn’t reason to go soft in the knees.

We’ve got a militia to organize here. If and when we need on. It’s a right and Heston, once upon a time, was going to take that away from us.

His spoof of the NRA in the early 1990’s, when Bill Clinton signed the Brady Bill into law, was easily the most effective anti-gun propaganda anyone could create. And it was funny.

Heston would later show he was at least crazy in other ways. In a December 1997, Heston trivialized the Holocaust and made disparaging remarks about women, gays and lesbians, and African Americans in a speech, drawing praise from David Duke.

I, for one, prefer to give more weight to the good work he did in his political activism before he went off the deep end. I’ve posted obituaries in arts & media.

A land divided

By HomepageNo Comments

Two friends, I’ll identify them as “M” and “Anon,” offered these reactions to the part of the speech by Sen. Barack Obama, (D-IL), that I said rang false to me.

First “M”:

It is a tactical decision indeed, as all actions and words are by all the candidates. And by all politicians in general. This looks to me like an insurmountable problem.This is not a government for the people, by the people.

Regarding the Israel comment of his I highlighted, it seems that he has acutely changed or modified his attitude. (Again or the attitude he tactically puts out in the public). It may be hard to believe, but my Arab-ness has really nothing to do with my feelings about Israel. I was also raised Coptic Orthodox (and am agnostic) and relate little if at all to Muslims or any religions. That being said, I do have very strong feelings about Israel occupying a country and committing countless inhumane acts (on a regular basis) against Palestinians.

The worst, almost laughable part of it, is that Zionism was born from the horrifying reality of the Holocaust.

And yet, here they are perpetuating and creating apartheid on another group of people. And no country is brave enough to stand up to Israel? To even discuss it in THOSE terms? For fear they may be labeled an anti-semite? It’s preposterous. Just today the news reported the German chancellor paying her visit to Israel.-and all the “shame” Germany felt for the past.I wonder if she took a look over the wall.

M

Read More