Obama and Elie Wiesel to write book together

[mlp]

Respectfully, I don't see anything anti-semitic about what rainforest1 has said in this thread.

You don't need to preface with "respectfully."

RF has a long history of New World Order threads, the Federal Reserve being a vast conspiracy, Holocaust and Hitler apologias, etc. The one thread that runs through all of that is that Jews are to blame for many/most of the world's ills, with a sidenote of "Gee, it's not so bad to try to exterminate them."

Now here's a thread where he objects to an American president co-authoring a book with another well known figure, who just happens to be Jewish. Apparently he thinks that more than one book per person is excessive, so maybe his dislike of Obama and Wiesel are based on them being too prolific in their book output? If that's his objection, then I'm surprised he didn't start by criticizing other authors - there are many thousands of authors who are more prolific than either Wiesel or Obama.

 

[mlp]

Also respectfully, I see Obama as somewhat of a warmonger and find this book idea highly ironic.

Why is it ironic? For all you know, it's going to be a cookbook, a book of silly limericks, or a book about how two people coming from different backgrounds and of different ages formed a friendship.

 

[Renee1]

Why is it ironic? For all you know, it's going to be a cookbook, a book of silly limericks, or a book about how two people coming from different backgrounds and of different ages formed a friendship.

Any of those books would still be ironic...

 

[cornsail]

Wow. I am just flabbergasted that writing a book with Elie Wiesal is considered a bad thing on this forum.


Just wow.

As someone who cares about US foreign policy and finds some of the things Elie Wiesel supports WRT Israel/Palestine highly offensive , I don't find it encouraging that Obama and Wiesel are writing a book together. Surely that isn't too hard to understand.

 

[mlp]

As someone who cares about US foreign policy and finds some of the things Elie Wiesel supports WRT Israel/Palestine highly offensive , I don't find it encouraging that Obama and Wiesel are writing a book together. Surely that isn't too hard to understand.

So, you would be likewise bothered if, for example, Bill Clinton and GW Bush wrote a book (of completely unspecified topic) together?(Assuming one or the other of them has supported some policy that you find offensive.)

 

[Second Summer]

You don't need to preface with "respectfully."

Thanks, mlp. It's just that I want to be cautious after some negative feedback lately and I don't want to open another Pandora's Box.

RF has a long history of New World Order threads, the Federal Reserve being a vast conspiracy, Holocaust and Hitler apologias, etc. The one thread that runs through all of that is that Jews are to blame for many/most of the world's ills, with a sidenote of "Gee, it's not so bad to try to exterminate them."

I wasn't aware RF had done any Holocaust and Hitler apologias? I could be wrong tho, I tend to have a rather forgiving memory.

 

[cornsail]

So, you would be likewise bothered if, for example, Bill Clinton and GW Bush wrote a book (of completely unspecified topic) together?(Assuming one or the other of them has supported some policy that you find offensive.)

Bill Clinton is not the president, so no, I would not care at all... I don't have a problem with it because it offends my sensibilities, I said I don't find it encouraging (i.e. encouraging for US foreign policy over the next four years). If Obama was writing a book about friendship with George W. Bush I would find that discouraging as well.

 

[mlp]

Bill Clinton is not the president, so no, I would not care at all... I don't have a problem with it because it offends my sensibilities, I said I don't find it encouraging (i.e. encouraging for US foreign policy over the next four years). If Obama was writing a book about friendship with George W. Bush I would find that discouraging as well.

Hmmmm...I wouldn't. Ted Kennedy was friends with quite a few people whose policies he vehemently opposed over the years, for example. I don't think any less of his liberal credentials because of it, nor would I have if wh and they had co-written a book on the subject of their friendship, favorite recipes, or silly limericks.

Perhaps I am somewhat more open to free speech and the free exchange of ideas than you in this particular respect.

 

[mlp]

I wasn't aware RF had done any Holocaust and Hitler apologias? I could be wrong tho, I tend to have a rather forgiving memory.

Ah well, I think comparing Churchill unfavorably to Hitler and other similar threads of thought kind of stuck with me, even though I'm not an unmitigated Churchill fan by any means.

 

[cornsail]

Hmmmm...I wouldn't. Ted Kennedy was friends with quite a few people whose policies he vehemently opposed over the years, for example. I don't think any less of his liberal credentials because of it, nor would I have if wh and they had co-written a book on the subject of their friendship, favorite recipes, or silly limericks.

Perhaps I am somewhat more open to free speech and the free exchange of ideas than you in this particular respect.

Finding something discouraging is not anti-free speech.

 

[mlp]

I was kidding, hence the use of the emoticon.

Really, I think it's a positive (and maybe even a necessity) in a leader to be able to find common ground with someone with whom there's disagreement on some issues. So I kind of find it the opposite of disturbing.

 

[cornsail]

I was kidding, hence the use of the emoticon.

Really, I think it's a positive (and maybe even a necessity) in a leader to be able to find common ground with someone with whom there's disagreement on some issues. So I kind of find it the opposite of disturbing.

That would depend on what the particular disagreement happened to be wouldn't it? I know you have made clear that you're strongly opposed to the attitude of "everyone's opinion should be respected" and that you wouldn't want to associate yourself with certain points of view. Also, there is a difference between finding common ground with someone you have to work with and writing a book about friendship with someone. The suggestion that East Jerusalem should be illegally settled by Israel due to Jerusalem being mentioned a lot in religious scriptures is something I disagree with very strongly.

BTW, my reaction was not "oh no, Obama is palling around with someone he strongly disagrees with. " It was more like "Oh geez, how much does Obama actually support the same things as this guy?"

 

[Freesia]

I honestly thought that when Obama was elected he would have stopped all the wars. He seemed like such an idealist. I dont know what has happened to him. He does not seem like the same person.

I dont personally have a problem with him writing a book with Eli Wiesal and I am saddened that he was in the Holocaust. However I dont approve of Israel acquiring all those weapons.

I thought that Christianity and Judaism and Islam were supposed to be religions of peace, but they are not doing a very good job in demonstrating this, and it seems that little has been learned from the Holocaust.

 

[Ansciess]

...or a book about how two people coming from different backgrounds and of different ages formed a friendship.

that would kind of be my guess, and that it's not going to be some hard hitting political treatise on Israel that some seem to possibly fear.

Threads that relate to Israel often make me uncomfortable, and I think there is a subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) kind of anti semitism, a singling out of Jewish people in a particular way, that often creeps in. I find this link helpful in terms of how to talk about this complicated issue:
http://www.thepast.info/ or http://www.scribd.com/doc/81712788/The-Past-Didn-t-Go-Anywhere-April-Rosenblum
(I'm not surprised that commenting has been disabled on the last link - whenever I see anything on YouTube or elsewhere on the unmoderated web that relates to someone Jewish there are inevitably going to be virulent anti semitic comments).

 

[Freesia]

I dont get this though. Why are people not allowed to discuss and bring up concerns about what Israel is doing without being called anti semitic? Are people not allowed to talk about what Israel is doing, yet it is ok to discuss what the Obama government is doing, or Cameron government, or any other governments.

 

[cornsail]

Yeah I don't know why antisemitism has been brought up multiple times already when I haven't seen it here. To be fair though, Ansciess didn't specifically say that it was going on in this thread, so for all I know it could have been a thing in a previous thread/s.

 

[Envy]

Well, based on the reactions of some in this thread, I have decided to buy it when it comes out, instead of just checking it out of the library.

I guess non-Jews should generally not associate at all with Jews, based on the controversy this book is causing before people even have any idea what the subject of it might be.

It's also the other way around.

RF has a long history of New World Order threads, the Federal Reserve being a vast conspiracy, Holocaust and Hitler apologias, etc. The one thread that runs through all of that is that Jews are to blame for many/most of the world's ills,

Did he ever say jews?

'cause it could just as easily be blamed on the rich and powerful.
Do you really think that people wouldn't make con. theories if the leading people weren't jews or related to them?

with a sidenote of "Gee, it's not so bad to try to exterminate them."

I'd really like you to find an instance where he said that.

 

[Ansciess]

I dont get this though. Why are people not allowed to discuss and bring up concerns about what Israel is doing without being called anti semitic?

That's a very defensive response. Maybe you could re-read my post for clarity, and then actually read my link, to see that I'm actually trying to address this issue i.e. ways that people can talk about Jewish people and Israel and still be sensitive to the issue of antisemitism.

My experience is that virtually no one who discusses this on-line who might be apt to get that charge or make the comment you just made is particularly interested in learning about why that charge is sometimes made and ways to talk about Israel or Jewish people without sounding antisemitic, but rather they prefer to go into defense mode and pout about it.

Regardless, I think it would be hard to claim that it isn't background noise in many on-line discussions concerning Israel or someone like Elie Weisel, referred to by the comment in this thread about reading the comments in the original article*, and to some posters' dubious past comments.


example: *

The title should be, A TALE OF TWO LIARS, boy that would be something to see, obongo trying like hell to out lie a jew. Obongo is one great liar but nobody can outlie a jew, nobody. Not even a ******

 

[cornsail]

My experience is that virtually no one who discusses this on-line who might be apt to get that charge or make the comment you just made is particularly interested in learning about why that charge is sometimes made and ways to talk about Israel or Jewish people without sounding antisemitic, but rather they prefer to go into defense mode and pout about it.

The article you linked to says pretty much the same thing she said:

"You're not pro-Palestinian... You're antisemitic!" If you work to support Palestinian self-determination, you've heard this sort of thing countless times. Sometimes it comes from Right-wing ideologues whose aim is to shut down debate about Palestinian rights. Other times it comes from Jews who are so scared of real antisemitism that they can't tell when a criticism of Israel is not driven by hatred of Jews. Either way, it's insulting to activists and - above all - to Palestinians.

What you saw as defensive, pouty, and indicative of someone unwilling to be reasonable, I saw as a politely worded expression of confusion and request for clarification.

I didn't understand why mlp was suggesting that people's problem was Wiesel's being Jewish and why you also seemed to view antisemitism as a problem on this site, myself, so I share the confusion. That is not to say I have any problem with you posting the article, though.

 

[Ansciess]

Why are people not allowed to discuss and bring up concerns about what Israel is doing without being called anti semitic?

Cornsail, I guess I didn't see here where anyone was accused of being anti semitic merely for having concerns about Israel. So I saw Freesia's question as a knee-jerk defensive response and not understanding what was being questioned here.

But I'm out of this conversation. As I said, I have often found on-line discussions concerning Israel or Jewish people disturbing, and I don't think a lot of people even understand the ways that they might be being offensive to some. I thought the article laid out how to talk about a complicated issue without expressing it in a way that might be offensive, in fact it's so explicit it even lays it out in a table, so I thought it might be helpful. But I think that in a lot of cases it will probably have the opposite effect to what was intended and just give people more linguistic weapons.