The Amona pogrom

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I will stop short of calling Israeli actions against the Jews a nazi act... I believe that what was done was criminally wrong but it doesn't rise to as disgusting a level as the Nazis who constructed camps just for the purpose of extermination of Jews. I believe that the police in Amona did not intend on killing the Jews, just to forcefully remove them from their homes.

I hope that all officers involved will have catastrophe in their lives...

Beatings of Jews and destroying their lives.... to me that classifies on the scale of Nazi acts, even if it's not the same as gas chambers.   It's simply the step right before it.

[muman613]

So what are we to think? The antisemites love to charge Israel with the title of being a Nazi-state. How do we respond to them? How do we distinguish our disgust with this wicked Israeli government without causing the antisemites to also label Israel as a Nazi state?

I hate what they did and what they are doing.... But where can we stand?

[Aces High]

I will stop short of calling Israeli actions against the Jews a nazi act... I believe that what was done was criminally wrong but it doesn't rise to as disgusting a level as the Nazis who constructed camps just for the purpose of extermination of Jews. I believe that the police in Amona did not intend on killing the Jews, just to forcefully remove them from their homes.

I hope that all officers involved will have catastrophe in their lives...

Beatings of Jews and destroying their lives.... to me that classifies on the scale of Nazi acts, even if it's not the same as gas chambers.   It's simply the step right before it.

Absolutely!  It is a Nazi campaign!  No two ways about it.  Those police were out to inflict permanent bodily damage to those Jews.  The Nazis beat the Jews the same way.  The Israeli government would have shot the Jews  on site if they could get away with it.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I will stop short of calling Israeli actions against the Jews a nazi act... I believe that what was done was criminally wrong but it doesn't rise to as disgusting a level as the Nazis who constructed camps just for the purpose of extermination of Jews. I believe that the police in Amona did not intend on killing the Jews, just to forcefully remove them from their homes.

I hope that all officers involved will have catastrophe in their lives...

Beatings of Jews and destroying their lives.... to me that classifies on the scale of Nazi acts, even if it's not the same as gas chambers.   It's simply the step right before it.

Absolutely!  It is a Nazi campaign!  No two ways about it.  Those police were out to inflict permanent bodily damage to those Jews.  The Nazis beat the Jews the same way.  The Israeli government would have shot the Jews  on site if they could get away with it.

Yes, I agree with you.  Their utter fear of a PR nightmare is all that prevents that.

[Secularbeliever]

Guys you need to understand something.  There is a reason you use the word Nazi here.  Because Nazis represent the absolute worst example of human cruelty and brutality in human history.  Nazis are the absolute outlier.  They are the standard.  The Nazi atrocities are still remembered 65 years after they fell from power.  They might be remember a thousand years from now.

As hideous as Amona was, will anyone remember it 65 years from now?  Not likely.  Even five years later it is hardly remembered.  The Nazi atrocities will be remembered in a thousand years if mankind still has the ability to remember history.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Guys you need to understand something.  There is a reason you use the word Nazi here.  Because Nazis represent the absolute worst example of human cruelty and brutality in human history.  Nazis are the absolute outlier.  They are the standard.  The Nazi atrocities are still remembered 65 years after they fell from power.  They might be remember a thousand years from now.

As hideous as Amona was, will anyone remember it 65 years from now?  Not likely.  Even five years later it is hardly remembered.  The Nazi atrocities will be remembered in a thousand years if mankind still has the ability to remember history.

Whether people remember something or not does not determine if it's evil or what type of act it was or how grave.

There were even people at the time Amona happened who had no idea it occurred or didn't even care that it did.   That does not make it any less evil.     This is like saying that if assimilated and well-connected Jews hadn't built holocaust museums and stoked the fires of guilt for the Europeans making it very memorable and well-known for everyone, that therefore the Nazi acts wouldn't have been as bad since no one remembers or less people care.  Come on.   

[Secularbeliever]

Are you really trying to tell me that the govt's agenda did not include destroying the lives of these Jews?

I think the government was hostile to the Jews of Gush Katif but that it was not their intention to kill them.  Again I am not defending the government, I was totally against the expulsion, I even travelled 70 miles to attend a demonstration against it (not that it was a heroic measure).  I just think it is a distortion to equate it with Nazis.  

[Secularbeliever]

Guys you need to understand something.  There is a reason you use the word Nazi here.  Because Nazis represent the absolute worst example of human cruelty and brutality in human history.  Nazis are the absolute outlier.  They are the standard.  The Nazi atrocities are still remembered 65 years after they fell from power.  They might be remember a thousand years from now.

As hideous as Amona was, will anyone remember it 65 years from now?  Not likely.  Even five years later it is hardly remembered.  The Nazi atrocities will be remembered in a thousand years if mankind still has the ability to remember history.

Whether people remember something or not does not determine if it's evil or what type of act it was or how grave.

There were even people at the time Amona happened who had no idea it occurred or didn't even care that it did.   That does not make it any less evil.     This is like saying that if assimilated and well-connected Jews hadn't built holocaust museums and stoked the fires of guilt for the Europeans making it very memorable and well-known for everyone, that therefore the Nazi acts wouldn't have been as bad since no one remembers or less people care.  Come on.   

You are totally missing the point.  The reason the Nazi holocaust is remembered is because of its scope, cruelty, mechanization and brutality.  Gush Katif and Amona were both hideous but were not of that scope.

[Secularbeliever]

Did the govt brutally expel civil rights marchers from their homes?   How is that a comparison?<<

They sicked attack dogs on them, turned high powered firehoses on them, arrested them, etc. etc.  It was the brutality of such attacks that brought the Federal Government into the picture.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Guys you need to understand something.  There is a reason you use the word Nazi here.  Because Nazis represent the absolute worst example of human cruelty and brutality in human history.  Nazis are the absolute outlier.  They are the standard.  The Nazi atrocities are still remembered 65 years after they fell from power.  They might be remember a thousand years from now.

As hideous as Amona was, will anyone remember it 65 years from now?  Not likely.  Even five years later it is hardly remembered.  The Nazi atrocities will be remembered in a thousand years if mankind still has the ability to remember history.

Whether people remember something or not does not determine if it's evil or what type of act it was or how grave.

There were even people at the time Amona happened who had no idea it occurred or didn't even care that it did.   That does not make it any less evil.     This is like saying that if assimilated and well-connected Jews hadn't built holocaust museums and stoked the fires of guilt for the Europeans making it very memorable and well-known for everyone, that therefore the Nazi acts wouldn't have been as bad since no one remembers or less people care.  Come on.   

You are totally missing the point.  The reason the Nazi holocaust is remembered is because of its scope, cruelty, mechanization and brutality.  Gush Katif and Amona were both hideous but were not of that scope.

I challenged you to explain why these acts should not be classified as nazi acts.   You give as a criteria that it's not as well known or not remembered.   That is irrelevant to determining if they were nazi acts.  The question is, are they brutal?  Are they targeting Jews for destruction?  This is what makes something a nazi act.   If it's just about "strength of memory" what's so mystifying about a strong lasting memory to you that nothing else can be classified similarly?   Try a different criteria because that is not a satisfactory explanation to make a distinction with nazi atrocity.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Did the govt brutally expel civil rights marchers from their homes?   How is that a comparison?<<

They sicked attack dogs on them, turned high powered firehoses on them, arrested them, etc. etc.  It was the brutality of such attacks that brought the Federal Government into the picture.

Yet they went home and had lives they could still live.   And those "marchers" chose to break the law for a civil cause.   The Jews in Gush Katif broke no such law.  That's why it's similar to when Nazis scapegoated Jews, then targeted them for attack, expulsion, beatings, and murder.

[Secularbeliever]

Try a different criteria because that is not a satisfactory explanation to make a distinction with nazi atrocity<<

I think if you think it through you will see my point.  Was Amona or Gush Katif an attempt to kill millions of Jews, to wipe us off the face of the Earth?  Of course not.  And as hideous as Amona was nobody died there.  How you can equate this with the Holocaust is beyond me.

Let's start with basics.  After Gush Katif and Amona, the victims were free to go whereever they wanted to.  If these were Nazis they were facing they would have been murdered and the survivors would have been sent to death camps.  Again as hideous as Amona and Gush Katif were, they were not of that scope, not even close.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Try a different criteria because that is not a satisfactory explanation to make a distinction with nazi atrocity<<

I think if you think it through you will see my point.  Was Amona or Gush Katif an attempt to kill millions of Jews, to wipe us off the face of the Earth?  Of course not.  And as hideous as Amona was nobody died there.  How you can equate this with the Holocaust is beyond me. 

Once again, there is a scale.  This was on a smaller scale.   But the same nature of attack.   Similar to the liquidation/expulsion of ONE ghetto.  They didn't all happen at once.  Yet those acts were evil nazi atrocities.   And like I've already said, gas chambers and mass murder is on the extreme of the nazi scale.   That does not mean nothing else can be called a nazi atrocity.   They did many things on a range of severity but all evil.     And likewise, no one is calling this "a holocaust."   Yet, we are calling it a nazi atrocity.   So to say, "this was not mass murder of millions of Jews" does not address the issue.    That would be a good point to make if people were calling this the holocaust.  But no one is.

[Secularbeliever]

Try a different criteria because that is not a satisfactory explanation to make a distinction with nazi atrocity<<

I think if you think it through you will see my point.  Was Amona or Gush Katif an attempt to kill millions of Jews, to wipe us off the face of the Earth?  Of course not.  And as hideous as Amona was nobody died there.  How you can equate this with the Holocaust is beyond me. 

Once again, there is a scale.  This was on a smaller scale.   But the same nature of attack.   Similar to the liquidation/expulsion of ONE ghetto.  They didn't all happen at once.  Yet those acts were evil nazi atrocities.   And like I've already said, gas chambers and mass murder is on the extreme of the nazi scale.   That does not mean nothing else can be called a nazi atrocity.   They did many things on a range of severity but all evil.     And likewise, no one is calling this "a holocaust."   Yet, we are calling it a nazi atrocity.   So to say, "this was not mass murder of millions of Jews" does not address the issue.    That would be a good point to make if people were calling this the holocaust.  But no one is.

This is my last comment on the subject because we are going in circles.  The reason people use the term Nazi as a perjorative term is because of the Holocaust, because of the murder of six million Jews, because of the attempt to annihilate Jews from the Earth.   It would probably make more sense to describe the Olmert and Sharon govenrments as Peronists than Nazis.  They were corrupt dictators (although elected Democratically) who dealt brutally and wrongly with anyone who stood in their way.  They were more of a petty dictator type than the most vicious in history. 

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Try a different criteria because that is not a satisfactory explanation to make a distinction with nazi atrocity<<

I think if you think it through you will see my point.  Was Amona or Gush Katif an attempt to kill millions of Jews, to wipe us off the face of the Earth?  Of course not.  And as hideous as Amona was nobody died there.  How you can equate this with the Holocaust is beyond me. 

Once again, there is a scale.  This was on a smaller scale.   But the same nature of attack.   Similar to the liquidation/expulsion of ONE ghetto.  They didn't all happen at once.  Yet those acts were evil nazi atrocities.   And like I've already said, gas chambers and mass murder is on the extreme of the nazi scale.   That does not mean nothing else can be called a nazi atrocity.   They did many things on a range of severity but all evil.     And likewise, no one is calling this "a holocaust."   Yet, we are calling it a nazi atrocity.   So to say, "this was not mass murder of millions of Jews" does not address the issue.    That would be a good point to make if people were calling this the holocaust.  But no one is.

This is my last comment on the subject because we are going in circles.  The reason people use the term Nazi as a perjorative term is because of the Holocaust, because of the murder of six million Jews, because of the attempt to annihilate Jews from the Earth.   It would probably make more sense to describe the Olmert and Sharon govenrments as Peronists than Nazis.  They were corrupt dictators (although elected Democratically) who dealt brutally and wrongly with anyone who stood in their way.  They were more of a petty dictator type than the most vicious in history. 

I don't really think we're going in circles.  I think I'm just starting to understand your very strange definition with this description.   But it doesn't make any sense.   If there was never a final solution, what the nazis did before that was also pure evil and they would also deserve a "pejorative" term for that too.   I mean really, was Kristalnacht not a nazi atrocity because it wasn't an attempt to mass murder 6 million Jews?   No, it certainly was a nazi atrocity even though it preceded all of that (ie the camps, the mass murder etc).   An expulsion of Jews from their homes because they are scapegoats is a nazi act regardless of what comes next.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

If they thought they could get away with it, the Bolshevik rulers of Israel would be every bit as savage as the German Nazis. We have historical proof for this in the Altalena massacre.

[Aces High]

If they thought they could get away with it, the Bolshevik rulers of Israel would be every bit as savage as the German Nazis. We have historical proof for this in the Altalena massacre.

100 Percent!!  Perfect example!!

[Secularbeliever]

Try a different criteria because that is not a satisfactory explanation to make a distinction with nazi atrocity<<

I think if you think it through you will see my point.  Was Amona or Gush Katif an attempt to kill millions of Jews, to wipe us off the face of the Earth?  Of course not.  And as hideous as Amona was nobody died there.  How you can equate this with the Holocaust is beyond me. 

Once again, there is a scale.  This was on a smaller scale.   But the same nature of attack.   Similar to the liquidation/expulsion of ONE ghetto.  They didn't all happen at once.  Yet those acts were evil nazi atrocities.   And like I've already said, gas chambers and mass murder is on the extreme of the nazi scale.   That does not mean nothing else can be called a nazi atrocity.   They did many things on a range of severity but all evil.     And likewise, no one is calling this "a holocaust."   Yet, we are calling it a nazi atrocity.   So to say, "this was not mass murder of millions of Jews" does not address the issue.    That would be a good point to make if people were calling this the holocaust.  But no one is.

This is my last comment on the subject because we are going in circles.  The reason people use the term Nazi as a perjorative term is because of the Holocaust, because of the murder of six million Jews, because of the attempt to annihilate Jews from the Earth.   It would probably make more sense to describe the Olmert and Sharon govenrments as Peronists than Nazis.  They were corrupt dictators (although elected Democratically) who dealt brutally and wrongly with anyone who stood in their way.  They were more of a petty dictator type than the most vicious in history. 

I don't really think we're going in circles.  I think I'm just starting to understand your very strange definition with this description.   But it doesn't make any sense.   If there was never a final solution, what the nazis did before that was also pure evil and they would also deserve a "pejorative" term for that too.   I mean really, was Kristalnacht not a nazi atrocity because it wasn't an attempt to mass murder 6 million Jews?   No, it certainly was a nazi atrocity even though it preceded all of that (ie the camps, the mass murder etc).   An expulsion of Jews from their homes because they are scapegoats is a nazi act regardless of what comes next.

If you take away World War 2 and the Holocaust the Nazis were unremarkable dictators.  You can't just say take away the very thing that makes our blood boil when you speak of Nazis and these guys are just as bad.  Without World War 2 and the Holocaust use of the terms Nazis would not occur to you any more than Peronist or Castro's Communists would.