Dan, I've let you down. Ok, I know the Fonz has jumped the shark tank, and I'm sorry for returning to this topic, but upon rereading I find that I myself have been unclear. *Gasp!* Yes, it's true. Therefore, in order to preserve in my conscience my right to hammer on the inanities of others, I feel I must clarify myself.
Mea maxima culpa. > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I suppose that for the very weakest definition of deportation, you > > might be right, but by that definition hundreds of thousands > > Palestinians have already been "deported." > > And what exactly might that definition be, then? Forcing people to relocate without their permission. Yes, the Nazis did this as a precursor to far more heinous crimes. Yes, Israel has done this. Yes, Ilana's suggestion implies it would be done to those who don't choose to become loyal Israeli citizens. The thing is, there's nothing uniquely Nazi-ish about such a move. America, France, Britain, Spain, Portugal...there's a long list of nations who have done similar things. Most of those nations did worse, making slaves of the aboriginal populations in their control and denying hope of citizenship to those people. So, not only does Ilana's suggestion not rise to the Nazi level of horror, it doesn't even rise to the American level of horror or the British level of horror. Every western nation that has had colonies, or that has been founded upon colonization, has conducted unjust relocations. I'm not saying that makes it right for Israel or that you should cut Israel extra slack. But if you want to compare Ilana's idea to Nazi practices, then you need to find something in it comparable to the things that make Nazis Nazis. Forcefully relocating populations didn't make Nazis Nazis. Exterminating whole populations of their own (ex-)citizens en masse is what makes Nazis Nazis. That doesn't make Ilana's suggestion right; it doesn't make you wrong to criticize it. But in the wide field of actions to which the term "deportation" can be applied, Ilana's suggestion is one of the more humane. If you want a comparison to Nazis to have any moral force, then you need to pick something for which the Nazis are unique and distinctive, not something that nearly every western nation has done many times over. > Actually, you are the one who is overlooking something. Unlike what > you seem > to be believing, I am not saying that if Israel does *one* thing the > Nazis > also did (deportations), it also wants to do everything else the > Nazis did. But unless you want to accuse Israel of planning something uniquely Nazi-esqe, that is, something of a class specific to Nazis alone, then it makes no sense to hammer endlessly on Nazi comparisons. Otherwise, Israel has done exactly what most Western nations did through and after WW2 -- fight to preserve lands acquired by colonization, displacing some original inhabitants in the process. It's fine to disapprove, but it's silly to expect Jews to be better than everybody else, and then to heap extra disgust on them when it turns out they're really just like everybody else after all. > I reread my posts, but I found nothing about "outrage". Disgust about > the > fact that a Jew of all people would suggest doing something that was > done to > Jews, yes. But nowhere did I say anything about be outraged. > Disgust, then. Whatever. But why on account of "a Jew of all people?" Marvin Long Austin, Texas
