[Winona Online Democracy]
Katherine Kersten: Ellison's use of Reichstag fire goes overboard
Katherine Kersten, Star Tribune
On Sunday, Fifth District Congressman Keith Ellison found a wildly receptive
audience in what might seem an unexpected place: a gathering of Minnesota
atheists. "You'll always find this Muslim standing up for your right to be
atheists all you want," he told them. (You might want to check the Qur'an on
that, Rep. Ellison.)
His speech invoked standard talking points of the hard left.
He characterized Vice President Dick Cheney's decision not to answer certain
questions as "the very definition of totalitarianism, authoritarianism and
dictatorship."
Actually, bona fide tyrants don't just claim, as Cheney has, that some
communications are off-limits; they torture and execute their political
opponen! ts and whole populations.
Imagine how long a critic like Ellison would have lasted in Stalin's Soviet
Union or Pol Pot's Cambodia.
But even the "impeach Bush now" crowd might have raised an eyebrow when Ellison
compared the Sept. 11 terror attacks to the burning of the Reichstag, or
Pariament building, in Nazi Germany in 1933.
"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," he told
applauding atheists. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the
Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position
where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted."
If you're fuzzy on your history of Nazi Germany, you might have missed
Ellison's point. Here's the context.
On Feb. 27, 1933, the Reichstag building in Berlin burned.
The fire occurred a week before the March 5 elections, which pitted the Nazis
against the Communists, Social Democrats and other parties.
!
For decades, it had been widely believed that the Nazis t! hemselve s planned
the fire in an effort to discredit the Communists and justify Nazi seizure of
emergency powers. Today, many scholars believe that the arsonist was a lone
radical. The identity of those responsible for the fire remains controversial.
It is clear, however, that Hitler - then chancellor - cynically exploited the
Reichstag fire to grab power for himself. The day after the fire, Hitler pushed
through a decree that ended protection of political, personal and property
rights. Then he moved to crush thousands of his political opponents, including
Reichstag members.
In "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," William Shirer provides a vivid
account: "Truckloads of stormtroopers roared through the streets all over
Germany, breaking into homes, rounding up victims and carting them off to
[Brownshirt] barracks, where they were tortured and beaten."
Hermann Goering, one of Hitler's henchmen, made clear that the rule of law was
over: "Fellow Germans, m! y measures will not be crippled by any judicial
thinking," he bellowed. "I don't have to worry about justice; my mission is
only to destroy and exterminate, nothing more! ... [T]he struggle to the death,
in which my fist will grasp your necks, I shall lead with those down there -
the Brownshirts!"
Despite their brutal tactics, the Nazis failed to win a sufficient
parliamentary majority to take power legally. On March 23, with storm troopers
lining the aisles, Nazi leaders persuaded the new Reichstag to pass an
"enabling act" that effectively ceded total power to Hitler.
Where is George Bush, with all his shortcomings, in the terrible tale of the
Reichstag fire and its aftermath? On what grounds does Ellison compare Bush
with Hitler, who butchered 6 million Jews and many others?
On Tuesday, Ellison told me that he invoked the Reichstag fire to make the
point that "in the aftermath of a tragedy, space is opened up for governments
to take action tha! t they could not have achieved before that." Which of the
Bush! adminis tration's post-9/11 actions did he place in that category? The
Iraq war, Bush's commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence and certain provisions
of the Patriot Act, he said.
Those seem a tad short of unleashing storm troopers, torturing political
opponents and demolishing the rule of law.
During his speech, Ellison went on to tell the atheists that "I'm not saying
[Sept. 11] was a [U.S.] plan, or anything like that, because, you know, that's
how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you."
Granted, such statements might get you dismissed as a nutball. But are they
true?
Ellison now says they are not. When we spoke, he agreed that Osama bin Laden --
not the Bush administration -- was responsible for the attacks on 9/11.
But why didn't he do the responsible thing and say that when asked about it at
the atheists' meeting?
During Ellison's first six months in Congress, observers have mostly left
behind his worrisome p! ast. It includes his connection with Louis Farrakhan's
Nation of Islam in the 1990s, his defense of Kathleen Soliah (who later was
convicted of planting pipe bombs under two Los Angeles police cars) -- and his
praise for convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur, who is on the lam in Cuba. Some
Democrats may have sighed with relief that Ellison has largely moved on to
bread-and-butter issues like health care and education.
But just when things were looking up, we learn that Ellison is still humoring
folks with extreme ideas.
One wonders what the next six months will bring.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. _______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
