I’ll give you a honorable mention if you send me some cash.
Refugees! Look at your language, “bludgeoned” “prison ships”, “prisoner-transport trains in Germany” it was all better than the fucking alternative ,Finn! Fucking disgusting comparison - equating the response to refugees by a country that had no money - to an extinction policy!
When your modern country was founded, who were your friends? Who armed you? France, and Britain, and Russia, that’s who. Now Israel suckles on the teat of the US, but that’s cool, Israel needs some external help, and rightly so.
Eh? The last thing I am is jingoistic. I left my own country and openly state to anyone that asks that I won’t be moving back as I don’t like what it has become.
Which, of course, is the very definition of jingoism.
For fuck’s sake. What lies have I told about you? I have disagreed with you, but as other have told, that is in no way the same thing as lying about you.
I truly believe you have no idea what the word “lie” means. Is English your native language?
[quote=“FinnAgain, post:228, topic:532923”]
No you stupid son of a bitch, I’ve made this very clear, many times. The problem is not allowing Jews to live in a baracks, it’s imprisoning them behind barbed wire and snipers, not allowing them to emmigrate and capturing other Jews who tried to immigrate to Palestine and similarly imprisoning them behind barbed wire and snipers. Including more than 10,000 human beings who were similarly imprisoned even when Israel as a sovereign nation, even when Britain’s own fact-finding team suggested that at least 100,000 Jews be allowed to immigrate, even when UNSCOP set up a situation that would have allowed immigration.
WTF is wrong with you, you moral-pervert?
"Expressions not referred to above but which are normally considered vulgar (e.g., asshole, dick, prick, bitch, kiss my ass) are subject to the following limitations:
- occasional use only"
Calm the fuck down. I’m growing increasingly bored of your insults. Their prevalence leads me to believe that you have absolutely nothing of worth to say.
For what its worth, I made a single comment regarding the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen. You can argue until the cows come home about stuff that happened later but that won’t make it what we were discussing in the first place.
Your berating me about things that happened years later is what they call a straw-man.
In 1945, when they were sick, dying and malnourished. Just when the camp had been liberated?
of course they fucking couldn’t.
And all I ever discussed was the immediate aftermath of the liberation. Not several years (or even months) down the line.
Neither actually. The problem is yours and your inability to understand that I, from the very beginning, have been talking about the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen.
Nothing of which has anything to do with the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen.
Nothing of which has anything to do with the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen
Yes it might possibly have been a mistake. Not because what the outcome was good, but because the outcome of leaving them in Palestine could have been so very much worse.
Have you ever heard of the phrase “the lesser of two evils”?
During which they have to be housed somewhere. Take, for example, the German Barracks where the British also set up a hospital in which to treat those injuries.
Regarding emigrating later, that has nothing to do with the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen, which was all I ever discussed in the first place.
Which has nothing to do with the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen, which was all I ever discussed in the first place.
Which is, of course, a lie. I supported the use of the German Barracks at Bergen-Belsen as housing for Jews in the immediate aftermath of the liberation of the camp.
Everything else is made up in your simple little mind.
I maintain that you are. It is called an opinion. I am allowed to have one and just because you disagree with it doesn’t make it a lie. You seem to have issue with that concept.
And had a hospital, schools, religious freedom, various diets attempted to get them back to health, their own newspaper …
Just like under the Nazis, eh?
But then again, as you know, I posted about the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen. I don’t believe I have shared with you my view of what should have been done years down the line. I may be mistaken in that, if so please point out the exact post where I did.
It is logically impossible for me to stop lying as I never actually started.
Your prejudice comes from reading your rants regarding the British in numerous threads. Threads where you are completely unable to comprehend that others may have a different opinion to you and you treat others like the dirt on your shoes if they dare express an opinion that differs in any way, shape or form from yours, because you 100% that your opinion is the genuine truth, there can never be any grey areas and those that disagree with you are liars, idiots, whores, sons of bitches and whatnot.
All sorts of dodges? You do realise that we are talking about a single post in a single thread? IIRC it was only two or three sentences long.
I’ve decided to report your post to the moderators. You’ve way overstepped the line of “occasional use only” and frankly I’m fed up of the insults and accusations of lying.
Who were on the way to a place that would accept them and make them full members of the community.
The British sailors who committed piracy to capture the Exodus beat two refugees and one member of the crew to death with the buts of their rifles. The British soldiers who forced the Jews off the boat and onto the prison trains in Germany beat them with fists and clubs. Would you prefer some word other than bludgeoned? Why? Why should I state that they were anything other than prison ships or prison trains? They were. That was their function, transporting prisoners. The trains had barred windows to prevent escape and took the captured Jews to a Nazi concentration camp that was now manned by the British, replete with snipers and barbed wire. The prison ships were exactly that, and were set up to intern prisoners. My language is accurate. If you think it has unfortunate connotations, then the problem is with the actions of the British during that time period, not my mention of them.
And obviously the refugees on the Exodus didn’t agree with your view, as they fought tooth and nail to avoid being captured by the British, staged a hunger strike and refused to be put of the boat and had to be bludgeoned into compliance. Nor did the 100,000 other refugees who made it into Israel seem to share your appraisal. Nor did the 10’s of thousand of other refugees who attempted to get into Israel but who were captured and imprisoned by the British.
Look, both our countries did some seriously bad shit. America created concentration camps for the Japanese Americans for fuck’s sake. The allied power took homosexuals who’d been imprisoned by Hitler, and re-imprisoned them!. Acknowledging that the British actions at the time wrt Jewish refugees who tried to escape to Israel were brutal and morally abhorrent is a fair assessment of the facts.
It is a disgusting comparison, and I hope you stop making it.
British officers did, however, lead Arab in the 1948 war, which was a war of extermination. And the British did have mutual defense pacts with the Arab nations and [idid* arm them and did help the Egyptian army as well.
If you disagree with me, please show which of my facts are in error.
The French fought with us against you, and we’re not really all that modern, 1776 was a long time ago.
However, if you’re talking about Israel, this is an absolute fiction. Israel was set up with zero aid from France, Britain actively tried to disarm the Jewish population and armed the Arab states, signed mutual-defense treaties with them, flew recon for the Egyptians and their officers led the Jordanians. Russia most certainly didn’t help.
I mentioned it earlier, but The Pledge by Leanord Slater would help clear up some of those misconceptions. When Israel was founded it was set up, largely, with surplus war goods that were smuggled in, defying the British blockade. It wasn’t until some time later that the French took an interest, they also placed an arms embargo on Israel and prevented Israel from keeping up with the Mirages that they’d sold them. I’m not sure what you think Russia did… as Russia was supporting the Arab states and armed them, not Israel. They also made it very, very difficult for Soviet Jews to emigrate to Israel as well.
Oh, absolutely. The best part is that he completely fails to understand that no one who is not scary and obsessive can navigate the Cliffs-of-Dover style walls of text, complete with wikipedia cites, and rife with what I can only call theoretical witticisms. It’s almost like he is as oblivious as those he so tediously rails against.
You see, according to him, my failing is actually that I haven’t verified all his points and checked his facts. I believe the format and length of his posts does far more to convey the idea of what FinnAgain is than the actual words contained therein. (Except for something about stupid lying racists.)
Amazing. That some posters still take the time to go through Frothing Finn’s endlessly repetitious zealot scrolls on the unparalleled virtues and vicissitudes of “Israel, The Nation That Can Do No Wrong And I Post 24/7 On The Dope To Make Sure Everyone Knows.”
Either he is a raving loon – which would be my bet – or he gets paid by the dismissive (cuss) word.
Could be both of course…either way he sure as hell can put a rock to sleep.
ETA: TTFN
The “concentration camp” meme is minor in the sense of being just one of many, but telling, characteristic. There are any number of phrases that reasonably describe the unfortunate situation between the British and the refugees. The choice of “concentration camp” clearly bespeaks a determined effort to add more heat than light.
You might have added just a sentence or two more to that quote to explain why, instead of, like Finn, leaving the implication that the British were just Nazis without the swastikas. Here, I’ll help you:
IOW it was part of the messy politics surrounding the creation of Israel, not that the Brits (or the UN, which had been in charge of the place for several years) were simply as eee-vulll as the Nazis.
You really ought to read the whole link. The British position was that the Jews of Poland could likely support themselves back in their homes in Poland, and wished they would do so. You really think there was nowhere else to go?
But not Bergen-Belsen? Can we call that an admission that you lied? And that’s before getting into the reasons, as if you really can’t conceive of the notion that emigration to Palestine, or anywhere, wasn’t necessarily a right of anyone except among the disseminators and recipients of propaganda saying otherwise.
Except, as noted, for the places they had come from, as was the case for most DP’s. :rolleyes:
What has a French site got to do with British “moral perversion”?
You really don’t have an answer as to why thousands of Jews kept trying to break INTO Bergen-Belsen, do you? :rolleyes:
First of all, I don’t think I ever said the British were as evil as the Nazis. In fact, I think I pointed out, in an admittedly understated way, that they were not.
Second, if you look at my previous post, I pointed out (and even bolded) that British policy regarding the DP camps was dominated by the Palestine question, and British policy not to let Jews into Palestine.
That doesn’t change the fact that the British did use force to keep people in the Bergen Belsen DP camp, past the time when they were healthy and could take care of themselves, and that they interned those Jews that attempted to get into Palestine, in camps on mainland Europe and Cyprus. Now, you might believe that their actions were warranted, and while that isn’t an argument I would care to make, you can certainly make it. But I think you do need to admit that these actions occurred.
Is anyone denying it?
I know personally I have compared these camps to places where asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are kept, waiting for processing. Force, armed guards, barbed wire and whatnot are used in these places as well. Sometimes people stay in them for years.
I’ll be honest, I think there has been a bit of confusion overlap. Finn Again has certainly implied that the British were no better than the Nazis, despite all the evidence otherwise. I’m not so sure that you have and perhaps you have been unfairly tarred with the same brush as him.
You really ought to get a clue. Poland? One of the most anti-semitic nations in Europe, one of the homes of the pogroms? German Jews also would’ve been allowed to return to Germany, eh, eh?
Please don’t tell me you really are stupid enough to say that Jews from nations that participated in handing them over to the Nazis should have returned to those nations after the war? And that if they didn’t, they should have been prohibited free movement because while the British were busy arming the Arabs, Jews who might join the Jewish self-defense forces simply had to be imprisoned with no hope of appeal. You really are saying that, aren’t you?
You’ve just had it cited that free movement was prohibited, I’m not surprised you’d ignore it. And yes, emigration is a basic human right. Why am I surprised that you’re claiming that the basic freedom of movement is something only propagandists would support?
It’s telling that you can’t even keep basic facts straight.
The site was a Nazi concentration camp, in Germany, taken over and controlled by the British. The British put the Exodus refugees there after they captured and beat them into submission. Your inability to comprehend basic facts is even more interesting, as they’ve been cited and quoted just a few posts up.
As for your fantasy that thousands of Jews were trying to break into Bergen Belsen… no, I don’t have an answer Elvis because I’m not sure how to explain that you shouldn’t simply make shit up. Those Jews who did voluntarily go there probably thought that they’d get shelter and relief and then be allowed to move on their way. Hah hah, joke’s on them.
Well, part of the desire of Polish Jews not to go back to Poland was due to the Communist takeover, but a large number of the Polish Jewish refugees that were fleeing into the British zone did so after the Kielce pogrom, which, if you remember, was the incident in which 42 Jewish concentration camp inmates returning to Poland were murdered by an anti-Semitic mob. So, between that and the other violence against Jews in Poland (something like 1500 Jews were murdered in Poland by Poles in the aftermath of the German defeat), you can understand why these refugees didn’t find Poland a safe place to be.
Poppendorf was a British camp.
The answer is obvious. There was food, shelter, and medical care there. And even though a DP camp isn’t an ideal solution, if you’ve lost everything, have no place to go, and are facing starvation or death by exposure, you obviously want to go there. Please don’t consider by the things that I’ve said that the camps were hellholes. They weren’t. They were doing their best to feed and shelter a homeless, hungry population whose lives had been ruined by the war. But at the same time, they were also an attempt by the Allied governments, especially the British government (who maintained DP camps for Jews longer than the American, French, and Soviet), to avoid dealing with the problem.
This one of the areas where you differ from Finn Again. It is unfortunate that people appear to have got you confused with him. I apologise if I did it at any point.
Elvis had made the statement that, first, there were no guards at the Bergen-Belsen DP camp, and then that the guards existed merely to keep people out.
Fair enough.
How much force would they actually have needed, to quell the protests of people who have just been relieved from a “real” concentration camp environment?
You really do like making shit up, dontcha? I’ve said nothing of the sort. The simple fact that you’re trying to justify British atrocities doesn’t mean that the British were as bad as the Nazis. Good, you’ve graduated to the George Bush School of Rhetoric and Logic: Britain, not as bad as [del]Sadaam[/del] Germany, so it’s okay! Because you aren’t too swift, you might want to consider how a nation can capture and imprison Jews, be morally wrong, and yet, magically, not be Nazis. The jingoism is strong in you. Can’t even bring yourself to admit that capturing and imprisoning Jews was maybe a bad thing.
And again you moral-perversion shows, as you’re claiming that capturing Jews and then imprisoning them with no charges, indefinitely, is just how asylum seeking normally works. And when asylum seekers find a country that will accept them and ask to leave, we keep them, by force, and tell them they can’t go there. .
Two posts for you:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12271173&postcount=232
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=12271227&postcount=236
By your definition, ANYWHERE with barbed wire and snipers appears to be a concentration camp. So that’s going to include places where asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are kept whilst waiting for processing, prisons and whatnot. Hell, that means something stupid like 1 or 2% of the entire US population is currently held in a concentration camp, according to you.
What angers me, is your use of the phrase “concentration camp” to refer to the DP camp at Bergen-Belsen. As I have pointed out to you, they were held in the barracks used by the Germans rather than where they were held under the Nazis, which one has to presume were slightly better facilities. They had a hospital, religious freedom, schools, a newspaper and God knows what else. Yet you sum it up with:
I’ve asked you several times now what the British were supposed to do with all the Jews, in the middle fo a warzone, in the immediate aftermath of the liberation of Bergen-Belsen (which, let me remind you, is the only camp I have been commenting on. You may wish that my post in “that” thread was about all camps everywhere, but it clearly wasn’t). All you’ve said is things like “treat their wounds and nurse them to health”. You have never said where they should be housed, although you are very vocal about how it shouldn’t be in the camp or the German barracks. So where should it be?
You see, from where I stand, housing them in the Barracks and setting up a hospital is exactly what they should have done. And did. Clearly you think otherwise. So what should they have done?
Just because I think people might be interested, even though I don’t know how much it will add to the discussion, here’s the September 19th, 1947 edition of the Canadian Jewish Chronicle, which has a page about the Exodus prisoners: