May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« Proof of God’s Existence | Main | Sorry I Confused You »

Comments

Vierotchka

Yes, you have been had, but not by those you believe have had you. Ahmadinejad never said that Israel should be wiped off the map. The American press and even the world press have been twisting his words and attributing to him statements that he has never made.

What he actually said was "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad." which means "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time", which has nothing to do with wiping anything off any map.

See http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=4527

Vijay Prozak

Sacred taboos always breed indignant responses, until the people are trained otherwise. We are trained well by our mass media.

As a frequent Dilbert reader, I enjoy its sense of realism about the tedium of American offices. Here's another realism: we have seven billion humans and most of them are abject morons. The way we're doing things so far is not working out.

A world of a half-billion intelligent, aware people beats this "quantity over quality" approach any day. This includes subtlety-impaired morons, insane religions, demagogues and sacred chows.

Alle

Some interesting and concisely expressed opinions. Nice blog!

Hamid Reza

You f'ing idiot Adam - I am an Iranian and he says "Israel MUST be wiped off the map" - plainly and clearly. You must have believed the obfuscations put out by that Farsi-illiterate Cole?

Did you not see the "Down with Esrael" poster in the military parade 2 days ago in Tehran which Ahmaqihitler presided? In Farsi and Arabic right above the English it said "Death to Israel".

F'ing post-colonial reactionary leftist douchebag who did not love any primitive Islamic petty dictator you did not meet. And Oh BTW, Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) raped a 9 year old girl and assassinated his critics. Now go and apologize for Islam - religion of peace needing a fascist police state to rule.

Bob

A little late, but:

"GOTCHA"

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]

[I never suggested moving Israel. I invite you to angrily cut and paste what I did say into your next message and angrily say "gotcha" while demonstrating a low level of reading comprehension. DMD. -- Scott]

I dare see there is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension.

Chris

The question of the world's motivation and rationalization for the creation of Israel is absolutely key. I think all commenters here would agree that, even if something like the holocaust happened now, there is no way that modern western governments would entertain the idea of simply taking over a patch of foreign land and declaring it to be a new country, regardless of the wishes of its current inhabitants. The idea would be condemned as the worst possible sort of imperialism, and correctly so. Try to imagine how any Arab would feel, having been treating with such utter contempt by the west for the last fifty years.

On the topic of Ahmadinejad's "wipe Israel off the map" comment, I think it's interesting that people choose to take that literally, but not *too* literally. If taken literally, it should be interpreted as meaning that he would like Israel to be removed as a political entity, ie "removed from the (political) map" - he didn't say "wiped off the face of the Earth", as in "physically destroyed". It all depends on how the original language was translated, of course...

Joe Berger

Here are some intersting facts proving the holocaust
At wars end Germany had almost 20 concentration camps. Most were said to have gas chambers. Slowly during the 50's and 60's accusations of gas chambers were withdrwan from all camps captured by the British French and Americans. Only in the 6 camps captured by the Russians did the gas chambers survive. To doubt the holocaust simply on this basis is rediculous. After all, we all know that Stalin was the most honest and reliable of all the ww2 leaders and would never fabricate stories about gas chambers.
2.The Russians, some years after capturing Aushwitz, erected a plaque stating that about 4 million people perished there. In the early 1990's they changed the number to 1.1 million. The revisionists like to cite this figure as proof that the 6 million holocaust victims is wildly exaggerated. We all know that the Poles were a bunch of anti-semetic, Nazi sympathizers and that their figure of 1.1 million simply cannot be trusted.
3 In 1989, the world's leading expert on WW2, David Irving, a man who lectures in four languages and who has written over 30 books on WW2 changed his mind and said he no longer believed that gas chambers existed in any of the camps. This rediculous conlusion only serves to demonstrate how even the brightest, most knowledgable men can come to absurd conclusions. Clearly, questioning the truth can lead people to all kinds of nonsensical ideas.
4.After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Russians released the death book records which they had captured at Auschwitz. Inmate deaths from all causes , including executions are all recorded. The number is about 75,000. Any one trusting German record keeping must be reallly stupid.
Reading revisionist historians is obviously a big waste of time. Is it any wonder that their books are often banned in most Western counties excluding the USA (because of the first amendment)

Joe Berger

Here are some intersting facts proving the holocaust
At wars end Germany had almost 20 concentration camps. Most were said to have gas chambers. Slowly during the 50's and 60's accusations of gas chambers were withdrwan from all camps captured by the British French and Americans. Only in the 6 camps captured by the Russians did the gas chambers survive. To doubt the holocaust simply on this basis is rediculous. After all, we all know that Stalin was the most honest and reliable of all the ww2 leaders and would never fabricate stories about gas chambers.
2.The Russians, some years after capturing Aushwitz, erected a plaque stating that about 4 million people perished there. In the early 1990's they changed the number to 1.1 million. The revisionists like to cite this figure as proof that the 6 million holocaust victims is wildly exaggerated. We all know that the Poles were a bunch of anti-semetic, Nazi sympathizers and that their figure of 1.1 million simply cannot be trusted.
3 In 1989, the world's leading expert on WW2, David Irving, a man who lectures in four languages and who has written over 30 books on WW2 changed his mind and said he no longer believed that gas chambers existed in any of the camps. This rediculous conlusion only serves to demonstrate how even the brightest, most knowledgable men can come to absurd conclusions. Clearly, questioning the truth can lead people to all kinds of nonsensical ideas.
4.After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Russians released the death book records which they had captured at Auschwitz. Inmate deaths from all causes , including executions are all recorded. The number is about 75,000. Any one trusting German record keeping must be reallly stupid.
Reading revisionist historians is obviously a big waste of time. Is it any wonder that their books are often banned in most Western counties excluding the USA (because of the first amendment)

ozz

Nothing lasts forever young man. I imagined you to be a more intelligent person than this. Think of the Romans, the Aztecs, Mayans. All mighty and glorious civilizations. But they all fell apart. Who knows.

BB

wow. holy touched and turned on by your lovely words. i am exhilarated beyond the descriptive. beautiful. i wish I had ur friendship

Havvy

Just a note: Islam and Christianity share the same religious link: The Old Testament. The Jews wrote the Old Testament.

Alice in Wonderland

The dog and cat holocaust is ongoing.

Sirk

Brilliant, Mr. Adams -- and much too cerebral for most to understand. Please keep up the good work. It is nice to know there are like-minded folks out there.

Trev

Let me see.

The Holocaust is a poor excuse for Israel.
Ahhmadinejad and Bush are equivalent tyrants.
Columbia was right to allow Ahmadinejad to speak so he could say things like "Iran has no fags" and "Israel deserves to be wiped off the planet" (oh wait you've stated that Ahmadinejad didn't actually say that 'scholars' (what scholars are these Scott?) said that he really wanted a more democratic gov't).

Scott, you're lost. I won't even try to argue with you because it's clear you've closed your mind.

My major emotion after reading this is sadness.

eli

"Eli, your argument comes down to saying that, since Christians in Europe killed 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, it is morally right to kick 4 million Arabs (the original refugees and their descendents) out of their homeland in Asia to provide Jews with a homeland. I have a better idea. Let's create a Jewish state in what is now Bavaria. The Nazi party was created in Munich; let's turn Munich into the capital of a new Jewish State. Nuremburg is known for its massive anti-Semitic rallies; let's make it a place for celebrating the exploits of our new Yiddish State's national soccer team. The Nazis wanted Germany to be free of Jews; I can think of no finer tribute to them than making Bavaria, the organization's birthplace, the new Jewish state."

No, my argument has nothing to do with morals. My argument is based on two assertions:
1) The holocuast provides strong support for a Jewish state because it shows that Jews should control their own destiny and cannot trust others for their security.
2) If you think it is reasonable to discuss relocating Israel you are an antisemite and that is why I think both you and Scott are anitsemites.

Would it have been nice if after WWII the Jews were given Bavaria after the Germans there were kicked out? I don't know, maybe, but it was never on the table. As for now, there is no alternative to relocate Israel to and the antisemites that propose this are fully aware of it.

If you know there is no alterantive, what does the discussion amount to except for trying to say that Israel has no right to exist or that the Jews should disperse in Europe and the US and lose their national identity and independence? What is there really to discuss? It is just a veiled attempt to undermine the legality of Israel.

So, saying that discussing the relocation of Israel is reasonable is blatantly antisemitic. No other nation is seen as a candidate for relocation. And since you and Scott think this is worth discussing, you are both antisemites.

As for 48, about 700,000 Palestinians lost their land because the Arabs did not accept a UN resolution and declared war on Israel. At the same time, about the same amount of Jews were expelled from Arab lands. Israel took in those Jews just as the Arabs should have accepted the Palestinians. That is what would have been morally right.

madman429

Scott, it almost seems as if you hit the nail on the head before the madcap even spoke. Ahmadinejad is quite clearly insane, and appears quite capable of Orwellian doublethink, particularly in his references to the Holocaust. The man is evidently a very capable speaker who is able to convey his own delusions on a wide scale. This makes him a very dangerous man.
Never once was he visibly shaken. He could probably pass a polygraph while voicing two distinct contradictions of logic consecutively. He never even broke a sweat. He could probably reduce Bush to a sweating, quivering heap in seconds despite his lies. A more cool evil man I have never seen.
Hillary recently referred to Dick Cheney as Darth Vader. Ahmadinejad reminds me of Emperor Palpatine (notice what you could do with "Palpatine", with three syllables, sounding sort of like...oops, better stop here-maybe I mispronounced it...?)...

Rich T.

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]

[I never suggested moving Israel. I invite you to angrily cut and paste what I did say into your next message and angrily say "gotcha" while demonstrating a low level of reading comprehension. DMD. -- Scott]

Assuming it was actually you who wrote both those comments, Scott, then how do you reconcile them? That you "didn't suggest it", but "would be in favor of it"? Wow, big distinction.


P.S. This whole "DMD" thing is just plain stupid, and takes any serious discussion down a few notches. It's a cop-out.

Adam

Scott, previously I found your commentary on evolution to be dreadfully lacking in scientific understanding but now with this blog entry you appear to be way too eager to believe fictions created by the religious-right. Are you really seeking truth or are you trying to make the facts fit your beliefs?

Scholars will tell me that the translation is about changing Israel's government? Do you seriously believe that? The dispute over the translation, from every source I've seen except your blog, is whether he is calling for Israel's destruction or if he is simply stating that he believes it will one day be destroyed.

As for the "Myth" being something society is built-upon, for someone that quibbles over translations you're certainly taking your own liberties here. He clearly means "the Holocaust is fictional", as illustrated by his many other speeches including the one at Columbia which HAS INDEED taken place (Columbia only rescinded their offer LAST YEAR because of SECURITY CONCERNS).

When asked how he could deny Holocaust (and host a 2-day-long International Holocaust Denyer's conference to top it off) when it is the most documented event in human history he avoided the question entirely and simply said that whether or not it occurred, it has no bearing on the plight of the Palestinians.

I believe he should have the right to free speech as well, Scott. And he was given the opportunity to speak, proving once again that our perception of him is founded in a disturbing truth and that your perceptions are either colored by some internal need to rage against the norm or by your own prejudices. I really hope it is the former because I love your cartoon and would be disappointed to say the least if you turned out to be a religious nut.

Jonathan

"So is it your view that it is a reasonable demand worth contemplating to move the Jewish homeland from Israel to somewhere else? Is that what you are implying?

So, in your opinion, willing to seriously discuss the relocation of Israel is not an antisemitic position? Which other nation except the Jews are you willing to contemplate such a solution for? How about the Palestinians?"

I can't tell if you're just being argumentative or serious but the mistake here (or perhaps intentional misleading sentiment) is that *everyone* in Israel will always follow the *symbolic* flag of a "Jewish State". That is to say, if the U.N. were to announce tomorrow that the "Jewish State" has been moved to this huge island that nobody has claimed, *every single Jew in Israel* would have to move there.

Just like how when they announced that what is currently Israel was officially the "Jewish State" in 1962, all of the current Jews all popped up there from the previous Jewish State instantaneously.

That's not going to happen. There were Jews in that region long before a Jewish State existed and there will continue to be a great number of Jews there if the Jewish State didn't exist. The *people* there have had their homes there for thousands of years and they weren't "wiped out in mass genocide" like the fear-mongering you're-an-anti-Semite crowd is screaming before Israel existed.

Not that I think Ahmadinejad isn't antisemitic but even an antisemite has to tone down his antisemitism when faced with world politics. And that toned-down, politically corrected view he is now presenting is, dare I say, reasonable. Israel's government *should* be changed such that it isn't a "Jewish State" but simply a "Sovereign State" that does not tie one particular ethnicity/religion to its government. I'm constantly amused how people will harp on about separation of church and state and even more importantly, a racially-blind government, but somehow make an exemption when it comes to the Jewish state because of holocaust guilt and/or fear of being called an antisemite for opposing theocracies.

[I never suggested moving Israel. I invite you to angrily cut and paste what I did say into your next message and angrily say "gotcha" while demonstrating a low level of reading comprehension. DMD. -- Scott]

David

[Bad interpretation. Ahmadinejad has expressed no complaint with the Jews having a homeland, as far as I know. His complaint is with the location. -- Scott]

[So is it your view that it is a reasonable demand worth contemplating to move the Jewish homeland from Israel to somewhere else? Is that what you are implying?

So, in your opinion, willing to seriously discuss the relocation of Israel is not an antisemitic position? Which other nation except the Jews are you willing to contemplate such a solution for? How about the Palestinians? - Eli]

In 1900, 95% of all Palestinians were Muslim or Christian; only 5% were Jews. Meanwhile, the largest ethnic group in Vilnius happened to be - the Jews. The Jews in Palestine weren't pushing for a Jewish state; the Zionists were largely European Jews. Based on this, it would make more sense for a Jewish homeland to be in the area around Vilnius than it would be for the homeland to be in the area around Jaffa. If the European Jews, and not the Palestinian Jews, wanted a Jewish state, then the logical place for such a state would be in Europe. (The early Zionists seemed to be ashamed of their Yiddish heritage. Many of them, including David Green, would go on to change their names to something that sounded less "Jewish.")

The goal of Zionism was to move millions of Jews out of Europe - making Europe Judenrein in the process - and moving them to Palestine. In order to accommodate this mass relocation of Jews that Zionists wanted, it was necessary to conduct massive ethnic cleansing in Palestine. About 750,000 non-Jews were forced out of Israel from 1945 to 1948 by Zionists.

(Not all of the refugees were Arabs; some ethnic Armenians who fled Turkey following the Armenian Genocide during WWI and resettled in Palestine were forced out of their houses by the Zionists as well. Albert Aghazarian can tell you how Zionist forces kicked his family out of his house back then. Where did they want those few thousand Armenians to go? There was no Armenian state during the 1940s, and, despite the fact that a Jew in Europe in 1938 had a slightly better chance of surviving the Holocaust than an Armenian in the Ottoman Empire in 1914 had of surviving the Armenian Genocide - 29.4% to 28.6% - the Zionists weren't doing anything to help Armenians get a homeland of their own in the several decades between the end of World War II and the collapse of the Soviet Union.)

Eli, your argument comes down to saying that, since Christians in Europe killed 6 million Jews in the Holocaust, it is morally right to kick 4 million Arabs (the original refugees and their descendents) out of their homeland in Asia to provide Jews with a homeland. I have a better idea. Let's create a Jewish state in what is now Bavaria. The Nazi party was created in Munich; let's turn Munich into the capital of a new Jewish State. Nuremburg is known for its massive anti-Semitic rallies; let's make it a place for celebrating the exploits of our new Yiddish State's national soccer team. The Nazis wanted Germany to be free of Jews; I can think of no finer tribute to them than making Bavaria, the organization's birthplace, the new Jewish state.

Best of all, we don't have to force anybody to leave Israel. Eli can hardly argue with the existence of two Jewish states, and we'll give Jews free choice of whether they want to live in a peaceful state integrated into the European Union, or a state in the desert that is in perpetual war because of the Zionist commitment to making the ethnic cleansing of 1945-1948 permanent. I would bet that most of them would choose to leave Israel for Bavaria. No Gentiles would be involved in moving the Jewish homeland; the Jews would be doing that themselves.

Lulu

Love the blog. Love the comments. And, thank God and our forefathers that we do have free speech in the United States (for now). I am very worried that our politicians (Republicans and Democrats) are going to limit that freedom also. If nothing else, your blogs make people think.

LanceThruster

Wow! I could not have imagined something like this coming from a mainstream talent such as yourself. It is wickedly funny and accurate, and as such cannot be allowed to go "unchallenged" (read - "unpunished") by those who have a vested interest in perpetuating the official narrative.

I am also thoroughly amazed and impressed with the confident manner (knowledge does that , doesn't it?) that you respond to those who take issue or offense with your piece. I wish I could write something wildy inaccurate or contrarian just to be honored with a personalized correction from you, but I happen to agree with everything you've said (comment replies too). Keep up the great work. See ya in the funny papers!

Rich T.

[I'd be in favor of moving Israel to America. Everyone except for you, of course. How's that square with your theory? -- Scott]

Oh you would, would you? And where exactly would that be? In Pleasanton and the surrounding area, after you and your neighbors vacate the premises? And would the "Israel-in-America" be its own country on North American soil, or just another "community" of a displaced people who forms clusters within the United States? If the latter, then the Jews already have the New York City area. And what is the historical link for Jews to accept your newly designated region?

eli

[Bad interpretation. Ahmadinejad has expressed no complaint with the Jews having a homeland, as far as I know. His complaint is with the location. -- Scott]

So is it your view that it is a reasonable demand worth contemplating to move the Jewish homeland from Israel to somewhere else? Is that what you are implying?

So, in your opinion, willing to seriously discuss the relocation of Israel is not an antisemitic position? Which other nation except the Jews are you willing to contemplate such a solution for? How about the Palestinians?

some girl

Hahahahaha, DAMN you got all the monkeys out to dance, didn't you? Nice pot stirring. I have only read about half the responses and it has kept me amused for a couple hours.

The comments to this entry are closed.