very decent of you. and, yes, it is very sad. many people get very annoyed about this, including survivors.

b’shalom

bananabrain

Please accept my apology, I didn’t realise that you hadn’t read the comment before and misunderstood what you were saying.

“the reason i said it was “thoroughly unhelpful” is because the knesset has one of the worst track records when it comes to misuse of the word “nazi”.”

That is very sad and indeed then the Knesset needs to look at itself. Why can’t MPs be banned for such slurs?

“what i find profoundly troubling is that you are unable to distinguish between my point of view ”

As I said I apologise as I misunderstood what you said, it was a genuine mistake and I can only apologise for my lack of understanding.

Regards

have just seen your comments above and i think you have fundamentally misunderstood what i’ve said.

not for the first time, i might add.

the reason i said it was “thoroughly unhelpful” is because the knesset has one of the worst track records when it comes to misuse of the word “nazi”. israeli mks routinely abuse each other in the most extreme terms and, to the shame of the country, its elected representatives are not shy of using the N-word whenever they are describing a point of view with which they profoundly disagree. it is something which disgusts me – but then again the conduct of the israeli political class is pretty disgusting in my experience. that is why it is inappropriate, not for any of the other rather jejune reasons you suggest, because he is playing to the gallery in the worst fashion and pandering to their already ridiculous prejudices.

“several right wing members of Knesset said that “Bush seems to be more Zionist the Olmert”

this is, to my way of thinking, neither complimentary to bush nor olmert – though i’m sure the speaker thought otherwise, zionism being in his undoubted view synonymous with the point of view of the israeli right wing. of course it is nothing of the sort, but merely a convenient label for one’s own political prejudices.

So a man who many would say is a war criminal was said after the speech to have been a true friend.

the phrase “many would say” is hardly a categorical one.

nThe objection only came from Mr. BananaBrain once Obama was elected and people started highlighting the speech.

indeed, that was the first i heard about it. you seem intent on finding some sinister motive.

In fact it is only now seen as inappropriate and is that because Obama won?

i don’t think you have the least idea how these idiots think. nor do you actually understand why i consider it inappropriate, which is why you seem to be equating my points of view with netanyahu. as i have said on that other thread (where i had begun to think we were getting somewhere in the discussion) this is both unhelpful and misleading.

Now the world has turned then BananaBrain tried to step in and excuse his MPs from their lack of inaction.

gosh, what a freudian slip this is. i’m not israeli, nowhere have i ever said so, yet you say these are *my* MPs. they’re not. i didn’t vote for them. i think i’ve said plenty about my objection to the conduct of the israeli political class both left and right. and i think i’ve been particularly clear about my objection to the politicisation of the term “nazi” to serve an alarmist right-wing agenda. yet you persist in painting me as some sort of apologist and netanyahu clone.

as a matter of fact your objections in the previous post to the misuse of the holocaust i agree with 100%. what i find profoundly troubling is that you are unable to distinguish between my point of view and some swivel-eyed right-wing nutjob. and that is profoundly troubling, because it’s precisely what the aforementioned swivel-eyed right-wing nutjobs say that people like you think about jews, israelis or not, regardless of their opinions. you’re actually treating me like a PO box for your prejudices, not as a person.

b’shalom

bananabrain

Yes I can – Bush implied to the Knesset that potentially one of the people they may have to deal with as future President may be a Nazi Appeaser or an ex-President who is trying or bring parties together may be a Nazi Appeaser.

How was it offensive is on two fronts:

1. The Holocaust shouldn’t be used to smear people because of an election. People died – men, women and children. It is distasteful to use such fear unnecessarily to put down your opponent as it demeans the horrible nature of the events.

Is the holocaust now a political football for self serving politicians to use as part of election campaigns or is it something people need to learn from?

If people like Bush and the GOP cry Nazi Appeaser too often then where a cry is needed people will ignore it. Given the fact this may affect the Jews then the Knesset should be offended as it may affect them when they need help.

2. The Knesset shouldn’t become an American Domestic Political playground where derogatory terms are passed around like a football. This devalues the role and standing of the Knesset.

Thus the members should have been offended.

Turn it the other way if a Holocaust Denier went to the Knesset and denied the holocaust took place would you expect the Knesset to sit quietly by and applaud later? No.

So why expect the Knesset to sit by as the Holocaust and its memories are used in a game of politics? It demeans those that were killed that their murder is now a political game.

Absolutely nothing. That was the problem. The fact they relished the adulation is disastrous for the institution and the country.

Sorry that is nonsense. Bush was plain nasty in his comments and silence can be implied as acceptance. So when they didn’t speak up they accepted his point

Can you tell me – without mentioning bananabrain – what exactly did Bush say that was offensive to the Knesset?

Sorry that is nonsense. Bush was plain nasty in his comments and silence can be implied as acceptance. So when they didn’t speak up they accepted his point.

To say the Knesset’s response is irrelevant means that it won’t take responsibility for what its allies say in its own arena.

Tell me would the Knesset be so quiet and acepting if Bush had had the guts to tell them a few home truths? Would Abraham Foxman be teary eyed at that special moment? Of course not.

The response of the Knesset said that they stood shoulder to shoulder with a man whose misleading has cost millions of lives by staying silent.

Sorry but the Knesset due to what happened in the Holocaust should be leaders in not giving audience to people like Bush and Blair and not giving them undue praise.

The leadership of all parties in the Knesset failed in their duty to humanity that day and they should be ashamed and not excused. What they asked Arabs Leaders to do they failed to do themselves – namely they let a man whose war mongering not only speak but also to taint people unfairly.

Bush’s actions are the cause of Israel’s misfortune in that region by not pushing for peace and if you think he deserves a Knesset speech then you are mistaken. The Knesset should have told him to get lost because he cost Israel and the Palestinians eight years of peace making and thus many lives.

If Bush had brought peace then he deserved to speak, if he had tried to broker an honest peace then he deserved to speak. But for failing the two parties and causing lasting damage he didn’t deserve a visa let alone speak in the Knesset and be given the accolades he was given.

The Knesset failed that day and it failed itself above all, and the people it serves next. It is a shameful moment in the history of the Knesset and the MPs there should be asking themselves why they didn’t have the courage to speak out or walk out.

The man has brought ruin to the region and Israel in the long term.

Bush, on his way out, was obviously going to be cheered. But that he took the opportunity to poison the well, to try to taint Obama in the eyes of people with whom Obama is going to be working within weeks, was certainly unhelpful.

The Knesset’s response is irrelevant. Bush damaged (or tried to)Obama’s position as an honest broker in the middle-east for party political reasons.

I think Imran has made a fair point.
Yeah, whatever, shout me down. But the fact of the matter is, he has.

Because Mr. BananaBrain claimed – “a thoroughly unhelpful thing to have said particularly in that forum.”

So if it was deemed by the Members of the Knesset to have been thoroughly unhelpful surely they would have reacted rather than applauding and saying how grrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeaaaaatttttt W was.

The objection only came from Mr. BananaBrain once Obama was elected and people started highlighting the speech.

They didn’t object because they agreed with George except events have moved on so they need to be seen to be objecting now.

Fact is that Israel only viewed friends if they are Yes men which is the most damaging aspect towards peace. Gideon Levy wrote a brilliant piece about this last week. They loved Bush because he did 99% of what they wanted.

Now the world has turned then BananaBrain tried to step in and excuse his MPs from their lack of inaction.

Hey BibiBrain did Peres object at the time? Nooooooooooooooo. Did Bibi object at the time? Nooooooooooooooo. Did Livni object at the time? Nooooooooooooooo.

Why would they object? The reason why it was deemed unacceptable in the US – is because Bush attacked Democrats in a political speech outside the US. There is an unwritten rule for politicians: never criticize your political opponents while away. In any case, Bush never said that Obama or Democrats were “nazi appeasers”, but accused them of being naive and clueless in the fight against terrorism, just like Chamberlain was when he negotiated with Hitler.

I believe they used the universal approval langage known as applause for the speech. They also gave Bush many honours which means that they deemed the comment as acceptable at the very least and many approved of it at the time.

For some people to now claim it was inappropriate in that forum when the forum didn’t even object at the time is crazy. Apparently it was a very special moment for that forum at the time as they mistily gazed at their friend calling people Nazi Sympathisers and said percisely nothing. Objected at the time to precisely nothing.

No wonder they are backing away now.

I wonder now if their true friend is still their true friend.

Hey BibiBrain did Peres object at the time? Nooooooooooooooo. Did Bibi object at the time? Nooooooooooooooo. Did Livni object at the time? Nooooooooooooooo.

Did anyone in the knesset object at the time?????

Well lets see what Knesset members who have stood shoulder to shoulder with Bush and said he is a true friend of Israel. Did they walk out in disgust or did they actually express more glowing terms for the speaker?

“several right wing members of Knesset said that “Bush seems to be more Zionist the Olmert”, and that “it is better to have Bush as a PM instead of Olmert”.”

“Some of the Knesset members even said that “Bush appears to be the one person who will achieve the Zionist aspirations”,”

“Olmert added that “Bush is a true and faithful friend to Israel”, and that the friendship between Israel and the United States is based on “moral, human and social values based on justice and peace”.”

So a man who many would say is a war criminal was said after the speech to have been a true friend.

Do you notice Mr. Whitewash that none complained about his comment until the Republicans lost power and the world pushed for change.

What is more amazing is that Abraham Foxman – ADL – actually didn’t bat an eyelid at the comment which you laughably claim was inappropriate in “that forum”.

In fact it is only now seen as inappropriate and is that because Obama won?

“”This has been Gorge Bush, this has been his policy: You don’t talk to terrorists,” Foxman told JTA. “To say to negotiate with Hamas and Hezbollah and al-Qaida is appeasement is not a political statement. It was a very special moment.”"

So it wasn’t described as inappropriate as a speech but a very special moment. So your crocodile tears over six motnhs later are simply false. That forum accepted what his statement and in fact some thought of it as a very special moment.

Hardly like your whitewash that it wasn’t appropriate.

In fact the only blast came from the USA itself:
“The National Jewish Democratic Council cast Bush’s comments as insulting to Israel.

“It was a real honor that Bush was invited to address the Knesset on Israel’s 60th anniversary,” it said in a statement. “Unfortunately, Bush took advantage of this opportunity to use the power and prestige of the presidency to launch a shameless political attack on foreign soil.”"

Actually even Mr. So-Called Peace – Peres didn’t object.

But “that forum” loved his speech and didn’t bat an eyelid at his comment. Only now they have been wrong footed that it is deemed inapproriate so Agent BibiBrain is out to pretend it was inappropriate. Did their comments get lost in the post then??

The fact is that the Knesset stood shoulder to shoulder with Bush when he made those disgraceful comemnts. It applauded Bush and Blair and gave them many honours and privledges for their needless war mongering and that forum as you call it has lavished continual praise on them. That forum should be ashamed and no-one should whitewash their role in support of Messrs Blair and Bush.

By using universal sign language.

Pray tell us precisely how many people in that forum stood up and objected to that statement and speech and how many in contrast applauded Bush and his speech?

Another whitewash because that forum didn’t object to Bush’s remark so why claim it was unhelpful in that forum when that forum didn’t say a word at the time?

How did they express their disgust? Oh yes they applauded the speech in “that forum”.

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/2463

Oops. Wrong thread. I was commenting on BillerickayDicky’s tendency to drag his antipathy to specific individuals into every thread.

What did you think I meant?