http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed...rticles/2005/09/19/muslims_and_the_holocaust/ CATHY YOUNG Muslims and the Holocaust By Cathy Young | September 19, 2005 RECENTLY IN England, four Muslim-staffed committees appointed to advise Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Cabinet on issues related to Islam have come up with a recommendation: Get rid of an official event viewed as offensive to Muslims. What event would that be? A celebration of the Crusades, perhaps? No, Holocaust Memorial Day. In the words of one committee member, ''The very name Holocaust Memorial Day sounds too exclusive to many young Muslims. It sends out the wrong signals: that the lives of one people are to be remembered more than others." That ''one people," of course, are the Jews. The committees aren't exactly proposing that the Holocaust commemoration be scrapped outright. They want it to be folded into a ''Genocide Memorial Day" that will also include such crimes as the slaughter of the Tutsis in Rwanda and the massacres of Bosnian Muslims by the Milosevic regime. Unfortunately, even against the bloody backdrop of the 20th century, there are strong reasons to regard the Nazi extermination of the Jews as a unique atrocity. It was the first, and so far the only time that, as Cornell University historian Stephen Katz put it in his 1994 book ''The Holocaust in Historical Context," that ''a state set out, as a matter of intentional principle and actualized policy, to annihilate physically every man, woman, and child belonging to a specific people." But the problem with the proposal goes far deeper. The other ''genocides" for which they want recognition include the Israeli killings of Palestinians. Clearly, Palestinians have suffered under the occupation. Over 4,000 have been killed since the renewal of violence five years ago. Some of these dead were completely innocent victims; others were fighters, violent protesters, or suicide bombers. (Nearly 1,000 Israelis have died as well.) This death toll is tragic; but to call it ''genocide" is to cheapen the word. Any equation between the Holocaust and Israel's treatment of the Palestinians is absurd. The effect of such a parallel is not to promote ''inclusiveness" -- it is to erase and minimize the tragedy of the Jews as past victims of genocide by slanderously assigning them an equal role as its present-day perpetrators. The committees are formally presenting their proposal (backed by the head of the Muslim Council of Britain) to the government later this week; the Home Office has already reportedly indicated that it does not plan to act on the recommendation. What's frightening, however, is that such a proposal could come from a group of people charged with the task of helping the government combat extremism. Alas, this is not a unique case. The same issue of the London Daily Telegraph that reported the attack on Holocaust Day carried another remarkable story. Ahmad Thomson, deputy chairman of Britain's Association of Muslim Lawyers and occasional adviser to the prime minister, recently claimed that Blair had been pressured into entering the Iraq war by a sinister conspiracy of Jews and Freemasons. In his 1994 book, ''The Next World Order," Thomson (a convert to Islam) claimed that the Holocaust is a ''big lie" and that the presence of US soldiers in Saudi Arabia is especially outrageous because many of them are Jewish. These two stories illustrate an uncomfortable truth: The infection of anti-Jewish bigotry is alarmingly widespread in the Muslim community today, not only in predominantly Muslim and Arab countries -- where the media routinely circulate anti-Semitic libels and conspiracy theories while preachers and editorialists compare Jews to pigs and monkeys -- but in Western democracies as well. Some apologists on the left blame this virulent hatred on the Israeli occupation of the territories. But is it plausible to believe that a state of Israel within its 1948 borders would be less hated by those who believe all of its land rightfully belongs to Muslims? This is not to tar all or most Muslims with the same brush, or to deny that anti-Muslim bias and paranoia exists, too. (In the United States, some right-wing bloggers have been shrieking that the proposed memorial to the victims of 9/11's Flight 93 is shaped like -- horrors! -- a crescent.) Nor is it to say that Islam is inherently intolerant: All religions and ethnic groups have their bigots and haters. For a variety of reasons, the bigotry and hate in Islam are perilously close to the mainstream. Cathy Young is a contributing editor at Reason magazine. Her column appears regularly in the Globe.
Thanks for dismissing the validity of yet another article posted by gwayneco. How could I possibly -- as a political scientist and historian -- take an author seriously if he on one hand cheapens the lives lost by Muslims and other groups by saying their deaths shouldn't be called genocides because it 'cheapens its meaning', while on the other hand completely ignores possibly the the largest Holocaust in recorded history? (Native Indians in case you're wondering) How about the Israeli massacres at Sabra and Shatila? What about the Armenian 'genocide' that was carried out by Turkey? What about the nuclear Holocaust perpetrated on the Japanese? What about Soviet genocide of Chechen Muslims? What about Serbian genocide of Bosnians? What about Japanese genocides in China? What about Sudanese genocide against MUSLIM BLACK AFRIKANS? And on and on and on.... No one group is 'unique', and to attempt and make the Jewish suffering somehow 'exclusive' in nature is in itself nothing more than being a hypocrite. On the other hand, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM whatsoever with the Holocaust being remembered as a great atrocity, because it was. But to choose to ignore other atrocities committed and hold the Jewish suffering on a pedastal is a double-standard and racist in itself.
There's a difference in the killings of native americans in the move westward and the holocaust. If you actually compare them, you're kidding. You both have also missed the point of the article. The article was that the one day set up for those who died in the holocaust to be remembered has been tainted. Regardless of the number other groups who may have suffered as much it's one day out of the year. Is it really going to hurt these people that much? If it were a day to remember all the Muslims killed in a particular genocide I doubt they'd have problems with it. So who's got the double standard? And it's not racist to want to remember the victims of a mass genocide. If the US wanted to set up a day to remember all the American Indians killed in the move westward and a jewish group spoke up saying that this shouldn't be happening because native americans weren't the only ones ever involved in a smiliar incident how many of you would agree with them? Probably none.
I would be for remember the atrocities committed by previous generations such as the Holocaust Memorial Day. But we also need a Native American Day. Tutsi Day. Etc. Maybe we should just make a generic "Remembrance Day". That would be a lot better for all.
I'm fairly sure that this article isnt very accurate. I've read about this also but those muslim advisors werent necessarily saying that a day remembering the holocaust was bad but rather that the UK doesnt really have anything to remember any of the other genocides of equal magnitude that occured. That stuff about how muslims are somehow offended by a holocaust rememberence day is pretty ridiculous, they just want their struggles to be acknowledged as well. And I think its a legitimate objection at that. You open up a pandora's box if you start having official days to recognize one period like the holocaust because inevitably everyone else wants the same. If the state refuses those demands, it really comes off as racist because one group gets privileged over another. So either have a day for every different group, dont have days for any group, or have a day that is for everyone, but what we have now doesnt make sense. Furthermore the main objection from most people here is to the paragraph that said that the holocaust was somehow a unique incident and deserving of a special day as opposed to other genocides. Come on you know that's bull****. I'd say the genocides in Rwanda, Armenia and Kosovo can be put in the same category.
There is no genetic difference between tutsi & hutu. It is a class-based distinction created primarily by Belgan Colonial rule.
Personally, I think the Holocaust was really the worst - not for the size or anything, but with the pure efficiency in which is was done. I mean, you just didn't have armies killing on rampages, you had an whole infrastructure with rail, plants, and squads - and they were freaking making soap out of the bodies. That's about the most atocious thing that could happen - so I don't think there is a comparison on that level. It's not the biggest act of genocide to be sure, but it certainly is about as evil as you can get. That being said - I think Israelis/Jews would be better served by including all genocide as worthy of equal remembrance. This would help them link to other people's suffering and may make other groups feel their pain is being recognized too. And Jews/Israelis could use a few allies these days.
Oh the Holocaust is absolutely sickening, and the thing is most people don't really know (or don't want to know) some of the details of what exactly happened, and it's that much more shocking because it happened so recently in our history. Despite reading multiple books/articles about it, I still have a very hard time believing that and entire country and entire group of people can be so evil to allow such an atrocity to take place in the name of 'unity', but then it sobers me to the reality that something like this not only can happen again, but probably sadly will -- as long as racism and pure hatred exists in the heart of man. Human history is disgusting, just absolutely disgusting, and this 'misery' is entirely self-inflicted. The sadder thing is that just when you think we all collectively as human beings have learned from our past, you see clear signs that we haven't and are more than willing to repeat those mistakes to an even larger extent.
1. Check the census bureau . . i suspect that the number of Jews in Germany may out number the Number of Native Americans in American while the Germans were more Efficient. . the Americans were more Thorough 2. To remember one Genocide while ignoring others is Racist It is liken to saying. . .their suffering is more important than other folx's suffering Rocket River
Not to mention the Roma/Gypsys.....who, from my understanding, actually suffered a greater percentage loss of their population during WW2 than did European Jews...
Of course it is... One has really bad teeth and the other has excessive amounts of arm pit hair. (both men and women)
Does Israle have a holocaust day? I personally think its quite useless to have memorial days, and days to ponder over the atrocities that have passed us. Yes, history repeats itself, but pondering over past events only tinkers old emotions and brings up past feelings again... thats my personal view, but to each their own.
what about the pakistani's massacre of bangladeshis? i think that would qualify. and thats an example of muslim on muslim violence backed or at least allowed by the US. because back then india was evil and pro-communist. and pakistan was our friend.
Is it time yet to bring up how Japan has barely ever attoned for the Rape of Nanking, Bataan Death March and several other attrocities? The sad truth is that many groups have had their Holocausts and I would hate to use the suffering of one to diminish that of the others.
Hmm, maybe the fact that Britain was at war with Germany during the holocaust and actually was involved in ending it gives it some special meaning to the British people. Nah, it must be because they hate Africans and Arabs.
