Holocaust museum LA retracts their recent statement saying "Never again can't only mean never again for Jews" to support the Israeli Holocaust of Palestinians
The language in this is almost hilarious in just how hard they're trying to throw someone under the bus. This was something they thought of, and pre-planned what, before the genocide? And then they have taken actions internally and fired so-and-so for it because it was all their fault!? Gosh, what a pickle!
It seemed to acknowledge that peoples other than Jews can also be victims of genocide.
This is considered controversial because Israel, which attempts to position itself as representing Jewish interests, is perpetrating a genocide on non-Jews as we speak. They deny that they are committing genocide.
22 Comments
bear@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 73 pts · 342d
Being against genocide is pretty controversial these days...
dessalines@lemmy.ml · 18 pts · 341d
timewarp@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 342d
So now the message is to be scared to stand up for what is right?
limer@lemmy.ml · 15 pts · 342d
Always has been.
KeavesSharpi@lemmy.ml · 37 pts · 342d
So... Never Again™ actually means only the Jews. Got it.
manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml · 13 pts · 341d
Never Again is a phrase popularised by zionist terrorist Kahane in the 70s, the original phrasing used by holocaust survivors was never forget
VeryVito@lemmy.ml · 21 pts · 341d
What the hell? So “Never Again” doesn’t actually mean “Never again” anymore?
What the fuck is wrong with everyone these days?
hackerwacker@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 340d
It never did mean that though.
davel@lemmy.ml · 18 pts · 342d
“Never again” can’t mean never again for Palestinians.
4grams@awful.systems · 12 pts · 341d
So their new slogan gonna be “ok, maybe just this one more time…for now.”
DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org · 3 pts · 340d
It’s different when we do it
ettyblatant@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 341d
The language in this is almost hilarious in just how hard they're trying to throw someone under the bus. This was something they thought of, and pre-planned what, before the genocide? And then they have taken actions internally and fired so-and-so for it because it was all their fault!? Gosh, what a pickle!
Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 12 pts · 341d
Yeah, and it's bullshit that they did. Cowards
pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 341d
whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 342d
I don't get it, what was the message sent by the first post?
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 37 pts · 342d
It seemed to acknowledge that peoples other than Jews can also be victims of genocide.
This is considered controversial because Israel, which attempts to position itself as representing Jewish interests, is perpetrating a genocide on non-Jews as we speak. They deny that they are committing genocide.
whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 341d
ohh, that makes more sense. I thought it meant never again but just for the Jews, otherwise it's okay. Actually my take seems more accurate currently
pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 341d
Well but if they deny they're committing genocide then they still can be against genocide right?
This is a rhetorical statement btw
grrgyle@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 341d
I agree with your rhetorical statement, but I think I'm missing some implication.
It's a true statement, I just don't understand what you're pointing out.
pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 341d
Rhetorical because they're fucking hypocrites who believe that killing Palestinians is the right thing to do so they get to do whatever they want.
marcela@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 342d
It was too woke for them. It features People of Color.
geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 341d
It's a variant of
Which is used these days to protest the Holocaust perpetrators supporting Israel.
njm1314@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 342d