We all know about the importance of context in understanding and judging the actions of others. If the person who stole a loaf of bread was starving, and trying to feed her starving child, we judge the theft differently from the way we judge an equivalent theft carried out by some opportunistically looting hooligans. So what would you think of someone who told you about the horrifying details of a wife’s premeditated murder of her husband, but completely omitted to mention the fact that he’d been abusing her terribly, physically and mentally, for 20 years? What would you think of someone who told you of the appalling punishment of ‘necklacing’ carried out by some members of the ANC in the 1980s and early 1990s in South Africa, without ever mentioning the brutalising facts of apartheid in that country at that time? What would you think of someone who described black American criminality without ever so much as mentioning racism or slavery? You might, at the very least, raise an eyebrow and murmur the word ‘context’. Even though each of these cases involve wrongful, sometimes horribly wrongful, actions, you might think that the context is important in judging those who carried out the actions. (And of course context is just as important in judging rightful action too). You might also think that the people who so ignored the context in these cases had rather poor and blinkered moral and political judgment. And if you wanted to explain this lack of judgement, these blinkers, you might in some cases make reference to the persistence of longstanding prejudices against women or Africans or American people of colour.
Now considerthis article in openDemocracy, about ‘the Israel Lobby’. The article walks us through the development of Zionist sympathies among British Jews and others in the UK.
I’ve always been interested in history, including WW2 which is one of the reasons I’ve been so upset with TV stations like the “History Channel” as of late, for not living up to their name along with most of what we call “educational TV” today. On the bright side, you can still find plenty of educational things dealing with actual science or actual history here on the internet, so long as you know where to look. earlier today I came across this Gem on Io9. It deals with an important historical subject, that I haven’t discussed that often, mainly, what were the biggest mistakes, the allies made, that could have cost us the war.
Hindsight is 20/20, especially when it comes to second guessing the harrowing decisions that have to be made during wartime. But sometimes we have to be critical, if we hope to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. With that in mind, here are the most egregious blunders made by the Western Allies during the Second World War.
Above photo: Alfred Palmer/OWI/LOC
A few caveats before we get started. I’m not going to include the blunders made by the Western Powers leading up to the war, nor am I going to include the mistakes made by the Russians (who were technically part of the grand alliance). Those both deserve lists of their own.
Also, I don’t mean to pick on the Allies, here. Axis forces were equally blunderous — if not more so — than their enemies, especially after Hitler took command of the German army in December 1941. But as already noted, it’s still worthwhile to be critical of the victorious forces.
Finally, I made an effort to choose mistakes which spanned the entire war and all the war theatres. I also felt it important to draw-out both “high level” mistakes and those with more immediate, but brutal, impacts. Given the complexity of war, I’m not going to pretend for a moment that my list is definitive or complete; You, the reader, are more than welcome to be critical in the comments and add your own.
Here’s the list, ordered chronologically:
The U.S. Supreme Court should find that the owners of secular, for-profit corporations have no right to impose their religious views onto employees by denying them access to contraceptives, Americans United for Separation of Church and State says.
Americans United urges this action in response to today’s announcement that the Supreme Court will consider the cases of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. v. Sebelius. The cases challenge the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive mandate, which requires most businesses to provide their employees with health insurance that includes access to no-cost birth control.
“The Supreme Court needs to make it clear that religious freedom is not a battering ram to use against individual rights,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United.
Added Lynn, “The question before the court is simple: Does the owner of a secular corporation have the right to impose his religious views onto his employees? And the answer is equally simple: No.”
So much for the claims that the “counter jihad” isn’t bigoted or that they support freedom and liberty, not mention respect the constitution. Recent ( Thankfully falsified ) reports that the nation of Angola has banned Islam have pleased our “counter jihad” buddies. Contrary to whatever they may claim, these people do not respect the US constitution.
@jihadwatchRS Great news! Kill them all..
— Ken in Arizona (@dayo1946) November 25, 2013
— Jason (@jbrownlee55) November 25, 2013
Angola 'Bans Islam': Surrounded by countries under the bloody seige of jihad, this is not surprising. Angola i… http://t.co/X5couIFylr
— Pamela Geller (@Atlasshrugs) November 25, 2013
Let's take a min and realize what the country of Angola has done. They have done what we have not! Good for them! http://t.co/EKkfRu9u7r ??
— D Smith (@OldGlory_) November 23, 2013
http://t.co/qt8Fj8O5L0. Good work Angola! They understand what Islam really is and are not blinded by western relativism.
— Whabo utjohngalt (@WhaboUtjohngalt) November 23, 2013
WOO HOO! African state of Angola bans Islam and will destroy all the mosques http://t.co/1Qj5j2ppkg
— rockynickydog (@rockynickydog) November 23, 2013
— Just call me Allah (@cheshirecat0025) November 23, 2013
@cheshirecat0025 yes!!!!! Perfect. It needs to be exterminated!! Do it!!
— D Smith (@OldGlory_) November 23, 2013
@Atlasshrugs The US should also ban Islam. It is not a religion. It is a cult and cults should be eliminated.
— Tommy Moore (@mooretommyh) November 25, 2013
@Atlasshrugs I cannot stop laughing. It had to happen, they have Boko Haram to the north and Al Shabaab to the East. Who can blame them?
— Reginald Adams (@reggiereggie66) November 25, 2013
Who can blame them Reginald Adams? I can blame them. Everything people like you claims to stand for, in reality do not, even if you think you do, and the “threat from Islam” you claim is out there doesn’t even exist. The entire Stealth Jihad/Creeping sharia conspiracy theory is a joke, as this video by youtuber, UJames1978Forever points out.
but now back to the wingnuts praising Angola for violating human rights and taking away the rights of their citizens to practice their own religion.
It can be done: Angola bans Islam, dismantles mosques. http://t.co/3Mc43VtO9S
— Bryan Fischer (@BryanJFischer) November 25, 2013
Angola bans Islam. Can we do that here? If we follow 1st Amendment as given by Founders, States can do it if they wish.
— Bryan Fischer (@BryanJFischer) November 25, 2013
No they can’t Bryan. Off course you don’t really care about freedom or the Constitution contrary to everything you may claim. Ironically you and your Dominionist Buddies pose a far greater threat to our freedom in the US than any group of genuine Muslim extremists. You really do deserve the “American Taliban” Label.
@BryanJFischer earlier the better.
— TheBanyanTreeWisdom (@WiseBanyanTree) November 25, 2013
— Debi Ringhaver Lane (@LibertyBee7) November 25, 2013
— Patrick Dollard (@PatDollard) November 25, 2013
Yes friends, the “completely and totally not bigoted counter jihad movement” who will protect our freedom from the non existent threat of creeping sharia by violating the rights of Muslims whenever we let them. If you’re a non Muslim like myself, Keep in mind that it won’t just be Muslims who will end up loosing their freedom if they have their way. When people can get away with violating the rights of one group of people, the rights of everyone else are in danger as well. These people are paranoid bigoted hate mongers, not defenders of liberty, especially religious liberty.
Update 11/25/13 at 5:09 PM
I fixed the broken link that Origuy pointed out to me. He also mention how the government of Angola has denied that it banned Islam, which is good news and not very surprising. However this still goes a long way to show us the true nature of the “counter Jihad” movement, which is at its heart bigoted
Update 11/25/13 at 5:17 PM
Update 11/26/13 at 7:42 AM
Curious Lurker has just pointed out another news article on this story that
does even more to debunk the claim that Angola banned Islam. I’m so glad, that claim turned out to be false. On the other hand, the shear fact that so many “Counter Jihad” people were so thrilled at the idea that they actually did, speaks volumes.
I saw the photo on the Mother Jones article that Rightwing Watch linked to in this story. Its the first link. Chris McDaniel is just another “totally not racist” Republican.
Mississippi’s Chris McDaniel isn’t the only Republican candidate for U.S. Senate who has allied with neo-Confederate activists. Warren Throckmorton reports today that Bill Flynn, a radio talk show host seeking the GOP nomination to challenge Democrat Kay Hagan in North Carolina, is a close partner of the Institute on the Constitution’s David Whitney and has taught courses through the Institute. Whitney wrote on the group’s website last week:
Our Institute On The Constituion [sic] Host Bill Flynn in Triad region of North Carolina announced his candidacy for the United States Senate race this past Sunday. Bill hosts a morning radio show on WEGO (980 AM). Bill has not only taught our U.S. Constitution course he was my co-host on the Constitutional Cruise, All Aboard America this past March. Bill is a good friend and patriot.
Whitney is the chaplain of the Maryland chapter of the League of the South, a neo-confederate hate group that promotes white nationalism.
Good news for tolerance and pluralism, bad news for our counter jihad “friends.” I wonder if Pamela or Robert Spencer has had a ragegasm over this yet, as Vicious Babushka would say. They probably have, this story is a little over a week old, but I just found out about this today, so it maybe news to many of you here.
By Patch Editor Kaitlin Glanzer
When South Windsor residents cast their votes for Dr. Saud Anwar, electing him the town’s next mayor, they likely were choosing the soft-spoken doctor and humanitarian who votes his conscience and urged the Town Council not to raise taxes when residents were struggling and families lived in the homeless shelter.
They likely were not considering that they would make history by electing the first Muslim mayor in Connecticut.
“They’re looking for the person who is going to do the best job for them with the priorities that they feel are important to them,” Anwar said Friday by phone.
Still, that South Windsor has embraced Anwar says much about them and about the United States.
“We live in the best country in the world …where everyone and anyone who follows the law is respected and can help make the country better,” Anwar said.
“The people of South Windsor are very caring, embracing individuals who respect people of all backgrounds, so my being elected is more about the people of South Windsor and less about me.”
A new poll released this week points to troubling public perception surrounding the rainbow flag, historically understood as a symbol of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) movement.
Public Policy Polling found that the Americans polled were more offended by the rainbow flag than the confederate flag, the latter of which has remained a controversial image since the American Civil War and for many holds oppressive and racist symbolism.
This Guy again?
The U.S.-born co-founder of a Muslim extremist group that once threatened the creators of “South Park” over an episode depicting the Prophet Muhammad wearing a bear suit is now facing up to five years in prison after pleading guilty to issuing online threats against Jewish leaders.
Yousef al-Khattab, who entered the plea on Nov. 1, is the third person associated with the group Revolution Muslim to be convicted in federal court in Alexandria, Va., the Washington Post reported. His sentencing is scheduled for Feb. 7.
The Post reported that in court documents al-Khattab “admits encouraging readers to take unspecified action against Jewish leaders.”
I hope they lose. Seriously, making that kid go through this nonsensical “therapy” to “cure” his “disease” of being gay, can only harm him. This is child abuse as far as I’m concerned.
A New Jersey couple is suing their state over a law banning so-called gay conversion therapy, which they say is a violation of their free speech rights, freedom of religion and ability to parent their child “free from unconstitutional government interference,” which in this case means putting a 15-year-old high school student through a medically discredited pseudotherapy intended to “cure” him of his sexual and gender identity.