Nick wrote:
Greg Kennedy (aka 'help bot') wrote:


Another mindless PARRot. Larry Parr sings that I
am Vince Hart/Greg Kennedy, and all the mice follow.


If the popular American television show 'Seinfield'
can use the term 'soup Nazi', then why would it
be any more offensive for Rob Mitchell to use the
term 'chess Nazi'?


One possibility here would be that this TV show is
written/directed/produced/or acted by Jews, who are
sometimes considered to have special immunity from
being accused of anti-Semitism. (For example, Mel
Brooks has made some movies which are chock-full
of jokes about the Jews, yet no one complains or
makes the typical accusations, as it would seem he
is immune. My conclusion is that Mel Brooks is
probably Jewish, which would also explain the oddball
appearance of many such jokes where they otherwise
make no sense.)



Another item I noticed is the, uh, "Jew-centric" approach
to all things Nazi Germany. One poster made several
remarks which seemed to indicate that he believed the
Jews were the only victims in WWII. He simply "forgot"
about all the other groups who were also victimised; for
example, Gypsies (i.e. Roma), Chinese, Russians, etc.
I mention this because even Nick B. followed suit in
discussing whether or not Jewish folk would be offended --
as if that in itself is decisive. There seems to be an idea
floating about that Jews have a lock on all things Nazi,
that nobody else's opinions count.

I wrote this statement about a 'Seinfield' episode
in which in a character was called the 'Soup Nazi'.


Precisely.


"I happen to know that some Jewish persons watched
that episode and enjoyed it, without believing that
'Seinfield' was disrespecting the victims of Nazi crimes."
--Nick

All that statement (above) means is that some of my
Jewish acquaintances told me that they had watched
that 'Seinfield' episode and enjoyed it, etc.


Right. And all my comment meant was that all the
other commentators here seem to have focused only
upon what Jews might think, or be offended by. Not
one has yet talked about the other groups, what they
might or might not be offended by. The handicapped,
Gypsies, homosexuals -- not one of these was actually
considered, only the Jews.


I know quite well that many non-Jewish persons were
the victims of Nazi crimes.


Misses my point entirely; obviously, I was already
aware of this. Nick B. has made countless posts here in
which he talked extensively about war crimes and such.
In reaction, the "conservatives" (I'm being generous here)
whine that this is off-topic.


If a Gypsy acquaintance
of mine had told me (which did *not* happen) that he
or she had watched that 'Seinfield' episode and enjoyed
it, then I may have mentioned that in addition.


My comments in no way referred to what, say, Nick,
"may have mentioned". On the contrary, my comments
referred to what Nick and others in fact *did* mention.

It was simply noting the fact that everyone here (but me)
appears to have taken a "Jew-centric" approach, that's
all. Nazis vs. Jews: this is an oversimplification, and as
such, it victimizes the other groups by ignoring them as
if they were not relevant or did not even exist. The same
thing happens all the time in the mass media -- the Jews
take the limelight and the other victims are ignored. It
makes you wonder, just who controls the media?


-- help bot