interesting...


I thought it was fascinating how I was completely in awe of this woman initially, but found myself asking why and realized it was purely because she had suffered, not because of anything she had done. This became apparent to me when she seemed irked, apathetic and angry to listen to the Palestinian suffering. She said something about having to be tough after talking about the Palestinians later on which troubled me because it reminded me of something I read in the diary of a Nazi general at one of the concentration camps - he spoke of how it wasn't easy for him to kill but how he had to be tough and remind himself of the harm the Jewish people did to German society.

Would it be a massive presumption to say that she saw the Palestinians as the 'other'? And this is the problem, the beginning of the dehumanization?

She established a museum to tell thousands of people about her suffering and the holocaust but couldn't bring herself to sit and hear the stories of suffering of innocent people who found themselves caught up in a conflict which had nothing to do with them?

It also made me wonder, I've seen so many holocaust movies and documentaries. But there are so many other genocides, atrocities and injustices throughout the world and history... its just depressing I don't even know what my point is anymore.

reply

[deleted]

I came to this board to express the very sentiment you already wrote about. I was completely appalled by her behavior at that meeting with the Palestinians. How dare she dismiss their stories of suffering, when she's traveled all over the world to not only share her own, but practically INSIST on forgiveness? Yet she couldn't extend a proverbial olive branch to the people who were suffering at the hands of her own people, acting as if these people somehow brought it on themselves?

I had a modicum of respect for her through most of the film, even if I didn't agree with her message, or didn't understand how she seemed to feel that she could extend forgiveness on behalf of a relatively small group of people (the Mengele twins). She was not their spokesperson, and I almost felt betrayed by her attitude that because she was acting as the "bigger person," her feelings and message eclipsed that of the other survivors. However, that tenuous respect completely evaporated when I watched the segment that took place in Isreal.

"I didn't come here to listen to their stories, I don't want to hear 9 stories, 10 stories, of suffering." Then what's the point? What's the point of what you're trying to do, what's the end result you hope to accomplish by doing what you do, preaching the message you wish to send? I'm so disappointed by her, by her behavior, and I hope that no one sees this and thinks that her atrocious attitude is shared by anyone else from the US, that we all aren't sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians in Isreal - that some of learned from history, even if it's a borrowed history, the history of others, the history of our predecessors.

I don't wish her ill will, but I hope her message of forgiveness-and-peace-when-it's-convenient-and-self-serving is not one that gains anymore popularity or is broadcast more than it already has been.

reply

Yeah she strikes me as a bit of a hypocrite I'm afraid.

reply