




















Open Letter to a victim of Ben Stein's lying propagandaNow I truly understand who you atheists and darwinists really are! You people believe that it was okay for my great-grandparents to die in the Holocaust! How disgusting. Your past article about the Holocaust was just window dressing. We Jews will fight to keep people like you out of the United States!
Yes I have. You know, I respect you as a human being and you have done great work exposing psychics and frauds, but this is a very touchy issue that affects me and family emotionally. Our family business was affected because of Auschwitz because now, our family has nothing. It is gone. Things began to make sense once I saw the movie and I am just appalled. I have learned a lot from Ben Stein, a Jewish brother, who has opened my eyes up a bit.
Now I truly understand who you atheists and darwinists really are! You people believe that it was okay for my great-grandparents to die in the Holocaust! How disgusting. Your past article about the Holocaust was just window dressing. We Jews will fight to keep people like you out of the United States!Just look at those words of yours. Probably you regret them by now. I certainly hope so, but I'll continue to write my letter to you, on the assumption that you still feel at least a part of what you wrote.
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.Hitler's obscene anti-Semitism was able to hold sway in Germany because there was a deeply embedded history of anti-Semitism in Germany, and indeed in Europe generally.
1902. Comment #174467 by missmoo on May 2, 2008 at 1:16 pm
As a humanistic atheist jew, I must say I am appalled and shamed to see anyone taking advantage of such a horrific time in history (not only for the jewish history).1903. Comment #174691 by ofir on May 3, 2008 at 9:12 am
The holocaust is the product of centuries of church based anti-jewish propaganda. This is why it's difficult for jews to oppose this Stein nonsense without sounding controversial and anti-christian.1904. Comment #174777 by Cantonakenobi on May 3, 2008 at 1:00 pm
1905. Comment #175192 by Quine on May 4, 2008 at 7:39 pm
1906. Comment #176761 by Jenny Haskins on May 8, 2008 at 1:01 am
"but it does seem to me to a logical end point to a purely naturalistic philosophy based on survival of the fittest."1907. Comment #176763 by MPhil on May 8, 2008 at 1:13 am
Blaming Darwin OR his theories for 'Social Darwinism" is as silly as blaming Karl Marx for the atrocities committed by the dictatorial societies that choose to call themselves 'Marxist'.
1908. Comment #176858 by grillem on May 8, 2008 at 7:22 am
Early years1909. Comment #177610 by leviticus on May 9, 2008 at 11:03 am
1910. Comment #177646 by TikiHead on May 9, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Zaphod:1911. Comment #177981 by grillem on May 10, 2008 at 5:57 am
"Eugenics is the self-direction of human evolution": Logo from the Second International Eugenics Conference [10], 1921, depicting it as a tree which unites a variety of different fields.1912. Comment #178691 by psaturn on May 11, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Dear Professor Hawkins, you are right that Darwin did not propose Eugenics but rather his family:1913. Comment #178697 by riandouglas on May 12, 2008 at 12:04 am
psaturn: [quote]Built into the idea of natural selection is a competition between the strong and the weak, between the fit and the unfit. The eugenicists believed that this mechanism was thwarted in the human race by charity, by people and churches who fed the poor and the weak so that they survived, thrived, and reproduced. [/quote]
1914. Comment #179129 by psaturn on May 12, 2008 at 6:11 pm
riandouglas1915. Comment #179131 by riandouglas on May 12, 2008 at 6:20 pm
psaturn: The point is quite simple...Eugenics were proposed by the inheritor of Darwin: his cousin and his son. His cousin founded the Eugenics Society and it seemed to be quite racist..
psaturn: People repeatedly disavow Eugenics as being part of Darwinian thinking but his family did not seem to think so...
1916. Comment #179134 by Brian English on May 12, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Pst Tosswad. Great comment, but I think the word is prescriptive (as in a doctor), not proscriptive (as in deny). ;)1917. Comment #179139 by Goldy on May 12, 2008 at 6:43 pm
People repeatedly disavow Eugenics as being part of Darwinian thinking but his family did not seem to think so...
1918. Comment #179150 by riandouglas on May 12, 2008 at 7:33 pm
1919. Comment #179156 by riandouglas on May 12, 2008 at 7:45 pm
"As a casual observer of what makes this country work and what stops it cold, I hereby offer a few suggestions on how we can ruin American competitiveness and innovation in the course of this century. I think the reader will agree with me that we are already far down the road on many of them...
12) Elevate mysticism, tribalism, shamanism and fundamentalism--and be sure to exclude educated, hardworking men and women--to an equal status with technology in the public mind. Make sure that, in order to pay proper (and politically correct) respect to all different ethnic groups in America, you act as if science were on an equal footing with voodoo and history with ethnic fable..."
â€" How to Ruin American Enterprise, by Ben Stein
Forbes Magazine, 12/23/02
1920. Comment #179160 by Brian English on May 12, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Give me a break Brian, I was in a hurry! :-)
1921. Comment #179394 by lorifoxbane on May 13, 2008 at 7:52 am
Good evidence for those who don't pay attention in school. He got his answer then how and why something like the houlocoust could happen. Ignorance, self perpetuated ignorance.1922. Comment #180832 by grillem on May 15, 2008 at 11:15 pm
I have not kept up with all of the postings so please excuse this comment if it has been dealt with before. It seems to me that Darwinism, eugenics and selective breeding are all comcepts that have much in common. Society, in general, today shelters and protects those that are less bright, able and fit. They do not die off and fail to breed as they normally would have done throughout history. Thus natural selection does not have a chance to opperate as it has in the past. For example, folks that are less bright with poor impulse control tend to have children at a higher rate than more intelligent individuals with good impulse control. Their lack of intelligence and poor impulse control would have done them in, in the distant past, and they would not have nearly the opportunity to breed and carry those traits forward. Much of Darwin's observations that have gone on forever in the distant past, no longer operate as they should. Does not the concept of eugenics and selective breeding come to the rescue to help stop the human race from actually moving backwards? This seems to me a very logical connection that should not be avoided. Also, since there are no absolute moral values to get in the way, would we not be serving the human race in positive way by utilizing these kinds of options?1923. Comment #180850 by MaxD on May 16, 2008 at 1:00 am
1924. Comment #181690 by rbannella on May 18, 2008 at 12:36 am
There are a lot of neo fascists, neo nazis, racists, fanatics in Europe.. But they don't talk of Intelligent Design nor they attack Darwinism.. Why this happens in the US? Who is paying for these campaigns? What they hope to gain from their financial investments?1925. Comment #181848 by stevmg on May 18, 2008 at 11:53 am
Ben Stein is among the anomlies of conservative Right Wing Jews (I myself am Jewish) which have been a minority up until now.1926. Comment #197032 by LilyBean on June 21, 2008 at 12:38 am
Great letter Richard.1927. Comment #197181 by Misael on June 21, 2008 at 9:47 am
just wondering what became of my comment.1928. Comment #197185 by epeeist on June 21, 2008 at 9:56 am
just wondering what became of my comment.According to the "Other Comments" link this is the only one that you have posted.
1929. Comment #197197 by TeraBrat on June 21, 2008 at 10:21 am
I feel bad for German people. No one lets the Nazi thing go. No one brings up the fact that the pilgrams that formed the US and Canada massicured 80% of the 100 million or more natives in the americas.
Not as if I am saying to forget about it, but it seems no one can shut up about it, while at the same time being completely ignored of the actual events and causes of the events. I think Japan is barely even mentioned in this because they got nuked, and people don't like to mention that. Though Germany too a massive beating to it's population and cities as well.
Anyone, I just think it must be increasingly frustrating if you're German. It seems no one can mention German without Nazism being in the sentence along with it. Which simply isn't fair.
1930. Comment #197205 by Misael on June 21, 2008 at 11:01 am
Thanks epeeist, mate, I must have done it wrong somehow.1931. Comment #197220 by epeeist on June 21, 2008 at 11:45 am
Actually I think he was straight on the money - have a look at http://www.expelledexposed.com/ for the lies and deceptions behind the film.
I think Professor Dawkins' terminology is over the top in his "open letter".
"unscrupulous", "wicked", "evil", "deliberate and calculated deception..."
1932. Comment #197225 by black wolf on June 21, 2008 at 11:54 am
1933. Comment #197258 by Misael on June 21, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Thanks epeeist --1934. Comment #197259 by Brian English on June 21, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Misael, the RD website is hosted in the US I believe. And only Zeus knows where Richard himself is.1935. Comment #197261 by Misael on June 21, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Darn it -- I'll never know what time anything is1936. Comment #197262 by mordacious1 on June 21, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Misael1937. Comment #197264 by Brian English on June 21, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Well, it's 6:37 am June 22 here which is GMT plus 101938. Comment #197281 by Corylus on June 21, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Misdirected aggression was how it came across!I would say vicarious rather than misdirected.
... it's also hard to see how the film, even if it misled "David J", could be said to have "cruelly" injured or harmed him.Really? Let's put this in context. How many letters to total strangers (not newspapers, but individuals) have you penned because you wish to express your anger and disappointment? What would it take to make you write the letter below?
Now I truly understand who you atheists and darwinists really are! You people believe that it was okay for my great-grandparents to die in the Holocaust! How disgusting. Your past article about the Holocaust was just window dressing. We Jews will fight to keep people like you out of the United States!The quote above appears to indicate a deeply agitated and emotional individual (by the exclamation marks if nothing else).* It is not surprising that he was lashing out in an uncontrolled fashion. He was viewing something he saw as an attack against his family (that vicarious anger again!) and, by extension, himself.
what he was saying was that he disagreed with Stein on the interpretation of certain historical data.If this were the impartial debate that you appear to be envisaging then this would be about the facts. It was not about the facts. The facts were deliberately misrepresented. Arguments about facts involve both parties sticking to them.
More worthy of an Oxford academic...Well, well, it does appear that Dawkins is a human being before being an 'Oxford academic'.
1939. Comment #197294 by TeraBrat on June 21, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I can see how on a first reading you might think that the language used was unwarrented. I am not trying to get at you :-)
However, when I sit and deeply consider this situation I find myself thinking it mild.
1940. Comment #197658 by Misael on June 22, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Thanks Corylus :-)1941. Comment #197663 by TeraBrat on June 22, 2008 at 12:58 pm
no, I'm afraid none of us who aren't Jewish can POSSIBLY understand. Though that doesn't let us off trying
1942. Comment #197735 by Corylus on June 22, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Thanks for that.No problem - always best to keep talking. :-)
a) the subject is hugeYou have got that right!
b) it seemed unlikely it hadn't been gone into, -- for all I know exhaustively -- already.I yes. I believe a few times on this thread. Why not read back a bit??
1943. Comment #198637 by rima_gerhard on June 24, 2008 at 10:31 am
To make matters worse, Ben Stein appeared on CNN's Glenn BEck Show and made the following outraegeoulsy false statements regarding the current state of euthanasia in Germany:1944. Comment #199751 by Misael on June 26, 2008 at 10:13 am
,Corylus:sigh, technology is not my strongpoint!
You mean like that??
I have only just found your reply. Still don't quite know why it wasn't underneath the other one...
Other Comments by Misael
1945. Comment #200904 by science_good on June 28, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Ben Stein appears on the Glenn Beck show on June 23rd and attacks Richard Dawkins, one of the world's most prominent atheists. To make his point, Stein claims that the Nazis derived their eugenics theory from Darwinism. Stein then goes on to claim that in the present time, German doctors are giving pills to old people for assisted suicide purposes. He also mentions that, close to where these events are said to have taken place, neo-nazis have desecrated jewish graves. The audience is supposed to believe "Darwinism=nazi=German". Stein is playing on the anti-German sentiment by associating Darwinism with Germans and nazis.1946. Comment #223915 by Peter K. on August 3, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Richard Dawkins and "Hmmmm":1947. Comment #242854 by supexcellency on September 4, 2008 at 3:17 pm
It is quite ironic, that a Jew is spewing hate towards people of other beliefs. It is almost as if I am looking into bizarro world. However, I can understand the psychological mechanism behind it. You find a person or group of people that have suffered a tragedy or misfortune. Then, you manipulate the facts in order to provide a culprit of such misfortune. What you get is a beautiful psychological "gut" reaction. Logic gets thrown out the window, and... as long as the victim has someone to blame, no further investigation is needed. For instance, parents of children with autism blame vaccination for this mental disorder. Reputable Science has been done on the hypothesis and there is no proof of such causation. The reason why people blame vaccines is because the diagnosis of autism is more or less done at the time that children are vaccinated. And, even though there's plenty of articles published that show that vaccines aren't the cause of autism, most parents can still not be persuaded.
1901. Comment #174383 by Quine on May 2, 2008 at 10:51 am
Of course, it is easy to quote some philosopher of the past who has not seen the recent DNA sequencing results, and never heard of Tiktaalik. I think there is a deeper fear that without dualism there is no means of breaking symmetry with regard to who deserves to have the respect (and social/economic status) of righteousness and who does not.
Other Comments by Quine