The statue commemorating Anne Frank, one of the most famous victims of the Holocaust, was defaced with pro-Palestinian graffiti for the second time on Sunday.
The statue is located in Merwedeplein, near the Anne Frank House in Amsterdam.
According to images published on X, the base of the statue was spray-painted with the slogan “Free Gaza” while the girl’s hands were painted with the same red color, AFP reported.
It’s to make a statement and draw attention, protest is supposed to make you upset. That’s just how life works.
Ed:
Ie. Make the disrespect of Mrs Frank and her family visible by defacing a statue of her the same way Israel defaces Jewish history and legacy.
Many people find antisemitism to be upsetting. Just because it’s being done as protest to upset people doesn’t change what it is.
What’s antisemitic about it? The same thing that happened to her is happening to Palestinian children right now and this message is just highlighting the disparity between the two in the response from the rest of the world.
It’s not anti semitic it’s anti zionic, Otto famously refusing to move to Israel and instead to iirc Switzerland.
The fact people know who Anne is and what the protest is about makes it very telling when people say it’s anti semitic in the same way people say being anti zionic is anti semitic.
Anne Frank has nothing to do with Zionism. She was dead long before the formation of Israel. She represents the suffering, struggles, and genocide of the Jews at the hands of the Nazis.
It would be like walking up to a Jewish person, regardless of their position on Zionism, and punching them in the face and then trying to claim it isn’t antisemitism but a protest against Zionism.
Sorry, but it is. They might not realize that they are blaming all Jews for Zionism, but that’s precisely what they are doing.
Wrong, she’s a famous public figure who’s family are openly anti Israeli. Neither her not her father Otto are likely to take issue to drawing attention to genocide… You know being arguably the most famous victim of it. But no no she’s a Jew that’s all she’ll ever be, you’re right how shameful of me to suggest otherwise.
Not at all the same, who’s harmed here? Your best example is actual physical violence when we’re talking about inanimate property.
Nope what you’re doing is implying that because she is a new she cannot be a symbol for Palestinians actively being genocided by members of her faith.
Wait, you’re arguing that her family would be for them defacing her memorial? Wow. No wonder you have to make up my position.
What if they painted a swastika on it? No one was harmed. Is that also nothing like the analogy I made?
No, what I’m saying is that targeting her for the protest, when she has nothing to do with Israel, makes it pretty clear they are targeting her because she is a jew. If you want to deface a genocide memorial to make your point about Gazans being the victim of genocide, it wouldn’t expose your antisemitism if you targeted memorials of victims other genocides.
No, I suggested her family would be ashamed of you for reducing her to just a jew, you ignore the genocide victim section and instead claim antisemitism solely because she’s Jewish.
That’s hate speech, there’s laws for that. There isn’t for making valid comparisons.
She may have nothing to do with Israel, but she has everything to do with genocide, the fact you can’t see that over her religion is the fucking point.
I certainly never did anything of the sort. Which is what I mean about making up my position. You can’t debate what I said, so you have to make up something ridiculous to attack.
But this still doesn’t answer my question. We are talking about someone defacing her memorial, and you said “Neither her not her father Otto are likely to take issue to drawing attention to genocide.”
I can only interpret this one of two ways: either you think they would be okay with people defacing her memorial, or you think that I’m against drawing attention to genocide. I can assure you the latter is not true, but can you explain? Maybe I’m missing something.
I very explicitly told them what they could do about the genocide part of it without exposing their antisemitism.
Again, many other genocide memorials one could deface, including right in Amsterdam. You seem to be projecting: you think that I’m focusing solely on her being Jewish, while you are seemingly ignoring it from your point.
You are though, the fact you don’t see it is my point.
They wouldn’t have an issue with someone spattering a statue with paint to draw attention to something she died from and he lived through. No, that seems like common sense and Otto talked quite a bit about his feelings about genocide. I’m not even sure how you screwed up plain English that badly unless you’re simply trying to twist what I said.
They would be ok with someone defacing the memorial to draw attention to genocide, notice that haven’t made a statement something they would do of it bothered them. I’m saying your actions say you’re against drawing attention to genocide, your motivations may be different but looking from the outside in reducing someone to a jew and not a icon is pretty shitty behavior.
How did they expose their anti semitism? As far as I’m aware all they did was paint pro Palestine stuff, there’s no indication as far as I’m aware that any of it was directly anti semitic only that people have taken it that way because she is Jewish.
Are the others as famous? No? Are they Jews? No. You want then to “protest the right way” you’re part of the problem.
I get where you’re coming from but all this is going to do is fuel the fire under people who think support for Palestine is hate for the Jewish community as a whole.
People said that about MLK’s walks.
And if his walks included racist undertones those complaints would have been valid. Your rebuttal could be used against literally anything. The Oklahoma bombings were done in protest to Waco and other shit. You going to defend that protest because i think it was extremist and say it’s not the right way to protest? There’s a line and using MLK to justify crossing it is disgusting.
American white nationalists regularly insisted they did and claimed that they were being victimized by angry black mobs.
Subsequent efforts by Hoover’s FBI during the COINTELPRO operation aimed at black civil rights leaders attempted to stock those fears and legitimize them with fabricated evidence in support of the claim.
Yes that is my point. He wasn’t doing actual racist shit so they had to make stuff up. Genociders won’t have that problem here.
And large numbers of White Americans believed it, because they were primed to assume colored people were monsters.
Stocking the hate towards Arabs is a pivotal part of the war effort against Gaza.
And, in my opinion, spray painting “free gaza” on a statue depicting a jewish teenager who died in the holocaust is only going to help them have something to point at and say “see, we’re right”
If you look at a Holocaust victim’s memorial tagged with a condemnation of another Holocaust, and you think you yourself “Arab people deserve to be exterminated”…
They aren’t credible.
Are you saying the person who did the defacing is an agent of the Israeli government?
In the 1950s and 60s, they were considered extremely credible.
No more than I am suggesting J. Edgar Hoover was Jewish.
I don’t think so.
or the Mossad infiltrated black groups in the US, I suppose. 😏
Shrug George Wallace was a governor for multiple terms. Strom Thurmond was a senator for decades. Nixon won the South on racism.
Black radical groups tended to align with Islam, particularly later into the 60s, 70s, and 80s.
Calling it anti semitic is my definition making it racial, I didn’t do that.
That’s correct, it wasn’t an effective protest because it didn’t get the change he wanted but did put his word out there, right here today I could get that manifesto in less than 30 seconds.
I don’t think anyone is supporting violence like a bombing, this is literal paint. Calm down, they aren’t comparable at all.
used to deface a memorial to a victim of genocide.
To bring light to genocide.
Imagine for a second that Anne frank wasn’t a Jew just the most famous genocide victim of all time, would it then be ok to deface the statue being directly relevant to the reason for protest.
But she was Jewish. She was a Jewish victim of a genocide of jewish people. It is a very prominent opinion that those advocating for Palestinian liberation are promoting a genocide of jewish people.
Where in that graffiti do you see anti semitic anything.
As far as I’m aware red hands means there is blood on their hands and free Gaza means… I suppose this isn’t complicated but “free Gaza”.
You are adding anti semitism where there isn’t any.
How would it be relevant to the reason of the protest?
Oh Mr bot you’re not even making sense.
It may not be the same as a bombing but the people whose minds they’re trying to change are only going to close further because they don’t want to be seen as supporting anti-semitism. Which when you’re defacing a jewish child’s statue seems like a not so far off stretch.
It’s not at all the same thing, you’re being bombastic about stupid shit.
Defacing a genocide victims statue to bring light to an active genocide committed by members of her religion, famously mass victims of genocide now commiting genocide.
You’re part of the problem, stop with the “protest the right way” bullshit.
So you think it’d be logical and a good move for trans civil rights activists to deface an mlk statue? Since apparently defacing victim monuments is your idea of a productive protest, why isn’t it happening?
Do you know remember last year or two when there was a rash of statue defacement that sparked meaningful conversation, you seen to just be I’ll informed based on your two weird comments.
Protest the right way.
^((at least try to.)^)
Hey thrown out the window the right way.
They did and they were wrong but his walks also did not bolster claims of anti semitism by defacing memorials to holocaust victims
It bolstered the concept of the “entitled ni**er” at the time, read a newspaper taking about it before it happened.
Please link us to articles and commentaries in such (supposed) newpapers.
I’ll look them up when I get home but your trying to get me to prove racist comments in 1964 and somehow think that’s a high bar to jump.
Either history escapes you or you are wildly ignorant.
Good luck, and try to make them major dailies. Rantings by, say, The KKK Times won’t count.
both.
You honestly think it’s going to be hard to find racism in a newspaper from 1964, you know sitting marches about racist shit in newspapers for instance.
Bold admission boss, seriously. Your creator has some work to do.
I get that angle, I do. I just question whether the statement works or not. Do you think the majority of people will interpret these actions that way? Do you think this will paint a good picture of anti-zionist action to the wider international public? Drop the “pro-palestinian” part and the headline reads like probably neo-nazi action. And I do firmly believe that’s how it will be interpreted. I’m a revolutionary leftist like I’m all for taking action this action just serves not to advance the cause but actually to degrade it. This action legitimizes accusations of anti semitism levied at anti zionists. That is exactly how it will be interpreted that is the exact story they will tell.
They’ll always try and accuse us of being antisemitic, see the college protests for example. But that was contentious like the public was not united in opposition to that because protesting on campus is not on its face value antisemitic. But defacing a statue of a girl who was murdered in a genocide of jewish people does NOT come across as anti-zionist action. We do NOT have to stir up outrage over disrespecting holocaust victims to advocate for Palestinian liberation.
Not to mention can we not have some respect for Jewish people within our movement? How do you think this makes them feel? An innocent girl who died due to virulent antisemitic hatred being brought into a conflict over another genocide. Jewish people tell us they don’t always feel safe in leftist circles. This is also not helping that in any way
I think the conversation is only elevated the now annoyed they are about the protest act. Historically effective protest is to literally rattle as many cages as possible, people get annoyed and take a side.
English suffrage was only gained by breaking windows, burning buildings, donning cardboard armor then learning judo and beating the absolute shit out of cops.
Ed: I think it’s more disrespectful for her to drag the Jewish faith along with Zionists solely because they claim the same religion, that’s the whole point of attacking a famous Jew that cannot physically be harmed only defaced temporarily.
To be clear, totally down with civil unrest. This is not civil unrest. This is defacing a statue of a universally known holocaust victim. A victim who was a helpless child.
Rattling the cage of “innocent victims of genocide” is literally the last fucking cage anyone should ever rattle like what are you talking about. This is the shit that neo nazis do. This action puts us in league with neonazis in the mind of the majority of the public like what do you mean?? Also how is defacing genocide victim statues doing anything to further our cause of international recognition of the genocide of Palestinian?
Break some windows. Civil unrest, fight back against the states that support this genocide. No question yea do that. Don’t deface Anne Franke statues like I genuinely can’t even believe this has to be said. Again, how do you think this makes jewish anti-zionists feel? Does this make them feel welcome in our movement?
Correct that’s protest, the fact that you find it repugnant is irrelevant. You’re talking about it, you wouldn’t be if they painted pro Palestine stuff anywhere else.
Anne and her father are both dead and their family aren’t pro Israel, just as an fyi because their cages literally couldn’t get rattled. I meant people like you, people more wrapped up in the statue and it’s visage than the reason it was defaced in the first place. Yes, everyone protests, that’s not the dig you think it is.
This is a broken window, it hurts literally no one and says a lot. Are you arguing for other means that often turn more violent than anonymous defacement? Why? You’re valuing a chunk of material depicting a famous over millions of Innocent Palestinians, why is that?
What’s your opinion of Qur’an burnings and depictions of the pedophile prophet?
Legit speech, go for it.
Though I will point out three fact that the only one who’s being objectively racist and bigoted here is you just now with that statement.
You like Jews and don’t like Muslims, good for you but maybe keep your hate speech to yourself.
There are many Christians and Muslims, and the few Jews I’ve meet, that I like; but all 3 of their religions are dumb.
Calling a man who had sex with a 9 year-old a pedophile isn’t hate speech.
Sure, I don’t disagree religion is dumb.
It is, the bible and Torah also have incest and pedophilia, pointing out one but not the others implies one is worse than the others.
I didn’t say it was hate speech btw, I said you were being racist and bigoted which you objectively are.
Did you miss the part where i said that I understood the intent but am calling out how this makes our movement look like fucking neo nazis? Do you want to re read what I’ve said please before throwing more baseless accusations at me?
No I wouldn’t give a shit if they painted pro Palestine messages on any non-holocaust related memorials. Because that wouldn’t make us look like neo nazis. This does. People are going to talk about this on the news today and millions of people will shake their head and lend more credence to claims that we are antisemites. And Jewish anti zionists now know that due to their religion some anti zionists are entirely willing to throw them under a bus in the name of “rattling cages”.
It doesn’t make anyone look like neo Nazis aside from the people who cannot see duality.
Yes she’s a Jew, neat.
She’s also the most famous victim of genocide ever.
There’s a current genocide that is being committed by isrealis a famously majority Jewish nation.
The fact that you can’t see her as anything but a Jew is more telling of you than anyone else.
Re read the first paragraph of the comment you’re responding to. I’m not interested in continuing this conversation if you are entirely incapable of considering how this will be viewed and how this impacts people without our own movement.
The way it will be viewed is the point!
There trying to force people to see that people can be two things, a Jew and a victim of genocide and that dichotomy is important considering the current genocide is being committed by Jews against Palestinians largely because of religious and possesive reasons.
I’m not interested in talking with anyone who refuses to go full stop, I don’t enjoy apologists.
She was murdered before 1948.
Super irrelevant Mr bot.