Israel to block Irish UN religion motion

[CaptainClark23]

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2003/1212/3151954265HM1MOTION.html

=snips=

Israel is to try to block Ireland's annual UN resolution condemning religious intolerance, because it does not include a specific condemnation of anti-Semitism

Ireland, which has sponsored the resolution for 20 years, declined Israel's request this year to include a condemnation of anti-Semitism, on the grounds that it would lead to the perception of a hierarchy of religious intolerance and detract from the resolution's universal scope.

=endsnips=

Religious intolerance is bad, but anti-semitism is much much worse!!

This is getting really stupid. Its all about Israel, ain't it. Oops, call the ADL, that could have been construed as an anti-semitic remark so I must be an anti-semite!

enough of this crap already, yes, there's hatred in the world. Israel isn't the only target of it. Suck it up, get a helmet. This kind of nonsense doesn't win Israel any more friends. Self-perpetuating feelings of persecution.

forgive the rant.

[Muddleoftheroad]

1. Hey, just get a thick skin

Forget about that Holocaust thingie...

[CaptainClark23]

3. I do hope you realise

That your comment in no way reflects my sentiment, the intent of my words, or my reasons for not appreciating this decision by Israel. I also hope that you do not seriously believe that my opposition to, and frustration with this issue indicates any kind of denial of the "Holocaust thingie" or its significance.

I will assume that your reference to the Holocaust is to make a point as to the origins of Israel's particular sensitivity to the issue of anti-semitism. That point is well understood, but in this particular case has no bearing on this specific issue, IMO.

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. My comment

Israel has tried like hell to get the UN to pass a resolution about anti-Semitism. It has failed, in part because not everybody things it is a bad thing.

While anti-Semitism has been around for a long time, certainly the largest instance of it is the Holocaust. But it is alive and well today and Israel must deal with it on a daily basis.

Your comment: "Religious intolerance is bad, but anti-semitism is much much worse!! This is getting really stupid. Its all about Israel, ain't it. Oops, call the ADL, that could have been construed as an anti-semitic remark so I must be an anti-semite!"

That was not exactly understanding of the Israeli situation.

[CaptainClark23]

11. granted

"Your comment: "Religious intolerance is bad, but anti-semitism is much much worse!! This is getting really stupid. Its all about Israel, ain't it. Oops, call the ADL, that could have been construed as an anti-semitic remark so I must be an anti-semite!"

That was not exactly understanding of the Israeli situation."


You are correct, and I realise the seeming insensitivity, hence, my initial apologies for the rant.

However, I still maintain that blocking a resolution calling for a universal condemnation of religious persecution works against Israel's efforts to have anti-semitism specifically addressed by the UN (which I understand has been a long uphill battle).

Ireland herself is certainly no stranger to religious prosecution, and too has lost millions for it, a century before the Holocaust, and earlier.

For a better explantion of why Ireland declined to put in specific language regarding anti-semitism, I direct you to Irish Foreign Minister Brian Cowen who addressed the issue specifically (sorry for the length, I tried to excerpt, but I think each bit is relevant to the discussion):


"Minister Cowen response to Parliamentary Questions on Ireland's resolution at the UN General Assembly on the Elimination of all forms of religious intolerance

For nearly 20 years, Ireland has proposed and been the principal sponsor, at both the UN General Assembly and the UN Commission on Human Rights, of a resolution on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance. Ireland took on this role because the UN Declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance based on religion or belief was adopted at a time when Ireland held the post of Chair of the Third Committee (Humanitarian and Social Affairs) of the General Assembly; Ireland was instrumental in securing the adoption of the Declaration in the face of considerable opposition.


The resolution aims to address all instances of religious intolerance or discrimination based on religion or belief, irrespective of where they occur or who are the victims. Sadly, instances of religious intolerance are widespread. They can be found all over the world. We are not just talking about discrimination against Moslems, Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, other world religions, or even non-believers. Frequently, it is a case of discrimination between different branches of the same religion.

Accordingly, we have over the years received numerous requests to include mention of specific forms of religious intolerance or discrimination. Until this year, we and the other co-sponsors had consistently maintained that, while the instances in question were indeed matters of great concern to us, to include specific references to them – and not to other instances of the problem - would detract from the universal scope of the resolution. This position of principle had in general been accepted.

It has therefore been the Government's firm and consistent view that singling out mention of discrimination against particular faiths – be it Judaism, Islam, Christianity, or any other – should be avoided. We do not recognise a hierarchy in the wrongness of religious intolerance, even though we readily acknowledge that at certain moments of history members of particular faiths have been singled out for the most savage and extreme persecution. Nobody should deny that this has all too often been the fate of those who follow the Jewish faith.

The Government's position regarding anti-semitism is clear; we condemn it in all its manifestations, without reservation. The fact that our draft resolution on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance does not make specific mention of discrimination against members of the Jewish faith or any other faith in no way diminishes our abhorrence of anti-semitism. The suggestion by the representatives of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre that the Government's position is tantamount to an act of anti-semitism is misguided, to say the least, and should be withdrawn. The same goes for their wider insinuations regarding Ireland's position in relation to anti-semitism. These statements are not worthy of further comment by me.

The question of anti-Semitism was addressed at the 2001 World Conference Against Racism (held in Durban), which called upon States to recognize the need to counter anti-Semitism, and urged all States to take effective measures to prevent the emergence of movements based on racism. Following on from the World Conference, it is generally considered that anti-Semitism is most appropriately dealt with in UN resolutions dealing with racism. Ireland and our EU partners share this view. Accordingly, we are currently supporting a US proposal to include a reference to anti-Semitism in a resolution on the incompatibility between democracy and racism (which addresses, inter alia, the question of neo-Nazism, neo-Fascism and other ideologies based on racism, racial discrimination and related intolerance).


The resolution sponsored by Ireland on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance has for many years been adopted by consensus in the general assembly. It has also succeeded in attracting a large number of States to co-sponsor it. These two elements – consensus and a wide level of co-sponsorship – have been important factors in enabling us secure the adoption of a valuable resolution on the sensitive subject of religious freedom.

However, earlier this year at the Commission on Human Rights, we agreed after objections and with considerable reluctance, to accept a US amendment to our draft resolution inserting specific reference to anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. Both the amendment and the resolution itself were subsequently forced to a vote and the traditional consensus on the elimination of all forms of religious intolerance was lost. In bringing the issue to the General Assembly, the Government has, therefore, decided to stand by its long-held position of resisting the singling out of discrimination against members of particular faiths.


I am of the view that our long-standing policy of approaching the question of religious freedom from a universal perspective is the appropriate one, and one which is widely shared among the member States of the United Nations. If it transpires in the course of the forthcoming debate in the General Assembly that the Assembly would prefer a resolution which does single out discrimination against members of some faiths over discrimination against members of all faiths or none, then we will consider yielding Ireland's traditional position as principal sponsor of this resolution to a member of the UN which is convinced of the correctness of such an approach."

http://www.irlgov.ie/iveagh/information/display.asp?ID=1342

Makes alot of sense to me, from that standpoint. I don't see how blocking this resolution helps Israel's efforts a single bit. On the contrary, I see this as another step of alienating Israel from her international neighbors, and thereby fueling anti-semitism worldwide.

[Malva Zebrina]

19. the holocaust was 60 years ago.

it is time to stop trying to play that card. Israel got it's own country--it is now a country that is a brutal as any can be toward those it does not want around. It is country that continues to play this holocaust card--Yugoslavia and other countries have also suffered holocausts--gypsies suffered holocausts--and if you want to go back into time and history, many have suffered similar fates. The "anti-semitism" moniker is old already. Too many people who are NOT anti-smeitic in the least bit have been called anti-semitic because they do and will not support Sharon's Likud, murdereous party that is "defending itself against all of the anti-semities out there. Like Saddam--who was NOT a threat to Israel by any stretch.

I think this has something to do with the pronouncemnet of Baradei--Israel--get rid of those hidden nukes--why? we NEED nukes to "defend ourself" from all the anti-semitic people who want to attack us because we are Jews. That is what I think is behind this public, unusual, announcement on the part of Israel--demanding to receive special status. Ireland is right--

[Muddleoftheroad]

20. Israel will stop playing the card when it is no long appropriate

Right now, it still applies.

It's not like getting a state has been all cookies and cream for Israel. Getting a state has result in numerous wars so it can fight for survival. Israel is still surrounded by enemies who work against it, support terror and many who swear to destroy it.

The only thing that truly stands in the way of that destruction is its ability to do massive destruction on its enemies. Their seeking to remove its last line of defense is not surprising, but not selfless either.

[Malva Zebrina]

42. It is inappropriate right now

when after twenty years, Israel decides that Ireland needs to be told that anti-semitism is more important that other religious intolerance so as to declare it's special status on the stage of intolerance.


Getting into a squabble over which holocaust and which intolerance is better and more deserving than the other, is really stupid and childish, especially when for twenty years, in the same situation, it was not mentioned.


It rings hollow and it is playing an old, dog eared, tattered card because Israel itself is now also engaged in ethnic cleansing and also engaged in ruthless murder of those they would deem to be not welcome and whose assets they indeed have taken by force or stolen.

-yes it is ethnic cleansing-it is also murder-.

[0007]

48. Ethnic cleansing could be applied to the American Indian,

could it not? Oh, I forgot they were pagan heathens, and that made it okay!

[Malva Zebrina]

50. someone should initiate a thread on the ethnic cleansing of indiginous

American Indian tribes. They as of now, have not been totally eliminated but are pretty much of mixed blood now and want casinos.

A people without the technology and that was their downfall. As well as the ethnic cleansing and slaughter of the pagan indigenous peoples of South America by the Christian Spaniards, as well as the slaughter and total, brutal, treatment of those indigenous, gentle,kind, passive and loving, trusting pagan Indians by the Christian Columbus. So much of it in history--the brutality of the English toward the French Acadiens--forcing them to march and give up their homelands and farms in Canada-to be forced to march south-they ended up as our Cajuns-and mmm some good food there, as I remember from the last time I travelled in Louisiana.

That was history--now we got countries with nukes--instead of swords and pikes.

[blindpig]

44. they didn't "get" a state, they took a state

but that too is history. Israel certainly has a right to exist, but is necessary for them to recognise the evils they have done and be fair to the people they have wronged. Not doing that has perpetuated the bloodshed as much as the other side. Of course, the US gov should do the same for our great sins.

[Chovexani]

45. The Porrajmos never ended.

It still goes on today for Gypsies--people of Roma descent--all over the world. Where is the condemnation of that?

I empathise greatly with the Jewish people for the suffering they have endured over the centuries but I agree with you, Ireland's position on this issue is reasonable, and I see nothing wrong wth it. I also believe Israel does itself a disservice by constantly playing the anti-Semite card against anyone who does not explicitly tow the party line or who might dare to disagree with some of its policies.

--C.

[Astarho]

47. No it didn't

I agree with everything you said. Check out the Patrin for more about that Roma.

http://www.geocities.com/Paris/5121/patrin.htm

[Zhade]

22. It's ironic for Israel to so fervently press for such a UN resolution...

...all while violating over sixty U.N. resolutions itself.

(Am I now considered an anti-semite for pointing this out?)

[damnraddem]

30. Anti-semitism is religious intolerance, so covered by the ...

Irish resolution. Yes, anti-semitism has been associated with racism, but then so have anti-Islamic attitudes. The Holocaust stands out as an event by the level of genocide -- but other such events, including Christian crusades against other Christians, differ not in intent but only in ability to achieve their ends. In sum, anti-semitism is horrible, a form of religious intolerance, but not worse than other forms of religious intolerance.

Israel may have had trouble getting an anti-semitism resolution through the UN. That is not helped by blocking the Irish resolution. In fact, it smacks of incredible stupidity, not to mention arrogance in denigrating all other condemnation of religious intolerance in favor of condemning only anti-semitism. But given Israel's track record with the Palestinians, it is likely that Israel has no interest in condemning other forms of religious intolerance -- since that would be to condemn their own practices.

[htuttle]

4. Should we forget about...

...that Inquisition thingie?
...and that decimation of the indigineous Americans in the name of God thingie?

That's the trouble with trying to 'prioritize' the intolerance and religious hate. Why should I have to decide which was worse, the Holocaust or the Inquisition? Both were very bad. We need to make sure nothing happens like that again, whether it's to Christians, Jews, Moslems, or Pagans. Or Buddhists. Or Sikhs. Or Hindus. (see, it's better to not start listing specifics, and just stay with the general rule: Pograms are bad.).

[Pale_Rider]

6. ... and surely not forget Christian on Christian intolerance ...

... which is the impetus of Ireland's resolution. Protestant and Catholics in Northern Ireland don't get on well. Bob Jones University should come to mind.

[madddog]

32. but that's a *fairly* recent phenomenon

Keep in mind the founding fathers of Irish Nationalism, and some of it's earliest martyrs, were ALL Protestant.

There are a myriad of other reasons that led to the problems in Northern Ireland over the last 70 years, not the least of which is the failure of the English government to revisit the borders after partition. It was widely held at the time the Brits would simply give up Derry, which was overwhelmingly Catholic, and So. Armagh, as fiercely Republican a piece of real estate as anywhere on the island. Had they done that, then there wouldn't have been much impetus for the modern day troubles.

It really evolved into a classic "haves and have nots" case, which just happen to be along religious lines. Had there been any form of equal/civil/judicial rights for Catholics, from Partition to '69, they never would have had to take to the streets to get them.

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. Intolerance and religious hate

Jews were victims of both the Holocaust and the Inquisition and have been victims of such hatred for a couple thousand years. It gets old when the UN won't even admit it.

[bemildred]

10. Refusing to single out one example of a thing is not

the same thing as denying it.

The UN acknowledges anti-semitism, as can be easily proven
by looking around their web site, and it is Ireland here that
is merely refusing to single out one religious bigotry relative
to the many other past and present instances of such.

[htuttle]

12. Buddy -- Pagans have had the same trouble for at least as long

In fact, by and large, officialdom doesn't even recognize it as an organized religion anymore, nor has the UN even said one word about it.

And we didn't even get our own country!

Why play the 'who was screwed worse' game? Best to concentrate on nobody getting screwed anymore in the name of God(dess).

[Chovexani]

46. So mote it be. (n/t)

[truthspeaker]

14. won't admit it?

They've passed resolutions condemning religious intolerance for 20 years.

[durutti]

17. So have the Roma

And of course the UN acknowledges that anti-Semitism exists. You're taking this event completely out of context.

[mitchtv]

39. Much more diplomatic to do it Ireland's way

that way they don't lose all the Muslim votes. Who is writing it anyway? if Isreal wants a resoultion against anti semitism, let her present one. Does she disagree with the premise of Irl's proposal?

[durutti]

15. Some things for you to forget, Muddle...

- the Turkish genocide of the Armenians

- the Iraqi, Iranian, and Turkish genocides of the Kurds

- Burundi's genocide of the Hutus and the Tutsis

- the DRC genocide of the Hutus

- Sudan's genocide of the Nuer, the Dinka, and the Nuba

- Uganda's genocide of the Acholi, the Lango, the Karamoja, the Baganda, and the Banyarwanda

- Nigeria's genocide of the Ibos Tiv, the Hausa, the Yoruba, and the Ogoni

- the genocide in Rwanda

- the British genocide of the Irish

- the Cambodian genocide of the Vietnamese

- the American and European genocides of the American Indian

- the Nazi genocide of the Roma

And many more...

[mmm]

23. Damn, that is quite a list

[madddog]

37. as for Ireland,

it was the ENGLISH, not the Scots or Welsh that were resonsible for that one...I hate to lump my Celtic brothers in with the Saxons.

"God brought the blight, the English brought the famine."

[PsychoDad]

33. But....

The nazi Holocaust of Jews was about race, not religion. Christian Jews died as well as other jews in the camps. I should also hasten to add that many others died in the camps also, homosexuals, Jehova's witnesses, etc.

But even given that, the practice of racial cleansing is equally vile and wrong whatever the race. All human life should be equally sacred. Is a jewish child's life worth more than a black child, or an Indian child ? - Of course not.

The thing that is so interesting about the Irish resolution is that it simply declares religous persecution wrong, regardless of the religion, or the persecuter. Isreal wishes to make a special note for anti-semitism, and unless they get it, they will not support the right of any other religion not be persecuted.

simple as that.

Why can't Israel be happy with a blanket resolution?
Any religious persecution is wrong. Peroid!

[underpants]

2. Great now we have the Israeli-Irish issue

JUST what everyone needed.

:eyes:

If they've done this for 20 years why fight it now? That's like protesting a Charlie Brown special at this point.

[soleft]

13. well now that you mention it.....

The exclusion of Peppermint Patty from the Xmas play.....

[Pale_Rider]

16. There has been a kindred association between the Irish ...

... and the Palestinians in someway symbolic of the troubles in the North. Sometimes Palestinian flags will be flown in the Catholic neighborhoods and the Star of David will be flown in Protestant neighborhoods. So perhaps Isreali demands are a sort of 'punishment' for Irish identification with (though separate from) the Palestinian cause.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20030101faessay10219/michael-scott-doran/palestine-iraq-and-american-strategy.html

Palestine-as-symbol has a protean nature, a capacity for expressing grievances wholly unrelated to the aspirations of the Palestinians themselves. In Northern Ireland last summer, for example, the Irish Republican Army raised the Palestinian flag over Republican strongholds. Why? Because for many around the world, this pennant now expresses simple anticolonial defiance, the protest of those who believe their native rights have been trampled under the boots of foreign rulers. (Not to be outdone, Unionists countered by flying the Israeli banner over their neighborhoods.)

The migration of Middle Eastern symbolism to a remote corner of Christian Europe would hardly be noteworthy were it not for the fact that the Palestinian flag plays a similar role throughout the Arab world itself, where it often expresses grievances unrelated to the specifics of Palestine-as-place. In addition to serving as a front for venting anger at local repression, unemployment, and inequity, Palestine-as-symbol expresses the resistance of Arabs and Muslims to Western political and cultural hegemony.

[CaptainClark23]

21. true, but...

The association between The Republican, Catholic faction of Northern Ireland and Palestine is rooted, as you excerpt says, in anticolonial defiance. The Republic of Ireland, which holds a seat at the United Nations is only connected to that association by proxy (i.e. same Island).

If this IS some sort of "punishment" on Israel's part against the Republican faction of Northern Ireland, it is not only badly misplaced so as to be laughable, but a VERY weak card to play given the negative message that the blocking of this resolution sends.

To follow the logic, Israel would be saying that since Republicans of N. Ireland support Palestinian Independence, the Republic of Ireland must be anti-semitic. Its Like saying that because some border Texans are in favor of tough immigration policy, New Yorkers don't like Mexicans.

[Muddleoftheroad]

24. Not just that

IRA terrorists trained and worked together with many of the Palestinian terror groups.

[CaptainClark23]

25. Right

and what has that to do with religious intolerance and persecution?

Zionist terrorists bombed the King David Hotel to get the Brits. I'm certain those individuals felt a kinship or association with the Irish Republican Army then.

Irish Republicans also cooperated with Germany during WWII...it PROVES they are anti-semites! It must be punishment for that! Surely no one could want to be free of a colonial yoke THAT badly. could they?

You're making reference to a terrorist group in British controlled Northern Ireland. Not the Republic of Ireland.

Not the Irish People as a whole.

As I just said above, making a connection between the two and using it as a justification for blocking a UNIVERSAL condemnation of religious persecution is ridiculous and illogical.

Surely you're not justifying a condemnation of the Republic of Ireland because of the activities of certain terrorists who are (for the most part) living under in the territory of and under the control of a Government apart and seperate from the Republic of Ireland?

Why, that would be akin to making anti-semitic remarks because of the policies of the State of Israel.

[Muddleoftheroad]

51. The IRA

Much of the IRA's history is terror within Ireland itself, not just NI.

As for the King David Hotel, it was the HQ for the British Army, a military target and STILL they were notified of the bomb ahead of time. That's not terror.

Yes, Irish Republicans also cooperated with Germany during WWII. It doesn't prove anti-Semitism, but it sure as hell doesn't disprove it.

You might note I was trying to explain some of the flag situation and how the pro-IRA folks use Palestinian flags.

[drewb]

27. Is it too late to build a wall around Ireland???

:think:

[madddog]

34. there already IS one...

in various bits of Northern Ireland...ironically called the "peace wall".

read about it here:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/belfast_peacewalls/

and a better indictment of failed British policy in NI you'd be hard pressed to find. 30 years on, and THIS is what they've got?

[SiobhanClancy]

35. The Irish would probably like to sometimes...

to keep all the eejits out.

[htuttle]

36. The Romans already tried that with Scotland long ago...

Didn't work.

[Bridget Burke]

41. No need for a wall----there's a sea

"The Sea Around Us" by Dominic Behan

They say that the lakes of Killarney are fair
No stream like the Liffey could ever compare
If it´s water you want you´ll find nothing more rare
Than the stuff they make down by the ocean

The sea, oh the sea is the gradh geal mo croide
Long may it stay between England and me
It´s a sure guarantee that some hour we´ll be free
Oh thank God we´re surrounded by water

Tom Moore made his waters made fame and renown
A great lover of anything dressed in a crown
In brandy the bandy old Saxon he´d drown
But throw ne'er a one into the ocean

The Scots have their whisky, the Welsh have their speech
And their poets are paid about tenpence a week
Provided no hard words on England they speak
Oh Lord! What a price for devotion

The Danes came to Ireland with nothing to do
But dream of the plundered old Irish they slew
´Yeh will in your Viking, said Brian Boru
And he threw them back into the ocean!

Two foreign old monarchs in battle did join,
Each wanting each head on the back of a coin
If the Irish had sense they´d drowned both in the Boyne
And partition throw into the ocean!

(He also wrote "The Patriot Game"--a more sobering look at the situation.)

[pinto]

49. Thks so much, My Grandma sang this to me years ago, n/t

[bemildred]

5. All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

[madddog]

38. yes, Orwell was right!

you've hit the nail on the head.

[Copperred]

8. Friends dont manipulate....the co-operate.

What the Israeli righters are not realizing is that by continuing with these manipulative tactics it does risk losing its only friend.

All you have to do is drive threw the midwest and ask normal folk about the current circumstances and ull have a good idea of what independent Americans are thinking.

[loudnclear]

18. It is getting more and more stupid and dangerous.

Keeping company with Israel, the US and Israel will be the most hated nations on earth. Way to go Aerial and GW!

[madddog]

26. for bette or worse,

that started WAY before Sharon and Bush.

[MrPrax]

28. I am naive, but is religious intolerance

the same as racism?
I always put anti-semitism in the racism category?

Religious intolerance strikes me as being qualitatively different than out and out racism?

Can Jews be separated from the Judeaism part--or have they become synomous?

Just wondering...
(arguing who's Holocaust is worst seems to miss the point)

[CaptainClark23]

29. good question

Isn't "Semite" a racial designation?

are there other Semites besides jews?

anyone?

[htuttle]

31. Well,

Not all Semites are Jewish (Arabs are technically Semitic, for example).

Not all Jews are Semites (Many are from Europe, Africa, etc...).

I'd say that in practice, 'anti-semite' refers to religious intolerance.

I'm not sure I'd agree it's qualitatively different. Just as England used to consider the Irish a separate 'race', there are anti-semites who themselves consider their hatred 'race-based' (bigots of all flavors have never been overly concerned with accuracy).


(and I otherwise agree with your parenthetical note).

[pinto]

40. I think Israel considers them one and the same, inseparable

[ikojo]

43. The difference between pre Nazi antisemitism and post

Nazi antisemitism is as follows:

BEFORE the Nazis: a Jew could rid himself of the "curse" or "stain" of Jewishness by conversion to Christianity. Jewishness was seen as a spiritual condition remedied by becoming a praciticing Christian. As a matter of fact admission to certain levels of European society required conversion and many Jews reluctantly did so in order to move up in society.

Hitlerian antisemitism: along came European nationalism of the late 19th century, eugenics of the early 20th century and the Nazis...with this strain of antisemitism a Jew was a Jew was a Jew. Even conversion to Christianity could not rid one of the "curse" or "stain" of Jewishness. During Hitler's reign there were MANY Germans, raised in the Lutheran or Catholic faith, who were totally unaware that they had a Jewish grandparent and thus were considered a Jew by the Nazis (although on a higher racial plane than a Jew with four Jewish grandparents).

When Jews think of antisemitism in the 21st century it is the Nazi variety that they think of. Even Jews who have heaps and gobs of money think of what they need should things change in the US. Of course this strain of thought is more common among the Holocaust generation, even if they were born in the US.