Societe Nationale des Chemins de Fer Francais(SNCF)  is bidding to get a piece of the lucrative contracts to build the United State’s first high speed rail tracks.  Plans for high-speed rails were announced by President Barack Obama.   Nothing out of the ordinary  until you add in some creepy and disturbing historical context.

Sixty-Nine years before they made their current play to transport us at high speed around the United States, SNCF was transporting Jews at relative high speed to concentration camp gas chambers during the Holocaust. Between 1941 and 1944, 3,000 wagons — originally designed for the transportation of cattle — were used by the SNCF to transport Jews to Nazi death camps.  Holocaust survivors and others are voicing their opposition to SNCF being part of the high speed rail process.

This is not the 1st time a foreign company with Holocaust ties has caused controversy when trying to do business in this country.  In 2008,  the Germany based financial services giant(the largest in the world),  Allianz received similar treatment when they announced that they would bid for the naming rights to the NFL’s New York Jets and New York Giants new Meadowlands Stadim. Allianz  has its name on Allianz Arena in Munich, Germany.   That’s the relative present.  In the historical past, Allianz insured the building of concentration camps.  In the past Allianz  had given money owed to Jewish beneficiaries of their life insurance policies to the Nazi authorities instead.

At first,  Like Allianz,  SNCF  poured on excuse after excuse of justification and order following to minimize their historical complicity in mass murder. SNCF  argues that it had no control over railroad operations when France was under Nazi occupation from 1940 to 1944. It was simply under orders to transport Jews to death camps. The following orders” argument goes directly to the moral low ground explicitly rejected in the Nuremberg Trials  and other war crimes tribunals.  It is insultingly despicable that it would even be put forth in a  good faith attempt to deal with the facts.  In January, faced with the prospect of  the loss United States high speed rail contracts,  SNCF finally did proffer a formal apology for its role.

States are now also taking steps to ensure that any company involved in the Billion Dollar nationwide project, disclose any involvement with the Holocaust. In California, lawmakers had passed a bill to ensure this,  but it was subsequently vetoed by then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.  The bill would have forced companies  wanting to bid on a share of  California’s $45 billion high-speed rail project to disclose whether they transported Holocaust victims.  Maryland has  passed legislation requiring  SNCF  to disclose, as a condition for receiving their rail contract, to disclose it’s role in transporting 76,000 people loaded in 76 cattle cars to their death in Nazi camps.

More recently, SNFC struck a deal with the  state of Florida to fund a Holocaust education program with an 80k donation.   Is this enough?  Many survivors do not think so calling it “tainted money”.

To a large extent time is taking care of the most vocal objections.  Within 10 years there will be few if any survivor left.   Many of us will always remember but many will forget, especially when profits make it expedient to do so. Will “Holocaust Tainted” companies care anymore then?

To quote a line  from the movie, The Social Network, “You Don’t Get To 500 million friends(now 750 million) without making a few enemies.”  Within any population sample whether it be brick and mortar or the online social sphere there will be a percentage of content that is hateful, offensive, and downright violent in nature.

A 2010 report, by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, found 14,000 hate and terrorism related web sites which constituted a a 12 percent increase from the prior year. Previous reports have targeted Facebook and YouTube as prime breeding grounds for this subculture of hate.  Now entering stage left is Google+  on pace to be the fastest growing social network ever.  It remains to be seen whether this growth can be sustained. There is however one certainty. Part of that growth will entail content that one group or another considers offensive.  Currently in the invite mode, we have yet to see much(if any) traditional hate speech content.  That is not to say that there are not racists, antisemites and homophobes among the early adopters.  Basic  demographic probabilities say there are.  They are simply not making themselves known because they currently lack a forum to have courage in numbers with the anonymity of groups pages which Google+ does not currently support.  Once the platform opens up however, it seems that features such as Circles, Huddle and Hangout with  multi-user ability will be prime to bring small minded individuals to a common place much in the same way as Facebook groups accomplish that function. Whose going to know about your “Holocaust Deniers” or “KKK member circle?  Build that circle, use Huddle and Hangout to prime the pump. You’re off and running in  much more subtle in insidious manner than traditional content postings.  How will Google monitor this?   It will obviously be(and is) a user based reporting system.  Hopefully Google+ will provide the tools, and be staffed to be more responsive and articulate than Facebook when it comes to dealing with hate speech reporting.  Google+ does have their initial “Content Policy” in place.  It is a strict and detailed one.

HATE SPEECH: “Do not distribute content that promotes hatred or violence towards groups of people based on their race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity”

This is a very specific and much more restrictive content policy than Facebook. It would indicate that Google will take a dim view of many types of unpopular speech that Facebook currently allows.  Facebook’s content policy with regards to hate speech reads as follows:

“You will not post content that: is hateful, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence”

Facebook”s policy is purposely vague.  They would rather make the decision with finality in a back room on what is “hateful content” than get into thousands of disputes with users over what content violates their content policy.  They do not want to die the death of a thousand razor cuts by having to staff to deal with it. Google+ has such a specific content policy that they may very well find they are dying that very death when the platform opens up.  What we see today in terms of prohibited content may not be what we see six months or a year from now.  Facebook’s vague policy has led to some very public disputes over  content that promotes Holocaust Denial, photos of  women breastfeeding and  Klu Klux Klan pages  just to name a few.

While the 1st Amendment does not apply to private social networks, they all strive to  strike a balance between a First Amendment corollary to the  free exchange of ideas and limiting offensive speech.  Where will Google+ fall on these issues?  Their 1st attempt goes well beyond a 1st Amendment type mindset and I expect that there will be push- back as the network grows.   In the early stages of Google+ it is all kisses and kumbaya but that will change.

The mayor of Arlington, Texas is pissed off.  Someone has created a fake Twitter account in his name and is making fun of him.  The horror of it all!

Arlington Mayor, Robert Cluck  has asked police to investigate a Twitter account using his name and photo.  The account named “Fake-Robert Cluck” is clearly a parody account designed to criticize Cluck.

It appears that Mayor Cluck has taken the fact that the Texas online harassment law was really designed to protect children and others from legitimate online bullying to heart.  He has decided to act like a child and attempt to twist the state law to snuff out the 1st Amendment and those who choose to criticize his performance through the use of parody.  Like a 10 year old crying to his mommie, he wants the other kids in school to stop saying mean things about him.

That the  mayor of a large community can not understand the basics of 1st Amendment protected parody and attempt to usurp a state law designed to protect children and others from legitimate, safety threatening harassment is beyond disturbing. This highlights the problem with anti-harassment statutes in general. They are rarely in comport with the 1st Amendment and consistently abused for personal agendas.  The bright side is that this is such an obvious case of 1st Amendment protected speech that someone who at a minimum took a high school civics class can set him straight.

In addition to not understanding the 1st Amendment, Mayor Cluck will be SOL in his attempt to get Twitter to remove the account.  Twitter actually has guidelines as to Parody accounts.  The fake Cluck account is well within those guidelines.

Here is the bottom line.  If there is another fake account set up under Cluck’s name, he can assume I am behind it.  I am making it easy on you Robert! Come and get me!  I really had no idea who you were before now but I have the 1st Amendment right to parody you, criticize you in your official duties and and generally say very mean things about you on the internet if I want to. I can use a parody Twitter account to do it as well.  I understand the 1st Amendment.  If you can’t grasp it or have a basic understanding of the Texas Anti-Harassment statute shame on you. Maybe you should educate yourself or resign.

Societe Nationale des Chemins de Fer Francais(SNCF)  is bidding to get a piece of the lucrative contracts to build the United State’s first high speech rail tracks.  Plans for high-speed rails were announced by President Barack Obama.   Nothing out of the ordinary  until you add in some creepy and disturbing historical context.

Sixty-Nine years before they made their current play to transport us at high speed around the United States, SNCF was transporting Jews at relative high speed to concentration camp gas chambers during the Holocaust. Between 1941 and 1944, 3,000 wagons — originally designed for the transportation of cattle — were used by the SNCF to transport Jews to Nazi death camps.  Holocaust survivors and others are voicing their opposition to SNCF being part of the high speed rail process.

This is not the 1st time a foreign company with Holocaust ties has caused controversy when trying to do business in this country.  In 2008,  the Germany based financial services giant(the largest in the world),  Allianz received similar treatment when they announced that they would bid for the naming rights to the NFL’s New York Jets and New York Giants new Meadowlands Stadim. Allianz  has its name on Allianz Arena in Munich, Germany.   That’s the relative present.  In the historical past, Allianz insured the building of concentration camps.  In the past Allianz  had given money owed to Jewish beneficiaries of their life insurance policies to the Nazi authorities instead.

At first,  Like Allianz,  SNCF  poured on excuse after excuse of justification and order following to minimize their historical complicity in mass murder. SNCF  argues that it had no control over railroad operations when France was under Nazi occupation from 1940 to 1944. It was simply under orders to transport Jews to death camps. The following orders” argument goes directly to the moral low ground explicitly rejected in the Nuremberg Trials  and other war crimes tribunals.  It is insultingly despicable that it would even be put forth in a  good faith attempt to deal with the facts.  In January, faced with the prospect of  the loss United States high speed rail contracts,  SNCF finally did proffer a formal apology for its role.

States are now also taking steps to ensure that any company involved in the Billion Dollar nationwide project, disclose any involvement with the Holocaust. In California, lawmakers had passed a bill to ensure this,  but it was subsequently vetoed by then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. The bill, would have forced companies  wanting to bid on a share of  California’s $45 billion high-speed rail project to disclose whether they transported Holocaust victims.  Maryland has now  passed legislation requiring  SNCF  to disclose, as a condition for receiving their rail contract, to disclose it’s role in transporting 76,000 people loaded in 76 cattle cars to their death in Nazi camps.

Will we reach a historical point where companies who wish to shed their Holocaust past can do business without fear of negative publicity and blackballed business dealings?  To a large extent time is taking care of that.  Within 10 years there will be few if any survivor left.  Many of us will always remember but many will forget, especially when profits make it expedient to do so.  There however,is still  time for companies who have not adequately confronted their past to do so and re-brand themselves for the future without excuse or justification.