‘Concentration camp’ comparison insulting, absurd

Thank you for being one of our most loyal readers. Please consider supporting community journalism by subscribing.


Re: “Yes, those are concentration camps,” by Thomas L. Knapp, Saturday:

Thomas Knapp’s justification for seriously referring to the facilities at our border as actual “concentration camps” by only enumerating the parallels but skillfully omitting the stark differences and distinctions between the two allows us to make all manner or similar burlesque analogies.

Are iron lungs and toaster ovens the same because they are both metal and operate off electricity?

Is a hospital the same as Wrigley Field? Both admit people of all ages and ethnicities. Both charge for admission. Both have large parking facilities.

The fact — and a very relevant and important fact — is that the “concentration camps” in history were mandatory and the detention centers are not, that those detained voluntarily march 1,700 miles to get to these camps and that the “concentration camps” in World War II did not allow for the detained to leave but those at our border are, indeed, free to leave and return home by merely saying so makes the comparison an intellectual mockery.

Forget to what degree actual concentration camp survivors are offended, your logic metric is clownish.

Detention camps sometimes don’t provide toothbrushes. “Concentration camps” didn’t provide food

I have to close now and enter my liberal analogy “prison,” my SUV. I’m limited in my movement, must obey regulations, can only exit under certain conditions and I am in a confined space, so it is no different than an actual prison. Right? Right?

Mark Levin