Todd wrote:

That was an "association". Hitler murdered any devout
believer. Same as the IRA in Ireland, which call themselves
"Catholic" and are not. It is an "association". And,
by the way, an automatic excommunication from the Catholic
Church.

And that murderous *******, Ian Paisley, calls himself a Presbyterian....

Higgs Boson wrote:

"The Invisible Wall" by W. Michael Blumenthal, is a scholarly account of
how far back in history German Jew-hatred can be traced.

As I mentioned in another post, Martin Luther certainly got his licks in. Of
course Germany wasn't an isolate instance. When were Jews expelled from
Britain? When were they allowed back? Columbus and the Jews sailed the ocean
blue in 1492 too. Or became maranos. France? Yeah, they're real liberal.
Poland? Another paradise, to this day.

trader_4 wrote:

The German economy was doing just fine in the 1920's after
WWI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperin...eimar_Republic

Yeah, right Want to buy a 50 million Mark postage stamp? England and France
wanted to eliminate Germany as a competitor forever and that gullible fool
Wilson stood by with his thumb up his ass.

Funny thing. England is a has been, good only for dysfunctional royals and
providing a Greek chorus for US presidents, while the French dream of having
it as good as the Germans. If the EU survives, it will be with German
leadership. It took 70 years but guess who won.

Stormin Mormon wrote:

CY: Get back at the Jews who shot him? Could be.

Not really. One thing that soured him was the German Revolution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_...8%E2%80%931919

That was seen as a stab in the back and the cause of the capitulation when
the war might have been concluded with a more equitable armistice.

Jews were overrepresented in the KPD (Communist Party of Germany) with some
in very visible leadership positions;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Luxemburg

Many central European countries suffered from Communist inspired revolts.
One of the worst was in Hungary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Terror_(Hungary)

Again Jews were greatly overrepresented in the Communist party.

On the other end of the spectrum, bankers profited from the war and were
.....

There were certainly other factors. Hitler had lived in Vienna and wasn't
impressed by the backward Orthodox Jews he dealt with there. Later his
mentor, Dietrich Eckart, was a virulent anti-Semite, along with Feder and
Rosenberg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_Eckart

As HB mentioned, the roots go deep. Even Marx took a shot at the problem:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/mar...wish-question/

CY: I'm not sure but what I'd do the same to the
Germans if I were writing treaties.

That worked so well in the long run. Everybody thought WWI would be a jolly
little war over by Christmas. Assigning all the blame and punitive damages
to Germany was bull****.

nestork wrote:

I don't think Adolf Hitler hated Jews any more than he hated Mormons or
Gypsies. He was heavily influenced by Lenin, who in turn was heavily
influenced by Darwin.

What part of your butt did you pull that out of?

trader_4 wrote:

I think you're wrong. He hated the above too, but from speeches,
writings, etc I think it's obvious he hated Jews more, referring to them
often as the "filthy jew". He passed laws that stripped Jews of their
rights to be citizens, to marry outside their race. Did he do that to
Mormons?

Did the Mormons ever claim to be a race with roots going back to God? If
your mother was a Mormon, are you automatically a Mormon? Did God ever
promise the Mormons so real estate uf they could kill of the Canaanites.

There is a distinct hazard to thinking of yourself as the chosen and never
quite assimilating into the prevalent culture. Having high profile members
in unpopular ocupations doesn't help either.

Like the Japanese say, it's the nail that's sticking up that gets hammered.

Todd wrote:

The Nazis picked the "mentally handicapped" in brightly
colored buses and promised to take them to wonderful
institutions. Then ...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell

"It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate
offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can
prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. [...]
Three generations of imbeciles are enough."

Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. Justice, United States Supreme Court. 1927


Almost 90 years later, the US is running an imbecile farm.

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 9:39:26 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
Todd wrote:
[...]
It's a slow read but Rigg's 'Hitler's Jewish Soldiers' documents a strange

phenomenon. The most famous was Field Marshall Erhard Milch:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erhard_Milch

When critized for using Milch, Goering said: "Wer Jude ist, bestimme Ich!" (I decide who is a Jew!)

His mother wasn't Jewish so he technically wasn't a Jew but a Mischling and
was declared an Aryan. That's where the book bogs down, the minute
examination of the racial laws.

Even sadder, many middle class German Jews thought of themselves as Germans
and really didn't like the backward eastern Jews either. They thought Hitler
was just talking about the kaftan wearing Orthodox from the polish shetls..

This was the case in other (Central?) European families as well. Film I've seen several times: "Sonnenschein" = Sunshine, with Ralph Fiennes playing character in saga about 3 generations of an aristocratic Hungarian Jewish family and their eventual fate under the Nazis. (Though my late mother said that the Arrow Cross, the Jew-hating Hungarian fascists, made the Nazis look like boy scouts.)

The snobbery you cite was replicated in New York, as the wealthy, long-established German Jews with their hochkultur patronized the "wretched refuse of [your] teeming shores" -- the late 19th & early 20th flood of poor Jews from Central/Eastern Europe. Sure, they did their duty under Jewish law to take care of their poor coreligionists, but in a condescending way -- at arm's length.

"Our Crowd" by Stephen Birmingham.

HB

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:01:09 PM UTC-7, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 19:35:51 -0400, Stormin Mormon

wrote:

I suspect you mean predates?

Tx, but "antedate" also works.

_Hitler responds to the new apple iPad _

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uMQL-C_0Ec

chuckle

Roger that! I spattered the screen!

HB

On 8/6/2014 7:45 PM, Todd wrote:
Now for Christians:

10 “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall
not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant,
nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey,
nor anything that is your neighbor's.” Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV

Means you can not be a Socialist. So Hitler was out. The
real German Christians were the ones who risked and often
lost their lives to protect the Jews. Christians then
as now act the same.

-T

As I read it, covet is what a greedy capitalist does.
Socialists, well, they just manage what is already
there.


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 8/7/2014 7:25 AM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:01:09 PM UTC-7, Oren wrote:
On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 19:35:51 -0400, Stormin Mormon

wrote:

I suspect you mean predates?

Tx, but "antedate" also works.


HB

Definition of ANTEDATE
: a date assigned to an event or document
earlier than the actual date of the event
or document

So, the Jew hating of Hitler's day was
falsely dated, as being earlier?

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 7:30:48 PM UTC-4, Todd wrote:
On 08/06/2014 04:14 PM, trader_4 wrote:

Yes, it worked spectacualarly well in Europe and Japan. And it's also

failed miserably in other countries where we've tried the same thing

recently, eg Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems the culture and values

of the people have a lot to do with it.



Where we succeeded, our military still has a presence

some 70 years later.



Where we did not succeed is where we "cut and run".

Depends on what idiot(s) we have running the show at

the time. Iraq is paying the penalty and Afghanistan

is going to start paying it shortly. Vietnam

payed for "cut and run" real bad too.



I don't think it's anywhere near that simple. The experiences
in Europe/Japan and Iraq/Afghanistan post war were very different
from day one. In the former case, once the war was over, there
was no significant continued hostilities, no terrorism, no sectarian
militants. In Europe/Japan, the people immediately set about
peacefully rebuilding their countries.
In the case of Iraq/Afghanistan, you had exactly the
opposite, with sectarian militants, terrorists, that started as soon
as the war ended. They are vastly different cultures. And with
Vietnam, there is every reason to believe that we could still have
been there fighting for decades, losing even more than the 50,000
lives we lost. Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are very similar in
important respects. The people there, for the most part, were unwilling to
fight for their own country and the USA had to shoulder the major portion
of the burden. You can see that right now in both Iraq and Afghanistan,
where their armies are ineffective, even after more than a decade of
US training and handholding. All of those countries had corrupt,
ineffective govts that the people didn't believe in. The major mistake
was in not learning from Vietnam that we can't fix everything, everywhere.
And assuming that all people, freed from an oppressive dictator, will
choose a path to peace and freedom.




And we will have both sects of Muslims competing

with each other on how many of us they can kill.

There are orders of magnitude more of them that want to just kill each other.
They've already proven that with the casualties so far. I'm not saying we
shouldn't do anything, but clearly the idea that we can build nations in that
environment has been proven to not work.

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 8:18:33 PM UTC-4, Todd wrote:


That's factually incorrect. There were a lot of people killed in the USSR,

but the death toll from WWII in Europe and Africa was many times the number who

died at the hands of Stalin and the Russian commies.







I would love it if it were so, less dead folks.

The death tool from the Ukrainian terror famine,

dwarfed Hitlers camps.



You have a different, limited system of counting. You're apparently
only looking at the deaths in Hitler's concentration camps and not
the real number that died as a result of Hitler. The latter is a
total of over 60 million people that died in WWII, 50mil+ of which
were in Europe, and those 50 mil at least, are directly attributable
to Hitler.




http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/socialisms-death-count/



What�s not appreciated is that Nazism is a form of

socialism. In fact, the term Nazi stands for the

National Socialist German Workers� Party. The unspeakable

acts of Adolf Hitler�s Nazis pale in comparison with the

horrors committed by the communists in the former Union

of Soviet Socialist Republics and the People�s Republic

of China. Between 1917 and 1987, Vladimir Lenin, Josef

Stalin and their successors murdered and were otherwise

responsible for the deaths of 62 million of their own

people.


The above is pretty much a fluff piece. There is no actual data,
no definition of what he's counting and not counting. He just tosses
out a number, anyone can do that. It's clearly
not just those that died in the gulags or were deliberately executed,
not to get to that number. If you have a factual analysis that goes
through the numbers, that would be interesting.

In article , Todd
wrote:


And we will have both sects of Muslims competing
with each other on how many of us they can kill.

The only upside is that they will also be working REALLY hard at seeing
how many of the other sect they can kill. Divided attention.
--
³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital.²
‹ Aaron Levenstein

On 08/07/2014 04:40 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/6/2014 7:45 PM, Todd wrote:
Now for Christians:

10 “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall
not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant,
nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey,
nor anything that is your neighbor's.” Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV

Means you can not be a Socialist. So Hitler was out. The
real German Christians were the ones who risked and often
lost their lives to protect the Jews. Christians then
as now act the same.

-T

As I read it, covet is what a greedy capitalist does.
Socialists, well, they just manage what is already
there.


Hi Stormin',

Remember that the term "capitalist" is an insult
term that was made up by Marxists to describe
the free market. "Capitalism" is simply a financial
tool and has be used widely by socialist monsters
(Nazi, Soviet, etc.) in the past, primarily to
fund their hideous war machines.

To define the free market: the free and open exchange
of good and services between consenting parties.

Under socialism, you live off the sweat of someone else's
brow.

Now under the free market, this is the way it works:
In order to meet your own needs, you must meet the
needs of your customers. Requires very little policing,
mainly to keep folks from cheating. The free market
channels self interest for the common good.

In my business, I live it and breath it daily. If i
don't meet my customer's needs, I starve. I have to
admit to being a bit sick and tired of having the
free market called "greedy". I serve others or
I starve.

But, you already know all this and were teasing.
Fell for it pretty good. One point for you.

-T

On 08/07/2014 06:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 8:18:33 PM UTC-4, Todd wrote:


That's factually incorrect. There were a lot of people killed in the USSR,

but the death toll from WWII in Europe and Africa was many times the number who

died at the hands of Stalin and the Russian commies.







I would love it if it were so, less dead folks.

The death tool from the Ukrainian terror famine,

dwarfed Hitlers camps.



You have a different, limited system of counting. You're apparently
only looking at the deaths in Hitler's concentration camps and not
the real number that died as a result of Hitler. The latter is a
total of over 60 million people that died in WWII, 50mil+ of which
were in Europe, and those 50 mil at least, are directly attributable
to Hitler.




http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/socialisms-death-count/



What�s not appreciated is that Nazism is a form of

socialism. In fact, the term Nazi stands for the

National Socialist German Workers� Party. The unspeakable

acts of Adolf Hitler�s Nazis pale in comparison with the

horrors committed by the communists in the former Union

of Soviet Socialist Republics and the People�s Republic

of China. Between 1917 and 1987, Vladimir Lenin, Josef

Stalin and their successors murdered and were otherwise

responsible for the deaths of 62 million of their own

people.


The above is pretty much a fluff piece. There is no actual data,
no definition of what he's counting and not counting. He just tosses
out a number, anyone can do that. It's clearly
not just those that died in the gulags or were deliberately executed,
not to get to that number. If you have a factual analysis that goes
through the numbers, that would be interesting.


I would love to be wrong.

On Thursday, August 7, 2014 2:14:48 PM UTC-4, Todd wrote:
On 08/07/2014 06:41 AM, trader_4 wrote:

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 8:18:33 PM UTC-4, Todd wrote:





That's factually incorrect. There were a lot of people killed in the USSR,



but the death toll from WWII in Europe and Africa was many times the number who



died at the hands of Stalin and the Russian commies.















I would love it if it were so, less dead folks.



The death tool from the Ukrainian terror famine,



dwarfed Hitlers camps.







You have a different, limited system of counting. You're apparently

only looking at the deaths in Hitler's concentration camps and not

the real number that died as a result of Hitler. The latter is a

total of over 60 million people that died in WWII, 50mil+ of which

were in Europe, and those 50 mil at least, are directly attributable

to Hitler.









http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/socialisms-death-count/







What�s not appreciated is that Nazism is a form of



socialism. In fact, the term Nazi stands for the



National Socialist German Workers� Party. The unspeakable



acts of Adolf Hitler�s Nazis pale in comparison with the



horrors committed by the communists in the former Union



of Soviet Socialist Republics and the People�s Republic



of China. Between 1917 and 1987, Vladimir Lenin, Josef



Stalin and their successors murdered and were otherwise



responsible for the deaths of 62 million of their own



people.





The above is pretty much a fluff piece. There is no actual data,

no definition of what he's counting and not counting. He just tosses

out a number, anyone can do that. It's clearly

not just those that died in the gulags or were deliberately executed,

not to get to that number. If you have a factual analysis that goes

through the numbers, that would be interesting.





I would love to be wrong.

As I said, if you have someone making a reasonable detailed analysis,
showing what the criteria was, as opposed to just claiming a number,
I'd be happy to see it. Otherwise, you don't know what is included,
what is counted, what isn't. I suspect you'll find that the numbers
that purport to show those 60 mil+ numbers include even the kitchen sink.
And if you count on that basis, you'd have to similarly take the highest numbers for WWII, in which case I think Hitler still exceeded the Russians.

On Thursday, August 7, 2014 4:44:58 AM UTC-7, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/7/2014 7:25 AM, Higgs Boson wrote:

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:01:09 PM UTC-7, Oren wrote:

On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 19:35:51 -0400, Stormin Mormon



wrote:



I suspect you mean predates?



Tx, but "antedate" also works.





HB



Definition of ANTEDATE

: a date assigned to an event or document

earlier than the actual date of the event

or document

I checked before my earlier post.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Antedate

HB

On 8/7/2014 2:13 PM, Todd wrote:
On 08/07/2014 04:40 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:

As I read it, covet is what a greedy capitalist does.
Socialists, well, they just manage what is already
there.


Hi Stormin',

Remember that the term "capitalist" is an insult
term that was made up by Marxists to describe
the free market. "Capitalism" is simply a financial
tool and has be used widely by socialist monsters
(Nazi, Soviet, etc.) in the past, primarily to
fund their hideous war machines.

To define the free market: the free and open exchange
of good and services between consenting parties.

Under socialism, you live off the sweat of someone else's
brow.

Now under the free market, this is the way it works:
In order to meet your own needs, you must meet the
needs of your customers. Requires very little policing,
mainly to keep folks from cheating. The free market
channels self interest for the common good.

In my business, I live it and breath it daily. If i
don't meet my customer's needs, I starve. I have to
admit to being a bit sick and tired of having the
free market called "greedy". I serve others or
I starve.

But, you already know all this and were teasing.
Fell for it pretty good. One point for you.

-T

Not teasing. Covet is what greedy capitalists do.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

On 8/7/2014 5:24 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Thursday, August 7, 2014 4:44:58 AM UTC-7, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/7/2014 7:25 AM, Higgs Boson wrote:

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:01:09 PM UTC-7, Oren wrote:

On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 19:35:51 -0400, Stormin Mormon



wrote:



I suspect you mean predates?



Tx, but "antedate" also works.





HB



Definition of ANTEDATE
: a date assigned to an event or document
earlier than the actual date of the event
or document

I checked before my earlier post.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Antedate

HB

So, Hitler put earlier dates on his documents?


--
..
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

trader_4 wrote:

50mil+ of which
were in Europe, and those 50 mil at least, are directly attributable
to Hitler.

I'd say many of those millions were from Stalin's choice to supply the
Wehrmacht with an endless supply of action targets.

Todd wrote:

Under socialism, you live off the sweat of someone else's
brow.


9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

10. The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually
and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the
interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework
of the whole for the benefit of all Consequently we demand:

11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-
slavery.


'The program of the NSDAP'

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/25points.asp

Under capitalism, the wealth live off the fruits of their rent-seeking
activities. They hardly break a sweat when buying politicians.

Higgs Boson wrote:

The snobbery you cite was replicated in New York, as the wealthy,
long-established German Jews with their hochkultur patronized the
"wretched refuse of [your] teeming shores" -- the late 19th & early 20th
flood of poor Jews from Central/Eastern Europe. Sure, they did their duty
under Jewish law to take care of their poor coreligionists, but in a
condescending way -- at arm's length.

I grew up in upstate NY in a small whitebread town, but was bussed into the
neighboring city for high school. To put it mildly, there was a certain
snobbishness and clique formation among the well to do Jewish kids. The
poorer Jews were pretty much out in the cold. I had one friend who was what
was called a DP, or displaced person. His family didn't have much money
after escaping from Europe and his English was passable, but not great. He
was well beyond the pale as far as the snobs were concerned.

There was a lot of ethnic diversity and kids tended to hang with their own
crowd but most of the groups didn't have such a well defined pecking order.

Higgs Boson wrote:

(Though my late mother said that the Arrow Cross, the Jew-hating Hungarian
fascists, made the Nazis look like boy scouts.)

Arrow Cross definitely was a piece of work. The rest of the story is they
had lived through the Hungarian Soviet Republic. It didn't last long but it
was a piece of work too. Kun, Szamuely, Lukács, Landler, as well as a lot of
the rank and file of the Communist Party had Jewish roots. Not every Muslim
is a terrorist; not every Jew is a blood thirsty Bolshevik. The psychology
never changes. They're different, they're threatening our culture, kill
them.

Stormin Mormon wrote:

So, the Jew hating of Hitler's day was
falsely dated, as being earlier?

Judenhass is as old as der ewige Jude.

On Thursday, August 7, 2014 7:17:32 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote:



So, the Jew hating of Hitler's day was

falsely dated, as being earlier?

Judenhass is as old as der ewige Jude.

I think Stormie is confusing grammar usage with Hitler's appropriate of the millennial Jew-hatred for construction of his Thousand Year Reich.

HB

On Thursday, August 7, 2014 8:42:08 PM UTC-7, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Thursday, August 7, 2014 7:17:32 PM UTC-7, rbowman wrote:

Stormin Mormon wrote:



So, the Jew hating of Hitler's day was falsely dated, as being earlier?



Judenhass is as old as der ewige Jude.



I think Stormie is confusing grammar usage with Hitler's appropriate of the millennial Jew-hatred for construction of his Thousand Year Reich.

Oops - "appropriation"

HB

On Thursday, August 7, 2014 9:39:55 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
trader_4 wrote:



50mil+ of which

were in Europe, and those 50 mil at least, are directly attributable

to Hitler.



I'd say many of those millions were from Stalin's choice to supply the

Wehrmacht with an endless supply of action targets.

Just like the rest of the Allies did. That's what you have to do when
your country is invaded. The deaths are still the direct result of Hitler.

I think the most important point that's not been mentioned so far in this thread is how both the Nazi and Allied governments used propoganda to motivate their populations. In England, German soldiers were portrayed on posters as quazi-neanderthal apes that killed babies with their bayonettes. In Germany, Jews were portrayed on posters as having many of the same characteristics as rats.

With a free media and television, both sides of any conflict are presented to the public on both sides of a border, so the use of propoganda is no longer available to any government to motivate their population to do anything. A good example of that is the Al Jazira television network that interviews both sides of conflicts (primarily in the middle east).

The only thing that bothers me is that I still see examples of governments lying to their people in order to get the populations support to do what that government wants.

1. In the USA, the most obvious example was when the US government said that prescription drugs imported from Canada weren't as safe as US drugs. In fact, in many of those cases, the drugs sold in Canada and those sold in the US were made in the same factories in Canada, and the only difference was the packaging or just the labels on the packaging. It wasn't until a US Senator or Congressman decided to investigate the matter for himself that the US Pharmaceutical Lobby in Washington fell silent because they knew that what he would uncover would prove what they were saying wasn't true.

2. In Canada, a recent example was when John Baird, the Canadian minister for Foreign Affairs said that Canada would not accept the results of a referendum in Eastern Ukraine because of the presence of Russian backed troops in that area. The inuendo was that people would vote to join Russia for fear of being shot. In that case, Baird was counting on the Canadian public to be ignorant enough about Ukrainian politics to accept that arguement as being a valid one. In recent months, Ukrainians have elected a leader who is acceptable to both eastern and western Ukraine. There are still differences in sentiment between Eastern and Western Ukraine, but neither side wants to see the country break apart. You no longer hear the Canadian nor the US government criticizing the Ukrainian election because the leader that was elected isn't pro-east nor pro-west. He's 100% pro-Ukraine.

On Friday, August 8, 2014 9:57:43 AM UTC-4, nestork wrote:
I think the most important point that's not been mentioned so far in

this thread is how both the Nazi and Allied governments used propoganda

to motivate their populations. In England, German soldiers were

portrayed on posters as quazi-neanderthal apes that killed babies with

their bayonettes.

Given that their troops were helping oversea the killing of Jewish and Gypsie children, handicapped childre too, it sounds like the Britts had it about
right.



In Germany, Jews were portrayed on posters as having

many of the same characteristics as rats.



The Germans had it wrong.




With a free media and television, both sides of any conflict are

presented to the public on both sides of a border, so the use of

propoganda is no longer available to any government to motivate their

population to do anything. A good example of that is the Al Jazira

television network that interviews both sides of conflicts (primarily in

the middle east).



The only thing that bothers me is that I still see examples of

governments lying to their people in order to get the populations

support to do what that government wants.



1. In the USA, the most obvious example was when the US government said

that prescription drugs imported from Canada weren't as safe as US

drugs. In fact, in many of those cases, the drugs sold in Canada and

those sold in the US were made in the same factories in Canada, and the

only difference was the packaging or just the labels on the packaging.

It wasn't until a US Senator or Congressman decided to investigate the

matter for himself that the US Pharmaceutical Lobby in Washington fell

silent because they knew that what he would uncover would prove what

they were saying wasn't true.



2. In Canada, a recent example was when John Baird, the Canadian

minister for Foreign Affairs said that Canada would not accept the

results of a referendum in Eastern Ukraine because of the presence of

Russian backed troops in that area. The inuendo was that people would

vote to join Russia for fear of being shot. In that case, Baird was

counting on the Canadian public to be ignorant enough about Ukrainian

politics to accept that arguement as being a valid one.


I can't believe that you've posted this crap yet again. You first
brought this up a couple months ago. It wasn' true then and it
isn't true now. What Baird said is consistent with what the USA and
Europe said, which is that free, civilized countries don't accept
election results held under a gun. Russian troops have no business
in Ukraine and they and the thugs they are supporting are not allowing
free, fair elections. They arrested and locked up the major political opposition. Then they held a bogus and unconstitutional election
with Russian troops in the streets. Is that how you conduct elections
in Canada? Baird got it right, you have it wrong.



In recent

months, Ukrainians have elected a leader who is acceptable to both

eastern and western Ukraine. There are still differences in sentiment

between Eastern and Western Ukraine, but neither side wants to see the

country break apart.

Really? I don't know what news service you watch. The separatists,
backed by Putin, want exactly that, to be annexed by Russia. They pulled
that stunt in Crimea, now they are trying to repeat it and take more
of Eastern Ukraine. And they are fighting for exactly that, to join
Russia. Poroshenko is not acceptable to them. Differences in sentiment? Yeah, I'd say so. One side is shooting down airliners and denying access to
the crash site while the bodies rot. One side is supported by Russian
troops, Russian military hardware, and russian lies. Good grief.



You no longer hear the Canadian nor the US

government criticizing the Ukrainian election because the leader that

was elected isn't pro-east nor pro-west. He's 100% pro-Ukraine.




First, I don't know when the US, Canada or Europe criticized the recent
Ukranian election. They might have criticized the fact that part of eastern
Ukraine was under occupation at the time. As for Poroshenko, he clearly is fighting the separatists and the Russian troops. He's relying on the West
for support. He recognizes Putin for the thug that he is and he knows
exactly what Putin is up to. I don't think you do.

On 08/07/2014 06:39 PM, rbowman wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

50mil+ of which
were in Europe, and those 50 mil at least, are directly attributable
to Hitler.

I'd say many of those millions were from Stalin's choice to supply the
Wehrmacht with an endless supply of action targets.



The word "tactic" never crossed their minds. The
human wave attack was their method. Just rush
in without a weapon and pick up the rifles from the
first wave. All these deaths have to be placed at
both the Wehrmacht and the Soviet monsters that
sent them into battle. Almost no Russian family
did not lose someone(s).

And, remember, the Soviets carved up Poland with
the Nazis. The are just as much the aggressor as
was Hitler. (Stupid mistake, one socialist monster
attacking another.)

On 08/07/2014 02:37 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/7/2014 2:13 PM, Todd wrote:
On 08/07/2014 04:40 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:

As I read it, covet is what a greedy capitalist does.
Socialists, well, they just manage what is already
there.


Hi Stormin',

Remember that the term "capitalist" is an insult
term that was made up by Marxists to describe
the free market. "Capitalism" is simply a financial
tool and has be used widely by socialist monsters
(Nazi, Soviet, etc.) in the past, primarily to
fund their hideous war machines.

To define the free market: the free and open exchange
of good and services between consenting parties.

Under socialism, you live off the sweat of someone else's
brow.

Now under the free market, this is the way it works:
In order to meet your own needs, you must meet the
needs of your customers. Requires very little policing,
mainly to keep folks from cheating. The free market
channels self interest for the common good.

In my business, I live it and breath it daily. If i
don't meet my customer's needs, I starve. I have to
admit to being a bit sick and tired of having the
free market called "greedy". I serve others or
I starve.

But, you already know all this and were teasing.
Fell for it pretty good. One point for you.

-T

Not teasing. Covet is what greedy capitalists do.

Doesn't work, if you don't server your customers.

On 08/07/2014 06:45 PM, rbowman wrote:
Todd wrote:

Under socialism, you live off the sweat of someone else's
brow.


9. All citizens must have equal rights and obligations.

10. The first obligation of every citizen must be to work both spiritually
and physically. The activity of individuals is not to counteract the
interests of the universality, but must have its result within the framework
of the whole for the benefit of all Consequently we demand:

11. Abolition of unearned (work and labour) incomes. Breaking of rent-
slavery.


'The program of the NSDAP'

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/25points.asp

Under capitalism, the wealth live off the fruits of their rent-seeking
activities. They hardly break a sweat when buying politicians.



Wonderful words.

Problem is that it has never worked. And worse, to try and
get it to work, they need an "emergency" to get people
act the way they they want, like a war. And a huge police
state to enforce things.

You wind up with an extremely wealthy ruling class and an
extremely poor general population. Plus a lot of propaganda
about how wonderful things were. Oh the wheat grew over
our heads! (That from the Ukrainian terror famine, with American
Pravda repeated.)

And as far as buying politicians, what exactly do you think
happens in socialism? All the moneyed interests run off
to the government and buy favors. In Nazi Germany, everyone
bought their own protected market. That is a the hazard of
an large over reaching central government. The original Soviet
instigator were all rich! Well, except Marx.

Don't mistake intentions, like the words you show above,
for actual result. People don't act that way. For the
better good, you need to force people to meet others
needs to meet their own need (the free market).

And, by the way, Capitalism is a financial vehicle, used
extensively by Nazis, Soviets and all socialists, usually
to fund their hideous war machines. The dialectics here
is not between capitalism and socialism, it is between
the Free Market and Socialism.

By the way, the most successful socialist are the ones that
try not to kill the goose that lays the golden egg (the
free market), but simply tried to tap its resources
to a point.

Definition of a Liberal: one who would rather live in
tyranny in poverty then live in freedom and let the
guy next to him use that freedom to do better
that he does.

On 08/07/2014 06:18 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 7:30:48 PM UTC-4, Todd wrote:
On 08/06/2014 04:14 PM, trader_4 wrote:

Yes, it worked spectacualarly well in Europe and Japan. And it's also

failed miserably in other countries where we've tried the same thing

recently, eg Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems the culture and values

of the people have a lot to do with it.



Where we succeeded, our military still has a presence

some 70 years later.



Where we did not succeed is where we "cut and run".

Depends on what idiot(s) we have running the show at

the time. Iraq is paying the penalty and Afghanistan

is going to start paying it shortly. Vietnam

payed for "cut and run" real bad too.



I don't think it's anywhere near that simple. The experiences
in Europe/Japan and Iraq/Afghanistan post war were very different
from day one. In the former case, once the war was over, there
was no significant continued hostilities, no terrorism, no sectarian
militants. In Europe/Japan, the people immediately set about
peacefully rebuilding their countries.
In the case of Iraq/Afghanistan, you had exactly the
opposite, with sectarian militants, terrorists, that started as soon
as the war ended. They are vastly different cultures. And with
Vietnam, there is every reason to believe that we could still have
been there fighting for decades, losing even more than the 50,000
lives we lost. Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan are very similar in
important respects. The people there, for the most part, were unwilling to
fight for their own country and the USA had to shoulder the major portion
of the burden. You can see that right now in both Iraq and Afghanistan,
where their armies are ineffective, even after more than a decade of
US training and handholding. All of those countries had corrupt,
ineffective govts that the people didn't believe in. The major mistake
was in not learning from Vietnam that we can't fix everything, everywhere.
And assuming that all people, freed from an oppressive dictator, will
choose a path to peace and freedom.




And we will have both sects of Muslims competing

with each other on how many of us they can kill.

There are orders of magnitude more of them that want to just kill each other.
They've already proven that with the casualties so far. I'm not saying we
shouldn't do anything, but clearly the idea that we can build nations in that
environment has been proven to not work.



Hi Trader-4,

You make a lot of good points.

Some things I wold like to add. In WWII the war was definable
not over when it was over. The was for the peace went on for
many years. If memory serves me, it was 7 year in Germany and
8 years in Japan. The Germans were called Whearwolfen (no
idea how to spell it). We would catch them and tie them to
a fence post and shoot them. That was back when we were serious.

Also, we did win the war with the Socialist pig Saddam and the
peace afterward. But that is not the only war being fought.
And that one will go on until we kill every Muslim extremist,
the regular Muslins stop supporting them, the Muslims
have a "reformation" were they modify this crap out of
their religion, and start policing themselves.

We made and commitment to those people. Cutting running
was really immoral. Some on that blood is one our hands.
The corruption you speak of too. Certainly not all of it.

Thinking we can walk away from an enemy that is not defeated
and the war will stop: stupid, stupid, stupid.

-T

On 08/06/2014 09:53 PM, rbowman wrote:
trader_4 wrote:

The German economy was doing just fine in the 1920's after
WWI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperin...eimar_Republic

Yeah, right Want to buy a 50 million Mark postage stamp? England and France
wanted to eliminate Germany as a competitor forever and that gullible fool
Wilson stood by with his thumb up his ass.

Funny thing. England is a has been, good only for dysfunctional royals and
providing a Greek chorus for US presidents, while the French dream of having
it as good as the Germans. If the EU survives, it will be with German
leadership. It took 70 years but guess who won.



And according to Winston Churchill "The Gathering Storm"
England was propping up Germany economy with gold.
Don't discount the depression and the evil of coveting
your neighbors property (Nazi's)

On 08/06/2014 10:16 PM, rbowman wrote:
nestork wrote:

I don't think Adolf Hitler hated Jews any more than he hated Mormons or
Gypsies. He was heavily influenced by Lenin, who in turn was heavily
influenced by Darwin.

What part of your butt did you pull that out of?


Yes, that does not sound right. But, I don't think he
meant it the way it came out. He was going after Hitler's
Eugenics thing. But, it is obvious Hitler had a special place
in his heart for anything Jewish. I think he was trying
to explain were Hitler got it from.

On 08/08/2014 03:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, August 7, 2014 9:39:55 PM UTC-4, rbowman wrote:
trader_4 wrote:



50mil+ of which

were in Europe, and those 50 mil at least, are directly attributable

to Hitler.



I'd say many of those millions were from Stalin's choice to supply the

Wehrmacht with an endless supply of action targets.

Just like the rest of the Allies did. That's what you have to do when
your country is invaded. The deaths are still the direct result of Hitler.


You are forgetting the Human Wave attacks. Both the Soviets
and the Nazis bear responsibility for that.

nestork wrote:

I think the most important point that's not been mentioned so far in
this thread is how both the Nazi and Allied governments used propoganda
to motivate their populations. In England, German soldiers were
portrayed on posters as quazi-neanderthal apes that killed babies with
their bayonettes. In Germany, Jews were portrayed on posters as having
many of the same characteristics as rats.

Britain had a head start amd perfected their chops in WWI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington_House

Britain had a brilliant idea; let's have our leading fiction authors pump
out some really stirring propaganda. Some had prior experience. Conan Doyle
had written some purple prose about the Belgian atrocities in the Congo. Not
having Microsoft Word, he had to edit it by hand to turn it into a tale of
German atrocities in Belgium. Kipling always was an armchair war monger and
fit right it. Toynbee cranked out some classics. Everytime I read about XXX
bayoneting babies and raping nuns I think of old Arnold. The description of
Iraqi atrocities in the invasion of Kuwait come to mind when GHW Bush was
trying to lead a reluctant nation into war. Sonny Boy showed him how it was
really done -- leading a nation into an ill-advised war, not winning it. At
least Daddy knew enough to quit while he was ahead.

trader_4 wrote:

Given that their troops were helping oversea the killing of Jewish and
Gypsie children, handicapped childre too, it sounds like the Britts had it
about right.

How many kids did Bomber Harris and his Merry Men kill? How about this bit
of poetic justice:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Cap_Arcona_(1927)

5000 people had survived the prison camps and were being evacuated before
the Soviet animals reached them only to have the ship sunk by the RAF.
Ironically, the Cap Arcona had been used in filming the 1943 German
'Titanic'. About 1500 died when the Titanic sank, versus over 5000 deaths
when the RAF sank the Cap Arcona. Raise your hands if you've ever heard of
the Cap Arcona. I doubt DiCaprio and Wnslet are going to star in that movie.

Todd wrote:

And, remember, the Soviets carved up Poland with
the Nazis. The are just as much the aggressor as
was Hitler. (Stupid mistake, one socialist monster
attacking another.)

Stalin was stalling for time to build up the Red Army. The attack was
inevitable.