# The Holocaust: Where Are All of the Bodies??



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Not nearly enough bodies *have been found* to document the millions for whom the Nazis must answer. Where are those bodies?
So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place.
Before considering the argument of the Holocaust deniers, that not nearly enough bodies of victims have been found to validate the charges raised about the Holocaust.....let's go back to get a sense of the time.......



1. At the very least, Franklin *Roosevelt's economic policies reflected his infatuation with Mussolini and with Hitler,* with both of whom he enjoyed amiable relations.

In fact, *his sending Americans into concentration camps*, based on their race, opens up the question as to what other polices of theirs he also envied.



2. Nor should one see Nazism as totally separate and different from a number of other political practices....
*Nazism is but one variant of totalitarian government....the totalitarian impulse in each nation is fed through the prism of that nation's history, people, culture.....*



 “Nazism was the product of German culture, grown out of a German context. The Holocaust could not have occurred in Italy, because Italians are not Germans. And in America, where hostility to big government is central to the national character, the case for statism must be made in terms of 'pragmatism' and decency.

In other words, *our version of fascism must be nice and for your own good.*


*American progressives, for the most part, did not disavow fascism until the horrors of the Nazi Holocaust became manifest *during World War II. 
After the war, those progressives who had praised Mussolini and Hitler in the 1920s and 1930s had no choice but to dissociate themselves from fascism. “Accordingly,” writes Jonah Goldberg, “leftist intellectuals *redefined fascism as 'right-wing' and projected their own sins onto conservatives,* even as they continued to borrow heavily from fascist and pre-fascist thought.” This progressive campaign to recast fascism as the "right-wing" antithesis of communism was aided by Joseph Stalin, ...."
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1223



Hitler, Stalin...Roosevelt.....the policies were similar....the extent to which they were carried out differed.


a. " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 48


b. In fact, Roosevelt did not envision entering the war against the Germans....not at first. Not until May 16, 1940, did Roosevelt address Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”



Roosevelt chose sides early....a question remains: why did he pick Stalin over Hitler?


It is more than interesting that Franklin Roosevelt had no problem associating himself and his nation with the *far more homicidal monster, Joseph Stalin*, having full knowledge of the millions he killed in the Ukrainian Famine, and the thousands he slaughtered in the Katyn Forest....but turned on the junior monster even before he knew of the atrocities of the 'Final Solution.'


Hitler declared war on the United States....."December 11, 1941, On this day, Adolf Hitler declares war on the United States, bringing America, which had been neutral, into the European conflict. "Germany declares war on the United States mdash History.com This Day in History mdash 12 11 1941


What if Japan hadn't forced Hitler's hand.......?


----------



## Ravi (Oct 11, 2014)

Damn, what a sick thread.


----------



## guno (Oct 11, 2014)

Ravi said:


> Damn, what a sick thread.




This is what the allowed into this country, little miss Saigon


----------



## Saigon (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Hitler, Stalin...Roosevelt.....the policies were similar....the extent to which they were carried out differed.



It is a sick thread....but not without some humour value.


----------



## Esmeralda (Oct 11, 2014)

Ravi said:


> Damn, what a sick thread.


The virulent nutter (PC) strikes again.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Ravi said:


> Damn, what a sick thread.





I fervently look toward the day when one of your persuasion will actually post a cogent, specific post in contention to what you seem to find objectionable.

Am I too much of an optimist?

Are there no intelligent folks on your side of the aisle?

None?

Well, then....you must be their queen.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Esmeralda said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Damn, what a sick thread.
> ...




For clarity....post #6 was not meant for you.....as you clearly have no intellect.


----------



## DriftingSand (Oct 11, 2014)

guno said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Damn, what a sick thread.
> ...





> Ravi: Damn, what a sick thread.



Actually, look at PC's second line of the OP:  "So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place."
She's clearly quoting what "some" people say about the Holocaust.  She isn't claiming that, herself.  Pay attention and actually READ.

Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

DriftingSand said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...






Thank you for being so observant.

I'm gonna shred the argument with some facts with which I doubt folks are familiar.
It will be a fascinating thread...watch!


----------



## Penelope (Oct 11, 2014)

6 million has been the number long before Hitler got in.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 11, 2014)

PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."

An informed 9th grader would easily refute PC's silliness.


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Not nearly enough bodies *have been found* to document the millions for whom the Nazis must answer. Where are those bodies?
> So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place.
> Before considering the argument of the Holocaust deniers, that not nearly enough bodies of victims have been found to validate the charges raised about the Holocaust.....let's go back to get a sense of the time.......
> 
> ...



Wow, knew you were a partisan hack, but I didn't realize how much I was low-balling it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 11, 2014)

PC's mind inhabits a world that did not exist in reality.


----------



## guno (Oct 11, 2014)

DriftingSand said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> 
> An informed 9th grader would easily refute PC's silliness.






So...you're admitting that you're not even up to the caliber of a 9th grader?

I've always found you to be second rate, at best.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Penelope said:


> 6 million has been the number long before Hitler got in.





What the heck does that mean?


----------



## Delta4Embassy (Oct 11, 2014)

Delta4Embassy said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Not nearly enough bodies *have been found* to document the millions for whom the Nazis must answer. Where are those bodies?
> ...



Actually, I take that back. You're not a partisan hack, and apologies to actual partisan hacks. You're just a Holocaust denier and Nazi sympathizer.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > 6 million has been the number long before Hitler got in.
> ...



How many Jews are said to of died in the Holocaust?


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 11, 2014)

Sick thread ...even for PC

Reeks of desperation


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Penelope said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...




"...long before Hitler got in."????????


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Sick thread ...even for PC
> 
> Reeks of desperation





You'd be a real threat if you had an education.


----------



## guno (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> ...


aren't you late for your job at the nail salon?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Delta4Embassy said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...






You seem to be bereft of either a cogent argument or a cerebrum.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 11, 2014)

PC is stumbling in desperation.  Her persecution complex is validated by the correctly directed opposition here to her.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC is stumbling in desperation.  Her persecution complex is validated by the correctly directed opposition here to her.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

guno said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...





That's one good lookin' gal, eh.

Doing something you can't.......read.

No wonder you're jealous.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> Sick thread ...even for PC
> 
> Reeks of desperation





Ohhhh......now I get it!


You pretend to ignore this line in the OP...
" So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place."  



And gin up your make-believe rage, when actually what you are enraged about is this:
", Franklin*Roosevelt's economic policies reflected his infatuation with Mussolini and with Hitler,*with both of whom he enjoyed amiable relations.

In fact,*his sending Americans into concentration camps*, based on their race, opens up the question as to what other polices of theirs he also envied."



That's it,....isn't it.

How dare I reveal the truth about your former god....before you latched onto Obama.



Hey....the truth is the truth.
Deal with it.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 11, 2014)

National Socialism was just FDR socialism lite.    ...


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Sick thread ...even for PC
> ...


I know it's the weekend and you need your dose of attention

But this is low even by your standards


----------



## Penelope (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



6 million for some reason is a magic no. before and after WWII

SIX MILLION JEWS IN THE NEWS BETWEEN 1915-1938 The Ugly Truth


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





Actually...it will be far higher than what you know to date....I will educate you, further even than post #27.


As the Cajuns say, ''J'vous garantis.''


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Pathetic really

Not just offensive to Liberals but to all Americans


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Penelope said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...






"The following figures from Lucy Dawidowicz show the annihilation of the Jewish population of Europe by (pre-war) country:[270]

CountryEstimated
Pre-War
Jewish
populationEstimated
killedPercent
killedPoland3,300,0003,000,00090Baltic countries253,000228,00090Germany and Austria240,000210,00090Bohemia and Moravia90,00080,00089Slovakia90,00075,00083Greece70,00054,00077Netherlands140,000105,00075Hungary650,000450,00070Byelorussian SSR375,000245,00065Ukrainian SSR1,500,000900,00060Belgium65,00040,00060Yugoslavia43,00026,00060Romania600,000300,00050Norway2,17389041France350,00090,00026Bulgaria64,00014,00022Italy40,0008,00020Luxembourg5,0001,00020Russian SFSR975,000107,00011Denmark8,00052<1*Total**8,861,800**5,933,900**67*
[THEAD]
[/THEAD]
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]Since 1945, the most commonly cited figure for the total number of Jews killed has been six million. The Yad Vashem Holocaust Martyrs' and Heroes' Remembrance Authority in Jerusalem, writes that there is no precise figure for the number of Jews killed,[287] but has been able to find documentation of more than three million names of Jewish victims killed,[288] which it displays at its visitors center. The figure most commonly used is the six million attributed to Adolf Eichmann, a senior SS official.[289]

Early calculations range from about 4.2 to 4.5 million in _The Final Solution_(1953) by Gerald Reitlinger (arguing against higher Russian estimates),[290]and 5.1 million from Raul Hilberg, to 5.95 million from Jacob Lestschinsky.Yisrael Gutman and Robert Rozett in the _Encyclopedia of the Holocaust_estimate 5.59–5.86 million.[291] A study led by Wolfgang Benz of the Technical University of Berlin suggests 5.29–6.2 million.[292][293] Yad Vashem writes that the main sources for these statistics are comparisons of prewar and postwar censuses and population estimates, and Nazi documentation on deportations and murders.[292] Its Central Database of Shoah Victims' Names currently holds close to three million names of Holocaust victims, all accessible online. Yad Vashem continues its project of collecting names of Jewish victims from historical documents and individual memories.[294]

Hilberg's estimate of 5.1 million, in the third edition of _The Destruction of the European Jews_, includes over 800,000 who died from "ghettoization and general privation"; 1,400,000 killed in open-air shootings; and up to 2,900,000 who perished in camps. Hilberg estimates the death toll of Jews in Poland as up to 3,000,000.[295] Hilberg's numbers are generally considered to be a conservative estimate, as they typically include only those deaths for which records are available, avoiding statistical adjustment.[296]

Martin Gilbert arrived at a "minimum estimate" of over 5.75 million Jewish victims including 2 million gassed at Auschwitz.[297] Lucy S. Dawidowicz used pre-war census figures to estimate that 5.934 million Jews died (see table below).[298]"

The Holocaust - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...





Nah....only to the ignorant ideologues.

Raise your paw.


----------



## MaryL (Oct 11, 2014)

How do you count bodies that have been cremated? America's shame of Japanese internment happened AFTER Japan attacked us, it certainly  wasn't merited but it's important to note the context and the timeline. The rest of the OP's premise is just morning after cherry picking of facts to fit a crackpot theory.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



did you watch the video, you can see that the magic no. of 6 mil was used when they were in Russia. Who knows the real no. of Jews who died in WWII??


----------



## Penelope (Oct 11, 2014)

True, everything about WWII is about the Jews in Germany and the atomic bomb. So much more went on leading up to and during the war, and even after,  but that is all blurred.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

MaryL said:


> How do you count bodies that have been cremated? America's shame of Japanese internment happened AFTER Japan attacked us, it certainly  wasn't merited but it's important to note the context and the timeline. The rest of the OP's premise is just morning after cherry picking of facts to fit a crackpot theory.




And, exactly, what theory would that be?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

Penelope said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...





1. Are you doubting that the Jews were the subject of the Nazi 'Final Solution"? 


2. Would you find it more.....copacetic if the number were 3 million?

Is there any way you can defend your position?


----------



## ricechickie (Oct 11, 2014)

Is politicalchic really asking this question?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

3. So....where are the bodies of the Nazis' victims?
This is where we get into the history that is less than common knowledge.

The Nazis called it *"Aktion 1005."*


The Nazis knew what they had done was indefensible, and knowledge of same would cost them any possible leverage when they lost the war....so,* they tried to wipe out the evidence of their crimes.*




a. " “It seems that rumors of our activities in the east have started to reach the ears of our enemies. We’ve also got a problem with one of the sites in the Warthegau region. Complaints about contamination of some kind.”

“If I may ask the obvious question, Herr Gruppenf_ü_hrer, what difference does it make if rumors reach the West? *Who would believe that such a thing was truly possible?*”

“Rumors are one thing, Erich. *Evidence* is quite another.” 
From the novel "A Death in Vienna," by Daniel Silva




" Operation 1005 was instituted by the Nazis to wipe out the traces of the mass murders they had perpetrated in Eastern and Central Europe. It began in mid-1942, when information concerning the mass slaughter of Jews and others by the Nazis first began to circulate in the West, and ended with the last days of the occupation .

.... units of _Einsatzkommando _1005 were established in various geographical locations These units consisted of SiPO–SD members who organized and directed the operation, scores of German police guards and hundreds of slave laborers, mostly Jews,....


Because this operation was to be ‘Top Secret,' Berlin *ordered that the slave laborers were to be murdered after the completion of the work i*n the area, and the German staff, who were sworn to secrecy, were not sent back to their units. As a result of this operation many *mass graves were obliterated*, making it impossible after the war to ascertain the exact extent of the Nazi crimes, especially in the Soviet Union and Poland."
AKTION 1005 EFFACING THE MURDER OF MILLIONS


----------



## ricechickie (Oct 11, 2014)

The simple answer is "cremated."


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

ricechickie said:


> The simple answer is "cremated."




I'd imagine that 'simple' is a word regularly associated with your name.


----------



## DriftingSand (Oct 11, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> 
> An informed 9th grader would easily refute PC's silliness.



Let us know when you graduate the 8th grade.


----------



## ricechickie (Oct 11, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> ricechickie said:
> 
> 
> > The simple answer is "cremated."
> ...



That's ok, Political "Batshit Crazy" Chic.


----------



## rightwinger (Oct 11, 2014)

ricechickie said:


> Is politicalchic really asking this question?


She is lonely


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

How, exactly,* to erase all traces of the murder of millions of men, women, children*....?




4. "What are you going to do with this place?”

“We’ll open the pits and burn the bodies, then we’ll *crush the bones and scatter the fragments in the forests and the rivers.”*

“Burn thirty thousand corpses? We tried it during the killing operations. We used flamethrowers, for God’s sake. Mass open-air cremations do not work.”

“That’s because you never constructed a proper pyre. At Chelmno, I proved it can be done. Trust me, Kurt, one day this place called Babi Yar will be only a rumor, just like the Jews who used to live here.”
From the novel "A Death in Vienna," by Daniel Silva





a. The *Sonderaktion 1005*(English: Special Action 1005), also called *Aktion 1005, *or _Enterdungsaktion _(English: Exhumation Action) began in May 1942 during World War II to hide any evidence that people had been murdered by Nazi Germany in _Aktion Reinhard _in occupied Poland.

The operation, which was *conducted in strict secrecy from 1942–1944,* used prisoners to exhume mass graves and burn the bodies. These work groups were officially called _Leichenkommandos _("corpse units") and were all part of _Sonderkommando _1005; inmates were often put in chains in order to prevent escape.

In May 1943 the operation moved into occupied territories in Eastern Europe *to destroy evidence of the Holocaust.* _Sonderaktion 1005 _was used *to conceal the evidence of massacres *committed by_SS-Einsatzgruppen _Nazi death squads that had massacred hundreds of thousands of mostly Jews, as well as Roma and local civilians in Eastern Europe. The _Aktion _was overseen by selected squads from the _Sicherheitsdienst _and _Ordnungspolizei_.
Sonderaktion 1005 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

rightwinger said:


> ricechickie said:
> 
> 
> > Is politicalchic really asking this question?
> ...





*I think of you when I’m are lonely. Then I’m content to be alone.*


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 11, 2014)

DriftingSand said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> ...



Sand, PC is a sicko, and if you support her nonsense, you are in the filth with her.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 11, 2014)

The national socialism that PCs's decries is exactly the type of right wing fascist conservatism  she wants big government to bring to America.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> The national socialism that PCs's decries is exactly the type of right wing fascist conservatism  she wants big government to bring to America.





Here, let me help you toward finally graduating from middle school....

Lesson for today:

Nazi...national socialism....based on nationalism and/or race... Communism....international socialism.

Pop quiz:
Which endorses genocide?

Which is based on a doctrine of controlling the lives of all of its citizens.

Which stems from the works of Karl Marx?



I know, I know....it's too difficult for you.

Well....get used to the last seat in the dumb row....for another year.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

5. The corpses were there. Millions of them, mostly in pits, covered over. But then they began to become exposed.....



" IT BEGAN, oddly enough, with a complaint from the neighbors.

Early in 1942, spring runoff exposed a series of mass graves in the Warthegau district of western Poland along the Ner River. Thousands of corpses floated to the surface, and a horrible stench spread for miles around the site. A German living nearby sent an anonymous letter to the Foreign Office in Berlin complaining about the situation. Alarm bells sounded. The graves contained the remains of thousands of Jews murdered by the mobile gas vans then being used at the Chelmno extermination camp. The Final Solution, Nazi Germany’s most closely guarded secret, was in danger of being exposed by snowmelt.

The first reports of the mass killings of Jews had already begun reaching the outside world, thanks to a Soviet diplomatic cable that alerted the Allies to the horrors being carried out by German forces on Polish and Soviet soil. Martin Luther, who handled “Jewish affairs” on behalf of the German Foreign Office, knew that the exposed graves near Chelmno represented a serious threat to the secrecy of the Final Solution. He forwarded a copy of the anonymous letter to Heinrich M_*ü*_ller of the Gestapo and requested immediate action." From the novel " A Death in Vienna, " by Daniel Silva



[*Martin Franz Julius Luther*After January 1942, Luther's principal task was to persuade or pressure German satellites and allies to hand over their Jewish populations for deportation to the death camps, a job which he performed with considerable aplomb. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_(diplomat)]


'The anonymous letter sent to the Foreign Office concerning the apparent solution of the Jewish question in the Warthegau district, which was submitted by you to me on 6 February 1942, I immediately transmitted for proper treatment. The results will be forthcoming in due course. In a place where wood is chopped, splinters must fall, and there is no avoiding this.'  Silva, Op.Cit.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

As the word of the atrocities began to become known, the Nazis came up with a *method of erasing the evidence.*


6. "Radek settled on cremation as the most effective method of disposing of the bodies. Burning had been attempted before, usually with flamethrowers, but with unsatisfactory results. Radek put his engineering training to good use, devising a method of *burning corpses two thousand at a time in towering aerodynamic pyres. Thick wooden beams, twenty-three to twenty-seven feet in length, were soaked in petrol and placed atop cement blocks. The corpses were layered between the beams-bodies, beams, bodies, beams, bodies… *

Petrol-soaked kindling was placed at the base of the structure and set ablaze. When the fire died down,* the charred bones would be crushed by heavy machinery and dispersed.*

The dirty work was done by Jewish slave laborers. Radek organized the Jews into three teams, one team to open the burial pits, a second to carry the corpses from the pits to the pyre, and a third to sift the ashes for bones and valuables. At the conclusion of each operation, the terrain was leveled and replanted to conceal what had taken place there. *Then the slaves were murdered and disposed of. In that way the secrecy of Aktion 1005 was preserved.*

“We’ll never know how many bodies Radek and his men disposed of. The crime was far too enormous to conceal completely, but Aktion 1005 managed to efface much of the evidence and make it virtually impossible after the war to arrive at an accurate estimate of the dead. So thorough was Radek’s work that, in some cases, the Polish and Soviet commissions investigating the Shoah could findno traces of the mass graves. At Babi Yar, Radek’s cleanup was so complete that, after the war, the Soviets were able to turn it into a park. 

*And now, unfortunately, the lack of physical remains of the dead has given inspiration to the lunatic fringe who claim the Holocaust never happened. Radek’s actions haunt us to this day.” *
From the novel "A Death in Vienna," by Daniel Silva


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

7. One might *question whether these beasts got the punishments that they deserved....*

And, unless one had an understanding of 'Realpolitik,'  *one might be surprised.*


a. A prime example is *Wernher von Braun* was "the central figure in the Nazis' rocket development program, responsible for the design and realization of theV-2combat rocket during World War II. After the war, he and some select members of his rocket team were taken to theUnited Statesas part of the then-secretOperation Paperclip." Wernher von Braun - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

He became the US Army ballistic missile scientist.




b. And another Nazi....this one *became the godfather of the CIA.*

Reinhard Gehlen "....*Majorgeneral Reinhard Gehlen *was chief of *Fremde Heere Ost (FHO)*, the General Staff’s Eastern Front Intelligence Service of the Wehrmacht.[29]The *Wehrmacht* was the unified armed forces of Germany from 1935 to 1946.....*Gehlen’s* foreign service, the FHO, was absorbed into *Reichsfuhrer SS Heinrich Himmler’s* Reichssicherheitshauptamt (*RSHA*) SS-command headquarter offices. In RSHA,*Gehlen’s* overseer and superior was Himmler’s Personal Staffer,*Brigadeführer SS*(*Wicked) Walter Schellenberg*." reinhard gehlen In Search of Black Assassins





As Franklin Roosevelt had entered a "marriage" with Joseph Stalin, we had no assets able to infiltrate the Soviet government.  The Nazis did.....Reinhard Gehlen.



8. " You see, before the war, we had no intelligence service-not areal one, anyway...*our intelligence operation inside the Soviet Union *consisted of a couple of guys from Harvard and a teletype machine. When we suddenly found ourselves nose to nose with the Russian bogeyman, we didn’t know shit about him. His strengths, his weaknesses, his intentions. And what’s more, we didn’t know how to find out. That another war was imminent was a foregone conclusion. And what did we have? Fuck all. No networks, no agents. Nothing. We were lost, wandering in the desert. We needed help. ...*General Reinhard Gehlen, head of the German General Staff’s Foreign Armies East branch, Hitler’s chief spy on the Russian front.*

 “Gehlen was the answer to our prayers. The man had spent a career spying on the Soviet Union, and now he was going to show us the way. We brought him into this country.... . He told us what we wanted to hear. *Stalinism was an evil unparalleled in human history. Stalin intended to subvert the countries of western Europe from within and then move against them militarily. Stalin had global ambitions.* Be not afraid, Gehlen told us. I have networks, I have sleepers and stay-behind cells. I know everything there is to know about Stalin and his henchmen. Together, we will crush him.”
Daniel Silva, Op.Cit.



9. "*Gehlen Organization *or *Gehlen Org *was an intelligence agency established in June 1946 by U.S. occupation authorities in the United States Zone of Germany, and consisted of *former members of the 12th Department of the German Army General Staff (Foreign Armies East, or FHO)*. It carries the name of Wehrmacht Major general Reinhard Gehlen, head of the German  military intelligence in the Eastern Front during World War II.... *The Org was for many years the only eyes and ears of the CIA on the ground in the Soviet Bloc nations during the Cold War.* The CIA kept close tabs on the Gehlen group: the Org supplied the manpower while the CIA supplied the material needs for clandestine operations, including funding, cars and airplanes.

Every German POW returning from Soviet captivity to West Germany between 1947 and 1955 was interviewed by Org agents. Those returnees who were forced to work in Soviet industries and construction and were willing to participate, represented an incomparable source of information, a post-war, up-to-date picture of the Soviet empire as it evolved.[2]"
.Gehlen Organization - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Gehlen eventually went back to Germany to head their Federal Intelligence Service.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 11, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> The national socialism that PCs's decries is exactly the type of right wing fascist conservatism  she wants big government to bring to America.





Jakal....afraid to answer post #51?

Need me to answer for you?


----------



## Penelope (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



I don't care, and yes I doubt the gas chambers, why would they bring these starved Jews to gas chambers, to gas them, why not kill them on the spot. There was a war going on. The Jews were brought to labor camps , aka as concentration camps, and well many died. The Jewish pop was large and many fought in partisan groups themselves against the Germans , either by extermination, but the maj. by starvation and typhus.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> 3. So....where are the bodies of the Nazis' victims?
> This is where we get into the history that is less than common knowledge.
> 
> The Nazis called it *"Aktion 1005."*
> ...



I don't believe that for a minute.


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

Esmeralda said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Damn, what a sick thread.
> ...


anything to score cheap political points is what rw Seoul Grl does.


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC's mind inhabits a world that did not exist in reality.


her rw hate is unbounded by any type of logic &/or civility.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Esmeralda said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...




Me....trying to score "political points" against the Nazis?

Guilty as charged.


So....that kinda puts you on the side of the Nazis, huh?


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

:yawn: PoilHack sinks to  a new low (every new thread she *cough* 'creates"  ) just to score cheap political points w/ n00bs who aren't aware of here predictable, child-like M.O.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> ...



You make an unsustainable secondary OP and you can't defend it.  So you ad hom others.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Penelope said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > 3. So....where are the bodies of the Nazis' victims?
> ...






 Arad, Yitzhak (1984), "Operation Reinhard: Extermination Camps of Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka" (Internet Archive), _Yad Vashem Studies XVI_, pp. 205–239 (26/30 of current document), "The Attempt to Remove Traces."
^ Jump up to:_*a*_ _*b*_ Operation Reinhard: "The attempt to remove traces" (reprint) Nizkor.org 2012. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
^ Jump up to:_*a*_ _*b*_ Davies, Norman (1998), _Europe: A History (internal link)_ (also at Google Books preview), HarperCollins, ISBN 0-06-097468-0
*Jump up^* International Katyn Commission (30 April 1943). "Commission Findings". _Transcript, Smolensk 30 April 1943_. Warsaw Uprising by Project InPosterum. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
*Jump up^* Kużniar-Plota, Małgorzata (30 November 2004). "Decision to commence investigation into Katyn Massacre". Departmental Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
*Jump up^* Sturdy Colls, Caroline (22 January 2012). "Treblinka: Revealing the hidden graves of the Holocaust". BBC News Magazine. Retrieved 5 June 2014.
*Jump up^* Evans, Richard J. (2008), _The Third Reich at War (internal link)_ (also at Google Books preview), Penguin Books, p. 292, ISBN 978-0-14-311671-4
*Jump up^* Wiernik, Jankiel (1945), _A year in Treblinka_ (Fourteen chapters; digitized by Zchor.org), _Verbatim translation from Yiddish_ (American Representation of the General Jewish Workers' Union of Poland), retrieved 5 June 2014, "The first ever published eye-witness report by an escaped prisoner of the camp."
*Jump up^* Holocaust Encyclopedia (10 June 2013). "Treblinka". United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Retrieved 5 June 2014.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...






Jakal....still afraid to answer post #51?

Need me to answer for you?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> :yawn: PoilHack sinks to  a new low (every new thread she *cough* 'creates"  ) just to score cheap political points w/ n00bs who aren't aware of here predictable, child-like M.O.





Gee.....hard for you to say that, as I document and link and source everything.

You must be a liar, huh?


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> Actually, look at PC's second line of the OP: "So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place."
> She's clearly quoting what "some" people say about the Holocaust. She isn't claiming that, herself. Pay attention and actually READ.



Come on...do you really expect liberal/progressive/socialists/democrats to comprehend what the read...or to read it at all...if they paid attention to their reading, or reality...they wouldn't believe the silly things they believe...


----------



## Penelope (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



You can quote me whatever you want, I do not believe in the gas chambers , or the digging up of mass graves at Babi Yar, to burn the bodies. I guess if there are no bodies one must make up a story right.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> And gin up your make-believe rage, when actually what you are enraged about is this:
> ", Franklin*Roosevelt's economic policies reflected his infatuation with Mussolini and with Hitler,*with both of whom he enjoyed amiable relations.
> 
> In fact,*his sending Americans into concentration camps*, based on their race, opens up the question as to what other polices of theirs he also envied."



I have often thought that World War 2 should have a name attached to it that would reflect the nature of the conflict...since all the leaders involved were socialists of some stripe, except for perhaps Churchhill, from national socialists in Germany, Italy and Japan, to international socialists like the U.S.S.R....and fdr was a socialist who was hemmed in by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights....

World War 2 could accurately be called the first Socialist War...funny how those who believe in big government, and took over whole countries...plunged the entire world into war...I thought free market types were supposed to be the ones who did that...but the truth is...socialism is a violent belief that leads to control of the people by the government....and then they fight amongst each other...


----------



## Penelope (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > Esmeralda said:
> ...





> score "political points" against the Nazis?
> Guilty as charged.



That makes you bias.

Many of us are just interested in the truth, neither pro or anti.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> The national socialism that PCs's decries is exactly the type of right wing fascist conservatism she wants big government to bring to America.



1) fascism is not right wing it is left wing (even in Europe where they always claim fascism is "right" it is actually far, far left wing...since if you look at the "right wing" in Europe, they tend to support as much if not more government control of the people...but they are distinguished by their racism and wanting the socialism for their own national group)

2) fascism and conservatism are diametrically opposed ideas

3) PoliticalChic is not left wing or fascist...she would be American Right wing in that she is one of these...a conservative, a libertarian, or a tea party sympathizer...all of which would be good things and far better than any of the mass murdering left wing brands of socialism...


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> 
> An informed 9th grader would easily refute PC's silliness.



Exactly so, and actually I think it's a testament to this site that the thread has been universally shat on by posters from right across the political spectrum. 

There aren't many threads that achieve a consensus response here, but P. Chic's absolutely extraordinary haplessness seems to have done it. 

That said, there are so many baffling and fascinating elements to Fascism and the Holocaust that it is perhaps a shame that the forum's weakest poster feels obliged to reduce the topic to childrens' cartoon level.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Penelope said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...





What you really believe is evident.

And it's not pretty.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Penelope said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Dot Com said:
> ...




So.....what is the 'truth' vis-a-vis the Nazis?

Did they endorse genocide?
Do you?


Do you know that Karl Marx was the first modern political theorist to support genocide, and that Adolph Hitler studied Marx?



Any of that new to you?

All of it?


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc said:


> 1) fascism is not right wing it is left wing (even in Europe where they always claim fascism is "right" it is actually far, far left wing...since if you look at the "right wing" in Europe, they tend to support as much if not more government control of the people...but they are distinguished by their racism and wanting the socialism for their own national group)



Jesus wept....

*Fascism* (/fæʃɪzəm/) is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2] that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. Influenced by national syndicalism, fascism originated in Italy in the immediate aftermath of World War I, combining more *typically right-wing positions* with elements of left-wing politics,[3] in opposition to liberalism, Marxism, and traditional conservatism. Although fascism is *usually placed on the far-right* on the traditional left–right spectrum, a number of academics have said that the description is inadequate.

Fascism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Fascist theory is a difficult and complex issue, but no one in his right mind thinks it is left-wing. It borrows some left wing elements, but then most authoritarian regimes (Stroessner, Cristiani, Rios Montte) do, and no one is calling them left wing.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> That said, there are so many baffling and fascinating elements to Fascism and the Holocaust that it is perhaps a shame that the forum's weakest poster feels obliged to reduce the topic to childrens' cartoon level.



yes...fascinating is not a word I would use to describe a belief system responsible for close to 100 million deaths around the world...but as a lefty, you probably think that if only the right people had been in charge they could have created heaven on earth...right?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Saigon said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> ...





Yet, you haven't been able to point to a single error in my posts.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> *Fascism* (/fæʃɪzəm/) is a form of radical authoritarian nationalism[1][2] that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe. Influenced by national syndicalism, fascism originated in Italy in the immediate aftermath ofWorld War I, combining more *typically right-wing positions* with elements of left-wing politics,[3] in opposition toliberalism, Marxism, and traditional conservatism. Although fascism is *usually placed on the far-right* on the traditional left–right spectrum, a number of academics have said that the description is inadequate.
> 
> Fascism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> Fascist theory is a difficult and complex issue, but no one in his right mind thinks it is left-wing. It borrows some left wing elements, but then most authoritarian regimes (Stroessner, Cristiani, Rios Montte) do, and no one is calling them left wing.



You are another lefty dupe...the left isolates fascism from the other socialism...international socialism 

1) because they don't want the world to realize that the greatest mass murderers in history were all socialists

2) they realize they can fool people into believing nazis weren't lefties if they just repeat that lie enough....


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

Yes...the left has lied about so many things...

HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST



> *The context of Nazism*"True, it is a fixed idea with the French that the Rhine is their property, but to this arrogant demand the only reply worthy of the German nation is Arndt's: "Give back Alsace and Lorraine". For I am of the opinion, perhaps in contrast to many whose standpoint I share in other respects, that the reconquest of the German-speaking left bank of the Rhine is a matter of national honour, and that the Germanisation of a disloyal Holland and of Belgium is a political necessity for us. Shall we let the German nationality be completely suppressed in these countries, while the Slavs are rising ever more powerfully in the East?"





> Have a look at the quote immediately above and say who wrote it. It is a typical Hitler rant, is it not? Give it to 100 people who know Hitler's speeches and 100 would identify it as something said by Adolf. The fierce German nationalism and territorial ambition is unmistakeable. And if there is any doubt, have a look at another quote from the same author:This is our calling, that we shall become the templars of this Grail, gird the sword round our loins for its sake and stake our lives joyfully in the last, holy war which will be followed by the thousand-year reign of freedom.That settles it, doesn't it? Who does not know of Hitler's glorification of military sacrifice and his aim to establish a "thousand-year _Reich_"?





> *But neither quote is in fact from Hitler. Both quotes were written by Friedrich Engels, Karl Marx's co-author (See hereand here). So let that be an introduction to the idea that Hitler not only called himself a socialist but that he WAS in fact a socialist by the standards of his day.* Ideas that are now condemned as Rightist were in Hitler's day perfectly normal ideas among Leftists. And if Friedrich Engels was not a Leftist, I do not know who would be.





> But the most spectacular aspect of Nazism was surely its antisemitism. And that had a grounding in Marx himself. The following passage is from Marx but it could just as well have been from Hitler:






> "Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew -- not the Sabbath Jew, as Bauer does, but the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time.... We recognize in Jewry, therefore, a general present-time-oriented anti-social element, an element which through historical development -- to which in this harmful respect the Jews have zealously contributed -- has been brought to its present high level, at which it must necessarily dissolve itself. In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Jewry".






> *Note that Marx wanted to "emancipate" (free) mankind from Jewry ("Judentum" in Marx's original German), just as Hitler did and that the title of Marx's essay in German was "Zur Judenfrage", which -- while not necessarily derogatory in itself -- is nonetheless exactly the same expression ("Jewish question") that Hitler used in his famous phrase "Endloesung der Judenfrage" ("Final solution of the Jewish question"). *And when Marx speaks of the end of Jewry by saying that Jewish identity must necessarily "dissolve" itself, the word he uses in German is "aufloesen", which is a close relative of Hitler's word "Endloesung" ("final solution"). So all the most condemned features of Nazism can be traced back to Marx and Engels, right down to the language used. The thinking of Hitler, Marx and Engels differed mainly in emphasis rather than in content. All three were second-rate German intellectuals of their times. Anybody who doubts that practically all Hitler's ideas were also to be found in Marx & Engels should spend a little time reading the quotations from Marx & Engels archived here.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc - 

Understanding what a word means is not a left/right issue. It's a dictonary issue, and I suggest you buy one. 

There is no dispute about which tyrants were left wong and which were right wing, because these are clear, simple historical facts. No intelligent person will deny that Mao, Ceaucescu or Husak were left wing, just as no intelligent person will deny that Hitler, Pinochet or Stroessner were right wing.


----------



## Valerie (Oct 12, 2014)

*The Holocaust: Where Are All of the Bodies??*


look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's _super troll!_


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Billc said:
> 
> 
> > 1) fascism is not right wing it is left wing (even in Europe where they always claim fascism is "right" it is actually far, far left wing...since if you look at the "right wing" in Europe, they tend to support as much if not more government control of the people...but they are distinguished by their racism and wanting the socialism for their own national group)
> ...




Communism
Socialism
Fascism
Progressivism
Liberalism

Which are based on big government, command and control economic principles, collectivism, dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives?



How about pointing out which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?


How 'bout it, you dunce?


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

Except perhaps for those alive at the time who had Ph.ds in economics...since socialism is an economic system...and the author below was alive when the nazis came to power...

Nazism is Socialism -- F A Hayek et al


> *The persecution of the Marxists, and of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National “Socialism” is a genuine socialist movement,* whose leading ideas are the final fruit of the anti-liberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority of the German intelligentsia first to “socialism of the chair” and later to Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form.






> One of the main reasons why the socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great industries and the great landowners.  But this merely proves that these groups too -as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment -have, at least partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement.  But only partly because -and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany – many capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience.  [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> 
> ...



hitler and the nazis were leftists...and socialists...


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

P. Chic -

I don't see what the point is in your asking questions when you must realise yourself that you couldn't possibly understand the reply.

Given I sometimes work with exactly this topic, I have actually explained on threads in the past exactly why fascism is considered to be essentially right wing, and I'd be more than happy to do so again, but only if I think it is likely to result in intelligent and reasonable discourse.

Alternatively, I'd be happy to recommend two or three of the better books on fascist theory, and you can read those. I think we both know you won't.


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > :yawn: PoilHack sinks to  a new low (every new thread she *cough* 'creates"  ) just to score cheap political points w/ n00bs who aren't aware of here predictable, child-like M.O.
> ...


I can get past some of your obvious eXtreme Right sourcing. Its your zany (made-up) formatting that is an insult to the intelligence of everyone w/ an education above the 7th-grade-level 

add to that your tedious habit of blathering on and on  and its a recipe for a snoozefest of a thread AKA tl;dr


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

Valerie said:


> *The Holocaust: Where Are All of the Bodies??*
> 
> 
> look! it's a bird, it's a plane, it's _super troll!_


I know right?


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

fascism, nazism and communism are all different styles of socialism....much like vanilla, chocolate and strawberry are all types of ice cream...but they are all the same thing...ice cream...

The lefties get distracted by superficials differences among the leftist socialists...uniforms...racism...and other things that allows them to deny hitler...because hitler is the most reviled socialist in history while the other vile socialists, stalin, lenin, mao, pol pot, che, castro...are still embraced by leftists...it is harder for them to embrace hitler and the nazis because their crimes were so well documented...


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

More on hitlers leftism...

HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST



> *Other examples of Hitler's Leftism*Further, as a good socialist does, Hitler justified everything he did in the name of "the people" (_Das Volk_). The Nazi State was, like the Soviet State, all-powerful, and the Nazi party, in good socialist fashion, instituted pervasive supervision of German industry.





> And of course Hitler and Stalin were initially allies. It was only the Nazi-Soviet pact that enabled Hitler's conquest of Western Europe. The fuel in the tanks of Hitler's_Panzern_as they stormed through France was Soviet fuel.And a book that was very fashionable worldwide in the '60s was the 1958 book "_The Affluent Society_" by influential "liberal" Canadian economist J.K. Galbraith -- in which he fulminated about what he saw as our "Private affluence and public squalor". But Hitler preceded him. Hitler shared with the German Left of his day the slogan: "_Gemeinnutz vor Eigennutz_" (Common use before private use).





> And we all know how evil Nazi eugenics were, don't we? How crazy were their efforts to build up the "master race" through selective breeding of SS men with the best of German women -- the "_Lebensborn_" project? Good Leftists recoil in horror from all that of course. But who were the great supporters of eugenics in Hitler's day? In the USA, the great eugenicists of the first half of the 20th century were the "Progressives".





> And who were the Progressives? Here is one summary of them:"Originally, progressive reformers sought to regulate irresponsible corporate monopoly, safeguarding consumers and labor from the excesses of the profit motive. Furthermore, they desired to correct the evils and inequities created by rapid and uncontrolled urbanization. Progressivism ..... asserted that the social order could and must be improved.....





> Some historians, like Richard Hofstadter and George Mowry, have argued that the progressive movement attempted to return America to an older, more simple, agrarian lifestyle. For a few progressives, this certainly was true. But for most, a humanitarian doctrine of social progress motivated the reforming spirit"Sound familiar?The Red/Green alliance of today is obviously not new.






> *So Hitler's eugenics were yet another part of Hitler's LEFTISM! He got his eugenic theories from the Leftists of his day. He was simply being a good Leftist intellectual in subscribing to such theories.*





> In the person of Margaret Sanger and others, they were very active in the USA in first half of the 20th century, advocating (for instance) abortion.* And Margaret Sanger was warmly praised by Hitler for her energetic championship of eugenics. And the American eugenicists were very racist. They shared Hitler's view that Jews were genetically inferior and opposed moves to allow into the USA Jews fleeing from Hitler* (Richmond, 1998). So if Hitler's eugenics and racial theories were loathsome, it should be acknowledged that his vigorous supporters in the matter at that time were Leftists and feminists, rather than conservatives.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

This paper does a great job of explaining why leftists today fail to understand that hitler was a leftist...part of it is calculation in that they don't want people to understand that all the biggest mass murderers in history were left wing socialists, and another part is they have been lied to by leftists in academics who are calculating the need to hide the mass murdering aspect of leftism...and the other part is they are easily confused by surface differences and fail to see the deeper, things that tie all these left wing socialist mass murderers together...

FrontPage Magazine - The Psychology Underlying Liberalism 

The author also addresses the differences...the real differences between right and left and dictators...



> So what are Rightists?
> 
> The prime focus in this paper has been on defining and explaining what Leftism is. It would nonetheless be remiss not to give also at least a skeletal outline of what Rightism is so I will now do that. If Leftism and Rightism are NOT mirror-images, as this paper asserts, some such account does appear necessary in order to complete the picture. I have, however, written one book and many previous papers for those who wish to study conservatism at greater length (See Ray, 1972b, 1973, 1974, 1979 & 1981).





> Military Dictators?
> 
> *In the late 20th century, it was a common rhetorical ploy of the more "revolutionary" Left in the "Western" world simply to ignore democracy as an alternative to Communism. Instead they would excuse the brutalities of Communism by pointing to the brutalities of the then numerous military dictatorships of Southern Europe and Latin America and pretend that such regimes were the only alternative to Communism. *These regimes were led by generals who might in various ways be seen as conservative (though Peron was clearly Leftist) so do they tell us anything about conservatism?





> Historically, most of the world has been ruled by military men and their successors (Sargon II of Assyria, Alexander of Macedon, Caesar, Augustus, Constantine, Charlemagne, Frederick II of Prussia etc.)* so it seems unlikely but perhaps the main point to note here is that the Hispanic dictatorships of the 20th century were very often created as a response to a perceived threat of a Communist takeover. This is particularly clear in the case of Spain, Chile and Argentina. They were an attempt to figh*t fire with fire. In Argentina of the 60s and 70s, for instance, Leftist "urban guerillas" were very active — blowing up anyone they disapproved of. The nice, mild, moderate Anglo-Saxon response to such depredations would have been to endure the deaths and disruptions concerned and use police methods to trace the perpetrators and bring them to trial. Much of the wo


rld is more fiery than that, however, and the Argentine generals certainly were.



> *They became impatient with the slow-grinding wheels of democracy and its apparent impotence in the face of the Leftist revolutionaries. They therefore seized power and instituted a reign of terror against the Leftist revolutionaries that was as bloody, arbitrary and indiscriminate as what the Leftists had inflicted. In a word, they used military methods to deal with the Leftist attackers.* So the nature of these regimes was only incidentally conservative. What they were was essentially military. We have to range further than the Hispanic generals, therefore, if we are to find out what is quintessentially conservative.


----------



## Camp (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> The Nazis knew what they had done was indefensible, and knowledge of same would cost them any possible leverage when they lost the war....so,* they tried to wipe out the evidence of their crimes.*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Seriously, a novel being used as a source?


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

Camp said:


> Seriously, a novel being used as a source?


They do that in economics too


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

It says a lot for this thread that Billc spamming it with articles he hasn't read was the best thing that could have happened to it.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> Fascism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> *Fascist theory is a difficult and complex issue,* but no one in his right mind thinks it is left-wing. It borrows some left wing elements, but then most authoritarian regimes (Stroessner, Cristiani, Rios Montte) do, and no one is calling them left wing.



You do realize why they consider fascist theory "difficult and complex?"  Because they are trying to find a way to hide the fact that it is a left wing socialist system...they have to work really hard to hide this fact and if you read what you posted from wikipedia...they give superficial differences to hide the left wing socialism in order to hide the very real left wing socialism...


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> One common definition of fascism focuses on three concepts: the _fascist negations_ of anti-liberalism, anti-communism and anti-conservatism; nationalist authoritarian goals of creating a regulated economic structure to transform social relations within a modern, self-determined culture; and a political aesthetic of romantic symbolism, mass mobilization, a positive view of violence, and promotion of masculinity, youth and charismatic leadership.[26][27][28] According to many scholars, fascism — especially once in power — has historically attacked communism, conservatism and parliamentary liberalism, attracting support primarily from the far right.[29]



From your own source...this describes every socialist movement...and the dumb point that the left wing Socialists who were called fascists...were anti communist...the national socialists were feeding from the same population as the international socialists...it was two gangs fighting for the same territory...but they were still gangs...so the dumb idea that nazis fighting communists in germany means they weren't the  same thing is just that...dumb...



> nationalist authoritarian goals of creating a regulated economic structure to transform social relations



As in from each according to their ability...to each according to their needs...and the socialist idea of transforming social relations...class struggle anyone...



> a positive view of violence,



Hmmmm...yeah, the other socialists, the international socialists believed in converting people with rainbows and pixie dust...or was that revolution and class warfare to over throw the bourgesie...and the death camps...

If you read this strained definition of fascism you can see, if you pay attention, that they try to make differences out of similiarities...in an effort to hide the fact that the nazis, the italian fascists and international socialists...the communists...were all left wing and all socialists...

Remember...mussolini was a communist...before they called him a facsist...and as was pointed out...hitler read and admired marx...but just didn't believe in the international aspect of the communists...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The Nazis knew what they had done was indefensible, and knowledge of same would cost them any possible leverage when they lost the war....so,* they tried to wipe out the evidence of their crimes.*
> ...





Seriously, learn to read.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> I don't see what the point is in your asking questions when you must realise yourself that you couldn't possibly understand the reply.
> 
> ...





Do....you are a dunce?


----------



## Camp (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc said:


> > Fascism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> >
> > *Fascist theory is a difficult and complex issue,* but no one in his right mind thinks it is left-wing. It borrows some left wing elements, but then most authoritarian regimes (Stroessner, Cristiani, Rios Montte) do, and no one is calling them left wing.
> 
> ...


Well, show us a source from somewhere besides a ultra conservative blog site or net magazine such as Front Page that defines fascist theory the way you are trying to define it.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

Well, did you read the points by Hayek, the guy who fled nazi germany, the guy who has a PH.D in economics...and understands what socialism is...and was alive when the nazis were taking power...

Besides...do your own digging...try doing it with the idea that the left is attempting to hide the nazis being left wing socialists...other wise all you will see is the lies trying to hide it...


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

Camp...here is a point to start your research...it links to a book that was written in 1939...

Articles The Nazis Were Marxists


> Hitler, before the First World War, was highly sympathetic to socialism.  Emile Lorimer, in his 1939 book, _What Hitler Wants_, writes about Hitler during these Vienna years that Hitler already had felt great sympathy for the trade unions and antipathy toward employers.  He attended sessions of the Austrian Parliament.  Hitler was not, as many have portrayed him, a political neophyte in 1914.



and more...



> Consider these remarks of Nazi leaders.  Hitler on May 1, 1927:
> 
> "We are socialists.  We are enemies of today's capitalistic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions."



_Der Angriff_ in 1928: 


> "The worker in a capitalist state - that is his greatest misfortune - no longer a human being, no longer a creator, no longer a shaper of things.  He has become a machine." ​
> 
> 
> > That image sounds almost identical to what Charlie Chaplin, a Marxist, was portraying in his caricature of industrial society, _Modern Times. _In 1930, Hitler tasked Hans Buchner to clarify what Nazi economic policies were.  What did Buchner elect to call the economic policies of the Nazis?  "State socialism." ​
> ...





> These measures were not hidden; they were trumpeted on the front pages of Nazi periodicals to ensure that party members knew what the Nazi Party in the Reichstag was doing.  Some Nazi proposals sound eerily modern. The Nazis, for example, proposed that old age and disability benefits (Social Security) be paid out of general revenue, rather than from the contributions of the individual recipient, and that the benefits be indexed to the cost of living.



Read more: Articles The Nazis Were Marxists 
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook​


----------



## MaryL (Oct 12, 2014)

Really, almost all Jews in Europe vanished in a six year period from 1939 to 1945. were did they all go? Never never land? So, where is this going? Israel is a  fiction based on lies , yadda yadda. Would it make you happy if the Nazis had erased Judaism?


----------



## Coyote (Oct 12, 2014)

Ravi said:


> Damn, what a sick thread.



Looked at the title and thought this thead would be a good refutation of the Holocaust Deniers but low and behold...how disappointing.  It doesn't address it at all.  Nothing whatsoever refuting their claim that there aren't enough bodies.  How disappointing.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



War is never pretty is it, esp. when they say 65 to 85 mil were killed.


----------



## Valerie (Oct 12, 2014)

Auschwitz - a prison camp or a death camp US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


----------



## Penelope (Oct 12, 2014)

MaryL said:


> Really, almost all Jews in Europe vanished in a six year period from 1939 to 1945. were did they all go? Never never land? So, where is this going? Israel is a  fiction based on lies , yadda yadda. Would it make you happy if the Nazis had erased Judaism?






MaryL said:


> Really, almost all Jews in Europe vanished in a six year period from 1939 to 1945. were did they all go? Never never land? So, where is this going? Israel is a  fiction based on lies , yadda yadda. Would it make you happy if the Nazis had erased Judaism?



Jewish insurgency in Palestine - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Of course some fought and died while fighting in the British and German armies, many fought in partisans groups either against the Soviets or against the Germans, and some went to the concentration camps of which some were executed , but the majority died due to starvation and typhus, and many also perished when we bombed the heck out of Berlin.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

*Billc and P. Chic - *

There are two kinds of posters - 

- Those who want to understand the truth 
- Those who only want to be proven right

Both of you are in the latter category, and that is why neither of you have a hope in hell of understanding this issue. Everytime the real answers are posted, you simply scream loud enough to block them out. 

If at any point you would like to actually understand the issue, let me know and I'll explain it in as much details as you like, answer any questions, and recommend books I consider objective and balanced in their approach. 

Personally, I don't believe either of you are capable of that, but I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> If at any point you would like to actually understand the issue, let me know and I'll explain it in as much details as you like, answer any questions, and recommend books I consider objective and balanced in their approach.
> 
> Personally, I don't believe either of you are capable of that, but I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.



Wow...how lucky we are to have you posting about us...your wisdom...compassion and understanding of people you feel you are superior too is truly inspiring...I don't know how to express just how truly, deeply I appreciate your knowledge and desire to educate us...am I dreaming...someone pinch me...


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

This is dedicated to you Saigon...please enjoy...

Leftists become incandescent when reminded of the socialist roots of Nazism 8211 Telegraph Blogs



> ...Hitler told Hermann Rauschning, a Prussian who briefly worked for the Nazis before rejecting them and fleeing the country, that he had admired much of the thinking of the revolutionaries he had known as a young man; but he felt that they had been talkers, not doers. *“I have put into practice what these peddlers and pen pushers have timidly begun,” he boasted, adding that “the whole of National Socialism” was “based on Marx”...*





> Goebbels never doubted that he was a socialist. He understood Nazism to be a better and more plausible form of socialism than that propagated by Lenin. Instead of spreading itself across different nations, it would operate within the unit of the Volk.
> 
> So total is the cultural victory of the modern Left that the merely to recount this fact is jarring. But few at the time would have found it especially contentious. As George Watson put it in _The Lost Literature of Socialism_:





> It is now clear beyond all reasonable doubt that Hitler and his associates believed they were socialists, and that others, including democratic socialists, thought so too.





> The clue is in the name. Subsequent generations of Leftists have tried to explain away the awkward nomenclature of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party as either a cynical PR stunt or an embarrassing coincidence. In fact, the name meant what it said.



.



> Marx’s error, Hitler believed, had been to foster class war instead of national unity – to set workers against industrialists instead of conscripting both groups into a corporatist order. His aim, he told his economic adviser, Otto Wagener, was to “convert the German Volk to socialism without simply killing off the old individualists” – by which he meant the bankers and factory owners who could, he thought, serve socialism better by generating revenue for the state. “What Marxism, Leninism and Stalinism failed to accomplish,” he told Wagener, “we shall be in a position to achieve.”





> Leftist readers may by now be seething. *Whenever I touch on this subject*, it elicits an almost berserk reaction from people who think of themselves as progressives and see anti-fascism as part of their ideology. Well, chaps, maybe now you know how we conservatives feel when you loosely associate Nazism with “the Right”.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

Camp...here is Ludwig Von Mises...an economist...a famous one...who was also alive when the nazis were coming to power...and here is one paper where his understanding of them is  discussed ...

Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian - George Reisman - Mises Daily



> My purpose today is to make just two main points: (1) To show why Nazi Germany was a socialist state, not a capitalist one. And (2) to show why socialism, understood as an economic system based on government ownership of the means of production, positively requires a totalitarian dictatorship.





> The identification of Nazi Germany as a socialist state was one of the many great contributions of Ludwig von Mises.





> When one remembers that the word "Nazi" was an abbreviation for "der National_sozialistische_Deutsche Arbeiters Partei — in English translation: the National _Socialist_ German Workers' Party — Mises's identification might not appear all that noteworthy. For what should one expect the economic system of a country ruled by a party with "socialist" in its name to be but socialism?





> Nevertheless, apart from Mises and his readers, practically no one thinks of Nazi Germany as a socialist state. It is far more common to believe that it represented a form of capitalism, which is what the Communists and all other Marxists have claimed.





> The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.





> *What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name onlyunder the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government.*





> *For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. *The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

This is one of the contortions the left has to go through to hide the fact that nazis, fascists and communists were the same thing...socialism...where the state controls the means of production...

For example...one way they dance is by describing fascism as...Totalitarianism + Capitalism...

There is no way those things exist together...since definitions are important to the left here, I will use their technique and use standard definitions to show why this is a stupid idea...

Capitalism...

CAPITALISM Capitalism is a social system based on the principle of INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS



> *What is Capitalism?*
> Capitalism is a social system based on the principle of* individual rights*. Politically, it is the system of *laissez-faire *(freedom). Legally it is a system of objective laws (*rule of law* as opposed to rule of man). Economically, when such freedom is applied to the sphere of production its result is the *free-market*.




totalitarianism government -- Encyclopedia Britannica



> *totalitarianism,* form of government that theoretically permits no individual freedom and that seeks to subordinate all aspects of the individual’s life to the authority of the government.



What part of individual rights and free markets comes close to being possible in a totalitarian socialist system...see the dancing they have to do to make that work...


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc said:


> Wow...how lucky we are to have you posting about us...your wisdom...compassion and understanding of people you feel you are superior too is truly inspiring...I don't know how to express just how truly, deeply I appreciate your knowledge and desire to educate us...am I dreaming...someone pinch me...



Actually, yes you are. 

Because in real life I suspect it is unlikely that you will bump into someone who is an expert in this area, and I'm at least expert enough to have published a half-dozen articles in international magazines on the topic. I know people who know more about it than I do, but I know to have read most of the major books on fascist theory, to have been to most of the key sites and talked with people who were themselves camp inmates, for instance. 

If you happen to know someone more qualified to discuss fascism than I am, then go with what they have to tell you instead. 

Alternatively, you can going back to spamming the thread with off-topic nonsense we both know you haven't read and don't understand.


----------



## Ravi (Oct 12, 2014)

JakeStarkey said:


> PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> 
> An informed 9th grader would easily refute PC's silliness.


Yep. Anyone that uses what happened to Jews under Hitler to advance her lies is sick.


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

Ravi said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > PC is sick, despite her second statement, because of those who come up with, which she accepts: "Also, just for the record, Nazism is the German term for NATIONAL *SOCIALISM* which is exactly what FDR & Obama are all about."
> ...


Sad, sad, SAD day for USMB 

ANOTHER reason that PoliChic needs her own sub-forum so that new lurkers don't think the board entertains her hyper-partisan, zaniness


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Saigon said:


> *Billc and P. Chic - *
> 
> There are two kinds of posters -
> 
> ...





So......how come you ran away from the questions in post #81?

Wadda you....some kind of dunce???

Oh...right, already determined.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

P. Chic - 

Please try and understand. The topic of this thread is what I do for a living; not always, but from time to time. It is an area in which I am somewhat of an expert, and I'm more than happy to provide details of what I mean by that, including publications in English that you can read for yourself. 

However, I am not going to waste my time jumping through hoops for people who aren't even vaguely interested in the topic. 

It takes a very special kind of closed-mindedness to have failed to understand that Fascism is inherently right wing. Personally, I doubt that kind of ignorance can be cured by facts and information alone, but if at some point you are interested in learning what everyone else already knows, I'm happy to answer any questons you may have, or point you in the direction of objective books from balanced sources.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> Please try and understand. The topic of this thread is what I do for a living; not always, but from time to time. It is an area in which I am somewhat of an expert, and I'm more than happy to provide details of what I mean by that, including publications in English that you can read for yourself.
> 
> ...





You're an expert on the topic?

Proof not in evidence.

I think you're simply a dunce mouthing what others tell you to.

Still haven't answered post #81, dunce.


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliHack!!! 

You people might win some elections..... well..... local ones anyways


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 12, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> PoliHack!!!
> 
> You people might win some elections..... well..... local ones anyways







Why do you seem incapable of constructing a post actually related to the thread?

Oh...right....because you can't.

Carry on.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> Because in real life I suspect it is unlikely that you will bump into someone who is an expert in this area,



Well, you can explain that to my professors that they don't know about Facsism and communism because like you, they were wrong...you may be an expert...but you are still wrong...I have read on this subject for years, initially believing as you do that the nazis were the opposite from the communists but the more I looked at it the sillier it became to think that they were different...they are one and the same with superficial differences based on the country  in which they were in...

Jump through all the hoops you have to to lie to yourself about the truth...that's on you...

Right wing...no...national socialism and international socialism are the same thing...socialism and left wing...a desire for the government to control the means of production...and the rest of society....where the communists see it as a step toward true communism...the national socialists couldn't care less...they both end in the same place...

And like other "experts" the idea that two ideas of freedom...one that advocates more freedom and the other that advocates more control by the state meet at the top of a circle and end with the same type of government...that too is silly...and yes, I have seen the 3 dimensional chart where they try to break down every aspect of right-left, economic and religious aspects of these societies and in the end...the straightest path to the truth is that the right represents limited government and more freedom while the left favors more government and less freedom of the individual in favor of the collective...

You are wrong Saigon...

Although I wouldn't mind adding your writings to my reading list...


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 12, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Not nearly enough bodies *have been found* to document the millions for whom the Nazis must answer. Where are those bodies?
> So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place.



Here are some of the bodies:
Holocaust Controversies Mass Graves and Dead Bodies

If you want to debate numbers,
a more conservative estimate of the 6 million count was
4 million were Jews while 2 million were Catholics, gypsies, homosexuals, disabled or other "undesirables"

If you can't discuss without arguing,
here is one man Peter Loth who just focuses on Forgiveness
to heal people regardless of our views and backgrounds and beliefs we struggle with:
Welcome to Forerunnerministries.org

I think that is the best approach that includes everyone of all views
even if we cannot agree on what happened in the past,
we can agree it is better for our healing health and sanity to forgive first
and seek corrections afterwards in that spirit. Thanks PC, let's focus on healing
and all the other truth and corrections will surely follow when we work together and not against each other.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

Did some of the people posting here actually read what PoliticalChic posted....it doesn't seem like it from some of theses posts...


----------



## whitehall (Oct 12, 2014)

Americans were in combat in Germany for about two years and yet about 80,000 American bodies are still unaccounted for even though America was acutely involved in keeping track of US servicemen. The Jewish Holocaust was ongoing for about a decade with the German regime deliberately hiding identities of their victims and covering up atrocities with secret burials and incineration techniques. It's insulting to humanity to question the legitimacy of the Holocaust.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2014)

> It's insulting to humanity to question the legitimacy of the Holocaust.



That isn't what the post was about...is that what you think he thread is about?


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc said:


> Did some of the people posting here actually read what PoliticalChic posted....it doesn't seem like it from some of theses posts...



Hi Billc: I decided to address this in a way that points to solutions not more division.

I get that PC and others are debating if you can blame Hitler/Holocaust on the leftwing or rightwing.
Either way that genocide based on ill will and retribution caused mass destruction.
Why not focus on what is going to heal the roots of such killing and mob mentality?
Does it matter if it is left or right, but the common factor is the abuse of power to oppress kill and destroy
with no due process or equal protections and defense, but complete obliteration of opposition int he name of dominance?

If you want to argue if Jefferson was Democrat or Republican you can go in circles all day.
Half the people will say the southern slavery was promoted by Democrats and half will keep blaming Republicans.

What good does that do in solving the aftermath of slavery?

So instead of playing into the game that goes nowhere,
I choose to address the points of agreement that will lead to a solution to end oppression.

Can we agree that regardless of left or right wing labels,
NOBODY wants to be oppressed by an opposing political faction threatening to take over and rule by dominance.

both left and right object to that.
so why not agree to stop the bullying if none of us wants to be under it?

I decided to address that factor which is common concerns on both sides
regardless if right blames left or left blames right. nobody agrees to be oppressed by force.
we all want freedom whether we call it civil liberties, religious freedom or freedom of choice.

why can't we fight together where we both win instead of fighting each other where we both lose?


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc said:


> > It's insulting to humanity to question the legitimacy of the Holocaust.
> 
> 
> 
> That isn't what the post was about...is that what you think he thread is about?



If PC used that question for bait in the topic, is it any wonder that people replied to it.

Since it was the topic in the subject, I think it is fair that people reply to that as well.
We need to resolve all aspects and angles of this historic issue
especially since a lot of the same questions have come up again with ISIS.
And how do we respond to that to prevent greater genocide that has already started.
How do we unite, bringing all people of all nations together to end the scourge on all levels?

PC wanted to fight about one angle, but there are many others that can be resolved at the same time.
why not address them all?


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc - 

It simply is not possible that you have read about this subject for years or sudied it at university and yet still don't understand dictionary definitions of terms like 'fascism'. 

This is not a competition, nor is it a matter of opinion. 

Almost any dictionary will confirm that fascism is right wing, and any of one hundreds of history books will explain why. There are very good reasons why you have not read those, and we both know that you aren't going to start reading them now. 

At the moment you are a first-time golder standing at the tee who swings and misses, swings and misses, swings and misses - all the while claiming to be a clubhouse pro.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

Billc - 

Here is what you somehow missed during all of years of study....something called a dictionary:

Fascism

noun (sometimes capital) 
1.
any ideology or movement inspired by Italian Fascism, such as German National Socialism; any *right-wing nationalist ideology* or movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism
2.
any ideology, movement, programme, tendency, etc, that may be characterized as *right-wing*, chauvinist, authoritarian, etc
3.
prejudice in relation to the subject specified: body fascism 

Fascism Define Fascism at Dictionary.com

Let me guess...the dictionary is wrong, and you know better, am I right?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 12, 2014)

guno said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Damn, what a sick thread.
> ...



^ This is why people run sock accounts


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Oct 12, 2014)

It bothers American Progressives that Hitler, Stalin and Mao were their ideological forefathers.


----------



## bodecea (Oct 12, 2014)

Ravi said:


> Damn, what a sick thread.


Well, now we know PC is a Holocaust Denier.   All else pales in comparison to that.


----------



## bodecea (Oct 12, 2014)

DriftingSand said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...


All that does is show she wants to hide behind the words of others....it's called plausible deniability.   But it doesn't fool us.


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 12, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Billc -
> 
> Here is what you somehow missed during all of years of study....something called a dictionary:
> 
> ...



Dear Saigon and Billc:
Thanks for sticking to the topic.

I agree that the most threatening tyrannical takeovers of govt
are the ones that mix "religious fundamentalism" associated with rightwing.
* What made the Holocaust so frightening is to think these were people
who followed the Bible, even stopping to sing hymnals like a church choir
before returning to their posts running the extermination camps (Peter Loth shows video
footage of these who believed they were doing the work of God as believers following scripture)
* And now the genocide by extreme Jihadists is also mixing religion with govt and militant forces.
So people naturally make the connection with "right wing" religion
that has Similar "patriarchal" traits of putting dominant males as the heads of authority over women and other followers as
lower in the pecking order and pack.

However, I see it is Equally valid for people on the Right to complain of
the Liberal Left abusing Party Politics to push their own partisan agenda and Political Beliefs.

Although this is not visibly and physically as "violent" as the oppression of the Holocaust and now ISIS,
the similar factor of dismissing and oppressing the DISSENTING members of the population,
and only recognizing the authority and beliefs of Party leaders that tow the party line,
is DISTURBING. (On one hand the liberal Democrat  politicians CLAIM to defend prochoice and separation of church and state, but then turn around and suppress the same free choice of other beliefs, as with dissenting beliefs on marriage and health care, and instead impose a national policy based on their party's beliefs as "the only way" and overriding other beliefs.)

So I acknowledge the equal need to recognize the "fascist" analogy made of the left
when this mob mentality is applied to push Leftwing party politics, agenda and beliefs
as national policies, while at the same time denying this and claiming only the rightwing has pushed ideology in oppressive ways.

As a progressive prochoice Democrat, myself, I find it not only disturbing and distressing,
but up and down Depressing that I seem to be the only person I know coming from the Left who is pointing this out as anti-choice and oppressive.  Even the Greens, Progressives and Occupy who were trying to address corporate corruption of the Democrat party are silenced. Those opinions only count if they align with the liberal Politicians for their agenda; and if not, nobody ever hears from these members who don't agree but are censored and only used for their votes.

The religious groups may be more visibly and historically violent in terms of organizing military force, but the leftwing are also guilty of abusing similar tactics and just MASKING it better.
the media is used to paint the left and right the way people want to paint these, even though the Greens and Occupy pointed out this is all part of the corporate game to divide and conquer.
The media and politicians continue to benefit from campaigns that play this same game as is.

To keep pushing the Secular policies of the left as "the law of the land" (from the belief in health care as a right to beliefs in gay marriage to the point of excluding and discriminating against Christians and conservatives who believe otherwise)
It is still suppressing of equal religious freedom and due process.
So it is still violation of human rights, disguised as something else.

It is more insidious that the left CLAIMS to be separating church and state
and keeping laws neutral by staying secular; but have instead gone too far
by excluding and demonizing beliefs that should be equally respected and accommodated.

The leftwing does this, too, but gets away with it
by disguising it in secular terms so it doesn't look like religion.

Until we recognize the political religion and beliefs on the left
as equally inappropriate to establish through the state "as any other religion,"
this fight will continue.

I look forward to the day when I am not the Only Democrat
standing up for political freedom and equality of political beliefs.

Neither denying the tactics of either left or right that have gone too far, but recognizing both left and right wing parties have done this and both need to stop the bullying and abuses of power.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 12, 2014)

Emily - 

One of the (many) mistakes made in this thread is assuming that fascism = tyranny = authoritarian = despot = big government. 

Each of these words actually has its own definition and meaning, and although there is crossover between the terms, they are not simply interchangeable. 

I would absolutely agree that tyranny occurs on the left and right wings, and I would say the same about authoritarianism. There are a dozen recent examples of left-wing tyranny, and a dozen recent examples of right-wing tyranny. Hence, playing these "Go Team!" games with words in order to try make the other Team look bad - as P Chic attempts to do on this thread - is childish, reductionist and incredibly stupid. 

There is no political ideology that cannot be distorted into tyranny, nor is there any religion that cannot be distorted for political gain. 

Likewise, distorting the meaning of words in order to try to clean the slate of a particular political philosophy is despicable. As soon as people start arguing with dictionary definitions and seeking to impose their own definitions of what century-old words mean, society has a serious problem, as this thread demonstrates.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Oct 12, 2014)

CrusaderFrank said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > Ravi said:
> ...



exactly


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 12, 2014)

CrusaderFrank said:


> It bothers American Progressives that Hitler, Stalin and Mao were their ideological forefathers.



From what I understand, the progressives came from Roosevelt's campaigns
to use govt to manage the country's economic and social services to recover from the Depression.

this was supposed to be a temporary program to go through govt to help rebuild areas
that didn't have enough localized resources to rebuild on their own. (If you look up the
leadership of Jesse Jones, Houston had the ability for local private investors to lend and
bail out banks from failing, but when such efforts were tried on a national scale,
going through federal govt to reach other regions that didn't have enough local support created dependency instead)

So it ended up becoming a dependent relationship with handouts through govt,
when the original plan was to invest in rebuilding 
until the private sector could return to independence and self-sufficience.

Welfare and medical and social services were opposed (and still are) not supported
by many unless it was enforced to stick to the short term goals as *temporary programs only.*

These programs were extended, and continue to today,
but this was not the original agreement. Unlike microlending programs
that have built in education and business plans to make sure recipients
pay back what they receive as loans, govt is not equipped to manage the one-on-one
longterm education training and mentorship for each recipient
so these social programs have operated as handouts. even student loans are not managed cost effectively
where these can be paid back but are now being forgiven and dumped on taxpayers.

What's interesting to me is that leaders on all sides
from Obama to Dr. Ben Carson support
microlending and education to replace welfare handouts
that we all know are not sustainable and keep people in poverty.

If we set aside party politics, maybe more leaders
could unite around sustainable solutions
and share credit instead of projecting blame back and forth.


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 12, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Emily -
> 
> One of the (many) mistakes made in this thread is assuming that fascism = tyranny = authoritarian = despot = big government.
> 
> ...



Ok let's try to stick to where we agree first
1. we agree that the authoritarian abuses and tyrannical paradigm
occurs on both left and right. agreed
2. as for fascism < not equal to > big government
can we agree that once any collective entity (whether a political or religious group,
corporation, even a nonprofit charity like Red Cross caught mishandling huge donations)
amasses greater resources, influence, or power than an individual person,
then this Big Collective runs the risk of abuse
that is greater than just trying to check one person.
And that is why we have the Bill of Rights to try to check Govt,
but this same problem applies to any group.
It is not just religious, but political parties and corporations abuse their collective influence and power.

Even if the bigness is not the problem itself,
do we agree the bigger the bureaucracy the
greater chances of this getting corrupted for lack of direct checks?

So bigger groups need to break down into smaller modules for accountability checks
or things get lost in the shuffle.

Can we agree this explains why people
fear big govt as associated with tyranny because it opens the door to abuses.

3. as for redefining terms
this reminds me of people who don't want marriage redefined.

can we stick to what concepts we agree with or don't agree with,
and maybe the terminology will follow from there. otherwise we will fight over that.

if we run into these problems where people cannot see or use words the same way,
perhaps we'll just have to deal with that. I don't know if that can be resolved,
as with the marriage issue where some people cannot change the definition,
and some people cannot have equality unless something changes. I don't think this is anyone's fault.

We may have to accept the fact the words are not going to serve us perfectly,
because people's beliefs and word perceptions are not the same and cannot be helped.
I don't think it is fair to criticize people if they have associations that are different,
and I prefer to find other ways to work around it if they cannot help it.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

Emily -

You make a lot of points, but I just want to focus on the issue of big government, because that is crucial here.

One of the other (many) mistakes made on this thread is to apply 21st century US terminology and thinking to Europe in 1939.

If big government = tyranny, then ALL governments in 1940 were tyrannical.

The whole idea of streamlining and downsizing adminsitrations, both public and private, really only came into focus during the 1980s or even 1990s - largely because of the global economic meltdown accompanying the fall of the Berlin wall, and the Reagan-Thatcher views on free market economics. Since then, the focus on 'big government' has maintained a high profile in the US, but less so elsewhere. In Europe, the idea of small government has never really been a big issue. It certainly isn't a major left/right issue as it is in the US, probably because a lot of left-wing adminstrations also slashed public sector jobs in the 1990s.

So on this thread we see posters claiming Hitler must be left wing because he ran a massive public sector. The problem with this thinking is that so did every other country in the developed world.

The schism between left and right wing thinking in Europe in 1940 did not depend on big vs small government, but on the role of a) class and b) capital.

In these senses, the various administrations in Europe fall quite clearly into left and right wing camps, with the right wing backing a class-based society with a strong upper and middle class; while the left looked to smash class structures. The right wing promoted the ownership of shares and used dividends to ensure the wealthy elite remained wealthy, thus ensuring their political support; the left wing looked to remove capital from the equation altogether.

These are very simple explanations for very complex issues, but hopefully they get the point across, anyway.


----------



## jon_berzerk (Oct 13, 2014)

emilynghiem said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > Emily -
> ...




the founders believed that big government led to corruptness 

*“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."Benjamin Franklin*


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 13, 2014)

jon_berzerk said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Saigon said:
> ...



Yes, but it is not synonymous but correlated.
Notice you said LED to corruptness, not was the same as.

We can have a big military but it does not need to be corrupted.
The key factor is if all the members are following the Constitution,
respecting due process and equal protection of the laws etc.

When we have more members of society, corporations and govt
all following the same Constitutional standards, we can handle big numbers and not
become a corrupt abused oppressive bureaucracy that is making
victims of us all.

We need to check each other as equals, and make sure all
large collective organizations follow the same system of due process
to prevent abuses of power resources and influence,
and we will achieve both -- getting rid of unchecked abuses
by setting up more localized and more direct accountability
and managing larger groups of people.

I agree it will mean streamlining the federal govt to just national level policies,
and delegating more responsibility for local management to states and to people.

People have to own the process for there to be accountability to each other.

To Constitutionalists on the Right, this is called limited govt and reserving
rights to the states and people.
To populists on the left, this means restoring democracy for the people
where govt represents the will of the people.

So either way we are talking about representing the people.
one group tends to see that as meaning going through govt to represent the people.
and the other group sees it as people int he private sector running and managing
things at the maximum level of autonomy and self govt while minimalizing federal govt.

but in the end, it will come out the same where the people are in charge
of localized management where people = equals = government.


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Emily -
> 
> You make a lot of points, but I just want to focus on the issue of big government, because that is crucial here.
> 
> ...



Hi Saigon
I think you make the same mistake by saying limited govt = corporate control run amok due to rightwing deregulation
as people who say Hitler holocaust = leftwing tyranny

Yes and no.

The corporate finagling hijacks both right and left politics.
The Greens and even the Occupy and Tea Party were pointing this out.
Even Milton Wolf a medical professional and cousin by marriage into Obama's own family
pleaded with Occupy and Tea Party to unite against "corporate cronyism" as the common enemy.

So you cannot say it is just "rightwing" corporatism when leftwing politicians take advantage too.
just like not saying Hitler is just leftwing marxism.

are we getting closer?


----------



## Yarddog (Oct 13, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > ricechickie said:
> ...


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 13, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > ricechickie said:
> ...



P W N


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

[QUOTE="emilynghiem, post: 9961438, member: 22295"

Hi Saigon
I think you make the same mistake by saying limited govt = corporate control run amok due to rightwing deregulation
as people who say Hitler holocaust = leftwing
?[/QUOTE]

I have never said anything even remotely like that. I didn't even comment on the topic of deregulation or corporate control.


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Hi Saigon
> ...



RE: "The whole idea of streamlining and downsizing adminsitrations, both public and private, really only came into focus during the 1980s or even 1990s - largely because of the global economic meltdown accompanying the fall of the Berlin wall, and the Reagan-Thatcher views on free market economics."

^ I thought you were criticizing the Reagan approach to deregulation ^
as the "demonizing of big government" for the purpose of "free market"
that has been in turn demonized as just enabling corporate abuses.

Sorry if this isn't what you meant.

I disagree, and cite the longterm conflict
that existed since the onset and founding of American govt,
between Federalists who pushed for powerful centralized govt
vs. AntiFederalists who wanted limited federal govt and maximum state.

If you want to say this argument only came back later, that's fine.
But it's still the same age old argument just resurfacing over
and over because we've never solved the problem:

how do we maintain and manage collective resources under a central uniform law and govt
WITHOUT having abuse of power from concentrating in a central source.

How do balance both the local democracy and sovereignty of states and people
with
a United states under one Constitutional law and one federal govt.

And what caused the big upset in disrupting checks and balances with govt
was the introduction of the Corporate personhood that
allowed these entities to act as both Collective forces
(with as much power and influence as Government over individuals in comparison),
but acting as Individuals with private rights of citizens under the Constitution
without the same checks and balances and due process required of Government.

These corporations in bypassing the checks and balances
between govt and individuals, then are abused in conflicts of interest
to sway decisions politically legally and financially in courts, congress and parties and media.

So this has upset the Constitutional limits on collective power
and protections of individual rights from such abuses.

And as long as the right blames the left for the monopoly on corporate media,
and the left blames the right for the monopoly through corporate interests,
then nobody is solving the problem but just blaming the other parties.

Both the media corporate interests are running amok profiting
from the conflicts either way,
and also the legal profession continues to profit from conflicts.

So until all these conflicts of interest are addressed
and not just blamed back and forth on left and right,
how can we start pinning down the abuses
and demanding restitution owed to taxpayers for the debts and damages caused.

Sorry Saigon I thought you were trying
to blame the crackdown on "big government"
as just a rightwing problem the same way
people were trying to say the leftwing problem
is linked to marxism and Hitler.

The best explanation of where the leftwing came from
is from Rousseau's version of radical liberalism,
(where the govt is used to impose the will of the people
as the common good determined for everyone to follow),
vs. the classic liberalism of Locke where people want
to preserve freedom from govt tyranny that is the
source of Conservative limited govt.

One depends on govt to ensure the rights of the people
and one depends on rights as given by God with
the purpose of the Constitution to limit and protect this from
govt. That is how I understand the founding fathers
and same historic struggle that we have today.

(And the progressive push came from recovery
after the Depression, to use federal govt to manage
the resources and services for the welfare of the people,
but it became a "dependent relationship on govt," instead of a temporary
fix while working toward financial independence through the private sector.)


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

Emily - 

ok, I get your point now! 

My point is not whether or not it was a good or bad thing for governments to sell assets, privatise departments or slash bureaucracy in the Reagan-Thatcher era - only to point out that these changes took place in the 1980s, and not in the 1940s.

Hence, the mistake a couple of posters are making here is a little like asking why the Founding Fathers did not refer to internet porn or assailt weapons in the constiution. I.e., Because one can not apply a principle or policy decades before anyone has thought of it.

Additionally, to this day, the idea of  big small government is not widely used in Europe to determine left vs right sing thinking. It is bot, and never has been, the determining factor that it is in the US.


----------



## emilynghiem (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Emily -
> 
> ok, I get your point now!
> 
> ...



OK but what about the history with
the Federalists vs. Antifederalists
and the Locke classic liberals (wanting natural rights from God and limiting govt to prevent overreaching)
vs. the Rousseau radical liberals (wanting the rights and will of the people established and protected through govt)

This same spit, whatever you call it (top down central mgmt vs. bottom up sovereignty of people and states rights first)
divided the Founders who fought about the Constitution (and why it needed the Bill of Rights before some states would
agree to ratify in advance under the condition the Bill of Rights would be added later)
and divided the Black leadership from Booker T. Washington to duBois (? I think, sorry if I cite the wrong name)
which carries forward to today's split between the liberal Black leadership in Democrat circles
depending on govt to uplift the people until they are back on equal track
vs. the Conservative Black leadership in Republic circles
depending on private business to uplift the people and not rely on govt to do that

Don't tell me this split between black liberal Democrats and black conservative Republicans
only started with Reagan in the 80s?

The split between classes has always happened
even before slavery used it to keep house slaves separated from field slaves,
which also carried down through the split today between liberal and conservative Blacks
calling each other slaves or Uncle Toms, but now it's expanded beyond race
and it's namecalling between whole parties blaming either the poor or the rich as a class.

This wasn't created new.
this class division has always been
but just manifests under different labels.

If we are going to argue which trend came from left or right,
isn't it going to flip around and get terribly confusing?
Since the southern slave owners and Jim Crowe laws
were pushed through the Dixiecrats (before the white
flight from the Democrats to the Republican side).

From what I understand
the Locke classic liberalism is what now aligns with conservative views of limited govt
and the Rousseau radical liberalism is what the Democrats follow with establishing and enforcing the
will of the people through govt as the means to the ends, while the conservatives believe govt
should reflect and respect the will of the people which is sovereign under God first and not granted by govt.

Is that close enough?


----------



## DriftingSand (Oct 13, 2014)

emilynghiem said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > Billc -
> ...



Beliefs (mixed with a sense of nationality) has always been a powerful motivator where land-grabbing, nation building, and national growth are concerned. Religion may or may not be implemented as a means to draw folks to the front lines.  But not all religions, in and of themselves, seek to grab powers and dominate peoples.  Christ and His Apostles never picked up arms as a means of overthrowing nations and forcing them to convert to Christianity.  The three most aggressive belief systems that come to mind that DO seek world domination are Islam, Zionism, and Marxism.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

whitehall said:


> Americans were in combat in Germany for about two years and yet about 80,000 American bodies are still unaccounted for even though America was acutely involved in keeping track of US servicemen. The Jewish Holocaust was ongoing for about a decade with the German regime deliberately hiding identities of their victims and covering up atrocities with secret burials and incineration techniques. It's insulting to humanity to question the legitimacy of the Holocaust.







"...yet about 80,000 American bodies are still unaccounted for..."

.  On March 26, 1945, Army Chief of Staff George C. Marshall issued the following order: "Censor all stories, delete criticism Russian treatment." This was aimed at those Americans who had been POWs of the Red Army. *Note that some 20,000 US soldiers were never returned by FDR's pal, Joe Stalin.*

a. FDR died April 12th..but, based on Marshall's order,  the White House clearly knew of the following prior to that:

" By May 15, 1945, the Pentagon believed 25,000 American POWs "liberated" by the Red Army were *still being held hostage to Soviet demands* that all "Soviet citizens" be returned to Soviet control, "without exception" and by force if necessary, as agreed to at the Yalta Conference in February 1945. When the U.S. refused to return some military formations composed of Soviet citizens, such as the First Ukrainian SS Division, Stalin retaliated by returning only 4,116 of the hostage American POWs. On June 1, 1945, the United States Government issued documents, signed by General Dwight D. Eisenhower, explaining away the loss of approximately 20,000 POWs remaining under Stalin's control." http://www.nationalalliance.org/wwii/wwii.htm


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 13, 2014)

> Almost any dictionary will confirm that fascism is right wing,



And those definitions are wrong...



> Fascism
> 
> noun (sometimes capital)
> 1.
> ...







> movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism
> 2.



this describes socialism at its extreme which is what Germany, Russia, China and all the other socialist paradises became...

 But actually it is the racism and nationalism that throws off the academics...since they see themselves as being anti racism and anti nationalsim how can the underlying common thread which is the government control of the economy be the same as the german model...the answer is simple...the racism of the German model of socialism was simply a peculiarity of that country, no more no less, the nationalism becomes a tool used in socialism around the world...look at China and the Soviet Union...they used nationalism as did the Germans, the Italians and the Japanese...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

bodecea said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> > Damn, what a sick thread.
> ...




Learn to read.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 13, 2014)

Some of the mystery as to why academics find "fascism" so hard to define...it comes down to hiding the fact that it is actually socialism, the thing they support....

Articles Dusting Off the Political F-Word



> I later learned from reading Solzhenitsyn that "fascist" first became a pejorative term in the Soviet Union. Communists branded everyone a "fascist" who wasn't one hundred percent supportive of Comrade Stalin's plan for global socialism under the control of the Soviet Communist party.






> This led to such absurdities as lumping together such champions of individual rights and liberties as Reagan and Thatcher with the Hitlers and Mussolinis who trampled individual rights and liberties, and whose policies were far more similar to Stalin's than to Reagan's and Thatcher's.* In a way, the word "fascist" was ripe for this kind of sloppy usage, because fascism, unlike socialism, was never a complete, coherent political philosophy. That made it easier to co-opt the term as a catch-all of condemnation.*





> All anti-liberty ideologies and movements -- communism, socialism, fascism, progressivism, environmentalism, and Orwellian, misnamed "liberalism" -- are opposed to liberty; therefore, they are literally illiberal.


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 13, 2014)

I don't think OP is as happy as you think she might be for you bumping this cringe thread.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

Billc -

Somehow I had a feeling that all of the dictionaries, the history books and indeed the views of the Nazis themselves would be wrong.

I have to ask though, given you've spent the entire thread claiming that socialists are trying to change the meaning of the word 'Nazi' - don't you feel just a little silly doing EXACTLY the same thing?

Or is it a coincidence that you think all of the dictionaries are wrong?

Really...what a child you are.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 13, 2014)

I find this article helpful in describing nazism, fascism and communism...

Articles Rethinking the Political Spectrum



> *Thank Joseph Stalin*
> 
> Indirectly yet powerfully, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin is responsible for the classic political spectrum commonly used to show the relationships between schools of political thought and the systems they engender. This is what happened:





> Adolf Hitler's National Socialist movement was, as the name clearly says, a party of the left. *While not explicitly Marxist-Leninist, National Socialism accepted the essentials of that worldview while adding Germanic racial supremacism to the mix.* This is not the place to lay this out in detail, but it is part of the historical record. Jonah Goldberg's _Liberal Fascism _includes the best recent treatment of the subject. Thus it was not astonishing that in 1939 Hitler and Stalin found ample common interests to establish an alliance, nor did it astonish that Communist Party members in the West almost unanimously took up support for Nazi Germany. The alliance simply recognized the ideological kinship between the two.





> Then in 1941, Hitler turned on his fellow socialist and invaded the Soviet Union. How was Stalin to explain or rationalize this turnabout? What ideological signboard could he put around Hitler's neck that would make sense in the Soviet political context?





> *Certainly Stalin could not let it appear he had been duped by a fellow socialist, nor could he allow Hitler to give socialism a bad name. The solution was to label the bad guys, Hitler and the Nazis, as polar opposites of the good guys, Stalin and the Communists. Fascism - a leftist, socialist doctrine - was abruptly and absurdly labeled a phenomenon of the extreme right.*







> *From 1941 onward into the postwar era, Soviet propaganda, diplomacy, and scholarship consistently depicted Nazism as a right-wing phenomenon, communism on the left, with the Western powers arrayed on a vague spectrum somewhere in between. Western academics and journalists fell into the same practice, often but not always because of their own leftist sympathies.*





> Few bothered to contest the analysis and assumptions that underlay the new model, and it was a convenient way to depict and describe political camps. Thus the classic political spectrum of the 20thcentury became second nature to everyone, not just to communists.



The author gives a model of left and right which is actually accurate...it won't paste over...then he goes on to explain why the model is more accurate than previous models...It will actually paste...



> Placing the political world into this more accurate framework yields a number of important corollary benefits and insights:





> Placing the political world into this more accurate framework yields a number of important corollary benefits and insights:





> Gone is the muddled notion that if one moves too far from tyranny, one only encounters more tyranny. Liberty is the opposite of tyranny, and the more accurate spectrum makes that clear.
> Leftist critics become less persuasive when depicting conservatives as incipient fascists. They can no longer warn that if one becomes too conservative, one becomes a fascist tyrant. To the contrary, the conservative is identified with liberty, while the liberal has more affinity with tyranny, whether soft or hard.
> Moderates lose their hallowed position and aura of wisdom and restraint. They are simply a bit more conservative than liberals and more liberal than conservatives, i.e. they are less jealous of their liberty than are those to their right.
> Libertarianism has a home. It resides at the right end of the spectrum, reflecting the maximization of liberty.





> Where is one to place oppressive regimes that are not particularly ideological? On the classic spectrum, they are often placed on the right, between conservatism and fascism. But consider their essential attributes: severe limits on liberty, the confiscation of productive assets by the government or cronies of the dictator, weak rule of law. These attributes have much more in common with socialism than with conservatism; indeed, many such regimes call themselves socialist, whether or not a political science purist would agree.




And the points above are a big part as to why academics want the right associated with fascism/nazism...


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

Emily - 

Again, I have not commented on Federalists, Rousseau or Locke - I am only talking about Fascist history, and why no historians apply the big government/small government concept to determine left vs right wing ideologies in 1940's Germany.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> I don't think OP is as happy as you think she might be for you bumping this cringe thread.



Indeed...you just know this is one of those threads the OP was hoping would simply die quietly with 0 views!!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Dot Com said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think OP is as happy as you think she might be for you bumping this cringe thread.
> ...





Hmmm......I sense projection on your part.

Twice you were given the opportunity to answer this:


I'll answer for you:

"Communism
Socialism
Fascism
Progressivism
Liberalism

All are based on *big government, command and control economic principles, collectivism, dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives.

That's right: it disingenuous and arbitrary to claim that they are not on the same end of the political scale.*

The conclusion: you are a fraud.


As for " which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society"...

None of them.


Now, back under your rock.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

P. Chic -

And as I have explained to you twice already, I will be more than happy to explain this to you, at such point as you are willing to listen and discuss the topic sensibly.

Actually, if you look back through the past couple of pages, you will find a couple of your most extraordinary errors explained already in #135 and #143.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> And as I have explained to you twice already, I will be more than happy to explain this to you, at such point as you are willing to listen and discuss the topic sensibly.
> 
> Actually, if you look back through the past couple of pages, you will find a couple of your most extraordinary errors explained already in #135 and #143.






Stop tap-dancing and admit that I answered the question that you wouldn't.

And admit that you wouldn't because it proved that I am correct.


Fascism is but one more iteration of communism, socialism, progrssivism, and Modern Liberalism.


----------



## Dot Com (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> And as I have explained to you twice already, I will be more than happy to explain this to you, at such point as you are willing to listen and discuss the topic sensibly.
> 
> Actually, if you look back through the past couple of pages, you will find a couple of your most extraordinary errors explained already in #135 and #143.


in Op's defense, she does that a lot 

As to the OP, the fusion of big biz & gov't would be a dream come true for Establ. Repubs. In fact, it has already occurred.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Dot Com said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > P. Chic -
> ...




You actually believe he had any points in 135 and 143?

You're dumber than I thought.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

P.Chic -

Your questions were answered in posts #135 and #143.

You are more than welcome to reply to those posts.I'll even post them again for you here.

One of the other (many) mistakes made on this thread is to apply 21st century US terminology and thinking to Europe in 1939.

If big government = tyranny, then ALL governments in 1940 were tyrannical.

The whole idea of streamlining and downsizing adminsitrations, both public and private, really only came into focus during the 1980s or even 1990s - largely because of the global economic meltdown accompanying the fall of the Berlin wall, and the Reagan-Thatcher views on free market economics. Since then, the focus on 'big government' has maintained a high profile in the US, but less so elsewhere. In Europe, the idea of small government has never really been a big issue. It certainly isn't a major left/right issue as it is in the US, probably because a lot of left-wing adminstrations also slashed public sector jobs in the 1990s.

So on this thread we see posters claiming Hitler must be left wing because he ran a massive public sector. The problem with this thinking is that so did every other country in the developed world.

The schism between left and right wing thinking in Europe in 1940 did not depend on big vs small government, but on the role of a) class and b) capital.

In these senses, the various administrations in Europe fall quite clearly into left and right wing camps, with the right wing backing a class-based society with a strong upper and middle class; while the left looked to smash class structures. The right wing promoted the ownership of shares and used dividends to ensure the wealthy elite remained wealthy, thus ensuring their political support; the left wing looked to remove capital from the equation altogether.

                                *                  *                     *

My point is not whether or not it was a good or bad thing for governments to sell assets, privatise departments or slash bureaucracy in the Reagan-Thatcher era - only to point out that these changes took place in the 1980s, and not in the 1940s.

Hence, the mistake a couple of posters are making here is a little like asking why the Founding Fathers did not refer to internet porn or assault weapons in the constiution. i.e., Because one can not apply a principle or policy decades before anyone has thought of it.

Additionally, to this day, the idea of big small government is not widely used in Europe to determine left vs right wing thinking. It is not, and never has been, the determining factor that it is in the US.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P.Chic -
> 
> Your questions were answered in posts #135 and #143.
> 
> You are more than welcome to reply to those posts.







You liar.

They were side-stepped until post #155.


You can fool all the people some of the time, and Dot Com all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

You're a big-talking self described 'expert,' but when the question that answers the question was put to you, you punted.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

P. Chic - 

Please see post #160, where I posted my reply for the second time.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P.Chic -
> 
> Your questions were answered in posts #135 and #143.
> 
> ...





Post #155 Take a shot.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> Please see post #160, where I posted my reply for the second time.




Post #155 Take a shot.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

P. Chic -

Do you really wonder why people ignore your questions?


My answer is the same as it was the first time you asked - as it appears in post #160. As it appeared in posts #135 and #143. It addresses your question exactly. 

Please read the comments sensibly, and feel to ask any points that you do not feel have been adequately covered.

btw. I really am trying to be patient here, because I can see that you genuinely don't understand why Fascism is considered right wing. That's fine, and I don't mind explaining these things, but I hope you will also have the integrity to acknolwedge the points and your own mistakes as they become clear to you. If not, there is little point in posters explaining things for you in future.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> Do you really wonder why people ignore your questions?
> 
> ...






Communism
Socialism
Fascism
Progressivism
Liberalism

Which of them is based on *big government, command and control economic principles, collectivism, dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives?
*

Which, you fraud?


And which of them would be classified as defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?

Which of them, two-face?


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

P. Chic - 

Jesus wept....is this SERIOUSLY the best you can do? Really?

I really have explained this to you as clearly and patiently as I can - and to answer again: your question makes no sense because the entire concept of small government as an indicator of right wing thinking did not exist prior to 1980, and has never existed in Germany. 

ALL western governments in 1940 were, by todays standards, big government, and very obviously they were not all left wing. 

As explained earlier - you might as well demand to know why internet porn isn't mentioned in the constitution. 

Again - PLEASE try and understand this. Really. I can't make it any clearer.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 13, 2014)

Penelope said:


> 6 million has been the number long before Hitler got in.



11 million is the more accurate number. 6 million Jews, but another 5 million Christians, Jehovah's witnesses, homosexuals, mongrels, idiots, etc.

BTW, the term "ovens" is literal. What happened to the bodies? The Nazis burned them.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 13, 2014)

Delta4Embassy said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Not nearly enough bodies *have been found* to document the millions for whom the Nazis must answer. Where are those bodies?
> ...



Are you a holocaust denier, delta?


----------



## Penelope (Oct 13, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > 6 million has been the number long before Hitler got in.
> ...



No I doubt the gas chambers and they didn't put bodies in ovens, how much time do you think they had fighting war?  Also 6 mil jews were perishing before 1920, watch the video I posted. Lots of Jews died, most from typhus and starvation. I do not believe the holocaust story as presented, and I sure don't believe in gas chambers.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 13, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> Jesus wept....is this SERIOUSLY the best you can do? Really?
> 
> ...




"I can't make it any clearer."
Stop lying.
Sure you can.

Answer the questions.




Communism
Socialism
Fascism
Progressivism
Liberalism

Which of them is based on *big government, command and control economic principles, collectivism, dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives?

Which, you fraud?


And which of them would be classified as defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?

Which of them, two-face?*


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 13, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Not nearly enough bodies *have been found* to document the millions for whom the Nazis must answer. Where are those bodies?
> So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place.
> Before considering the argument of the Holocaust deniers, that not nearly enough bodies of victims have been found to validate the charges raised about the Holocaust.....let's go back to get a sense of the time.......
> 
> ...



Nice job trivializing the Holocaust.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

P. Chic - 

At this stage I think we both have to accept that this is simply over your head. I really cannot make it any simpler, and believe me - I have tried. 

I can even put it in A-B-C for you: 

A) Big government vs small government can not be used to determine left wing vs right wing in 1940s Europe, because the concept of small government had not yet been fully realised anywhere in the world. 

B) Hence, asking the Sesame Street question of 'Which of these big governments is not like the other' is a nonsense - ALL 1940s European governments were big governments. They were not all left wing. 

C) The determining factors of left vs right wing are the role of capital, and the role of class. Follow those, and the answers to your questions are obvious. 

That said - I think we both realise that you are not going to figure this out, whether because of you are not intelligent enough to get it or simply don't want to get it; I don't know. 

The only thing I can suggest is that you go through my comments with a friend, and have them explain to you why your question is nonsensical, and then we can perhaps try again.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 13, 2014)

Penelope said:


> No I doubt the gas chambers and they didn't put bodies in ovens, how much time do you think they had fighting war?  Also 6 mil jews were perishing before 1920, watch the video I posted. Lots of Jews died, most from typhus and starvation. I do not believe the holocaust story as presented, and I sure don't believe in gas chambers.



Then I suggest you visit some gas chambers. 

Not many people need a lot of time at Birkenau before they understand something of the horror and insanity that took place there.


----------



## Political Junky (Oct 14, 2014)

Billc said:


> > The national socialism that PCs's decries is exactly the type of right wing fascist conservatism she wants big government to bring to America.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hitler set out to destroy Marxism. Marx was a Jew. Hitler hated Jews.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 14, 2014)

> Hitler set out to destroy Marxism. Marx was a Jew. Hitler hated Jews.



And marx hated jews as well...and he fought the communists/international socialists because he wanted their followers to be national socialists...and he wanted to be in control instead of them....


----------



## irosie91 (Oct 14, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > No I doubt the gas chambers and they didn't put bodies in ovens, how much time do you think they had fighting war?  Also 6 mil jews were perishing before 1920, watch the video I posted. Lots of Jews died, most from typhus and starvation. I do not believe the holocaust story as presented, and I sure don't believe in gas chambers.
> ...


----------



## Penelope (Oct 14, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > No I doubt the gas chambers and they didn't put bodies in ovens, how much time do you think they had fighting war?  Also 6 mil jews were perishing before 1920, watch the video I posted. Lots of Jews died, most from typhus and starvation. I do not believe the holocaust story as presented, and I sure don't believe in gas chambers.
> ...



No I don't need to visit anywhere, thanks.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 14, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> At this stage I think we both have to accept that this is simply over your head. I really cannot make it any simpler, and believe me - I have tried.
> 
> ...







"...that this is simply over your head..."
Hardly.

You are simply a lying sack of sewage.

True?


Stop begging and simply answer the two questions I've posed...three or four times....a one word for each.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 14, 2014)

Hmmm...Saigon...I imagine you would like to compare your intellect to Hayek's who was alive at the time of the rise of the nazis, and is a Nobel prize winner...

Friedrich Hayek - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



> *Friedrich Hayek* CH (German: [ˈfʁiːdʁɪç ˈaʊ̯ɡʊst ˈhaɪ̯ɛk]; 8 May 1899 – 23 March 1992), born in Austria-Hungary as *Friedrich August von Hayek* and frequently referred to as *F. A. Hayek*, was an Austrian, later British,[1] economist[2] and philosopher best known for his defence of classical liberalism. *Hayek shared the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (with Gunnar Myrdal) for his "pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and ... penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena".*[3]





> Hayek was a major political thinker of the twentieth century,[4] and his account of how changing prices communicate information which enables individuals to co-ordinate their plans is widely regarded as an important achievement in economics.[5]
> 
> Hayek served in World War I and said that his experience in the war and his desire to help avoid the mistakes that had led to the war led him to his career. Hayek lived in Austria, Great Britain, the United States and Germany, and became a British subject in 1938. He spent most of his academic life at the London School of Economics (LSE), the University of Chicago, and the University of Freiburg.





> In 1984, he was appointed a member of the Order of the Companions of Honour by Queen Elizabeth II on the advice of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher for his "services to the study of economics".[6] He was the first recipient of the Hanns Martin Schleyer Prize in 1984.[7] He also received the US Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1991 from President George H. W. Bush.[8] In 2011, his article "The Use of Knowledge in Society" was selected as one of the top 20 articles published in _The American Economic Review_ during its first 100 years.[9



So, excuse me if I don't accept your work on the subject vs. Hayek's leaving out the fact you were brain washed by your professors who were mislead by theirs...

The Socialist Roots of Naziism

Nazism is Socialism



> It would, indeed, hardly have been possible for the Nationalists to advance fundamental objections to the economic policy of the other socialist parties when their own published programme differed from these only in that its socialism was much cruder and less rational.  The famous 25 points drawn up by Herr Feder, one of Hitler's early allies, repeatedly endorsed by Hitler and recognized by the by-laws of the National-Socialist party as the immutable basis of all its actions, which together with an extensive commentary is circulating throughout Germany in many hundreds of thousands of copies, is full of ideas resembling those of the early socialists.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 14, 2014)

This is another version....

Hayek Hitler was a socialist Centurean2 s Weblog


----------



## Saigon (Oct 14, 2014)

Billc - 

At the time you start arguing that dictonaries and history books and the Germans themselves are wrong and you are right, we both know that you have lost the argument. 

End of story.


----------



## Saigon (Oct 14, 2014)

P. Chic - 

It's impossible to me whether you genuinely do not understand my answers to your question, or are simply unable to admit that you were very, very wrong in your assumptions.

Either, I am not being paid to ensure you understand this, and to be honest, it was fairly clear from the get go that you don't want to understand it. 

That said, my explanations are there, and any time you want to try and muster a coherent response to them, I'd be delighted to address it.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 14, 2014)

> At the time you start arguing that dictonaries and history books and the Germans themselves are wrong and you are right, we both know that you have lost the argument.
> 
> End of story.



Keep telling yourself that...one day you will know the truth...


----------



## irosie91 (Oct 14, 2014)

Billc said:


> > At the time you start arguing that dictonaries and history books and the Germans themselves are wrong and you are right, we both know that you have lost the argument.
> >
> > End of story.
> 
> ...




I am fascinated-----this thread is far too long to review----WHAT IS THE  *****TRUTH******


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 14, 2014)

Saigon said:


> P. Chic -
> 
> It's impossible to me whether you genuinely do not understand my answers to your question, or are simply unable to admit that you were very, very wrong in your assumptions.
> 
> ...





Answer the questions, dope.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 14, 2014)

That hitler and the nazis (national socialists) were left wing, not right wing (as we would define them here in the United States) and that they were socialists...not capitalists...as has been the lie since hitler invaded the Soviet Union...the nazis controlled every aspect of the economy as did the socialists in the Soviet Union...the difference...hitler didn't care about spreading socialism as an international cause...


----------



## Saigon (Oct 14, 2014)

P. Chic - 

As mentioned earlier, I cannot know whether you genuinely do not understand my responses, or are ignoring them out of hurt pride. 

I can't say I care a lot either way. 

I'd be delighted to see you address my points, but I think we both realise that you can't. In which case I'll leave it there, I think.


----------



## irosie91 (Oct 14, 2014)

Billc said:


> That hitler and the nazis (national socialists) were left wing, not right wing (as we would define them here in the United States) and that they were socialists...not capitalists...as has been the lie since hitler invaded the Soviet Union...the nazis controlled every aspect of the economy as did the socialists in the Soviet Union...the difference...hitler didn't care about spreading socialism as an international cause...




your hero   ADOLF   sought to create an empire-------of Nazism---------same thing as world wide communism and the filth of  CALIPHATE--------you are wrong----_THE THIRD REICH  was a world wide ---agenda thing


----------



## oldfart (Oct 14, 2014)

Saigon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Hitler, Stalin...Roosevelt.....the policies were similar....the extent to which they were carried out differed.
> ...



Sort of like the Mary Tyler Moore Show episode about Chuckles the Clown who was dressed in a peanut suit when shucked to death by an elephant in the circus parade.....


----------



## Penelope (Oct 14, 2014)

Billc said:


> This is another version....
> 
> Hayek Hitler was a socialist Centurean2 s Weblog





irosie91 said:


> Billc said:
> 
> 
> > That hitler and the nazis (national socialists) were left wing, not right wing (as we would define them here in the United States) and that they were socialists...not capitalists...as has been the lie since hitler invaded the Soviet Union...the nazis controlled every aspect of the economy as did the socialists in the Soviet Union...the difference...hitler didn't care about spreading socialism as an international cause...
> ...



Lets remember Zionism was created in Russian due to the Russian Pogroms,
which is why the Zion Mule Corp. joined Britain in 1917 in fighting the Ottomans (before Hitler).
Of course the pogroms in Russia seen the rise of Lenin, and the revolution. Adolf didn't seek to get an empire, he was given on at the peace treaty between Gemany and Russia after WWI.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 14, 2014)

> your hero ADOLF sought to create an empire-------of Nazism---------same thing as world wide communism and the filth of CALIPHATE--------you are wrong----_THE THIRD REICH was a world wide ---agenda thing



Look bozo...the nazis are no hero of mine, I'm an American conservative...I believe in individual rights, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights...the socialists who still love communism deserve your  scorn not me or for that matter PoliticalChic...hitler was a leftist and a socialist, two things I oppose...so back off with the accusations...

Your reading comprehension sucks too...

Try rereading my post dip stick...



> hitler didn't care about spreading socialism as an international cause...



He didn't care about anyone except himself, his party and then the control of the German people...


----------



## irosie91 (Oct 14, 2014)

Penelope said:


> Billc said:
> 
> 
> > This is another version....
> ...




where did you learn that  "Zionism was created in  'Russian" due to the Russian Pogroms"     in the mosque?----maybe you were dizzy from the stench of sweaty sock----rising from the stinking carpet.....           did you graduate the sixth grade?.      The islamo Nazi pig  adolf was "given"  an empire????    by Russia??      Is that the official version of
mecccaist history?


----------



## Penelope (Oct 14, 2014)

irosie91 said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Billc said:
> ...



It began in the 1880's not with Hitler. Do I have to show the papers of the NY Times of 6 mil Jews in Russia need money . When did the first Jews go to Palestine ??

1882 -Rishon Lezion, bought 835 acres SE of tel Avie. Hiter was how old then??
Oh excuse me , Petah Tikva was the first.


----------



## irosie91 (Oct 14, 2014)

Penelope said:


> irosie91 said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



You have nothing to show me------"it"  started more than 3000 years ago.         The word   ZION  appears in the bible---     long before  Petah tikva was founded          How long have you been so stupid?         The word  ZION   means the same thing today as it meant 3500 years ago.

if you tell me a little about yourself-----I can help you----
you are amazingly ignorant of simple facts of history
that normal people know.    I can help you by giving
you a perspective of history based on that which you
already know.     For example---it might help a normal
person in this culture to understand the life and times of
people like   Maimonides and Salaadin and Richard the lion hearted to know that they ALL LIVED in the same era
as  the legendary  "robin hood"          Do you know the legend of Robin Hood?      Maimonides is buried in Israel---
He had a synagogue in Egypt which is still there---it contains a large metal star of david-----since the time of
maimonides-----in the center---in metal,,,    is the word 
ZION    (in Hebrew,  of course)     -----it's still there.
Could you give me an idea as to how old you are  (just a hint) ----and what sort of education you had  (just a hint---
you need not post details on the net about yourself)

btw----did you recognize the name  ""Maimonides""?


----------



## irosie91 (Oct 14, 2014)

PS   do you recognize the name   Salaadin?     (spelling?) 
   Have you ever heard of the  "crusades"?      did you ever
   attend school in the USA?


----------



## DriftingSand (Oct 14, 2014)

guno said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Don't you ever call anyone else a "prejudiced bigot" again.

Aren't you late to your circumcision?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 14, 2014)

Penelope said:


> No I doubt the gas chambers and they didn't put bodies in ovens, how much time do you think they had fighting war?  Also 6 mil jews were perishing before 1920, watch the video I posted. Lots of Jews died, most from typhus and starvation. I do not believe the holocaust story as presented, and I sure don't believe in gas chambers.



Okay, you're mentally retarded.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 14, 2014)

Discombobulated said:


> Nice job trivializing the Holocaust.



How do you breath? I mean, you're too fucking stupid to grasp that PC is slamming the leftist fucks like Penelope who are JOOOOO hating holocaust deniers. As dumb as you are, it's amazing that you have enough brain function for autonomous processes.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 14, 2014)

The statement of a brainwashed fool: "Lots of Jews died, most from typhus and starvation. I do not believe the holocaust story as presented, and I sure don't believe in gas chambers."


----------



## JakeStarkey (Oct 14, 2014)

PC and penelope are the same person in two different bodies.


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 14, 2014)

I was born during WW2. I have met and talked with two differant US soldiers that were helped liberate two differant death camps. Had someone dared to tell them that the Holocaust was a lie, they would have eaten a knuckle sandwich, even when these men were past 70. They both were choked up and angry when talking about it. They never spoke to me about the fighting they had seen, which was major, from what their families stated, but I once commented about the assholes that were denying the Holocaust, and listened for over 1/2 hour to angry and horrified men, two men of supreme courage, as they described what they had seen. 

There was a horrible atrocity in Germany during WW2. And we are now seeing the same demons on the loose in Iraq and Syria.


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Nice job trivializing the Holocaust.
> ...



Wrong again dummy.  She obviously trivializes the Holocaust to make some petty ideological/political remarks that have no relevance to the Holocaust of any kind.   The author of the OP is evil and manipulative.......you are simply dim witted.


----------



## DriftingSand (Oct 15, 2014)

Old Rocks said:


> I was born during WW2. I have met and talked with two differant US soldiers that were helped liberate two differant death camps. Had someone dared to tell them that the Holocaust was a lie, they would have eaten a knuckle sandwich, even when these men were past 70. They both were choked up and angry when talking about it. They never spoke to me about the fighting they had seen, which was major, from what their families stated, but I once commented about the assholes that were denying the Holocaust, and listened for over 1/2 hour to angry and horrified men, two men of supreme courage, as they described what they had seen.
> 
> There was a horrible atrocity in Germany during WW2. And we are now seeing the same demons on the loose in Iraq and Syria.



There are German Nazis in Iraq and Syria?  Just kidding.

Has anyone ever heard of the Leuchter Report?  I was talking about this issue in another forum a few months ago and someone PMed me and asked if I had ever read it.  I haven't but wonder if anyone else has.


Discombobulated said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Discombobulated said:
> ...



Hey dope. Take your meds yet?


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

DriftingSand said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > I was born during WW2. I have met and talked with two differant US soldiers that were helped liberate two differant death camps. Had someone dared to tell them that the Holocaust was a lie, they would have eaten a knuckle sandwich, even when these men were past 70. They both were choked up and angry when talking about it. They never spoke to me about the fighting they had seen, which was major, from what their families stated, but I once commented about the assholes that were denying the Holocaust, and listened for over 1/2 hour to angry and horrified men, two men of supreme courage, as they described what they had seen.
> ...



If it's the same shit you take I'd rather not be quite that stupid today......thanks all the same.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Saigon said:


> Billc -
> 
> At the time you start arguing that dictonaries and history books and the Germans themselves are wrong and you are right, we both know that you have lost the argument.
> 
> End of story.




In other words, don't confuse you with the facts.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Penelope said:


> Lets remember Zionism was created in Russian due to the Russian Pogroms,
> which is why the Zion Mule Corp. joined Britain in 1917 in fighting the Ottomans (before Hitler).
> Of course the pogroms in Russia seen the rise of Lenin, and the revolution. Adolf didn't seek to get an empire, he was given on at the peace treaty between Gemany and Russia after WWI.



Penelope, your phrasing and cadence is very strange. Do you use a translation program to translate Farsi to English?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Discombobulated said:


> Wrong again dummy.  She obviously trivializes the Holocaust to make some petty ideological/political remarks that have no relevance to the Holocaust of any kind.   The author of the OP is evil and manipulative.......you are simply dim witted.



That you are illiterate is clear.

Read the second line of the OP - shit fer brains.


----------



## Sunni Man (Oct 15, 2014)

I never could understand why so many American's feel the need to rabidly defend the Holohoax myth?

The alleged event took place in a foreign land to non American's.

Yet, most of our citizens act like it's somehow patriotic to believe in this preposterous fantasy story.     ........     

.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Lets remember Zionism was created in Russian due to the Russian Pogroms,
> ...






Uncensored2008 said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Lets remember Zionism was created in Russian due to the Russian Pogroms,
> ...



Ha Ha, I'm not Iranian, but if I were I'd have no problem telling you. I wrote what I wrote. Zionism was created not because of Hitler, but due to the anti Jewism  in all of Europe esp. the soviet union , where most Jews were in that day, and the Jews caused the Russia revolution. Who do you think was at  the treaty between Germany and the soviet Union after WWI? Look it up
called the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Penelope said:


> Ha Ha, I'm not Iranian, but if I were I'd have no problem telling you.



You're clearly not a native English speaker. Further, liars for Allah are known to lie - so it would be of little surprise for an Internet Jihadist to pretend to be something he is not.



> I wrote what I wrote. Zionism was created not because of Hitler, but due to the anti Jewism  in all of Europe esp. the soviet union , where most Jews were in that day, and the Jews caused the Russia revolution. Who do you think was at  the treaty between Germany and the soviet Union after WWI? Look it up
> called the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.



So, you repeat absurd Muslim antisemitism, while pretending that you are not a Muzzie Beast. No, Lenin was not a Jew, nor was Stalin.


----------



## konradv (Oct 15, 2014)

Sunni Man said:


> I never could understand why so many American's feel the need to rabidly defend the Holohoax myth?
> 
> The alleged event took place in a foreign land to non American's.
> 
> Yet, most of our citizens act like it's somehow patriotic to believe in this preposterous fantasy story.



Yet you'll believe the fantasy that Mohammed was more than just an ordinary man that spent too much time min the desert sun and the Koran is more than the ravings of a sunstroke victim.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Ha Ha, I'm not Iranian, but if I were I'd have no problem telling you.
> ...



More of the Zionist mantra.  Muzzie Beast, another made up term by Zionist.  Yes , Lenin was a Jew and also Stalin had jewish ancestry. Look it up. PS: insulting me will not intimidate me, just so you know.


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong again dummy.  She obviously trivializes the Holocaust to make some petty ideological/political remarks that have no relevance to the Holocaust of any kind.   The author of the OP is evil and manipulative.......you are simply dim witted.
> ...



Oh look, she almost mentions the Holocaust in the OP.


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

Penelope said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



Why are you arguing about the Holocaust on a thread based on an OP that has nothing to do with the Holocaust?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Penelope said:


> More of the Zionist mantra.



In 1890, Zionism was real.

It isn't 1890 anymore.



> Muzzie Beast, another made up term by Zionist.



Actually, that is a term I coined myself. Westerners who are literate and well read might grasp what inspired it. 



> Yes , Lenin was a Jew and also Stalin had jewish ancestry. Look it up. PS: insulting me will not intimidate me, just so you know.



You are mentally retarded. Another Iranian thinking you can spread shit.

Stalin was in Catholic seminary.

Lenin a Jew - BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - what a fucktard you are,  Muzzie Beast.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Discombobulated said:


> Oh look, she almost mentions the Holocaust in the OP.



{So state some of those who deny that the Holocaust took place.}

You really are a stupid fucker.


----------



## Penelope (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > More of the Zionist mantra.
> ...



Lenin was a jew get over it. Stalin there is some debate about. I don't care where he went to school or church, it doesn't matter, as Jews were always trying to hide their identity.


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > Oh look, she almost mentions the Holocaust in the OP.
> ...



She couldn't care less about the Holocaust and neither could you.   You are both worthless trash because you seek to exploit the Holocaust for petty political rhetoric.


----------



## High_Gravity (Oct 15, 2014)

Old Rocks said:


> I was born during WW2. I have met and talked with two differant US soldiers that were helped liberate two differant death camps. Had someone dared to tell them that the Holocaust was a lie, they would have eaten a knuckle sandwich, even when these men were past 70. They both were choked up and angry when talking about it. They never spoke to me about the fighting they had seen, which was major, from what their families stated, but I once commented about the assholes that were denying the Holocaust, and listened for over 1/2 hour to angry and horrified men, two men of supreme courage, as they described what they had seen.
> 
> There was a horrible atrocity in Germany during WW2. And we are now seeing the same demons on the loose in Iraq and Syria.


 
You are spot on.


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

Penelope said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Penelope said:
> ...



You seem determined to prove to the whole world just how stupid you really are.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Penelope said:


> Lenin was a jew get over it. Stalin there is some debate about. I don't care where he went to school or church, it doesn't matter, as Jews were always trying to hide their identity.



{The couple, now nobility, had two children, Anna (born 1864) and Alexander (born 1868), before Vladimir "Volodya" Ilyich was born on 10 April 1870, and *baptised in St. Nicholas Cathedral* several days later.}

Vladimir Lenin - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Stupid fucking Muzzie Beasts....


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Discombobulated said:


> She couldn't care less about the Holocaust and neither could you.   You are both worthless trash because you seek to exploit the Holocaust for petty political rhetoric.



You're a retard.

A reactionary partisan hack who was too stupid to grasp what PC wrote - now you have made a fool of yourself and jumped into bed with Penelope, a bearded Iranian antisemite....


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > She couldn't care less about the Holocaust and neither could you.   You are both worthless trash because you seek to exploit the Holocaust for petty political rhetoric.
> ...



I grasp every fucking word......and you're in bed with a vicious little ****.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Oct 15, 2014)

Discombobulated said:


> I grasp every fucking word......and you're in bed with a vicious little ****.



You are a hack, and reacted without grasping what the message was. Now you are stinging from being exposed as a fool.


----------



## Discombobulated (Oct 15, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Discombobulated said:
> 
> 
> > I grasp every fucking word......and you're in bed with a vicious little ****.
> ...



Anyone who exploits the Holocaust to support dim wit rhetoric has no credibility of any kind.


----------



## bendog (Oct 15, 2014)

aw jeez, PC.  Your bat shite crazy, but generally in a good and non-offensive way.  This is just sad/pathetic.


----------



## Urbanguerrilla (Oct 25, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> 2. Would you find it more.....copacetic if the number were 3 million?
> 
> Is there any way you can defend your position?



Are you saying it is 3 million and not 6?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 25, 2014)

Urbanguerrilla said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > 2. Would you find it more.....copacetic if the number were 3 million?
> ...





ques·tion mark
_noun_

a punctuation mark (?) indicating a question.
used to express doubt or uncertainty about something.


----------



## Urbanguerrilla (Oct 25, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Urbanguerrilla said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



So you're saying it was just 3 million.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Oct 25, 2014)

Urbanguerrilla said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Urbanguerrilla said:
> ...





Actually, I'm stating that it would be advisable for you to remediate, and amend your difficulty with elementary grammar.


----------



## Urbanguerrilla (Oct 26, 2014)

PoliticalChic said:


> Urbanguerrilla said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Yeee-yeh ok so at 3 million I think we're in business, we can negotiate on those figures


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 28, 2014)

This is what happens when you lock someone in a house and make them listen to hate radio all day.


----------



## Roadrunner (Oct 28, 2014)

guno said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Fuck you and your racist stereotype of our Vietnamese fellow citizens.


----------



## Roadrunner (Oct 28, 2014)

ricechickie said:


> The simple answer is "cremated."


See above post.

It is not that simple.

Most were NOT cremated.


----------



## Urbanguerrilla (Oct 28, 2014)

JoeB131 said:


> This is what happens when you lock someone in a house and make them listen to hate radio all day.



Is that what happened to you...I was wondering


----------



## CAPTCHATHIS (Oct 28, 2014)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> > Ha Ha, I'm not Iranian, but if I were I'd have no problem telling you.
> ...


It's ironic how quickly you are to brand someone as an anti-Semite because they have a different view of historical events.
..and in the same breath you overtly spew your hate for a people that are irrelevant to this discussion.

Wouldn't a true anti-Semite embrace the holocaust??


"The declassification of documents since the collapse of the Soviet Communist tyranny in 1991 has brought irrefutable proof that Lenin's maternal great-grandfather was a shtetl Jew named Moshko Blank."

Was Lenin Jewish - My Jewish Learning


----------

