# quote from nuremberg trials still highly relevant today



## blu




----------



## gekaap

Thread Godwin'd in the OP.  That's gotta be a world record.


----------



## elvis

gekaap said:


> Thread Godwin'd in the OP.  That's gotta be a world record.



have anything to say about the subject or are you just going to go on about Godwin's Law?


----------



## RetiredGySgt

Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

RetiredGySgt said:


> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?



Who claimed that we are no better than the Nazis?


----------



## georgephillip

blu said:


>


*Another view of war that's still relevant:*

"The choice facing the world is 'stark and dreadful and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?'"

Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell quoted in Noam Chomsky's _Failed States_ copyright 2006 P.3


----------



## RetiredGySgt

theDoctorisIn said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who claimed that we are no better than the Nazis?
Click to expand...


Ya Blu posted that for no reason right? Been here long enough to know what he is up too, maybe you should engage your brain?


----------



## theDoctorisIn

RetiredGySgt said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who claimed that we are no better than the Nazis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ya Blu posted that for no reason right? Been here long enough to know what he is up too, maybe you should engage your brain?
Click to expand...


He posted it to make a point, a valid one.

But no where did he say "Americans are no better than Nazis". If you have to make things up in order to argue a point, you might want to work on that a little.


----------



## The Rabbi

theDoctorisIn said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who claimed that we are no better than the Nazis?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ya Blu posted that for no reason right? Been here long enough to know what he is up too, maybe you should engage your brain?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He posted it to make a point, a valid one.
> 
> But no where did he say "Americans are no better than Nazis". If you have to make things up in order to argue a point, you might want to work on that a little.
Click to expand...


So what was that point, genius?


----------



## georgephillip

If there was no profit in war after the first innocent life was taken, would war disappear like chattel slavery?

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

"It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. 

"It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. 

"Only a small 'inside' group knows what it is about. 

"It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. 

"*Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.*

"In the World War _ a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. 

"That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows."

No spoils; No war?_


----------



## whitehall

What Goering said is applicable only a Nationalist-socialist or fascist society where the government controls information. Why do you think thousand year old civilizations like Egypt still live in dirt poverty? Freedom you fools. The USA is the greatest Country the world has ever known because of freedom. The first item in the Bill of Rights gives freedom to the press. The Constitution allows us to change presidents every four years and congressmen every two years and shorter than that if necessary. Anyone who would would take a statement like this from a Nazi and try to apply it to the United States is an ignorant fool.


----------



## blu

RetiredGySgt said:


> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?



what do your logical fallacies have to do with anything? and if you want to ask how democrats think on things, why don't you ask them (please start your own thread about it though)


----------



## blu

theDoctorisIn said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who claimed that we are no better than the Nazis?
Click to expand...


you can tell the OP hit a little to close to home for him


----------



## blu

whitehall said:


> What Goering said is applicable only a Nationalist-socialist or fascist society where the government controls information. Why do you think thousand year old civilizations like Egypt still live in dirt poverty? Freedom you fools. The USA is the greatest Country the world has ever known because of freedom. The first item in the Bill of Rights gives freedom to the press. The Constitution allows us to change presidents every four years and congressmen every two years and shorter than that if necessary. Anyone who would would take a statement like this from a Nazi and try to apply it to the United States is an ignorant fool.



no one was applying it to the US, but your post is full of nonsense, there is no free press in this country, all the major outlets are all owned by corporations that won't allow anything bad to be said about their interests. Bush's WH fed FOX talking points and MSNBC has a collective breakdown if anyone doesn't pray to Obama.


----------



## Comrade Ishmael

Excellent quote! It does work every time... you'd think we'd learn.


----------



## Dawg

The Rabbi said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ya Blu posted that for no reason right? Been here long enough to know what he is up too, maybe you should engage your brain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He posted it to make a point, a valid one.
> 
> But no where did he say "Americans are no better than Nazis". If you have to make things up in order to argue a point, you might want to work on that a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what was that point, genius?
Click to expand...


The point was that it is very easy for Political Leaders to manipulate the masses by lies, deception and fear.


----------



## The Rabbi

Dawg said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> He posted it to make a point, a valid one.
> 
> But no where did he say "Americans are no better than Nazis". If you have to make things up in order to argue a point, you might want to work on that a little.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what was that point, genius?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The point was that it is very easy for Political Leaders to manipulate the masses by lies, deception and fear.
Click to expand...


Apparently not.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

Ok, since Blu has said this has nothing to do with our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maybe he would like to explain what it IS about? Why out of the "blu" he posted this when he had no point?


----------



## georgephillip

Iraq? Afghanistan? Vietnam? Korea?

Which of the above wars did NOT involve lies?

Which of the countries posed a threat to the US homeland?

Would any of the wars been waged if there had been NO corporate profits generated?

ALL governments lie.

War is the biggest lie of ALL.


----------



## code1211

The Rabbi said:


> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ya Blu posted that for no reason right? Been here long enough to know what he is up too, maybe you should engage your brain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He posted it to make a point, a valid one.
> 
> But no where did he say "Americans are no better than Nazis". If you have to make things up in order to argue a point, you might want to work on that a little.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what was that point, genius?
Click to expand...



The "point" seems pretty obvious.  People can be led to do things by associating opposition with things that are reviled.  

In this case, wanting peace in the face of war mongering leadership brings a challenge to one's patriotism.  This happens in the ramp up to war in every case, every time.

It happened in 2002 and 3 around here.

However, it happens in all led by the nose issues.  In the health care debate, the Democrat promise was healthcare for everyone and the FACT that this care would cost through the nose for those who cannot afford it was somehow glossed over.

If you were against the Obamacare swindle, you were against healthcare for poor children.

Same lie.  Different topic.


----------



## code1211

The Rabbi said:


> Dawg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what was that point, genius?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The point was that it is very easy for Political Leaders to manipulate the masses by lies, deception and fear.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently not.
Click to expand...



Really?


----------



## Old Rocks

whitehall said:


> What Goering said is applicable only a Nationalist-socialist or fascist society where the government controls information. Why do you think thousand year old civilizations like Egypt still live in dirt poverty? Freedom you fools. The USA is the greatest Country the world has ever known because of freedom. The first item in the Bill of Rights gives freedom to the press. The Constitution allows us to change presidents every four years and congressmen every two years and shorter than that if necessary. Anyone who would would take a statement like this from a Nazi and try to apply it to the United States is an ignorant fool.



Really? Where then is the WMD that Iraq had? All those tons of material and nuclear material, just where did it go? And what have we gained from that war, other than massive debt and poverty for many? Look at the companies that made billions off of that war, Halliburton is now a foreign corperation as is Blackwater.

I would have to say that the quote in the OP is entirely applicable to our invasion of Iraq on the basis of lies.


----------



## Old Rocks

RetiredGySgt said:


> Ok, since Blu has said this has nothing to do with our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maybe he would like to explain what it IS about? Why out of the "blu" he posted this when he had no point?



You would really like to pretend that is so. That quote has everything to do with our invasion of Iraq.


----------



## Old Rocks

code1211 said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> theDoctorisIn said:
> 
> 
> 
> He posted it to make a point, a valid one.
> 
> But no where did he say "Americans are no better than Nazis". If you have to make things up in order to argue a point, you might want to work on that a little.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what was that point, genius?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The "point" seems pretty obvious.  People can be led to do things by associating opposition with things that are reviled.
> 
> In this case, wanting peace in the face of war mongering leadership brings a challenge to one's patriotism.  This happens in the ramp up to war in every case, every time.
> 
> It happened in 2002 and 3 around here.
> 
> However, it happens in all led by the nose issues.  In the health care debate, the Democrat promise was healthcare for everyone and the FACT that this care would cost through the nose for those who cannot afford it was somehow glossed over.
> 
> If you were against the Obamacare swindle, you were against healthcare for poor children.
> 
> Same lie.  Different topic.
Click to expand...


OK, Code, since the same people voted against the healthcare for children as voted against the present health care bill, you are clearly making a false statement.

I would far rather have seen us go, in one step, to a Canadian or Japanese system. However, we had to settle for crumbs, once again.


----------



## midcan5

whitehall said:


> ...Anyone who would would take a statement like this from a Nazi and try to apply it to the United States is an ignorant fool.



I think you missed the point - they already have and Iraq proved it in our so called modern sophisticated contemporary time. 'Freedom' is one of the words that mean whatever the speaker wants it to mean. 


Check this book out for those interested in words and power. [ame=http://www.amazon.com/What-Orwell-Didnt-Know-Propaganda/dp/1586485601/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1296999587&sr=1-1]Amazon.com: What Orwell Didn't Know: Propaganda and the New Face of American Politics (9781586485603): Andras Szanto, Orville Schell: Books[/ame]


'A Conversation With Herman Goering'

"During the Nuremberg Trials in Germany after World War 2, Nazi leader Herman Goering was interviewed by Gustav Gilbert, an American intelligence officer.  Goering said: "Of course the people don't want war.  Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. . . .  But after all it is the leaders of the country that determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along." 

*Gustav Gilbert replied: "There is one difference.  In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in America only Congress can declare wars."

Goering replied:  "Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the will of the leaders.  That is easy.  All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.  It works the same way in any country."*


"The aide [purported to be Karl Rove] said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.""  Ron Suskind http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html
.


----------



## Old Rocks

It is unfortunate that Rove didn't get to accept the reality that so many of our servicemen and women had to accept coming back from Iraq in a basket.


----------



## The Rabbi

code1211 said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dawg said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was that it is very easy for Political Leaders to manipulate the masses by lies, deception and fear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
Click to expand...


Yup.  Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale.  So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.


----------



## blu

RetiredGySgt said:


> Ok, since Blu has said this has nothing to do with our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maybe he would like to explain what it IS about? Why out of the "blu" he posted this when he had no point?



your projection is killing me


----------



## The Rabbi

blu said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, since Blu has said this has nothing to do with our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maybe he would like to explain what it IS about? Why out of the "blu" he posted this when he had no point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your projection is killing me
Click to expand...


Wow if that were all it took....


----------



## elvis

Old Rocks said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, since Blu has said this has nothing to do with our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maybe he would like to explain what it IS about? Why out of the "blu" he posted this when he had no point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You would really like to pretend that is so. That quote has everything to do with our invasion of Iraq.
Click to expand...


which half the ossiah's cabinet supported.


----------



## Trajan

georgephillip said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Another view of war that's still relevant:*
> 
> "The choice facing the world is 'stark and dreadful and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?'"
> 
> Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell quoted in Noam Chomsky's _Failed States_ copyright 2006 P.3
Click to expand...


ha!


here ya george......i looked this up for you specifically

*The Big Lie* (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."

Big Lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## georgephillip

The Rabbi said:


> code1211 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup.  Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
> Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale.  So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
> I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.
Click to expand...

How much money did the Bush family make from WW2?

More that WW1?

Korea? Vietnam? Afghanistan? Iraq?

Next?


----------



## georgephillip

Trajan said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Another view of war that's still relevant:*
> 
> "The choice facing the world is 'stark and dreadful and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?'"
> 
> Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell quoted in Noam Chomsky's _Failed States_ copyright 2006 P.3
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ha!
> 
> 
> here ya george......i looked this up for you specifically
> 
> *The Big Lie* (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
> 
> Big Lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

*"The phrase* was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing *Hitler's psychological profile*:[3][4]

    "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; *never admit a fault or wrong*; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; *never accept blame*; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people *will believe a big lie sooner than a little one*; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[5]"

*Does this sound like anyone you've ever voted for?*

Big Lie - Wiki


----------



## Trajan

georgephillip said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Another view of war that's still relevant:*
> 
> "The choice facing the world is 'stark and dreadful and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?'"
> 
> Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell quoted in Noam Chomsky's _Failed States_ copyright 2006 P.3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ha!
> 
> 
> here ya george......i looked this up for you specifically
> 
> *The Big Lie* (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
> 
> Big Lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *"The phrase* was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing *Hitler's psychological profile*:[3][4]
> 
> "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; *never admit a fault or wrong*; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; *never accept blame*; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people *will believe a big lie sooner than a little one*; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[5]"
> 
> *Does this sound like anyone you've ever voted for?*
> 
> Big Lie - Wiki
Click to expand...


I didn't vote for obama....oh and McCain neither...sorry.


----------



## daveman

blu said:


>



Perhaps you should report people who disagree to flag@whitehouse.gov.


----------



## elvis

Trajan said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> ha!
> 
> 
> here ya george......i looked this up for you specifically
> 
> *The Big Lie* (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
> 
> Big Lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> *"The phrase* was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing *Hitler's psychological profile*:[3][4]
> 
> "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; *never admit a fault or wrong*; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; *never accept blame*; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people *will believe a big lie sooner than a little one*; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[5]"
> 
> *Does this sound like anyone you've ever voted for?*
> 
> Big Lie - Wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I didn't vote for obama....oh and McCain neither...sorry.
Click to expand...


Baldwin or Barr?


----------



## Sheldon

blu said:


>





I bet there's a quote from some Roman Empire general making the same point, just articulated differently.

While I think social media could become a hedge against the dissemination of government propaganda, the debate tactics of "with us or against us" can still be effective because it pulls on peoples guilt trips, especially when soldiers and flag-waving are involved.

And it doesn't even need to be confined to war.


----------



## blu

The Rabbi said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, since Blu has said this has nothing to do with our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maybe he would like to explain what it IS about? Why out of the "blu" he posted this when he had no point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> your projection is killing me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wow if that were all it took....
Click to expand...




what a fool you are, go back to stormfront


----------



## elvis

blu said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> your projection is killing me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow if that were all it took....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what a fool you are, go back to stormfront
Click to expand...


Um, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't fit in at Stormfront.


----------



## blu

The Rabbi said:


> code1211 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup.  Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
> Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale.  So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
> I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.
Click to expand...


george bush wasn't a nazi, but his granddad prescott was. it took an act of congress for him to pull his funding of hitler


----------



## blu

Trajan said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> ha!
> 
> 
> here ya george......i looked this up for you specifically
> 
> *The Big Lie* (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
> 
> Big Lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> *"The phrase* was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing *Hitler's psychological profile*:[3][4]
> 
> "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; *never admit a fault or wrong*; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; *never accept blame*; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people *will believe a big lie sooner than a little one*; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[5]"
> 
> *Does this sound like anyone you've ever voted for?*
> 
> Big Lie - Wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I didn't vote for obama....oh and McCain neither...sorry.
Click to expand...


stupid deflections again who people voted for is alwayss the last stand of someone defeated in debate


----------



## blu

daveman said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should report people who disagree to flag@whitehouse.gov.
Click to expand...


you are either with us or with the terrorists


----------



## JBeukema

RetiredGySgt said:


> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme.



Who said that?

Are you dishonest, retarded, or both?


----------



## JBeukema

georgephillip said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Another view of war that's still relevant:*
> 
> "The choice facing the world is 'stark and dreadful and inescapable: shall we put an end to the human race; or shall mankind renounce war?'"
> 
> Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell quoted in Noam Chomsky's _Failed States_ copyright 2006 P.3
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ha!
> 
> 
> here ya george......i looked this up for you specifically
> 
> *The Big Lie* (German: Große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, for a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."
> 
> Big Lie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *"The phrase* was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing *Hitler's psychological profile*:[3][4]
> 
> "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; *never admit a fault or wrong*; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; *never accept blame*; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people *will believe a big lie sooner than a little one*; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[5]"
> 
> *Does this sound like anyone you've ever voted for?*
> 
> Big Lie - Wiki
Click to expand...

Ms Thatcher?


----------



## RetiredGySgt

blu said:


> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> code1211 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
> Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale.  So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
> I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> george bush wasn't a nazi, but his granddad prescott was. it took an act of congress for him to pull his funding of hitler
Click to expand...


And Blu proves the point.


----------



## Trajan

elvis said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"The phrase* was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing *Hitler's psychological profile*:[3][4]
> 
> "His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; *never admit a fault or wrong*; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; *never accept blame*; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people *will believe a big lie sooner than a little one*; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[5]"
> 
> *Does this sound like anyone you've ever voted for?*
> 
> Big Lie - Wiki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't vote for obama....oh and McCain neither...sorry.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Baldwin or Barr?
Click to expand...


I wrote in Paul. 

I wasn't quiet about it  at the polling place either...


----------



## Trajan

Sheldon said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bet there's a quote from some Roman Empire general making the same point, just articulated differently.
> 
> While I think social media could become a hedge against the dissemination of government propaganda, the debate tactics of "with us or against us" can still be effective because it pulls on peoples guilt trips, especially when soldiers and flag-waving are involved.
> 
> And it doesn't even need to be confined to war.
Click to expand...


Facilis descensus averno....

more apropos ala nazis?  ...Silent leges inter arma....


----------



## JBeukema

JBeukema said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who said that?
> 
> Are you dishonest, retarded, or both?
Click to expand...




			
				RetiredGySgt said:
			
		

> Hi, you have received -184 reputation points from RetiredGySgt.
> Reputation was given for *this* post.
> 
> Comment:
> Retard alert.
> 
> Regards,
> RetiredGySgt
> 
> Note: This is an automated message.



Thanks, but we already saw you- the alarm's a bit late


----------



## jillian

RetiredGySgt said:


> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?



poor rgs... totally gone.

if you hate it, it must be "ALL" "liberals" or "lefties" or anything else you want to make up in your little swiss cheese mind.


----------



## Barb

RetiredGySgt said:


> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?



A reference to the structurally entrapping rhetoric employed at that time is not "claiming we are no better than...yadda, yadda, yadda...," and I suspect you know it. 

That stuff is studied. What worked is used. Advertisers do it, politicians do it, interest organizations and think tanks do it. 
Religions do it.
WE do it.
THEY do it.
Men do it. Women do it.
The trick is to recognize it when it it being done. 
The other trick is the "yadda, yadda, yadda..." deflection.


----------



## Barb

whitehall said:


> What Goering said is applicable only a Nationalist-socialist or fascist society where the government controls information. Why do you think thousand year old civilizations like Egypt still live in dirt poverty? Freedom you fools. The USA is the greatest Country the world has ever known because of freedom. The first item in the Bill of Rights gives freedom to the press. The Constitution allows us to change presidents every four years and congressmen every two years and shorter than that if necessary. Anyone who would would take a statement like this from a Nazi and try to apply it to the United States is an ignorant fool.



Really? 
Democracy?s invisible line - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition 



> The US writer Noam Chomsky talks about the mechanisms behind modern communication, an essential instrument of government in democratic countries  as important to our governments as propaganda is to a dictatorship.
> by Noam Chomsky and Daniel Mermet





> Look at the US federal budget. Most Americans want less military spending and more welfare expenditure, credits for the United Nations, and economic and international humanitarian aid. They also want to cancel the tax reductions decided by President George Bush for the benefit of the biggest taxpayers.
> 
> On all these topics, White House policy is completely at odds with what public opinion wants. But the media rarely publish the polls that highlight this persistent public opposition. Not only are citizens excluded from political power, they are also kept in a state of ignorance as to the true state of public opinion.





> It is one of the big differences between the propaganda system of a totalitarian state and the way democratic societies go about things. Exaggerating slightly, in totalitarian countries the state decides the official line and everyone must then comply. Democratic societies operate differently. The line is never presented as such, merely implied. This involves brainwashing people who are still at liberty. Even the passionate debates in the main media stay within the bounds of commonly accepted, implicit rules, which sideline a large number of contrary views. The system of control in democratic societies is extremely effective. We do not notice the line any more than we notice the air we breathe. We sometimes even imagine we are seeing a lively debate. The system of control is much more powerful than in totalitarian systems.



Please read the rest. Its kind of important. 

Democracy?s invisible line - Le Monde diplomatique - English edition


----------



## strollingbones

RetiredGySgt said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
> Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale.  So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
> I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> george bush wasn't a nazi, but his granddad prescott was. it took an act of congress for him to pull his funding of hitler
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Blu proves the point.
Click to expand...


by telling the truth about the bush family?


----------



## blu

RetiredGySgt said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
> Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale.  So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
> I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> george bush wasn't a nazi, but his granddad prescott was. it took an act of congress for him to pull his funding of hitler
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Blu proves the point.
Click to expand...


by posting the truth? too bad you are an idiot


----------



## daveman

blu said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should report people who disagree to flag@whitehouse.gov.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> you are either with us or with the terrorists
Click to expand...







And who is Hasan Akbar?  He was a US Army Soldier who decided he was with the terrorists.  The insane-looking woman pictured seems to be with the terrorists, too.


----------



## georgephillip

Barb said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A reference to the structurally entrapping rhetoric employed at that time is not "claiming we are no better than...yadda, yadda, yadda...," and I suspect you know it.
> 
> That stuff is studied. What worked is used. Advertisers do it, politicians do it, interest organizations and think tanks do it.
> Religions do it.
> WE do it.
> THEY do it.
> Men do it. Women do it.
> The trick is to recognize it when it it being done.
> The other trick is the "yadda, yadda, yadda..." deflection.
Click to expand...

"All you have to do is to tell them *they are being attacked*, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.

*"It works the same in every country."*

If the quote above qualifies as "structurally entrapping rhetoric" it's worked for church and state for thousands of years, i.e., even before the birth of the first nation states.

It seems to work as well in societies with 90% illiteracy rates as in those cultures with the exact opposite literacy level. It taps into the same violence that drives Super Bowl ratings (and advertising prices)

And if Einstein and Russell were right, it will destroy this specie likely within the lifetimes of many alive today.

Maybe it's Natural Selection?

Any specie that kills its young for money or glory is hardwired for self-destruction??


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should report people who disagree to flag@whitehouse.gov.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you are either with us or with the terrorists
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who is Hasan Akbar?  He was a US Army Soldier who decided he was with the terrorists.  The insane-looking woman pictured seems to be with the terrorists, too.
Click to expand...

What's your definition of "terrorist?"

Most standard descriptions involve taking *innocent civilian lives* for political, religious, or economic ends.

Hasan Akbar- Wiki


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are either with us or with the terrorists
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who is Hasan Akbar?  He was a US Army Soldier who decided he was with the terrorists.  The insane-looking woman pictured seems to be with the terrorists, too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What's your definition of "terrorist?"
> 
> Most standard descriptions involve taking *innocent civilian lives* for political, religious, or economic ends.
> 
> Hasan Akbar- Wiki
Click to expand...


Akbar sided with the terrorists, moron.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who is Hasan Akbar?  He was a US Army Soldier who decided he was with the terrorists.  The insane-looking woman pictured seems to be with the terrorists, too.
> 
> 
> 
> What's your definition of "terrorist?"
> 
> Most standard descriptions involve taking *innocent civilian lives* for political, religious, or economic ends.
> 
> Hasan Akbar- Wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Akbar sided with the terrorists, moron.
Click to expand...

Are you even capable of considering the possibility that you are not one of the "good" guys?


----------



## RetiredGySgt

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> blu said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are either with us or with the terrorists
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who is Hasan Akbar?  He was a US Army Soldier who decided he was with the terrorists.  The insane-looking woman pictured seems to be with the terrorists, too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What's your definition of "terrorist?"
> 
> Most standard descriptions involve taking *innocent civilian lives* for political, religious, or economic ends.
> 
> Hasan Akbar- Wiki
Click to expand...


Or actively supporting them with money help or materials. She is helping a known terrorist by advocating he be freed.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's your definition of "terrorist?"
> 
> Most standard descriptions involve taking *innocent civilian lives* for political, religious, or economic ends.
> 
> Hasan Akbar- Wiki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Akbar sided with the terrorists, moron.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you even capable of considering the possibility that you are not one of the "good" guys?
Click to expand...

What a _good_ little Chomskybot you are.  I'll ask again:  If America sucks so bad, why are you here?


----------



## RetiredGySgt

Blu got EXACTLY what he wanted with this thread, his leftist retardo brothers and sisters attacking the US over Afghanistan and Iraq. That was the entire point of his post.


----------



## georgephillip

RetiredGySgt said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And who is Hasan Akbar?  He was a US Army Soldier who decided he was with the terrorists.  The insane-looking woman pictured seems to be with the terrorists, too.
> 
> 
> 
> What's your definition of "terrorist?"
> 
> Most standard descriptions involve taking *innocent civilian lives* for political, religious, or economic ends.
> 
> Hasan Akbar- Wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Or actively supporting them with money help or materials. She is helping a known terrorist by advocating he be freed.
Click to expand...

None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.

That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Akbar sided with the terrorists, moron.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you even capable of considering the possibility that you are not one of the "good" guys?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What a _good_ little Chomskybot you are.  I'll ask again:  If America sucks so bad, why are you here?
Click to expand...

Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.

Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?

Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's your definition of "terrorist?"
> 
> Most standard descriptions involve taking *innocent civilian lives* for political, religious, or economic ends.
> 
> Hasan Akbar- Wiki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or actively supporting them with money help or materials. She is helping a known terrorist by advocating he be freed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.
> 
> That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.
Click to expand...

My goodness, but you're a stupid, _stupid_ alleged man.  Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you even capable of considering the possibility that you are not one of the "good" guys?
> 
> 
> 
> What a _good_ little Chomskybot you are.  I'll ask again:  If America sucks so bad, why are you here?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.
> 
> Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?
> 
> Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?
Click to expand...

No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.


----------



## georgephillip

RetiredGySgt said:


> Blu got EXACTLY what he wanted with this thread, his leftist retardo brothers and sisters attacking the US over Afghanistan and Iraq. That was the entire point of his post.


*Was Goering Right?*

"...All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for *lack of patriotism* or *exposing the country to danger.*"

*"It works the same in every country."*

Did it work here after 911?


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or actively supporting them with money help or materials. She is helping a known terrorist by advocating he be freed.
> 
> 
> 
> None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.
> 
> That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My goodness, but you're a stupid, _stupid_ alleged man.  Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.
Click to expand...

*What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?*

*"Akbar himself reportedly* said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"

Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> None of Hasan Akbar's Kuwait victims were innocent or civilians.
> 
> That means he is a cold blooded murderer but not a terrorist as were those who planned an implemented the 2003 US invasion of Iraq.
> 
> 
> 
> My goodness, but you're a stupid, _stupid_ alleged man.  Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?*
> 
> *"Akbar himself reportedly* said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"
> 
> Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?
Click to expand...

Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you.  The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs.  You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a _good_ little Chomskybot you are.  I'll ask again:  If America sucks so bad, why are you here?
> 
> 
> 
> Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.
> 
> Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?
> 
> Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.
Click to expand...

*Is this a fact?*

"Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, *approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007."* (Wiki)

Do you accept this definition of terrorism?

*"the calculated use of violence* (or the threat of violence) *against civilians* in order to attain goals that are political or religious or *ideological* in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because I'm not the one taking money to kill innocent human beings.
> 
> Why do you refuse to consider the possibility that the US Empire relies on deliberate violence against innocent civilians at least as much as past empires?
> 
> Because it's the blind loyalty of good "patriots" like you that enable their terror?
> 
> 
> 
> No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Is this a fact?*
> 
> "Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, *approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007."* (Wiki)
> 
> Do you accept this definition of terrorism?
> 
> *"the calculated use of violence* (or the threat of violence) *against civilians* in order to attain goals that are political or religious or *ideological* in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."
Click to expand...

Now find where any of those civilians were _deliberately_ targeted.  You know, like your terrorist heroes do.  

And then get the hell out of my country.  You're stinking it up.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> My goodness, but you're a stupid, _stupid_ alleged man.  Akbar was not a terrorist, but he was siding with his terrorist brothers.
> 
> 
> 
> *What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?*
> 
> *"Akbar himself reportedly* said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"
> 
> Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you.  The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs.  You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.
Click to expand...

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."

*"It works the same in every country."*

You are living proof Goering was right.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, because the facts simply don't support your America-hating braindead leftist talking point.
> 
> 
> 
> *Is this a fact?*
> 
> "Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, *approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007."* (Wiki)
> 
> Do you accept this definition of terrorism?
> 
> *"the calculated use of violence* (or the threat of violence) *against civilians* in order to attain goals that are political or religious or *ideological* in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now find where any of those civilians were _deliberately_ targeted.  You know, like your terrorist heroes do.
> 
> And then get the hell out of my country.  You're stinking it up.
Click to expand...

Howard Zinn, *combat* vet of WWII, believed there was a third option when considering war crimes. 

"Along with *accidental* and *deliberate* targeting of civilians, there was also targeting practices which resulted in the *inevitable* loss of civilian life.

As far as Iraq's concerned, what light does WikiLeaks shed?

"The secret US army files made public Friday by the WikiLeaks web site provide massive documentation of the criminal character of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

"WikiLeaks posted nearly 400,000 army field reports, filed by low-ranking soldiers after combat or reconnaissance operations, describing the death tolls due to US military action, attacks by anti-US insurgents, or the internecine civil conflict sparked by the US occupation. 

"The reports cover the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, and therefore provide no data on the mass killings that took place during the initial US invasion in March 2003..."

*&#8220;The war logs*, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq's roads and during raids on people's homes. 

"*The victims include dozens of women and children*. 

"The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.&#8221;

Don't let the door smack your fat ass on your way out, Punk.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *What if his terrorist brothers were sleeping in their tents?*
> 
> *"Akbar himself reportedly* said, just moments after his arrest, 'You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'"
> 
> Is Akbar's blindness greater than yours?
> 
> 
> 
> Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you.  The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs.  You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."
> 
> *"It works the same in every country."*
> 
> You are living proof Goering was right.
Click to expand...

Not really.  You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle.  If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Is this a fact?*
> 
> "Estimates on civilian casualties are more variable than those for military personnel. According to Iraq Body Count, a group that relies on press reports, NGO-based reports and official figures to measure civilian casualties, *approximately 7,500 civilians were killed during the invasion phase, while more than 60,000 civilians have been killed as of April 2007."* (Wiki)
> 
> Do you accept this definition of terrorism?
> 
> *"the calculated use of violence* (or the threat of violence) *against civilians* in order to attain goals that are political or religious or *ideological* in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear."
> 
> 
> 
> Now find where any of those civilians were _deliberately_ targeted.  You know, like your terrorist heroes do.
> 
> And then get the hell out of my country.  You're stinking it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Howard Zinn, *combat* vet of WWII, believed there was a third option when considering war crimes.
> 
> "Along with *accidental* and *deliberate* targeting of civilians, there was also targeting practices which resulted in the *inevitable* loss of civilian life.
> 
> As far as Iraq's concerned, what light does WikiLeaks shed?
> 
> "The secret US army files made public Friday by the WikiLeaks web site provide massive documentation of the criminal character of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.
> 
> "WikiLeaks posted nearly 400,000 army field reports, filed by low-ranking soldiers after combat or reconnaissance operations, describing the death tolls due to US military action, attacks by anti-US insurgents, or the internecine civil conflict sparked by the US occupation.
> 
> "The reports cover the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, and therefore provide no data on the mass killings that took place during the initial US invasion in March 2003..."
> 
> *The war logs*, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq's roads and during raids on people's homes.
> 
> "*The victims include dozens of women and children*.
> 
> "The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.
> 
> Don't let the door smack your fat ass on your way out, Punk.
Click to expand...

First Chomsky, now Zinn.  You'l believe anything that validates your hatred of America, won't you?  

You really are a mindless fool.


----------



## kiwiman127

The Rabbi said:


> code1211 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Rabbi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup.  Apparently the point is that George Bush is a Nazi follower of Goehring because he lied us into war just Goehring predicted.
> Frankly the old Bush is Hitler meme is geting kind of stale.  So is Blu and the usual anti American crowd here.
> I wonder if these same geniuses said the same thing about WW2.
Click to expand...


Or Obama with Obamacare!  LBJ with the Gulf of Tonkin Incident!  The list could go on and on.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you.  The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs.  You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.
> 
> 
> 
> "All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."
> 
> *"It works the same in every country."*
> 
> You are living proof Goering was right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.  You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle.  If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.
Click to expand...

If I were a pacifist, I wouldn't be planning attacks on anyone.

Only Slaves kill for money.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."
> 
> *"It works the same in every country."*
> 
> You are living proof Goering was right.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.  You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle.  If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If I were a pacifist, I wouldn't be planning attacks on anyone.
> 
> Only Slaves kill for money.
Click to expand...

Pay attention, fool.  Your pacifism stems not from a desire for peace but from your cowardice.

That you are a coward is a well-established fact.


----------



## kiwiman127

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Akbar's an America-hating retard, and so are you.  The only difference between you is he had the courage to do something about his beliefs.  You bitch impotently on the internet, and that's ALL you do, because you're a fucking coward.
> 
> 
> 
> "All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."
> 
> *"It works the same in every country."*
> 
> You are living proof Goering was right.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really.  You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle.  If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.
Click to expand...


What a crock of shit!
Per example, the invasion of Iraq.  Many people were against the war based on their principles.  I was all for invading Afghanistan but Iraq was a totally different story.  During the Bush selling the concept using false information as his tool, one could find information that correctly contradicted the Bush selling points in the European press.  I remember I read in the European press that the aluminum tubes designed to enrich uranium claim was bunk based on the opinion of Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA.  Also the Yellow Cake myth was exposed long before Joseph Wilson even had gone to Nigeria by the European Press. The same with the Saddam/al Qeda tie in.
Many people who supported the invasion of Afghanistan were against invading Iraq because they knew the selling points were BS.  So, they were pacifist on principle, where as the cowards were the ones who fell for the scare tactics of the Bush Administration.


----------



## daveman

kiwiman127 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> "All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism or exposing the country to danger."
> 
> *"It works the same in every country."*
> 
> You are living proof Goering was right.
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.  You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle.  If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a crock of shit!
> Per example, the invasion of Iraq.  Many people were against the war based on their principles.  I was all for invading Afghanistan but Iraq was a totally different story.  During the Bush selling the concept using false information as his tool, one could find information that correctly contradicted the Bush selling points in the European press.  I remember I read in the European press that the aluminum tubes designed to enrich uranium claim was bunk based on the opinion of Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA.  Also the Yellow Cake myth was exposed long before Joseph Wilson even had gone to Nigeria by the European Press. Then same with the Saddam/al Qeda tie in.
> Many people who supported the invasion of Afghanistan were against invading Iraq because they knew the selling points were BS.  So, they were pacifist on principle, where as the cowards were the ones who fell for the scare tactics of the Bush Administration.
Click to expand...

Hey, dumbass, I'm speaking of Red George personally.  Airman I Miss My Mommy So I'll Say My Back Hurts.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now find where any of those civilians were _deliberately_ targeted.  You know, like your terrorist heroes do.
> 
> And then get the hell out of my country.  You're stinking it up.
> 
> 
> 
> Howard Zinn, *combat* vet of WWII, believed there was a third option when considering war crimes.
> 
> "Along with *accidental* and *deliberate* targeting of civilians, there was also targeting practices which resulted in the *inevitable* loss of civilian life.
> 
> As far as Iraq's concerned, what light does WikiLeaks shed?
> 
> "The secret US army files made public Friday by the WikiLeaks web site provide massive documentation of the criminal character of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.
> 
> "WikiLeaks posted nearly 400,000 army field reports, filed by low-ranking soldiers after combat or reconnaissance operations, describing the death tolls due to US military action, attacks by anti-US insurgents, or the internecine civil conflict sparked by the US occupation.
> 
> "The reports cover the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, and therefore provide no data on the mass killings that took place during the initial US invasion in March 2003..."
> 
> *The war logs*, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq's roads and during raids on people's homes.
> 
> "*The victims include dozens of women and children*.
> 
> "The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.
> 
> Don't let the door smack your fat ass on your way out, Punk.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> First Chomsky, now Zinn.  You'l believe anything that validates your hatred of America, won't you?
> 
> You really are a mindless fool.
Click to expand...

*"The Guardian notes* that the army reports, however grisly, significantly underestimate the death toll from US military action, even compared to the figures produced by Iraq Body Count (IBC), which are well below estimates, based on demographic studies, of a million or more Iraqis killed. 

"The newspaper writes:

'A key example of the failure by US forces to record civilian casualties they have inflicted comes in the two major urban battles against insurgents *fought in 2004 in Falluja*. Numerous buildings were reduced to rubble by air strikes, tank shells and howitzers, and there were well-attested deaths of hundreds of civilians. IBC has identified between *1,226 and 1,362 such deaths during April and November*. But the leaked US internal field reports record no civilian casualties at all.'

WikiLeaks...

*Why are you running from this debate??*


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not really.  You're a pacifist only because you're a coward, not out of any principle.  If you had any balls you'd be plotting your own attacks against the US military.
> 
> 
> 
> If I were a pacifist, I wouldn't be planning attacks on anyone.
> 
> Only Slaves kill for money.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Pay attention, fool.  Your pacifism stems not from a desire for peace but from your cowardice.
> 
> That you are a coward is a well-established fact.
Click to expand...

My lack of courage has nothing to do with the validity of Goering"s message:

"All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism (or courage) or exposing the country to danger."

*"It works the same in every country."*

Goering wasn't the first psychopath to notice this technique. It's been a staple for all governments through all time to socialize cost while privatizing profit.

My personal failings have no impact on that.

Right?


----------



## blu

RetiredGySgt said:


> Blu got EXACTLY what he wanted with this thread, his leftist retardo brothers and sisters attacking the US over Afghanistan and Iraq. That was the entire point of his post.



are you avoiding the post about GW's granddad?


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Howard Zinn, *combat* vet of WWII, believed there was a third option when considering war crimes.
> 
> "Along with *accidental* and *deliberate* targeting of civilians, there was also targeting practices which resulted in the *inevitable* loss of civilian life.
> 
> As far as Iraq's concerned, what light does WikiLeaks shed?
> 
> "The secret US army files made public Friday by the WikiLeaks web site provide massive documentation of the criminal character of the US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq.
> 
> "WikiLeaks posted nearly 400,000 army field reports, filed by low-ranking soldiers after combat or reconnaissance operations, describing the death tolls due to US military action, attacks by anti-US insurgents, or the internecine civil conflict sparked by the US occupation.
> 
> "The reports cover the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009, and therefore provide no data on the mass killings that took place during the initial US invasion in March 2003..."
> 
> *The war logs*, seen by the Guardian, contain a horrific dossier of cases where US troops killed innocent civilians at checkpoints, on Iraq's roads and during raids on people's homes.
> 
> "*The victims include dozens of women and children*.
> 
> "The US rarely admitted their deaths publicly.
> 
> Don't let the door smack your fat ass on your way out, Punk.
> 
> 
> 
> First Chomsky, now Zinn.  You'l believe anything that validates your hatred of America, won't you?
> 
> You really are a mindless fool.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *"The Guardian notes* that the army reports, however grisly, significantly underestimate the death toll from US military action, even compared to the figures produced by Iraq Body Count (IBC), which are well below estimates, based on demographic studies, of a million or more Iraqis killed.
> 
> "The newspaper writes:
> 
> 'A key example of the failure by US forces to record civilian casualties they have inflicted comes in the two major urban battles against insurgents *fought in 2004 in Falluja*. Numerous buildings were reduced to rubble by air strikes, tank shells and howitzers, and there were well-attested deaths of hundreds of civilians. IBC has identified between *1,226 and 1,362 such deaths during April and November*. But the leaked US internal field reports record no civilian casualties at all.'
> 
> WikiLeaks...
> 
> *Why are you running from this debate??*
Click to expand...

You don't want debate, coward.  You want validation for your hatred of America.

You can get all that you want from Chomsky and Zinn.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> If I were a pacifist, I wouldn't be planning attacks on anyone.
> 
> Only Slaves kill for money.
> 
> 
> 
> Pay attention, fool.  Your pacifism stems not from a desire for peace but from your cowardice.
> 
> That you are a coward is a well-established fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My lack of courage has nothing to do with the validity of Goering"s message:
> 
> "All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism (or courage) or exposing the country to danger."
> 
> *"It works the same in every country."*
> 
> Goering wasn't the first psychopath to notice this technique. It's been a staple for all governments through all time to socialize cost while privatizing profit.
> 
> My personal failings have no impact on that.
> 
> Right?
Click to expand...

Who cares what you think?  Excuse me...you don't think at all.  You regurgitate like a good little leftybot.


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> First Chomsky, now Zinn.  You'l believe anything that validates your hatred of America, won't you?
> 
> You really are a mindless fool.
> 
> 
> 
> *"The Guardian notes* that the army reports, however grisly, significantly underestimate the death toll from US military action, even compared to the figures produced by Iraq Body Count (IBC), which are well below estimates, based on demographic studies, of a million or more Iraqis killed.
> 
> "The newspaper writes:
> 
> 'A key example of the failure by US forces to record civilian casualties they have inflicted comes in the two major urban battles against insurgents *fought in 2004 in Falluja*. Numerous buildings were reduced to rubble by air strikes, tank shells and howitzers, and there were well-attested deaths of hundreds of civilians. IBC has identified between *1,226 and 1,362 such deaths during April and November*. But the leaked US internal field reports record no civilian casualties at all.'
> 
> WikiLeaks...
> 
> *Why are you running from this debate??*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don't want debate, coward.  You want validation for your hatred of America.
> 
> You can get all that you want from Chomsky and Zinn.
Click to expand...

My hatred in reserved for elites (including US elites) who profit from summary executions and other war crimes:

*"The Guardian focuses* on the scale of the bloodshed, including *15,000 civilians killed in incidents not previously reported* by the US military&#8212;which publicly denied it was even counting civilian deaths, *while keeping an extensive internal log*. 

"The newspaper&#8217;s report begins: 'A grim picture of the US and Britain's legacy in Iraq has been revealed in a massive leak of American military documents that detail *torture, summary executions and war crimes.'&#8221;*

Our government kills children for money and lies about it.
That should offend anyone who desires freedom.
Hero or coward.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"The Guardian notes* that the army reports, however grisly, significantly underestimate the death toll from US military action, even compared to the figures produced by Iraq Body Count (IBC), which are well below estimates, based on demographic studies, of a million or more Iraqis killed.
> 
> "The newspaper writes:
> 
> 'A key example of the failure by US forces to record civilian casualties they have inflicted comes in the two major urban battles against insurgents *fought in 2004 in Falluja*. Numerous buildings were reduced to rubble by air strikes, tank shells and howitzers, and there were well-attested deaths of hundreds of civilians. IBC has identified between *1,226 and 1,362 such deaths during April and November*. But the leaked US internal field reports record no civilian casualties at all.'
> 
> WikiLeaks...
> 
> *Why are you running from this debate??*
> 
> 
> 
> You don't want debate, coward.  You want validation for your hatred of America.
> 
> You can get all that you want from Chomsky and Zinn.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My hatred in reserved for elites (including US elites) who profit from summary executions and other war crimes:
> 
> *"The Guardian focuses* on the scale of the bloodshed, including *15,000 civilians killed in incidents not previously reported* by the US militarywhich publicly denied it was even counting civilian deaths, *while keeping an extensive internal log*.
> 
> "The newspapers report begins: 'A grim picture of the US and Britain's legacy in Iraq has been revealed in a massive leak of American military documents that detail *torture, summary executions and war crimes.'*
> 
> Our government kills children for money and lies about it.
> That should offend anyone who desires freedom.
> Hero or coward.
Click to expand...

So what are you going to do about it?  Note that posting on the internet is NOT "doing something about it".

But that's all you'll do.  Because it's safe.  Despite your fellow nutcases' claims of this being a fascist police state, the government really doesn't give a shit about you.  You're not going to be disappeared.  You're not going to be surveilled.  There is no one tracing your calls or tracking your website visits.  No one is following you.  

Got it, coward?  You're just sucking up resources and giving nothing back to society.  You're too cowardly to fight the system you hate.  

But you just keep posting on the internet and pretending you're making a difference, Red George.  But you're only deluding yourself.  

Coward.


----------



## RetiredGySgt

blu said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> 
> Blu got EXACTLY what he wanted with this thread, his leftist retardo brothers and sisters attacking the US over Afghanistan and Iraq. That was the entire point of his post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> are you avoiding the post about GW's granddad?
Click to expand...


You are aware, I assume that, that the US protested to Britain about them seizing US ships headed to Germany after the war started? That it was not illegal to sell to Germany when people were doing it even after the Allies declared war?

Since when does it matter who sold what LEGALLY to anyone matter?


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't want debate, coward.  You want validation for your hatred of America.
> 
> You can get all that you want from Chomsky and Zinn.
> 
> 
> 
> My hatred in reserved for elites (including US elites) who profit from summary executions and other war crimes:
> 
> *"The Guardian focuses* on the scale of the bloodshed, including *15,000 civilians killed in incidents not previously reported* by the US militarywhich publicly denied it was even counting civilian deaths, *while keeping an extensive internal log*.
> 
> "The newspapers report begins: 'A grim picture of the US and Britain's legacy in Iraq has been revealed in a massive leak of American military documents that detail *torture, summary executions and war crimes.'*
> 
> Our government kills children for money and lies about it.
> That should offend anyone who desires freedom.
> Hero or coward.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So what are you going to do about it?  Note that posting on the internet is NOT "doing something about it".
> 
> But that's all you'll do.  Because it's safe.  Despite your fellow nutcases' claims of this being a fascist police state, the government really doesn't give a shit about you.  You're not going to be disappeared.  You're not going to be surveilled.  There is no one tracing your calls or tracking your website visits.  No one is following you.
> 
> Got it, coward?  You're just sucking up resources and giving nothing back to society.  You're too cowardly to fight the system you hate.
> 
> But you just keep posting on the internet and pretending you're making a difference, Red George.  But you're only deluding yourself.
> 
> Coward.
Click to expand...

Whether I'm capable of helping to end US war crimes or not, at the very least I'm not actively working to assist those who kill children for money.

You on the other hand apparently expect thanks for helping turn the world into living hell for tens of thousands of Muslim families.

Thanks for all you do.

Slave.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> My hatred in reserved for elites (including US elites) who profit from summary executions and other war crimes:
> 
> *"The Guardian focuses* on the scale of the bloodshed, including *15,000 civilians killed in incidents not previously reported* by the US militarywhich publicly denied it was even counting civilian deaths, *while keeping an extensive internal log*.
> 
> "The newspapers report begins: 'A grim picture of the US and Britain's legacy in Iraq has been revealed in a massive leak of American military documents that detail *torture, summary executions and war crimes.'*
> 
> Our government kills children for money and lies about it.
> That should offend anyone who desires freedom.
> Hero or coward.
> 
> 
> 
> So what are you going to do about it?  Note that posting on the internet is NOT "doing something about it".
> 
> But that's all you'll do.  Because it's safe.  Despite your fellow nutcases' claims of this being a fascist police state, the government really doesn't give a shit about you.  You're not going to be disappeared.  You're not going to be surveilled.  There is no one tracing your calls or tracking your website visits.  No one is following you.
> 
> Got it, coward?  You're just sucking up resources and giving nothing back to society.  You're too cowardly to fight the system you hate.
> 
> But you just keep posting on the internet and pretending you're making a difference, Red George.  But you're only deluding yourself.
> 
> Coward.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whether I'm capable of helping to end US war crimes or not, at the very least I'm not actively working to assist those who kill children for money.
> 
> You on the other hand apparently expect thanks for helping turn the world into living hell for tens of thousands of Muslim families.
> 
> Thanks for all you do.
> 
> Slave.
Click to expand...

It's funny (and by that, I mean pathetic) that you feel that making ridiculous claims about me refutes the fact of your cowardice.  

Go on, Red George.  Bring down the fascists.  Post some more.


----------



## georgephillip

Calling someone a coward on the internet?

Delusion?
Distraction?
Projection?

Do you have proof I'm a coward?

Links?

Or are you simply incapable of arguments other than Ad hominem, i.e., are you more comfortable appealing to prejudices and feelings rather than intellect?


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> Calling someone a coward on the internet?
> 
> Delusion?
> Distraction?
> Projection?
> 
> Do you have proof I'm a coward?
> 
> Links?
> 
> Or are you simply incapable of arguments other than Ad hominem, i.e., are you more comfortable appealing to prejudices and feelings rather than intellect?


I have your own words as proof of your cowardice, Red George.



georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> In early March of 1966 I spent ten days processing out of the USAF. I lied about "back pain" and received a medical discharge within my first month of service.
> 
> 
> 
> Were you drafted, or did you enlist?  Either way, what made you want to break your contract?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Enlisted as part of a "buddy program" to avoid the draft.
> 
> My buddy reneged and joined the Marines.
> 
> I would have to credit homesickness as the excuse for breaking  my contract.
Click to expand...


----------



## georgephillip

Now connect the dots between homesick and coward.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> Now connect the dots between homesick and coward.



There's pretty much only one dot.  You couldn't man up enough to fulfill your end of the contract, so you lied to get out of it.  

Just as well.  The service doesn't need lying cowards in uniform.  Someone else with courage and honor took your place.


----------



## rikules

blu said:


>



now where I have I seen that before....?


think....think...think...


oh yes!

it's the FOX news motto!

in fact (all joking aside) newt gingrich created a booklet based on this concept...

it contained words to use to demonize your opponents and words to use to lionize your friends....

it STESSED that it was important to use the worst possible words (on your enemies) no matter HOW UNTRUE they were...

gingrich....goebbels......

same difference....


----------



## georgephillip

daveman said:


> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now connect the dots between homesick and coward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's pretty much only one dot.  You couldn't man up enough to fulfill your end of the contract, so you lied to get out of it.
> 
> Just as well.  The service doesn't need lying cowards in uniform.  Someone else with courage and honor took your place.
Click to expand...

Obviously the USAF needs lying cowards or you would be among the unemployed.


----------



## Truthmatters

You can remember the lessons of history without calling everyone you disagree with a nazi.


The Op posted a quote that is worth remembering.

I didnt see anyone called a nazi


----------



## rikules

Truthmatters said:


> You can remember the lessons of history without calling everyone you disagree with a nazi.
> 
> 
> The Op posted a quote that is worth remembering.
> 
> I didnt see anyone called a nazi



I don't know of anyone here who called other people "nazis" simply because they disagreed......


well...rush limbaugh does it....

and every conservative who has referred tp democrats as demoNAZIS has done it....

and every conservative who has called hillary HITLARY and posted a pciture of her in a nazi uniform has done it.....

however
as important as it is to NOT call people "nazis" simply for having differing opinions it is ALSO important to refer to REAL nazis as "nazis"

political chic is a sane, rational and intelligent conservative who uses logic, reason and opinion
to make her points....


she is NOT a nazi

she is a well respected opponent in the political arena

on the other hand rush limbaugh uses fear tactics, misinformation lies to "help" his followers  "believe" that liberals are EVIL, the ENEMY, out to RUIN America, anti-GOD, anti-GOOD.....and the only good answer to liberalism is violence...."

that makes limbaugh a nazi

newts booklet, full of examples of extreme words to use to demonize liberals, is just exactly the type of lying fear-filled propaganda that goebbels used.....

in this case...

a spade is a spade


----------



## Truthmatters

As bad as they are they are not nazis.


----------



## daveman

georgephillip said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> georgephillip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now connect the dots between homesick and coward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's pretty much only one dot.  You couldn't man up enough to fulfill your end of the contract, so you lied to get out of it.
> 
> Just as well.  The service doesn't need lying cowards in uniform.  Someone else with courage and honor took your place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obviously the USAF needs lying cowards or you would be among the unemployed.
Click to expand...

Oh, sheesh, you're just phoning it in now.  I'm not a liar, and I'm not a coward.  

You, on the other hand, are both.


----------



## georgephillip

Consider it charity.


----------



## mdn2000

The Nazi's, scapegoats of Europe, had Hitler never lived you know how history would read, the exact same. The Europeans would of killed the Jews, Hitler was only one leader, Hitler had hundreds years of help.

Yes its easy to convince people to go to war, when its a war against people who are nothing more than murderers.

How about all those cops in Germany that were not Nazi's that hunted down the Jews, what about Europeans that hunted the Jews, what about Jews who turned in Jews, it was a pretty fucked up time and it does not get that way simply because a man that could not finish High School is clever enough to trick all of Europe. 

Goering, are his comments relevant, not one bit, unless your a Marxist, or unless your a Liberal, or unless your a dumbass. 

Goering, Marxist like Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky obviously respect Goering, at least that is what it appears like when you read the posts of those who worship the Marxist Zinn and Chomsky.


----------



## georgephillip

I've never seen evidence that Howard Zinn or Noam Chomsky have/had the slightest respect for Goering. 

Chomsky's an anarchist who believes all power "...unless justified is inherently illegitimate and that the burden of proof is on those in authority. If this burden can't be met, the authority in question should be dismantled and *authority for its own sake is inherently unjustified.*"

Wiki - Chomsky

Howard Zinn put  his life on the line trying to kill Goering and everything the Nazis supported:

"Eager to fight fascism, Zinn joined the Army Air Force during World War II where he was assigned as a bombardier in the 490th Bombardment Group,[7] bombing targets in Berlin, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary.[8] 

"The anti-war stance Zinn developed later was informed, in part, by his experiences. In April 1945, he participated in an early military use of napalm, which took place in Royan, western France."

Wiki - Zinn

While both Howard and Noam read Marx, it isn't accurate to categorize either one as a "Marxist." It's one thing to support Marx' criticisms of capitalism and something entirely different to support his solutions to capitalism.

Finally, I think you are at least partially right about some Jews. 

For centuries SOME (mostly rich) Jews have behaved in ways that made millions of enemies throughout the world. Whatever mistakes SOME Jews have made in history and continue making today shouldn't be used to discriminate (and worse) against ALL Jews today.


----------



## rikules

RetiredGySgt said:


> Claiming we are no better then the Nazi's is ignorant to the extreme. But then any lie is acceptable to the Liberal. By the way Blu? Why didn't Obama and the Democrats stop these supposed immoral wars?




your obvious problem is that your defective brain is incapable of seeing the BIG PICTURE.

that is why you are conservative

in that defective brain of yours you see nazis (ALL nazis) as evil, hatefilled murderers.

but that is NOT the case at all!


in the 1930's, as naziism was on the rise in germany (and in America), MOST believers/followers of naziism were;

proudly patriotic
religious
traditional family men and women

(just like you!)

who truely believed that "liberals/intellectuals/jews/minorities/gays are the enemy of germany/America"
and that these "enemies" are "immoral, stupid, evil, out to destroy germany/America"
and that SOMETHING should be done about these evil liberals....

(just like you)

if anyone had mentioned to the average nazi in 1936 that  their lies and hate would lead to the murder of millions they would have scoffed (just like you) and said something like;
"there!  there goes your typical liberal/intellectual/jew/gay/minority....spreading hatefull lies about our beloved leader....hitler/palin..."

(just like you)


long before they (people like you) started using SWORDS on millions of innocent people they started with WORDS


today you demonize liberals with words (just like the nazis started in the 1930s)

no doubt your hatred of them will lead you (probably with a smile on your face) to a point
and time when you will rather use SWORDS

just like nazis


----------

