- Thread starter
- #261
The above is particularly important when on considers the Liberal myth that Communism is of the Left, but it is balanced by Nazism on the Right. Both Communism and Nazism are of the Left, and only after the Holocaust was revealed did the Left claim that Nazism was of the Left.
a. Liberals claim the center by placing socialism on the left and national socialism on the right, even though Lenin/Stalin and Hitler/other Nazis had much in common as they centralized power and preached hatred. A more accurate spectrum would place totalitarians of many stripes on the left and defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom on the right. WORLD Let s admit who we are Marvin Olasky July 17 2010
b. " 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
LOL! For the Nazis to be to one's right, one would need to be standing upon the teetering edge of the Left. Axiomatically disqualifying such an individual's point of view... for anyone even remotely in kinship with America.
Except that the GOP agrees with Nazi rhetoric on almost every issue:
Jacobin Reason Sneak Peek at 2012 GOP Platform
Bush and Chaney used 9-11 and propaganda and nationalism to lie us into war just like Adolf and the Nazi's did. Took a page right out of the playbook.
What, exactly, was the "lie"?
WMD's.
"WMD's."
I should stop saying "How stupid can you be?"
You take it as a challenge.
Watch:
FactCheck.org: Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
"In its May 22, 2004 edition, the New York Times confirmed a myriad of reports on Saddam's nuclear fuel stockpile - and revealed a chilling detail unknown to weapons inspectors before the war: that Saddam had begun to partially enrich his uranium stash.
The Times noted:
"The repository, at Tuwaitha, a centerpiece of Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program, . . . . holds more than 500 tons of uranium . . . . Some 1.8 tons is classified as low-enriched uranium."
Thomas B. Cochran, director of the nuclear program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told the Times that "the low-enriched version could be useful to a nation with nuclear ambitions."
"A country like Iran," Mr. Cochran said, "could convert that into weapons-grade material with a lot fewer centrifuges than would be required with natural uranium."
NewsMax Archives
This has not been a good day for you, huh?