The Battle: Truth vs. Ideology

[PoliticalChic]

Don't feel sorry. You haven't trapped anyone buy yourself. It's 2014 and people understand the marketing (propaganda) methodology of misinterpretation or misrepresentation of factual statements. The sky is blue, that is a fact. Only it isn't blue at night. It isn't blue on a rainy or cloudy day or sometime during a sunrise or sunset. And it isn't blue above a certain distance from the earth.
And anyhow, all you are doing is saying you are smarter than me because your opinion is of more value than mine. You aren't even using facts, you are using opinions.
Still, your nonsense is based on that Power Elite Fascist that helped support escaped Nazi war criminals. Your sources quotes and sources lead back to him. It is why so many have asked you in previous threads why you supported the Nazi's and Hitler. They could see the connection, but couldn't put the finger on it. I have the finger and you know it. Perhaps you are super stupid and didn't know it yesterday, but your response indicates you know it now.

1. "...misinterpretation or misrepresentation of factual statements."


So.....where are your examples of the above?




2. "Don't feel sorry."

Sorry?

How so?

I'm ripping a new one for one who is one.

 

[norwegen]

you are a clear cut example of one who places ideology over truth

Watch how I jam those words down your throat:

It you are correct.....and that would be a first, an event that usually accompanies a parting sea or a stone tablet.....

...all you have to do is produce anything in the OP that is not true.


Waiting.

That's daft.

The essence of your entire body of work here at usm is not in your OP, so - - - - - your if/than is stupid. Or "it" as your mistyped it.

Did you mean if/then? Or did you just mistype it?

 

[norwegen]

I love a battle!
Coming up, a question of the facts about President Roosevelt's foreign policy.

Me, the facts, and my opponent, History Butt, a Roosevelt apologist who can never see a problem with his idol.

To shed light on the question, I asked a series of questions about the former President, History Butt gave his considered opinions.
You decide.





1. PC: Was Roosevelt mentally unstable, and unable to objectively view the world scene?
Why did Four Presidents and their six Secretaries of State for over a decade and a half refuse to recognize the Soviet government?


HB: Your questions are just stupid and can not be debated or discussed to any kind of conclusion. Lets look at those questions.
Was FDR mentally unstable? No.

PC: OK, I admit that the phrasing was...incendiary, but it gets to this point: there were so very many reasons not to recognize the USSR....one wonders if a rational person would have...

a. Previous occupants of the office refused to. Almost as soon as he was President, FDR recognized the Soviet Union.... He assumed office in March of 1933, and on November 16th, 1933, signed a worthless agreement with Litvinov, recognizing the USSR.



b. Did Roosevelt have any reason to believe that Stalin would live up to his word?
Roosevelt signed the recognition agreement: Litvinov "returned to the Soviet embassy.....all smiles....and said 'Well, it's all in the bag; we have it.'" On September 23, 1939, Dr. D. H. Dombrowsky testified before the Dies committee. The Winona Republican-Herald on Newspapers.com

And Dombrowsky testified that Litvinov boasted that he pulled the wool over FDR's eyes:

"Well, it's all in the bag. They wanted us to recognize the debts we owed them and I promised we were going to negotiate. But they did not know we were going to negotiate until doomsday. The next one was a corker; they wanted us to promise freedom of religion in the Soviet Union, and I promised that, too. I was very much prompted to offer that I would personally collect all the Bibles and ship them over."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.33.




Why, ever, sign treaties with the communists? Why?

c. In 1982, Ronald Reagan asked his arms control advisory committee to conduct a review of Soviet compliance in the 25 years of arms control treaties. It was the first such concerted review ever. The answer to the question of Soviet arms controls compliance was that there was none.
West, "American Betrayal," p. 198.

"The Soviet Union repeatedly violates treaties, and the rest of the world turns their heads and proceeds to enter into still more treaties, which the Soviets violate with impunity." Joseph D. Douglass, Jr., "Why the Soviets Violate Arms Control Treaties," vii, 83.



d. The agreement that Litvinov signed promised " To respect scrupulously the indisputable right of the United States to order its own life within its own jurisdiction in its own way and to refrain from interfering in any manner in the internal affairs of the United States, its territories or possessions.... in particular, from any act tending to incite or encourage armed intervention, or any agitation or propaganda having as an aim, the violation of the territorial integrity of the United States, its territories or possessions, or the bringing about by force of a change in the political or social order of the whole or any part of the United States, its territories or possessions....

Not to permit the formation or residence on its territory of any organization or group--and to prevent the activity on its territory of any organization or group, or of representatives or officials of any organization or group--which makes claim to be the Government of,...

...prevent the activity on its territory of any organization or group, or of representatives or officials of any organization or group--which has as an aim the overthrow or the preparation for the overthrow of, or the bringing about by force of a change in, the political or social order of the whole or any part of the United States,...etc." Roosevelt-Litvinov





Get it? They promised no espionage, no Communist Part of the United States of America (CPUSA)....



e. "FDR had knowledge of two glaring examples of communist conspiracy specifically directed against the United States." Hoover, in his "Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath," by George H. Nash, published posthumously, obviously, in 2011.

Yeah....FDR knew.

Were FDR's action vis-a-vis the USSR those of a rational man? Or, if they appear irrational, is there an explanation for them?



So....you might call it an error in judgment....I call it mentally unstable.

I think it was neither an error in judgment nor mental instability. He was a statist; it was intentional.

 

[kiwiman127]

PC, you're an ideologue, you're consistent with being an ideologue and that is the truth! You should be honest with yourself and your readers. Denial is not the name of a river in Egypt. Just accept it and move on.
Thank you!

 

[Camp]

Don't feel sorry. You haven't trapped anyone buy yourself. It's 2014 and people understand the marketing (propaganda) methodology of misinterpretation or misrepresentation of factual statements. The sky is blue, that is a fact. Only it isn't blue at night. It isn't blue on a rainy or cloudy day or sometime during a sunrise or sunset. And it isn't blue above a certain distance from the earth.
And anyhow, all you are doing is saying you are smarter than me because your opinion is of more value than mine. You aren't even using facts, you are using opinions.
Still, your nonsense is based on that Power Elite Fascist that helped support escaped Nazi war criminals. Your sources quotes and sources lead back to him. It is why so many have asked you in previous threads why you supported the Nazi's and Hitler. They could see the connection, but couldn't put the finger on it. I have the finger and you know it. Perhaps you are super stupid and didn't know it yesterday, but your response indicates you know it now.

1. "...misinterpretation or misrepresentation of factual statements."


So.....where are your examples of the above?




2. "Don't feel sorry."

Sorry?

How so?

I'm ripping a new one for one who is one.

Unless you are a doctor of psychiatry the question of whether an individual suffers from mental illness can not be answered factually. Even with a doctorate in psychiatry the answer would be based on opinion and subject to review and critique by others with the same credentials (happens in the courts everyday). Hence, it you believe you can answer your own question with a factual statement, your are nuts and delusional.

I told you already, your questions are mostly stupid and can not be answered in an academic or factual way. They can only be answered with opinions. That is what makes them stupid.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC, you're an ideologue, you're consistent with being an ideologue and that is the truth! You should be honest with yourself and your readers. Denial is not the name of a river in Egypt. Just accept it and move on.
Thank you!

Let me carefully consider this post.....hmmmmm...


You're a dope......

....that kind of obviates your entire post.


Heck, I should have realized that as soon as I noticed that you weren't able to write anything about the OP, or any part of the thread.

Jeeezzz....I could have saved 5, maybe 6, seconds.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Don't feel sorry. You haven't trapped anyone buy yourself. It's 2014 and people understand the marketing (propaganda) methodology of misinterpretation or misrepresentation of factual statements. The sky is blue, that is a fact. Only it isn't blue at night. It isn't blue on a rainy or cloudy day or sometime during a sunrise or sunset. And it isn't blue above a certain distance from the earth.
And anyhow, all you are doing is saying you are smarter than me because your opinion is of more value than mine. You aren't even using facts, you are using opinions.
Still, your nonsense is based on that Power Elite Fascist that helped support escaped Nazi war criminals. Your sources quotes and sources lead back to him. It is why so many have asked you in previous threads why you supported the Nazi's and Hitler. They could see the connection, but couldn't put the finger on it. I have the finger and you know it. Perhaps you are super stupid and didn't know it yesterday, but your response indicates you know it now.

1. "...misinterpretation or misrepresentation of factual statements."


So.....where are your examples of the above?




2. "Don't feel sorry."

Sorry?

How so?

I'm ripping a new one for one who is one.

Unless you are a doctor of psychiatry the question of whether an individual suffers from mental illness can not be answered factually. Even with a doctorate in psychiatry the answer would be based on opinion and subject to review and critique by others with the same credentials (happens in the courts everyday). Hence, it you believe you can answer your own question with a factual statement, your are nuts and delusional.

I told you already, your questions are mostly stupid and can not be answered in an academic or factual way. They can only be answered with opinions. That is what makes them stupid.

"I told you already, your questions are mostly stupid and can not be answered in an academic or factual way."


Yet, you did answer all of 'em.....

And as you attempted to do so....

....it behooves me to grade your responses.


And I have begun to do so, above.




So far you aren't doing well.

 

[Camp]

1. "...misinterpretation or misrepresentation of factual statements."


So.....where are your examples of the above?




2. "Don't feel sorry."

Sorry?

How so?

I'm ripping a new one for one who is one.

Unless you are a doctor of psychiatry the question of whether an individual suffers from mental illness can not be answered factually. Even with a doctorate in psychiatry the answer would be based on opinion and subject to review and critique by others with the same credentials (happens in the courts everyday). Hence, it you believe you can answer your own question with a factual statement, your are nuts and delusional.

I told you already, your questions are mostly stupid and can not be answered in an academic or factual way. They can only be answered with opinions. That is what makes them stupid.

"I told you already, your questions are mostly stupid and can not be answered in an academic or factual way."


Yet, you did answer all of 'em.....

And as you attempted to do so....

....it behooves me to grade your responses.


And I have begun to do so, above.




So far you aren't doing well.

I am doing just fine. You are the one embarrassing yourself. Show where I stated or indicated that when I answered your questions I claimed them a fact. I know, I know, you depend on distortion and misrepresentation to make your points, but just for giggles, let's say we do this with just a small taste of honesty. I gave you yes or no answers to most of your questions, the ones I determined were only answerable with opinions. The big one, the one about the southern strategy and the claim that Ike used the invasion of Normandy at the request of Stalin and ignored the more sensible strategy of an invasion of Italy, well, you got crushed and exposed as being a complete idiot because you don't look and consider dates. History, duh. You didn't know about the Italian campaign and invasion of Italy but think you are qualified to discuss WWII.

 

[NYcarbineer]

you are a clear cut example of one who places ideology over truth

Watch how I jam those words down your throat:

It you are correct.....and that would be a first, an event that usually accompanies a parting sea or a stone tablet.....

...all you have to do is produce anything in the OP that is not true.


Waiting.

Reagan signed the INF Treaty with the Soviets.

 

[Camp]

"...on the instructions of Martin Bormann, the surviving SS, soon to be known as ODESSA, established hundreds of corporations abroad, donated handsomely to extreme right wing political candidates in the US...
Over 100 of these companies were based in the US.....They were instructed to invest in propaganda mills...
For America, a spin off of America First Committee was formed in 1954, ran by some of the leading WWII "isolationist". One of the organizations leading lights was Colonel Robert McCormick, publisher of the Chicago Tribune from Scenes from the Post WWII Reemergence of the Nazi Party by Alex Constantine July 2013

Scenes from the Post-WW II Reemergence of the Nazi Party » The Constantine Report

Go through any of the anti FDR threads and you find Political Chic using Chesly Manly as a main source of information. When you check Manly's sources you find dead ends. When you investigate Manly, you discover he didn't exist as a real human being. He was the voice of the owner of the Chicago Tribune, Robert McCormick. McCormick was a Nazi supporting Power Elite Fascist and isolationist who wanted Hitler to conquer Europe and Russia, see Fascism take hold in America and dreamed of the joining of the fascist for world domination.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Unless you are a doctor of psychiatry the question of whether an individual suffers from mental illness can not be answered factually. Even with a doctorate in psychiatry the answer would be based on opinion and subject to review and critique by others with the same credentials (happens in the courts everyday). Hence, it you believe you can answer your own question with a factual statement, your are nuts and delusional.

I told you already, your questions are mostly stupid and can not be answered in an academic or factual way. They can only be answered with opinions. That is what makes them stupid.

"I told you already, your questions are mostly stupid and can not be answered in an academic or factual way."


Yet, you did answer all of 'em.....

And as you attempted to do so....

....it behooves me to grade your responses.


And I have begun to do so, above.




So far you aren't doing well.

I am doing just fine. You are the one embarrassing yourself. Show where I stated or indicated that when I answered your questions I claimed them a fact. I know, I know, you depend on distortion and misrepresentation to make your points, but just for giggles, let's say we do this with just a small taste of honesty. I gave you yes or no answers to most of your questions, the ones I determined were only answerable with opinions. The big one, the one about the southern strategy and the claim that Ike used the invasion of Normandy at the request of Stalin and ignored the more sensible strategy of an invasion of Italy, well, you got crushed and exposed as being a complete idiot because you don't look and consider dates. History, duh. You didn't know about the Italian campaign and invasion of Italy but think you are qualified to discuss WWII.

" Show where I stated or indicated that when I answered your questions I claimed them a fact......I gave you yes or no answers to most of your questions, the ones I determined were only answerable with opinions."

So....you did answer them?

And don't think I don't appreciate the hard work you put in!

As far as doing 'just fine,' let's leave that up to the reader.




Next one, with your answer, and my tutorial:


Question #5.
Did he have so little respect for the kind of nation that our Founders set up that he was willing to toss it aside and form an amalgam with the bloody history of the Bolsheviks?

HB: Did he respect the founders Yes



PC: That's doesn't fully respond to the question...think of what the Founders stood for, and what Stalin stood for.

a. "Russia does not fight for the same ideals as the United States."
Loy Henderson, Soviet and Eastern European affairs expert and Foreign Service officer, as quoted by Martin Weil in "A pretty good club: The founding fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service," p. 106.



b. To trick the American public into support for the Russian tyrant....Roosevelt swore to the American public the exact opposite: he declared that Stalin fought for the same ideals! FDR was lying!

September 30, 1941, FDR claimed that there was freedom of religion in the USSR. "The claim that Stalin's Russia allowed religious freedom was the first step in a massive pro-Soviet campaign that the White House coordinated for the duration of the war."
"Caught between Roosevelt and Stalin: America's Ambassadors to Moscow," by Dennis J. Dunn, p. 137




c. Since the Founders gave us our Constitution, Roosevelt's actions in opposition to the Constitution, tell volumes about his lack of respect for the Founders.

In July 5, 1935, in a letter to Representative Samuel B. Hill of Washington, the President manifested his contempt for the Constitution.

Hill was chairman of the subcommittee studying the Guffey-Vinson bill to regulate the coal industry: the purpose of the legislation was to re-establish, for the coal industry, the NRA code system which the Supreme Court had unanimously declared unconstitutional. Roosevelt wrote: "I hope your committee will not permit doubts as to constitutionality, however reasonable, to block the legislation.
This was the same Roosevelt who had sworn an oath on his 300 year old family Bible, to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p. 65.




d. In 1935, the Supreme Court upheld the New Deal repudiation of gold payments in government contracts and private contracts .... Justice McReynolds declared in a dissenting opinion that "the Constitution as we have known it is gone." The Brookshire Times on Newspapers.com



e. The Founders were classical liberals, who honored the individual. Franklin Roosevelt, Progressive, who hated the individual, an advanced the supremacy of the collective.
The irrevocable alteration that Franklin Roosevelt wreaked on this nation, in effect, produced what Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), a Marxist intellectual claimed....Gramschi’s motto is that of liberals today: “that all life is "political." John Fonte -- Why There Is A Culture War: Gramsci and Tocqueville in America

True...thanks to Franklin Roosevelt.




Still think you're 'doing fine'?

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC is an Opus Dei like creature who would have wanted us to ally with the Nazis against Stalin. Stupid. Or to sit out WWII. Even more stupid.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC is an Opus Dei like creature who would have wanted us to ally with the Nazis against Stalin. Stupid. Or to sit out WWII. Even more stupid.

Oh, my.....look what the cat dragged in....a rat.



Either your are a lying sack of sewage, or you can document this slander: "...who would have wanted us to ally with the Nazis against Stalin."



Admit it, Jakal....you posted that because I eviscerate your posts every time you appear.

And....will continue to do so.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The point of this exercise is to document how the missteps, errors that have penalized the nation and the world, of Franklin Roosevelt are denied by his devotees.
Here, let's look at another example....




Question #6. Did FDR desire ceding half of Europe to Stalin, who, he knew, would treat those people with the comfort of the gulag?

HB: ? Did FDR give eastern Europe to Stalin as a gift? No, he gave it to Stalin as a gift to western Europe with western Europe's blessing. It was a buffer between the west and the east. Eastern Europe did not have economic or military value to western Europe and the USA. Eastern Europe was seen as a burden. So he let Stalin have the burden.




PC. "gift"????

The meaning of that term can only be compared to its usage by savages who threw virgins into the volcano as a "gift" to their gods.
What more need be said.....well, maybe a bit more.
Let's take a look at the "gift."


First: FDR's pal, Stalin, was responsible for far more slaughter than Hitler! That means slaughter of his own citizens.
Tens of Millions.

And....mull this over: who knows more about the evil than those living under same.


a. When the Allies succumbed to Stalin's demands at Yalta, that all those refugees, from generals of armies to intellectuals, Cossacks, kulaks, teachers, peasants, and workers, be repatriated to Stalin!


b. The 850,000 strong army of Gen. Andrei Andreyevich Vlasov, having gone to the other side, Germany, "to save their country from Stalin" and having later surrendered to US forces, "formed the core of those forcibly repatriated between 1944 and 1947." "Operation Keelhaul; The Story of Forced Repatriation from 1944 to the Present. by Julius Epstein p.27, 53.


c. Gen. Deniken, former commanding general of the White Russian armies which were supported by the USA in 1917-1920, explained that none of these men served in the Nazi army out of love for Germany..."they hated the Germans" he wrote....rather, they knew what awaited them in the 'Soviet paradise'....as FDR's 'gift'

Hey....didn't Clinton give Castro a 'gift,' too? Elian Gonzalez.
Democrats and dictators.....


How badly did these individuals not want to go to Stalin's USSR?

From the NYTimes, January 20, 1946:
"Ten renegade Russian soldiers, in a frenzy of terror over their impending repatriation to the homeland, committed suicide today during a riot in the Dachau prison camp...."


a. And, in the Times, March 5, 1946:
" - Many thousands of persons hostile to the present regime in the Soviet Union are being forcibly sent there....the Catholic Church constantly received appeals from 'displaced persons' terrified of being sent back to territory now controlled by Russia."





Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits?

Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army, the German Army.
"The Secret Betrayal" by Nikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.




And you, History Butt: what kind of mentality is required to speak of those about to spend their lives, and deaths, in gulags and mental institution as a "gift"?
Does that make you the typical FDR supporter?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your posts document my opinion above.

Your own writing condemns you, PC.

You would have permitted the Hitler death camps if (1) the Nazis finished off Stalin and (2) America stayed neutral.

You won't deny that because you would be lying.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your posts document my opinion above.

Your own writing condemns you, PC.

You would have permitted the Hitler death camps if (1) the Nazis finished off Stalin and (2) America stayed neutral.

You won't deny that because you would be lying.

I demanded that you provide any proof of your slander.

You didn't because you cannot.

In fact, this post proves that you cannot, and that it is your simple-minded attempt at revenge for what I have done to you in numerous posts.
It will continue.

You are a disgusting pile of offal.






Get back under the rock where you came from.

 

[Camp]

Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits?

The stupid questions never end with you. You are just so boring. You never answer or respond to critiques and questions that are put to you with academic or intellectual ways. You never have a creative rebuttal. It's always that cut and paste junk you rely on in every thread. You just declare victory and commence with repeating yourself endlessly. Your sources never changes. It is the same old fascist connected and promotional garbage over and over.

Why couldn't you figure out yourself why the USSR had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? First, thousands is a low number. Try hundreds of thousands. The USSR was made up of dozens of former nations called "Republics" that did not share a language, culture or ethnicity with Russia. To this very day some of them continue to wage insurgencies and and protest against Russian interference.

Those people didn't "go over to the other side", they were already on the other side. They just fought alongside the folks who were fighting the same enemy that they were already fighting.

Of course, you will only respond to the answer provided to you regarding your question if you can find it in one of your fascist sources. Otherwise, me thinks you will be lost and have to change the subject with deflection.

 

[Camp]

Here is a question for you PC. If FDR had not given assistance to Stalin to wage war with Hitler, could Stalin have withstood the attack by Hitler or would he had been defeated?
Another, if Stalin had been defeated by Hitler and Hitler was able to fold the conquered Russian Army with his divisions not need on an Eastern Front, into Divisions to defend the Western Wall, could an invasion of Europe have been implemented? If so, how many American divisions would have been required?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ask yourself this: why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits?

The stupid questions never end with you. You are just so boring. You never answer or respond to critiques and questions that are put to you with academic or intellectual ways. You never have a creative rebuttal. It's always that cut and paste junk you rely on in every thread. You just declare victory and commence with repeating yourself endlessly. Your sources never changes. It is the same old fascist connected and promotional garbage over and over.

Why couldn't you figure out yourself why the USSR had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? First, thousands is a low number. Try hundreds of thousands. The USSR was made up of dozens of former nations called "Republics" that did not share a language, culture or ethnicity with Russia. To this very day some of them continue to wage insurgencies and and protest against Russian interference.

Those people didn't "go over to the other side", they were already on the other side. They just fought alongside the folks who were fighting the same enemy that they were already fighting.

Of course, you will only respond to the answer provided to you regarding your question if you can find it in one of your fascist sources. Otherwise, me thinks you will be lost and have to change the subject with deflection.

b. The 850,000 strong army of Gen. Andrei Andreyevich Vlasov, having gone to the other side, Germany, "to save their country from Stalin" and having later surrendered to US forces, "formed the core of those forcibly repatriated between 1944 and 1947." "Operation Keelhaul; The Story of Forced Repatriation from 1944 to the Present. by Julius Epstein p.27, 53.


c. Gen. Deniken, former commanding general of the White Russian armies which were supported by the USA in 1917-1920, explained that none of these men served in the Nazi army out of love for Germany..."they hated the Germans" he wrote....rather, they knew what awaited them in the 'Soviet paradise'....as FDR's 'gift'



Only in the USSR....of all Allied nations......

Yet some moron called these folks a "gift" to Stalin....

Who was that moron?

 

[September]

Stalin was awesome.