PDA

View Full Version : Are we destined to repeat history?


HemiEd
05-11-2007, 01:57 PM
A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two and who

owned a number of large industries and estates, when asked how many

German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our

attitude toward fanaticism.

"Very few people were true Nazis" he said, "but many enjoyed the

return of German pride and many more were too busy to care. I was

one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the

majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew

it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of our world

had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration

camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."

We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that

Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims

just want to live in peace.

Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely

irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better and meant to

somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe

in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this

moment in history.

It is the fanatics who march.

It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.

It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal

groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire

continent in an Islamic wave.

It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill.

It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.

It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of

rape victims and homosexuals.

The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority".... the

"silent majority".... is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in

peace. Yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of over 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

China's huge population.... it was peaceful as well. But Chinese

Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a

warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way

across Southeast Asia in an orgy of killing that included the

systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians.... most killed by

sword, shovel and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it

not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt. Yet for all

our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated

of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up,

because.... like my friend from Germany.... they will awake one day and

find that the fanatics own them and the end of their world will have

begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs

Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and

many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up

until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold.... we must pay attention to the only

group that counts.... the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

BucEyedPea
05-11-2007, 02:07 PM
Yes, the Nazis ( their govt) were fanatics who sold their people on the idea that the Jews were going to destroy the Aryan race. So they demonized them, created and atmosphere of fear and set out to invade Poland and other nations...then engaged in the Holocaust.

Dave Lane
05-11-2007, 02:12 PM
Yes, the Neocons ( their govt) were fanatics who sold their people on the idea that the Arabs were going to destroy the American race. So they demonized them, created and atmosphere of fear and set out to invade Iraq and other nations...then engaged in the more bad stuff.


FYP

Dave

Sully
05-11-2007, 02:17 PM
I neeed to check my email, too.
Thanks.

patteeu
05-11-2007, 02:17 PM
This OP would have gone over better here if the Neocons turned out to be the potential nazis, not the radical muslims. As is, it will be treated with ridicule by those who despise the neocons more than they despise our true enemies.

I see that Dave Lane is getting the party started! ;)

the Talking Can
05-11-2007, 02:21 PM
I'm going to kill that muther ****er George Carlin.

My spam folder is full!

Direckshun
05-11-2007, 02:22 PM
Are we destined to repeat history?
Aren't we always.

BucEyedPea
05-11-2007, 02:33 PM
FYP

Dave
You got it right!
That's what I was alluding to.
Just a matter of perspective, eh?

Nightwish
05-11-2007, 04:16 PM
This OP would have gone over better here if the Neocons turned out to be the potential nazis, not the radical muslims.
The parallel would be more accurate, to say the least.

Nightwish
05-11-2007, 04:18 PM
I'm going to kill that muther ****er George Carlin.

My spam folder is full!
I've been seeing some of those mass emails floating around attributed to George Carlin. To be honest, I have serious doubts that George Carlin (at least, not the social comedian) had anything to do with them.

Adept Havelock
05-11-2007, 04:25 PM
Are we destined to repeat history?

Yep.

We learn from history that we learn nothing from history.

Mr. Laz
05-11-2007, 04:27 PM
yes ... we'll keep repeating history as long as people insist that violence is the answer.

Adept Havelock
05-11-2007, 04:30 PM
yes ... we'll keep repeating history as long as people insist that violence is the answer.

I admire the idealism, but sometimes...it is. :shrug:

Mr. Laz
05-11-2007, 04:33 PM
I admire the idealism, but sometimes...it is. :shrug:
i know ..... violence is human nature


i'm not exactly a huggy person myself but violence rarely works ... especially long term.

Nightwish
05-11-2007, 04:37 PM
I admire the idealism, but sometimes...it is. :shrug:I agree. Sometimes it is. I believe that if an answer, or a resolution is to be had to the problems in Iraq, it will necessarily be through violence. But leaving our people in the middle of it resolves nothing. The violence between their factions is going to have to play itself out. As long as we keep trying to quell it, we're doing nothing but forestalling the inevitable, our presence is not going to lead to a stable Iraq or a peaceful coexistence between the Shiites and the Sunnis and the Kurds. They may find peace eventually through the Law of the Claw and Fang, but not through any intervention of ours. They live in an alien world that is defined by an alien mindset, and our willful ignorance of the particular laws that govern that world is not going to move things forward.

BucEyedPea
05-11-2007, 04:37 PM
i'm not exactly a huggy person myself...

Could of fooled me with that avatar of yours. :p

Mr. Laz
05-11-2007, 04:41 PM
Could of fooled me with that avatar of yours. :p
awww ... such cute lil' kitties :)

BucEyedPea
05-11-2007, 04:43 PM
What IS with the kitty pics on this board?

Is there some sort of inside joke?

the Talking Can
05-11-2007, 04:43 PM
I've been seeing some of those mass emails floating around attributed to George Carlin. To be honest, I have serious doubts that George Carlin (at least, not the social comedian) had anything to do with them.

it's an old inside joke...long time ago someone posted one of these insanely stupid conservative chain emails and claimed it was from George Carlin (it obviously wasn't)....snopes even had an entry on it, I think

since then I blame it all on Carlin....

Nightwish
05-11-2007, 05:18 PM
it's an old inside joke...long time ago someone posted one of these insanely stupid conservative chain emails and claimed it was from George Carlin (it obviously wasn't)....snopes even had an entry on it, I think

since then I blame it all on Carlin....
Yeah, I got one of those emails a couple weeks ago. Through the first part of it, I was like, okay, I can see him saying that. But then when it got to the bottom and started talking about God, being a Believer, and all that, I knew it was fake, since he's a staunch atheist.

HemiEd
05-11-2007, 05:43 PM
it's an old inside joke...long time ago someone posted one of these insanely stupid conservative chain emails and claimed it was from George Carlin (it obviously wasn't)....snopes even had an entry on it, I think

since then I blame it all on Carlin....

So your opinion is that this is insanely stupid conservative?

I posted it because I thought it might provoke some interesting discussion, nothing more.

I am an old conservative, and proud of it. History has proven, if your a ****ing lamb, you are going to get eaten.

Nightwish
05-11-2007, 05:55 PM
So your opinion is that this is insanely stupid conservative?

I posted it because I thought it might provoke some interesting discussion, nothing more.

I am an old conservative, and proud of it. History has proven, if your a ****ing lamb, you are going to get eaten.
I haven't seen the post you guys are talking about, so I don't know if it's the same letter I received or not. The letter I received, all in all, didn't seem insanely stupid conservative to me (it seemed more Libertarian than anything), and some of the comments in it may actually have come from George Carlin. But these three comments (if we're talking about the same chain letter), make it kind of naive to believe that Carlin actually authored the letter:

And I'm proud that 'God' is written on my money.

We NEED GOD BACK IN OUR COUNTRY

I would rather live my life as if there is a God, and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't, and die to find out there is.

No way in hell George Carlin said any of that!

HemiEd
05-11-2007, 06:07 PM
I haven't seen the post you guys are talking about, so I don't know if it's the same letter I received or not. The letter I received, all in all, didn't seem insanely stupid conservative to me (it seemed more Libertarian than anything), and some of the comments in it may actually have come from George Carlin. But these three comments (if we're talking about the same chain letter), make it kind of naive to believe that Carlin actually authored the letter:

And I'm proud that 'God' is written on my money.

We NEED GOD BACK IN OUR COUNTRY

I would rather live my life as if there is a God, and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't, and die to find out there is.

No way in hell George Carlin said any of that!

No question about it, Carlin makes no bones about his beliefs. My comment was directed at the talking can using the word "these" as in, this one inclusive. Several people have made comments about this being from an email. So What?
I don't normally spend any time up here in DC, but I found this angle interesting and thought provoking. Of course, I have believed for a long time that the best defense was a good offense.

the Talking Can
05-11-2007, 06:13 PM
So your opinion is that this is insanely stupid conservative?

I posted it because I thought it might provoke some interesting discussion, nothing more.

I am an old conservative, and proud of it. History has proven, if your a ****ing lamb, you are going to get eaten.

what you posted isn't history, it's just a rant, just shit stirred together with no context, it wouldn't pass muster in a 5th grade class room....I'm sorry if you think this proves something...it only proves that people avoid actual history for stupid chain emails...

sadly, I think our politicians have about this much insight into the world in which we live...which explains why Iraq has been such a complete and total cluster ****...

Taco John
05-11-2007, 07:17 PM
A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two and who

owned a number of large industries and estates, when asked how many

German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our

attitude toward fanaticism.

"Very few people were true Nazis" he said, "but many enjoyed the

return of German pride and many more were too busy to care. I was

one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the

majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew

it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of our world

had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration

camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."

We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that

Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims

just want to live in peace.

Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely

irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better and meant to

somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe

in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this

moment in history.

It is the fanatics who march.

It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.

It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal

groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire

continent in an Islamic wave.

It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill.

It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.

It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of

rape victims and homosexuals.

The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority".... the

"silent majority".... is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in

peace. Yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of over 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

China's huge population.... it was peaceful as well. But Chinese

Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a

warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way

across Southeast Asia in an orgy of killing that included the

systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians.... most killed by

sword, shovel and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it

not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt. Yet for all

our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated

of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up,

because.... like my friend from Germany.... they will awake one day and

find that the fanatics own them and the end of their world will have

begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs

Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and

many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up

until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold.... we must pay attention to the only

group that counts.... the fanatics who threaten our way of life.



This is alarming!

I say what we do is round up all of those professing Islam, and put them into (what we can call) freedom camps. Problem solved.

Hammock Parties
05-11-2007, 07:26 PM
Retarded.

HemiEd
05-12-2007, 03:52 AM
what you posted isn't history, it's just a rant, just shit stirred together with no context, it wouldn't pass muster in a 5th grade class room....I'm sorry if you think this proves something...it only proves that people avoid actual history for stupid chain emails...

sadly, I think our politicians have about this much insight into the world in which we live...which explains why Iraq has been such a complete and total cluster ****...

I don't think I said anywhere that it proves anything. Just an interesting perspective I thought might provoke discussion. Are you saying those things did not happen? Which ones? 5th grade was a long time ago.

It is my opinion, our politicians are pretty much all the same. I quit taking any of them very serious, a long time ago. It is getting worse, not better. The latest democrat failure, John Karry, was the biggest liar to date.

StcChief
05-12-2007, 07:59 AM
repeat history..... Vietnam war closing same way as Iraq war.... again defeated by our media and those refusing to let us fight the war.

patteeu
05-12-2007, 08:57 AM
I agree. Sometimes it is. I believe that if an answer, or a resolution is to be had to the problems in Iraq, it will necessarily be through violence. But leaving our people in the middle of it resolves nothing. The violence between their factions is going to have to play itself out. As long as we keep trying to quell it, we're doing nothing but forestalling the inevitable, our presence is not going to lead to a stable Iraq or a peaceful coexistence between the Shiites and the Sunnis and the Kurds. They may find peace eventually through the Law of the Claw and Fang, but not through any intervention of ours. They live in an alien world that is defined by an alien mindset, and our willful ignorance of the particular laws that govern that world is not going to move things forward.

Do you feel the same way about the Israeli/Palestinian problem?

patteeu
05-12-2007, 09:08 AM
No question about it, Carlin makes no bones about his beliefs. My comment was directed at the talking can using the word "these" as in, this one inclusive. Several people have made comments about this being from an email. So What?
I don't normally spend any time up here in DC, but I found this angle interesting and thought provoking. Of course, I have believed for a long time that the best defense was a good offense.

Told you so. I find it interesting too, but I knew it would be ridiculed here because most of the more vocal people around here would rather blame the neocons than recognize that radical islam is an emerging threat to the west. Even if the radical islamists started assassinating westerner artists, blowing themselves up in crowds of civilians and cutting off heads of infidels, these guys would still find a way to blame us...

Mr. Laz
05-12-2007, 09:11 AM
repeat history..... Vietnam war closing same way as Iraq war.... again defeated by our media and those refusing to let us fight the war.
yea ... that's it


it's the way we ENDED these wars that is the problem.


:doh!:

Nightwish
05-12-2007, 09:29 AM
Do you feel the same way about the Israeli/Palestinian problem?
I've said as much several times. We need to let Israel and Palestine (and whoever else in the region has a legitimate beef with Israel (e.g. land was taken from them to create Israel, or Israel's ethnic cleansing created a refugee crisis in their country, etc., not just a "we hate them because they're Jewish/Muslim" beef), just have it out without any interference from us, and to the victor go the spoils. I don't believe Israel or any other nation on this planet has the "right to exist." What they have is the conditional freedom to exist for as long as they are able, unless/until someone comes along whose ability and will to take that freedom away is greater than the target country's ability and will to keep it.

patteeu
05-12-2007, 09:39 AM
I've said as much several times. We need to let Israel and Palestine (and whoever else in the region has a legitimate beef with Israel (e.g. land was taken from them to create Israel, or Israel's ethnic cleansing created a refugee crisis in their country, etc., not just a "we hate them because they're Jewish/Muslim" beef), just have it out without any interference from us, and to the victor go the spoils. I don't believe Israel or any other nation on this planet has the "right to exist." What they have is the conditional freedom to exist for as long as they are able, unless/until someone comes along whose ability and will to take that freedom away is greater than the target country's ability and will to keep it.

I don't see any reason why we should stay out of it, but I could agree with the idea of letting the parties go at it until one side is finally defeated (one way or another). Instead though, most of the people who want to get out of the way of the factions in Iraq are the same people who want to impose peace on the Israelis and Palestinians.

Nightwish
05-12-2007, 09:43 AM
I don't see any reason why we should stay out of it, but I could agree with the idea of letting the parties go at it until one side is finally defeated (one way or another). Instead though, most of the people who want to get out of the way of the factions in Iraq are the same people who want to impose peace on the Israelis and Palestinians.I agree there is a bit of a double standard there with some people. Though it has been my observation that many of those who want us out of the business in Iraq, but want to interfere in the process in Israel/Palestine, appear to be more in favor of efforts to broker peace politically than through military intervention.

Joe Seahawk
05-12-2007, 10:04 AM
I don't believe Israel or any other nation on this planet has the "right to exist." What they have is the conditional freedom to exist for as long as they are able, unless/until someone comes along whose ability and will to take that freedom away is greater than the target country's ability and will to keep it.

So we should have just let Sadaam invade Kuwait and eventually (probably ) Saudi Arabia and done nothing?

BucEyedPea
05-12-2007, 10:09 AM
...most of the more vocal people around here would rather blame the neocons than recognize that radical islam is an emerging threat to the west.
Ahem! :mad: The NeoCons ARE responsible for getting our govt to invade Iraq...and also Iran and Syria. This is not opinion but bald and basic fact. They won the day in the WH.

The "blame" line, however, is just irresponsibility. True responsibility means looking at what steps could have been avoided or policy failures. It means some self-analysis and criticism. That's just being rational. Otherwise, you're just being a victim.

If conservatives are the party of responsibility, they'd realize that for every action there is a reaction and change. It takes two to tangle, sometimes three or more. We don't live in a world where we can do whatever we want,without consequences unintended or otherwise.

This idea that Islam is a rising threat, comes from NC literature, in particular Newt Gingrich, who believes we have a right to impose our way ( including our culture Muslim's feel contains a lot of immorality) on others and when they resist we call them a threat. Lol! Very sane and rational. Sounds pretty authoritarian to me. If anyone did that to a conservative just watch the sparks fly.

BucEyedPea
05-12-2007, 10:15 AM
BTW pat, you do know the GOP has a not too infrequent cut-and-run history?

Sully
05-12-2007, 10:25 AM
Ahem! :mad: The NeoCons ARE responsible for getting our govt to invade Iraq...and also Iran and Syria. This is not opinion but bald and basic fact. They won the day in the WH.

The "blame" line, however, is just irresponsibility. True responsibility means looking at what steps could have been avoided or policy failures. It means some self-analysis and criticism. That's just being rational. Otherwise, you're just being a victim.

If conservatives are the party of responsibility, they'd realize that for every action there is a reaction and change. It takes two to tangle, sometimes three or more. We don't live in a world where we can do whatever we want,without consequences unintended or otherwise.

This idea that Islam is a rising threat, comes from NC literature, in particular Newt Gingrich, who believes we have a right to impose our way ( including our culture Muslim's feel contains a lot of immorality) on others and when they resist we call them a threat. Lol! Very sane and rational. Sounds pretty authoritarian to me. If anyone did that to a conservative just watch the sparks fly.
You should know that you'll never get anywhere with this type of thinking.
Any type of self-criticism or introspection is quickly titled "blaming America" and done away with. Why do you hate America?

BucEyedPea
05-12-2007, 10:29 AM
So we should have just let Sadaam invade Kuwait and eventually (probably ) Saudi Arabia and done nothing?
PGWI had it's own deceptions too, if you care to study it. Granted it was only one or three instead of at least 128 for this one...like babies in incubators.

The Bush Sr. administration could have stopped SH easily with words,he was stillour ally then, as SH asked first and got the green light more or less or the idea that he wouldn't be stopped by a UN coalition. Frankly, Kuwait was once part of Iraq ( the existing border was drawn by the British) and they were doing things to provoke it like slant drilling into his pipelines.

First casualty of war is always the truth.

If we insist on policing the whole world we'll be bankrupt and no longer a superpower the same way Great Britian wound up. If a nation is really sovereign that definition means able to defend it's nationhood.

Nightwish
05-12-2007, 10:41 AM
So we should have just let Sadaam invade Kuwait and eventually (probably ) Saudi Arabia and done nothing?Not exactly. That's not a parallel. In both the cases of Israel/Palestine (which is technically part of Israel), and Iraq, the issue is with conflict between rival factions within its own borders. As a member of the UN, we are bound by the terms of the UN Charter to protect other member states from invasion by outside forces (including other member states), if the sovereignty and security of the invaded state is threatened (as Kuwait's was when Iraq invaded them, and as Iraq's was when we invaded - legally, the rest of the UN should have done what they had to to eject us from Iraq and protect its sovereignty, since we violated the UN Charter by invading a country with whom we were not at war, and from whom we suffered no threat to our security or sovereignty). The Charter, however, does not bind us to step in and intervene in internal affairs between rival factions. That is their responsibility to hash out. If they ask for our help in settling those conflicts (Iraq didn't), then I see nothing wrong with participating in the process to a reasonable a degree, but I feel that we stepped beyond the "reasonable degree" line with our coddling of Israel many years ago, and they've abused it ever since - it's time they stepped up and handled their own affairs entirely).

Incidentally, I'm not sure where you're getting that "probably" Saudi Arabia thing from, as there is no indication that SH had any intention of ever invading Saudi Arabia, and even if he did, I seriously doubt they would need our help to kick him back out - SA is quite capable of defending itself.

BucEyedPea
05-12-2007, 10:59 AM
That's where you and I differ Nightwish, that we have to defend other nations, at least as much as we feel we do. Anyhow, my point here, is that traditionally conservatives have disliked the UN for this reason as it involved us in more wars as a result. The flip-flop is here we had a case where the UN stood in our way to a war...and yet conservatives complained about that.

And yet, still, nations like France we call wimps but that wimpiness is exactly what allowed us to do what we wanted instead of stopping us. Go figure.

Nightwish
05-12-2007, 11:04 AM
That's where you and I differ Nightwish, that we have to defend other nations, at least as much as we feel we do. Anyhow, my point here, is that traditionally conservatives have disliked the UN for this reason as it involved us in more wars as a result. The flip-flop is here we had a case where the UN stood in our way to a war...and yet conservatives complained about that.

And yet, still, nations like France we call wimps but that wimpiness is exactly what allowed us to do what we wanted instead of stopping us. Go figure.I'm not sure we really differ that much on this issue. I'm not saying that we have any moral obligation to defend other nations, only that as long as we are a part of the UN, the Charter we signed gives us a legal obligation to do so under certain circumstances (which were not met wrt our invasion of Iraq, but may have been met wrt to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait - depending on whether Kuwait was technically an independent and sovereign nation at the time). And I totally agree about our giving SH the green light to invade Kuwait, that was inexcusable trickery of the highest order on our part (though I'm not sure that Glaspie actually knew we didn't intend to honor that position when she gave it).

BucEyedPea
05-12-2007, 11:11 AM
I see.

(though I'm not sure that Glaspie actually knew we didn't intend to honor that position when she gave it).


Oh, I'd agree with that too. Glapsie was just the messenger.

HemiEd
05-12-2007, 06:23 PM
Told you so. I find it interesting too, but I knew it would be ridiculed here because most of the more vocal people around here would rather blame the neocons than recognize that radical islam is an emerging threat to the west. Even if the radical islamists started assassinating westerner artists, blowing themselves up in crowds of civilians and cutting off heads of infidels, these guys would still find a way to blame us...

You were right, the only thing that surprised me was the problem with posting an email. Why does it matter if we pull a subject from an email?

penchief
05-12-2007, 06:47 PM
History is a struggle between common sense and greed.

So the answer to your question is, "yes," dependent upon who controls the reins at any one particular point in history.

Ultra Peanut
05-13-2007, 05:10 AM
http://imgred.com/http://ancai045.blogchina.com/inc/925037.jpg

Logical
05-13-2007, 04:51 PM
You were right, the only thing that surprised me was the problem with posting an email. Why does it matter if we pull a subject from an email?I have no problem with the email but the formatting is really annoying.

Demonpenz
05-13-2007, 06:21 PM
A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War Two and who

owned a number of large industries and estates, when asked how many

German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our

attitude toward fanaticism.

"Very few people were true Nazis" he said, "but many enjoyed the

return of German pride and many more were too busy to care. I was

one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the

majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew

it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of our world

had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration

camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."

We are told again and again by "experts" and "talking heads" that

Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims

just want to live in peace.

Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely

irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better and meant to

somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe

in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this

moment in history.

It is the fanatics who march.

It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide.

It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal

groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire

continent in an Islamic wave.

It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor kill.

It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque.

It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of

rape victims and homosexuals.

The hard quantifiable fact is that the "peaceful majority".... the

"silent majority".... is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in

peace. Yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of over 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

China's huge population.... it was peaceful as well. But Chinese

Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese individual prior to World War 2 was not a

warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way

across Southeast Asia in an orgy of killing that included the

systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians.... most killed by

sword, shovel and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it

not be said that the majority of Rwandans were "peace loving"?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt. Yet for all

our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated

of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence.

Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don't speak up,

because.... like my friend from Germany.... they will awake one day and

find that the fanatics own them and the end of their world will have

begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs

Afghans, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and

many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up

until it was too late.

As for us who watch it all unfold.... we must pay attention to the only

group that counts.... the fanatics who threaten our way of life.


no

patteeu
05-13-2007, 07:51 PM
BTW pat, you do know the GOP has a not too infrequent cut-and-run history?

I honestly don't care about the GOP. I certainly won't support Republicans in Congress (or the President for that matter) if they go soft on Iraq. On Meet the Press this weekend, John McCain said he'd still be in favor of fighting to win in Iraq even if every other Republican in Congress abandons the position. I'll be supporting McCain at that point.

go bo
05-13-2007, 08:02 PM
Told you so. I find it interesting too, but I knew it would be ridiculed here because most of the more vocal people around here would rather blame the neocons than recognize that radical islam is an emerging threat to the west. Even if the radical islamists started assassinating westerner artists, blowing themselves up in crowds of civilians and cutting off heads of infidels, these guys would still find a way to blame us...we recognize that radical islam is an emerging threat to the west...

for some time now...

well, some of us anyway...

actually, radical islamists were an emerging threat before they started blowing up our embassies and ships...

they're not emerging any more, radical nutjobs are a very real and increasing threat to all of us in the "civilized' world...

btw, what are westerner artists?

do we have any of them left around these parts?

and why would the terrorists hate artists so much?

HemiEd
05-14-2007, 07:29 AM
I have no problem with the email but the formatting is really annoying.

I have no idea how to change that, sorry.

we recognize that radical islam is an emerging threat to the west...

for some time now...

well, some of us anyway...

actually, radical islamists were an emerging threat before they started blowing up our embassies and ships...

they're not emerging any more, radical nutjobs are a very real and increasing threat to all of us in the "civilized' world...

btw, what are westerner artists?

do we have any of them left around these parts?

and why would the terrorists hate artists so much?

Wouldn't westerner artists be musicians etc.? It has been my perception they hate about anything we find desirable, that is of man's making.

patteeu
05-14-2007, 07:52 AM
we recognize that radical islam is an emerging threat to the west...

for some time now...

well, some of us anyway...

Some of you do. Plenty of you don't seem to though. :)

actually, radical islamists were an emerging threat before they started blowing up our embassies and ships...

they're not emerging any more, radical nutjobs are a very real and increasing threat to all of us in the "civilized' world...

btw, what are westerner artists?

do we have any of them left around these parts?

and why would the terrorists hate artists so much?

I was thinking of Theo van Gogh although I could see how you might have gotten the impression I was talking about someone like Louis L'Amour.

go bo
05-14-2007, 12:01 PM
i used to have a great big box full of nearly every louis l'amour western novel there was...


always fresh and always entertaining...

mr. l'amour was one of the best westerner writers evah!!

Ultra Peanut
05-14-2007, 12:15 PM
You were right, the only thing that surprised me was the problem with posting an email. Why does it matter if we pull a subject from an email?Brothers and Sisters, please read and pass along. We must remember this at the polls, and choose wisely. Whites-only covenant shows Bush's true colors.

Texas governor and Republican presidential candidate, George W. Bush recently sent waves through the Black community following a discovery that a Dallas house he sold in 1995 carries a racial covenant, which restricts the sale of the house to white people only. Bush and his wife, Laura, bought the house in 1988. How is this legal? It isn't.

The Fair Housing Act prevents the enforcement of racial covenants. However, many houses still carry them as a remnant of the Jim Crow era when it was common practice to exclude Blacks from buying houses and living in white neighborhoods. The Bush campaign responded with a online statement saying that the racial covenant was void and that Bush was unaware of it when he sold the house. Yeah right! It's extremely irresponsible for a public figure to accidentally overlook such a stipulation. Did Bush really know but just didn't care to do anything about it? The real estate agent who prepared the papers for the sale said that she notified Bush of the racial covenant but that he signed the papers anyway.

Perhaps equally shocking as the racial covenant is the fact that the media has swept this story under the rug.

Have you heard about it in any of the newspapers you read or on any of the news programs you watch?

Do you give Bush the benefit of the doubt?

Was he unaware of the racial covenant during the time he and his family lived in the house, or did he know and decide that it wasn't worth having?

Should HUD initiate a law that requires all homeowners to wipe racial covenants from their deeds?

* Did the media deliberately fail to cover this story?

* Do you think it would have been handled differently if a similar story was revealed about a Black candidate?

Ultra Peanut
05-14-2007, 12:17 PM
I am a senior partner in the firm of Midland Consulting Limited: Private Investigators and Security Consultants. We are conducting a standard process investigation on behalf of HSBC, the International Banking Conglomerate.

This investigation involves a client who shares the same surname with you and also the circumstances surrounding investments made by this client at HSBC Republic, the Private Banking arm of HSBC. The HSBC Private Banking client died in testate and nominated no successor in title over the investments made with the bank. The essence of this communication with you is to request you provide us information/comments on any or all of the four issues:

1-Are you aware of any relative/relation who shares your same name whose last known contact address was Brussels Belgium?

2-Are you aware of any investment of considerable value made by such a person at the Private Banking Division of HSBC Bank PLC?

3-Born on the 1st of october 1941

4-Can you establish beyond reasonable doubt your eligibility to assume status of successor in title to the deceased?

It is pertinent that you inform us ASAP whether or not you are familiar with this personality that we may put an end to this communication with you and our inquiries surrounding this personality.

You must appreciate that we are constrained from providing you with more detailed information at this point. Please respond to this mail as soon as possible to afford us the opportunity to close this investigation.

Thank you for accommodating our enquiry.

Eleazar
05-14-2007, 12:38 PM
Texas governor and Republican presidential candidate, George W. Bush recently sent waves through the Black community following a discovery that a Dallas house he sold in 1995 carries a racial covenant, which restricts the sale of the house to white people only.

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/bush.htm

|Zach|
05-14-2007, 12:43 PM
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/bush.htm
I think this was a parody of e-mail posting in the first place.

Ultra Peanut
05-14-2007, 01:16 PM
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/bush.htmWell, THANKS for telling everyone where I found my material. :mad: