# Dateline: norway, Norway and islam



## billc (Mar 25, 2011)

An aricle from bigpeace.com about multiculturalism in Norway.

http://bigpeace.com/nmay/2011/03/25...en-threatened-if-they-bring-salami-to-school/

The article below was published today in _Aftenposten_, one of the major Norwegian newspapers:
*&#8220;It is difficult to be ethnic Norwegian here&#8221;*
Patrick Åserud has had enough of pressure about salami-free food, blond-hate and horrible language skills.
&#8220;I will not let my children grow up here. I do not dare to.&#8221;
He has made up his mind. After spending his whole life in Groruddalen [a *district of Oslo*], the developments of the past year have frightened Patrick Åserud into leaving. In the coming summer he will move with his wife and kindergarten-age daughter from Furuset [in Groruddalen], and out of the city.
He is moving from a local area he thinks is on its way to falling apart due to the heavy weight of failed integration.

*Worrying stories*
&#8220;It has become difficult to be an ethnic Norwegian in Groruddalen. There are huge language problems, and additionally a pressure that we [Norwegians] must adjust to norms that feel completely foreign to us, who have a Western lifestyle and mindset.
&#8220;There are kindergartens where almost no children or parents speak Norwegian, and there are schools where children are threatened with beatings if they bring salami with them for their school lunch.
&#8220;Girls are bullied for being blond, and they colour their hair dark to avoid it and fit in. It is especially not okay to be gay at the school, nor atheist, and especially not Jewish.
&#8220;Over the last three years it has been particularly frightening to watch and hear about everything that happens,&#8221; says Åserud.​


----------



## Empty Hands (Mar 25, 2011)

I severely doubt it.  According to the CIA world fact book, Norway is 94.4% Norwegian, 3.6% other European, and 2% other.  Their migration rate is 43rd in the world.  Not exactly a hotspot of immigration.


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 25, 2011)

As with anything else in this field, it depends on local concentrations.

Britiain as a whole has a too high population transfer rate in my opinion but the local concentrations in areas of certain regions does have the same effect on we poor indigs that is described above.

There is a reason why there are BNP city councillors, even tho' their politics are so far right that a chap named Adolf would recognise them and they have been speciifcally told by the Queen to stop using references to Winston Churchill in their literature because it debases his memory.

People are tolerant and welcoming right up to the point where they feel they are being displaced and disadvantaged - then the racism takes root.  It's not great but it is very human, sad to say.


----------



## granfire (Mar 25, 2011)

I guess the poor sap lives in the one neighborhood in Oslo....
Last time I looked, there was a lot of Norway and not so many people


----------



## Archangel M (Jul 25, 2011)

This thread... and this one too. Are eerily prophetic in light of what just happened.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2011)

You've got to love right wing propaganda, it never changes just the victims, once it was the Jews, now it's the Muslims. Same old story...they are taking our jobs, they are diluting our culture, they are pushing us out yeah yeah. Stir it up and get the mobs on the street or in this case a killer out. Slag off all other countries, show how the 'socialists' are ruining the police, the country, the economy etc etc etc ad nauseum. You've got to laugh or else you'd cry at history constantly repeating itself.


----------



## Archangel M (Jul 25, 2011)

I could care less about the opinions in these articles. I just find the syncronicity of these Norway/Islam?Car Burning/etc articles strange. These issues seem to have obviously influenced this nutter and here they are in the news days before the tragedy.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2011)

Archangel M said:


> I could care less about the opinions in these articles. I just find the syncronicity of these Norway/Islam?Car Burning/etc articles strange. These issues seem to have obviously influenced this nutter and here they are in the news days before the tragedy.




According to the killer he's been over ten years of more in the planning of this atrocity, he was in the UK in 2002 meeting with the English Defence League, a right wing neo Nazi group here. 
I suspect that the reporting of cars burning etc has had little influence on the killer as his views were set in place very firmly a long time ago.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14266140


----------



## Carol (Jul 25, 2011)

Which makes the actions even more curious.   The English Defense League was borne of drunken Soccer Casuals bounded by a common hate of things Islamic.

He may have had the extremist view for a long time, but when it became time to turn those views in to actual mechanical actions,  it strikes me as a bit odd that his chosen pattern was less like a hooligan Chav, and closer to that of Al-Qaeda.

Granted, that's just my view from far away.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2011)

Carol said:


> Which makes the actions even more curious. The English Defense League was borne of drunken Soccer Casuals bounded by a common hate of things Islamic.
> 
> He may have had the extremist view for a long time, but when it became time to turn those views in to actual mechanical actions, it strikes me as a bit odd that his chosen pattern was less like a hooligan Chav, and closer to that of Al-Qaeda.




Less like Al Queda and very like Combat 18, one of Britain's finest right wing neo Nazi groups. The soccer casuals aren't drunks btw, they are well organised intelligent groups. They don't fight and attack randomly, they have scouts and will plot ambushes as well as try to outwit the police. They are rascist and have links to the BNP as does the English Defence League. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Defence_League

We are currently investigating EDL membership in the Armed Forces, one thing they do is email people quite rascist but reasonable sounding views, Sukerkin posted one up not long ago I'm afraid. They are seeking to appear reasonable to ordinary voters.

If you can watch the film 'Rise of the Foot Soldier', graphic violence but good portrayal of the football gangs.


----------



## Carol (Jul 25, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Less like Al Queda and very like Combat 18, one of Britain's finest right wing neo Nazi groups. The soccer casuals aren't drunks btw, they are well organised intelligent groups. They don't fight and attack randomly, they have scouts and will plot ambushes as well as try to outwit the police. They are rascist and have links to the BNP as does the English Defence League.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Defence_League
> 
> We are currently investigating EDL membership in the Armed Forces, one thing they do is email people quite rascist but reasonable sounding views, Sukerkin posted one up not long ago I'm afraid. They are seeking to appear reasonable to ordinary voters.
> ...



Thank you very much :asian:  I'll watch for that (with remote in hand...LOL)


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2011)

Carol said:


> Thank you very much :asian: I'll watch for that (with remote in hand...LOL)



I have a friend in it lol, Dave Legeno, an MMA fighter here. I believe 'Green Street' covers the same scenerio though I haven't seen it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Street


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 25, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> We are currently investigating EDL membership in the Armed Forces, one thing they do is email people quite rascist but reasonable sounding views, Sukerkin posted one up not long ago I'm afraid. They are seeking to appear reasonable to ordinary voters.



Ahhh.  I assume you mean that one about pensions and benefits, Tez?  So that came from the EDL originally?  I'd investigated it the day after putting it in a thread and it seems to have made the rounds of several countries with lashed up fictional figures in it that don't bear scrutiny.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2011)

Sukerkin said:


> Ahhh. I assume you mean that one about pensions and benefits, Tez? So that came from the EDL originally? I'd investigated it the day after putting it in a thread and it seems to have made the rounds of several countries with lashed up fictional figures in it that don't bear scrutiny.




It's hard to pin down exactly where they come from but many bear resemblances to certain writing styles that come from these groups.
 Many of the neo Nazi groups have the same MO, they want to make ordinary people think that things are far worse than they are, that immigration is a bigger problem than it really is. It doesn't help that immigrants do want to settle near each other making it seem as if there are more than there are really. If the immigrants were spread through the country you'd actually hardly notice them. Immigrants btw include many Gurkhas and their families who stay on here, with permission, some have also been targeted by the neo Nazi groups, quite nastily in some cases, they are called mercenaries and told to 'go home'.
http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2009/05/lumley-bnp-sickos-slur-hero-gurkha.html


----------



## billc (Jul 25, 2011)

Hmmm...right wing neo-nazis, not possible.  Nazism, wether neo or not, is a left wing socialist movement.  Like other socialist movements they pick out a group, wether jews, capitalists, muslims, and use the as targets.  They see groups and use them against each other to gain power.  Now American conservatives, of which I am one, do not do that.  We value the individual, and support limits on the government so that it cannot persecute groups that are out of disfavor with the socialists or the country in general.   Here is a video, that I just stumbled upon that points to the tendency to violence in socialist groups.  I bring up american conservatives because already you have the left over here trying to link the nutjob, murderer to the "rightwing."  They also try to make him out to be a christian, but that would be untrue as well.  Christ never called on the actions this man took.


the video "The soviet Story."
At 4 minutes it discusses Marx's plan for those people too far behind the curve of history
At 6:18 it discussess the nazis and communists and how close they were to being the same
At 9 minutes you get a speech from George Bernard Shaw about killing useless people
At 12 minutes you get the invasion of Poland and the cooperation between the nazis and the communists.

Be right back with the link.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 25, 2011)

Hands up everyone who thinks the Nazis are left wing, ok, that's just the one of you then. What is interesting is that you don't believe in capital letters.


----------



## billc (Jul 25, 2011)

Yeah, Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von mises can't raise their hands cause they are dead.  You can read their thoughts on the matter as well as Thomas Sowell, another economist, and several others.  Watch the video, it is enlightening as well.

http://mises.org/daily/1937

From the article:

The basis of the claim that Nazi Germany was capitalist was the fact that most industries in Nazi Germany appeared to be left in private hands.
What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed _in name only_ under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was _the German government_ and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the _substantive powers of ownership_: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.
_De facto_ government ownership of the means of production, as Mises termed it, was logically implied by such fundamental collectivist principles embraced by the Nazis as that the common good comes before the private good and the individual exists as a means to the ends of the State. If the individual is a means to the ends of the State, so too, of course, is his property. Just as he is owned by the State, his property is also owned by the State.
---------------------------------------

SOUNDS RIGHT WING TO ME...NOT.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 25, 2011)

nazi's were leftist


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 25, 2011)

And North Korea is Democratic, because, well, it says so in their name.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 25, 2011)

thats just silly


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 25, 2011)

Perhaps we should think about forwarding all such threads to the Anti-Defamation League?  I'm sure that their opinion would carry some practical weight as to what the political leanings of the Nazi Party were?  

Maybe not.  But it is very tempting, just to see if we actually got a reply :lol:.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jul 25, 2011)

Twin Fist said:


> thats just silly



It is as silly as saying the Nazis were socialists because they said so in their name.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jul 25, 2011)

i didnt say that


----------



## Big Don (Jul 25, 2011)

From the NY Times following the Fort Hood shooting:
November 6, 2009
Army Doctor Held in Ft. Hood Rampage 
By ROBERT D. McFADDEN

An Army  psychiatrist facing deployment to one of Americas war zones killed 13  people and wounded 30 others on Thursday in a shooting rampage with two  handguns at the sprawling Fort Hood Army post in central Texas, military officials said.

It was one of the worst mass shootings ever at a military base in the United States. 
The gunman, who was still alive after being shot four times, was  identified by law enforcement authorities as Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, 39,  who had been in the service since 1995. Major Hasan was about to be  deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, said Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas.

Clad in a military uniform and firing an automatic pistol and another  weapon, Major Hasan, a balding, chubby-faced man with heavy eyebrows,  sprayed bullets inside a crowded medical processing center for soldiers  returning from or about to be sent overseas, military officials said.
 The victims, nearly all military personnel but including two  civilians, were cut down in clusters, the officials said. Witnesses told  military investigators that medics working at the center tore open the  clothing of the dead and wounded to get at the wounds and administer  first aid.
 As the shooting unfolded, military police and civilian officers of  the Department of the Army responded and returned the gunmans fire,  officials said, adding that Major Hasan was shot by a first-responder,  who was herself wounded in the exchange. 

From the NY Times July 23d:
Oslo Suspect Wrote of Fear of Islam and Plan for War
By STEVEN ERLANGER and SCOTT SHANE              OSLO  The Norwegian man charged Saturday with a pair of attacks in Oslo  that killed at least 92 people left behind a detailed manifesto  outlining his preparations and calling for a Christian war to defend  Europe against the threat of Muslim domination, according to Norwegian  and American officials familiar with the investigation.        
  As stunned Norwegians grappled with the deadliest attack in the country  since World War II, a portrait began to emerge of the suspect, Anders Behring Breivik,  32. The police identified him as a right-wing fundamentalist Christian,  while acquaintances described him as a gun-loving Norwegian obsessed  with what he saw as the threats of multiculturalism and Muslim immigration.        

  We are not sure whether he was alone or had help, a police official,  Roger Andresen, said at a televised news conference. What we know is  that he is right wing and a Christian fundamentalist.        
END EXCERPTS
Compare and contrast the two stories. Major Hasan screamed "Allahu Ackbar" as he killed, and yet, is not identified as a Muslim extremist. Breivik did not scream any slogan, and yet is called a Christian Extremist in what has long been called "The Paper of Record". But, there is no bias... none.


----------



## billc (Jul 25, 2011)

It has more to do with the actual economic practices of the Nazis and not just the fact that they properly identify themselves as socialists.  You should try to read some of the articles I have found on the topic.  The video, "The Soviet Story," posted above has some interesting points as well.

Here is one of many:

http://knol.google.com/k/hitler-was-a-socialist#

From the article:

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

also:

This finds its counterpart in the academic literature too. Scholarly works on 
Hitler's deeds continue to emerge (e.g. Feuchtwanger, 1995) and in a survey of 
the history of Western civilization, Lipson (1993) named Hitlerism and the 
nuclear bomb as the two great evils of the 20th century. Stalin's tyranny lasted 
longer, Pol Pot killed a higher proportion of his country's population and 
Hitler was not the first Fascist but the name of Hitler nonetheless hangs over 
the entire 20th century as something inescapably and inexplicably malign. It 
seems doubtful that even the whole of the 21st century will erase from the minds 
of thinking people the still largely unfulfilled need to understand how and why 
Hitler became so influential and wrought so much evil.


----------



## billc (Jul 25, 2011)

From Ph.D. Rudy Rummel: (professor emeritus in Political Science)

http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/2009/05/23/hitler-was-a-socialist/

From the article:

Two prevailing historical myths that the left has propagated successfully is that Hitler was a far right wing conservative and was democratically elected in 1933 (a blow at bourgeois  democracy and conservatives).  Actually, he was defeated twice in the national elections (he became chancellor in a smoke-filled-room appointment by those German politicians who thought they could control him &#8212; see &#8220;What? Hitler Was Not Elected?&#8221;) and as head of the National Socialist German Workers&#8217; Party, he considered himself a socialist, and was one by the evidence of his writings and the his economic policies. 
To be clear, National Socialism differs from Marxism in its nationalism, emphasis on folk history and culture, idolization of the leader, and its racism. But the Nazi and Marxist-Leninists shared a faith in government, an absolute ruler,  totalitarian control over all significant  economic and social matters for the good of the working man, concentration camps, and genocide/democide as an effective government policy (only in his last years did Stalin plan for his own Holocaust of the Jews).



And from Friedrich Hayek, Nobel prize winning economist:

http://www.brookesnews.com/091910hayeknazis.html

From the article:


The persecution of the Marxists, and 
of democrats in general, tends to obscure the fundamental fact that National 
"Socialism" is a genuine socialist movement, whose leading ideas are the final 
fruit of the anti-liberal tendencies which have been steadily gaining ground in 
Germany since the later part of the Bismarckian era, and which led the majority 
of the German intelligentsia first to "socialism of the chair" and later to 
Marxism in its social-democratic or communist form. 
One of the main reasons why the 
socialist character of National Socialism has been quite generally unrecognized, 
is, no doubt, its alliance with the nationalist groups which represent the great 
industries and the great landowners.  But this merely proves that these groups 
too, as they have since learnt to their bitter disappointment, have, at least 
partly, been mistaken as to the nature of the movement.  But only partly 
because, and this is the most characteristic feature of modern Germany, many 
capitalists are themselves strongly influenced by socialistic ideas, and have 
not sufficient belief in capitalism to defend it with a clear conscience.
-----------------------------------

SO, A PH.d. IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AND A NOBEL PRIZE WINNING ECONOMIST BOTH BELIEVE HITLER WAS A LEFTY AND A SOCIALIST...HMMMM...I GUESS THEY WERE JUST FOOLED BY THE WORD "SOCIALIST" TOO.


----------



## Blade96 (Jul 26, 2011)

So you admit that nazism and Marx are not the same. But yes as for hitler and lenin/stalin I would agree with you that those ones had stuff in common. But lenin/stalin had distorted Marx.

Btw billi, little socialist, you can come out the closet now, we know your secret


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

Did you watch the video on this thread, "The Soviet Story," and the time marked points at 4, 6:18, 9 and 12 minutes.  Marx's idea for the groups that had not achieved a capitalist state is quite chilling.  I have always said that communism and nazism are different types of socialism, but that they are both socialism.  They have some superficial differnces which is what confuses so many people.  They share a dislike of people of the jewish faith, they both hate capitalists, they both believe the individual should be controlled by the state.   They both believed that the state should control the economy.  The video also talks about how similar marxism and nazism are.  As I have said before, chocalte, vanilla and strawberry are different flavors but they are all types of ice cream.


what always confused me is when people use the left-right scale for the different groups.  If the left, represented by the socialists, is marked by a large government, then the opposite, being a left-right scale, would be a belief in a smaller government.  So, socialists, of the communist model, believe in large government (yes, I know that communism is the final stage once you pass through the socialist stage, but the guys who called themselves communists had an all controlling government)  so the opposite would have to be a group that believed in a small government, which would be for example, American conservatives.  The nazis believed in a large controlling government, not a small one.  so the left-right system breaks down right there.  The scale below from an American thinker article, and I believe also from a youtube video seem a little more accurate.

From the article the visual of the political spectrum is in the article)

There is something nonsensical about a political spectrum that spans the range between tyranny and ... tyranny. If one end of the spectrum is the home of tyranny, then shouldn't the opposite end of the spectrum be the home of liberty, tyranny's opposite? The new spectrum is a rough measurement of liberty: very little liberty on the left end, quite a bit on the right end. At the left extreme reside the hard tyrannies of communism and fascism, as seen historically in such places as the Soviet Union, China, Germany, or North Korea. A bit to the right are the softer tyrannies of socialism, as commonly practiced in Western Europe. Liberalism comes next, then "moderation." Moving further along the spectrum toward greater liberty, one finds conservatism, and finally libertarianism.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/rethinking_the_political_spect.html


----------



## Cirdan (Jul 26, 2011)

Thanks billi, it is good to know I only live in a "softer" tyranny :lol2:


----------



## Blade96 (Jul 26, 2011)

I watched it, one thing i noticed is that one of the dudes speculates, he said I can't find anything about holocaust before marx so...it must have started with him right? He speculated on the basis of no evidence.  And poland - its leaving out history. Stalin did not sign that ten year non agression pact with hitler right away because theyagreed with each other and were natural allies. He first sought a alliance with the west. and they rejected him (munich agreement) Churchill later said they paid dearly for ignoring the russians. Stalin signed that alliance cause he needed time to build up his army.


----------



## Tez3 (Jul 26, 2011)

Americans have different definitions of what constitutes left and right from Europeans, being a 'liberal' in America is totally different from being a liberal in Europe so putting American definitions on European politics leads to this argument. To Americans socialism is communism not socialism as we know it here. FEw Americans I think can understand European politics escpically things like the Chritian Socialist parties, the Green Patries and the Christians Communists parties we have. 

My country recognises the Nazis as being right wing fascists and the neo Nazi groups as being right wing, as you can read from the reports from Norway the killer there is a self confessed right wing conservative who belongs to neo Nazi group/s. What he believes is understand in Europe to be right wing, it may not fit what American believe is right wing but it's how everyone else believes.Whats more the neo nazi groups themselves recognise and call themselves right wing. Constantly putting American definitions and values on something non American is going to cause arguments as you see, twisting European history to make it suit those American definitions is wrong. The assumption that socialism and communism are the same and one leads to the other is nonsense, there is no country that has gone from being socialist to communist in Europe, the countries who were 'communist' such as Yugoslavia were actually nothing more than dictatorships disguised as communist states. Considering what happened to Yugoslavia after the fall of Tito one wondrs if actually that was such a bad thing!

This 'big' government thing is a smokescreen, the USA has from what we can see a far 'bigger' government than many European socialist countries, you have far less freedoms in many aspects than our countries. That may be how you like it but until you understand European history, politics and definitions as we do you will never get anywhere arguing with us.  Until you understand socialism as it pertains to Europeans you are merely ranting, if your 'proof' thinks Norway is a 'soft' tyranny then it just proves that you have no idea what you are talking about.


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

Perhaps you could explain what the "right" means in Europe and what the left means as well?


----------



## Sukerkin (Jul 26, 2011)

I am pretty sure I already did ... or I intended to and maybe decided it would be wasted effort as those here supporting the American equivalent of the BNP {or Republican Party as some deluded people call it} wouldn't really read it.

Or maybe they would but then just pick a bit of phrasing they could twist to mean something vile, or the reverse of what was intended and rant on about that.

I've seen it happen too many times over six years here and every now and again I exceed my 'Fill Level'.  It is certain that there are far worse examples of devoted political allegiance, with less wit and common sense, out in Net-land but what I've seen here is quite bad enough.

After this last gasp of awesome political acuity over the massacre in Norway, I'm not interested in playing the game any more.  If someone asks for my opinion then I'll give it but that's it, other than 'Official' involvement of course.


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

THe "he was christian," aspect of the atrocity is addressed by Bill O'reilly in this video clip...

http://bigpeace.com/abostom/2011/07...ard-regarding-norwegian-mass-murderer-brevik/


----------



## elder999 (Jul 26, 2011)

billcihak said:


> THe "he was christian," aspect of the atrocity is addressed by Bill O'reilly in this video clip...
> 
> http://bigpeace.com/abostom/2011/07...ard-regarding-norwegian-mass-murderer-brevik/



.....and over on the Stormfront forum, the neo-Nazis are saying this guy wasn't a Nazi; he was a Zionist! :lol:

Both you Bills-O'reilly and _cihak_-sound just like 'em, _Sounds like...._ :lfao:


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

As an opponent of all the forms of socialism, nazism, facism and communism, I always find it funny when the other side of an argurment starts insinutating the "that guy sounds like a nazi," a really interesting tactic, typical.  Next should be the mental illness insinuation, the racist insinuation, it is a typical tactic that is used to not debate but to quietly attack and intimidate in order to silence.   Nice Elder, subtley done.


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

Notice, I didn't say he wasn't a nazi, I said he was a nazi and that made him a socialist.   It is others who say he wasn't a lefty and he wasn't a socialist.  I believe that he is.  Totalitarian perspectives live on the left.  To use the government to discriminate against a group of people is a lefty habit.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 26, 2011)

billcihak said:


> As an opponent of all the forms of socialism, nazism, facism and communism, I always find it funny when the other side of an argurment starts insinutating the "that guy sounds like a nazi," a really interesting tactic, typical. Next should be the mental illness insinuation, the racist insinuation, it is a typical tactic that is used to not debate but to quietly attack and intimidate in order to silence. Nice Elder, subtley done.



_*PANCAKE BUNNY??????!!!!!!!!

*_:lfao:


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 26, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Perhaps you could explain what the "right" means in Europe and what the left means as well?



Left and Right it all depends on which side of the room you sit


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

Well, since I sit on the American "Right" the nazis are obviously, as socialists, on the left.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jul 26, 2011)

Yes but in England they drive on the left and in the US we drive on the right it all depends on yor location


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

Fair point on the driving issue.  They also have funny names for elevators, buses and garbage cans, don't they?


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

The false point that the nazis identify with christianity is addressed in this article from the American Thinker website:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_nazis_and_christianity.html

from the article:


[FONT=times new roman,times]This hostility or indifference toward Christianity in Europe, and especially in Germany, led naturally to a profound anti-Christian sentiment in Nazi Germany.  Nazis, more than most Germans, were indifferent or hostile to Christianity.  Hitler originally appeared to just ignore Christianity.  Dark and Essex write in their 1938 book that _Mein Kampf _ has few passages which in any way refer to religion, none that  refer to Hitler's own personal religion, or to the teaching of the Bible, nor any branch of Christian teaching.  Jacob Marcus in his 1934 book by the Union of American Hebrew Congregations notes that "Though his parents were both Catholics, Hitler himself has apparently no interest in any organized religion."   Marcus also has an entire section in his book about Nazi "anti-Christian anti-Semitism."  Rauschning in 1938 wrote [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]"The purpose of the National Socialism fight against Christianity is the same:  the total destruction of the last and most deep-rooted support of the forces of conservation.  The destruction of the spirit of Christianity in Germany is certainly more far-reaching than appears on the surface...Such vestiges of living Christianity as remain are steadily degenerating in the direction of a superficial and unthinking deism" and that ultimate goal as "...the total abolition of Christianity, which is not a mere philosophical fad of the National Socialists but an iron necessity of their system."[/FONT]​[FONT=times new roman,times]Within a year of taking power, Hitler was saying:  [/FONT]
[FONT=times new roman,times]"Christianity was incapable of uniting the Germans, and that only an entirely new world-theory was capable of doing so."  [/FONT]​


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

How the nazis became "right" and the communists "left."   An article from the american thinker...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/the_taming_of_the_masses.html

this explains why there is confusion:

[FONT=times new roman,times]Beginning in the 1930s, at Stalin's direction, communists in the West publicly began to proclaim that they were on the opposite end of the sociopolitical spectrum from what we now call the "fascist" or "right-wing" movements of Europe.  In fact, the Fascisti in Italy, the Nazis in Germany, and the Communists in the Soviet Union were all socialists.  But the Soviet-backed communists in Europe became embroiled in a deadly power struggle over which socialist party was going to rule the European masses.  So they decided to delegitimize the other socialist parties.  This was expedited by the simple but effective Orwellian label "counter-revolutionary," which placed any number of socialist groups on the opposite end of the sociopolitical spectrum from the European communists, who by self-anointment became the "true" socialists.  To cement this distinction, the Communists started calling themselves "left-wing" revolutionaries and labeled anyone who did not accept their claim to supremacy "right-wing" reactionaries. [/FONT]

[FONT=times new roman,times]Most twentieth-century history books accept the false "left-wing" label propagated by communists and socialists.  They teach that European communists of the 1930s were ultimately suppressed by the Nazis and the Fascisti and that the Axis powers of Germany, Italy, and Japan thereafter went on the killing spree we call World War II.  According to this version of history, the "left-wing" Soviet socialists were attacked by the "right-wing" Nazi fascists, and the Soviet military swung into action in June of 1941 to defend itself from "right-wing" aggression.  [/FONT]


----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

Elder, what, no picture of he pancake bunny?  You dissapoint.


----------



## elder999 (Jul 26, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Elder, what, no picture of he pancake bunny? You dissapoint.



'droid.


----------



## granfire (Jul 26, 2011)




----------



## billc (Jul 26, 2011)

Now I feel better.


----------

