Glazov exposes the Left

[redunderthebed]

Please find me a quotation that shows a western politician or academic extolling the virtues of Hitler the way someone like Chomsky did of the Hanoi regime.

In fifteen years that have followed this resolve, he has succeeded in restoring Germany to the most powerful position in Europe, and not only has he restored the position of his country, but he has even, to a very great extent, reversed the results of the Great War.... the vanquished are in the process of becoming the victors and the victors the vanquished.... whatever else might be thought about these exploits they are certainly among the most remarkable in the whole history of the world.

It is not the Germany of the first decade that followed the war- broken, dejected and bowed down with a sense of apprehension and impotence. It is now full of hope and confidence, and of a renewed sense of determination to lead its own life without interference from any influence outside its own frontiers. One man has accomplished this miracle. He is a born leader of men. A magnetic and dynamic personality with a single-minded purpose, a resolute will and a dauntless heart.

I have never met a happier people than the Germans and Hitler is one of the greatest men. The old trust him; the young idolise him. It is the worship of a national hero who has saved his country.

He has a supreme intellect. I have known only two other men to whom I could apply such distinction - Lord Northcliffe and Lloyd George. If one puts a question to Hitler, he gives an immediate, brilliant clear answer. There is no human being living whose promise on important matters I would trust more readily.

When I said that Herr Hitler's action was right and inevitable, the storm of abuse that was about to burst on me was suddenly checked by Mr. Lloyd George saying exactly the same thing. It is inconceivable that a single vote should be cast against him.

I could go on.

This got me thinking XC, so I tried to think if there was a difference.... and there is. Once Nazi Germany became a threat to peace in Europe and to Britain especially I don't think these men had much praise for Hitler. Certainly they praised him in the above passages, but I doubt they rooted for him to win and conquer Britain in WWII. I think this is the critical difference here, and especially with regards to post WWII conflicts. The leftists ROOTED for the Viet Cong, they hoped they would kill and expel American soldiers. This is the critical difference here.

Its simple Hitler was a better alternative to the right and the establishment in Europe (and elsewhere) than the Communists they where willing to ignore abhorrent anti-democratic and anti-semitic parts so to keep the commies out.Way to go 10-12 million people died because western europe thought hitler was a good guy because he hated communists.They thought he wouldn't get to the point of bombing the crap out of britain they could manipulate him for their own ends and for germany to hand over money and anything else they had for WWI "reparations" they were dead wrong.

Viet Cong was liberation movement that had being fighting colonialism long long before the yanks turned up. They didnt want US soldiers dead they just wanted their country that belonged to them back and independent and unified and not a toy of the colonial powers.The left weren't cheering the deaths of US soldier you ignoramus they were cheering an oppressed people standing up for themselves.....something of which you appreciate with the founding fathers no?.They fought violently against the poms occupying what they thought to be their country whats the difference?.

Get your head out of your arse and stop watching fox news.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Its simple Hitler was a better alternative to the right and the establishment in Europe (and elsewhere) than the Communists they where willing to ignore abhorrent anti-democratic and anti-semitic parts so to keep the commies out.Way to go 10-12 million people died because western europe thought hitler was a good guy because he hated communists.They thought he wouldn't get to the point of bombing the crap out of britain they could manipulate him for their own ends and for germany to hand over money and anything else they had for WWI "reparations" they were dead wrong.

Viet Cong was liberation movement that had being fighting colonialism long long before the yanks turned up. They didnt want US soldiers dead they just wanted their country that belonged to them back and independent and unified and not a toy of the colonial powers.The left weren't cheering the deaths of US soldier you ignoramus they were cheering an oppressed people standing up for themselves.....something of which you appreciate with the founding fathers no?.They fought violently against the poms occupying what they thought to be their country whats the difference?.

Get your head out of your arse and stop watching fox news.

(my bold)

Red. If you read al rawandi's previous post, you will see that he has since revised his opinions of Glazov's book. Also, while opinionated, I would say it is grossly unfair to describe him as an ignoramus.

While you made some valid points in your post, there was no reason for the gratuitous personal insults, you could have made your points just as well without them. Others have already been warned for similar posts in this thread. Kindly restrict yourself to attacking the arguments made and not the people making them. Consider this a reminder of the 'Play Nice' rule.

Cheers,

XC

[redunderthebed]

Its simple Hitler was a better alternative to the right and the establishment in Europe (and elsewhere) than the Communists they where willing to ignore abhorrent anti-democratic and anti-semitic parts so to keep the commies out.Way to go 10-12 million people died because western europe thought hitler was a good guy because he hated communists.They thought he wouldn't get to the point of bombing the crap out of britain they could manipulate him for their own ends and for germany to hand over money and anything else they had for WWI "reparations" they were dead wrong.

Viet Cong was liberation movement that had being fighting colonialism long long before the yanks turned up. They didnt want US soldiers dead they just wanted their country that belonged to them back and independent and unified and not a toy of the colonial powers.The left weren't cheering the deaths of US soldier you ignoramus they were cheering an oppressed people standing up for themselves.....something of which you appreciate with the founding fathers no?.They fought violently against the poms occupying what they thought to be their country whats the difference?.

Get your head out of your arse and stop watching fox news.

(my bold)

Red. If you read al rawandi's previous post, you will see that he has since revised his opinions of Glazov's book. Also, while opinionated, I would say it is grossly unfair to describe him as an ignoramus.

While you made some valid points in your post, there was no reason for the gratuitous personal insults, you could have made your points just as well without them. Others have already been warned for similar posts in this thread. Kindly restrict yourself to attacking the arguments made and not the people making them. Consider this a reminder of the 'Play Nice' rule.

Cheers,

XC

No worries it just seems at times he just regurgitates whatever the popular "intellectual" opinion of the right of the day.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Its simple Hitler was a better alternative to the right and the establishment in Europe (and elsewhere) than the Communists they where willing to ignore abhorrent anti-democratic and anti-semitic parts so to keep the commies out.Way to go 10-12 million people died because western europe thought hitler was a good guy because he hated communists.They thought he wouldn't get to the point of bombing the crap out of britain they could manipulate him for their own ends and for germany to hand over money and anything else they had for WWI "reparations" they were dead wrong.

Viet Cong was liberation movement that had being fighting colonialism long long before the yanks turned up. They didnt want US soldiers dead they just wanted their country that belonged to them back and independent and unified and not a toy of the colonial powers.The left weren't cheering the deaths of US soldier you ignoramus they were cheering an oppressed people standing up for themselves.....something of which you appreciate with the founding fathers no?.They fought violently against the poms occupying what they thought to be their country whats the difference?.

Get your head out of your arse and stop watching fox news.

(my bold)

Red. If you read al rawandi's previous post, you will see that he has since revised his opinions of Glazov's book. Also, while opinionated, I would say it is grossly unfair to describe him as an ignoramus.

While you made some valid points in your post, there was no reason for the gratuitous personal insults, you could have made your points just as well without them. Others have already been warned for similar posts in this thread. Kindly restrict yourself to attacking the arguments made and not the people making them. Consider this a reminder of the 'Play Nice' rule.

Cheers,

XC

No worries it just seems at times he just regurgitates whatever the popular "intellectual" opinion of the right of the day.

If that's what you think, I'm sure you are articulate enough to say so in a nice way. And if you did read al's last post, you will see that his opinions are more open to revision than you might think.

[al-rawandi]

Please find me a quotation that shows a western politician or academic extolling the virtues of Hitler the way someone like Chomsky did of the Hanoi regime.

In fifteen years that have followed this resolve, he has succeeded in restoring Germany to the most powerful position in Europe, and not only has he restored the position of his country, but he has even, to a very great extent, reversed the results of the Great War.... the vanquished are in the process of becoming the victors and the victors the vanquished.... whatever else might be thought about these exploits they are certainly among the most remarkable in the whole history of the world.

It is not the Germany of the first decade that followed the war- broken, dejected and bowed down with a sense of apprehension and impotence. It is now full of hope and confidence, and of a renewed sense of determination to lead its own life without interference from any influence outside its own frontiers. One man has accomplished this miracle. He is a born leader of men. A magnetic and dynamic personality with a single-minded purpose, a resolute will and a dauntless heart.

I have never met a happier people than the Germans and Hitler is one of the greatest men. The old trust him; the young idolise him. It is the worship of a national hero who has saved his country.

He has a supreme intellect. I have known only two other men to whom I could apply such distinction - Lord Northcliffe and Lloyd George. If one puts a question to Hitler, he gives an immediate, brilliant clear answer. There is no human being living whose promise on important matters I would trust more readily.

When I said that Herr Hitler's action was right and inevitable, the storm of abuse that was about to burst on me was suddenly checked by Mr. Lloyd George saying exactly the same thing. It is inconceivable that a single vote should be cast against him.

I could go on.

This got me thinking XC, so I tried to think if there was a difference.... and there is. Once Nazi Germany became a threat to peace in Europe and to Britain especially I don't think these men had much praise for Hitler. Certainly they praised him in the above passages, but I doubt they rooted for him to win and conquer Britain in WWII. I think this is the critical difference here, and especially with regards to post WWII conflicts. The leftists ROOTED for the Viet Cong, they hoped they would kill and expel American soldiers. This is the critical difference here.

Its simple Hitler was a better alternative to the right and the establishment in Europe (and elsewhere) than the Communists they where willing to ignore abhorrent anti-democratic and anti-semitic parts so to keep the commies out.Way to go 10-12 million people died because western europe thought hitler was a good guy because he hated communists.They thought he wouldn't get to the point of bombing the crap out of britain they could manipulate him for their own ends and for germany to hand over money and anything else they had for WWI "reparations" they were dead wrong.

Viet Cong was liberation movement that had being fighting colonialism long long before the yanks turned up. They didnt want US soldiers dead they just wanted their country that belonged to them back and independent and unified and not a toy of the colonial powers.The left weren't cheering the deaths of US soldier you ignoramus they were cheering an oppressed people standing up for themselves.....something of which you appreciate with the founding fathers no?.They fought violently against the poms occupying what they thought to be their country whats the difference?.

Get your head out of your arse and stop watching fox news.

So they supported Hitler to stifle Communism, yet it was FDR I believe who said Stalin was "decent fellow" someone who "could be trusted". Not to mention Joseph Davies (ambassador to Moscow) who heaped all kinds of praise on the man. In fact it were the western powers who relied on Stalin to help destroy the Nazi menace.

The liberation of their country????? HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH, stop, please stop. They terrorized the population of Vietnam and set the path for a police state that continues to brutalize its people. The thing is the leftists would cheer anyone who hated the US and its allies. Yes I respect the founding fathers as imperfect people, many of whom had a dark side, yet set up a society that was unmatched in its respect for personal freedom and Liberty.

I don't now, nor have I ever watched Fox News. The kind of insulting thoughtless response you posted is what I have come to expect from leftist dogmatists such as yourself. Good luck with the dictatorship of the proletariat. Please continue liberating countries like Mao and Pol Pot did. Thanks for the lulz.

[al-rawandi]

Its simple Hitler was a better alternative to the right and the establishment in Europe (and elsewhere) than the Communists they where willing to ignore abhorrent anti-democratic and anti-semitic parts so to keep the commies out.Way to go 10-12 million people died because western europe thought hitler was a good guy because he hated communists.They thought he wouldn't get to the point of bombing the crap out of britain they could manipulate him for their own ends and for germany to hand over money and anything else they had for WWI "reparations" they were dead wrong.

Viet Cong was liberation movement that had being fighting colonialism long long before the yanks turned up. They didnt want US soldiers dead they just wanted their country that belonged to them back and independent and unified and not a toy of the colonial powers.The left weren't cheering the deaths of US soldier you ignoramus they were cheering an oppressed people standing up for themselves.....something of which you appreciate with the founding fathers no?.They fought violently against the poms occupying what they thought to be their country whats the difference?.

Get your head out of your arse and stop watching fox news.

(my bold)

Red. If you read al rawandi's previous post, you will see that he has since revised his opinions of Glazov's book. Also, while opinionated, I would say it is grossly unfair to describe him as an ignoramus.

While you made some valid points in your post, there was no reason for the gratuitous personal insults, you could have made your points just as well without them. Others have already been warned for similar posts in this thread. Kindly restrict yourself to attacking the arguments made and not the people making them. Consider this a reminder of the 'Play Nice' rule.

Cheers,

XC

No worries it just seems at times he just regurgitates whatever the popular "intellectual" opinion of the right of the day.

Unfortunately I score far left on the political compass. But it was a good effort.

[al-rawandi]

Its simple Hitler was a better alternative to the right and the establishment in Europe (and elsewhere) than the Communists they where willing to ignore abhorrent anti-democratic and anti-semitic parts so to keep the commies out.Way to go 10-12 million people died because western europe thought hitler was a good guy because he hated communists.They thought he wouldn't get to the point of bombing the crap out of britain they could manipulate him for their own ends and for germany to hand over money and anything else they had for WWI "reparations" they were dead wrong.

Viet Cong was liberation movement that had being fighting colonialism long long before the yanks turned up. They didnt want US soldiers dead they just wanted their country that belonged to them back and independent and unified and not a toy of the colonial powers.The left weren't cheering the deaths of US soldier you ignoramus they were cheering an oppressed people standing up for themselves.....something of which you appreciate with the founding fathers no?.They fought violently against the poms occupying what they thought to be their country whats the difference?.

Get your head out of your arse and stop watching fox news.

(my bold)

Red. If you read al rawandi's previous post, you will see that he has since revised his opinions of Glazov's book. Also, while opinionated, I would say it is grossly unfair to describe him as an ignoramus.

While you made some valid points in your post, there was no reason for the gratuitous personal insults, you could have made your points just as well without them. Others have already been warned for similar posts in this thread. Kindly restrict yourself to attacking the arguments made and not the people making them. Consider this a reminder of the 'Play Nice' rule.

Cheers,

XC

That's the difference, when evidence presents itself I am happy to change my view to fit reality. Some people seem rather incapable of that. Say what you want about me, but I do subject my opinions to rigorous critique and adjust them when evidence requires.

But being a diehard Marxist is just so much more fashionable... whatever gets you laid around campus I guess.