Elllson Compares 9-11 to Reichstag Fire

[red states rule]

This is so typical of the kook left who believes 9-11 was an inside job. How long will the people put up with this?


snip


Ellison's use of Reichstag fire goes overboard
By Katherine Kersten, Star Tribune

Last update: July 11, 2007 – 9:41 PM

But even the "impeach Bush now" crowd might have raised an eyebrow when Ellison compared the Sept. 11 terror attacks to the burning of the Reichstag, or Pariament building, in Nazi Germany in 1933.

"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," he told applauding atheists. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted."

If you're fuzzy on your history of Nazi Germany, you might have missed Ellison's point. Here's the context.

On Feb. 27, 1933, the Reichstag building in Berlin burned.

The fire occurred a week before the March 5 elections, which pitted the Nazis against the Communists, Social Democrats and other parties.

For decades, it had been widely believed that the Nazis themselves planned the fire in an effort to discredit the Communists and justify Nazi seizure of emergency powers. Today, many scholars believe that the arsonist was a lone radical. The identity of those responsible for the fire remains controversial.

It is clear, however, that Hitler - then chancellor - cynically exploited the Reichstag fire to grab power for himself. The day after the fire, Hitler pushed through a decree that ended protection of political, personal and property rights. Then he moved to crush thousands of his political opponents, including Reichstag members.

In "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich," William Shirer provides a vivid account: "Truckloads of stormtroopers roared through the streets all over Germany, breaking into homes, rounding up victims and carting them off to [Brownshirt] barracks, where they were tortured and beaten."

Hermann Goering, one of Hitler's henchmen, made clear that the rule of law was over: "Fellow Germans, my measures will not be crippled by any judicial thinking," he bellowed. "I don't have to worry about justice; my mission is only to destroy and exterminate, nothing more! ... [T]he struggle to the death, in which my fist will grasp your necks, I shall lead with those down there - the Brownshirts!"

http://www.startribune.com/191/story/1297757.html

 

[maineman]

I think your interpretation that Ellison is suggesting that 9/11 was an inside job is an unwarranted stretch. It could certainly be argued that 9/11 has allowed this administration to sidestep the rule of law under the guise of national security.

 

[red states rule]

I think your interpretation that Ellison is suggesting that 9/11 was an inside job is an unwarranted stretch. It could certainly be argued that 9/11 has allowed this administration to sidestep the rule of law under the guise of national security.

Yea, right

Loyal Dems like you are more then willing to overlook what he was saying. The kook left have long tried to say Pres Bush was behind 9-11 and allowed it to happen

 

[ReillyT]

This is so typical of the kook left who believes 9-11 was an inside job. How long will the people put up with this?

What do you expect "people" to do about it? He has the right to say it if he wants. Most people just stop listening to the nutjobs. Nobody (relatively speaking) takes this guy seriously. However, when you bring up wackos like this, you grant them the exposure that they seek.

 

[ReillyT]

Yea, right

Loyal Dems like you are more then willing to overlook what he was saying. The kook left have long tried to say Pres Bush was behind 9-11 and allowed it to happen

MM, you could be right about that interpretation, I hadn't thought about that.

RSR, if by the "kook left," you mean an odd and tiny assortment of wackjobs that are reminiscent of the "kook right" that perpetrated the Oklahoma city bombing, then okay. Don't make it more than it is though.

By the way, are you capable of thinking critically, even just a wee bit?

 

[red states rule]

What do you expect "people" to do about it? He has the right to say it if he wants. Most people just stop listening to the nutjobs. Nobody (relatively speaking) takes this guy seriously. However, when you bring up wackos like this, you grant them the exposure that they seek.

I am asking where the outrage is from the liberal media? If a Republican would have said this and Clinton was President - the calls for his resignation would be loud and constant

Libs can say anything about anybody - as long as it is directed at Republicans

 

[red states rule]

MM, you could be right about that interpretation, I hadn't thought about that.

RSR, if by the "kook left," you mean an odd and tiny assortment of wackjobs that are reminiscent of the "kook right" that perpetrated the Oklahoma city bombing, then okay. Don't make it more than it is though.

By the way, are you capable of thinking critically, even just a wee bit?

It is clear to anyone what he was saying

The double standards of libs like MM is sickening

 

[ReillyT]

I am asking where the outrage is from the liberal media? If a Republican would have said this and Clinton was President - the calls for his resignation would be loud and constant

Libs can say anything about anybody - as long as it is directed at Republicans

People say stupid stuff like this all the time (right and left), and this particular charge (if your interpretation of Ellison's statement is correct) has been made before by other members of the fringe. It doesn't get media play because a) it is old news, and b) the vast, vast majority of people know that these guys are crazy, and we don't waste our time worrying about them. Why can't you just ignore them, like everybody else? They could not be happier that they ruffle your feathers and that you can make an issue out of them.

 

[red states rule]

People say stupid stuff like this all the time (right and left), and this particular charge (if your interpretation of Ellison's statement is correct) has been made before by other members of the fringe. It doesn't get media play because a) it is old news, and b) the vast, vast majority of people know that these guys are crazy, and we don't waste our time worrying about them. Why can't you just ignore them, like everybody else? They could not be happier that they ruffle your feathers and that you can make an issue out of them.

IF my interpretation of Ellison's statement is correct? What other interpretation is there?

If doesn't get any play in the media because he is a LIBERAL

I know libs would love for us to ignore them - so there insane comments can go unchallenged

 

[maineman]

Yea, right

Loyal Dems like you are more then willing to overlook what he was saying. The kook left have long tried to say Pres Bush was behind 9-11 and allowed it to happen

those are two different things.

I have never suggested that Bush was BEHIND 9/11.

I do think that he ignored the warning signs and was unworried about OBL being determined to strike...I think he was more interested in his golf game than in protecting America, and to THAT end, he may have made it easier for the 9/11 perpetrators to succeed.

ANd please show me where Ellison said that 9/11 was an INSIDE job.

I'll wait.

Once again, you cut and paste analysis from a conservative op-ed piece and pass it off as fact.

BOOOORRRRING

 

[ReillyT]

IF my interpretation of Ellison's statement is correct? What other interpretation is there?

If doesn't get any play in the media because he is a LIBERAL

Be wild! Be crazy! Try to imagine another interpretation. What could it be? You can do it big boy!

If you are unable to interpret Ellison's words to mean anything other than that Bush perpetrated 9/11, then nothing I could say will be capable of plumbing the depths (however shallow they may be) of your little mind.

However, that is secondary to the point that I have been trying to communicate to you, and which you obviously cannot grasp.

I will not waste another moment of my life on this inane conversation with you.

GOOD DAY SIR. [Spins, and walks off stage haughtily.]

 

[red states rule]

those are two different things.

I have never suggested that Bush was BEHIND 9/11.

I do think that he ignored the warning signs and was unworried about OBL being determined to strike...I think he was more interested in his golf game than in protecting America, and to THAT end, he may have made it easier for the 9/11 perpetrators to succeed.

ANd please show me where Ellison said that 9/11 was an INSIDE job.

I'll wait.

Once again, you cut and paste analysis from a conservative op-ed piece and pass it off as fact.

BOOOORRRRING

What he said proves he was saying 9-11 was an inside job

Again, your bias will never allow you to admit the truth

 

[red states rule]

Be wild! Be crazy! Try to imagine another interpretation. What could it be? You can do it big boy!

If you are unable to interpret Ellison's words to mean anything other than that Bush perpetrated 9/11, then nothing I could say will be capable of plumbing the depths (however shallow they may be) of your little mind.

However, that is secondary to the point that I have been trying to communicate to you, and which you obviously cannot grasp.

I will not waste another moment of my life on this inane conversation with you.

GOOD DAY SIR. [Spins, and walks off stage haughtily.]

Then what is the other interperation?

It is trypical for the left to attack the messenger and not the message

 

[maineman]

What he said proves he was saying 9-11 was an inside job

Again, your bias will never allow you to admit the truth

bullshit.

"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," he told applauding atheists. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted."

NOTHING in that statement even INFERS that 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB.

Proof? My ass.

 

[red states rule]

bullshit.

"It's almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that," he told applauding atheists. "After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted."

NOTHING in that statement even INFERS that 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB.

Proof? My ass.

He was comparing Bush to Hitler - something the left does daily

Only a loyal lib, who has put his party first - would see it otherwise

 

[ReillyT]

Then what is the other interperation?

It is trypical for the left to attack the messenger and not the message

[Returns to stage center.]

Okay. Okay. Okay.

I know I said I wouldn't, but what the hell. I hate to see a poor man drowning. Yep. ya pulled me right back in. I am a flip flopper.

Anyway, here is the other interpretation, but read slowly, because it is very complicated. Tres complique, as the French would say.

Okay. Okay. Okay.

Here is is.

The two events (9/11 & Reichstag) are similar b/c:

wait for it....

wait for it...

in each, the executive used a criminal terrorist act to consolidate executive power.


Whooooo.....

I am exhausted. That was tough.

 

[maineman]

He was comparing Bush to Hitler - something the left does daily

Only a loyal lib, who has put his party first - would see it otherwise

comparing Bush to Hitler is not the same thing as saying that 9/11 was an inside job. Bush spent six months successfully convincing the American public that Saddam was responsible for 9/11..... that is the analogy. NOWHERE does Ellison suggest that 9/11 was an INSIDE job.... only that Bush used 9/11 to demonize an enemy that was NOT responsible for the attack against us.

Your logical reasoning skills are pretty fucking weak, aren't they?

 

[red states rule]

[Returns to stage center.]

Okay. Okay. Okay.

I know I said I wouldn't, but what the hell. I hate to see a poor man drowning. Yep. ya pulled me right back in. I am a flip flopper.

Anyway, here is the other interpretation, but read slowly, because it is very complicated. Tres complique, as the French would say.

Okay. Okay. Okay.

Here is is.

The two events (9/11 & Reichstag) are similar b/c:

wait for it....

wait for it...

in each, the executive used a criminal terrorist act to consolidate executive power.


Whooooo.....

I am exhausted. That was tough.

AS I said, he was comparing Bush to Hitler, and manufactered a reason to start a war

It is funny to watch the left squirm when cornered

 

[ReillyT]

He was comparing Bush to Hitler - something the left does daily

Only a loyal lib, who has put his party first - would see it otherwise

My wife is about as tall as Hitler was.

Oh my god! What does this mean? Is she a nazi? Does she hate jews?

I must retire to consider the serious consquences of this similarity between Hitler and my wife. Perhaps I will be lucky to find that my wife is just a bit taller after all.

 

[red states rule]

comparing Bush to Hitler is not the same thing as saying that 9/11 was an inside job. Bush spent six months successfully convincing the American public that Saddam was responsible for 9/11..... that is the analogy. NOWHERE does Ellison suggest that 9/11 was an INSIDE job.... only that Bush used 9/11 to demonize an enemy that was NOT responsible for the attack against us.

Your logical reasoning skills are pretty fucking weak, aren't they?

I don;t think you will ever run out of passes to hand to out to Dems when they stick their foot in their mouth