Stone to rehablitate Hilter Stalin and Mao.

[B L Zeebub]

Do you have a link to your blog?

I don't have a blog - I am a journalist.

I worked for several years specialising in Fascist Theory and in Post-Soviet Republics, work which took me to every country in Eastern Europe and often involved months working in cities like Cracow, Minsk and Kyev researching political history.

I believe you once stated that you are a jew.

That means you have an agenda to champion.

So and anything you write will be far from objective.

I dont believe Mr Titnah is a Jew, we do have the odd nebbish, but they tend to be denied computers.

 

[GHook93]

who also also compared the experience of sympathizing with war criminals to making his "W" movie about George W. Bush. "I'm trying to understand somebody I thoroughly despised."

Stone also warned that the same military industrial complex forces that he's explored in movies such as "JFK" and in "Secret History," are now corrupting Barack Obama.

"You can understand why Obama is following in Bush's footsteps in Afghanistan," Stone said."Obama is very much trapped, we believe, in that system. And so that's what we're going to try and show you -- the way it works."

Amazing Stone will villian America and slander American Politicians, but he will produce a fictitious movie (since that is what all his so called based on real evidence movies are) about how swell and misunderstood Hitler, Stalin and Mao were. The left has no honor!

 

[Sunni Man]

I don't have a blog - I am a journalist.

I worked for several years specialising in Fascist Theory and in Post-Soviet Republics, work which took me to every country in Eastern Europe and often involved months working in cities like Cracow, Minsk and Kyev researching political history.

I believe you once stated that you are a jew.

That means you have an agenda to champion.

So and anything you write will be far from objective.

I dont believe Mr Titnah is a Jew, we do have the odd nebbish, but they tend to be denied computers.

Sorry for the mix up.

I was addressing Sodafin

 

[Sodafin]

I love it when people try to claim the Nazi's were a leftwing party or a rightwing party. They had elements of both and neither. I think the mistake is in assuming that politics falls into a simplistic 2-dimensional left-right axis.

I know what you mean, but in this case there really is no question at all that Nazism is inherently right wing.

I think the issue is really one of people struggling to understand that what is considered 'right wing' and 'left wing' by theorists does not precisely match their ideals of what is pure - or good or bad. In reality, no government is 'purely' left wing or right wing according to dictionary definitions, but that doesn't mean they can not be placed upon a horse-show map.

Garyd -

I think the reason you are struggling here is exactly what I have just laid out here. I can only suggest you look at a couple of encyclopedia definitions of what 'left' and 'right' actually mean in politics, and then I think it will all become a bit clearer.

 

[Sodafin]

I believe you once stated that you are a jew.

:

No, I am not Jewish - although the idea that all Jews have an agenda must go down as perhaps the most stupid, ill-informed and ignorant statement I have ever seen posted on the internet.

I have specialised in Middle Eastern politics, btw, so I do know my Hama from my Black September.

 

[Sunni Man]

I believe you once stated that you are a jew.

:

No, I am not Jewish - although the idea that all Jews have an agenda must go down as perhaps the most stupid, ill-informed and ignorant statement I have ever seen posted on the internet.

Exactly when or where did I state that ALL jews have an agenda??

 

[Sodafin]

Exactly when or where did I state that ALL jews have an agenda??

Here:

I believe you once stated that you are a jew.

That means you have an agenda to champion.

So and anything you write will be far from objective.

You might want to consider apologising and withdrawing your comment.

 

[Sunni Man]

You mischaraterize my statement.

Then insult me with: "stupid, ill-informed and ignorant statement I have ever seen posted on the internet".

Heck, you should apologize to me for your slanderous remarks.

 

[editec]

"He's not saying we're going to come out with a more positive view of Hitler," emphasized professor Peter Kuznick, the lead writer on the project. "But we're going to describe him as a historical phenomenon and not just somebody who appeared out of nowhere."

Sounds like Stone's plan is to present the backstory of why somebody like HITLER and his NAZI PARTY were possible.

Nothing wrong with that.

The fact is that without the ENGLISH AND FRANCE screwing Germany after WWI , no Hitler would have emerged from Germany.

The facts are that US corportions like IBM made the hallocaust possible, too.

Hitler and the Soviet didn't come out of nowwhere, folks.

They came to power (and exited power, too) thanks to the historical context of their times.

If that's what Stone is about, then he's not doing anything new.

Thoroughly reputable historians have been saying the same thing for decades.

In fact, if a historian doesn't put those guys into the historical context of their times, they're not credible historians.

 

[Sodafin]

Sunni -

The idea that a Jewish journalist would be any less objective - or have any more of an agenda - than a Muslim journalist, a communist journalist, an Evangelical Christian journalist, or an Orthodox Hindu journalist displays a level of stupidity and ignorance rarely seen in your posting.

Your statement was beneath you.

But maybe we can get back to the topic now....

 

[Sodafin]

Whether Soda likes it or ot the poilitical line runs from anarchy on the extreme right to totalitarianism on the extreme left. You can't be a totalitarian and not be on the political left. Doing it Soda's way puts Anarchy in the middle and totaltarianism at both ends which is logically absurd.

You are wrong on almost every detail here.

Firstly, politics are rarely measured on a line - but either on a horseshoe (link 1) in which the ends are closer to each other than the middle, or on a square with 2 different axes. (Where politics are measured on a continuum, Nazism is ALWAYS on the right, link 2).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-right_politics

Secondly, anarchy is either positioned on the extreme left, or is often left off the spectrum in that tends to eschew ideology as a concept.

Thirdly, totalitarianism is very present on both the left or right. Examples from the right include Pinochet, Cristiani, Rios Montte etc. Try Arendt's 'History of Totalitarianism' as proof - and also note she devotes 100 pages to Hitler's right wing principles!!

Lastly, you seem to base your assessments on the size of government. In reality, this is not considered a key factor, if used at all. The key factors in determining where a party sits on the horseshoe - and I am now explaining this for the 2nd time - are class, capital, and the role of the nation.

 

[Sunni Man]

Sunni -

The idea that a Jewish journalist would be any less objective - or have any more of an agenda - than a Muslim journalist, a communist journalist, an Evangelical Christian journalist, or an Orthodox Hindu journalist displays a level of stupidity and ignorance rarely seen in your posting.

I am of the personal opinion, that NO one can be totally objective.

People aren't born in a test tube and then live in a completely sterile envinronment.

Their background will influence how they think, act, and feel about everything.

Objectivity is a myth.

 

[GHook93]

Stone has lost all creditability. He has become (probably always has been) a self-hating American. He thinks America is worst than Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia.

I mean this is the guy that is preparing a propaganda piece on how great of a guy Hugo Chavez is.

Trust me people will walk out of the documentary saying why was Stone putting Hitler, Mao and Stalin in a good light?

"He's not saying we're going to come out with a more positive view of Hitler," emphasized professor Peter Kuznick, the lead writer on the project. "But we're going to describe him as a historical phenomenon and not just somebody who appeared out of nowhere."

Sounds like Stone's plan is to present the backstory of why somebody like HITLER and his NAZI PARTY were possible.

Nothing wrong with that.

The fact is that without the ENGLISH AND FRANCE screwing Germany after WWI , no Hitler would have emerged from Germany.

The facts are that US corportions like IBM made the hallocaust possible, too.

Hitler and the Soviet didn't come out of nowwhere, folks.

They came to power (and exited power, too) thanks to the historical context of their times.

If that's what Stone is about, then he's not doing anything new.

Thoroughly reputable historians have been saying the same thing for decades.

In fact, if a historian doesn't put those guys into the historical context of their times, they're not credible historians.

 

[Sunni Man]

He thinks America is worst than Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia.

Please provide a link to where Stone has said he thinks America is worse than Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia.

Thank You

 

[Big Fitz]

I don't have a blog - I am a journalist.

ROFL... no wonder you spout such bullshit. What was the name of the NY Times Journalist who covered for Stalin's pogroms against the Jews, yet won a pullitzer? Oh yes. Walter Duranty.

That title gives you no cover or credibility anymore. You can thank the rest of your fascisti thugs in the industry for squandering that.

BTW, Ward Churchill could be called educated too. But he's still a bullshit spouting jackass who loves socialism and has no problem using his bully pulpit to brainwash students.

 

[Sodafin]

Big Fitz -

Would you mind keeping the off-topic spam to a minimum?

This is an interesting topic - let's stick to it.

 

[Big Fitz]

Oh I'm sorry your holiness. I forgot, never to question the infallability of 'political journalists' who deny simple correlations between the American left and German National Socialist party.

You can also draw the same lines of comparison to the progressives during the Wilsonian era. After his demise by stroke, and the failure of the League of Nations, the progressive movement was becoming increasingly discredited and therefore changed their name and co-opted the term 'Liberal' away from Libertarians.

Mussolini was worshiped as a near god as secularists get for his theories on eugenics and 'Corporatism'. But at least he got the trains to run on time.

Margaret Sanger was idolized by Hitler for her stance on eugenics and many of her ideas were expanded on by him. We were credited by some in the Nazi party as being an inspiration to their goals and platforms.

And of course, the banning of weapons was a critical move for the Nazis in power to take away the ability of their countrymen to defend themselves against oppression they intended to bring, all in the effort to 'perfect humanity'.

Nope. I don't see any similarities whatsoever.

 

[MaggieMae]

Maggie neither Goldberg or myself believe that every democrat is a socialist. In fact they can't be. Registered Democrats are almost forty percent of voters but only 21% claim to be liberal or left. Hitler was a statist, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Lenin were all statists. Statist is a left wing not a right wing position.

Whether Soda likes it or ot the poilitical line runs from anarchy on the extreme right to totalitarianism on the extreme left. You can't be a totalitarian and not be on the political left. Doing it Soda's way puts Anarchy in the middle and totaltarianism at both ends which is logically absurd.

Not true. Look up any definition of "totalitarianism." It is an extreme form of authoritarianism, and it defined Hitler. Granted, it also defined Stalin, but as I said you simply cannot compare those two extreme ideologies to the, shall we say "toned down" ideologies in today's political arena in America. And I think Jonah Goldberg was attempting to make that assertion.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Oh I'm sorry your holiness. I forgot, never to question the infallability of 'political journalists' who deny simple correlations between the American left and German National Socialist party.

You can also draw the same lines of comparison to the progressives during the Wilsonian era. After his demise by stroke, and the failure of the League of Nations, the progressive movement was becoming increasingly discredited and therefore changed their name and co-opted the term 'Liberal' away from Libertarians.

Mussolini was worshiped as a near god as secularists get for his theories on eugenics and 'Corporatism'. But at least he got the trains to run on time.

Margaret Sanger was idolized by Hitler for her stance on eugenics and many of her ideas were expanded on by him. We were credited by some in the Nazi party as being an inspiration to their goals and platforms.

And of course, the banning of weapons was a critical move for the Nazis in power to take away the ability of their countrymen to defend themselves against oppression they intended to bring, all in the effort to 'perfect humanity'.

Nope. I don't see any similarities whatsoever.

Lets see how the nazi agenda is doing under the guidance of the progressives
Anti smoking -check
Anti home school- check
anti gun - check
Euthanasia _check
Radical environmentalism-check
politcal correctness- check

 

[MaggieMae]

Sunni -

The idea that a Jewish journalist would be any less objective - or have any more of an agenda - than a Muslim journalist, a communist journalist, an Evangelical Christian journalist, or an Orthodox Hindu journalist displays a level of stupidity and ignorance rarely seen in your posting.

I am of the personal opinion, that NO one can be totally objective.

People aren't born in a test tube and then live in a completely sterile envinronment.

Their background will influence how they think, act, and feel about everything.

Objectivity is a myth.

Except when influenced by a mob mentality.