PDA

View Full Version : Early 20th century history: Apparently the gays caused WW1, WW2, and the holocaust



Falke
Jan 4, 2011, 10:21 PM
At least according to John Becker.

Here is his post from: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=13717


Note: What follows is a current revision of an original article which appeared in the As-Eye-See-It section of Virtueonline in January of 2010. With the rescinding of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" this past week, it takes on a new significance.

A MONSTROUS LIE

By John Becker
www.virtueonline.org
December 28, 2010

Adolf Hitler's imprint on the history of the 20th century is universally accepted, and continues to this day. In Mein Kampf he formulated the concept of "The Big Lie", the belief that a lie repeated often enough and loudly enough, using the full force of the press and other media, would eventually be accepted as truth by the general population.

We all know that Hitler's depravity led to the attempt to exterminate the Jews, Poles, Gypsies, homosexuals and other minorities. How do we know that? We know it because that is what the media has trumpeted over the last 65 years since 1945. Such is the force and influence of propaganda.

But read that opening sentence again: "We all know that Hitler's depravity led to the attempt to exterminate the Jews, Poles, Gypsies, homosexuals and other minorities". Hidden within that statement, most of it true, is a MONSTROUS LIE. Hitler and his henchmen did not attempt to exterminate all homosexuals, only some of them. The opposite is in fact true: every phase of the rise to power of the Nazis was engineered and masterminded by radical hyper-masculine homosexual militarists.

A huge majority of the top generals and officers in the Brown Shirts, the SS and Gestapo, Hitler's government appointees, and concentration camp staff were "Butch" homosexuals - an important distinction - they were not the effeminate homosexuals or "Femmes", which current American political correctness endorses and which the "Butches" opposed and despised.

It is the purpose of this article to outline the process by which this state of affairs came to be.

The whole Nazi phenomenon cannot be properly understood without considering the philosophical movements at the end of the 19th century. Foremost among them was the idea expressed in 1867 by Karl Marx in Das Kapital, with its devastating consequences worldwide, but most immediately in Russia.

Much less well known outside Germany were three other German philosophers who all championed the virtues of Man/Boy sex as originally practiced by the ancient Greeks. They were Benedict Friedlaender (1866-1906), Adolf Brand (1874-1935), and Hans Blüher (1888-1955). In 1896 Brand began publishing "Der Eigene", (translation: "The self possessed") the first homosexual journal. He fiercely advocated hyper-masculine homosexuality and Man-Boy sex, and vigorously countered the writings of the leader of the dominant homosexual movement of the day, Magnus Hirschfeld (1868-1935) who advocated the primacy of effeminate gay and masculine lesbian homosexuality, and co-founded The Scientific Humanitarian Committee in 1897, and later in 1919 The Institut fur Sexualwissenchaft (Institute for Sexual Research).

Thus the homosexual movement in Germany became divided into two intensely polarized camps, one camp advocating Hyper-masculine Man/Boy sex, and loosely called "Butches", and the other camp championing effeminate homosexuality called "Femmes". These two camps became fiercely antagonistic, each camp hating and despising the other.

Meanwhile Hans Blüher (see above) had become a champion of Die Wandervogel movement. Die Wandervogel (or the migratory birds) had begun as a relatively innocent camping and hiking organization for both boys and girls, but changed its nature when Blüher became involved as a member, and appointed himself as the mouthpiece of the organization, and its key philosopher. Through his influence Die Wandervogeln began to practice and promote the concept of Man-Boy sex. In 1912 he became the first man to write a history of Die Wandervogeln called "The German Wandervogel Movement as an Erotic Phenomenon". After this, in 1913 girls were excluded from The Wandervogels.

This laid the foundation for one of the greatest scandals in German history.

This was vividly described by Catrine Clay in her compelling 2008 book :King, Kaiser, Tsar", ISBN-13; 9780802716774 which told the story of the lives of the three cousins who ruled England, Germany and Russia; British King George V, German Kaiser Wilhelm II, and Russian Tsar Nicholas II.

Kaiser Wilhelm II surrounded himself with a clique of ultra militaristic Butch homosexuals, who constantly goaded him to prove his masculinity by launching a major aggressive war against France, Belgium, and Russia. He himself was reluctant to do so, because of his close family relationship with and affection for his cousins the English King and the Tsar.

However, the Kaiser was very uncertain of his own masculinity because of having been born with a withered left arm, caused by an error of the doctor who delivered him at birth with forceps. As a result the left arm was substantially shorter and weaker than the other arm, and its use was limited, much to the Kaiser's constant shame and embarrassment. In photographs you can always see him favoring his right arm, and trying to disguise his left.

He compensated by becoming a member of what became known as the Eulenberg clique, (or the Liebenberg Circle), all hyper-masculine individuals, and very prominent members of the German government and military. There is no recorded evidence that he himself stepped over the sexual boundary, (he fathered six sons and a daughter), but there is ample evidence that he was in awe of and hugely influenced by, the militaristic Eulenberg clique.

The clique was named after it leader, Prince Phillip of Eulenberg, and its extraordinary size and power, and the influence of its members remained hidden for years. The clique became known as the "Liebenberg (or "Love Mountain") Round Table" and its secrets were finally made public in 1907 when a prominent Journalist Maximilian Harden "outed" Prince Eulenberg in what became known as the Harden-Eulenberg scandal. In 1902 Adolf Brand (see above) had founded the "Gemeinschaft der Eigenen" (Community of Self Owners) together with his mentor, Benedict Friedlaender another homosexual, and nine others. Then in 1907 Brand became implicated in the Harden-Eulenberg Affair when he assisted Harden in the "outing" of German Chancellor Prince Bernhard von Bülow, accusing him of having a homosexual relationship with Privy Councilor Max Scheefer. Bülow sued Brand for libel, and Brand was convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison.

It was a scandal of epic proportions, broadcast widely in the press, comparable in its coverage to the recent O.J. Simpson trial or the Dreyfus Case, and resulted in several prison sentences. A brief description can be found on the web at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eulenberg_affair

This culture of hyper-masculine Butch homosexuality continued to permeate the entire German military, and was a key contributing factor in Prussian militarism, and a source of its extreme violence and ruthless sadism. It clearly was instrumental in finally persuading the Kaiser to attack Belgium, France and Russia in 1914, against his own instincts and his affection for his cousins. The legendary might and ruthlessness of the Prussian military in World War One resulted from the dominance of this hyper-masculine homosexual militarist clique in the German army right through the end of the first World War. As a Private Adolf Hitler was intimately involved as Lothar Machtan (see below) explains.

In the lead up to World War I and during the war itself and the following Weimar period Die Wandervogeln gradually morphed into Hitler's Brownshirts, the hugely powerful Sturm Abteilung (SA), and later into the Hitler Jugend, which became mandatory for all German youth after 1933, when all church-based youth groups were ordered to integrate into the Hitler Youth. The "Sieg Heil" salute originated in the Wandervogels, as did the style of uniforms worn by the Brown Shirts and Hitler Youth. The actual Brown Shirts had been bought in quantity cheaply after WWI out of the surplus army inventory. There is ample evidence that Hitler himself had homosexual tendencies, and intimate relations with other boys after the death of his father, and that he favored perverted sexuality, most notably sadomasochism and coprophilia. The most compelling account of this was provided by the German author Lothar Machtan in his book "The Hidden Hitler", ISBN-13: 9780465043095

Machtan, in his introduction, writes about the prevalence of the view that Hitler was "Evil", without any explanation having being given for the source of his twisted and evil views. Machtan offers as his thesis that the explanation for Hitler's life's trajectory and its tragic and violent events lies in his core values emerging from his latent homosexuality. He then proves his point in letters and postcards between Hitler and his male "lovers" over many years. Four of Hitler's closest women friends attempted suicide in this period - two of them succeeded - probably because of his insistence on extreme perverted sex involving sado-masochism and coprophilia.

As he rose to power, Hitler surrounded himself with ultra-masculine homosexuals, and chose as his chief of staff Ernst Roehm, his closest friend and leader of the Brown Shirted Sturm Abteilung, (SA) and one of Germany's most notorious and flamboyant Butch homosexuals. It was Roehm who as the head of the Wandervogels had recruited Hitler to a junior position. Roehm's riotous excesses had become a national scandal, widely publicized in the press, and Hitler was being ridiculed for his involvement in a homosexual organization. After a while it became clear to Hitler that Roehm and the Butch homosexual clique who ran the SA had ambitions of taking over the Nazi movement, which would challenge and certainly terminate Hitler's own ambitions to rise to the Chancellorship. So Roehm had to be eliminated.

Therefore starting at 4:00AM on June 29th 1934 and continuing into June 30th, 1934, Hitler personally oversaw Roehm's execution, along with hundreds of other homosexual Brown Shirts in what Hitler, and subsequent history called "The night of the Long Knives". Hitler immediately thereafter seized control of the 400,000 members of the Brown Shirts who had since 1927 made up the majority of participants in the gigantic Nuremberg Rallies.

The immediate effect of the "Night of the Long Knives" was that in the press Hitler's growing reputation for being intimately involved in a homosexual organization was instantly disproved, clearing his name for his assault on the Chancellorship. After Hitler came to power, Machtan describes how by a systematic campaign throughout Germany all the articles which had appeared in the press describing the homosexual roots of the Nazis and its links to Hitler were expunged. Hitler immediately closed down and banned Magnus Hirschfeld's effeminate gay organization, the Institut fur Sexual Wissenschaft.

The gay propagandists ever since have used the "Night of the Long Knives" to give credence to the MONSTROUS LIE that Hitler was anti-homosexual or a homophobe. He certainly wasn't. He filled the ranks of the SS and Gestapo with hyper masculine types who gloried in Man-Boy sex, and emulated such practices as they claimed were inherited from the ancient Greeks. It was the super-macho SS "Butch" homosexuals who despised and first raped and later murdered the "Femmes" in the concentration camps. Several former Gestapo officers have claimed that it was impossible to become an officer of the Gestapo or SS if you were not a Butch homosexual. It became the bedrock on which the S.A. (Sturm Abteilung) was formed between the wars. In the 1920s the allies strictly limited military organizations, but had no restrictions on scouting groups.

The Gay community in promoting the idea that Hitler was anti-gay have pursued it to the point of proclaiming that there was a "Gay Holocaust" and suggesting the idea of a Memorial Museum to commemorate it. The proposed Memorial makes no mention of the homosexual prison guards, guilty of most of the killing. In reality Hitler and his supermen homosexual followers glorified Man-Boy sex, and despised, tortured, raped and murdered effeminate homosexuals, but their core values were intensely homosexual.

Here is the heart of an extraordinary "coincidence": both Kaiser Wilhelm II before World War I and Adolf Hitler 20 years later, surrounded themselves with Butch homosexuals, and plunged the world into the two most catastrophic wars in human history as a result. This is a slice of history that has been carefully swept under the rug, but its implications are gigantic in an American age when homosexual marriage, and the removal of all constraints on homosexual behavior, is the priority of the day.

An ultimate danger for America today is the fact that the gay community has advanced the concept of treating effeminate gay sex as the only legitimate form of homosexuality while disowning any linkage whatever to Man-Boy hyper-masculine sex as promoted by the North American Man Boy Love Association, NAMBLA.

The Gay and Lesbian establishment won't even apply the term homosexual to such behavior or groups. They call them pederasts, without acknowledging that pederasty is one of several manifestations and variants of homosexuality, along with bestiality, sado-masochism, coprophilia, pedophilia and other deviant behaviors. They claim that a majority of pedophiles abusing young girls sexually are heterosexuals (which is probably true) while refusing to acknowledge that the vast majority of those pedophiles guilty of sexually abusing young boys are homosexual, as the Catholic Church has learned to its shame. Many of the offending priests became priests in order to have access to young boys.

What this pattern leads to is the gradual formation of a committed clique of gays and a similar one of lesbians with their own sexual agendas, completely separate from heterosexual society and with totally different objectives. The Marxist ideologues all recognized the value of, and encouraged the promotion of, this phenomenon in furthering Marxist causes. When a tiny fraction of society in general are totally committed to promoting their own values at the expense of the heterosexual majority, and are engaged in practices which tightly bind them together and of which the majority is totally ignorant and which they can barely imagine, you have a perfect formula for steering that majority towards the Marxist ideal, or as Hitler proved, towards the Nazi ideal.

Today we can see this underground culture at work through the length and breadth of the American civilization; first and foremost in colleges and universities, where the Marxist theorists set up shop long ago; in the churches; in the high schools; in the courthouses, in the theater; in television; in Hollywood; in the institution of marriage and divorce and the breakdown of the nuclear family, and in the Washington government establishment. The radical extremists will tell you that this is progress, and it is indeed; steady progress towards the radical Marxist goals they have set for all the rest of us.

This week we have entered a new era, with the signing by President Obama of legislation rescinding "Don't Ask - Don't Tell". At the same time the Swiss government is recommending legislation to decriminalize incest. It appears that worldwide we are on the threshold of removing all constraints on sexual behavior whatsoever. We continue to refuse to recognize the intimate relationship between the sexual perversions and EVIL in its most horrific forms, as the Nazi phenomenon in Germany demonstrated catastrophically.

As a wiser man than I once said: "If you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything." Another, even wiser, said: "Those who refuse to learn from the errors of the past are condemned to repeat them."

CONCLUSION:

If it is time to reconsider society's attitudes towards Homosexuality. Let's examine all the behaviors it encompasses, not just one small segment. Opening the flood gates to one segment opens them to all segments, and history has disturbingly and conclusively proven the folly of so doing.

Meanwhile NAMBLA and other proponents of Man/Boy sex have evidently made a tactical decision to lie low, while the militant effeminate Gay groups ride their Trojan Horse promoting Gay Marriage, and the repeal of Don't Ask - Don't Tell to lead the Man/Boy crowd into the Promised Land.

America will follow that course to its peril and its destruction.

NOTE: For a more comprehensive account of the dominance of Butch homosexuals in the German military read Scott Lively's book "The poisoned Stream - Gay influence in Human History"; ISBN 0-9647-609-2-4. It is composed largely of extensive excerpts from the courageous book by a Jewish scholar, Samuel Igra originally published in 1945 and titled "Germany's National Vice" and describing in detail the homosexual roots of Nazism and the drive to promote the idea of "The Gay Holocaust". Lively's earlier best-selling book "The Pink Swastika"ISBN-13: 9780964760936 is another vital source on this topic.

END

darkeyes
Jan 5, 2011, 4:28 AM
'Twas on a corruption of the reality such as this twaddle that the Nazi's were put in a position to take over from a discredited ruling elite when Germany's economy went belly up. I seem to recall that Mein Kampf had its scapegoats and boy, were they not able to exploit their Jewish myth once they got a whiff of power..

DuckiesDarling
Jan 5, 2011, 4:45 AM
You know...there is a reason why people followed Adolph Hitler. He was very charismatic and articulate. He was short and dark haired, his vision of the perfect race was tall and blonde. Yet people willingly followed him down that long dark tunnel. That was World War 2. Nope wasn't gays.

World War 1 was caused by a variety of factors that ultimately were brought around because of an alliance. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand catapulted the first stone out to ripple in the water. Nope wasn't gays.

Holocaust was because of one person's demented dream of a perfect race and his drive to rid the world of those he regarded as inferior. Wasn't the gays that started it, it was Hitler.

The above article is basically what I'd expect from someone angling for an Anglican spot, but this is the kind of stuff we do not need to spread. Everytime we give it another voice and it reaches a different readership the chances that someone somewhere will go "Hey he's right" will increase.

Long Duck Dong
Jan 5, 2011, 5:04 AM
( read as extreme sarcasm and tongue in cheek )


* adds it to the list of immorality caused the tsunami, 911 is cos god hates gays, earthquakes are cos people are sexually immoral and aliens are visiting earth to do anal probes on gay people and accidental grabbing straight people instead "

there is always the * blame it on the gays * people in the world.... yet if you point the finger back... you get something like...." who gave birth to serial killers, peewee herman, hitler, people that created anime, terrorists etc etc ".... I would hazard a wild guess that it may just be heterosexual / bisexual people....

now I have to be clear that I hate pointing the finger at specific groups and blaming them for actions that other groups could have been involved in, so in order to be fair, I will add in eunuchs into the mix of people that have been involved in the birth of some people, as we are not sure the number of children fathered by eunuchs....

I can not help but notice the way the catholic church is targeted as a main harbour of homosexual males that will abuse young males in a safe haven...... but I will admit that I am very distressed by the reports of gay priests that have on going illicit affairs with male nuns in habits...... I mean seriously people.... you have the sisters of the catholic church having homosexual sex with male priests.... its disgusting I tell ya..... those sisters bending the priests over the alters.......... immoral.......

its shocking the way the world has turned out to be like, now..... what happened to the good old days of greed, lust, coveting, lies, deceit, murder, genocide, incest and rape...... all the good aspects of society that were untainted by the gay people..... sighs.....

I tell you people the world is gonna end cos of gay people..... and that means that straight male people like me and our boyfriends are going to suffer cos of immoral people........ its a tragedy..... such a tragedy

darkeyes
Jan 5, 2011, 6:31 AM
Everytime we give it another voice and it reaches a different readership the chances that someone somewhere will go "Hey he's right" will increase.

..and that, Darlin' darlin'.. is wy we havta stamp on them an slap 'em down soon as they raise their ugly, odious lil heads... or they will creep up on us an have us in their gas chambers (or modern equivelant) before we can say "Jack Robinson"!

Realist
Jan 5, 2011, 8:04 AM
It's a common practice for those who crave power, to find a scapegoat, to meld people into a cohesive force. The new allies may never have come together, without being convinced that only together would they be able to combat the perceived enemy. At times, these practices may be a viable to combat a legitimate threat, but many times history shows an abuse of power. Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Mao Se Dung, are probably the most famous examples, but Jim Jones, David Koresh, and others come to mind, too.

Diva667
Jan 5, 2011, 8:35 AM
if it weren't for the tragedy involved this would bet laughable. As it is it places the author in the same league as holocaust deniers.

:rolleyes:

I agree Fran we need to slap down this nonsense as soon as we see it.

I hate Nazi's...

I've seen this twaddle in other places besides this , along with the myth that the Nazi's were socialists (it says they are right in the name...)

If the any of the Nazi's were gay they'd be the type in deep denial, like some of the discredited ministers/ senators.

Remember they destroyed Magnus Hirshfield's works...


Hirschfeld founded one
of the world’s earliest gay rights groups. Its primary goal was the
elimination of Paragraph 175 — the legislation that made gay sex
illegal in Germany.

...By the time the roaring ‘20s were in
full, decadent swing, he was a minor celebrity. In 1919, the same year
he opened his Institute for Sexual Science (Institut für
Sexualwissenschaft), Hirschfeld co-wrote and appeared in what might be
the first gay rights film, Different from the Others (Anders als die
Andern)...

On May 6, 1933, Fascist thugs attacked Hirschfeld’s institute. Four
days later at Bebelplatz, Nazis burned Hirschfeld’s collections in
what Austrian journalist Joseph Roth later described as an auto-da-fé
of the mind. On the same site in present-day Berlin is a monument to
the book burnings.

http://www.mail-archive.com/transgender-news@googlegroups.com/msg07154.html

darkeyes
Jan 5, 2011, 8:56 AM
[QUOTE=Realist;191092]
At times, these practices may be a viable to combat a legitimate threat, but many times history shows an abuse of power.
[QUOTE]

Are you saying that there are times when such practices can be justified? Thats how it reads to me.. if so, who decides when it is justified and the right thing to do? It may well be a valid argument, but so much misery has been caused and conflicts begun and perpetuated by by those who spread such misinformation and propaganda.. and the so called forces of right are still doing it.. as we see and hear every day of the week on telly, radio and other forms of media... :(

A lie is a lie is it not? Simply because that untruth suits our purpose does not make it right.. which is why I question everything I am told by those who run our world..

DuckiesDarling
Jan 5, 2011, 11:13 AM
Now, Fran, taking it out of context like that changes what he meant.

His entire quote was

It's a common practice for those who crave power, to find a scapegoat, to meld people into a cohesive force. The new allies may never have come together, without being convinced that only together would they be able to combat the perceived enemy. At times, these practices may be a viable to combat a legitimate threat, but many times history shows an abuse of power. Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, and Mao Se Dung, are probably the most famous examples, but Jim Jones, David Koresh, and others come to mind, too.

and in context of the entire quote I tend to agree with him.

darkeyes
Jan 5, 2011, 11:37 AM
I merely want to know just what Realist means by one part of his statement.. I agree with him for the most part, but I think it important to clear up his meaning as to the part I have queried.. I'm not trying to take anything out of context at all.. :)

12voltman59
Jan 5, 2011, 1:36 PM
Some of what that person writes of is true---many of those who became the top people in the Nazi party, Hitler's inner circle and maybe even Hitler himself---did go to those camps he spoke of. I only got to see it in part--but I once came across a documentary about the sports camps that were found all over Germany---they basically allowed the boys to be nude--they performed most of their sports in the nude and many of the boys did have sex with each other rather openly. Many of those boys, as grown men, did go on to be the top members of the Nazi party---but many more of those men who had been at those camps as boys did wind up in the concentration camps.

Surely it was a case that Roehm and his crowd were gay--they were openly so until Hitler did away with them.

The part of this that is total BS in my view is when the guy goes off about the "rabid homosexual agenda" crap----as if there is a cabal of gays who are plotting to corrupt society and take things over.

I don't really know where this guy is coming from in terms of being liberal, conservative or whatever--but it surely does seem with conservative types--there is no end to all of those cabals of people they see out there plotting to end freedom and take things over, sorta like that very funny cartoon from a few years ago with the mouse who was so intent on "total world domination!!!" :bigrin::bigrin::bigrin::bigrin:

Realist
Jan 5, 2011, 2:12 PM
Fran,

I think there are times when a country is under threat and some of the population may not see the danger, it's necessary to encourage them to join the team to help out. (I'm not talking about trumped-up charges, like Hitler did about Poland and The Sudetenland, but legitimate threats) They may be in jeopardy and, unless everyone participates as a team, the whole of the country may go under.

I'm not a historical expert, or a political theorist, but I can visualize what would have happened to GB, if almost everyone hadn't chipped in on it's defense. I think we should have helped out before we did, but it's a little late to beat that dog....

Also, I think it was terribly wrong of us and the rest of the free world, not to help Czechoslovakia and Poland. Even after signing a treaty to come to their aid, the allies reneged. We left them alone to hang!

I don't care how much of a pacifist anyone is, when their lives, or those of their loved ones are threatened, they will fight, or die like rats. I'm afraid the allies had no choice. Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo, were working toward world domination and, if not for GB and her allies, we'd all be speaking German, Italian, and Japanese today!

Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan...........I'll leave that argument to the historians.

jamieknyc
Jan 5, 2011, 2:26 PM
it is a myth that there was a mass roundup of homosexuals in Nazi Germany. Homosexuality wasa criminal offense in Germany long before the Nazis came to power, and convicted homosexuals were sent to camps along with otehr convicted criminals. But there was never a policy of actively seeking out homosexuals. Nazi courts even dismissed cases of homosexuality if the defendant agreed to marry.

Gay activists like to make identity politics over those gays who were sent to the camps, but they never like to talk about what they did there. In the camps, like other prisoners of "German race," the gays were the camp elite and were given positions of authority over the Jews who made up the bulk of the prisoners. One of the most feared persons in the camps was the homosexual block captain who had the power to have young men sent to the gas chambers if they did not give in to his wishes.

darkeyes
Jan 5, 2011, 2:35 PM
Doesnt it just bring back "Mein Kampf" and the worst of Nazi propaganda, Voltie? Real people, real names, groups, enough historical reference to catch the attention (I hesitate to say historical fact, but some of that too), appeals to the worst prejudices of a mass of (often less, though not necessarily so, intelligent) people who feel threatened by something of which they know little and are unlikely to make the effort to find out for themselves, and so are likely to accept everything as gospel without question, mix it up in a blender and what do we have? The sort of trash Beck has published. Thats why we cannot sit back and say or do nothing, why we have to argue our corner and make every effort to persuade, cajole and convince.. and crush the life out of this drivel wherever it raises its ugly head..

I am not unduly worried about Beck and his dross.. but as with any such claptrap, we cannot simply let it pass.. we have an obligation to ourselves and to the world not to do so.. for a failure on our part in that, circumstances may yet arise, where, in some future state, maybe Britain, maybe Germany, possibly France, the USA, or somewhere else, that we truly become the scapegoat, the 21st century Jews, blamed for the ills of the world in the eyes of a misdirected and deceived population and pay the price accordingly...

I have always said that a backlash is inevitable against the forward march of gay rights.. it is up to us to ensure that any backlash is stood up to and stopped dead in its tracks.. this is not yet that backlash.. but it is a salutory warning what to expect..

.. but for now.. Fran goes on her weary way, enjoying life, her family and her life to the full.. I wont lose sleep over this nasty piece of work or others like him.. but while I am not fretting as yet, am nowhere near, when I have to I will do my bit, and encourage that others do theirs, to squeeze the life out of his credo, his lies and his credibility..

darkeyes
Jan 6, 2011, 6:31 AM
Fran,

I think there are times when a country is under threat and some of the population may not see the danger, it's necessary to encourage them to join the team to help out. (I'm not talking about trumped-up charges, like Hitler did about Poland and The Sudetenland, but legitimate threats) They may be in jeopardy and, unless everyone participates as a team, the whole of the country may go under.

I'm not a historical expert, or a political theorist, but I can visualize what would have happened to GB, if almost everyone hadn't chipped in on it's defense. I think we should have helped out before we did, but it's a little late to beat that dog....

Also, I think it was terribly wrong of us and the rest of the free world, not to help Czechoslovakia and Poland. Even after signing a treaty to come to their aid, the allies reneged. We left them alone to hang!

I don't care how much of a pacifist anyone is, when their lives, or those of their loved ones are threatened, they will fight, or die like rats. I'm afraid the allies had no choice. Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo, were working toward world domination and, if not for GB and her allies, we'd all be speaking German, Italian, and Japanese today!

Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan...........I'll leave that argument to the historians.

Realist.. I dont want to get into a deep discussion on the rights aand wrongs of historical conflicts.. I have written at length many times in forums of my take on them, of my pacifism, and of why warring is in the first instance the lazy man's way of dealing with disputes, in the second, why it is about preserving property, philosophies and power for national elites and why with some forethought wars could be avoided... nor are we fighting for our way of life.. most think I am potty for holding these views but that doesnt necessarily make me wrong..

.. but these were not my questions to you.. I merely queried whether you believe dishonest propaganda by what I will term "our side" is justifiable, and that by lying to people by our political masters to get them to lay down their lives on a false premise is something to be accepted. Does the end justify the means? Or does it make our political rulers every bit as bad as those they oppose?

DuckiesDarling
Jan 6, 2011, 6:47 AM
.. but these were not my questions to you.. I merely queried whether you believe dishonest propaganda by what I will term "our side" is justifiable, and that by lying to people by our political masters to get them to lay down their lives on a false premise is something to be accepted. Does the end justify the means? Or does it make our political rulers every bit as bad as those they oppose?

Since he already answered you, I'll expand. Yes. It is perfectly allowable as it's been going on with both sides of any conflict, including your oh so prized peace talks, and has been since the dawn of time when Cain asked if he was his brother's keeper to misdirect the attention from his brother's murder.

Sometimes, just like a parent with a child, the government needs to outright lie to increase awarness of an issue without exposing the real information and any informants they may have. Just one person being more alert could stop a hijacking, one person more alert could notice an unattended bag left near a place of gathering and let authorities know. Just one person having a life saved is more than worth whatever offended sensibilities of anyone on this planet.

darkeyes
Jan 6, 2011, 7:20 AM
Its a valid argument u make Darlin' darlin'.. not one I have ever accepted, but most do no denying it.. it does raise a question, and also a real problem.. when we fight these wars based on lies, by both sides, how do we know we are still fighting for the things we are told we are fighting for? And I'm not convinced of the argument about saving a life.. if we didnt war, we would prevent millions being lost.. and millions more ruined.. all lost and ruined based on lies to defend not you or I but vested interest of those who rule over us.. we are the tools they need.. to be utilised and cast aside at will..

..and I didnt mention peace talks, although by definition they are imortant and necessary.. there are other ways of stopping tyrants than peace talks, and war..

..and Realist hun, I may be a pacifist, but I have no intention of dying like a rat.. I dont intend ever to take a human life, but pacifists sacrifice their lives in a myriad of ways to defend the things in which they believe.. that is not dying like rats.. It is pacifism to a great extent which gives us so much angst about war.. and why we frown about things like collateral damage and why in the west at least, there is real concern about how modern warfare is carried out.. the powers that be, and the military strategists and generals would quite happily have us taken out because to a considerable degree it is pacifism and its adherents which are the conscience of the world..

darkeyes
Jan 6, 2011, 7:56 AM
..and while I remember darlin' darlin.. like a parent with a child?? Really.. paternalism? We are not children though often enough adults act like them.. would you lie to your child to gain her or his support and to keep her or him onside? Would you lie to your child to get them to walk across the street and batter the living daylights out of another because of a real or perceived slight or any other reason?

We condemn governments for lying to us in peacetime and deceiving us.. how much more important is it to judge for ourselves the truth of the matter based on reality not some corrupted version which governments think will keep us on side.. fight for a lie if you like.. thats not my way..

DuckiesDarling
Jan 6, 2011, 8:06 AM
..and while I remember darlin' darlin.. like a parent with a child?? Really.. paternalism? We are not children though often enough adults act like them.. would you lie to your child to gain her or his support and to keep her or him onside? Would you lie to your child to get them to walk across the street and batter the living daylights out of another because of a real or perceived slight or any other reason?

We condemn governments for lying to us in peacetime and deceiving us.. how much more important is it to judge for ourselves the truth of the matter based on reality not some corrupted version which governments think will keep us on side.. fight for a lie if you like.. thats not my way..

Once again you try to twist something to make an exaggerated point. Would I lie to my child and tell them that Santa wouldn't bring them presents if they were bad? Yep. Would I lie to any of my children about stranger dangers to keep them safe? Yep. Sadly, don't have to stretch stranger danger much as all you have to do is turn on the news.


Now as for your other post, I never said we are lied to so that we go to war. There has not been since Helen of Troy was kidnapped a war fought merely for ONE person. Sure the catalyst of WWI was an assassination, but that was political not personal. So saving one life rather than 200 killed by a terrorist bomb is most definitely worth any offended sensibilities of anyone, even you dear Fran.

Long Duck Dong
Jan 6, 2011, 8:07 AM
and pacifism has stopped what conflicts and what wars ?????

are we talking about america staying out of ww2.... while the civilian and military count was climbing.... and what happened..... pearl harbour....

or are we talking about the peaceful talks with north korea.... never mind the fact that people are starving to death cos of the years of * peace talks * and trade embargos.....

maybe we are talking about saddam hussein and the * peace talks and negotiations with him, while he was testing chemical weapons on his own people.....

maybe we are refering to the peace talks with israel and gaza... you know.... israel and the people that want to wipe israel off the map.....

I can see failure, after failure after failure .... and a body count that is climbing..... the so called acceptable collateral damage....

now you have no intention of dying like a rat.... yet, there seems to be no issue with others dying like rats in a sewer or a dungeon, or in prison, while people sit around and talk..... and talk...... and talk..... and talk......

can you do me the good grace of showing me where pacifist actions saved the lives of the jews in germany or... saved the lives of the people in iraq under saddam or the many thousands in north korea.....or in israel...... cos unless I am blind.... people died thru lack of action...... and before you try and counter that with the military action cost more lives, and innocent people at that, I draw your attention to the millions that died while no action was taken.......

I have to remember the WW1 vets taking about the high death count on the front lines cos no orders were issued during afternoon tea time... including the orders to retreat... that could have saved lives....

there is a time for no action and a time for action..... a solider will understand that his actions may cost some lives, in order to save others..... a pacifist will argue that no action is good action..... and those that die as a result.... are collateral damage.......

I thought that all life was of value to pacifists, strangely enuf, more often than not, pacifists are happy to sit back and take no action, thus condemning others to dead, in the name of the pacifist beliefs.....

Yes I am a ex soldier and I and of the mindset that I would rather have invaded iraq and cost 1000 civilian lives, thru proaction.... than sit on my ass, holding talks for 20 years and cost 10,000 civilian lives.....

Bluebiyou
Jan 6, 2011, 8:47 AM
I missed entirely how Hitler's sexual relationship with his female cousin, whom he apparently liked pissing on him, and who he eventually had murdered was brought into the Hitler equation.
But, this is a writing taylored for some "virtue online".
It has to reach so far - for support of it's thesis - that it somehow leaves out:
Sociopathy
Reflexive pathologies to child abuse.
Power hunger
Greed
Intolerance.
In it's equation of human behavior.

The author did a great job in pursuing a bogus article that would spark interest in a confined group by biasing both data and logic. The "virtue online" internet forum may hire him again for a future article. :)
Unfortunately, this also tarnishes the author's future (assuming he uses the same name) of ever rising above yellow journalism jobs.

Realist
Jan 6, 2011, 8:51 AM
LDD, That was the most astute thing I've ever read about pacifism! No truer thing was ever said!

Bluebiyou
Jan 6, 2011, 9:01 AM
Plus the author forgot to include that the homosexual general Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben helped the revolutionary forces of America in their horrible civil war (and subsequent betrayal and estrangement) from loving mother Britain.
Indeed, after examining his methods and affects, one might say the general provided critical help (as in hindsight might-have-lost-the-war) and lasting influence to these rebellious traitors.
What a shame the author did not include (as further proof) the fact the USA might very well (and with virtue!) still be a British colony... except for a butch homosexual general in the late 1790s.

Realist
Jan 6, 2011, 9:27 AM
Fran wrote.......".. but these were not my questions to you.. I merely queried whether you believe dishonest propaganda by what I will term "our side" is justifiable, and that by lying to people by our political masters to get them to lay down their lives on a false premise is something to be accepted. Does the end justify the means? Or does it make our political rulers every bit as bad as those they oppose?"

I can see how the above could cause a continuing debate that branches out like a family tree, each branch leading to more and more conjecture, theories, and emotional banter. However, I am not intellectually adept enough, nor do I have the energy to delve into this too deeply.

I will only say that in my opinion, maybe the ends do justify the means, in some instances.

Are our rulers as bad as those we oppose? Considering our historical opponents, I'd say no. Are our leaders angels, or infallible? I'd say absolutely not. Maybe, at best, they are sometimes the lesser of two evils.

I can think of some American leaders who were most self-serving, devious, and manipulative. Still, comparing our leaders with some others...the debate can go on and on.

And no, I usually don't believe propaganda, but sometimes it does achieve results that does benefit the majority.

12voltman59
Jan 6, 2011, 10:20 AM
I later recalled the name of that very funny cartoon show--it was "Pinky and The Brain."

I am sure that kids loved it since it was a cartoon--but like Rocky and Bullwinkle and other cartoons over the years---they could appeal just as much to adults for their use of sly humor and double entendre.

I wished they still were making new episodes of that cartoon. I thought it was very, very funny.

Bluebiyou
Jan 6, 2011, 11:11 AM
Fran was born a few year later than the song was made. I first heard it shortly before Fran was born.
It wasn't very well known at the time.
The group was called 'Yes'.
The song was 'The Gates of Delirium' on the Relayer album. Fantastic song, ROCK OUT (not sarcasm, I love this song, it rocks).
But it captures the... part of the perspective,feeling, and reasoning on Fran's side of the argument.

Without pacifism, without peace, war would be pointless. Who wants to war every day to work, fighting and killing blacks, whites, hispanics, gays, breeders (straights), bisexuals, idiots, intellectuals, haves, have nots, filthy Muslims, infidel crusader invading Christians? Let's learn to get along.
However, human nature being inescapable, there's always some asshole who wants to shit on everyone (quick allusion to puppet movie "Team America"), and if by chance of personal charm, politics, etc s/he comes into power, then complete obliteration of the existing structure must occur, by violent military power to destroy the social evil.
The NAZI party (even without Hitler and many key henchmen) would have continued it's evil structure because it is that the people - who were elements of the party - would sustain the structure.
The same is true of my current company. The structure is corrupt. The worker bees are mostly honest and decent folk, but subject to corrupt directives from corrupt structure. Government required measures to counter corruption (the required 'watchdog' entities within companies) are themselves entirely corrupt. My company is profitable and sustainable as long as we keep up the corrupt status quo. The company structure will have to be destroyed to eliminate the inherent evil, just like the 3rd reich.
FRAN, or possibly someone else. How about we write a book that is the counter to Mein Kampf. A book geared solely to counter the ascension of evil over populace. It would be like a constitution or bill of rights for all people with successive guidelines against evil. Perhaps local neighborhood, corporate, local government, small nation government, and large nation government. Possibly other divisions (or non-divisions) I haven't though of.

Bluebiyou
Jan 6, 2011, 11:28 AM
There is so much 'to' the American constitution and bill of rights that furthered the entire world. Reasonable freedom of speech, reasonable freedom of press, reasonable freedom of religion, reasonable right to bear arms... that seem so necessary for as many humans as possible to live in the highest existence of human history. Indeed, it can be said that when humans were ushered into a 'higher existence' that even animals 'rights' improved (theoretically, as long as the animals in question were cute, cuddly and weren't food or profitable human commodity).

Long Duck Dong
Jan 7, 2011, 12:53 AM
There is so much 'to' the American constitution and bill of rights that furthered the entire world. Reasonable freedom of speech, reasonable freedom of press, reasonable freedom of religion, reasonable right to bear arms... that seem so necessary for as many humans as possible to live in the highest existence of human history. Indeed, it can be said that when humans were ushered into a 'higher existence' that even animals 'rights' improved (theoretically, as long as the animals in question were cute, cuddly and weren't food or profitable human commodity).

with the freedom of rights and speech, we also gave power to groups like the WBC and the KKK.......

we have not really advanced the human race that much but we have made great gains in giving people more power to create conflict legally.....

unfortunately we have not furthered the entire world, but actually brought it to the brink of destruction..... while groups gain rights, countries are falling under the burden of money and power......

when we are starving, cold and thirsty, we will learn that all the rights we have fought for, are hollow victories.....as we can not live on human rights and equal rights and the minimum wage, if there is no water to drink, no food to eat and no house to live in.....