New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

If someone calls you a Nazi...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Colorforms

Senator
It doesn’t take a master of propaganda to point out a blindingly obvious truth. Goebbels, a right-wing propagandist, had of course a much more difficult job of twisting the truth until it appeared to support a side that (then and now) was at war with science, history, and decency.
He had the same tools as today's fascist left. He had the schools, the media, and many court positions throughout the country.
 

FakeName

Governor
Apparently it is a number of things. Currently among the left it is a movement, just like it was in Germany and Italy. And in all 3 cases, it's linked again to socialism.
It is not now, and never has been, a left wing movement just like communnism is not, and never has bee , a right wing movement.
 

Colorforms

Senator
It is not now, and never has been, a left wing movement just like communnism is not, and never has bee , a right wing movement.
And yet it has been adopted by the left here in the US. Guess you lefties broke another cultural norm. Congrats. :)
 

EatTheRich

President
Apparently it is a number of things. Currently among the left it is a movement, just like it was in Germany and Italy. And in all 3 cases, it's linked again to socialism.
The “link” is fascism’s eternal enmity toward socialism. Fascism has always been a right-wing, irreconcilably anti-socialist, movement.
 

write on

Senator
Doing away with labor unions. Doing away with any regulation over business environment safety. Allowing agreements between business to form monopolies over segments of industry or the economy...Price fixing.

Fascism is all about trickle down economics. A very regulated link between business and industry that is supposed to be for the good of all by making business more profitable...
And here is an example of right wing fascism....


1593884567602.png
 

FakeName

Governor
And yet it has been adopted by the left here in the US. Guess you lefties broke another cultural norm. Congrats. :)
No, it hasn't.

It is an undeniable fact that the fascists in the US are on the right. They organized the UNITE THE RIGHT rally for Christ's sake, not a UNITE THE LEFT rally.

And no the people that confronted those fascists and fought with them (i.e. leftists) are not fascists.

Violently opposing fascism does not make one a fascist. It is perfectly Orwellian to say that it does though.
 

AIL

Jet fuel that's a good one.
Keep listening to the Jewish news media and you will be OK
..

The newspaper of record the New York times lied to you on many occasions to get their pro war agenda in the middle east for Israel's benefit

Believe what you what to believe I don't kiss any ass especially Jewish ass ; if you want to kiss Jewish ass go a head Om not going to stop you .

Scum bag news media
New York Times: we were wrong on Iraq





TOO late millions dead and trillions of dollars down the drain but Israel and the Zionist extremist are happy you fought their war for them


The New York Times today issued an extraordinary mea culpa over its coverage of Iraq, admitting it had been misled about the presence of weapons of mass destruction by sources including the controversial Iraqi leader Ahmad Chalabi.
In a note to readers published today under the headline 'The Times and Iraq', the editors of the newspaper said they had found "a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been".
"In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged.
"Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged - or failed to emerge," they continued.
Advertisement

The paper said it was encouraged to report the claims by "United States officials convinced of the need to intervene in Iraq".
But today for the first time it admitted that accounts of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq were never independently verified.
"It is still possible that chemical or biological weapons will be unearthed in Iraq, but in this case it looks as if we, along with the administration, were taken in. And until now we have not reported that to our readers," the paper said.
The Baghdad offices of Mr Chalabi, the one-time favourite of the Bush administration as a future leader of Iraq, were raided last week by Iraqi police over alleged links with the Iranian intelligence forces.
The New York Times today admitted he had introduced reporters to exiles bent on "regime change" in Iraq.
And it said that when other journalists wrote stories that appeared to contradict claims of a WMD programme in Iraq, their reports were buried.
The paper said editors should have challenged reporters on their information but were "perhaps too intent on rushing scoops into the paper".
"Accounts of Iraqi defectors were not always weighed against their strong desire to have Saddam Hussein ousted," the Times added.
"Articles based on dire claims about Iraq tended to get prominent display, while follow-up articles that called the original ones into question were sometimes buried. In some cases, there was no follow-up at all."
The paper said it considered "the story of Iraq's weapons, and of the pattern of misinformation, to be unfinished business", adding, "we fully intend to continue aggressive reporting aimed at setting the record straight".
One of the New York Times' star reporters, Judith Miller, is known to have relied heavily on Mr Chalabi for stories about Iraq's purported weapons of mass destruction, although she was not named in today's piece.
The note to readers cited a front-page article published on December 20 2001, which quoted an Iraqi defector who said he had personally worked on "renovations of secret facilities for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in underground wells, private villas and under the Saddam Hussein Hospital in Baghdad as recently as a year ago".
But it added that when the defector had recently been asked to identify to US officials the sites where he claimed to have worked, he had failed to do so. The officials, the paper said, had also found no evidence of such weapons programmes.
The New York Times' admission that it was misled by sources follows the revelation a year ago that another of its reporters, Jayson Blair, had fabricated and plagiarised large sections of stories carried by the paper.
That scandal led to the departure of the then editor, Howell Raines, and is widely regarded as having seriously dented the image of the country's national press.
Recent research showed more than half of all national news journalists and 46% of local news reporters in the US "believe that journalism is going in the wrong direction".

 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
No, it hasn't.

It is an undeniable fact that the fascists in the US are on the right. They organized the UNITE THE RIGHT rally for Christ's sake, not a UNITE THE LEFT rally.

And no the people that confronted those fascists and fought with them (i.e. leftists) are not fascists.

Violently opposing fascism does not make one a fascist. It is perfectly Orwellian to say that it does though.
If you go look at the Rose City Antifa website you'll find that freedom of speech is not a right they support for people they don't like. They actually argue that using violence to keep opinions they don't like is a good thing. I don't mind their counter protests, their violence is unacceptable. They actually say that they want to make their communities "Ungovernable" in order to stem the growth of fascism...They're nuts and should be shut down wherever they show up to start a riot.
 

Colorforms

Senator
The “link” is fascism’s eternal enmity toward socialism. Fascism has always been a right-wing, irreconcilably anti-socialist, movement.
You keep claiming that, yet it seems to always be adopted by socialists. You should rethink your propaganda.
 

Colorforms

Senator
No, it hasn't.

It is an undeniable fact that the fascists in the US are on the right. They organized the UNITE THE RIGHT rally for Christ's sake, not a UNITE THE LEFT rally.

And no the people that confronted those fascists and fought with them (i.e. leftists) are not fascists.

Violently opposing fascism does not make one a fascist. It is perfectly Orwellian to say that it does though.
You're conflating what people call themselves with what they do. The left wing Antifa calls itself "antifascist" but they violently attack people who don't think like they do, and use terrorist tactics to attain political goals. It's like a person claiming that killing murderers makes them an "anti-murderer".

The left are, by definition, fascists. Your acceptance of this is irrelevant. The left very rarely admits what they really are. It took decades for them to finally admit their socialists after all of their denials. I didn't expect they would admit to being fascists. :)
 

FakeName

Governor
You're conflating what people call themselves with what they do. The left wing Antifa calls itself "antifascist" but they violently attack people who don't think like they do, and use terrorist tactics to attain political goals. It's like a person claiming that killing murderers makes them an "anti-murderer".

The left are, by definition, fascists. Your acceptance of this is irrelevant. The left very rarely admits what they really are. It took decades for them to finally admit their socialists after all of their denials. I didn't expect they would admit to being fascists. :)
Antifa violently attacks fascists.

What they do makes them anti fascist.

Like I said, Violently opposing fascism does not make one a fascist.

It is perfectly Orwellian to say that it does though.
 

EatTheRich

President
Keep listening to the Jewish news media and you will be OK
..

The newspaper of record the New York times lied to you on many occasions to get their pro war agenda in the middle east for Israel's benefit

Believe what you what to believe I don't kiss any ass especially Jewish ass ; if you want to kiss Jewish ass go a head Om not going to stop you .

Scum bag news media
New York Times: we were wrong on Iraq





TOO late millions dead and trillions of dollars down the drain but Israel and the Zionist extremist are happy you fought their war for them


The New York Times today issued an extraordinary mea culpa over its coverage of Iraq, admitting it had been misled about the presence of weapons of mass destruction by sources including the controversial Iraqi leader Ahmad Chalabi.
In a note to readers published today under the headline 'The Times and Iraq', the editors of the newspaper said they had found "a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been".
"In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged.
"Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged - or failed to emerge," they continued.
Advertisement

The paper said it was encouraged to report the claims by "United States officials convinced of the need to intervene in Iraq".
But today for the first time it admitted that accounts of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq were never independently verified.
"It is still possible that chemical or biological weapons will be unearthed in Iraq, but in this case it looks as if we, along with the administration, were taken in. And until now we have not reported that to our readers," the paper said.
The Baghdad offices of Mr Chalabi, the one-time favourite of the Bush administration as a future leader of Iraq, were raided last week by Iraqi police over alleged links with the Iranian intelligence forces.
The New York Times today admitted he had introduced reporters to exiles bent on "regime change" in Iraq.
And it said that when other journalists wrote stories that appeared to contradict claims of a WMD programme in Iraq, their reports were buried.
The paper said editors should have challenged reporters on their information but were "perhaps too intent on rushing scoops into the paper".
"Accounts of Iraqi defectors were not always weighed against their strong desire to have Saddam Hussein ousted," the Times added.
"Articles based on dire claims about Iraq tended to get prominent display, while follow-up articles that called the original ones into question were sometimes buried. In some cases, there was no follow-up at all."
The paper said it considered "the story of Iraq's weapons, and of the pattern of misinformation, to be unfinished business", adding, "we fully intend to continue aggressive reporting aimed at setting the record straight".
One of the New York Times' star reporters, Judith Miller, is known to have relied heavily on Mr Chalabi for stories about Iraq's purported weapons of mass destruction, although she was not named in today's piece.
The note to readers cited a front-page article published on December 20 2001, which quoted an Iraqi defector who said he had personally worked on "renovations of secret facilities for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in underground wells, private villas and under the Saddam Hussein Hospital in Baghdad as recently as a year ago".
But it added that when the defector had recently been asked to identify to US officials the sites where he claimed to have worked, he had failed to do so. The officials, the paper said, had also found no evidence of such weapons programmes.
The New York Times' admission that it was misled by sources follows the revelation a year ago that another of its reporters, Jayson Blair, had fabricated and plagiarised large sections of stories carried by the paper.
That scandal led to the departure of the then editor, Howell Raines, and is widely regarded as having seriously dented the image of the country's national press.
Recent research showed more than half of all national news journalists and 46% of local news reporters in the US "believe that journalism is going in the wrong direction".

Inconveniently for your thesis, the Iraq War undermined Israel, weakened the U.S.-Israel alliance, and strengthened Israel’s major antagonist, Iran.
 

EatTheRich

President
Hmmm, I'll take your lack of rational retort as a concession that I am right.
I have already, in detail, exposed as a lie your claim that “left-wing fascists” exist. You have simply repeated your demonstrably false claim without bothering to address my factual counterarguments. You have also ignored that Goebbels, like you, was compelled to tell outlandish lies to support his far-right POV, while the left has benefitted from telling the truth and does not so much control the media as benefits from having a minimal level of honesty in the media.
 

EatTheRich

President
You're conflating what people call themselves with what they do. The left wing Antifa calls itself "antifascist" but they violently attack people who don't think like they do, and use terrorist tactics to attain political goals. It's like a person claiming that killing murderers makes them an "anti-murderer".

The left are, by definition, fascists. Your acceptance of this is irrelevant. The left very rarely admits what they really are. It took decades for them to finally admit their socialists after all of their denials. I didn't expect they would admit to being fascists. :)
“Fascism” is not synonymous with “factional thuggery.” That is of course typical of fascism, but not unique to them. What distinguishes fascism is its general war, not against this or that dissenting voice within the labor movement, but against the labor movement as such.
 

EatTheRich

President
Antifa violently attacks fascists.

What they do makes them anti fascist.

Like I said, Violently opposing fascism does not make one a fascist.

It is perfectly Orwellian to say that it does though.
Antifa attacks fascists, rightists, conservatives, liberals, even left-wing radicals. What separates them from fascists is their left-wing orientation, enmity toward actual fascism, and lack of big-business support. All things that could change in the future.
 

write on

Senator
If you go look at the Rose City Antifa website you'll find that freedom of speech is not a right they support for people they don't like. They actually argue that using violence to keep opinions they don't like is a good thing. I don't mind their counter protests, their violence is unacceptable. They actually say that they want to make their communities "Ungovernable" in order to stem the growth of fascism...They're nuts and should be shut down wherever they show up to start a riot.
"I don't mind their counter protests, their violence is unacceptable."

And how many decades must they have to endure before they see change?

History shows that 'peaceful' protests don't work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top