Quote from hii a_ooiioo_a:
What I can tell you is that the mentality and ideologies of these two psychopaths are identical. Just the names and scenery have been changed, but it's the same plot and the same dialogue.
Hitler: seized power by blowing up the German parliament, or whatever that building was, replacing the democratic government with his dictatorship. Hitler gained influence by writing his hateful book in prison.
Bush: seized power by vote tampering (what a coincidence that the governor of Florida happens to be Bush's little brother, huh?), thwarting the legitimate American democratic electoral process.
Crazy things happened in Florida, and I believe that there were some corrupt things happening as well. However, this is a far cry from turning a democracy into a democracy based on a racist and murderous ideology. Kennedy won his election again Nixon with fraud as well. Is Kennedy similar to Hitler? And the suggestion that the "idealogies of these two" are identical is too absurd. Bush has done nothing to try to push for segregation or genocide. In fact, he was relaxing immigration laws before September 11th.
Quote from hii a_ooiioo_a:
Bush has stated more than once that he wished he were the dictator of America rather than the president. He should be writing a book (if he knew how to write) from prison, which is where he belongs along with all those who colluded in the serious treasonous act of swindling a presidential election.
Hitler: used jingoistic excessive patriotic flagwaving (swastika) in the name of national unity to keep Germans distracted and suppress any and all dissent. He called his world-dominance plan the "New Order" and rallied Germans with his xenophobic dogma about The Fatherland.
Bush: used jingoistic patriotic flagwaving (stars & stripes) in the name of national unity to keep Americans distracted and suppress any and all dissent. Both George Bush Sr and Jr have spoken about America's dominant role in the "New World Order", and Bush's xenophobic dogma is crystallized in his policies about The Homeland.
Even if Bush has demonstrated xenophobia (again, he was actually relaxing immigration laws, especially for Mexicans, before September 11th), this is so far removed from the depictions, demonization, racist propganda and violent condoning that Hitler utilized to seize and maintain power. Hitler assasinated his political opponents, turned a democracy into a totalitarian state (which is more complete consolidation of power and brainwashing of the masses than occurs under even a typical dictatorship). On the night of Kristalnacht, after the Nazis had encouraged the masses to loot and attack Jews (soon to be followed by attacks on many other groups, and following the massacres of those with mental disabilities), Hitler charged the Jews money for "causing" their own victimhood. Bush? Never has he done anything that even deserves comparison to such. Making such comparisons is an insult to all the people who suffered under this nightmare, just as comparisons between slavery and contemporary questionable grievances in this country is an insult to those who suffered and persevered through slavery and the lynchings that followed.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Quote from hii a_ooiioo_a:
Hitler: used paranoid scapegoating to unify Germans through manufactured hatred. It's "Us" against "The Evil Ones". Hitler stirred up racial hatred of the Jews, the Gypsies, the Slavs. Called his alliance the Axis.
Bush: uses paranoid scapegoating to unify Americans through manufactured hatred. It's "Good vs. Evil". Bush stirs up cultural hatred of the Afghans, the Iraqis, the North Koreans. Calls them the Axis Of Evil.
First, there is evil in this world. To deny this is to engage in moral equivocation. When people want to force their twisted and oppressive sexist and religious views on everyone else, and seek to murder all those who don't and won't believe what they do, this is evil. Hitler was evil. bin Laden is evil. Moreover, Bush has never tried to demonize N. Koreans nor the Afghan people. He stated quite the opposite many times. He referred to evil regimes, headed by evil people.
[/B][/QUOTE]
Quote from hii a_ooiioo_a:
Hitler: odd little mustache
Bush: Remington electric razor
Yeah, Bush hasn't killed 11 million people. "Only" a few thousand so far. But neither had Hitler in 1935, two years into his regime.
George is doing his darndest to follow in Adolf's footsteps though.
[/B]
I guess this is supposed to be funny. But being serious, Hitler started killing the mentally retarded and insane before long, and he started setting the stage for genocide from before he even was elected (beginning with his attempted coup, and then the writing of Mein Kampf-sp??-, which is a best seller in many Arab countries).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Quote from hii a_ooiioo_a:
If you think Christian abuses are all in the past, what about Bosnia, what about Northern Ireland, as handy top-of-the-head examples. What about the political dominance and genocide of the Bosnian Moslems by the intolerant Christian Serbs? Surely your distaste for Moslems doesn't justify in your mind the situations where Moslems are the victims of genocide at the hands of Christians? Surely Milosevic's brutal genocide of Moslems and Croats was not somehow less horrible than Hitler's genocide of Jews and Gypsies, just because the ethnicity and numbers of the victims were not identical.
Such inappropriate argument would reflect poorly on you.
The murder of Bosnian muslums was very wrong. However, the muslums engaged in atrocities as well, and KLA was employing terrorist tactics (as it still does in Macedonia) from before the Serbs began their massacres. However, what Milosovic did was very wrong. N. Ireland is a political dispute with religious under tones (often simply an excuse).