Personally, I don't support the Torture of P.O.W.'s, seems too nazi-like

[mopaul]

is this somehow a quaint and antiquated notion now? should i apologize, and to whom? is it now a crime to compare criminal behaviour as nazi-like? even if it's true? when did this law go into effect?

[kansasblue]

1. I agree, no need for you to apologize or cry.

[Cha]

2. bush was in some newspaper

article on ..
"The Bush administration altered critical portions of a scientific analysis of the environmental impact of cattle grazing on public lands before announcing Thursday that it would relax regulations limiting grazing on those lands, according to scientists involved in the study."

with his Heil Hitler Salute..



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3898373

http://news.yahoo.com/s/latimests/20050618/ts_latimes/landstudyongrazingdenounced

[sofaman1]

3. Someone over the weekend said...

that the first person to use the word "Nazi" has lost the argument. Might have been George Mitchell.

[stepnw1f]

4. Whatever....

[Mythsaje]

5. The problem with this reasoning

is that it'll be impossible to use when the comparison is absolutely accurate. It may be a bit of hyperbole now (though the comparison between the Republicans and the early Nazi party is viable) but if it wasn't hyperbolic, but factual?

[sofaman1]

7. Using the "Nazi" analogy..

is a losing argument. I don't believe that it's possible to use the term without it being hyperbolic. The fact is that when one uses the term, the immediate thought that springs to mind is genocide. And there isn't a rational person that honestly believes that the US is guilty of genocide.

[mopaul]

8. hee hee, you're funny

[annabanana]

11. the biggest problem with the term "Nazi"

is that it is time specific, to a particular group of fascists.

We should always use the correct, generic term. Bush is a fascist, the neo-con agenda is a fascist agenda.

Problem solved..

[Mythsaje]

14. That's the one I use,

personally. But I think a certain amount of historical perspective is important...the rise of the Nazis to power and their initial consolidation of said power...before the death camps. There are some striking similarities in behavior and philosophy.

[sofaman1]

17. Sorry, I don't see the logic in that...

it's okay to disagree politically, but the rhetoric has become so overblown. We may disagree with Bush completely, but he's no fascist.

The same type of rhetoric was used when Clinton was Pres. The right called him a communist, a socialist and God knows what else. It was stupid then just as this is stupid now.

We disagree? Fine. Work to change it. Stop hurling insults and get to work. Get the message out. What do we stand for? Right now, we stand for insults. I remember back in 1999 when Ma richards said that the one thing that Bush will do is stay on message. And he does...hammmers away at it and doesn't get distracted. He ignores the slings and arrows and sticks to his message.

Democrats would do well to take a leaf out of that play book. Define your campaign, and run with it. Don't be deflected or distracted. Ranting just makes us look silly.

[Mythsaje]

23. Bush isn't a fascist?

Let's see.

Takes away civil liberties. Check.
Silences dissent by calling dissenters "traitors." Check.
Supports corporate interests over human interests. Check.
Avoids any contact with protesters. Check.
Starts a war on false pretenses. Check.
Would be considering other wars if he had the troops. Check.
Lies consistently. Check.

Seems pretty fascist to me.

[sofaman1]

36. well...

here's the problem.

I was born and raised in a country that was a fascist state. And we, in the US, aren't anywhere close.

Civil liberties? We don't need travel documents to allow us to travel from San Diego to Phoenix, or from New York to Philadelphia. And when we don't have those documents we're thrown in prison.

Silence dissent by calling people traitors? That's silly. You silence dissent by arresting people in the dead of night and taking them to God knows where where they can be held incommunicado for as long as the secret police deem necessary, which could be years. Reason? Don't need one. They don't have to admit that he's being held or where he's being held. He just disappears.

You silence dissent by "banning" people. They may not be quoted, they may not meet with more than 2 other people at any one time, including family. They must surrender their passport. They are under house arrest and may not leave their home without written permission. They and their home are subject to searches at all ours of the day or night. All visitors to their home are subject to arrest and detention. You may not receive representatives of the foreign press, or representatives of humanitarian organizations.

Corporate interests over human interests? I don't see it. The ex-CEO of TYCO was just sentenced to 15 yrs in prison. The CFO? Same deal.

Avoids contact with protesters...of course. All politicians do. BTW, in a fascist state, the secret police photograph you, your phone is tapped, you're followed sporadically, you're picked up and brought in "for questioning"...kept for a couple of days in solitary...your food is pushed through a hole in a solid door. There are no windows, so you don't know whether it's day or night because they took your watch and clothes.Protests? In a fascist state, you don't have the right. You'd disappear.

Starts a war under false pretenses? Interpretive...we can agree or disagree.

Would be considering other wars if he had the troops. I don't know that. Supposition.

Lies consistently...he's a politician. It's part of the job description.

I've said before, politically we can disagree 50%, 80% or 100%. But hyperbole destroys arguments. Meantime, I'm sorry that this turned into such a long post. But I've been there. There is not a thing that we have experienced in this country that would warrant the utterance of a word like fascism.

[YankeyMCC]

44. It's not a light switch

The path starts somewhere and pointing to the potential destination is not out of line when talking about such important issues.

[Mythsaje]

51. In many cultures

control of the bottom from those on the top is merely business as usual. Look at the Russians and Chinese, for example. The Chinese replaced an Imperial bureaucratic tyranny with a Communist bureaucratic tyranny. The people at the bottom didn't have a chance, and, for all intents and purposes, don't recognize the difference. Same with Russia, in a way. It's not as though they were free societies that had the opportunity to recognize the creeping onset of tyranny. They have nothing to compare it with.

But the concept of the United States has always been based on self-determination. This isn't even arguable. But when the government spreads "disinformation" in the interest of deceiving the public into doing something it wouldn't ordinarily agree with, and shouting down voices of dissent with personal attacks and conceptual non-sequitors in order to 'change the subject,' as it were, it IS moving in the direction of fascism. It hasn't gotten to the point people are being 'disappeared,' but you don't need to 'disappear' people if you've warped the justice system to the point where it serves your interests anyway. It doesn't matter if people are still able to exercise their own judgment if the information they're basing these judgments on is fundamentally flawed in the first place.

You can't say "I know fascism and this isn't fascism" as if there aren't as many possible models of tyranny as there are potential tyrants and tyrannical regimes. A subtle tyranny (or 'fascism-lite') is as bad in its own way as one that's overt...in fact, it may be worse, for EXACTLY the reason we're dealing with here. It's harder to recognize encroaching tyranny if you're expecting it to look like hardcore tyranny right out of the gate.

A government seemingly disassembling the in-built checks and balances designed to protect people from tyranny is a damned suspicious thing. When one group of religious people known for their contempt for other sects of the same damn religion, start trying to dismantle the wall of separation between church and state (originally intended to keep the various Christian sects from doing this very thing) one can only watch nervously, hoping it doesn't go too far.

When those who lived through the holocaust are now returning to Germany because they say this is all getting too familiar, it's time to sit up and pay attention.

[datasuspect]

34. yeah WE should take a leaf out of W's playbook

what in god's name are YOU smoking?

the RW has a virtual monopoly on smear, illogic, falsehood, unreason, dirt, lunacy, insults, and everything else you are attempting to tar the left with.

get transparent much?

[sofaman1]

37. Smoking?

I'm trying to tar the left with all those things?

I made a comment..maybe you disagree and that's okay. But...um..I don't smoke. And I'm not trying to tar anyone with anything.

[datasuspect]

40. ummm

it usually isn't a good idea to go to a left-leaning progressive site that is called DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND to shill for bush.

[sofaman1]

41. You're funny...

I come here because, typically, I'm able to have a reasonable discussion with reasonable people. I sometimes agree, and I sometimes disagree.

I do not toe a party line, which is why I am a registered independent. I don't have to apologize to you for my opinions, anymore than you have to apologize to me. I'm sorry you have a problem with that. But I enjoy it here although I haven't been here that long, so I think I'll stay.

[datasuspect]

43. oh, the old "registered independent" line

well that's fine, i'm just one of those people that think that anyone to the right of mikhail bakunin has a mental disorder.

good luck promoting W though.

let me know how that works out for you.

you know, it's really offensive to tell many people who have a visceral disgust for that man to tell them to "take a leaf from his playbook."

[sofaman1]

45. I have no intention of getting into a pissing contest with you.

[datasuspect]

46. then stop urinating on me

by saying we should "take a leaf from w's playbook."

can you explain that further?

that is some O-F-F-E-N-S-I-V-E stuff.

[sofaman1]

49. It's very simple..

He stays on message...he isn't distracted. That was first pointed out by Anne Richards. She was exactly correct.

So here is what I have learned..stay on message. Don't be distracted. By staying on message, you don't make mistakes, like Dick Durbin did.

By staying on message, people learn what you stand for..that's how Bill Clinton won twice. With all the nonsense swirling around him, he plugged away at his message and he won. That is the common denominator between Bush and Clinton.

I have no idea why you got your knickers in a wad. Whether you detest someone or not, it is very interesting to study what has made them successful.

[datasuspect]

50. so what you are saying is

by mentioning your agreement with george w. bush and cloaking it in terms of how notable democrats "support" certain aspects of him, this somehow justifies your idea that we should "take a leaf from his playbook?"

and what message was bush staying on precisely?

what message?

that gays are second class citizens?

that saddam hussein (the one osama bin laden called a "socialist infidel") caused 9-11?

that there were "weapons of mass destruction?"

and how did dick durbin make a mistake?

i don't think you realize where you are.

[Mythsaje]

13. We are not responsible

for the assumptions of other people.

You say "Nazi," and people imagine death camps.

But they didn't start out with death camps. They started out small, and slow, doing many of the same things this government is doing. The comparison IS valid.

So it's Nazi-lite. :shrug:

Question is--do we see this administration and the republicans as INCAPABLE of something like that? Ask any atheist, agnostic, or pagan. Hell, ask any older Japanese American or Native American. Ask someone who follows Islam. You'll get a much different answer than if you ask your average white-bread heartlander.

[sofaman1]

30. I think way more of the American people

than that. This is not a compliant electorate. I fail totally to see any parallel between the United States under George Bush and Germany under Adolph Hitler. It may make us feel better to call Bush a fascist or a Nazi, etc but it really isn't accurate and it accomplishes nothing.

My own reaction to "Nazi" statements, is threefold:

1. It angers me because it devalues the enormity of the crimes of the Nazis and insults the memory of the 10 million souls that perished at the hands of those madmen.

2. I roll my eyes and think that the person saying it has kooked out.

3. If the person saying it, holds a position of power such as Sen Durbin, and really believes that we are behaving like Nazis, then he should be relieved of his duties and referred to an appropriate clinic.

[datasuspect]

35. this is not a "competent" electorate

complete sentence there buddy.

[sofaman1]

38. Not a competent electorate?

That's a chilling statement.

[datasuspect]

39. chillingly true

or do you read the papers?

i guess 50 million retards can't be wrong (the ones who voted against their own interests to reelect the idiot son of an asshole - bushy boy, aka mangina, that is).

[datasuspect]

32. i am a rational person

and i honestly believe the U.S. is/has been guilty of genocide in the past.

read much history?

[Cleita]

20. The comparison is accurate right now.

How many parallels have to be drawn for you. It's almost as if we are reliving history except that this time we are the bad guys.

[Mythsaje]

24. Who's "we,"

kemo sabe? Got mouse in pocket? ;)

We're along for the ride...and kicking and screaming the whole way.

[Straight Shooter]

12. Nazi Nazi Nazi.

There. I've now lost three arguments in a row.

But I'm still right.

[MisterP]

22. Nazi Nazi Nazi Nazi Nazi Nazi--I got six!

[Cleita]

18. Yes, then our argument has been diluted considerably when

we can't use it. You only lose the argument when they tell you what you can and cannot say. That's what they want. Next they will be calling you girlie men.

[datasuspect]

33. the only way you can win an argument with RW'ers

is to agree that bush is right about everything.

[Jack Rabbit]

6. Nazis may have done worse things than Gitmo GIs as reported by the FBI

However, Nazis did those things, too, and heretofore it has been regarded as unacceptable for those wearing American uniform to do them.

Senator Durbin owed no one an apology. Those in power who told our soldiers that it is acceptable to violate the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture owe the American people much more than an apology. They should spend the rest of their live behind bars apologizing.

[Cleita]

21. You know the world as a whole didn't know how bad things

were under the Nazis until they were defeated and the camps opened up. We have yet to see what real atrocities our government has wrought.

[Jack Rabbit]

27. You're right, but . . .

We really didn't know anything about that sort of thing at all until the death camps were discovered. We already know enough about the neocon gulags to press charges against those who established and maintain them.

Even if they are nowhere near as bad as Nazi death camps, that isn't the point. They are bad enough.

[EFerrari]

29. They're just not as bad YET. n/t

[Al-CIAda]

9. Not now, but your words may be taken out of context, and THEN it

will be demanded that YOU apologize.

[Mythsaje]

15. Okay, then,

I apologize that I pointed out the inescapable fact that this administration's policies have had the unintended consequence of reminding people of Nazis.

[Rex]

10. Supporting torture was like so 2004.

You gotta get into the now! Napalm is the 'it' thing in 2005.

[Cleita]

16. No law went into effect, just a bunch of apologists for the

regime trying to propagandize the issue and turn our attention away from it. It's too bad that some of those who have a forum to speak for us have decided to speak more nicely of a bunch of cutthroat criminals who are no better than Nazis.

[EFerrari]

19. Once you start apologizing to these Nazis, you're in for more

fresh Fascist hell.

Durbin has now made a mistake. Too bad that he's in for a hot, tall pile, because I really like this man.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

25. If they act like Nazis they should expect to be compared to them.

Which is what Durbin did. His apology was unnecessary.

[Cleita]

26. Truer words were never spoken.

:yourock:

[philosophie_en_rose]

28. Apparently, it's taboo to learn from the rise of the Nazis.

It's too mean and unfair to call torturing prisoners with methods used by the Nazis as Nazi-like. It's just not nice to say that Gestapo-like tactics have anything in common with techniques used by the Gestapo. Concerned about the rise of fascism in America? Forget about it!

Nope. No learning from history. No examining current events in relation to the hideous acts of the past. Please look away from the reality around you.



:sarcasm:

[Boo Boo]

31. I agree. Torturing people is the kind of thing

that the war criminals Bush's grandfather did business with would do.

[jimshoes]

42. If someone acts like a Nazi

or if an action committed by someone can be equated to a behavior by someone who happened to be a Nazi can no longer be stated without being prejudged as not being a valid comparisson, we have lost part of our ability to argue a point. I'm not falling for it. Some of these assholes are acting just like Nazi's and that's got to change.

[Xithras]

47. Ironically, the Nazi's treated their POW's very well.

Until the reich started to disentegrate in the closing days of the war, the VAST majority of Allied POW's held by the Germans were treated very well. In the Luftwaffe controlled camps for captured Allied airmen, life was downright comfy. Things changed slightly when it became obvious that Germany was about to get trounced, and the Germans had no qualms with executing people caught escaping, but even at that point outright torture was extremely rare.

So you see, what the Bush regime has done to POW's in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib is worse than what the Nazi's did.

[LittleClarkie]

48. I think one just needs to be sure it's applicable

before one plays the "holocaust card." Rather like the "race card" it will lose meaning, and demean the struggle for civil rights, the more it is used. It had better apply.

Somehow I think it applies more in Dalfur than here, at least superficially. No one is seeking a final solution against all Iraqis. I think that while saying that Bush and Co. are reminiscent of the Nazi's, it was playing the Holocaust card that was too much for some people.

I'm not Jewish. But when someone who is, like Jon Stewart, say "Don't go there" we'd better be damn sure before we go there anyway.