Couple who named their son after Adolf Hitler jailed

[nahtanbob]

Well, may be she is not as black as negroes from Central Africa, but from my point of view she is definitely very far from being white. A girl of her kind naming a child Adolf Hitler is like a billionaire pretending to be a communist.

portugal, italy and greece are white even though they have a lot of people with those feature sets

 

[war&peace]

Precisely true. And now go and look in the mirror.

I look everyday.....especially in the morning while tying the necktie or making shave, brushing my teeth, making ablution etc

 

[nahtanbob]

Not necessarily,nazis had a lot of loyal collaborators from where that pos came to UK(judging from his name one of ex Yugoslav countries).
That girl on the other hand being a white supremacist...just wow.

i never understood who in yugoslavia decided to partner with Nazis and who decided to fight them

 

[Joe Shearer]

Indeed my friend. It is a discourse that I have now had many times with some extremely intelligent people (of all political flavours you can imagine)...on top of the internal debate I do with myself.

Trust me, I was also once of the persuasion that the "greater good" mattered the most (as defined by the majority)....my transition to a minimalist complete logic/reason driven position (no matter how much I may like or despise whoever benefits in some way from the greater good line of argument) was a long somewhat arduous one and of course nowhere near complete.

It is interesting both the KKK and Trump have already come up in this thread....given the KKK was spawned by the party that opposes Trump now largely regarding the very issues they benefited from (but feign a sudden selective amnesia and even perceived emotional opposition to) and largely continue to do so (by many other means past most media-vetted public discourse today). My friend, to even begin to understand Trump, a detailed study is needed of the preceding cpl decades...he did not arise out of the blue (however you perceive him personally).

LOL. I am sorry to sound amused about this very unamusing topic, but you seem to forget that at my age, I can remember what a Southern Democrat was, and what the Republicans represented one generation earlier.

The preceding president (ironically belonging to the elder-KKK party that no longer claims to be) was captured in a photo (in his senator days), all smiles with a certain movement leader that ticks a lot of nasty boxes (including unfettered black supremacy - endorsing violence/extreme racial prejudice much like the topic of the OP - but I do support his right to so):

Caption for the pic is... Dershowitz: I Wouldn't Have Campaigned for Obama If I Knew About Farrakhan Pic

(I won't go into who Dershowitz is, but he is one of the few heavyweight staunch non-hypocrite neutrals I have come across).

But this picture was repressed on purpose (along with certain details of Obama's past regarding a black supremacist preacher in a Chicago church he frequented) during Obama's campaign for the presidency.

Again, modern-day Islamic activists are aroused by today's seeming hostility to Islam that seems to be linked to the hostility towards certain ethnic backgrounds, rather than to the religion in general. They certainly forget what damage was done to the image of the religion in previous decades, due to Louis Farrakhan and those like him. They do not seem to remember the black community taking refuge in Islam; they forget how Cassius Clay shocked my generation by transmuting himself to Muhammad Ali.

I am not a registered Democrat voter, and my views are not favourable to either the closest to a neo-con came to the top job, or to that horrible mistake, Hilary Clinton.

I don't think I need to go into what would have happened if such a meeting (much less picture evidence) existed regarding equivalents for Trump....regarding both whether the media would have censured/suppressed it...and their (and their controlled public fora) reaction to it.

I remember that there was a negative reaction. These two incidents did not go unnoticed.

This is why I push for complete common minimum standards for all. It is simply too easy for society to drift or even lurch (over time) to a very destructive place when we indulge in selectivism on such fundamental things regarding human existence and human rights. Simply because an argument can be (and has already been) made its fine to do it now for so and so....but later (and it has happened already in many countries) the same exact precedent can be used on others (who are deemed to similarly be undesirable)....because simply no check valve exists anymore....and I need not explain how power can do some pretty awful things to both those that wield it and are affected by it.

Comment is superfluous.

I empathise more than you could know. I definitely do not like those that power-worship personalities....especially politicians. But I support everyone else's right to do so (and not do so)...I have my right to my personal opinion and thought and they have theirs.

The argument we must be focused on is what is the common minimum standard where govt authority should be imposed on...so that there is no chance (or at least minimal chance) that slippery slope tendencies can accumulate and grow negative (big power dependent) momentum over time....i.e the best neutral level playing field that a society can impose on itself.

I think the individuals inalienable rights are sacrosanct as the basis first and to then build upon (using no harm clauses etc). This was part of the castle building analogy I was using elsewhere (starting from open field scratch and layering up)...compared to starting out with "society" as the big rock edifice and then shaping it top down (and the individual simply becomes a unit of no real inherent worth). @Mage

The devil is in the details.

I look everyday.....especially in the morning while tying the necktie or making shave, brushing my teeth, making ablution etc

What a pity that it has such little impact.

 

[war&peace]

What a pity that it has such little impact.

It mean it has a heavy impact on you......

 

[Nilgiri]

LOL. I am sorry to sound amused about this very unamusing topic, but you seem to forget that at my age, I can remember what a Southern Democrat was, and what the Republicans represented one generation earlier.



Again, modern-day Islamic activists are aroused by today's seeming hostility to Islam that seems to be linked to the hostility towards certain ethnic backgrounds, rather than to the religion in general. They certainly forget what damage was done to the image of the religion in previous decades, due to Louis Farrakhan and those like him. They do not seem to remember the black community taking refuge in Islam; they forget how Cassius Clay shocked my generation by transmuting himself to Muhammad Ali.

I am not a registered Democrat voter, and my views are not favourable to either the closest to a neo-con came to the top job, or to that horrible mistake, Hilary Clinton.



I remember that there was a negative reaction. These two incidents did not go unnoticed.



Comment is superfluous.



The devil is in the details.



What a pity that it has such little impact.

Sometimes my friend, you must bear with me a bit...for I am talking to a larger audience that may stumble across this stuff ...rather than it being a selective talk to just you....because I know you are aware already of much of what I say.

That is one good thing on a forum, it is a written record (that many others may partake of)....can't quite do the same in face to face verbal conversation/debate as easily.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It mean it has a heavy impact on you......

I take every human transgression seriously, being indifferent to none. That is why I am engaged and passionate, and do not cower behind a facade of casual nonchalance. And that is why rude and uncouth responses, and responses that are self-serving at that, arouse my indignation.

 

[war&peace]

I take every human transgression seriously, being indifferent to none. That is why I am engaged and passionate, and do not cower behind a facade of casual nonchalance. And that is why rude and uncouth responses, and responses that are self-serving at that, arouse my indignation.

It is good to think very highly of yourself especially when not many are appreciative of your abilities

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sometimes my friend, you must bear with me a bit...for I am talking to a larger audience that may stumble across this stuff ...rather than it being a selective talk to just you....because I know you are aware already of much of what I say.

That is one good thing on a forum, it is a written record (that many others may partake of)....can't quite do the same in face to face verbal conversation/debate as easily.

Of course.

However, realising that you are doing a bigger job than speaking to an individual does not absolve me of the responsibility of keeping my own point of view always in public view, and especially in your view. If this is not done, there is the ever-present risk of silence being taken as a confession of culpability, on minor misdemeanours and on larger felonious responses.

It is good to think very highly of yourself especially when not many are appreciative of your abilities

[deleted]

 

[war&peace]

Such silly gibes are easily handled. Look at my record, as defined by other members. I did not refer to your record; that does not stand any scrutiny whatsoever.

Have a nice day or night

 

[Nilgiri]

However, realising that you are doing a bigger job than speaking to an individual does not absolve me of the responsibility of keeping my own point of view always in public view, and especially in your view. If this is not done, there is the ever-present risk of silence being taken as a confession of culpability, on minor misdemeanours and on larger felonious responses.

Why do you think I tag you joe...especially for certain kinds of controversial topics? You do not nod in dull agreement neither do you object brashly. I gain sustained respect only really for nuanced individuals who can argue and flesh out their points of view...no matter how much I agree or disagree with them! It is sadly a diminishing presence among all fora I find these days (but maybe it was always like this and I just didn't know much on it before because I was more in the process of accumulating rather than dispensing point of view and debate)...thus I hold onto the all too few bright spots I find...and hold onto them long as possible. Maybe enough reasonable people everywhere doing such is really all that will be the key in the end for things to not blow up into smithereens. At least I hope so!

 

[Joe Shearer]

i never understood who in yugoslavia decided to partner with Nazis and who decided to fight them

It split on ethnic lines. The Croatian Chetniks sided with the Nazis, the Serbian Partisans opposed them, and they were many more than Serbians. Milovan Djilas, for instance, was Montenegrin.

 

[nahtanbob]

It split on ethnic lines. The Croatian Chetniks sided with the Nazis, the Serbian Partisans opposed them, and they were many more than Serbians. Milovan Djilas, for instance, was Montenegrin.

it was not clear. Usually the word Chetnik denotes Serbian fascist. Of course Ustasha was Croat fascist.

 

[Joe Shearer]

it was not clear. Usually the word Chetnik denotes Serbian fascist. Of course Ustasha was Croat fascist.

I am sorry, of course that is correct, I meant Ustasha, not Chetnik. At the time I wrote that comment, I was furious at something else that had occurred and was simply not thinking. But from your quick and accurate correction, you do know a lot more than you claim

 

[nahtanbob]

I am sorry, of course that is correct, I meant Ustasha, not Chetnik. At the time I wrote that comment, I was furious at something else that had occurred and was simply not thinking. But from your quick and accurate correction, you do know a lot more than you claim

I never understood why people choose to join the various groups, who became a partisan, who was a communist, why communists defied Stalin/Soviets later.

I was interested in the topic by the sheer number of German officers who were executed by Yugolsavs at the end of the war. they were merciless in dispensing victor's justice - much more than the Soviets