Thanks. That’s all I needed to know. Get your clock cleaned, have no credible rebuttal, declare “Victory!”, and skedaddle.

Despite your mischaracterizations (check your reading comprehension), I have no “multiple” handles here. This is in fact the first thread I’ve commented on in BuzzMachine and the other comments (2 – quite complimentary to Jeff) were directly emailed to Jeff Jarvis under my real name (not “fake” as far as I know).

GOP through and through. All hat and no cattle!

A tip of the hat to Skate for his predictive abilities. You have indeed lumped me with the terrorist forces of violence and irrationality. Though I don’t think it was in the Mein Kampf quotes, you present a textbook example of one of their main ploys; accuse others of those things you are guilty of yourself (such as the Reichstag fire). You elect not to support your premises nor defend/deny the instances of lies, deception, and murder by your side, yet are quick to accuse me of same.

I think you, and those of your mindset, are a cancer on this country, and will surely bring about its downfall. There are just too godd*m many of you, and those who appeal to your ego and laziness (too “smart” to need to examine your position) are sure that you will buy into their pack of lies.

I found it interesting that there was not even one element of the 9/11 narrative that doesn’t give you pause, as something that just doesn’t add up and was worth questioning and further examination.

And yet *I’m* the traitorous anti-American! FEH!

You’ve only confirmed my earlier observations.

In order for me to get a better perspective of your takee on current events, could you share with me any of the discrepancies you see in the analysis of the 9/11 attacks? I ask because it seems to me that the bulk of the lies are not being spread by Islamofascists (as dastardly as they may be).

She also has a history of calling people she disagrees with “terrorists.” You could be next…

[unimportant trivia alert] The name “LanceThruster” was a creation for the online game “MegaWars” on CompuServe. While everyone else was picking crew names like “Capt. Kirk” and “Hans Solo”, I wanted something similar to “Flash Gordon” or “Buck Rogers” but still original. I was also partial to “Slartibartfast”. Most common reaction/question, “Are you gay?” A: Not that I know of, but not that it matters. I believe in civil rights but I’m not a minority either (other than atheist).

You also seem to imply that to be against Bush’s “crusade” (which has been renamed several times – WMD Mission, GWOT, G-SAVE, GWOT again, CREEP PT. II, etc…) is to be for theocratic fascism. I am an atheist. I support the cause of freedom against religious totalitarianism such as espoused by Salman Rushdie or Ibn Warriq. That is not to say I am an enemy of Arabs, or Persians, or Muslims as a group.

I also feel that Israel has been givien too much leeway in their actions against the people of the region and that this has fostered much additional strife and bloodshed. This is not to excuse the violence from the other side, just an acknowledgement that much of the story regarding Israeli oppression is downplayed or ignored entirely.

I might try to cut and paste some examples later but many of the actions taken by Israel mirror those of the Nazis. Not on the same level but certainly with a desire for a similar outcome (having the problem go away). I would suggest having a look at the online book “When Victims Rule” to see what I mean. And before someone tries to label it as anti-Semitic, read the introduction that explains the need to discuss issues openly and honestly. This is exactly the approach I applauded Jeff Jarvis for when I first wrote him (although under my real name – WB). Many of the most eye-opening revelations were from Jewish historians themselves (such as Hannah Arendt). They were often admonished by Jewish groups, “not in front of the goyim.”

So, it makes no difference to me if you counter that some other group does it too or does it worse. I am trying to maintain the level of freedoms we have known throughout our history (flawed, bloody, and hypocritical as it has been) and the mechanisms to keep it so (free press, representitive government, Bill of Rights, Constitutional powers to redress greivences against the government).

Whether from the Hitler/Goebbels playbook or the pages of “1984″, or the warnings of Neil Postman (Amusing Ourselves to Death), or Noam Chomsky (Manufacturing Consent), I think the push to manupulate, deceive, subjegate, and destroy select sub-groups of the masses is just as dangerous (possibly more so) than Islamic Fascism. I can readily identify that I want no part of a Caliphate. I am not so sure I can convince my fellow citizens that a Xian theocracy is not any better and entails the same threat to freedom.

Look at how we create a climate for failure with our other crusades; War on Drugs (war against our citizens, and those in drug producing countries), War on Poverty (war against integration, education, and economic opportunity – the perpetuation of the “what’s wrong with those people?” myth), the war against secular humanism (“they’re trying to kill our god!” – irrationalists insisting that the job of government is the exclusive branding of their belief system – the height of insecurity over its inability to stand on its own merits) and now we have the War on Terror (a rose by any other name). Do you not see the fallacy of saying, “it is not right to kill 3000 innocent people because you have a political beef” as we kill untold thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of innocent people because we have a political beef.

It is being sold under the guise of trading freedom for security (which as you know from the quote means we should deserve neither).

Where is this leading? The industrialists felt they could use Hitler to acheive their ends, and vice versa. We have a similar situation now. The coming wars will be over food/water (look at the take over of water resources by corporations in South America and India, and by the state in the Middle East) and race (group “X” just cannot blend in with modern society and forfeits their rights to belong in the world community). We will be the world’s policeman (see Thomas P.M. Barnett’s “Pentagon’s New Map”) but instead of ensuring freedom and democracy, we will be enforcing corporate dominionism over peoples unable to resist the juggernaut.

Expect with the help of greedheads globally, more of the same inequity only worse.

All thanks to the astute reading of human nature by Herr Hitler used by those who are not above a Reichstag fire or two (or three) of their own. Strap yourselves in, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

“An Arabic translation of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf is being distributed by Al-Shurouq, a Ramallah based book distributor, to East Jerusalem and territories controlled by the PA. According to Agence France Presse (Sept. 8), the book, previously banned by Israel, has been allowed by the PA and is 6th on the Palestinian best-seller list. Bisan publishers in Lebanon first published this edition in 1963 and again in 1995. The book costs about $10. The cover, presented below, shows a picture of Hitler, a swastika, and the title in both German and Arabic. The translator, Luis Al-Haj, wrote the following introduction:

“Adolf Hitler was not an ordinary man to be [forgotten] by the wheels of time… Adolf Hitler does not belong to the German people alone, he is one of the few great men who almost stopped the motion of history, altered its course, and changed the face of the world. Hence, he belongs to history.”

“Hitler the soldier left behind not only a legend stained by tragedy itself; the tragedy of a state whose dreams were shattered, a regime whose pillars were torn down, and a political party that was crushed. Hitler was a man of ideology who bequeathed an ideological heritage whose decay is inconceivable. This ideological heritage includes politics, society, science, culture, and war as science and culture.”

“The National Socialism that Hitler preached for and whose characteristics were presented in his book My Struggle, and whose principles he explained in his speeches before he took power, as well as during the 13 years he spent at the head of the German nation – this National Socialism did not die with the death of its herald. Rather, its seeds multiplied under each star…”

Google “Mein Kampf Middle East Bestseller” to see 2005 sales rates in Turkey, Etc.

Probably because of your buddy Amin al Husseini, the “Grand Mufti” and father of today’s jihad:

http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/AminAlHusseini.htm:

“From The Muslim Brotherhood to the Third Reich
Amin Al-Husseini / Adolf Hitler Connection

1933-2002

1933

Hitler Finds Arab Support [xiii]
Arab Nazi political groups [xiv] spring up throughout Middle East:

. Young Egypt. Led by Muslim Brotherhood member Abdul Gamal Nasser (future Egyptian President). Young Egypt’s political slogan “One Folk, One Party, One Leader” is a direct translation from German of Nazi slogan.

. Social Nationalist Party in Syria. Led by Anton Saada [xv] (known as the Syrian Fuhrer)

1936

Husseini Meets Hitler’s banker
Francois Genoud [xvi] , later known as the Swiss Banker of the Hitler’s Third Reich, travels to Palestine to meet Amin Al-Husseini for the first time. Their relationship will continue well into the 1960’s.

1936

Palestine Riots

Weapon of Choice

Suicide Squads

Muslim Leaders assassinated

Amin Al Husseini in Jerusalem during 1936 Riots

Amin Al-Husseini is main organizer of riots. [xvii] He organizes suicide squads against the local authorities. Applies Nazi methodology of “systematic extermination” of any Arab suspected of less than total loyalty to Pan-Islamic vision of Muslim Brotherhood.

Any “non-Islamic” element is a threat to his Pan-Islamic vision.

Many Muslim and Christian Palestinian intellectual leaders and clerics assassinated for protesting Husseini’s Islamic terror.

1936-1938. Murdered by Husseini’s men:

Sheikh Daoud Ansari ( Imam of Al Aqsa Mosque), Sheikh Ali Nur el Khattib (Al Aqsa Mosque), Sheikh Nusbi Abdal Rahim (Council of Muslim Religious Court), Sheikh Abdul el Badoui (Acre, Palestine), Sheikh El Namouri (Hebron), Nasr El Din Nassr (Mayor of Hebron). Between Feb. 1937 and Nov 1938, Eleven (11) Mukhtars (community leaders) and their entire families slain by Amin al Husseini’s men.

1937

On Hitler’s Payroll
Amin Al-Husseini visits Jerusalem German Consul. He meets SS Hauptschanfuehrer A.Eichman and SS Oberscherfuehrer H. Hagen to discuss “the Jewish question”. [xviii] Amin Al-Husseini subsequently receives financial and military aid from Nazi Germany. [xix] [xx]

1941

Mufti Joins Hitler In

Jihad against Britain

Amin Al-Husseini arrives in Rome, where he meets fascist leader Benito Mussolini, the genocidal butcher of Ethiopians in Africa. Mussolini vows to help the Palestinian cause against the Jews. From Rome, Husseini declares Fatwa-Jihad [xxi] against Britain. He preaches the notion of Pan-Islamism, with vision of Muslim unity to further his cause.

RETURN TO THE TOP
Amin Al-Husseini: Root of Today’s Iraqi Tragedy
1941

Husseini-Tulfah [xxii]

Iraqi

Pro-nazi coup
Palestinian Volunteers to the Iraqi Army for 1941 Pro-Nazi Coup in Bagdad.
Amin Al-Husseini instigates a pro-nazi coup in Baghdad, Iraq. Kharaillah Tulfah is his right-hand man. Tulfah is Saddam Hussein’s mentor and uncle. Germany sends weapons and aircrafts to Husseini. Coup fails. Amin Al Husseini in Bagdad with Rashid Al-Qailani, Leader of Pro-Nazi Iraqi Coup 1941

1941

European Jews Must Not Make It To Palestine
Amin Al Husseini In Berlin during WWII.
Amin Al-Husseini in Berlin meets [xxiii] with Adolf Hitler [xxiv] and is active in the decision to exterminate all Jews through the infamous Final Solution [xxv] .”

And etc. Read all about it. Please.

Islam requires that good little jihadis spout the taqiyya line, which basically reverses all facts in the universe and attempts to make those evil U.S. INFIDELS (and ESPECIALLY GWB) Satan.

Fact is, Islamofascism IS Naziism personified. Only much, much worse. This tiime it’s not just the Jews they’re after, it’s the Jews AND ALL INFIDELS until the caliphate is achieved. You bet they know all about Hitler’s tactics.

Boy(s) the gig is UP. Don’t you get it that WE GET IT??

(from:http://home.att.net/~Resurgence/Quotes-media.htm )

“The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands…”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 180-181.

“In political matters feeling often decides more correctly than reason.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 173

“All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 180

“But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 184

“It is a mistake to make propaganda many-sided, like scientific instruction, for instance… As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 180-181

“[Propaganda] must be aimed at the emotions and only to a very limited degree at the so-called intellect… The art of propaganda lies in understanding the emotional ideas of the great masses and finding, through a psychologically correct form, the way to the attention and thence to the heart of the broad masses.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 180

“[Propaganda] does not have multiple shadings; it has a positive and a negative; love or hate, right or wrong, truth or lie, never half this way and half that way…”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 183

“[This is the] very first condition which has to be fulfilled in every kind of propaganda: a systematically one-sided attitude towards every problem that has to be dealt with…”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 182

“The more modest its intellectual ballast, the more exclusively it takes into consideration the emotions of the masses, the more effective [propaganda] will be.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 180

“For I must not measure the speech of a statesman to his people by the impression which it leaves in a university professor, but by the effect it exerts on the people. And this alone gives the standard for the speaker’s genius.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 477

“The purpose of propaganda is not to provide interesting distraction for blasé young gentlemen, but to convince… the masses. But the masses are slow moving, and they always require a certain time before they are ready even to notice a thing, and only after the simplest ideas are repeated thousands of times will the masses finally remember them.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 185

“When there is change, it must not alter the content of what propaganda is driving at, but in the end must always say the same thing. For instance, a slogan must be presented from different angles, but the end of all remarks must always and immutably be the slogan itself. Only in this way can the propaganda have a unified and complete effect.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 185

“To whom should propaganda be addressed? To the scientifically trained intelligentsia or the less educated masses? It must be addressed always and exclusively to the masses.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 179

“As soon as one point is removed from the sphere of dogmatic certainty, the discussion may not simply result in a new and better formulation, but may easily lead to endless debates and general confusion.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

“The grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

“I have already stated… that all great, world-shaking events have been brought about, not by written matter, but by the spoken word… While the speaker gets a continuous correction of his speech from the crowd he is addressing, since he can always see in the faces of his listeners to what they extent they follow his arguments with understanding and whether the impression and the effect of his words lead to the desired goal — the writer does not know his readers at all. The essential point… is that a piece of literature never knows into what hands it will fall, and yet must retain its definite form.”
– Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 469-70

I think if any of these description fit those on the other side of the aisle, so be it.

I think Cindy Sheehan is a patriot in the truest sense of the word. Regardless of where one stands on the merits of her position, to speak truth (as one sees it) to power is the ultimate right and duty of the American citizen, and to be so thoroughly demonized (Plamed) by some is just downright….well, un-American.

What I fear most is that in the consolidation of power by any means necessary, BushCo anti-patriots will turn this country on its head and make such actions truly “American”. They have quite a head start in their endless campaign to equate being against Bush with being against America.

It is tragically ironic that the patriotism is questioned of those who refuse to fight in a war started by men who refused to fight in a war. For something Bush declares involves the future and safety of the free world, enlistment shortfalls seem unthinkable (have the Bush twins found a summer job yet?). It seems all the red state fair-weather patriots would be beating a path to the recruiting office to do their part. They must have other priorities.

Maybe if they were approached in a language that appeals to them such as,

“War is good business, invest your children!”

You conveniently forget that Bush would not condemn the Republican smear campaign against Kerry. High praise indeed.

As for Kerry not praising Bush. Well, I’m not sure that is true, but if you can find evidence of Bush’s **war service** then you might have a point.

I’d say that it could be a coding challenge for a qualitative statistical study, but I don’t think it is un-measurable. However, I don’t think you have to do a statistical analysis to have a meaningful comparison. You argue that maybe FDR or some other administration has used some of the techniques in question but you still haven’t denied the Administration is using the techniques described by the OSS.

“Never admit mistakes”
Bush has been asked this at least twice during the last election campaign and has never admitted any mistakes. He only joked that he might make some different appointments.

“never accept blame”
They still won’t concede that they should have planned the war better, nor will they accept responsibility for the prisoner abuse in Iraq or Guantanamo Bay.

“never concede there’s any good in your enemy”
This one is slightly more ambiguous, but calling people Evil Dooers and an Axis of Evil might qualify. But, they have said we are for the Iraqi people, not the government–so they may not pass this test.

“Big lies are believed sooner than little lies?’
Again with the requests for research. Do you have any that is contrary?

None the less, it is a philosophy and one being used by the GOP and the administration. As Josh Marshall notes “Now we can see in full view what we’ve seen again and again in recent years, the favored tactic: terror by grand moral inversion, the lie so total and audacious that it almost knocks opponents off their feet…John Kerry decorated war hero? No, coward and showboat… Wilson, a whistleblower administration officials were trying to punish? A whistleblower calling out White House manipulated intelligence during the lead-up to war?

Not at all. Rove was the whistleblower trying to knock down a campaign of disinformation from Joe Wilson. The audacity of it is enough to knock some people off their feet. ”

Granted, the above is only an opinion, but so is everything you say. My opinion, at this point, is better illustrated.

“You just wrote, “There has never been a more secretive and manipulative administration in the history of the US.”

I think this one is true and demonstrably so, from the hiding of presidential papers that were scheduled to be released, denying congress access to documents they request for vetting nominees, hiding even the names of lobbyists who met with the Vice President, encouraging the routine denial of FOI requests, secret arrests, secret jails, secret detentions, secret briefs filed with a court who was requested to keep even the legal reasons secret, and even secret laws (the Fed won’t even disclose what law allegedly requires you to show ID at an airport). I’d say the secretiveness of this administration is an open and shut case.

I’d say that my points are accurate and provable.

Just look how many times the charge “un-American” is trotted out against those who seek merely to hold governent leaders accountable for their actions.

You mean “against those with whom (they) disagree”.

I’ve seen all of the following groups of people referred to as unamerican:

The Bush administration
Michael Moore
People who supported pulling Schaivo’s feeding tube
People who supported the Federal government’s actions to stop the pulling of Schaivo’s feeding tube.
Opponents of the Iraq invasion
Supporters of the Iraq invasion
Swift Boat Veterans
John Kerry
Opponents of Same sex Marriage
Supporters of Same sex marriage
Howard Stern
Brent Bozell
Rush Limbaugh
Al Franken
Ann Coulter
Bill Maher

In each case, the persons hurling the unamerican charge, the persons questioning the patriotism of the other was always someone who simply disliked or disagreed with what the “victim” was saying when it was being said.

Did FDR or Truman concede the good in their enemies? Does any partisan?

There’s also a question as to which enemy they refer to. Presumably they mean political enemy, and given that Bush actually praised Kerry’s war service, that clearly shows this premise to be false. I can’t find evidence of Kerry praising Bush, however.

“Never admit mistakes, concede there’s any good in your enemy, leave room, accept blame…” That’s all eye of the beholder stuff. Who do you have to admit a fault to to nullify that charge? Do you have to make a public spectacle of yourself? Did FDR or Truman concede the good in their enemies? Does any partisan?

Big lies are believed sooner than little lies? Is there some reputable research to back that up? Considering all the white lies we tell others and swallow ourselves that conclusion seems questionable.

You just wrote, “There has never been a more secretive and manipulative administration in the history of the US.” By what measurement? How do you compare the secretive nature of the FDR, Truman, Nixon or any other administrations? I can’t imagine how to weigh the truth of your statement so I can’t say you are wrong. But you don’t say what historical facts you used to arrive at your conclusion so I also can’t accept that you are right.

But whatever, I think I get the message. Bush is a very bad man… a very, very bad man.

Once these lies are broadcast and/or in print (to be regurgitated repeatedly), they become memes that are accepted as fact by those who stop investigating once they can find any thread to cling to in order to maintain their belief system regardless of any information that would discredit or alter that belief.

I think BushCo and cronies are expert at using the Goebbels model to their advantage (not to mention other unsavory elements of fascist intimidation).

Just look how many times the charge “un-American” is trotted out against those who seek merely to hold governent leaders accountable for their actions.

That is a valid possibility, however you may be doing the exact opposite! Your dismissal of my conclusion is out of hand as opposed to showing that my conclusion is wrong.

Is the bush administration doing the following:

“never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it. ”

I’d say they are. While those could be considered common forms of government propaganda in a totalitarian society, are you going to argue they are techniques **our** government should be using on us?

If you disagree, show me where I’m wrong.

True, I dislike the hostile approach the Republicans are taking towards the media, but this administration is the most secretive in US history. The President and his staff repeat false messages (“the end of major combat operations,” “the insurgency is “in its last throws,” is loosing “steam”), appear extensively on FOX news to the exclusion of other media outlets, create phony news spots (Karen Ryan), pay pundants to secretly tout Administration policy (Armstrong Williams), and outright lie (“the leaker will be fired”).

There has never been a more secretive and manipulative administration in the history of the US. A cool headed comparison to WWII Germany is rational if we don’t wish to repeat history. This Administration along with the GOP is a well oiled, highly disciplined propaganda machine. Talking points (argumentum ad nauseum) are repeated verbatim by multiple shills. Dissent is not tolerated.

Be vigilant, very vigilant.

As for laurence, who wrote, “BTW those primary rules you quote sound like a lot of people. That might be because they are pretty vague and hard to measure.”

I’d disagree. The fact that they fit so well is, perhaps, telling.