Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
It was not my intention. I was watching Mike Basset England Manager on youtube and then found myself watching one of the suggested links which was a great debate between Brian Clough and Don Reavie. One of the suggested links to that interview was then the 1967 Frost interview of Oswald Mosley. I found it very ironic how Mosley kept so composed and answered every question so directly while one person in particular in the audience was so aggressive in his line of questioning.
Show More
First time I had ever seen Mosley "in person". He was completely different to how I expected.
Mosley was certainly an exceptionally talented politician.
Frost's case against him was overwhelming, and he also had a particularly aggressive audience to deal with.
Yet he managed to answer ever question head on and still finished with a flourish.
He was 71 years of age when that was recorded.
The BBC didn't make the same mistake when they had Nick Griffin on Question Time.
There they had a hand picked panel, prepared questions and the audience lined up against him.
I reckon even someone as good as Mosley would have struggled against that barrage.
Frost's case against him was overwhelming, and he also had a particularly aggressive audience to deal with.
Yet he managed to answer ever question head on and still finished with a flourish.
He was 71 years of age when that was recorded.
The BBC didn't make the same mistake when they had Nick Griffin on Question Time.
There they had a hand picked panel, prepared questions and the audience lined up against him.
I reckon even someone as good as Mosley would have struggled against that barrage.
paddletoe 04 Dec 14 09:40
First time I had ever seen Mosley "in person". He was completely different to how I expected.
You mean you hadn't thought he was an arrogant,anti Semitic, racist and fascist, still in denial after all those years.
He was a Hitler like figure who speeches,uniform and posturing were an exact copy. His Black Shirts were his Nazi Party - even down to the salute.
For him to deny he was not anti Jewish, that his black shirts never waged 'war ' on the Jewish communities is a sick joke.
A pathetic figure, who failed in his objectives. Was jailed for his actions. And was rightly shunned and deserted by everyone. Yet still appeared on TV with Frost and denied it all, and insisted it was all done for the best of reasons and for the greatness of the Uk.
Unfortunately, deluded people have continued in his wake. The National Front, BNP ,EDL. All have failed.
The new, nice ' kid on the block ' is UKIP . Following the same strategy of appealing to certain sections of society who are only too willing to have a reason they can point to and blame as to why they are suffering. And again ,it's the racist card that is played, blame immigration and whip up the hysteria and promise the earth in return for support.
Sometimes we learn nothing from history.
To point the finger at immigrants, or the poor 'feckless benefit scroungers' as the reason, really is a cheap misguided trick.
But it's an easy target. And easier for people to point the finger of blame. Because they can relate to it more easily.
More easily, than the fact that the five richest families in this country, have more wealth than the 12 million poorest, and that £50 billion worth of taxes from top business and individuals, went unpaid by ' loopholes' in the law.
The smoke and mirrors of government and media continue to fool people to look down for the solution instead of up !
First time I had ever seen Mosley "in person". He was completely different to how I expected.
You mean you hadn't thought he was an arrogant,anti Semitic, racist and fascist, still in denial after all those years.
He was a Hitler like figure who speeches,uniform and posturing were an exact copy. His Black Shirts were his Nazi Party - even down to the salute.
For him to deny he was not anti Jewish, that his black shirts never waged 'war ' on the Jewish communities is a sick joke.
A pathetic figure, who failed in his objectives. Was jailed for his actions. And was rightly shunned and deserted by everyone. Yet still appeared on TV with Frost and denied it all, and insisted it was all done for the best of reasons and for the greatness of the Uk.
Unfortunately, deluded people have continued in his wake. The National Front, BNP ,EDL. All have failed.
The new, nice ' kid on the block ' is UKIP . Following the same strategy of appealing to certain sections of society who are only too willing to have a reason they can point to and blame as to why they are suffering. And again ,it's the racist card that is played, blame immigration and whip up the hysteria and promise the earth in return for support.
Sometimes we learn nothing from history.
To point the finger at immigrants, or the poor 'feckless benefit scroungers' as the reason, really is a cheap misguided trick.
But it's an easy target. And easier for people to point the finger of blame. Because they can relate to it more easily.
More easily, than the fact that the five richest families in this country, have more wealth than the 12 million poorest, and that £50 billion worth of taxes from top business and individuals, went unpaid by ' loopholes' in the law.
The smoke and mirrors of government and media continue to fool people to look down for the solution instead of up !
It was a fascinating interview and given his obvious powers of oratory and seeming ability to change the truth to suit his purposes it seems a quirk of fate that he didn't rise to very high office within the Labour movement of the late 20's. I say seems because given his obvious political qualities and given that his only real challenger at that time for parliamentary oration was probably Churchill it does beg the question why the Labour government didn't find him a more high ranking position than what was effectively minister without portfolio. My argument would be that many people who knew him at the time considered him a bounder even before he left the Labour party.
Undoubtedly a charismatic man but definitely a wrong un.
Undoubtedly a charismatic man but definitely a wrong un.
I'm sure even given their political difference him anf that other bounder facts would have got on like a house on fire. Truth is always optional for the left.
To be honest I was not sure what to expect. Like most people I just have this certain image about him. I am not saying I was convinced by all his answers but I was impressed just how articulate he came across especially for a man in his latter years. He was not evasive in answering any questions.
His comments that's he was not imitating Hitler with his gestures while he was addressing crowds was however not convincing as I had seen a documentary on Hitlers rise to power very recently and in that documentary it showed how Hitler received coaching on how to use different mannerisms when making his speeches. Mosley seemed to copy Hitler exactly in that respect.
His comments that's he was not imitating Hitler with his gestures while he was addressing crowds was however not convincing as I had seen a documentary on Hitlers rise to power very recently and in that documentary it showed how Hitler received coaching on how to use different mannerisms when making his speeches. Mosley seemed to copy Hitler exactly in that respect.
Without seeing any footage of him from earlier in his career it's impossible to say where Mosley ends and Hitler begins there paddle. As I say he was widely considered to be a master of oratory in the 20's. He certainly seems to take some cues about staging and presentation from Hitler in things like his Belle Vue speech.
People make the mistake of retrofitting thoughts about an individual so that they end up assuming that something was inevitable all along when little about history is inevitable. It is assumed that Hitler is a perisher now because events proved him to be a perisher but at the time there were a lot of people who were persuaded by him and an awful lot of anti semitism. Soemthing which never went away and still rears its head when people try to have a rational debate about Israel/Palestine.
People make the mistake of retrofitting thoughts about an individual so that they end up assuming that something was inevitable all along when little about history is inevitable. It is assumed that Hitler is a perisher now because events proved him to be a perisher but at the time there were a lot of people who were persuaded by him and an awful lot of anti semitism. Soemthing which never went away and still rears its head when people try to have a rational debate about Israel/Palestine.
He could have been a great dictator given half a chance but they treated him like a traitor so he went and lived in France.
We don't really do dictators as a nation though. Our sense of humour won't allow it. There is just so much of the perisher and buffoon about such individuals that our instinct is to guffaw at them. Just look at that bellend Putin striding around like he is a collossus whilst preening and puffing himself up.
Proof that fascism isn't really a right-wing or left-wing ideology, although not as a neat a one as nazis. Is there anyone who has been affiliated to more political parties?
I do like that his ideas of a united Europe came to pass, maybe not QUITE in the way he imagined :-)
Eeternaloptimist 04 Dec 14 11:49
I'm sure even given their political difference him anf that other bounder facts would have got on like a house on fire. Truth is always optional for the left.
You obviously don't take in what people state. So I've jumbled the next sentence up, to make you concentrate more.
On fire piss had wouldn't on he if him been.
I'm sure even given their political difference him anf that other bounder facts would have got on like a house on fire. Truth is always optional for the left.
You obviously don't take in what people state. So I've jumbled the next sentence up, to make you concentrate more.
On fire piss had wouldn't on he if him been.
rob, don't hold back, say what you really think 
facts, are angry with the whole world??
facts, are angry with the whole world??
Not at all. Just unfairness, greed and corruption at the expense of the defenceless.
P.s to rob
Off fck !
P.s to rob
Off fck !
Scratch a left winger be they racist like Mosley or obsessed with racism like Facts and you will find an authoritarian trying to tell people how they should live their lives.
I'm very wary of left wingers, and in particular Socialists, They have nothing and the barstewards want to share with everyone!
BOXING
I am quite happy to lend you my Somali staff, while I am busy on the Guardian page.
I am quite happy to lend you my Somali staff, while I am busy on the Guardian page.
moisok, you are as always, kind and generous to a falt, gawd bless you governor.
It must 7years since we have crossed paths. Still a pleasure.
It must 7years since we have crossed paths. Still a pleasure.
To desire to be a leader of a country you have to usually be what the medical profession call "a bit of a nut job"
Oswald would never succeed in Britain because he obviously had a kangaroo loose in the top paddock. You have to be able to disguise your mental short comings a bit better to get to the top in this country.
Oswald would never succeed in Britain because he obviously had a kangaroo loose in the top paddock. You have to be able to disguise your mental short comings a bit better to get to the top in this country.
Clungehungry 04 Dec 14 13:20
Proof that fascism isn't really a right-wing or left-wing ideology, although not as a neat a one as nazis.
What?
Proof that fascism isn't really a right-wing or left-wing ideology, although not as a neat a one as nazis.
What?
If it wasn't for the greedy ,self serving, paedophile hugging,lying barstarrds who've been ruining, sorry, Running the country over the past 20 years or so , then people wouldn't be swayed into voting for more hard line parties.
The new, nice ' kid on the block ' is UKIP . Following the same strategy of appealing to certain sections of society who are only too willing to have a reason they can point to and blame as to why they are suffering. And again ,it's the racist card that is played, blame immigration and whip up the hysteria and promise the earth in return for support.
Sometimes we learn nothing from history.
To point the finger at immigrants, or the poor 'feckless benefit scroungers' as the reason, really is a cheap misguided trick.
But it's an easy target. And easier for people to point the finger of blame. Because they can relate to it more easily.
straight out of the Socialist Workers Party manual
So does the country allow uncontrolled immigration, where literally anyone can walk into the country? The gaols are full of foreign criminals, the increased terrorism threat, the strain on public services, etc etc. We cannot take ALL the worlds waifs and strays. There must be a limit.
There is also 1 million under 25's out there looking for work - might be an idea to try and find them a job first rather than import cheap labour from the 4 corners of the world.
You need to wise up
Sometimes we learn nothing from history.
To point the finger at immigrants, or the poor 'feckless benefit scroungers' as the reason, really is a cheap misguided trick.
But it's an easy target. And easier for people to point the finger of blame. Because they can relate to it more easily.
straight out of the Socialist Workers Party manual
So does the country allow uncontrolled immigration, where literally anyone can walk into the country? The gaols are full of foreign criminals, the increased terrorism threat, the strain on public services, etc etc. We cannot take ALL the worlds waifs and strays. There must be a limit.
There is also 1 million under 25's out there looking for work - might be an idea to try and find them a job first rather than import cheap labour from the 4 corners of the world.
You need to wise up
Facts 04 Dec 14 14:54
Not at all. Just unfairness, greed and corruption at the expense of the defenceless.
10 pages in (400 posts) and you still haven’t appeared on the Rotherham Abuse Enquiry thread yet, and condemned the actions of pakistani muslims against defenceless white girls.
Or admitted that Nick Griffin was right years ago about the abuse and cover up in Bradford, but people like you called him racist for it.
Or admitted that the Daily Mail was right when they wrote about it.
No surprise that your rag, The Guardian, blocks comments about it on their website.
Have you asked how it's possible that Question Time had a show in Birmingham two weeks ago, but to my surprise, the 'Trojan Horse' scandal never got a mention.
Not at all. Just unfairness, greed and corruption at the expense of the defenceless.
10 pages in (400 posts) and you still haven’t appeared on the Rotherham Abuse Enquiry thread yet, and condemned the actions of pakistani muslims against defenceless white girls.
Or admitted that Nick Griffin was right years ago about the abuse and cover up in Bradford, but people like you called him racist for it.
Or admitted that the Daily Mail was right when they wrote about it.
No surprise that your rag, The Guardian, blocks comments about it on their website.
Have you asked how it's possible that Question Time had a show in Birmingham two weeks ago, but to my surprise, the 'Trojan Horse' scandal never got a mention.
Do I really.
Immigration is not uncontrolled, anyone cannot literally walk into the country.
Our prisons are full of foreign criminals ! What % of prisoners in our jails are immigrants ?
We do not take ALL the worlds waifs and strays
If the jobs are really there, then what's stopping the young unemployed taking them ? Immigrants are not taking jobs from UK workers.
I think it's you who need to wise up, and not be suckered into believing the political spin, and the media 'newspeak '
Immigration is not uncontrolled, anyone cannot literally walk into the country.
Our prisons are full of foreign criminals ! What % of prisoners in our jails are immigrants ?
We do not take ALL the worlds waifs and strays
If the jobs are really there, then what's stopping the young unemployed taking them ? Immigrants are not taking jobs from UK workers.
I think it's you who need to wise up, and not be suckered into believing the political spin, and the media 'newspeak '
CMAT
Do I have to be seen to defend the indefensible ? Are you implying that I don't condemn the atrocities metered out by certain factions of the Muslim community on certain white girls ? Of course I do.
What I won't do is blanket discriminate the whole Pakistani /Muslim society in Rotherham, or in any part of the UK.
Nor will I ever agree with anything the racist Griffin utters. The man is scum.
Neither will I believe everything that your rag The Daily Mail prints. It delights in publishing articles designed to ' whip up hate and discord '
Do I have to be seen to defend the indefensible ? Are you implying that I don't condemn the atrocities metered out by certain factions of the Muslim community on certain white girls ? Of course I do.
What I won't do is blanket discriminate the whole Pakistani /Muslim society in Rotherham, or in any part of the UK.
Nor will I ever agree with anything the racist Griffin utters. The man is scum.
Neither will I believe everything that your rag The Daily Mail prints. It delights in publishing articles designed to ' whip up hate and discord '
facts. Would you continue to allow immigration from countries who when they get here are involved in tens of thousands of rapes?
Neither will I believe everything that your rag The Daily Mail prints.
There you go again.
'my rag'
As stated most likely a hundred times over the years, I have not purchased a newspaper for years, at least all this century.
Nor will I ever agree with anything the racist Griffin utters. The man is scum.
Why is he scum?
He wants a predominantly white UK population.
What's wrong with that?
As Injera posted a few days ago, Griffin was against the war in Iraq.
Strange behaviour for a 'racist'- missing a chance to kill hundreds, if not thousands, of 'darkies'.
There you go again.
'my rag'
As stated most likely a hundred times over the years, I have not purchased a newspaper for years, at least all this century.
Nor will I ever agree with anything the racist Griffin utters. The man is scum.
Why is he scum?
He wants a predominantly white UK population.
What's wrong with that?
As Injera posted a few days ago, Griffin was against the war in Iraq.
Strange behaviour for a 'racist'- missing a chance to kill hundreds, if not thousands, of 'darkies'.
Is it countries or in fact elements of a specific culture/religion from whom the ongoing brave attempts of our security services to stop the buggers blowing us up, female genital mutilation, subjugation of women, refusal to integrate and often learn the language?
We don't have a problem with Hindus, Sikh's, Chinese and others so I guess the question being asked of facts is do the negative aspects of that specific culture/religion outweigh the positives?
We don't have a problem with Hindus, Sikh's, Chinese and others so I guess the question being asked of facts is do the negative aspects of that specific culture/religion outweigh the positives?
Neither will I believe everything that your rag The Daily Mail prints. It delights in publishing articles designed to ' whip up hate and discord '
How many copies a day does your rag, The Guardian, sell?
How many copies a day does your rag, The Guardian, sell?
Or in certain cases please name the positives as I cant see them.
For more than 60 years it's been difficult to see where Hitler ends and Stalin begins. Luckily we've (many in the world haven't) been living in that slippery zone. But luck always runs out. Time to start choosing your insane extreme?
That could be extremely profound bodil. Can you explain it to me?
EO, you said earlier in this thread Mosley was a left winger??? A little confused aren't you mate?? He was a far right wing Nazi. I think you are confusing National Socialist(hitlier,mosley..facist) with socialism of thee left wing kind..i.r tony benn,dennis skinner Jeremy corbyn etc. Or are you saying Mosley shared the same politics as Dennis Skinner and Tony Benn???
CMAT
My jibe at ' your rag ' was a response to you stating The Guardian was ' my rag ' You don't need to be in denial
My jibe at ' your rag ' was a response to you stating The Guardian was ' my rag ' You don't need to be in denial
Extremes always attract the more ignorant - hence 'vigorous'. The more reasonable are less prone to violent support of their beliefs - and then get stuffed by the violent short-termists (led by smart people who wish to dictate after any revolution). The thinkers don't fare well when bullets are flying. Most revolutionaries end up as blood-stains on tank tracks. Their cunning leaders die as multi-billionaire dictators having a heart-attack when f**king 4 blonde nymphets.
Blood stains on tank tracks. I like that saying. Is it your own bodil, or have you borrowed it ?
Blood stains on tank tracks. I like that saying. Is it your own bodil, or have you borrowed it ?
From today's Dilbert cartoon! Sort of. Dogbert talking to Ratbert.
I'm not in the least confused gentlemen. Mosley was a racist left winger. I reject the characterisation perpetuated by the left that fascists were extreme right wing. They weren't. To all intents and purposes in practice they were indistinguishable from communists. They were thugs who didn't believe in democracy. Just like communists. They were authoritarians and would bully and indulge in mass murder of their own citizens to get their way. Just like communists. They didn't believe in free enterprise and capitalism. Just like communists. The list goes on and on. Fascists had far more in common with communists than they ever could with people like libertarians on the right. Which is why the fascists and the communists of Germany and Russia were able to form a pact until Hitler double crossed them.
Which is why Mosley was perfectly at home in the Labour movement until his reforms were rejected. Reforms which were not only welcomed by people like Bevan at the time but which the post war Labour movement did embrace and which Crossland described as visionary.
Which is why Mosley was perfectly at home in the Labour movement until his reforms were rejected. Reforms which were not only welcomed by people like Bevan at the time but which the post war Labour movement did embrace and which Crossland described as visionary.
Further on that point every man and his dog has a negative view of people like Hitler now but cast your minds back to when he came to power and not only was it leading left leaning intellectuals in this country who provided succour to Stalin but they also did so to Hitler.
'Cast your mind back to when he came to power' - You think we're all as old as cannyman?
It's all there in the record books if you dig deeply enough. Of course the left don't like to admit such things.
The British Union of Fascists was a political party in the United Kingdom formed in 1932 by Oswald Mosley. In 1936, it changed its name to the British Union of Fascists and National Socialists and in 1937 to British Union which existed until 1940 when it was proscribed
I.e Nazism
I.e Nazism
1933-1945 - hitler bad; 1946-present day - allies good
bodil 05 Dec 14 01:06
Oh Facts, duck and dive for your own survival.
Are you disputing the truth of history ?
Oh Facts, duck and dive for your own survival.
Are you disputing the truth of history ?
You seem to be having difficulty addressing your brain washing by the left facts. The same points apply to Nazism as to British fascism. Both had far more in common with totalitarian communism which as I pointed out made a peaceful non aggression pact quite possible at the same time as the fascists were fighting against democratic countries. Stalin would have been quite happy for that state to continue had Hitler not reneged on the deal.
Can you look into the dark heart of your soul and see the similarities which your creed shares with that other authoritarian anti democratic creed of fascism? Just because two bullies get into a spat doesn't mean that one of them ceases to be a bully.
Can you look into the dark heart of your soul and see the similarities which your creed shares with that other authoritarian anti democratic creed of fascism? Just because two bullies get into a spat doesn't mean that one of them ceases to be a bully.
.......Hitler and Mussolini were both dictators, both lead totalitarian regimes in their countries and cooperated together during World War Two. Their regimes had many similarities, but at the same time, they had differences which distinguished nazism from fascism. First important similarity between these two regimes was their anti-communist policy. Especially for Germany, Russia was their natural enemy with its combination of inferior Slavic culture, Bolshevism and „Jewish dominated government“. Fear of communism existed in whole Europe and this gave Hitler solid basis support from all classes. Just as Germany, Italy as well feared communists to take over the government. This played into the hands of the fascists, who were able to use it as their advantage. Mussolini was able to pose as the 'savior of the nation from the communism', which brought him support from big businesses and elite.
Both societies were extremly anti-democratic and attempted to organize totalitarian states controlling industry, agriculture, education and the way people live. Hitler followed a policy known as Glechschaltung (forcible co-ordination), which turned Germany into a totalitarian state. It was dangerous to oppose or criticize the government in any way. All political parties were banned except the National socialists, so Germany became a one-party state just as Italy and USSR. The civil service was purged, all Jews and other suspected enemies of the country were removed. Education system was closely controlled so that children could be raised with Nazi opinions. All communists and the media were controlled; film, music, art, newspaper were supervised........
Both societies were extremly anti-democratic and attempted to organize totalitarian states controlling industry, agriculture, education and the way people live. Hitler followed a policy known as Glechschaltung (forcible co-ordination), which turned Germany into a totalitarian state. It was dangerous to oppose or criticize the government in any way. All political parties were banned except the National socialists, so Germany became a one-party state just as Italy and USSR. The civil service was purged, all Jews and other suspected enemies of the country were removed. Education system was closely controlled so that children could be raised with Nazi opinions. All communists and the media were controlled; film, music, art, newspaper were supervised........
Eeternaloptimist, much as I try to avoid any dealings with you on this forum, mostly because you're an unbending nutjob, having read though this thread, I just have to point out that you've written even more misinformed, poorly thought out, erroneous crap than you usually do.
That is all, I'm not justifying this post, and I'm not going to waste any time discussing it with you, I'm too busy.
Facts, you're banging your head against a wall mate. Just wanting to see a bit of fairness gets you labelled and feeds the trolls.
fwiw, btw, aih: As anyone here who actually knows me (and there are quite a few on here) will know, I'm nowhere near being the 'Leftie' I keep being called, and I have never read, let alone bought, the Guardian, never actually voted Labour and have no political affiliation.
Perhaps making my own mind up has lead me to some non-govt ideas and my own understanding of society and the world, instead of what the lying, sleazy, rich, self-serving members of the press/media and the govt tell me I should think.
You, eeternaloptimist, are way more brainwashed than anyone you accuse on here.
Finally, and on thread, I've often thought there is a connection (apart from grandson Max Mosely) with the wealth/corruption/Nazism and Formula 1. Which somehow goe back to and has some sort of link to (Sir) Oswald.
That is all, I'm not justifying this post, and I'm not going to waste any time discussing it with you, I'm too busy.
Facts, you're banging your head against a wall mate. Just wanting to see a bit of fairness gets you labelled and feeds the trolls.
fwiw, btw, aih: As anyone here who actually knows me (and there are quite a few on here) will know, I'm nowhere near being the 'Leftie' I keep being called, and I have never read, let alone bought, the Guardian, never actually voted Labour and have no political affiliation.
Perhaps making my own mind up has lead me to some non-govt ideas and my own understanding of society and the world, instead of what the lying, sleazy, rich, self-serving members of the press/media and the govt tell me I should think.
You, eeternaloptimist, are way more brainwashed than anyone you accuse on here.
Finally, and on thread, I've often thought there is a connection (apart from grandson Max Mosely) with the wealth/corruption/Nazism and Formula 1. Which somehow goe back to and has some sort of link to (Sir) Oswald.
Once again it is shown how people misuse extreme right and extreme left wing. Soon someone will be on to assure us the BNP are an extreme right wing party when they are nothing of the sort.
Partito Nazionale Britannico
Political party
The British National Party is a far-right political party in the United Kingdom. The party was formed by John Tyndall in 1982 from the merging of several political parties, and from 1999 to 2014 was led by Nick Griffin.
.
Hope this succinct statement helps the deluded
Political party
The British National Party is a far-right political party in the United Kingdom. The party was formed by John Tyndall in 1982 from the merging of several political parties, and from 1999 to 2014 was led by Nick Griffin.
.
Hope this succinct statement helps the deluded
I HEARD HE WAS KIND AND ONE WAS OF THE FIRST PEOPLE TO SEND MONEY TO SAVE THE PENQUINS SOCIETY .HE JUST LIKE TO BE HEARD LIKE YOU LOT,
NOT A LOT KNOW BUT HE DID ALOT OF SPEECHES AT THE WOMENS GUILD ON THE BENEFITS OF HEALTHY EATING
Take a minute facts and go through your own quote line by line. Identify the policies and methods fascists and communists used and tell me how they differed. There is a world of difference between how communism/fascism operated and how democracy operates.
Let me ask it another way:
How can you have opposite ends of a political line ie left and right wing where the methods of operating are so similar?
I'm fully aware of the fact that people identify fascist movements as being right wing. I'm asking ou to explain your position and just quoting someone who asserts that one is left wing and one right whilst explaining how similar their methods were won't cut the mustard. You can tell me a banana is straight. Doesn't mean it is.
Let me ask it another way:
How can you have opposite ends of a political line ie left and right wing where the methods of operating are so similar?
I'm fully aware of the fact that people identify fascist movements as being right wing. I'm asking ou to explain your position and just quoting someone who asserts that one is left wing and one right whilst explaining how similar their methods were won't cut the mustard. You can tell me a banana is straight. Doesn't mean it is.
As for you studybore if you are unable to rationally explain and discuss your views just because they don't accord with my own then it probably is better that you give up.
I'll tell you what facts, I'll do it for you:
.......Hitler and Mussolini were both dictators, both lead totalitarian regimes in their countries and cooperated together during World War Two.
How does this differ from the USSR? Stalin was a dictator who lead a totalitarian regime and he cooperated with Hitler until Hitler double crossed him.
Their regimes had many similarities, but at the same time, they had differences which distinguished nazism from fascism.
How does this differ from the soviets? The similarities are great. The differences are few.
First important similarity between these two regimes was their anti-communist policy. Especially for Germany, Russia was their natural enemy with its combination of inferior Slavic culture, Bolshevism and „Jewish dominated government“. Fear of communism existed in whole Europe and this gave Hitler solid basis support from all classes. Just as Germany, Italy as well feared communists to take over the government. This played into the hands of the fascists, who were able to use it as their advantage. Mussolini was able to pose as the 'savior of the nation from the communism', which brought him support from big businesses and elite.
Earlier I made the analogy about bullies fighting over the same piece of ideological land. Communists didn't like fascists and vice versa but when you move beyond that and look at their methodology you see the closeness of how they saw the world. A closeness which meant that until Hitler double crossed Stalin they were in an alliance.
Both societies were extremly anti-democratic and attempted to organize totalitarian states controlling industry, agriculture, education and the way people live.
How does this differ from the soviets?
Hitler followed a policy known as Glechschaltung (forcible co-ordination), which turned Germany into a totalitarian state. It was dangerous to oppose or criticize the government in any way.
Hw does this differ from the soviets?
All political parties were banned except the National socialists, so Germany became a one-party state just as Italy and USSR.
I don't need to ask here because the information is offered.
The civil service was purged, all Jews and other suspected enemies of the country were removed. Education system was closely controlled so that children could be raised with Nazi opinions. All communists and the media were controlled; film, music, art, newspaper were supervised........
How does this differ from how the soviets operated?
There you go.
.......Hitler and Mussolini were both dictators, both lead totalitarian regimes in their countries and cooperated together during World War Two.
How does this differ from the USSR? Stalin was a dictator who lead a totalitarian regime and he cooperated with Hitler until Hitler double crossed him.
Their regimes had many similarities, but at the same time, they had differences which distinguished nazism from fascism.
How does this differ from the soviets? The similarities are great. The differences are few.
First important similarity between these two regimes was their anti-communist policy. Especially for Germany, Russia was their natural enemy with its combination of inferior Slavic culture, Bolshevism and „Jewish dominated government“. Fear of communism existed in whole Europe and this gave Hitler solid basis support from all classes. Just as Germany, Italy as well feared communists to take over the government. This played into the hands of the fascists, who were able to use it as their advantage. Mussolini was able to pose as the 'savior of the nation from the communism', which brought him support from big businesses and elite.
Earlier I made the analogy about bullies fighting over the same piece of ideological land. Communists didn't like fascists and vice versa but when you move beyond that and look at their methodology you see the closeness of how they saw the world. A closeness which meant that until Hitler double crossed Stalin they were in an alliance.
Both societies were extremly anti-democratic and attempted to organize totalitarian states controlling industry, agriculture, education and the way people live.
How does this differ from the soviets?
Hitler followed a policy known as Glechschaltung (forcible co-ordination), which turned Germany into a totalitarian state. It was dangerous to oppose or criticize the government in any way.
Hw does this differ from the soviets?
All political parties were banned except the National socialists, so Germany became a one-party state just as Italy and USSR.
I don't need to ask here because the information is offered.
The civil service was purged, all Jews and other suspected enemies of the country were removed. Education system was closely controlled so that children could be raised with Nazi opinions. All communists and the media were controlled; film, music, art, newspaper were supervised........
How does this differ from how the soviets operated?
There you go.
''To point the finger at immigrants, or the poor 'feckless benefit scroungers' as the reason, really is a cheap misguided trick.
But it's an easy target. And easier for people to point the finger of blame. Because they can relate to it more easily.
More easily, than the fact that the five richest families in this country, have more wealth than the 12 million poorest, and that £50 billion worth of taxes from top business and individuals, went unpaid by ' loopholes' in the law.''
Eeternal, why do u never address issues as described above?
But it's an easy target. And easier for people to point the finger of blame. Because they can relate to it more easily.
More easily, than the fact that the five richest families in this country, have more wealth than the 12 million poorest, and that £50 billion worth of taxes from top business and individuals, went unpaid by ' loopholes' in the law.''
Eeternal, why do u never address issues as described above?
Facts
05 Dec 14 00:22
CMAT
My jibe at ' your rag ' was a response to you stating The Guardian was ' my rag ' You don't need to be in denial
You admitted that you only read one paper, 'the one that prints the truth'
When I asked you what it was you replied 'The Guardian, of course.'
Unless you were lying, and thought it was a jibe.
Do you know how many copies a day does it sells?
I have never admitted to reading any newspaper, not even the RP.
But you and your ilk have no problem accusing all who diagree with you of being 'Mail' readers.
It's a wonder that any other papers sell any copies at all to readers of this forum.
2 The Guardian
10 the Sun, for the tits.
All others, the Mail.
05 Dec 14 00:22
CMAT
My jibe at ' your rag ' was a response to you stating The Guardian was ' my rag ' You don't need to be in denial
You admitted that you only read one paper, 'the one that prints the truth'
When I asked you what it was you replied 'The Guardian, of course.'
Unless you were lying, and thought it was a jibe.
Do you know how many copies a day does it sells?
I have never admitted to reading any newspaper, not even the RP.
But you and your ilk have no problem accusing all who diagree with you of being 'Mail' readers.
It's a wonder that any other papers sell any copies at all to readers of this forum.
2 The Guardian
10 the Sun, for the tits.
All others, the Mail.
I'm not any sort of coward, I'm just far too busy to waste my time bandying words with a self-inflated idiot like you.
It has been a waste of time for others too and you just pump out the same old bilge on here day after day after day after day...... ad nauseum
Randomly chucking out unfunny insults and believing you have "beaten" people in arguments and sent them scurrying away, whereas in reality most of them have just had enough and have better things to do.
There is no way that pointing out the worst pieces of nonsense from you in this thread will make any difference, nor will you ever change any views, even when categorically put straight, nor is what you say of any more value than what other people write - though you seem to think it is! So I'm not going to bother.
Now, I have work to do.
It has been a waste of time for others too and you just pump out the same old bilge on here day after day after day after day...... ad nauseum
Randomly chucking out unfunny insults and believing you have "beaten" people in arguments and sent them scurrying away, whereas in reality most of them have just had enough and have better things to do.
There is no way that pointing out the worst pieces of nonsense from you in this thread will make any difference, nor will you ever change any views, even when categorically put straight, nor is what you say of any more value than what other people write - though you seem to think it is! So I'm not going to bother.
Now, I have work to do.
How strange. You don't want to debate the issues because you are too busy but you've got the time to post several paragraphs posting ad hominum attacks after complaining abut how I post.
It's ad hominem. A trait which can be attributed far more to you than to me.
and... I am busy, but I outlined the other reasons too.
and... I am busy, but I outlined the other reasons too.
It is ad hominem but that kind of correction is something you would rarely see from me.
On the issue not only have you not outlined reasons neither has facts or anybody else. What people have done is made assertions or quoted with the quotes being rebutted by logical examination. I have already conceded that it is a commonly held view. My contention was backed up with reasoned argument why I feel this view is wrong.
On the issue not only have you not outlined reasons neither has facts or anybody else. What people have done is made assertions or quoted with the quotes being rebutted by logical examination. I have already conceded that it is a commonly held view. My contention was backed up with reasoned argument why I feel this view is wrong.
on a serious note, did mosely bum a young james savile on a visit to leeds in 1934.if so it had no lasting effect as js was never arrested for any crime.
as you were
as you were
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539