BS: False advertising by the RNC

Subject: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 06 Jan 04 - 04:24 PM

There has been criticism leveled at Move On for distributing
TV spots depicting Bush and Hitler by association. This is false. These ads were rejected by Move On when submitted in a recent contest. They are falsely being shown as an example of MOve On's political advertising. They do NOT represent Move On in any way. The ads Move On has selected are excellent and have nothing to do with what the RNC ads are claiming. Dirty politics once again. When will the lying stop?

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: artbrooks
Date: 06 Jan 04 - 04:42 PM

Let me say first that my initial assumption is that any statement made by the Republican National Committee is suspect. However, the statements on the RNC website specifically refer to video clips of possible ads shown on the MoveOn website, and do not say that these have been distributed for TV by MoveOn or anybody else. There is no lie-they were there, and MoveOn has stated that they "slipped through our screening process." Whether or not the RNC is justified in making such an issue of it is something else entirely.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Jan 04 - 06:53 PM

Lying by the RNC. Dirty tricks by Republicans. Who knew? Shocking.

Any minute now they'll start the chorus of whining about "negative campaign ads" aired by the Dems. and the "Liberal Media".

And the damn brain-dead public will buy it lock, stock and barrel & come running back for more.

Whooda Thunkit?

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 06:13 AM

The two clips have actually been available at the Move On website, though only for a short time.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 09:13 AM

We agree that the two ads in question were in poor taste and deeply regret that they slipped through our screening process. In the future, if we publish or broadcast raw material, we will create a more effective filtering system. (MoveOn)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 09:35 AM

Hey, what's wrong with telling the truth about the association of the Bush's and Nazis? Prescott Bush, GWB's, grand-daddy had close ties to the Nazis, both on a personal and business side... Then ahortly after WW II, former Nazi's started finding their way into influential positions in the Republican Party.

But realistically, Greg F is correct in that his observatation that the masses are "brain dead", or mighty danged near to it, and can easliy be wipped up into a lather by the anti-government sentiments that the right wing has cleverly created and the Nazi ad would certainly backfire.

Yeah, Joe 12 Pack will believe a Bush lie in a heartbeat rather than have to deal with the truth...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 10:28 AM

Maybe the backlash will bring more attention to MoveOn--this story was talked about it on ABC news' Goodmorning America today. The winning ad will run during the week of the Iowa Caucuses, and perhaps people will pay some attention to it because news organizations are on the lookout for it.

One can always hope.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Mudlark
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 05:55 PM

I agree, Stilly....Look what Fox did for Moore.

Altho I didn't look at a lot of the ads (load time too long on my slow machine) some of them were really good, some struck me as too far over the top to be anything but preaching to the choir. It will be interesting to see which ad finally makes it.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 05:57 PM

wipped up into a lather by the anti-government sentiments that the right wing has cleverly created

Whal, Bobert, ya see that there's a big part of the brain death problem- Joe 12-pak don't realize that the right wingers ARE the gummint......

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 06:48 PM

I just read through the Michael Moore thread and was about to post a long screed, but maybe it belongs here instead. Anyway, here it comes (as I deftly click on "paste").

The problem with the Democrats is that too many of them don't have a clear idea of what they are about, whereas the Republicans (under the thumb of the neo-cons) know exactly what they want, and are willing to stop at nothing to get it. And that the Democrats are much too polite for the current political climate. But there are people like Michael Moore who don't mind being a bit rude now and then. Therein, perhaps, lies our hope.

When this harsh political climate blew in, I'm not too sure, but I think it happened during the Reagan years. Reagan was determined to return the United States to the conditions that existed prior to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's administration back in the Thirties. Roosevelt brought the country out of the worst depression it ever had (25% unemployment) and averted a possible Russian-style revolution that was looming due to the vast discrepancy between the rich and the poor (the middle-class had dwindled to near non-existence). He did this by initiating regulations stopped the most flagrant abuses of corporate corruption, initiated a social safety net (things like Social Security), and put people back to work directly, on government projects such as building infrastructure (WPA)—rather than letting them starve while waiting for tax cuts for the wealthy to "trickle down." He also established the SEC to oversee and prevent the kind of insane speculation that led to the 1929 stock market crash, and the FDIC to keep people from losing their savings when banks went broke. Opponents cried "socialism!" But if one understands what socialism actually is, one would realize that what Roosevelt did can hardly be called socialism. It was (and still is) a handy epithet. But be that as it may. Roosevelt did save the country from sinking into the chaos that the prior twelve years of Republican administration had allowed to grow unrestrained.

But what has rankled in the right-wing conservative craw for the past seventy years are those pesky restrictions on corporate robber-baronism. And the fact that the social safety net was not allowing the weaker or less fortunate members of society to fulfill their Social Darwinian destiny by dying off and thereby improving the gene pool (And some of these folks keep insisting that this is "a Christian country." To them I say, see Matthew 25:35-41).

Somewhere along the line, a coterie of right-wing extremists managed to take over the Republican Party. These people are so far right-wing that they even find many of the policies espoused by the late Barry Goldwater, considered to be the quintessential American Conservative, to be much too liberal. They were not all that happy with George Herbert Walker Bush, because he, too, was not sufficiently right-wing for their purposes. He did do much of their bidding, but it was a bitter disappointment to them when he stopped the Gulf War once the stated and legitimate goal of driving the Iraqi invaders out of Kuwait had been accomplished and did not go on to conquer and occupy Iraq as they intended he should.   

But determined to maintain their grasp on the tiller and hopefully bend George Herbert Walker Bush to their will, it was another bitter blow to them when Bill Clinton defeated Bush in 1992 after he had served only one term. This would never do! To try to insure that a Republican puppet (preferably more malleable than G. H. W. Bush) would be elected in 1996, or at least by 2000, they began a campaign of character assassination against Bill Clinton. And when it became obvious that she was going to be an active participant in his administration, Hillary Clinton became a target as well. Despite that fact that Clinton was at least a halfway decent president and left the country in good financial shape (by the way, many of the better presidents had trouble keeping their flies zipped, so I don't consider his little peccadilloes in that area to be relevant) and that Hillary is popular enough to have won a Senatorial election in New York state, there is a residue of unreasoning hatred for them, even among some Democrats, based on nothing more than accusation and innuendo—never any actual proof of anything.

Conservative interest groups, commentators, and self-appointed investigators (among them, undoubtedly Karl Rove, the right-wing's Character Assassin-in-Chief) went to work with a right good will to make the life of the Clintons as miserable as possible during their whole time in the White House, relentlessly and remorselessly firing accusation after accusation at them. None of them ever amounted to anything, but on the principle that "to be accused is to be condemned," which Joseph McCarthy used so expertly, and the belief that most people have that "where there's smoke, there's fire," they blew vast quantities of smoke. The truth of the matter in this case is "where there's smoke, there's a smoke-making machine."

George W. Bush has had a very cushy go of it so far. He and his supporters cavil at any criticism of him (often with accusations of lack of patriotism on the part of the critic, another tactic used by McCarthy—and people far worse!), but bitch though they might, Dubya has had it really easy compared to the ride he would have had if the Democrats and the liberals (they're not quite the same, you know) had in place an organized effort to pick up on the plethora of gaffs, goofs, sub rosa wheeling and dealing, promises without funding, ripping up the social safety net, outright lies, and general malfeasance that has been the main leitmotif of the Bush administration and call them to the attention of a press that is receptive, not just an administration lap-dog.

There are a few people who get occasional media coverage (often negative), such as Michael Moore and Al Franken, who level blasts at the Bush administration, generally couched in bitter humor. The only person in the media of any prominence that I can think of who could qualify as a serious critic is Bill Moyers. And he's pretty low-key. He quietly reports on stories that the right-wing would prefer that the public not know about, and let's you make up your own mind. But he's on PBS on Friday nights, competing with Hope and Faith on ABC, Ed on NBC, JAG on CBS, not to mention Stargate SG-1 on the Sci-Fi channel, Powder Puff Girls on the Cartoon channel, Celebrities Uncensored on E!, 100 Hottest Hotties on VH1—and, of course, Special Report with Brit Hume on Fox News Channel. Neither Democrats nor liberals have anything as nearly well organized as the right-wing propaganda machine that fired all those bon mots at the Clintons—and who are already at work on whoever emerges to oppose Bush in 2004.

Already there have been articles published in national newspapers attacking the Democratic candidates, particularly Dean, because he's the front-runner right now. The one they keep repeating like a mantra is that Dean is "unelectable." Don't they wish! If they can convince enough people that it's true and they succumb to defeatism, then that's one very dangerous candidate out of the way. Other cute comments involve referring to the broad base of Dean supporters as "Deanie-weenies" or "Dean's Internet Gestapo." One article accuses Dean of "shameless disregard of the First Amendment" because of the way he's gained support on the internet, but I'll be damned if I can see how that accusation applies. But Dean, apparently, is not the only one they regard as dangerous. There is one article (and this is a lulu!) that likens Kocinich's somewhat unruly hair to Hitler's. Get it? Dean=Gestapo, Kucinich=Hitler. Interesting, when you stop and consider. Pots? Kettles? Hmm? That's pretty much the level of political discourse that we can expect for the coming ten months.

Politics has always been a matter of push-and-shove, give-and-take, a system of arguing, bargaining, and reaching compromises. A cumbersome, unwieldy system all in all, but it does have the virtue of making sure that in a system that at least works some of the time, changes that could screw it up totally are not going to occur without lots of discussion and debate. That's government. But the right-wing cabal is not interested any of this. They don't want discussion and debate. They don't want to compromise. They are not interested in governing. They want to rule.

Brace yourselves, ladies and gentlemen. 2004 is gonna be one nasty campaign!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 07:41 PM

Typical of my left wing comrades to level accusations of stupidity at the masses.This is the way to political organisation for the "common good" by people who know whats best for everyone else ,and leads to "State capitalism " and many other horrors ,finally to Pol Phot and the reoganisation of Cambodia.
In my opinion when the masses take in issue on board seriously,like opposition to the Iraq War, Against most of the media, they are invariably right.
This has been uncomfortable for me on some occasions given my left wing views,but iv come to accept that there is a mass perception at work which will not be fooled by Capitalists ,Communists Or any other.,...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 07:50 PM

There is also a mass perception of politicians ,Republican, Democrat,Labour ,Conservative,as being, manipulative, devious,self serving scum and who could argue with that...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 08:39 PM

Actually "the masses", in America and increasingly in England, don't seem to buy much of this stuff, as evidenced by the fact that they sit in their hands and don't vote.

In fact it wasn't "the masses" who went out and voted for Hitler, it was the respectable upright uptight people. Not so much because they were stupid as because they were looking after number one, and saw Hitler as someone who would put the rough common people and those clever Jews in their place. The kind of people who, still today, if they feel they are among friends, are liable to mutter things like "Well of course Hitler went too far - but he had some good ideas..."

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jan 04 - 09:07 PM

Excellent piece of observation and writing, Don. Unfortunately, the folks you have framed so well won't read it because they know exactly what's going down and they don't want to be reminded that they are on the anit-human, anti-earth side of the equation.

I dare any of you right wing Bush apologists to read Don's post!!!

No, didn't think so... You don't want to hear it.

If I wanta get dem nigga's back on mah plantations, pickin' mah cotton, den you commie's ain'ta gonna stop me!

Oh yeah, like 1927, you'll melt it down an' ya better hope they'll be a FDR to save yer right winged asses next time 'round 'er it could easlily be blood bath: yours!

Jus' think about it...

When you have gotten enuff of "Southern Man's" maxed out and outta work cause you sent his job overseas, he'll have something fir ya that don't resemble the "Southern Stategy Pea-Under-The-Shell" crap you been feedin' him since Reconstruction...

Like I said, you'd better give what Don's talkin' about some thought before its too late fir ya. Yer way, way, way outnumbered and the way yer screwing over our Vets, push come to shove, they'll be gunning fir ya too...

Don't think so? Think about what has gone down in just 3 short years and mirror that into the future...

Better think twice...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 01:06 PM

Bobert,

Hey, what's wrong with telling the truth about the association of the Bush's and Nazis?

This from The Straight Dope site.

Was President Bush's great-grandfather a Nazi?
14-Feb-2003

Dear Cecil:
I read in the New Yorker that George W. Bush's grandfather and great-grandfather worked for Brown Brothers Harriman, and had clients who funded the building of the Nazi regime. I searched the Net and found hundreds of sites giving volumes of details and listing sources like the New York Times and the Library of Congress. Conspiracy theories aside, what's the truth about our president's family? --Matt Tiegler

Cecil replies:
Remember how during the Clinton era there were all those rabid EOBs (Enemies of Bill) who seemingly devoted their every waking hour to propagating scurrilous stories about the president and his family? Well, an equally dedicated crew is now spreading sensational allegations about Dubya and his forebears. (Sample: the president's grandfather not only financed the Nazis, he used concentration-camp prisoners as slaves.) So each side gets a chance to drag the other through the mud. Is this a great country or what?

Though the Bush family's detractors are legion, one of the most prominent is John Loftus, a former federal prosecutor and past president of the Florida Holocaust Museum in Saint Petersburg. In 1994 Loftus coauthored a book with Mark Aarons entitled The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People. The book alleges various misdeeds by George W.'s father, George H.W., his grandfather, Prescott Bush, and his great-grandfather, George Herbert Walker. Since space is limited we'll focus on the accusations against Prescott Bush, which in my opinion are the most serious.

The central charge against Prescott Bush has a basis in fact. In 1942, under the Trading With the Enemy Act, the U.S. government seized several companies in which he had an interest. Prescott at the time was an investment banker with Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), which had funneled U.S. capital into Germany during the 1920s and '30s. Among the seized companies was the Union Banking Corporation (UBC) of New York, which was controlled by German industrialist Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen had been an early financier of the Nazi party--in fact, in 1941 he published a book entitled I Paid Hitler. Ergo, Prescott helped finance the Nazis.

An article by journalist Toby Rogers posted on Loftus's Web site makes an even more explosive charge. Another company in which Prescott and his associates had a stake was the Silesian-American Corporation (SAC), which owned several industrial concerns in Poland. The Auschwitz death camp was established in a district where SAC already had a steel plant. The plant allegedly used forced labor from Auschwitz during World War II. The article asserts that "a portion of the slave labor force in Poland was 'managed by Prescott Bush,' according to a Dutch intelligence agent." (See www.john-loftus.com/Thyssen.asp.)

The slave labor charge is easy to dismiss. SAC plants in Poland were taken over by the German government after the Nazi invasion of 1939, and the Auschwitz prison camp wasn't established until 1940. No one can seriously claim that Prescott Bush managed camp inmates in any of those plants.

Prescott's involvement with Nazi finance is more complicated. Though Thyssen had been an ardent backer of the Nazis in the early days, he broke with them in 1938 after the Kristallnacht pogrom against the Jews. He fled to Switzerland the following year, and Hitler confiscated his fortune and stripped him of his citizenship. In I Paid Hitler Thyssen confessed his role in financing the Nazis and denounced the Führer. Arrested in Vichy France, he spent the balance of the war as an Axis prisoner. Prescott Bush, for his part, owned a single share of stock (of 4,000) in UBC, the Thyssen bank. According to a 2001 Boston Globe piece, the New York Herald Tribune ran a story in July 1942 headlined "Hitler's Angel Has 3 Million in US Bank," in which Prescott and other BBH partners "explain[ed] to government regulators that their position [as directors of UBC] was merely an unpaid courtesy for a client."

So, did Bush and his firm finance the Nazis and enable Germany to rearm? Indirectly, yes. But they had a lot of company. Some of the most distinguished names in American business had investments or subsidiaries in prewar Germany, including Standard Oil and General Motors. Critics have argued for years that without U.S. money, the Nazis could never have waged war. But American business has always invested in totalitarian regimes--witness our dealings with mainland China.

Loftus tells me there's more to it than that. He says that the value of German industrial assets in which Bush and friends invested increased during World War II, in part due to slave labor, and that Bush benefited from this increase when the assets were returned--supposedly he got $1.5 million when UBC was liquidated in 1951. I'll buy the claim that Bush got his share of UBC back--it was an American bank, after all--but the idea that his German holdings increased in value despite being obliterated by Allied bombs is ridiculous.
--CECIL ADAMS

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Nerd
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 02:00 PM

So, Teribus,

your argument is he DID have ties to the Nazis, and DID make money off of Nazism, but not as much as lefties sometimes claim; and that other industrialists did too. Ooh, glad you mounted such a great defense! Why, Prescott Bush was a real American hero!

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 03:14 PM

Edward Feser, writing for TechCentral.com, promotes this fallacy about MoveOn as truth in an article entitled The Mustache on the Left. I wrote in to call him on it, but it may or may not have any effect.

It is intellectual dishonesty to subscribe to this sort of reality-distortion just because one feels strongly about an issue.

A

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: DougR
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 03:46 PM

Bobert: I read Don's post. He has a right to his opinion, and a right to write it. What else can I say?

As to the Nazi connection with the Bush family, some people will believe the worst of anybody, and proof doesn't necessarily have to be present. As the article posted by Teribus explains, a lot of well-known American businesses probably provided funds that helped the Nazi party when it began. It is my recollection, though, that the Nazi Party did not become the hated party that it became until later in the 1930s, after the invasion of Poland. Lindburg, for example, gave Hitler strong support, as did John F. Kennedy's father prior to 1939. Kennedy at the time was Ambassador to Great Britain and urged Roosevelt not to side against Hitler.

Yet I don't see any postings by Don, Bobert, or anyone else on the Mudcat accusing Kennedy or Lindburg of being Nazis.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 04:08 PM

i don't think there are posts accusing P. Bush of being a nazi, either. i think they are accusing him of being a war profiteer. that's pretty shameful, if true, wouldn't you agree dougR?

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: DougR
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 04:36 PM

Sorry to disappoint you. I see nothing wrong with a company or an individual making a profit so long as it is legal, in war time or not.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 04:44 PM

DougR:

That is not what war profiteering means.

All businesses try to operate at a profit in peace or in war.

"Profiteering" directly implies taking undue advantage of the situation to make excess profit -- i.e., rates of mark-up that would be inordinate except for war. The reason it is immoral is not simply because of the profit as such but because it drains the resourc of the nation while it is at war thus reducing its chances at winning the war. As such it is viewed in extreme circumstances as a treacherous act of self-aggrandizement.

That is very different from continuing to do business at a reasonable profit during war time.

A

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 05:02 PM

Did I somehow miss the evidence, or a link to the evidence, that Prescott Bush was either a member or a supporter of the National Socialist German Workers Party or profited improperly from the war? It certainly wasn't in the lengthy article/letter that Terebus quoted. And if he did, this has exactly what to do with George Dubya? He has quite enough of his own issues to answer for without people trying to wish the alleged sins of his great-grandfather on him.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 05:40 PM

Doug, I know this is fruitless, but a lot of what I wrote above is historical fact, not just my opinion. And if you don't see the rest of it working out day by day, it's because you don't want to see it.

As far as any Nazi connection between the Kennedy and Bush families, I'm not up on that, so I make no comment. I was aware of Lindberg's sentiments, however. I have heard allegations (as above) about the Kennedys and the Bushes, but I have not checked it out for myself. I do that, you know.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,pdc
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 07:18 PM

The title of this thread says it all: False Advertising by the RNC.
Just watch between now and the election next November -- just watch. It's going to get uglier, and cleverer, and nastier, and more manipulation will take place this time than in 2000, and the voter fraud will be more subtle.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 07:31 PM

"It is my recollection, though, that the Nazi Party did not become the hated party that it became until later in the 1930s, after the invasion of Poland."

Absolutely true among a lot of respectable and important people in both our countries. What's a little persecution of Jews and STrades Unionists and so forth matter when the man wasn't interfering with making money?

"Premature anti-fascist" was the term coined in the USA later to refer to the kind of people who tried to make a fuss about that kind of thing.

The same way when Saddam was gassing Kurds and waging aggressive war and persecuting his opponents, that wasn't a matter for the same kind of people to worry about, until he invaded Kuwait and threatened profits.

"Premature anti-fascist" was the term coined in the USA later to refer to the kind of people who tried to make a fuss about that kind of thing.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 07:34 PM

"It is my recollection, though, that the Nazi Party did not become the hated party that it became until later in the 1930s, after the invasion of Poland."

Absolutely true among a lot of respectable and important people in both our countries. What did a little persecution of Jews and STrades Unionists and so forth matter, when the man wasn't interfering with making money?

"Premature anti-fascist" was the term coined in the USA later to refer to the kind of people who tried to make a fuss about what Hitler was doing too early.

The same way when Saddam was gassing Kurds and waging aggressive war and persecuting his opponents, that wasn't a matter for the same kind of people to worry about, until he invaded Kuwait and threatened profits.

"Premature anti-fascist" was the term coined in the USA later to refer to the kind of people who tried to make a fuss about that kind of thing.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: DougR
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 07:38 PM

Thanks, Amos, I'm familiar with the term. And no, I would not support anyone who was convicted of profiteering from a war. The key word, of course, is convicted.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 07:51 PM

"The key word, of course, is convicted."

The crucial thing is that there should be the will to ensure that people and companies reasonably suspected of this kind of thing should be prosecuted; and that the law shouldn't have loopholes that enable the guilty to walk free and get back on the gravy train, even when they are wealthy and powerful.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 08:44 PM

Well, Doug,

Hard as yer boy, T, tried he didn't dent my original accusation. And din't ven touch upon the fact that after WW II, lots and lots of former Nazi's were brought into the Republican Party and not as goffers but in positions of power.

Now, if you know the history of the folks you supporst and still want to support their ideologies that go way back into the 30's fine. Just say so. I can rspect that. But to deny the facsist fabric and leanings of the Republican Party is dishonest...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 09:09 PM

Bobert, not to dispute your opinion, but do you mean 'Nazis,' a purely German political party which had some (mostly unsuccessful) imitators in other countries, or fascists, or radical right-wingers, or what? Or do you refer to the fact that many people admired them for the way they pulled Germany out of the Depression, without fully understanding the rot at the core of the party's philosophy? And who, exactly?

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: kendall
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 09:22 PM

If my shakey European history is not too far off, Hitler was sending Jews to the death camps long before he invaded Poland.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 10:46 PM

Kendall

Interesting hypothesis, but not something I had previously thought was true . Any corroborating evidence for that chronology?

A

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 10:48 PM

No, Artbrooks, not purely German Nazi's but folks like Laszlo Pasztor, a Hunagarian fascist, memebr of the Arrow Cross which was the Huingarian equivelent to the German Nazi Party. The Arrow Crooss later joined up with Hitler in 1944 and Pasztor joined Hitler in Germany...

Pasztor became the founder of the Heritage Coucil of the Republican Party in the early's 50's and as we know this Council is still going stron promoting right wohned agendas..

But there wer many Naziz's and Nazi sypathathizers; Ivan Docheff, a fascists from Bulgaria, Also Radi Slavoff, anothe Bu8lgarian fascist. Valerian Trifa, an Romanian fascist, Walter Melianovich, as Bylorussian fascists, etc. etc. Hundreds of these Hitler sypathizers ened up right here in the US in the Republican Party.

A good read is Russ Ballant's "Old Nazis, the New Right and the Republican Party". He goes into details that are beyond belief except, he provides the resources fir the doubters. This book is a slam dunk... and purdy danged scarey...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 Jan 04 - 11:04 PM

Thanks...I'll look for that book.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 06:54 AM

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 07:12 AM

"Death camps" as such weren't introduced bybthe Nazis until after the war had started, along with other extermination methods directed at Jews and Gypsies. Without the war it seems unlikely they would have happened in that form.

But there was plenty of persecution and murder of Jews and Gypsies. Most dramatically, for Jews, during the Kristallnacht pogroms in 1938.

The evidence was there, but a lot of people chose to look the other way. Not just ordinary people who were dependent on what the mass media chose to tell them, but the kind of people who controlled what went into the mass media.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 07:58 AM

MGOH, beat me to it - death camps formed part of the Nazi's "final Solution" and were not introduced until 1941 (If memory serves me correctly). So by the time camps were established in Poland, SAC's facilities in Poland had been commandeered by the Nazi's for about a year and a half. Which means that GWB's Grandfather could hardly be held responsible for their management.

Bobert, it would appear that when you refer to Nazi's, you actually are referring to fascists, as all those you name are non-German and were not members of the Nazi Party.

The book you refer to, makes mention of one, Reinhard Gehlen:

"The most important Nazi employed by the U.S. was Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler's most senior eastern front military intelligence officer. After Germany's defeat became certain, Gehlen offered the U.S. certain concessions in exchange for his own protection."

During the latter stages of the Second World War, US representatives, at the Yalta Conference, started to have doubts about Soviet intentions. Churchill had been warning the Americans for quite some time but his warnings had been ignored. By the time the Potsdam Conference took place, the Americans fully realised that the Russians were indeed a threat and discovered that their intelligence on Russia was deplorably lacking. No existing agents, no networks in place, no contacts - the USSR was in effect an intelligence black-hole.

That situation had to be remedied - enter Reinhard Gehlen - he offered the Americans everything they lacked - personally I believe he was one of the best con-men of his age, a brilliant opportunist and born survivor. He knew that neither the British or the French would entertain him, they didn't need to, but to the US Intelligence Services of the day, he must have appeared like the answer to a prayer. The result, the Americans took him hook, line and sinker. But his function was to maintain and develope espionage networks in eastern Europe and in the Soviet Republic, not run the Republican Party.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 10:04 AM

Okay, Teribus, until I finish reading the book, I'll re-phrase if it will make you happy:

The Republican Party brought into its fols many, many people who wer members of fascists organization that were allied with Hitler and the Nazi Party...

There. Any arguments with this wording?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: artbrooks
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 11:09 AM

"Fascist", of course, is a label, rather a lot like "Liberal." It means what the user wants it to mean and can be used to lump together groups and individuals that have little or nothing in common. Among historians, economists and political scientists, it is generally (although not universally) agreed that the Fascist Party of Italy had little in common with the Nazi Party of Germany other than totalitarianism, extreme nationalism and expansionism, and these were the traits that they shared with the micro-parties of Eastern Europe as well. An interesting book on the topic of the right-totalitarian parties of inter-war Europe is Stanley Payne's History of Fascism.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 11:37 AM

Bobert,

Not just the Republican Party. People with past histories such as you describe made there way to lots of countries and lots of organisations.

The early space programmes of both the USA and the USSR would have been completely stuffed without them. Russia's mine and submarine programmes benefited greatly from German engineers and designers. The Russian Whisky Class submarine was basically a German Type XXI and for a long time was the mainstay of the Soviet submarine fleet. The 5th French Foreign Legion was almost made up entirely of ex-Waffen SS, in French Indo-China they gave Ho Chi Min a bloody good run for his money, damn near defeated him, until pressure from Russia and China brought public pressure to bear and caused the units disbandment.

Generally, hard working, gifted engineers, chemists, scientists, they proved themselves useful members of whatever society they became part of. They were not all fervent dyed-in-the-wool Nazi's most were forced to join the Nazi Party to continue working in order to provide for their families.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Two_bears
Date: 09 Jan 04 - 12:04 PM

There has been criticism leveled at Move On for distributing
TV spots depicting Bush and Hitler by association. This is false. These ads were rejected by Move On when submitted in a
-----

You are mistaken.

Move On WAS distributing that advertizement via their web site.

If the spot had been rejected as you claim; all they had to do was delete the file.

It was Move On's website, and THEY are the ones responsible for the web site content.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 10:04 AM

Two Bears, I'm sorry but you are mistaken. The ads found on the website were rejected inasmuch as this was a contest, not an endorsement.

With this logic, any pictures of Hitler found on the RNC website could be construed as a Republican endorsement of him.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 10:22 AM

Furthermore, the ad in question lost in the first round of votes and was not brought forward with the second round of finalists.

It was a concept in poor taste, but it was submitted, and MoveOn was holding a contest; and they saw no reason to act authoritarian and censor it.


A

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Wolfgang
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 12:13 PM

This is but a small digression about the word Kristallnacht used twice in this thread and why many in Germany don't use it anymore, except some very old people and Neonazis.

'Reichskristallnacht' means 'imperial crystal night' and was the Nazi slang for the pogroms in 1938 (November 11). 'Crystal' was a mocking allusion to the shattered glass of the Jewish shops and houses. An allusion to shattered glass for a night in which dozens of Jews have been murdered and many more injured and harassed, and synagogues, shops and houses have been burned down is a euphemism of the worst kind. The association with this word was(is): Look how the Jews are raising hell about a bit of shattered glass.

All except the extreme right wing newspapers in Germany a couple of years ago (10 perhaps) have agreed to call it by a much better fitting name: Reichspogromnacht, i.e. 'imperial pogrom night'. It has taken close to 50 years to get rid of this Nazi euphemism but I think it is worth it.

I think it's fine if you keep in English the word you are used to for you don't have the belittling associations we have. But I thought you'd like to know why many of us don't use that word any more.

(As an aside, my personal favourite day for our National Holiday would be November 11. At this date the first German Republic has been proclaimed (1918), the first (large scale) Nazi pogrom against the Jews has been organised (1938), and the revolution in East Germany has seen the people dancing on the Wall (1989). All good and evil in one century of German history is captured in that date.)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 01:42 PM

Wolfgang:

I never would have known that had you not spoken up! Thank you.

A

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 03:35 PM

"Kristallnacht" doesn't come across to me as a euphemism of any kind. If it was invented by the perpetrators,with that in mind, it turned against them, as so often happens. The contrast between what happened and what should be a beautiful word seems to bring the horror across even more powerfully.

It also carries the message of something broken which can never be repaired. The word almost makes you hear it and see it, once you've learnt what it refers to. "Reichspogromnacht" sounds bureaucratic, distanced, filed away.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 04:20 PM

As I mentioned earlier, MoveOn.org is gaining momentum because of this flap about unendorsed ads:

San Francisco Chronicle

MoveOn.org becomes anti-Bush online powerhouse



BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer

(01-10) 10:15 PST BERKELEY, Calif. (AP) --

Chances are, Democratic Party consultants won't take credit for the hardest-hitting anti-Bush ad to air on network TV this month. That honor will likely go to MoveOn.org, an online group that has become too potent for establishment politicians to ignore.

Years before Howard Dean's use of the Internet dazzled analysts and propelled him to the front of the 2004 Democratic presidential field, MoveOn paved the way, evolving in six short years from something of a cybergeek forum to arguably the largest and most forceful voice in digital-era politics.

Its members' angry opposition to President Bush's policies has coalesced into a force that includes a political action committee and fund-raising organization that has pledged to spend millions on anti-Bush TV ads.

In its latest campaign, MoveOn invited people to create their own anti-Bush ads. More than 1,500 entries were submitted, and hundreds of thousands of wired MoveOn members voted for the most effective. The 15 most popular will be judged Monday in New York, and the winning ad will air the same week President Bush gives his State of the Union address.

the rest is online.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: Two_bears
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 06:42 PM

Two Bears, I'm sorry but you are mistaken. The ads found on the website were rejected inasmuch as this was a contest, not an endorsement.
-----

You are the one mistaken.

The ad was on the Move-On website, and they were distributing it via the web.


-----
With this logic, any pictures of Hitler found on the RNC website could be construed as a Republican endorsement of him.
-----

Are you aware of any such photos of Hitler on the RNC website? provide the evidence or stop defending the indefensible?

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: artbrooks
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 06:53 PM

1. The MoveOn ad is now on the RNC website (or at least it was 3 days ago).

2. The MoveOn ad in question contains pictures of Hitler.

3. Therefore there are pictures of Hitler on the RNC website.

Subject: RE: BS: False advertising by the RNC
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 10 Jan 04 - 06:54 PM

Two Bears,

No, there may not be any pix of Hitler there. But this was meant as a hypothetical statement. If there were it could be construed by this kind of logic that they endorsed it.

Move On does not endorse any ads having to do with comparing Bush to Hitler. The fact that the RNC says that they do is an example of dirty politics by intimation in the worst tradition of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove. The idea that they endorse such ads is an abject lie and is being used in an underhanded way by the RNC.

They are not distributing this on their website. Go to their website and look. You won't find it there.

You will find however the ads that won the contest and they are worth looking at and taking to heart.

Frank