Jump to content

Protecting Second Life From Hate Groups Hiding & Organizing Here


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 189 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Vivienne Schell said:

Funny when fascists quote Orwell in order to hide that they are fascists.

Again I am going to go with the fact you do not know me, what I believe in or anything about me.  

Ignorant.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jordan Whitt said:

Again I am going to go with the fact you do not know me, what I believe in or anything about me.  

Ignorant.

Well you are making a real nice job of pretending to be a karen!

Edited by foneco Zuzu
  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jordan Whitt said:

Again I am going to go with the fact you do not know me, what I believe in or anything about me.  

Ignorant.

Youbexposed yourself sufficiently.

3 minutes ago, Talon Brown said:

And there it is.  Out come the rhetorical knives when you have no other argument to make.

That´s politics, boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Syo Emerald said:

I actually agree. I find such statements quite problematic on a social level and they should be frowned upon in the same way other opinions of the same nature are.

My comment was a response to multiple people making blanket statements that every opinion should be allowed to be promoted and spread. This blanket statement is just nonesense, because it eliminates the ability to draw a line. And a line needs to be drawn somewhere. 

 

And I agree that a line needs to be drawn somewhere.  However, it should be a line that is there for ALL, and not just those you agree or disagree with.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Doc Carling said:

Nice try. The difference is fascist regimes put you into concentration camps or or kill you in another way. While in democratic systems you get away with the same offense.

Which party is now talking about rounding up the "peaceful protesters", oh sorry, "domestic terrorists" and sending them off to Gitmo? Hint, it's the "anti-fascist" party which also had no problem rounding up the "Japs" and putting them into camps in 1942.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, foneco Zuzu said:

Well you are making a real nice job of pretending to be a karen!

I have always said that those who resort to name calling are the ones who do not know how to debate or have a civilised conversation.

  • Like 7
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

Um, that is not how he rose to power. He was actually ridiculed by many newspapers prior to when he took power

Hugenberg became the country's leading media proprietor during the interwar period. As leader of the German National People's Party he was instrumental in helping Adolf Hitler become Chancellor of Germany

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Talon Brown said:

Which party is now talking about rounding up the "peaceful protesters", oh sorry, "domestic terrorists" and sending them off to Gitmo? Hint, it's the "anti-fascist" party which also had no problem rounding up the "Japs" and putting them into camps in 1942.

All parties supporting democracy are antif-fascist by default.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Talon Brown said:

Who the ***** are you calling a boy?  I'm going to assume you're not American and don't realize that's racist AF.

And i assume you are American and only had to dealt with dictators when they where good to exploit them and to use them to make money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Vivienne Schell said:

In fact, the NSDAP party never received more than 34 percent of the votes in free and fair elections. Fact is, that right wing conservative parties and a right wing conservative president enabled them.

Yes, he exploited a loophole within German politics whereby the NSDAP walked out of session over and over resulting in a continual election which gave the party more and more seats. That said Hindenburg (the president you mention) despised Hitler and his ideals and refused to pass him chancellorship over and over until the NSDAP had to much control of the parliament, there was a stalemate and left him with no choice. 

Also your 34% statement is misleading. 37% was enough seats to make the party the largest in the Reichstag, which generally by law mandated that that party be given chancellorship, but Hindenburg still refused despite Hilter's demands. So whilst your phrase implies that Hindenburg was right wing and favoured him, that is wrong and misleading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Talon Brown said:

And there it is.  Out come the rhetorical knives when you have no other argument to make.

Letters become words and words become phrases and soon those are spread and led to a few let millions being killed for being different.

Edited by foneco Zuzu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Talon Brown said:

Which party is now talking about rounding up the "peaceful protesters", oh sorry, "domestic terrorists"

Well, I'm a German. I spent the night to watch the congress session on tv because I was curious how it works overthere. I saw hords of people breaking in the capitol, destroying doors and windows, yelling they will hang senators, kicking and beating officers, stealing things - the list is endless. If that were peaceful protesters in your eyes, what do you consider as terrorists?

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Doc Carling said:

Well, I'm a German. I spent the night to watch the congress session on tv because I was curious how it works overthere. I saw hords of people breaking in the capitol, destroying doors and windows, yelling they will hang senators, kicking and beating officers, stealing things - the list is endless. If that were peaceful protesters in your eyes, what do you consider as terrorists?

So I take it you didn't see the mob attacking the White House a few months back doing the same things.  The media assured us those were "peaceful protesters" while this mob are "domestic terrorists."  Who gets called what depends on which side you prefer, that was my point.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Talon Brown said:

So I take it you didn't see the mob attacking the White House a few months back doing the same things. 

Oh yes, I did. I saw hundreds of national guards, cops and security services protecting the capitol. I wonder where all those have been this time? I remember that I thought, what is that? No cops? What is going there.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Talon Brown said:

You know for someone that claimed they were going to ignore all my posts 2 pages back you certainly seem intent to reply to all of them now.

You try to defend the unthinkable. that needs to be denounced with arguments but sometimes not even those are enough.

I can not let anyone that defends regimes that lead to the deaths of millions in the past to try to rise again without an answer!

And i lack the skills to argument by words you can bet will defend them in person as i did already in my youth, to stop the seed of evil to spread again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, foneco Zuzu said:

And i lack the skills to argument by words you can bet will defend them in person as i did already in my youth, to stop the seed of evil to spread again.

   How is your juvenile delinquency record in any way, shape, or form a relevant argument in an online environment with international participants, though? Not that a whole lot of anything around here is relevant by any means, but that one stood out as particularly peculiar. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, foneco Zuzu said:

You try to defend the unthinkable. that needs to be denounced with arguments but sometimes not even those are enough.

I can not let anyone that defends regimes that lead to the deaths of millions in the past to try to rise again without an answer!

And i lack the skills to argument by words you can bet will defend them in person as i did already in my youth, to stop the seed of evil to spread again.

I'm defending freedom of speech and freedom of thought.  I'm terribly sorry you consider those unpleasant concepts.  As for your last statement...

 

badass.png

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Doc Carling said:

I never said that Hitler didn't have papers that covered him as I said it was 3% of the total 42,000 odd papers in Germany. That said, whilst he did get exposure in Hugenbergs papers it was insignificant compared to the financial support as well as introducing him to the right people and pointing him how to act. He even is often credited for giving Hitler hints on how to look and stand out from the crowd.

In other words it was more Hugenberg's social status, money and contacts than his paper that was influential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 189 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...