U.S. rejects Chavez's cancer statement

[Broheim]

Hey look, I can play the bullshit statistical game also:

-snip-
Khmer Rouge 2,035,000
-snip

erm, you do realize that the khmer rouge were communists right?

what does the Nazis have to do with capitalism? the Nazi party's real name is Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (nationalsocialistic german workersparty), capitalism wasn't one of their cornerstones...

Cigarette related deaths? you know Karl Marx smoked right? does that make him a capitalist? what about Castro?

you know what I'm gonna stop pointing out all the flaws in your "statistic" and instead just call BS on your entire post...

 

[Steeplerot]

erm, you do realize that the khmer rouge were communists right?

what does the Nazis have to do with capitalism? the Nazi party's real name is Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (nationalsocialistic german workersparty), capitalism wasn't one of their cornerstones...

Cigarette related deaths? you know Karl Marx smoked right? does that make him a capitalist? what about Castro?

you know what I'm gonna stop pointing out all the flaws in your "statistic" and instead just call BS on your entire post...

Considering that those figures posted by you that are related to WW2 are from straight up Nazi propaganda used in the "Black book of Communism" as I said, its a bullshit statistics game, as far as why Nazi party, yes, god and capitalism were foundations of the N-S party as it is today in Nazi parties, the term Socialist already existed before Hitler took over the meetings in Munich and murdered the original members. Hitler commented that he left the name in to attract workers. Another round of right-wing projection same as "Fair and Balanced" is used by Foxnews ironically.

Read a bit of history son. If you want to learn about such things Hitler lays all this out in Mein Kampf written by his own hand.


The ideology was developed first by Anton Drexler and then Adolf Hitler as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism.[7] Initially Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, though such aspects were later downplayed in the 1930s to gain the support from industrial owners for the Nazis; focus was shifted to anti-Semitic and anti-Marxist themes.

Moderate socialists were sent to gas chambers. You are associating innocent people who were victims of nazism with Nazis. I would say you should be ashamed but I know the right wing propaganda machine loves to lie its ass off to try to scrub that stain of conservatism off the books and even better to blame the victims of the ideology. The perfect crime.

 

[Craig234]

erm, you do realize that the khmer rouge were communists right?

You don't understand the issue.

The Khmer Rouge being 'communists' was irrelevant to their being a murderous regime. The people they went to war with were communists, too.

Fact is, the Khmer Rouge couldn't have come to power if the US hadn't destabilized the Cambodian government. They are our fault that they got to power.

what does the Nazis have to do with capitalism? the Nazi party's real name is Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (nationalsocialistic german workersparty), capitalism wasn't one of their cornerstones...

Their name has nothing to do with their economy. It was facist, it was capitalist.

 

[Steeplerot]

Hitler was a homo sapiens too, thus everyone is a nazi! OMGZ!


Such a silly argument they use.

China is not communist, nor was the USSR, nor was the Khmer Rouge they are State Capitalist governments. Always have been.

There are very few "communist" governments (Spanish Civil war/Ukraine in the Russian Revolution) throughout history. And the few around were always crushed mercilessly by an alliance of capitalists/fascists and Stalinist type state capitalist governments.

A cool little bit on this from Comrade Durruti speaking to a capitalist/fascist reporter from America and a Stalinst KGB agent come to ask for the help of the Left Libertarians. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAajfSJ71Yc

No Pasarán to any totalitarian enemies of the working class, regardless of the banner fascism hides behind.

 

[Broheim]

Considering that those figures posted by you that are related to WW2 are from straight up Nazi propaganda used in the "Black book of Communism" as I said, its a bullshit statistics game, as far as why Nazi party, yes, god and capitalism were foundations of the N-S party as it is today in Nazi parties, the term Socialist already existed before Hitler took over the meetings in Munich and murdered the original members. Hitler commented that he left the name in to attract workers. Another round of right-wing projection same as "Fair and Balanced" is used by Foxnews ironically.

Read a bit of history son. If you want to learn about such things Hitler lays all this out in Mein Kampf written by his own hand.


The ideology was developed first by Anton Drexler and then Adolf Hitler as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism.[7] Initially Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, though such aspects were later downplayed in the 1930s to gain the support from industrial owners for the Nazis; focus was shifted to anti-Semitic and anti-Marxist themes.

Moderate socialists were sent to gas chambers. You are associating innocent people who were victims of nazism with Nazis. I would say you should be ashamed but I know the right wing propaganda machine loves to lie its ass off to try to scrub that stain of conservatism off the books and even better to blame the victims of the ideology. The perfect crime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Labour_Front

DAF: the trademark of capitalism...wait what?

You don't understand the issue.

The Khmer Rouge being 'communists' was irrelevant to their being a murderous regime. The people they went to war with were communists, too.

Fact is, the Khmer Rouge couldn't have come to power if the US hadn't destabilized the Cambodian government. They are our fault that they got to power.

if I help a man change a flat tire, after which he drives off and proceeds to murder a whole bunch of people without my prior knowledge, is it my fault that those people got murdered?

I can start pointing out why the US did what they did and how that's linked to the soviet and then we could keep analysing the cold war into oblivion, but the the fact of the matter is it's irrelevant how the Khmer rouge came to power. they did the killing, they are to blame; as simple as that.

Their name has nothing to do with their economy. It was facist, it was capitalist.

facism has nothing to do with capitalism. see my reply to steeplerot.

 

[Gintaras]

facism has nothing to do with capitalism. see my reply to steeplerot.

It can be anywhere, under any system...etc:

Hermann Goering:

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

"All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked":

9/11/2001, what looks more like a False Flag:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

Just similar, what Germany used to start WWII:

In the Gleiwitz incident on August 31, 1939, Reinhard Heydrich made use of fabricated evidence of a Polish attack against Germany to mobilize German public opinion and to fabricate a false justification for a war with Poland. This, along with other false flag operations in Operation Himmler, would be used to mobilize support from the German population for the start of World War II in Europe.

The question of 9/11 will be similar to Reichstag fire:

On the night of February 27, 1933, the Reichstag building was set on fire. At the urging of Hitler, Hindenburg responded the next day by issuing an emergency decree "for the Protection of the people and the State," which stated: "Restrictions on personal liberty, on the right of free expression of opinion, including freedom of the press; on the rights of assembly and association; and violations of the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed" suspending key provisions of the German Weimar Constitution. The question of who actually started the Reichstag fire is still often considered unknown and occasionally debated

"and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger":

Remenber Jorge Boosh words after 9/11:

"Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You%27re_either_with_us,_or_against_us


So, many be very carefull, who you put your faith in....

 

[Broheim]

-snip-

so... you're high right now, right?

you put a little extra something something in the new year cigar?

 

[Craig234]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Labour_Front

DAF: the trademark of capitalism...wait what?



if I help a man change a flat tire, after which he drives off and proceeds to murder a whole bunch of people without my prior knowledge, is it my fault that those people got murdered?

I can start pointing out why the US did what they did and how that's linked to the soviet and then we could keep analysing the cold war into oblivion, but the the fact of the matter is it's irrelevant how the Khmer rouge came to power. they did the killing, they are to blame; as simple as that.



facism has nothing to do with capitalism. see my reply to steeplerot.

Is it going to be a waste of time to respond?

You know how 'ideologies' and 'isms' aren't always 'pure'?

For example, the US is called 'capitalist', but it has elements of ast least socialism (the military is almost kind of communist, isn't it) among other things - and elements of fascism as well (the government and corporations as *very* close in many ways, much as in fascism).

So-called 'communist' countries might say they're communist and have great differences, we call ourselves 'capitalist' and have great differences.

For example, take the corporate dominace over our political system nowadays - nowhere is that in the 'nice textbook' versions of 'democracy and capitalism'. Just ignore it, ok?

Fascism has more to do with capitalism than you understand. There's a reason Nazi Germany was a *darling* of many 'capitalist' US companies.

Your tire-changing analogy is pathetic, however. A better one is, 'if you went to a city and killed the police and government and criminal gangs took power, you are the cause'.

The Khmer Rouge are absolutely responsible for their acts of murder. And the US is responsible for its acts without which the Khmer Rouge couldn't have committed theirs.

 

[Steeplerot]

so... you're high right now, right?

you put a little extra something something in the new year cigar?

In other words you have no rebuttal so you must call the other person intoxicated, this is dishonesty and shows you have 0% credibility when it comes to adult talk. Move along kid. You obviously are not grown up enough to learn when people explain things and provide historical data.

 

[Steeplerot]

"We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right,' a fascist century." -Benito Mussolini

Capitalism itself is the embodiment of the dog eat dog Nietzschesque doctrine of fascism, the two are inseparable. This is why the rest of the world calls the US idea of capitalism/libertarian right wing market anarchism "neo-liberals".

The whole concept has been hijacked by Ayn Randian cultist types which only comes from the 1950s in America.

Adam Smith for example was not a fascist, he would be a moderate socialist, most people nowadays do not even realize it was Karl Marx who coined the term Capitalism back in the mid 1800s.


A primer of sorts on The Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith:

Smith saw the task of political economy as the pursuit of "two distinct objects": "first, to provide a plentiful revenue or subsistence for the people, or more properly to enable them to provide such a revenue or subsistence for themselves; and second, to supply the state or commonwealth with a revenue sufficient for the public services". He defended such public services as free education and poverty relief, while demanding greater freedom for the indigent who receives support than the rather punitive Poor Laws of his day permitted. Beyond his attention to the components and responsibilities of a well-functioning market system (such as the role of accountability and trust), he was deeply concerned about the inequality and poverty that might remain in an otherwise successful market economy. Even in dealing with regulations that restrain the markets, Smith additionally acknowledged the importance of interventions on behalf of the poor and the underdogs of society. At one stage, he gives a formula of disarming simplicity: "When the regulation, therefore, is in favour of the workmen, it is always just and equitable; but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters." Smith was both a proponent of a plural institutional structure and a champion of social values that transcend the profit motive, in principle as well as in actual reach.

My message generally to so called "Libertarians" (neo-liberals) in the USA when they start to wake up from the folly of their views is "Do not fall for false revolutions" fascism can hide behind any face as it usually has the backing of the capitalist establishment to project itself however it likes. ("Fair and balanced" anyone?)

 

[Gintaras]

so... you're high right now, right?

you put a little extra something something in the new year cigar?

Am I right or wrong, are you right or wrong, not for us to judge...
All I know, a History time to time repeats itself. Most likely, a History will judge us...


I won't stand up on 12:00am 1/1/2012 and scream: "sieg heil Romney..."

Ok, I've to go...to "meet" beginning of last year of current Era - Era of Aquarius...not an end of our World...

 

[Broheim]

Is it going to be a waste of time to respond?

You know how 'ideologies' and 'isms' aren't always 'pure'?

For example, the US is called 'capitalist', but it has elements of ast least socialism (the military is almost kind of communist, isn't it) among other things - and elements of fascism as well (the government and corporations as *very* close in many ways, much as in fascism).

So-called 'communist' countries might say they're communist and have great differences, we call ourselves 'capitalist' and have great differences.

For example, take the corporate dominace over our political system nowadays - nowhere is that in the 'nice textbook' versions of 'democracy and capitalism'. Just ignore it, ok?

Fascism has more to do with capitalism than you understand. There's a reason Nazi Germany was a *darling* of many 'capitalist' US companies.

Your tire-changing analogy is pathetic, however. A better one is, 'if you went to a city and killed the police and government and criminal gangs took power, you are the cause'.

The Khmer Rouge are absolutely responsible for their acts of murder. And the US is responsible for its acts without which the Khmer Rouge couldn't have committed theirs.

In other words you have no rebuttal so you must call the other person intoxicated, this is dishonesty and shows you have 0% credibility when it comes to adult talk. Move along kid. You obviously are not grown up enough to learn when people explain things and provide historical data.

"We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the 'right,' a fascist century." -Benito Mussolini

Capitalism itself is the embodiment of the dog eat dog Nietzschesque doctrine of fascism, the two are inseparable. This is why the rest of the world calls the US idea of capitalism/libertarian right wing market anarchism "neo-liberals".

The whole concept has been hijacked by Ayn Randian cultist types which only comes from the 1950s in America.

Adam Smith for example was not a fascist, he would be a moderate socialist, most people nowadays do not even realize it was Karl Marx who coined the term Capitalism back in the mid 1800s.


A primer of sorts on The Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith:

Smith saw the task of political economy as the pursuit of "two distinct objects": "first, to provide a plentiful revenue or subsistence for the people, or more properly to enable them to provide such a revenue or subsistence for themselves; and second, to supply the state or commonwealth with a revenue sufficient for the public services". He defended such public services as free education and poverty relief, while demanding greater freedom for the indigent who receives support than the rather punitive Poor Laws of his day permitted. Beyond his attention to the components and responsibilities of a well-functioning market system (such as the role of accountability and trust), he was deeply concerned about the inequality and poverty that might remain in an otherwise successful market economy. Even in dealing with regulations that restrain the markets, Smith additionally acknowledged the importance of interventions on behalf of the poor and the underdogs of society. At one stage, he gives a formula of disarming simplicity: "When the regulation, therefore, is in favour of the workmen, it is always just and equitable; but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters." Smith was both a proponent of a plural institutional structure and a champion of social values that transcend the profit motive, in principle as well as in actual reach.

My message generally to so called "Libertarians" (neo-liberals) in the USA when they start to wake up from the folly of their views is "Do not fall for false revolutions" fascism can hide behind any face as it usually has the backing of the capitalist establishment to project itself however it likes. ("Fair and balanced" anyone?)

all I'm seeing are deflections and partisan hackery that has nothing to do with the matter at hand.

 

[Craig234]

Is it going to be a waste of time to respond?

Turns out, yes.