THere is a poster on here called Roger who really is a despicable piece of work, earlier on this thread he said that if it was up to me there would be no Jews left. I really have no idea how he came to that conclusion. I appreciate that all sorts of weird people are drawn to Internet forums, but for him to suggest something as utterly disgusting as that is as risible as it can get.
I shouldn't worry, it's hard to imagine anyone takes him seriously
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
So, in light of your post at 16:29 what did you mean by that last, unfinished, sentence? What is the one thing that will happen if, for example, France elects a FN president?
I said before that I think the election of one far-right government will lead to many others' being elected across Europe; and that this will eventually result in a war. I believe that Front Nationale is a fascist, racist organisation which is also anti-semitic; and that as a result this will mean bad news for those in France who are ethnic minorities, and Jews for a start.
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
So, in light of your post at 16:29 what did you mean by that last, unfinished, sentence? What is the one thing that will happen if, for example, France elects a FN president?
I said before that I think the election of one far-right government will lead to many others' being elected across Europe; and that this will eventually result in a war. I believe that Front Nationale is a fascist, racist organisation which is also anti-semiotic; and that as a result this will mean bad news for those in France who are ethnic minorities, and Jews for a start.
Hitler was never elected. He was appointed chancellor by Hindenburg in 1933. His party, as I'm sure you recall, went by "Nationalsozialist".
WWII was round four of a conflict that can be traced back to 1806; or, if that's too far, 1870.
I know the 'far right' is a modern bogeyman. Where are they? Where are the atrocities committed by the far right post 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, Bali and many others too numerous to list. I just don't see it. Le Pen is a nationalist. Her father is a much more unpleasant critter, that I will grant you.
Well, it's complicated with Hitler; The Nazis got the most votes; and in that sense they've often been referred to has having been 'elected'. But if that's your issue; we'll change it to the 'rise' of far-right governments, given that Hitler and the Nazis didn't get pass the threshold needed to form a government at that time.
The Nazis may have well been called the National Socialists, but in pretty much most discussions they are not seen as associated with totalitarian forms of 'socialism' in the same way Stalin was. For a start the Nazis - courtsey of their Brownshirts - went around intimidating and beating up communists.
On WW2; I never said that the rise in far-right, and militaristic governments was the only cause; as I stated before I said it was 'one of the causes', and 'contributed' to the outbreak of WW2. I'm well aware of the other reasons behind WW2.
If you're relaxed about the rise of the far-right, again that's fine. I'm not though.
The German Communists were quite capable of street violence themselves and were organised in much the same way as the NSDAP. The Communists would beat up the mostsly pacific socialists as much as the Nazis.
Ah well, we were never taught that. The only focus on the activities of German communists we covered were the Spartacists, and Rosa Luxemburg - along with various attempts at coups in the 1920s.
Hitler was never elected. He was appointed chancellor by Hindenburg in 1933. His party, as I'm sure you recall, went by "Nationalsozialist".
WWII was round four of a conflict that can be traced back to 1806; or, if that's too far, 1870.
I know the 'far right' is a modern bogeyman. Where are they? Where are the atrocities committed by the far right post 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, Bali and many others too numerous to list. I just don't see it. Le Pen is a nationalist. Her father is a much more unpleasant critter, that I will grant you.
Well, it's complicated with Hitler; The Nazis got the most votes; and in that sense they've often been referred to has having been 'elected'. But if that's your issue; we'll change it to the 'rise' of far-right governments, given that Hitler and the Nazis didn't get pass the threshold needed to form a government at that time.
The Nazis may have well been called the National Socialists, but in pretty much most discussions they are not seen as associated with totalitarian forms of 'socialism' in the same way Stalin was. For a start the Nazis - courtsey of their Brownshirts - went around intimidating and beating up communists.
On WW2; I never said that the rise in far-right, and militaristic governments was the only cause; as I stated before I said it was 'one of the causes', and 'contributed' to the outbreak of WW2. I'm well aware of the other reasons behind WW2.
If you're relaxed about the rise of the far-right, again that's fine. I'm not though.
The German Communists were quite capable of street violence themselves and were organised in much the same way as the NSDAP. The Communists would beat up the mostsly pacific socialists as much as the Nazis.
Ah well, we were never taught that. The only focus on the activities of German communists we covered were the Spartacists, and Rosa Luxemburg - along with various attempts at coups in the 1920s.
It's simply the equivalence of bastards.
There;s not point trying to claim one bunch of totalitarian ideologues are more dangerous than their opposite numbers.
"It targeted the capital of prostitution and obscenity, the carrier of the banner of the Cross in Europe: Paris." ... "[They also targeted] the Bataclan Conference Center, where hundreds of apostates had gathered in a profligate prostitution party" ...
Hitler was never elected. He was appointed chancellor by Hindenburg in 1933. His party, as I'm sure you recall, went by "Nationalsozialist".
WWII was round four of a conflict that can be traced back to 1806; or, if that's too far, 1870.
I know the 'far right' is a modern bogeyman. Where are they? Where are the atrocities committed by the far right post 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, Bali and many others too numerous to list. I just don't see it. Le Pen is a nationalist. Her father is a much more unpleasant critter, that I will grant you.
Well, it's complicated with Hitler; The Nazis got the most votes; and in that sense they've often been referred to has having been 'elected'. But if that's your issue; we'll change it to the 'rise' of far-right governments, given that Hitler and the Nazis didn't get pass the threshold needed to form a government at that time.
The Nazis may have well been called the National Socialists, but in pretty much most discussions they are not seen as associated with totalitarian forms of 'socialism' in the same way Stalin was. For a start the Nazis - courtsey of their Brownshirts - went around intimidating and beating up communists.
On WW2; I never said that the rise in far-right, and militaristic governments was the only cause; as I stated before I said it was 'one of the causes', and 'contributed' to the outbreak of WW2. I'm well aware of the other reasons behind WW2.
If you're relaxed about the rise of the far-right, again that's fine. I'm not though.
The German Communists were quite capable of street violence themselves and were organised in much the same way as the NSDAP. The Communists would beat up the mostsly pacific socialists as much as the Nazis.
Ah well, we were never taught that. The only focus on the activities of German communists we covered were the Spartacists, and Rosa Luxemburg - along with various attempts at coups in the 1920s.
It's simply the equivalence of bastards.
There;s not point trying to claim one bunch of totalitarian ideologues are more dangerous than their opposite numbers.
Stalin murdered more people than Hitler.
Oh don't get me wrong; I don't think the that only far-right ideologies are dangerous. The far-left are also absolutely awful. The reason why I mentioned the far-right is because it looks like far-right parties are more likely to gain ground, and support in Europe that the far-left right now. I also know about Stalin, regarding his atrocities such as the gulags etc. I've never quite understood why he isn't seen as evil as Hitler is.
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
Russia hasn't really upset us that much.
We'll be cooperating with them soon enough.
Russia's activity in Ukraine, Georgia, and its relationship with Assad is certainly worrying. Russia are obviously a lesser evil in comparison to ISIS and the like, but I still wouldn't trust Putin.
How do you think Putin would betray us if we were co-operating against ISIS?
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
Russia hasn't really upset us that much.
We'll be cooperating with them soon enough.
Russia's activity in Ukraine, Georgia, and its relationship with Assad is certainly worrying. Russia are obviously a lesser evil in comparison to ISIS and the like, but I still wouldn't trust Putin.
But it hasn't exactly led to a war.
Ukraines boundaries for better or worse don't reflect the ethnic make up of the population and I'd rather have Assad than ISIL.
True, but Russia - historically in the twentieth century - were one of the totalitarian governments who did not pursue a 'war', in the same way Hitler, Mussolinin etc. pursued war. So although I don't think Russia is looking for a war, I am concerned they have expansionist aims. Of course Assad is the lesser evil to ISIS, but he's still an 'evil'.
You really shouldn't post on matters you know FA about.
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
Russia hasn't really upset us that much.
We'll be cooperating with them soon enough.
Russia's activity in Ukraine, Georgia, and its relationship with Assad is certainly worrying. Russia are obviously a lesser evil in comparison to ISIS and the like, but I still wouldn't trust Putin.
How do you think Putin would betray us if we were co-operating against ISIS?
?
I don't think he would in that specific circumstance. I meant that in other words, he's clearly a relatively lesser evil to ISIS, but in the long-term I would not trust him.
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
Russia hasn't really upset us that much.
We'll be cooperating with them soon enough.
Russia's activity in Ukraine, Georgia, and its relationship with Assad is certainly worrying. Russia are obviously a lesser evil in comparison to ISIS and the like, but I still wouldn't trust Putin.
But it hasn't exactly led to a war.
Ukraines boundaries for better or worse don't reflect the ethnic make up of the population and I'd rather have Assad than ISIL.
True, but Russia - historically in the twentieth century - were one of the totalitarian governments who did not pursue a 'war', in the same way Hitler, Mussolinin etc. pursued war. So although I don't think Russia is looking for a war, I am concerned they have expansionist aims. Of course Assad is the lesser evil to ISIS, but he's still an 'evil'.
You really shouldn't post on matters you know FA about.
There's no need to be rude. I simply forgot, I did learn about Russia's invasion of various countries but you know, sometimes in real life people aren't all political maniacs who remember all facts at a given time; sometimes people forget things in the moment.
It's responses like that which turn a great many ordinary people off of politics.
Hitler was never elected. He was appointed chancellor by Hindenburg in 1933. His party, as I'm sure you recall, went by "Nationalsozialist".
WWII was round four of a conflict that can be traced back to 1806; or, if that's too far, 1870.
I know the 'far right' is a modern bogeyman. Where are they? Where are the atrocities committed by the far right post 9/11, 7/7, Madrid, Bali and many others too numerous to list. I just don't see it. Le Pen is a nationalist. Her father is a much more unpleasant critter, that I will grant you.
Well, it's complicated with Hitler; The Nazis got the most votes; and in that sense they've often been referred to has having been 'elected'. But if that's your issue; we'll change it to the 'rise' of far-right governments, given that Hitler and the Nazis didn't get pass the threshold needed to form a government at that time.
The Nazis may have well been called the National Socialists, but in pretty much most discussions they are not seen as associated with totalitarian forms of 'socialism' in the same way Stalin was. For a start the Nazis - courtsey of their Brownshirts - went around intimidating and beating up communists.
On WW2; I never said that the rise in far-right, and militaristic governments was the only cause; as I stated before I said it was 'one of the causes', and 'contributed' to the outbreak of WW2. I'm well aware of the other reasons behind WW2.
If you're relaxed about the rise of the far-right, again that's fine. I'm not though.
The German Communists were quite capable of street violence themselves and were organised in much the same way as the NSDAP. The Communists would beat up the mostsly pacific socialists as much as the Nazis.
Ah well, we were never taught that. The only focus on the activities of German communists we covered were the Spartacists, and Rosa Luxemburg - along with various attempts at coups in the 1920s.
It's simply the equivalence of bastards.
There;s not point trying to claim one bunch of totalitarian ideologues are more dangerous than their opposite numbers.
Stalin murdered more people than Hitler.
Oh don't get me wrong; I don't think the that only far-right ideologies are dangerous. The far-left are also absolutely awful. The reason why I mentioned the far-right is because it looks like far-right parties are more likely to gain ground, and support in Europe that the far-left right now. I also know about Stalin, regarding his atrocities such as the gulags etc. I've never quite understood why he isn't seen as evil as Hitler is.
well the far left are about to go in to coalition with in Portugal.
well the far left are about to go in to coalition with in Portugal.
I've heard (briefly) about that, but still most of these extreme parties in Europe - Jobbik, Front Nationale, Party for Freedom even Pedegia - perhaps even True Finns etc all seem to lean more towards the the far-right. The only other places I've heard of the far-left rising is Greece, and some months ago, Spain - although it seems their Conservative government will be re-elected again, now.
well the far left are about to go in to coalition with in Portugal.
I've heard (briefly) about that, but still most of these extreme parties in Europe - Jobbik, Front Nationale, Party for Freedom even Pedegia - perhaps even True Finns etc all seem to more towards the the far-right. The only other places I've heard of the far-left rising is Greece, and some months ago, Spain - although it seems their Conservative government will be re-elected again, now.
well one could also argue the far left have taken control of Labour.
the only difference between far right and left is one discriminates on ethnicity while the other disciminates on the vagueness of class.
but at the end of the day if you're not "one of us" you're shit.
well the far left are about to go in to coalition with in Portugal.
I've heard (briefly) about that, but still most of these extreme parties in Europe - Jobbik, Front Nationale, Party for Freedom even Pedegia - perhaps even True Finns etc all seem to more towards the the far-right. The only other places I've heard of the far-left rising is Greece, and some months ago, Spain - although it seems their Conservative government will be re-elected again, now.
well one could also argue the far left have taken control of Labour.
the only difference between far right and left is one discriminates on ethnicity while the other disciminates on the vagueness of class.
but at the end of the day if you're not "one of us" you're shit.
On your second and third point we're in agreement. I also agree that the far-left have pretty much taken over Labour, but I don't think they'll be getting any considerable support as a result. If anything, it makes it less likely voters will support Labour.
All I can say is thank goodness David Cameron is the Prime Minister at this time.
Indeed. Imagine PM Corbyn in Downing Street today.
'People of the UK, you brought this upon yourselves. I now invite our friends, the representatives of ISIS to join me to negotiate our surrender'. (Masked figures enter Downing Street, door closes, muffled sound of explosions as backpack bombs are detonated).
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
Russia hasn't really upset us that much.
We'll be cooperating with them soon enough.
Russia's activity in Ukraine, Georgia, and its relationship with Assad is certainly worrying. Russia are obviously a lesser evil in comparison to ISIS and the like, but I still wouldn't trust Putin.
But it hasn't exactly led to a war.
Ukraines boundaries for better or worse don't reflect the ethnic make up of the population and I'd rather have Assad than ISIL.
True, but Russia - historically in the twentieth century - were one of the totalitarian governments who did not pursue a 'war', in the same way Hitler, Mussolinin etc. pursued war. So although I don't think Russia is looking for a war, I am concerned they have expansionist aims. Of course Assad is the lesser evil to ISIS, but he's still an 'evil'.
You really shouldn't post on matters you know FA about.
There's no need to be rude. I simply forgot, I did learn about Russia's invasion of various countries but you know, sometimes in real life people aren't all political maniacs who remember all facts at a given time; sometimes people forget things in the moment.
It's responses like that which turn a great many ordinary people off of politics.
Don't let that halfwit upset you , pompous clown thinks he knows it all.
The tragic thing is that the only French politician talking any sense, today, and offering serious, cogent proposals - rather than dreary platitudes - is Marine Le Pen.
Why is that tragic? I know little of le Pen but surely talking sense is a good thing.
Front Nationale being elected will make things even worse than they already are in Europe. France really has a terrible set of politicians to choose from.
You can't get worse than Merkel's full scale push towards national suicide.
I think one of Europe biggest power's electing a fascist, racist government would be suicidal for pretty much all of Europe. Once one far-right government gets elected, it's likely to set off a chain reaction. As history shows, that can only mean one thing....
Russia hasn't really upset us that much.
We'll be cooperating with them soon enough.
Russia's activity in Ukraine, Georgia, and its relationship with Assad is certainly worrying. Russia are obviously a lesser evil in comparison to ISIS and the like, but I still wouldn't trust Putin.
But it hasn't exactly led to a war.
Ukraines boundaries for better or worse don't reflect the ethnic make up of the population and I'd rather have Assad than ISIL.
True, but Russia - historically in the twentieth century - were one of the totalitarian governments who did not pursue a 'war', in the same way Hitler, Mussolinin etc. pursued war. So although I don't think Russia is looking for a war, I am concerned they have expansionist aims. Of course Assad is the lesser evil to ISIS, but he's still an 'evil'.
You really shouldn't post on matters you know FA about.
There's no need to be rude. I simply forgot, I did learn about Russia's invasion of various countries but you know, sometimes in real life people aren't all political maniacs who remember all facts at a given time; sometimes people forget things in the moment.
It's responses like that which turn a great many ordinary people off of politics.
Don't let that halfwit upset you , pompous clown thinks he knows it all.
All I can say is thank goodness David Cameron is the Prime Minister at this time.
Indeed. Imagine PM Corbyn in Downing Street today.
'People of the UK, you brought this upon yourselves. I now invite our friends, the representatives of ISIS to join me to negotiate our surrender'. (Masked figures enter Downing Street, door closes, muffled sound of explosions as backpack bombs are detonated).
I think everyone here can be agreed upon one single thing; Jeremy Corbyn is not the man you want to be leading your country in this kind of crisis. He is fine as a pressure group politician, but the compromises that you require for saying the right things, and setting the right tone, for bringing people with you, Corbyn just cannot do this. It is simply not in him.
Hollande was hamfisted today, but he played the political leader (sort of) well. Blair was good, Clinton too- OK, not quite Churchill, but not bad.
And, also, we can all now see why Ed lost. Britain will never vote in as PM someone who hasn't the credibility to do the basics well.
Don't take any support from Mr. G to be meaningful, Miss, especially at this time of day. Beyond midday you don't get much sense out of him and after six its rare he can still think coherently let alone type.
Are ye alright, Mr G.? Good man, don't let the blue lobsters climbing the walls get you.
*damn, tries to find the emoticon for a smiling wink*
Don't take any support from Mr. G to be meaningful, Miss, especially at this time of day. Beyond midday you don't get much sense out of him and after six its rare he can still think coherently let alone type.
Are ye alright, Mr G.? Good man, don't let the blue lobsters climbing the walls get you.
*damn, tries to find the emoticon for a smiling wink*
I don't know Mr L; he seems to have been posting sense today, or so far as I've seen on dipping in and out.
"It targeted the capital of prostitution and obscenity, the carrier of the banner of the Cross in Europe: Paris." ... "[They also targeted] the Bataclan Conference Center, where hundreds of apostates had gathered in a profligate prostitution party" ...
These people reeeeally need to get laid.
A long thread to catch up on after work!
A martyr is someone who dies for their faith, not one who kills for it. One of many things that the Islamists have wrong.
They do seem to have a very confused attitude to sex. If Allah hates fornication, prostitution, etc on earth then why would he tolerate it in heaven? The very idea of 72 virgins (with sexual favours) for wiping out harlots is rather self contradictory.
Comments
There;s not point trying to claim one bunch of totalitarian ideologues are more dangerous than their opposite numbers.
Stalin murdered more people than Hitler.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3318312/Gatwick-North-Terminal-evacuated-armed-police-arrest-man-grenade-bag.html
I don't think he would in that specific circumstance. I meant that in other words, he's clearly a relatively lesser evil to ISIS, but in the long-term I would not trust him.
It's responses like that which turn a great many ordinary people off of politics.
well the far left are about to go in to coalition with in Portugal.
the only difference between far right and left is one discriminates on ethnicity while the other disciminates on the vagueness of class.
but at the end of the day if you're not "one of us" you're shit.
Hollande was hamfisted today, but he played the political leader (sort of) well. Blair was good, Clinton too- OK, not quite Churchill, but not bad.
And, also, we can all now see why Ed lost. Britain will never vote in as PM someone who hasn't the credibility to do the basics well.
Are ye alright, Mr G.? Good man, don't let the blue lobsters climbing the walls get you.
*damn, tries to find the emoticon for a smiling wink*
A martyr is someone who dies for their faith, not one who kills for it. One of many things that the Islamists have wrong.
They do seem to have a very confused attitude to sex. If Allah hates fornication, prostitution, etc on earth then why would he tolerate it in heaven? The very idea of 72 virgins (with sexual favours) for wiping out harlots is rather self contradictory.