Bush/Hitler creates another phony "terrorist" incident to suppress us...

Yes you do and you know it.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
wrote in message ...

(referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
Are you two neighbors or something?

I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
this was:

"Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*

I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.

However, it's generally true that those who don't
like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.

Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.

Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
compendium of several people including a sometime
sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.

But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')

For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
a) entertaining
b) worthwhile about flying.

Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.

JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".

Cheers,
Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
wrote in message ...

(referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
Are you two neighbors or something?

I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
this was:

"Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*

I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.

However, it's generally true that those who don't
like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.

Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.

Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
compendium of several people including a sometime
sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.

But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')

For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
a) entertaining
b) worthwhile about flying.

Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.

JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".

Cheers,
Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

Quit being such a chauvinist, next thing you know, you'll be goose-stepping
like the Hitler youth.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
wrote in message ...

(referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
Are you two neighbors or something?

I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
this was:

"Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*

I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.

However, it's generally true that those who don't
like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.

Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.

Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
compendium of several people including a sometime
sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.

But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')

For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
a) entertaining
b) worthwhile about flying.

Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.

JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".

Cheers,
Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

Hitler Youth?? I invoke Usenet rules. Thread closed.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
wrote in message ...

(referring to Bill Phillips and 'pacplyer')
And you two are the only ones here that don't like Sydney.
Are you two neighbors or something?

I appreciate the compliment, but my first reaction reading
this was:

"Zounds! Where have I gone Wrong?" *g*

I'm sure there are plenty of other people who don't like
me on these newsgroups, past and present. I'm not
everybody's Teacup, and I wouldn't want to be.

However, it's generally true that those who don't
like me, do respect me. Else just ignore me.

Which brings me to this request: while I appreciate your
concern for me, I wish you'd join them and leave my name
out of your exchange with "pac" whoever he may be. I
know for myself, it's much harder to sit quietly while
someone I like or respect gets abused than it is to sit
quietly while it's headed my way, but nevertheless, I ask.

Personally if I were voting, I'd vote for "pac" as a
compendium of several people including a sometime
sock puppet for BP (a la Hef/Wingie). IIRC I think he
actually sort of acknowledged something of the sort at
one point. He's had his unintentionally amusing moments.
Accusing me of "harassing" my long-time net.friend Chip
was almost as good as "Hef's" Boxter -- true ROTFL.
Now I gather he thinks I'm you, which is also funny.

But overall he just sort of seems worth ignoring to me.
Sort of like "Selway Kid" aka 'ol shy and bashful' (whose
identity is another 'hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm')

For a supposed aviation enthusiast and professional pilot,
pacplyer doesn't seem to spend much time saying anything
a) entertaining
b) worthwhile about flying.

Even Unka Bob, that noted net.curmudgeon has, in his crotchety
way, much more worthwhile to say if you read between the lines.

JMO of course and "do as thou wilt".

Cheers,
Sydney (with time to fly, temp 37/dewpoint 37, thunder and
rain, forecast ice pellets. *grumble*)

"John Stricker" wrote in message ...
No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.

Great Heavens Steakbreath, SEVEN (7) top-posted one-liners (and
counting for all I know)???

Has your ISP imposed a one-line-per-post limit, or is
it a personal limitation? Are you trying to justify
Pasture Dave's Christmas Ode to you?

I won't tell you what you like. I'll leave that for the
Warrior Princess.

She'll tell you you like me

*smooch*
Sydney

I refuse to bow to the whims of the bottom post Nazis. I like top posting
when I read them so that's what I'm going to do.

So there.

John Stricker

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
"John Stricker" wrote in message
...
No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.

Great Heavens Steakbreath, SEVEN (7) top-posted one-liners (and
counting for all I know)???

Has your ISP imposed a one-line-per-post limit, or is
it a personal limitation? Are you trying to justify
Pasture Dave's Christmas Ode to you?

I won't tell you what you like. I'll leave that for the
Warrior Princess.

She'll tell you you like me

*smooch*
Sydney

Fine, then I'll read your posts from the bottom up!!

Ha!
--
Richard Riley
Cthulu for President, '04!
Why settle for the lesser evil!!

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:23:25 -0600, "John Stricker"
wrote:

:I refuse to bow to the whims of the bottom post Nazis. I like top posting
:when I read them so that's what I'm going to do.
:
:So there.
:
:John Stricker
:
:"Snowbird" wrote in message
. com...
: "John Stricker" wrote in message
...
: No I don't, she's a girl who thinks she can fly. She should stay in the
: kitchen. Or at least the lab. Don't tell me what I like.
:
: Great Heavens Steakbreath, SEVEN (7) top-posted one-liners (and
: counting for all I know)???
:
: Has your ISP imposed a one-line-per-post limit, or is
: it a personal limitation? Are you trying to justify
: Pasture Dave's Christmas Ode to you?
:
: I won't tell you what you like. I'll leave that for the
: Warrior Princess.
:
: She'll tell you you like me
:
: *smooch*
: Sydney
:

Richard Riley wrote in message . ..
Fine, then I'll read your posts from the bottom up!!

Ha!

At least he's up to three sentences and only one response.

But does he invoke Godwin's Law on himself for referring to
"bottom post Nazis"?

Richard Riley
Cthulu for President, '04!
Why settle for the lesser evil!!

I need a bumper sticker!

Sydney

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
Richard Riley wrote in message
. ..
Fine, then I'll read your posts from the bottom up!!

Ha!

At least he's up to three sentences and only one response.

But does he invoke Godwin's Law on himself for referring to
"bottom post Nazis"?

Richard Riley
Cthulu for President, '04!
Why settle for the lesser evil!!

I need a bumper sticker!

Sydney

OK http://www.cthulhu.org/cthulhu/stickers.html

The "Campus Crusade for Cthulu" is an especially touching one.

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 22:37:45 -0500, "Larry Smith" wrote:


"Top Sirloin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:44:56 -0500, "Larry Smith"
wrote:

Like
seizing private citizens and imprisoning them without trial, without
formal
charges?

If this is true you should have no problem finding us lots of references
for
this statement Larry.

Now I want you to read this, Scott, especially the last paragraph with the
words of Founding Father, James Madison. It is entitled "No Charges and No
Trial; Just Jail": http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-21-03.html

I'm sorry Larry, but Jose Padilla ceded his American Citizenship when he trained
with a foreign military to fight against the United States.

Do you also think the Rosenbergs deserved a traditional jury trial for selling
atomic bomb secrets to the Soviets and that the goverment was heavy-handed in
trying them under the Espionage Act of 1917?

I'm not surprised that's the best you can do, considering you show an amazing
lack of comprehension by comparing a sitting US President with a mass murderer.

Here's something for you, especially the last paragraph:

------

Nazis murdered millions of unarmed people. They put them in ovens. They made
soap out of them. They carted off children in boxcars to die and used some of
the kids for medical experiments, including injecting dyes into their eyes to
see if they could improve their looks. Lower on the list of charges, the Nazis
enslaved millions and launched wars for territorial and egotistical gain (and
sent many of the conquered populations to death camps as well). Lower still,
they banned books and burned them too. They expropriated homes and businesses,
banned religions, etc.

An intelligent person wouldn't normally assume these are the sorts of facts
people forget. It's not quite the same thing as saying that the Mork and Mindy
was a spin-off from Happy Days, is it?

I could, of course, get more graphic about what the Nazis did, but I don't much
like writing about the Holocaust. It's not merely a depressing subject, its
enormity is so depressing, so compacted down with evil and barbarity and cruelty
that it folds in upon itself like a black hole. The gravitational pull of its
tragedy has permanently bent the trajectory of mankind. Suffice it to say that
the Nazis weren't simply generically bad, they were uniquely and monumentally
evil, not just in their hearts but also in literally billions of intentional,
well-planned, and bureaucratized decisions they made every day.

And yet, in polite and supposedly sophisticated circles in America today it is
acceptable to say George Bush is akin to a Nazi and that America is becoming
Nazi-like. Indeed, in certain corners of the globe to disagree with this
assertion is the more outlandish position than to agree with it.

In the September 1, 2003, issue of National Review, Byron York chronicles (read
the piece here) some of the Bushphobia. He writes,

A staple of Bush-hating is the portrayal of the president as a Nazi. That has,
of course, been a prominent part of other attacks against other presidents, but
today it seems to be deployed with particular aggressiveness against Bush. There
are thousands of references, across the vastness of the Internet, linking Bush
to Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich. Do you want to buy a T-shirt with a
swastika replacing the "s" in Bush? No problem. Do you want to collect images of
Bush in a German army uniform, with a Hitler mustache Photoshopped onto his
face? That's easy. Do you want to find pictures of Dick Cheney and Tom Ridge and
Ari Fleischer dressed as Bush's Nazi henchmen? That's easy, too.

As York observes, It's not just the intellectual poltroons of the Internet who
feign bravery by loudly saying what is patently stupid so that people a fraction
dumber than them might mistake it for boldness and conviction. It's not just the
masses of undifferentiated cattle who sport their Hitlerfied George Bush
T-shirts and who chant slogans with a verve more truly reminiscent of Nuremberg
than anything ever uttered by George Bush.

Indeed, "smart" people mouth this nonsense too. Scholars at Berkeley insist that
George Bush shares a psychological profile with Hitler. An editorial writer for
the Kansas City Star invokes Martin Niemoller's "First they came for the Jews…"
mantra to decry the alleged excesses of the Patriot Act. Various Muslim
activists are constantly suggesting that they are the Jews of the Nazified
America. Almost everyday I get dozens of e-mails from seemingly intelligent
liberals -- and a few conservatives -- who insist that I "can't deny it" anymore
-- it's 1933 Germany in America. Retired Princeton University professor Sheldon
Wolin writes of the "inverted totalitarianism" of the Republican party -- "a
fervently doctrinal party, zealous, ruthless, antidemocratic, and boasting a
near majority" -- as a stand-in for a Nazi party which doesn't need to use
"totalitarian thugs" to attain power. He writes:

No doubt these remarks will be dismissed by some as alarmist, but I want to go
further and name the emergent political system "inverted totalitarianism." By
inverted I mean that while the current system and its operatives share with
Nazism the aspiration toward unlimited power and aggressive expansionism, their
methods and actions seem upside down. For example, in Weimar Germany, before the
Nazis took power, the "streets" were dominated by totalitarian-oriented gangs of
toughs, and whatever there was of democracy was confined to the government. In
the United States, however, it is the streets where democracy is most alive --
while the real danger lies with an increasingly unbridled government.

You may think that's brilliant stuff and that Wolin is a savant. As for me, I'm
simply reminded of Walter Bagehot's observation that "In the faculty of writing
nonsense, stupidity is no match for genius."

"It's going a bit far to compare the Bush of 2003 to the Hitler of 1933," writes
Dave Lindorff in "Bush and Hitler: The Strategy of Fear," which according to
York's article appeared in February on the site Counterpunch.org. "Bush simply
is not the orator that Hitler was. But comparisons of the Bush administration's
fear-mongering tactics to those practiced so successfully and with such terrible
results by Hitler and Goebbels . . . are not at all out of line."

In the September issue of Vanity Fair a photo of Richard Perle is placed
alongside Joseph Goebbels and the caption asks: "Separated at Birth?" The
editors of Vanity Fair ran the pictures because a letter-writer noted a
similarity between the two. "Perle isn't the first government official to use
deceit and fear mongering to force an extremist, irrational, and ultimately
violent view on an entire nation, or globe." In the face of this idiocy the
editors of The New Republic were forced to ask: "Does someone really need to
explain to Vanity Fair that nothing Perle or President Bush will ever do can
invite a comparison to Nazi Germany?"

But The New Republic misses the point. They believe Vanity Fair mistakenly took
a "crank" correspondent too seriously. Unfortunately, The New Republic isn't
taking Vanity Fair seriously enough. For while it's by no means an
extraordinarily serious magazine, Vanity Fair is a near-perfect barometer for
what is fashionable and what passes for intelligent conversation among the
chattering classes.

Show me the camps. Show me the millions of people being gassed. Show me the
tattoos on people's arms. Show me elderly Muslim men being beaten in the
streets, their stores smashed, and books burned. Show me huge piles of emaciated
bodies stocked high like cords of wood.

Instead, on the web we find juxtaposed pictures of Bush with a dog and Hitler
with a dog; Bush posing with children and Hitler posing with children; Bush
appearing before large crowds and Hitler appearing before large crowds. By such
"standards" every president -- every politician -- since at least the day
photography was invented is a Nazi. To assume the mantle of "reasonableness" --
as Lindorff does -- by conceding that Bush isn't as good an orator as Hitler
was, is to claim soundness of mind by conceding that a clock doesn't melt
because vests have no sleeves.

The likes of Wolin and Abbot Gleason are more clever. They, too, say that Nazism
is coming, but they don't refer to the Holocaust. They simply mean an illiberal
regime with imperial ambitions is in the offing. I think this is ludicrous, too.
But it's a different argument. Nevertheless, the intellectuals insist on using
Nazism as a way of decrying what they see as American militarism. But comparing
America to Nazi Germany in this way is like saying Jonah Goldberg is just like
the "Son of Sam" serial killer because they both get lots of parking tickets. To
leave out all the genocide and murder is to leave out a pretty important part of
the story.

So if you can't show me the death camps and the horror, find another example.
Compare Bush to Bismarck or Franco or Mikey from the Life cereal commercials for
all I care -- because any of those would make more sense.

By the way, I don't say this because I feel a passionate need to defend George
Bush. I would make the exact same points if Al Gore were president. I would make
the exact same points if anybody running for the Democratic nomination were
president. This has nothing to do with partisanship. It has to do with the fact
that such comparisons are slanderous to the United States and historical truth
and amount to Holocaust denial. When you say that anything George Bush has done
is akin to what Hitler did, you make the Holocaust into nothing more than an
example of partisan excess. Tax cuts are not genocide, as so many Democrats have
suggested over the years. (For example,. during the Contract with America
debate, Charles Rangel complained that "Hitler wasn't even talking about doing
these things" that were in the Contract with America. In other words, the
Contract with America was in some way worse than what Hitler did. At the end of
the day, that is Holocaust denial.)

"Darn those Republicans" does not equal "Darn those Nazis." The Patriot Act is
not the final solution. The handful of men in Guantanamo may not all be guilty
of terrorism, but it's more than reasonable to assume they are. And no matter
how you try to contort it, Gitmo is not the same thing as Auschwitz or Dachau.
There are no children there. You don't get carted off to Cuba and gassed if you
criticize the president or if you are one-quarter Muslim. And, inversely, there
was no reasonable justification for throwing the Jews and the Gypsies and all
the others into the death camps. The Jews weren't terrorists or members of a
terrorist organization. To say that the men in Guantanamo -- or any of the
Muslims being politely interviewed by appointment -- are akin to the Jews of
Germany is to trivialize the experiences of the millions who were slaughtered.
Even if you think Muslims are being unfairly inconvenienced, when you say they
are the Jews of Nazified America you are in essence saying the worst crime of
the Holocaust was to unfairly inconvenience the Jews.

But let's stop talking about Nazis.

I hate blue cheese. I mean I hate it. To me, it tastes like death or Al
Sharpton's socks after they've been under the fridge for a year. But no matter
how much I hate it, no matter how much I loathe its texture and smell and taste,
it's still only blue or, if you must, "bleu" cheese. Even if you tripled my
hatred for it, it would still just be a musky fromage from the land of cheese,
long speeches, and short-lived loyalties. It would not, through the mysterious
alchemy of hatred and bile, become poison. Sure, I could call it Sarin or
Anthrax but that would not make it so. Because, you see, hating an object
doesn't change an object. Only the most arrogant and solipsistic fool would
argue or convince himself that his hatred of something increases the importance
of that thing.

And that's how I think of all these people who e-mail me insistent that George
Bush is a Nazi. They believe they are so important, so noble, their hatred and
fear must be rooted things of Great Consequence. It's just so prosaic to hate
Republicans. I am better than that. So, Republicans must be Nazis. They must be
a threat to the whole world and to the sanctity of everything I hold dear
because anything less would not be worth my time. George Bush can't simply be
someone I disagree with. No, his popularity must be an indication of mass
hysteria, of Nuremberg-style devotion to evil.

So desperate are these people to live in interesting times and play the hero,
that they are willing and eager to topple every significant moral and historical
category so they can role play as the Heroes who Would Not Stay Silent. That
would be fine if these losers were playing some multisided dice game in their
basements. But they're not. There's a war going on and these guys are acting
like we're the real enemy. That's not just shameful and stupid, it's unhelpful.