24
   

Congratulations, House Republicans!

 
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 10:05 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Re: parados (Post 5637472)
Quote:

Muslims in the US have no more right to discriminate than Christians do.


They do pretty good in Nigeria.


Did pretty good in Bosnia Herzegovina, too

Srebrenica massacre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Srebrenica massacre
Srebrenica genocide
Part of Bosnian War
Srebrenica massacre memorial gravestones 2009 1.jpg
The cemetery at the Srebrenica-Potočari Memorial and Cemetery to Genocide Victims
Location Srebrenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Date 11 July 1995 – 13 July 1995
Target Bosniak men and boys
Attack type
military assault, summary executions
Deaths 8,373[1]
Perpetrators Army of the Republika Srpska[2][3]
Scorpions paramilitary group[4][5][6]
[show]

v
t
e

Bosnian War
Srebrenica Genocide Memorial Stone at Potočari
Burial of 610 identified Bosniaks in 2005
Burial of 465 identified Bosniaks in 2007
Burial of 775 identified victims in 2010

The Srebrenica massacre, also known as the Srebrenica genocide[7][8][9][10][11][12] (Bosnian: Genocid u Srebrenici), was the July 1995 killing of more than 8,000[1][13][14][15][16] Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims), mainly men and boys, in and around the town of Srebrenica during the Bosnian War. The killing was perpetrated by units of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) under the command of General Ratko Mladić. The Secretary-General of the United Nations described the mass murder as the worst crime on European soil since the Second World War.[2][3] A paramilitary unit from Serbia known as the Scorpions, officially part of the Serbian Interior Ministry until 1991, participated in the massacre,[6][17] along with several hundred Russian and Greek volunteers.[18][19]

In April 1993, the United Nations declared the besieged enclave of Srebrenica in the Drina Valley of north-eastern Bosnia a "safe area" under UN protection. However, in July 1995, the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR), represented on the ground by a 400-strong contingent of Dutch peacekeepers, Dutchbat, did not prevent the town's capture by the VRS and the subsequent massacre.[20][21][22][23]

In 2004, in a unanimous ruling on the case of Prosecutor v. Krstić, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), located in The Hague, ruled that the massacre of the enclave's male inhabitants constituted genocide, a crime under international law.[24] The forcible transfer of between 25,000 to 30,000 Bosniak women, children and elderly which accompanied the massacre was found to be confirming evidence of the genocidal intent of members of the VRS Main Staff who orchestrated the massacre.[25] Then in 2005, in a message to the tenth anniversary commemoration of the genocide, the Secretary-General of the United Nations noted that, while blame lay first and foremost with those who planned and carried out the massacre and those who assisted and harboured them, great nations had failed to respond adequately, the UN itself had made serious errors of judgement and the tragedy of Srebrenica would haunt the UN's history forever.[2]

Serbia and Montenegro was cleared of direct responsibility for or complicity in the massacre, but was found responsible for not doing enough to prevent the massacre and not prosecuting the responsible, in breach of the Genocide Convention. The Preliminary List of People Missing or Killed in Srebrenica compiled by the Bosnian Federal Commission of Missing Persons contains 8,373 names.[1] As of July 2012, 6,838 genocide victims have been identified through DNA analysis of body parts recovered from mass graves[26] and 6,066 (July 2013) victims have been buried at the Memorial Centre of Potočari.[27] Serbian President Tomislav Nikolić officially apologized for the massacre, although he stopped short of calling it genocide.[28]
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 10:16 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Not a single prosecution!- BBC

No Boko Haram Muslims are prosecuted either. When the Christians fight back they are monsters. Islam has a genocide in store for Nigerian Christians, especially educated ones. They regularly kill teachers and student.

The BBC has its head squarely up Islams ass. The media, and the government are intimidated by threats of violence from Islam.

In the slave trade, that was over 90% Muslim run, is responsible for killing 130 million Africans. Not surprised you would support intimidation and murder.
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 10:23 pm
@coldjoint,
Keep on stuttering asshole. You don't have a clue how truly offensive you are. Your reputation here is as a blathering hateful piece of ****.

You're racist and a bigot.
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 10:25 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Did pretty good in Bosnia Herzegovina, too


It has been proven Muslims burned down their own villages and abandon the peace loving Muslims to die. That is propaganda. Islam was and still is the aggressor.
<br /> http://www.wnd.com/2007/05/41373/
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 10:36 pm
Quote:
Brunei's new law permits stoning gay people to death
United Nations condemns the new penal code


yeah, that will stop them. Think this all part of Islamocare?
http://www.metroweekly.com/news/last_word/2014/04/bruneis-new-law-permits-stoning-gay-people-to-deat.html
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 10:48 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
Re: bobsal u1553115 (Post 5639334)
Quote:

Did pretty good in Bosnia Herzegovina, too



It has been proven Muslims burned down their own villages and abandon the peace loving Muslims to die. That is propaganda. Islam was and still is the aggressor.
<br /> http://www.wnd.com/2007/05/41373/


Thats a lie. BULL ****. And your link doesn't work.

World Net Daily. Please.
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 10:58 pm
@bobsal u1553115,

Quote:
Thats a lie. BULL ****. And your link doesn't work.


No it isn't a lie is has been documented by a UN observer
Quote:
This detailed account first published in 1998 by former UN Military Observer Carlos Martino Branco casts serious doubt on the decision of The Appeals Chamber of the Hague Tribunal (ICTY) that “genocide was committed in Srebrenica in 1995.”

http://balkanblog.org/2011/12/03/%E2%80%9Csrebrenica-massacre%E2%80%9D-is-a-western-myth-was-srebrenica-a-hoax/
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 11:01 pm
Quote:
But in this instance, with the attention of the media focused upon the area, military defence of the enclave would have revealed the true situation in security zones, and demonstrated that these had never been genuinely demilitarized zones as was claimed, but harboured highly-armed (Muslim) military units. Military resistance would jeopardize the image of (Muslims as) victims, which had been so carefully constructed, and which the Muslims considered it was vital to maintain.


A set up by the Muslims that fooled Clinton.

http://slavicnet.com/sokolac/sokolac_srebrenica_hoax_forum.html
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Thu 17 Apr, 2014 11:09 pm
@coldjoint,
A Serbian website. Really.
http://www.gendercide.org/case_bosnia.html

Case Study:
Bosnia-Herzegovina

Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, war criminals

Summary

Atrocities were committed by all sides and against all sectors of the population in Bosnia-Herzegovina between 1992 and 1995. But the Serb strategy of gender-selective mass executions of non-combatant men was the most severe and systematic atrocity inflicted throughout. The war in Bosnia can thus be considered both a genocide against Bosnia's Muslim population, and a gendercide against Muslim men in particular.

The background

Bosnia-Herzegovina MapThe Yugoslav ("Southern Slav") federation, cobbled together from the disintegrated Ottoman Empire after World War I, was torn apart by combined Nazi invasion and ethnic conflict during the Second World War. Indeed, the slaughter of Serbs, Jews, Muslims, Croats, and Roma (Gypsies) constituted one of the most genocidal theatres of that war; the Jewish population was nearly exterminated. A partisan movement led by Josip Broz Tito (a Croat) seized power with Allied help, massacred its enemies, and established a comparatively liberal socialist state, creating an atmosphere for a sense of Yugoslav nationhood to flourish (an idea that lives on today in "Cyber-Yugoslavia"). The federation began to unwind after Marshal Tito's death in 1980, with economic crisis and foreign debt speeding the dissolution of the union. A new generation of extreme-nationalist politicians arose to fan the flames of ethnic hatred as a springboard to personal power. In Serbia, President Slobodan Milosevic consolidated his highly authoritarian brand of rule after 1987, imposing a police state on the restive Serb province of Kosovo and its ethnic-Albanian majority in 1989. Franjo Tudjman, meanwhile, won presidential elections in Croatia by reviving the symbolism and rhetoric of the fascist Ustashe, Croatia's Nazi collaborationists, who fifty years earlier had inflicted genocide on the Serbs, Jews, and Roma within their reach.

While Tudjman and others played an important role in ensuring that the breakup of Yugoslavia would be violent, it was overridingly Milosevic's ambitions of a "Greater Serbia" that sparked the onset of fullscale war in both Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. Using its dominant control over the Yugoslav army, the Serb regime shelled large parts of Croatia into submission in 1991 (including the destruction of the Danube city of Vukovar and the subsequent genocidal massacre: see below). The Bosnian government, almost defenseless, desperately sought to stay out of the widening conflict. But the following year, in Spring 1992, Milosevic -- in alliance with Radovan Karadzic's breakaway Bosnian Serbs -- launched the genocidal and gendercidal "ethnic cleansing" of those parts of Bosnia intended for "Greater Serbia." Sarajevo's time-honoured ethnic harmony was shattered by a protracted Serb siege. Meanwhile, the outside world dithered ineffectually, imposing an arms embargo on the Bosnian Muslims equal to the one it imposed on the well-armed Serbs. Europe's worst conflict since the Second World War was underway, and the military imbalance placed Milosevic's genocidal ambitions within reach.

The gendercide

Victim of Srebrenica Massacre, 1995 (Photo, 19k)In the light of long-established and heavily "gendered" strategies of intercommunal conflict in the Balkans, it was hardly surprising that the gender-selective massacre of non-combatant males would emerge as the dominant and most severe atrocity inflicted on the civilian population in the modern Balkans wars. Regardless of their often-atrocious maltreatment of other population groups (including the destruction of entire cities and the mass rape of women), Serb forces -- and to a lesser extent Croats and Muslims -- concentrated their attention systematically on "battle-age" men. As the Bosnian Prime Minister Hasan Muratovic described the Serb strategy in 1996, "Wherever they [the Serbs] captured people, they either detained or killed all the males from 18 to 55 [years old]. It has never happened that the men of that age arrived across the front-line." Citing Muratovic's comment, Mark Danner summarized the Serbs' modus operandi as follows:

1. Concentration. Surround the area to be cleansed and after warning the resident Serbs -- often they are urged to leave or are at least told to mark their houses with white flags -- intimidate the target population with artillery fire and arbitrary executions and then bring them out into the streets.
2. Decapitation. Execute political leaders and those capable of taking their places: lawyers, judges, public officials, writers, professors.
3. Separation. Divide women, children, and old men from men of "fighting age" -- sixteen years to sixty years old.
4. Evacuation. Transport women, children, and old men to the border, expelling them into a neighboring territory or country.
5. Liquidation. Execute "fighting age" men, dispose of bodies.

All of the largest atrocities of the Balkans war were variations on this gendercidal theme -- targeting males almost exclusively, and for the most part "battle-age" males. The five worst acts of mass killing in the modern Balkans wars were also the worst in Europe since the killing of tens of thousands of disarmed enemy men by Tito's partisan forces in 1945-46. At Vukovar in November 1991, between 200 and 300 Croatian men, "mostly lightly wounded soldiers and hospital workers," were pulled out of the hospital surroundings -- some with the catheters still dangling from their arms -- executed, and buried en masse outside city limits. (See Stover and Peress, The Graves: Srebrenica and Vukovar.)

A panel from Joe Sacco's memorable work, Safe Area Gorazde
(link to ordering information for Sacco's book).
Panel from Joe Sacco's 'Safe Area Gorazde'

The story of Vlasic (Ugar Gorge) is that of another ruthless act of gender-selective mass killing. On 21 August 1992, a convoy of prisoners from the Serb-run Trnopolje concentration camp were driven to Muslim and Croat territory. En route, men were separated from women, driven off in separate buses, and executed at the edge of the ravine. Some 200-250 men are believed to have died.

But neither Vukovar nor the Ugar Gorge could hold a candle to a more obscure slaughter -- at Brcko during the Serb offensive of 1992. Although much about the incident remains shadowy, Brcko, a strategic "choke point" on the Drina River, appears to have been the target of a systematic gender-selective slaughter that strongly foreshadowed the nightmare at Srebrenica three years later. Mark Danner, who has investigated what little is publicly known about the events, summarizes them as follows:

During the late spring and early summer of 1992, some three thousand Muslims ... were herded by Serb troops into an abandoned warehouse, tortured, and put to death. A U.S. intelligence satellite orbiting over the former Yugoslavia photographed part of the slaughter. "They have photos of trucks going into Brcko with bodies standing upright, and pictures of trucks coming out of Brcko carrying bodies lying horizontally, stacked like cordwood," an investigator working outside the U.S. government who has seen the photographs told us. ... The photographs remain unpublished to this day. (Danner, "Bosnia: The Great Betrayal," New York Review of Books, 26 March 1998.)

The vast majority of mass killings and gender-selective slaughters between 1991 and 1994 were smaller in magnitude, and went virtually unrecorded. The best place to find accounts of them, in English at least, is the Helsinki Watch/Human Rights Watch report, War Crimes in Bosnia-Hercegovina. The litany of atrocities in a narrow stretch of Volume II alone makes clear the pervasiveness and systematic character of the gendercide in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in a way that the more epic mass killings perhaps do not:

In my village, about 180 men were killed. The army put all men in the center of the village. After the killing, the women took care of the bodies and identified them. The older men buried the bodies. (Trnopolje)

We were met by the Cetniks [Serb paramilitaries], who were separating women and children from the men. Many of the men were killed on the spot -- mostly over old, private disputes. The rest of us were put on buses and they started to beat us. (Kozarac)

The army came to the village that day. They took us from our houses. The men were beaten. The army came in on trucks and started shooting at the men and killing them. (Prnovo)

The army took most of the men and killed them. There were bodies everywhere. (Rizvanovici)

The shooting started at about 4:00 p.m., but we were surrounded and could not escape. They [Serb troops] finally entered the village at 8:00 p.m. and immediately began setting houses on fire, looking for men and executing them. When they got to our house, they ordered us to come out with hands raised above our heads, including the children. There were four men among us, and they shot them in front of us. We were screaming, and the children cried as we were forced to walk on. I saw another six men killed nearby. (Skelani)

Our men had to hide. My husband was with us, but hiding. I saw my uncle being beaten on July 25 when there was a kind of massacre. The Serbs were searching for arms. Three hundred men were killed that day. (Carakovo)

We came out of the shelter. They were looking for men. They got them all together. We saw them beating the men. We heard the sounds of the shooting. One man survived the executions. They killed his brother and father. Afterwards the women buried the men. (Biscani)

The crowning act of gendercide in the Balkans wars -- at least until "Operation Horseshoe" in Kosovo in 1999 -- came at Srebrenica between July 12 and 17, 1995. After the atrocities of 1992 and further fighting in 1993, Srebrenica had been declared one of five "safe areas" under UN protection. Tens of thousands of desperate Muslims sought protection there. Despite privations and squalor, the safety held -- until July 1995, when Serb forces overran the enclave. As Dutch U.N. troops and the international community looked on, the Serbs separated the men, most of them elderly and infirm, from the children and women. While the other members of the community were bused to safety in Muslim-held territory, thousands of Srebrenica's men were taken out to open fields, executed, and buried in mass graves. Thousands of other unarmed men were rounded up and hunted down in nearby forests, in what Serb commander Ratko Mladic called a "feast" of mass killing.

How many died?

"As of December 1994," writes Sabrina Ramet in Balkan Babel (p. 267), "between 200,000 and 400,000 people had died since June 1991 as a result of the war between Serbs and non-Serbs, and at least 2.7 million people had been reduced to refugees. An estimated 20,000-50,000 Bosnian Muslim women had been raped by Bosnian Serb soldiers in a systematic campaign of humiliation and psychological terror." Most authorities, while accepting that the death-toll from the Bosnian conflict alone reached six figures, would tend towards the lower end of Ramet's casualty estimate. But to this must be added the further slaughter during the "endgame" of the war in mid-1995, including the gendercidal massacre at Srebrenica and the Croat invasion of the Serb-held Krajina region later in the summer.

No reliable statistics exist for the number of male versus female casualties in the Bosnian or Croatian wars. All members of the civilian population suffered in the protracted and bloody sieges of cities such as Vukovar and Sarajevo. But the overwhelming weight of testimony and recorded evidence suggests a heavy preponderance of "battle-age" males among the dead -- probably over 80 percent. One clue can be gleaned from the lists of missing persons from the Bosnian conflict. The International Committee of the Red Cross has noted that "the majority of missing persons [in Bosnia-Herzegovina] are men ... Of the approximately 18,000 persons registered by the ICRC in Bosnia-Herzegovina as still missing in connection with the armed conflict that ended there in 1995, 92% are men and 8% are women." (ICRC, "The Impact of Armed Conflict on Women", 6 March 2001.) This apparent disproportion, combined with the systematic gender-selective strategies pursued in the individual massacres and "ethnic cleansing" campaigns, warrants the designation of Bosnia-Herzegovina as one of the worst gendercides in recent decades. Especially in 1992-93, atrocities were also inflicted in the brutal concentration camps operated by the Serbs (e.g., Omarska, Trnopolje), and to a lesser extent by the Croats (Dretelj). The inmates of these camps were overwhelmingly Muslim males (95 percent or more); many thousands died from torture, beatings, and summary executions.

Who is responsible?

Bosnia War CrimeAlthough crimes have been committed by all sides in the Balkans conflict, the vast majority of the mass killings and other atrocities were inflicted by the Yugoslav regime of Slobodan Milosevic. Milosevic himself now numbers among those indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), on the basis of his genocidal actions in Kosovo. He is presently the only sitting head of state to be so indicted. Four top aides were indicted alongside him. Among Milosevic's key co-conspirators is his wife, Mirjana Markovic, a leading party ideologue.

The Yugoslav power structure is extensively penetrated by criminal and paramilitary elements, most notably those under the control of Zeljko Raznatovic ("Arkan") and Vojislav Seselj. Both of these paramilitary leaders were deeply involved in the ground-level killing at the major massacre sites. Radovan Karadzic, Prime Minister of the self-declared "Republika Srpska" (the Serb statelet in Bosnia-Herzegovina), has also been indicted on war-crimes charges. He was intimately involved in planning and preparing the genocidal actions against the Muslim population of Bosnia. His top general, Ratko Mladic, supervised the gendercide at Srebrenica and numerous other acts of mass killing, and is also under indictment.

One must not overlook the men and occasionally women who slaughtered the defenseless victims and buried them in the mass graves, or killed them in their houses and streets. Again, although extreme nationalism was evident in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Kosovo, it is the ordinary citizens of Serbia who have overridingly supported their regime in its campaign to build "Greater Serbia" over the graves of Muslims, Croats, and Kosovars.

The aftermath

The slaughter at Srebrenica, which seemed to mark the apogee of "Greater Serbia," was quickly followed by its demise. A Croat-Muslim alliance, now rearmed with tacit U.S. assistance, went on the offensive. "On August 4 [1995], with clear U.S. backing, Croatia's army attacked and overran Knin, the symbolic capital of the rebel Serbs who, at the instigation of Slobodan Milosevic and the Yugoslav army, had seized a quarter of Croatia's territory and driven out their Croat neighbors in 1990 and 1991. Within hours, the tide of the wars in Yugoslavia had shifted. The rebel Serbs' leaders abandoned the civilian Serb population in Croatia. The Croatian army sent tens of thousands of these Serbs fleeing across the Croatian border into Serb-held districts in Bosnia." (Sudetic, Blood and Vengeance, p. 324.) Many thousands of Serbs, especially the elderly and infirm, were killed by Croat forces in these new vengeful "cleansings." Milosevic and his Bosnian Serb allies were forced to the negotiating table. In November 1995, at Dayton, Ohio, they signed a peace treaty with Muslim and Croat representatives that saw Bosnia-Herzegovina formally preserved as an independent country, though with clear areas of predominance for Serbs, Muslims, and Croats. The pact was secured by 60,000 NATO peacekeepers -- but Milosevic's "Greater Serbia" dream remained. It would turn its attentions next to the territory it had first focused upon -- Kosovo, with its rebellious ethnic-Albanian majority. The result was a renewed bout of "ethnic cleansing" and gendercide in the Balkans, in 1998-99.
0 Replies
 
anonymously99
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 07:09 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Keep on stuttering asshole. You don't have a clue how truly offensive you are. Your reputation here is as a blathering hateful piece of ****.You're racist and a bigot.


Bobsie is hypocritical?
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 07:17 am
Meanwhile 98% think Bush lied on important matters.
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 07:31 am
@anonymously99,
Quote:
Re: bobsal u1553115 (Post 5639351)
Quote:

Keep on stuttering asshole. You don't have a clue how truly offensive you are. Your reputation here is as a blathering hateful piece of ****.You're racist and a bigot.


Not at all. carpfart has always been offensive and intellectually dishonest and I've called him out for it each time.

Discribe my "hypocracy"? I say over and over, I treat as I've been treated plus 1. You're nice - I'm nicer. You're rude - I'm ruder.
anonymously99
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 07:52 am
@bobsal u1553115,
You make me feel strange. That I don't know feeling.

Strange as in I don't understand my feelings because I can't understand who you are as I want.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 08:48 am
@parados,
Quote:
Re: coldjoint (Post 5639297)
Meanwhile 98% think Bush lied on important matters.


Meanwhile Bushs' lies somehow make Obamas, go away? Try again.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 09:27 am
http://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Bumper-Sticker-Ithaca-Experts-Agree-Gun-Control-589x442.jpg
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 09:44 am
@coldjoint,
Bull ****.

Just for the record: I am for private gun ownership. I am for private ownership of automatic weapons. Whatever the cops got, we should be allowed to own, too.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnazimyth.html

Guncite is a 2nd Amendment pro-gun web site.

The Myth of Nazi Gun Control

By N. A. Browne

A commonly heard argument against gun control is that the National Socialists of Germany (the Nazis) used it in their ascent to and maintenance of power. A corollary argument is sometimes made that had the Jews (and presumably the other targeted groups) been armed, they could have fought off Nazi tyranny. This tract seeks to counter these misassumptions about Nazi gun control.

Gun control, the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, was introduced to Germany in 1928 under the Weimar regime (there was no Right to Arms in the Constitution of 1919) in large part to disarm the nascent private armies, e.g. the Nazi SA (aka "the brownshirts"). The Weimar government was attempting to bring some stability to German society and politics (a classic "law and order" position). Violent extremist movements (of both the Left and Right) were actively attacking the young, and very fragile, democratic state. A government that cannot maintain some degree of public order cannot sustain its legitimacy. Nor was the German citizenry well grounded in Constitutional, republican government (as was evidenced in their choices at the ballot box). Gun control was not initiated at the behest or on behalf of the Nazis - it was in fact designed to keep them, or others of the same ilk, from executing a revolution against the lawful government. In the strictest sense, the law succeeded - the Nazis did not stage an armed coup.

The 1928 law was subsequently extended in 1938 under the Third Reich (this action being the principal point in support of the contention that the Nazis were advocates of gun control). However, the Nazis were firmly in control of Germany at the time the Weapons Law of 1938 was created. Further, this law was not passed by a legislative body, but was promulgated under the dictatorial power granted Hitler in 1933. Obviously, the Nazis did not need gun control to attain power as they already (in 1938) possessed supreme and unlimited power in Germany. The only feasible argument that gun control favored the Nazis would be that the 1928 law deprived private armies of a means to defeat them. The basic flaw with this argument is that the Nazis did not seize power by force of arms, but through their success at the ballot box (and the political cunning of Hitler himself). Secondary considerations that arise are that gun ownership was not that widespread to begin with, and, even imagining such ubiquity the German people, Jews in particular, were not predisposed to violent resistance to their government.

The Third Reich did not need gun control (in 1938 or at any time thereafter) to maintain their power. The success of Nazi programs (restoring the economy, dispelling socio-political chaos) and the misappropriation of justice by the apparatus of terror (the Gestapo) assured the compliance of the German people. Arguing otherwise assumes a resistance to Nazi rule that did not exist. Further, supposing the existance of an armed resistance also requires the acceptance that the German people would have rallied to the rebellion. This argument requires a total suspension of disbelief given everything we know about 1930s Germany. Why then did the Nazis introduce this program? As with most of their actions (including the formation of the Third Reich itself), they desired to effect a facade of legalism around the exercise of naked power. It is unreasonable to treat this as a normal part of lawful governance, as the rule of law had been entirely demolished in the Third Reich. Any direct quotations, of which there are several, that pronounce some beneficence to the Weapons Law should be considered in the same manner as all other Nazi pronouncements - absolute lies. (See Bogus Gun Control Quotes and endnote [1].)

A more farfetched question is the hypothetical proposition of armed Jewish resistance. First, they were not commonly armed even prior to the 1928 Law. Second, Jews had seen pogroms before and had survived them, though not without suffering. They would expect that this one would, as had the past ones, eventually subside and permit a return to normalcy. Many considered themselves "patriotic Germans" for their service in the first World War. These simply were not people prepared to stage violent resistance. Nor were they alone in this mode of appeasement. The defiance of "never again" is not so much a warning to potential oppressors as it is a challenge to Jews to reject the passive response to pogrom. Third, it hardly seems conceivable that armed resistance by Jews (or any other target group) would have led to any weakening of Nazi rule, let alone a full scale popular rebellion; on the contrary, it seems more likely it would have strengthened the support the Nazis already had. Their foul lies about Jewish perfidy would have been given a grain of substance. To project backward and speculate thus is to fail to learn the lesson history has so painfully provided.

The simple conclusion is that there are no lessons about the efficacy of gun control to be learned from the Germany of the first half of this century. It is all too easy to forget the seductive allure that fascism presented to all the West, bogged down in economic and social morass. What must be remembered is that the Nazis were master manipulators of popular emotion and sentiment, and were disdainful of people thinking for themselves. There is the danger to which we should pay great heed. Not fanciful stories about Nazi's seizing guns.

ources:

Shirer, William L., The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

Jay Simkin, Aaron Zelman and Alan Rice, Lethal Laws.

International Constitutional Law

Endnote:

[1]. This is not to say Hitler did not value gun control. After having occupied Russian territory Hitler said:

Der größte Unsinn, den man in den besetzen Ostgebieten machen könnte, sei der, den unterworfenen Völkern Waffen zu geben. Die Geschicte lehre, daß alle Herrenvölker untergegangen seien, nachdem sie den von ihnen unterworfenen Volkern Waffen bewilligt hatten.

[The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.]
--- Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitlers Tischegesprache Im Fuhrerhauptquartier 1941-1942.
[Hitler's Table-Talk at the Fuhrer's Headquarters 1941-1942], Dr. Henry Picker, ed. (Athenaum-Verlag, Bonn, 1951)

GunCite does not have the German version, but Hitler continues, "Indeed I would go so far as to say that the underdog is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let's not have any native militia or police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order."

Besides you guys LOOOOOVE Hitler.



cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 09:49 am
@parados,
Bush not lied on important matters, but also instituted torture of prisoners, started the NSA, AbuGarib, Gitmo, and started two wars that lasted longer than WWII- while breaking international laws against attacking sovereign countries.

No finer terrorists than American presidents who are responsible for the killings of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children.

He even looks sane to many conservatives!
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 09:53 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Besides you guys LOOOOOVE Hitler.


That is simply not true. Progressives are the anti Semites. And Obama is just another Hitler, the only difference is Obamas race card has not killed people, yet.
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 10:00 am
@coldjoint,
You LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE Hitler. Be a man. Admit it. Hitler didn't care much about black people,just like you.

http://www.ushmm.org/lcmedia/photo/lc/image/17/17608.jpg
Nazi propaganda photo depicts friendship between an "Aryan" and a black woman. The caption states: "The result! A loss of racial pride." Germany, prewar.

— US Holocaust Memorial Museum
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Fri 18 Apr, 2014 10:05 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Hitler didn't care much about black people,


The economic position that Blacks are in now shows Obama doesn't give a **** either. And why do you bring race in? Must be out of ideas or lies(same thing)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 08:38:00