Bush is a hero

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175507 Mar 4, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I think her comments were horribly wrong because there was all kinds of open dialogue about Hitler and his plans for war, and for the Jews. It started in earnest in the late 1920s when the Nazi party became a major player in German politics, and continued right up until the war started in 1939.
It wasn't the absence of dialogue that allowed him to do what he did. The historical record doesn't support the notion that if only we'd dialogued (talked) more he could have been stopped. We talked, the British talked, the French talked, and we talked and we talked and we talked.
We talked - but some didn't listen, and nobody did squat.
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>
Before he could start the war, well, this country was asleep and self-absorbed, and we fought waking up with all the sound and fury of American politics. It was an ugly process - uglier than politics is now, maybe Great Britain was trying to hang onto a crumbling empire on the cheap and though they could buy Hitler off at the expense of other, smaller nations. Frenchmen were too busy recovering from WWI, which was fought on their turf, and far too busy fighting battles between left and right to pay enough attention to Hitler.
OK so if what you say about us, UK and France is true, and I have no reason to believe it
isn't, then the idle chit chat type of dialogue with Germany should've been replaced by more extremely MEANINGFUL dialogue (IMO).

If the US was asleep at the switch, if the UK was preoccupied trying to restore their empire, and if France was recovering from WW1, and not paying much attention to Hitler, then it must be true that real & serious discussions with Germany concerning Hitler's increasingly agressive behavior were NOT being held. And if you look at what Lyndi was saying, doesn't
that pretty much sum it up? Not that dialogues were not being held, focused on Germany, but that more specific serious dialogues regarding Hitler & his ambitions to take over, not only his own country, but eventually the surrounding countries, were not being held. Or at least not enough to dissuade Adolf in the least.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175508 Mar 4, 2014
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
OK so if what you say about us, UK and France is true, and I have no reason to believe it
isn't, then the idle chit chat type of dialogue with Germany should've been replaced by more extremely MEANINGFUL dialogue (IMO).
If the US was asleep at the switch, if the UK was preoccupied trying to restore their empire, and if France was recovering from WW1, and not paying much attention to Hitler, then it must be true that real & serious discussions with Germany concerning Hitler's increasingly agressive behavior were NOT being held. And if you look at what Lyndi was saying, doesn't
that pretty much sum it up? Not that dialogues were not being held, focused on Germany, but that more specific serious dialogues regarding Hitler & his ambitions to take over, not only his own country, but eventually the surrounding countries, were not being held. Or at least not enough to dissuade Adolf in the least.
No, bob, I don't think it holds up at all. The problem wasn't a failure to dialogue - it was a failure to act.

You can dialogue until the cows come home, but there's no guarantee the dialogue will persuade people. It wasn't for lack of information that Hitler was allowed to do what he did. it wasn't because he held his plans secret - it was in his book, it was in his speeches to the Party. Those were reported on in all the countries mentioned - in this country, some of them were even broadcast (I think with a translator, but I'm not sure).

In Britain, Churchill was talking about Hitler before he became Chancellor, iirc the late 20s. He and his allies were ignored. The French (those not secretly aligned with Hitler) mostly knew what a threat he was, but they were more concerned with partisan politics, with winning the next election or forming the next government.

In America, it wasn't our problem. People who warned of the dangers of Hitler hated Germans or were Jews or were profiteering war mongers or fascists (a charge both sides employed frequently) and who knows what else, imperialist France and Britain were as bad as Hitler, and so on and so forth, ad nauseum. This wasn't, until the very end, a partisan fight either. Isolationist Dems were fighting Interventionist Dems, Interventionist Reps were fighting Isolationist Reps, there were liberals and conservatives in both camps.

We talked and we talked and we talked, we dialogued and debated and and discussed and we listened and we screamed and we pondered ... and did nothing.

USA_1

“For F***'s Sake”

Since: Aug 13

Tanner Flats

#175509 Mar 4, 2014
LittleWillie wrote:
<quoted text>No, bob, I don't think it holds up at all. The problem wasn't a failure to dialogue - it was a failure to act.
You can dialogue until the cows come home, but there's no guarantee the dialogue will persuade people. It wasn't for lack of information that Hitler was allowed to do what he did. it wasn't because he held his plans secret - it was in his book, it was in his speeches to the Party. Those were reported on in all the countries mentioned - in this country, some of them were even broadcast (I think with a translator, but I'm not sure).
In Britain, Churchill was talking about Hitler before he became Chancellor, iirc the late 20s. He and his allies were ignored. The French (those not secretly aligned with Hitler) mostly knew what a threat he was, but they were more concerned with partisan politics, with winning the next election or forming the next government.
In America, it wasn't our problem. People who warned of the dangers of Hitler hated Germans or were Jews or were profiteering war mongers or fascists (a charge both sides employed frequently) and who knows what else, imperialist France and Britain were as bad as Hitler, and so on and so forth, ad nauseum. This wasn't, until the very end, a partisan fight either. Isolationist Dems were fighting Interventionist Dems, Interventionist Reps were fighting Isolationist Reps, there were liberals and conservatives in both camps.
We talked and we talked and we talked, we dialogued and debated and and discussed and we listened and we screamed and we pondered ... and did nothing.
Don't forget, Neville Chamberlain was as big of a wimp as Vladimir Putin perceives Barry O to be. Appeasement doesn't work with tyrants and that was the strategy everyone was employing with Hitler. I don't see Putin being handled much differently. Barry O has run out of red lines.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175510 Mar 4, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>No, bob, I don't think it holds up at all. The problem wasn't a failure to dialogue - it was a failure to act.

We talked and we talked and we talked, we dialogued and debated and and discussed and we listened and we screamed and we pondered ... and did nothing.
What a travesty and a huge black mark in global history.

Appreciate ya takin' the time for this.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#175511 Mar 4, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Let's say somebody says they want to talk to you about Israel and the Palestinians. To open the conversation with you they start off with something like "Maybe it's time we talk about whether there is any "validity and justification" to antisemitism."

Would you even bother to consider anything else they had to say?
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
<quoted text>Haven't you said some dumb things?
Even some hateful things?
(Not rhetorical)
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, but so what?
That can happen for a lot of reasons ranging from anger to a failed attempt at humor to just not knowing any better, but that doesn't make me a racist.
Sooooo...
Hateful speech is given a pass if it is a failed attempt at humor?

Hateful speech is given a pass if one does not know better?

Really?
Maybe if we were talking about little children but we are talking about adults who do know better.

Guess there really is no pass for hateful speech or racial humor and if I read your post above correctly...there is no mercy for them either. Yes?

Question -
Have you ever laughed at a racial joke?
Told one?

Watched racially motivated entertainment?

Thought a racial thought?

(rhetorical)

You see, I believe as I posted earlier that once we are exposed to racial undertones we are contaminated for life. The genie is out of the bottle, the tooth-paste out of the tube. BUT we can discuss it and we must discuss it, without being labeled as such.

If not then why "Would you even bother to consider anything else they had to say?"
Your words

Don't fear the one who talks about race / culture / ethnicity / difference...I fear the one who doesn't.

Just saying...

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#175512 Mar 4, 2014
*edit

Sooooo...
Hateful speech is given a pass if it is said in anger?

Hateful speech is given a pass if it is a failed attempt at humor?

Hateful speech is given a pass if one does not know better?

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175514 Mar 4, 2014
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Sooooo...
Hateful speech is given a pass if it is a failed attempt at humor?
Hateful speech is given a pass if one does not know better?
Really?
Maybe if we were talking about little children but we are talking about adults who do know better.
Guess there really is no pass for hateful speech or racial humor and if I read your post above correctly...there is no mercy for them either. Yes?
Question -
Have you ever laughed at a racial joke?
Told one?
Watched racially motivated entertainment?
Thought a racial thought?
(rhetorical)
You see, I believe as I posted earlier that once we are exposed to racial undertones we are contaminated for life. The genie is out of the bottle, the tooth-paste out of the tube. BUT we can discuss it and we must discuss it, without being labeled as such.
If not then why "Would you even bother to consider anything else they had to say?"
Your words
Don't fear the one who talks about race / culture / ethnicity / difference...I fear the one who doesn't.
Just saying...
Why are you talking about fear?

“zero nuclear weapons”

Since: Sep 08

Perryville

#175515 Mar 4, 2014
USA_1 wrote:
<quoted text>Don't forget, Neville Chamberlain was as big of a wimp as Vladimir Putin perceives Barry O to be. Appeasement doesn't work with tyrants and that was the strategy everyone was employing with Hitler. I don't see Putin being handled much differently. Barry O has run out of red lines.
Bet you fell off the trunp truck and had major brain damage. That barry stuff is put out by a bunch of raciest. The president's name is Barack H Obama.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#175516 Mar 5, 2014
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>

You see, I believe as I posted earlier that once we are exposed to racial undertones we are contaminated for life. The genie is out of the bottle, the tooth-paste out of the tube.
Maybe not.
====
"Are we born racist? A new Israeli study has some surprising answers

Is racial discrimination innate or learned? Are humans programmed to prefer their own group over others? Prof. Gil Diesendruck of Bar-Ilan University’s Psychology Department and Gonda Brain Research Center tries to answer these questions.

“The specific characteristics used as a basis for categorization depend on the culture and the environment, but the tendency to sort people into groups and this essentialist belief about them is something natural. Innate even. It’s something that quite surprised us, because you might think children are born without any social biases, and that they only develop this essentialist belief as a result of a certain kind of upbringing. But what we found was just the opposite: Children start out with this essentialist tendency, and only a particular kind of education can lead them to develop a different, more open attitude.”

http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/magazine/.prem...

=====
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#175517 Mar 5, 2014
Racism is Innate: The Human Brain Makes Unconscious Decisions Based on Ethnicity

Racism is hardwired into the brain and operates unconsciously because areas that detect ethnicity and control emotion are closely connected, according to scientists.

Researchers explain that the same brain circuits that allow us to classify a person into an ethnic group overlap with other circuits that process emotion and make decisions, leading people to make unconscious decisions based on another's race.

The latest study, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, found that functional magnetic resonance imaging brain scans revealed that interactions between people from different racial groups trigger reactions that researchers think may be completely unknown to our conscious selves.

Researchers led by psychologist and neuroscientist Dr. Elizabeth Phelps of New York University reviewed past brain imaging studies showing how different social categories of race are processed, evaluated and integrated in decision-making.

Past research found that the amygdala, an almond-shaped brain region located deep within the brain that processes fear and emotions, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex involved in top-down emotional control, and the anterior cingulate cortex that manages conflict between intentional and unintentional tendencies, and the fusiform face area that differentiates between familiar and unfamiliar faces, were simultaneously active during tasks that engaged racial bias like having participants view black and white faces while doing different tasks.


Phelps and her team said that not only are these brain areas important in the unintentional, implicit expression of racial attitudes, the functional connectivity that links them together are critical for this processing.

"A few decades ago, it was unthinkable that looking at the brain to understand representations of social groups such as black versus white was even possible, let alone that such explorations could yield useful knowledge," the authors wrote, according to the Daily Mail. "Evidence from neuroscience has been vital in clarifying the nature of how intergroup cognition unfolds."

Researchers said that research into the neuroscience of race will help them reveal individual behaviors of what happens when intergroup cognition is at stake and if it is possible to change real human interactions.

"How to use this knowledge from brain and behavior to further extend basic knowledge and to drive applications is the obvious next generation of questions that we must pose," they wrote. "If good people who intend well act in a manner inconsistent with their own standards of egalitarianism because of the racial groups to which 'the other' belongs, then the question of change takes on new and urgent meaning."

"This urgency requires that we attend to the evidence about how our minds work when we confront racial and other group differences," they concluded.

"This goes back to potent psychobiological theories of human behavior," said psychiatrist and neuroscientist Anthony Harris, with Sydney University's Medical School, according to The Australian. "But it's very difficult to tease out the cultural influence on our biological processes."

Researchers say that the next step was to develop techniques to reduce or eliminate the negative associations that make up unwanted implicit racial attitudes.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/racism-innate-hum...
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#175518 Mar 5, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>No, bob, I don't think it holds up at all. The problem wasn't a failure to dialogue - it was a failure to act.
The problem wasn't a failure to act, it was and still is a failure to understand.
If action was the solution, then the liberation of the camps and the global discovery of the horrors should have put an end to anti-Semitism and as we all know, anti-Semitism is alive and well. Racism and anti-Semitism isn't a problem that can be eradicated by bumper stickers that say, "JUST BE NICE, " Willie and if what I posted from science journals and psychologists is true and it's hardwired into the human animal, you're going to have to come up with a better plan to eradicate it than finger pointing, name calling, and pig piles. I'd suggest again a brutally honest dialogue but this forum isn't up to it. Too many simpletons in here think it's something that can be wished away.

Since: Sep 10

Redondo Beach, CA

#175519 Mar 5, 2014
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem wasn't a failure to act, it was and still is a failure to understand.
If action was the solution, then the liberation of the camps and the global discovery of the horrors should have put an end to anti-Semitism and as we all know, anti-Semitism is alive and well. Racism and anti-Semitism isn't a problem that can be eradicated by bumper stickers that say, "JUST BE NICE, " Willie and if what I posted from science journals and psychologists is true and it's hardwired into the human animal, you're going to have to come up with a better plan to eradicate it than finger pointing, name calling, and pig piles. I'd suggest again a brutally honest dialogue but this forum isn't up to it. Too many simpletons in here think it's something that can be wished away.
Hey look! Lyndi has found the racist gene!

It's not a choice at all.

Poor thing, she can't help it.

It's simply wrong to discriminate against racists.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175520 Mar 5, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey look! Lyndi has found the racist gene!
It's not a choice at all.
Poor thing, she can't help it.
It's simply wrong to discriminate against racists.
Stalking Lyndi again, chaser. You must REALLY be obsessed with her.

Worthless freakin' troll!

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175521 Mar 5, 2014
nebka wrote:
<quoted text>
Bet you fell off the trunp truck and had major brain damage. That barry stuff is put out by a bunch of raciest. The president's name is Barack H Obama.
Spoken like a diehard misguided loyalist. But you left out barry's complete middle name, Lois. Don't be shy now, SPIT it out. H-U-S-S-

BTW, it wasn't a trunp truck, it was a cawrtot truck, and he had his helmmett on.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175522 Mar 5, 2014
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem wasn't a failure to act, it was and still is a failure to understand.
If action was the solution, then the liberation of the camps and the global discovery of the horrors should have put an end to anti-Semitism and as we all know, anti-Semitism is alive and well. Racism and anti-Semitism isn't a problem that can be eradicated by bumper stickers that say, "JUST BE NICE, " Willie and if what I posted from science journals and psychologists is true and it's hardwired into the human animal, you're going to have to come up with a better plan to eradicate it than finger pointing, name calling, and pig piles. I'd suggest again a brutally honest dialogue but this forum isn't up to it. Too many simpletons in here think it's something that can be wished away.
Failure to understand, failure to act, are different labels for the same thing.

My point is that the failure of whatever you want to call it did not result from a lack of conversation with or about the Nazis and their aims, or a lack of conversation with antisemites, or about antisemitism.

If you want a brutally frank discussion of race, Lyndi, I'm game if you're willing to talk to me and consider my views as I post them. I'll extend the same courtesy to you.

Since your first post, however, you've been telling me what I own because I'm a liberal. That's not a brutally frank discussion; that's a staged event.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#175523 Mar 5, 2014
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem wasn't a failure to act, it was and still is a failure to understand.
If action was the solution, then the liberation of the camps and the global discovery of the horrors should have put an end to anti-Semitism and as we all know, anti-Semitism is alive and well. Racism and anti-Semitism isn't a problem that can be eradicated by bumper stickers that say, "JUST BE NICE, " Willie and if what I posted from science journals and psychologists is true and it's hardwired into the human animal, you're going to have to come up with a better plan to eradicate it than finger pointing, name calling, and pig piles. I'd suggest again a brutally honest dialogue but this forum isn't up to it. Too many simpletons in here think it's something that can be wished away.
Seems it's you that isn't up for a 'brutally frank discussion' of racism. Looks like you've already said everything you care to say about it.

You'd love for 'what you posted from science journals and psychologists' to be true, because if racism is hardwired into people, all the talking in the universe isn't going to change it. If it's part of us, you've justified yours.

Congrats. But you suck at 'brutally frank' discussions....you've got the 'brutal' part down, but the 'frank' is demonstrably absent.

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#175524 Mar 5, 2014
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Seems it's you that isn't up for a 'brutally frank discussion' of racism. Looks like you've already said everything you care to say about it.
You'd love for 'what you posted from science journals and psychologists' to be true, because if racism is hardwired into people, all the talking in the universe isn't going to change it. If it's part of us, you've justified yours.
Congrats. But you suck at 'brutally frank' discussions....you've got the 'brutal' part down, but the 'frank' is demonstrably absent.
The bottom line, after Lyndi's newly discovered evidence, is that racists are born that way.

It's not a lifestyle choice at all, it's the racist gene.

The girl can't help it.

We must heceforth all give racists equal protection of the laws.

No more discrimination against racists.

Homosexuals, not so much. We're still looking for that gene. In the meantime, it's a choice.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175525 Mar 5, 2014
It can be difficult to have a frank discussion about race.

A high school friend of mine - we once got stopped and taken to a police station because a black guy and a white guy in a car together was suspicious to some in the 60s - went on to become a minister at a church, not inner city/slum neighborhood but on the fringe and crumbling.

We stayed in touch through the years. In the mid 90s I happened to see him on television twice in the span of a couple of months. The first time he was decrying the lack of police protection near his church. The second time he was decrying the fact that in the course of a shootout with (and begun by) gang members, an innocent bystander was shot and killed, and he blamed the police.

Next time I saw him I asked him about that, if he didn't see at least some inconsistency in the two statements.

His initial response was to challenge my 'racist' views.

Now, we got past it and stayed friends without a whole lot of strain - but I'll be damned if I ever brought up anything like that with him again.

It could very well be that the sort of thing I'm talking about here is what Lyndi's talking about - at least, that's what I'd like to think.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#175526 Mar 5, 2014
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Seems it's you that isn't up for a 'brutally frank discussion' of racism. Looks like you've already said everything you care to say about it.
You'd love for 'what you posted from science journals and psychologists' to be true, because if racism is hardwired into people, all the talking in the universe isn't going to change it. If it's part of us, you've justified yours.
Congrats. But you suck at 'brutally frank' discussions....you've got the 'brutal' part down, but the 'frank' is demonstrably absent.


Try writing SURRENDER LYNDI in the sky the next time you take your broom out for a spin!

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#175527 Mar 5, 2014
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =r4kiXh8YOzkXX
Try writing SURRENDER LYNDI in the sky the next time you take your broom out for a spin!
Since you just did, what would be the point of that?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min Bongo 64,057
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 6 min Classic 3,807
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 52 min Steve III 654,009
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 973,805
I prefer women's satin panties over men's under... 5 hr Clive 27
Moms having sex with their sons (Aug '12) 5 hr Clive 80
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 5 hr Rosa_Winkel 106,508
More from around the web