Total posts: 2,182
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
Your flow chart leads to the possibility of gas chambers not existing but evidence says otherwise, so your flow chart outcome is wrong.
the reason I want you to do this? I want to know if your argumentation is grounded in reason and not in response. because if it's the latter then this discussion will never yield fruit for either of us and it is a waste of our time.
You want me to do this?
Why should I do what you want me to do.
This is the stupidest argument I have ever heard:
Argue according to my standards, or we can't argue.
That's not how arguments work.
I could do the exact same thing for you.
I provided a timeline and the events, and things that Hitler did, and you have yet to say any of them are false.
You are a conspiracy theorist, and a bad one at that.
Go worship your Hitler statue, you Nazi.
You can't even argue rationally.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Elliott
Bankers are not climate scientists and Banks still have still have vast financial interests in the promotion of fossil fuels.
But if the climate crisis was a real threat, then why wouldn't the banks be freaking out?
The banks are smart, and if they did see a real threat to their money, then they would be stopping loans.
But they know it's all BS, because if it wasn't they would be doing something about it.
As to the article from “Investor’s Business Daily” as soon as it mentioned “ Real Climate Science” and Tony Heller, who also isn’t a climate scientist, it lost any credibility.A final point, if all the ice caps melt the sea level is expected to rise not 5 feet but somewhere between 60 and 70 meters that is up to around 200 to 230 feet.
But they can look at the facts, and take from it what they can.
They are investors, and not stupid.
If they saw any sort of threat at all, they would be doing something.
Also lets not forget that these so called "climate scientists" said that the world was going to end in ten years about 15 years ago. So I wouldn't trust them either.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
And I couldn't have made myself more clear.According to THE BIBLE, people have seen god, heard god, touched god and spoken to god. Physically .
No, people have had encounters with God, that felt physical. They weren't physical in the sense that we know physical to be.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
We also shouldn’t punish people for breaking the rules either if they don’t harm someone else by doing so, whether it’s not wearing an ID card, speeding 10 mph above the speed limit, or being undocumented.
Rules are put in place for a reason. If you purposely break them, whether your intentions are good or not, it's still breaking a rule.
You can't have a rule to protect people, and then allow certain people to break it.
If you don't wear an ID card, that is breaking the rules. You might not want to wear it, but you still have to for everyone's safety.
If you don't want to follow the speed limit, that is breaking the rules. You might not want to follow it, but you still have to for everyone's safety.
If you want to enter a country undocumented that is breaking the rules. You might not want to follow them, but you still have to for everyone's safety.
Alright; so prosecute JUST that murderer and don’t prosecute any undocumented immigrant for that murder charge.
First of all, that's not what we are doing.
Second of all, we wouldn't be able to prosecute just that murderer, because we wouldn't be able to find him, with just DNA analysis.
What happens when a sophisticated group of criminals from Mexico come over the border, and have no documentation.
And this wouldn't be a small group, I'm talking about a couple hundred of people, maybe even a thousand.
Having no documentation would cause a lot of damage to us.
Deporting people without their consent is taking away their freedom. Those willing to trade liberty for safety deserve neither and will lose both.
You have to be an American citizen to enjoy your freedoms.
Americans have freedoms.
Illegal immigrant's don't.
You prosecute merely the INDIVIDUAL who did the victim producing crime, not anybody else. Being undocumented is a victimless crime.
We can't predetermine others intentions.
So in order to stop the source.
We have to take precautions.
And those precautions involve implementing ID's.
Because it makes everyone safe.
It's basic common knowledge.
You broke the law the last time you decided to drive over the speed limit. But just like with the undocumented, you breaking a victimless law shouldn’t face prosecution (unless your okay with giving $500 to the state every time you drove above the speed limit).
You can't compare driving 10 mph over the speed limit, to crossing and international border illegally.
Your not just breaking American laws, your breaking international laws as well.
I think that our law enforcement can determine threats, and if they think the person who was driving 10 mph over the speed limit was being a threat, then they should charge them, but breaking international law is most definitely a threat, and has to be charged.
The Mexicans who moved to the US tended to settle where there would be a lot of Mexicans and that was close to Mexico, saving money on transportation. If I wanted to move to New York (I’m from CT), I’d be more likely to move somewhere close to the CT border.
Your chart showed legal immigrants, not illegal ones.
It's kind of hard to chart out how many illegal immigrants' live where, because they don't have any documentation to be charted.
So go after the cartels with FCE; just not undocumented immigrants caught in the crosshairs with ICE.
Cartels are smarter than you think, and won't just reside in Mexico. They will move if threatened by national threats.
Also The FCE wouldn't be able to take any legal action, because they are the Fondo de Cultura Economica.
It's also not just fentanyl that is the threat. It is bad people that are the threat, and again, we can't predetermine others intentions, so we have to take precautions to prevent the actions that we can't predetermine.
With cars, many people that die in accidents didn’t cause the accident. Did you watch the video? When one does whatever it takes to save even one human life at the expense of significant amount of liberty, they become authoritarian.
This is obviously ridiculous.
If someone makes the decision to drive a car, they are taking the risk that they might get into an accidents whether or not they caused it or not.
It's consensual. You are consenting to the possibility that you might crash.
Not being vaccinated against COVID causes some vaccinated people to die. But I’m not going to force people to get vaccinated to save a small number of lives since the freedom treaded upon would be too significant. The undocumented are in the same situation. If you deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants based on 1 murder done by 1 undocumented immigrant, that is group justice/social justice. Social justice is bad.
Well with vaccinations it becomes a little weird. The government told us that if we get the vaccine, then we would be safe. Then changed the narrative and said if we don't get the vaccine then others with the vaccine will die.
And it's not based on 1 murder done by 1 undocumented immigrant, it has to do with our safety and things that could happen because of us being unsafe. We already see it with the fentanyl crisis, and crime all around the border, and in border states, with most of the offenders being illegal immigrants.
There is no excuse to cross the border illegally, when there is a perfectly legal way to do it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
right back at ya. I recommend starting with Mein Kampf.then I recommend not taking results from the first page of Google when you try to prove somebody wrong without knowing what you're talking about.serious question: do you know why Hitler came to power? like the main reason? (without Googling it)
Reading Mein Kampf wouldn't be research for the history of what actually happened.
It would be research in studying Hitler as a person, I'll give you that.
Actually, not the first result from Google (I like to do my research).
Ok let's answer your serious question.
Without doing research.
Hitler came to power from influencing the people of Germany, with a future of prosperity, and used the historical significance of the hating of Jews, to make the people more eager to follow him, because he was following a popular trend.
So, while promising prosperity, and wealth for all, he murdered 6 million Jews, and even more Germans.
Never got even close to the prosperity he promised.
All I can say for that question, was he was very influential, and preached popular beliefs to the extreme.
send me as many pics of bodies that you want to. hey, notice all the shaved heads?i refer back to my flowchart, in which you have failed to find a logical fallacy.
Alright.
In your flowchart, you say that homicidal gas chambers are not materially proven to exist.
Pictures
Also
The extermination procedure in the gas chambers / Auschwitz and Shoah / History / Auschwitz-Birkenau
So that's definitely a logical fallacy.
those bodies... do you know anything about the camps... honestly...
DO YOU??
This is something we literally learned in middle school.
what are you trying to argue, by linking the bodies? please learn more about the camps. it's embarrassing
I'm not arguing anything. I am showing you evidence that everyone knows exists.
You are the one arguing against historical evidence.
I'm starting to think you are a Nazi.
why did Hitler propose peace to the UK over 12 times?
So, again, you didn't prove my point wrong, only brought other points in.
Is what I said wrong? If so, how?
Also, I will answer your questions.
It was after he murdered a lot of people, so..........yea, it was more of a "please don't hurt me I'm sorry."
why did Hitler use Blitzkrieg?
........it's a war tactic.........used in war.............
I honestly have no words.
why did Hitler attempt via peaceful means several times to reclaim the German-speaking areas of Eastern Europe taken from Germany after WW1, arguably unjustly?
Again, plea for his safety.
After he realized, he was going to die, he tried his best to save himself, or his pride, given he killed himself anyways.
so he killed his own people, you're saying? look up "G-day"
Yes, he did.
Also, G-day is a tech enthusiast meet up from country's all over the world so........
hmm. how many non-Jews? less than 6 presumably
In all of these responses you have yet to say the information is wrong, which is proving that you are just deciding to ignore the information, and facts, and instead come up with," oh well what about these people that died."
A lot of kinds of people died in WW1. How all of them died? Some I don't know. But I'm not talking about Russia, I am talking about Germany right now.
refer to chapter 6 of Mein Kampf: "War Propaganda"
No.
and? tbh he was an anti-imperialist, which you would know if you read Mein Kampf.
Actions speak louder than words.
true. and? conquest is... what?
Good point.
yeh he did this to secure the area from being used as a mounting point by the Allies. it's quite clear. the French were sitting waiting near the border in trenches for him to attack and he went around that, through the low countries and into France. what is wrong here?
France defending its country is not a reason to break a Treaty that many countries have signed and agreed to.
yes. could have surrended earlier and avoided being carpet-bombed. although the extent of bombing on Poland was nowhere near the extent levied on Germany by the Allies, and Germany did not intentionally target civilian areas at anywhere near the level the Allies did.https://www.hellstormdocumentary.com/ and "G-day" (foiled by German intelligence)
The documentary is promoting Communism.
Not going to trust anyone who promotes that.
flick through it. explain the rest of them https://archive.org/details/SIXMILLIONOPENGATESByS.A.R.Lynch271_201808/page/n15/mode/2up
Instead of asking more questions, maybe actually reply to my evidence.
Your responses are:
"Yea but look at this."
"Well, don't worry about that evidence. Look at this instead"
It's all BS.
you haven't read it. so stop acting like you know what's in it. I don't see why you think something has changed here.
I don't have to read Mein Kampf to know what kind of book it is.
Mein Kampf is like a Bible to you huh. Hitler must be Jesus.
this right here proves to me all you know about WW2 is what you learned in school. I advise reading some books about the interwar period, which they don't really tell you properly about in school, and the pre-WW1 period. or you can read Mein Kampf, where that period is summarised and is backed up by the historical record as being truthfully told by Hitler.come back to me when you know something. theorising doesn't help you learn.
Anything I said not historically accurate?
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
How is all that any different to any other fantasy tale?
Well, usually with fantasy tales, there isn't any historical evidence to back up what the fantasy tale said to be true.
You are proposing from speculation only, the behaviour and requirements of a "being" that cannot be shown to exist.
Shown in the physical sense.
Again, I bring back the gravity argument.
You can't see gravity, you can't hear gravity, and you can't touch gravity, but you can feel it's effects all around you.
Scientists don't really understand how the force of gravity really came to be in the first place either so it's something that scientists can't explain. Scientists can observe, and explain its effects, but not gravity itself.
Same with God. You can't physically hear, touch or see him, but you can see his effects all around you, with the 2 billion people committed to God, and the fact that we have a world to live in.
So, based upon the writings of J.R.R. Tolkien, is it reasonable for me to accept without actual proof that Middle Earth must exist.Albeit conveniently, outside of time, space and matter.
Is there any historical, literary, or concrete evidence or signs that Middle Earth exists?
The Lord of the Rings, and The Hobbit are both actually allegories of God, and sin, and the struggle between man, and sin.
So, it does have some allegorical significance, but the author J.R.R. Tolkien told us it was an allegory, therefore if the author claims it to be nothing more than a fake story, then it is.
The difference between that and the Bible, is that the Bible claims to be more than just a story, but reality.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
God is a being, not a person.We cannot physically hear, see, feel, or touch him.God is a being that exists outside of Time, Space, and Matter.Well that isn't quite true is it? Lets break it down.We cannot physically hear him.Genesis 32. Numbers 12:8We cannot physically see, himGenesis 32. Numbers 12:8Genesis 32We cannot physically feel, or touch him.Genesis 32. Numbers 12:8
I'm sorry, I should have been more clear.
We can't see him, hear him, or physically see him, but that doesn't mean you can't have an encounter with God.
The point I am trying to make, is that God is not a physical object that can be defined with our senses that were designed to sense physical things. We can still have encounters with God, but not the same as physical things.
I still stand by my point.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
A. Tell me what/who exactly is GOD.
God is a being, not a person.
We cannot physically hear, see, feel, or touch him.
God is a being that exists outside of Time, Space, and Matter.
He defies the laws of what we know to be true, because he created all that we know to be true.
To explain even better, God is the almighty creator of the Universe. God is Love. God is Kindness. God is Gracefulness.
God is everything good.
God is without sin, or any imperfection.
When we've explicitly sorted out this conundrum, we can perhaps move on to the necessity of a relationship.That's assuming that GOD (as yet unidentified) does indeed want a relationship with one and all.Though, given that GOD has decided to remain unidentifiable for as long as it has been unidentifiable, it's therefore quite likely that GOD isn't actually going to be seeking a relationship with a human being anytime soon.
So basically (correct me if I am wrong) you are saying that since, God has not explicitly shown himself to us as we want to see him, then he doesn't want a relationship with him.
But this is not true.
I'll explain it like this:
God loves us, but love cannot be forced. If love is forced, then it is not love, because the person being forced is not really loving the other person.
So, in order for love to be real, both sides have to choose to love. But when choosing, you have to have an opposing side as well, because you can't choose something if it is the only option. So, sin enters the world and gives us humans the choice between God and sin.
Now as for God not showing himself, this would also be a forced love as well. If God were to explicitly show himself to us as we want to see him, then when he does show himself, we will realize that the only way to get out of eternal death and damnation, would be to "love" God, so instead of putting their faith in God, and trusting him, (which is an aspect of love) instead they "love" him for their own convenience. Thats not love that using God to get a "get into heaven free ticket.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Elliott
Co2 isn’t like the CFC’s and has no direct impact on the ozone layer. Co2 is a greenhouse gas which prevents heat from escaping. This link explains it better:A couple of decades isn’t a very long time and we are already seeing the effects of global warming on the climate.
Another reason why I know this global warming crisis isn't really a crisis, is because take a look at our banks.
The "professionals" claim that in a couple of decades, Icecaps will melt and that will raise ocean levels, to about 5 ft higher or such.
If that really was a threat, you wouldn't be able to get a loan, because the banks would basically be throwing away money if they did.
The banks know this is BS, because otherwise they would be giving out loans.
I have come across the argument that it’s all part of a natural cycle by way of explanation many times, but natural cycles have a cause and unless you identify that cause it explains nothing. So what is causing the earth to naturally heat up, and as we are entering a period known as a “solar minimum”things should be cooling but they aren’t. Also, although we have had past periods of global warming, not regional ones, they occur over long periods of time, thousands of years but what is taking place now with global warming is happening very quickly.As our use of fossil flues to provide energy has been identified as the main cause for the rise in Co2 and global warming, then reducing and eventually eliminating their use should most definitely help alleviate that problem.
Again, the banks and companies would be acting very differently if this was the case.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
you're trying to make my understanding of Hitler invalid based on what you have learned in history about Hitler. And I've just shown you how that history is massively flawed. you can convince me that it possibly isn't, if you can find a logical fallacy in my flowchart.
Actions speak louder than words.
You're going to have to prove to me history is wrong using actual imperial evidence, and not what Hitler claimed to of happened.
If history is massively flawed, explain to me how it is flawed, and what sources we can use to tell what happened in history.
Why is WW1 history flawed? Do you have any evidence of it being flawed?
because people talk shit about him and I don't like it. simple
You don't like people saying that Hitler was a bad person.
Are you going to defend every single person in history that was called a bad person?
If not, then why specifically Hitler?
also, it's barely an autobiography, it's more like political theory mixed with anecdotes and historical issues that have resulted in problems in modern (then) Germany and Austria
No, it's definitely an autobiography, by definition. The rest of the things you just mentioned is something called context.
he did make Germany prosperous.
........you just love the idea of mass genocide, don't you?
all his actions, such as?what did he do.be specific.sound like a parrot after coming out of history classhe wasn't a horrible man. how was he?you could read what Ghandi said about him.
Alright:
Hitler was responsible for the start of WW2 where 55 million people were killed.
Over 20 million of those were Germans.
He is also responsible of the execution of 6 million Jews (Holocaust) where the population of Jews in Europe went from 9 million to 3.
Hitler used Propaganda techniques to achieve his selfish goal in building a German Empire in Europe.
He was a fascist, a strong nationalist... And also an imperialist.
He took over the Sudetenland which is a chunk of land in the Czech Republic where 3.5 million Germans lived, afterwards he took the entire Republic.
He took land back from France, Belgium, and Poland, which he was not allowed to do according to the Treaty of Versailles and its 14 points.
On September 1st WW2 began when Germany carpet bombed Poland off the map - they surrendered within a month.
So yea not a particularly nice dude.
i've already explained the genocide and racism - psycopath, though? really? why do you claim that? and the chosen/destined thing, so what? the greater purpose of saving Germany, which he failed to do?
Psychopath: a person affected by chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior.
Hitler was mentally ill, and literally committed suicide.
He was also violent (55 million people killed).
Also, if you're going to argue that the greater purpose/outcome of Hitlers plan, was worth the genocide, then you should probably talk to a therapist.
1940, June, before the killings allegedly commenced, yes. By the Jewish World Congress. 6,000,000. there's the notion for ya
"The Allied Powers were aware of the scale of the Jewish Holocaust two-and-a-half years earlier than is generally assumed, and had even prepared war crimes indictments against Adolf Hitler and his top Nazi commanders.
Newly accessed material from the United Nations – not seen for around 70 years – shows that as early as December 1942, the US, UK and Soviet governments were aware that at least two million Jews had been murdered and a further five million were at risk of being killed, and were preparing charges. Despite this, the Allied Powers did very little to try and rescue or provide sanctuary to those in mortal danger.
Indeed, in March 1943, Viscount Cranborne, a minister in the war cabinet of Winston Churchill, said the Jews should not be considered a special case and that the British Empire was already too full of refugees to offer a safe haven to any more."
Maybe do your research before making your claims.
want to see eyewitness accounts from prisoners who lived in the camps for years and didn't see anything of the sort? why is counter-narrative evidence censored online?
You want to see eyewitness account from prisoners who survived the camps and saw the genocide and was tortured?
We have the pictures dude.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Elliott
Wind energy isn’t the total solution; one thing we are not short of in the UK is wind. I have no objection to nuclear even Greta Thunberg has no objection to that and if we ever develop fusion reactors, that will alleviate the energy problem, but we do need an alternative to fossil fuels.
I halfway agree. The amount of CO2 that we emit to the atmosphere doesn't really make an impact on our planet's ozone layer.
It does make an impact but won't have any dire consequences until about maybe a couple decades.
I also have no objection to nuclear either. I think nuclear energy should be pushed more, because of its potential.
That the climate has always changed is a fact but there is always a cause and the consensus of well over 90% of climate scientists accept that the main cause is human activity and the burning of fossil fuels.
I would disagree with that. I think it's just bad timing with our fossil fuels and the earth naturally heating up.
But even if that were to be true, if we were to stop all carbon emissions right now, it wouldn't help with the problem at all. It wouldn't make a difference, so having natural resources, that still require carbon emissions, wouldn't help either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
You are not even arguing against me anymore.
You are telling me to prove you wrong, when I told you that the history you provided literally isn't wrong, but the way Hitler portrays himself is.
You didn't answer my question also.
My question was would you support Hitler?
You still dodge this question.
Created:
Trump didn’t pass a bill. He revoked some safety rules passed in a bill signed by President Obama.
Ok, but it never passed.
The main one was requiring upgraded braking systems on trains carry a certain amount of hazardous material.
Not the same trains he tried to revoke safety rules on.
He also reduced the number of required crew on trains.
Again, didn't pass.
The main takeaway is Trump is lowering safety standards and Democrats are focused on increasing safety standards of trains.
No Democrats are focused on increasing the safety for Ukraine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
) i never claimed a right, I pointed out that people were talking about Hitler with falsities and they spread such falsities without reading the most fundamental written word on his struggle.
Ok well are those falsities wrong.
Yes, or no?
Do you agree with what Hitler did through his life?
p.s. do you know the context of any of those quotes? NO. because you (still) haven't bothered to read it and instead act as if you know about it. I already gave you a PDF link that you can go and read the context of such quotes in.
I know the context.
I'd readily forgive your not having read it if:a) you didn't act like you know what's in itb) you act like you know more than I do about Hitler (and I don't even know that much)
You don't even know that much about Hitler, so why are you defending him?
I haven't read Mein Kampf, but I know a summary of what the book is about based on certain parts of the book I have read, and the fact that it is an autobiography.
I don't need to read the Quran or the Bible, to know what it is about. Same with Mein Kampf.
you rely on the annals of history as a guide to what happened.
Yes, I rely on historical evidence when arguing about history.
Like every other logical person.
well, find something wrong in my logic here and come tell me why history is correct. remember, that's the historical record
There is nothing historically wrong about Mein Kampf, but the way Hitler portrays himself in Mein Kampf, is wrong.
He portrays himself as this chosen hero of Germany, that will make the world. prosperous.
That sounds pretty good. But then you find out his actions, and the things he did to try to get to that point, and you realize he was a horrible man for doing that.
go back to my initial comment. and the errors I pointed out in things people were saying about Hitler.
Hitler killed millions of Jews and was racist. He was also a psychopath, and thought he was chosen/destined for a greater purpose.
That is all anyone in the forum has said about him.
Is that wrong?
i mean I can't really help you if you fail to accept the possibility that he has been lied about by those who defeated him.
The notion that he had killed millions of Jews happened before his defeat.
We have photographic, eyewitness, testimonial, and audible evidence of his wrongdoings, by thousands of people, not just by those who have defeated him.
It's harder to believe the conspiracy that thousands lied about what he did, rather than believe he did those things, based on all the evidence we have of him doing it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Elliott
I accept that renewable energy isn’t totally environmentally friendly but it is preferable to the alternative. Here in the UK wind power contributed 26.1% of the UK’s total electricity generation in 2021, so things are moving in the right direction.
Wind energy isn't a reliable source of energy, and the parts it takes to make them are not environmentally friendly.
Wind energy just itself causes bird migration problems, only works when it's a windy day, and the materials used to make the wind turbines cause a lot of detrimental pollution to our sky's.
From your initial comment “But the accurate facts show that the world isn't actually in jeopardy,” I thought your position was of global warming denial but from these links you posted it seems that is not the case. And as main theme of this topic seems to be the endorsement of Mein Kampf, I will move on.
Yes.
Global Warming does indeed exist no doubt, but it has always existed no matter what we did to it. Us as humans have really only contributed like not even 1% to Global Warming. It's all natures doing.
I say we should let nature take its course, and do things to be healthier, but we shouldn't try to push an agenda or force people to change how they live, because of a lie that the world is ending soon.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
You can't read a book that almost no one else here has read, and claim your right and no one else is, because you read an opinionated book.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
you don't get it at all. you are dumb (in this topic) because you think you can lecture me on Hitler when you haven't even read Mein Kampf.that's my point and you're just proving it by responding to everything I say without going and looking at Mein Kampf first.you are a teenager or early 20s who thinks they learned everything they need to know about one of the most important figures of the 20th Century - and all from 'middle school' ...Well done. Go read Mein Kampf if you want to continue your arguments. Waste of time otherwise
This is the stupidest argument that I have ever heard.
Saying:
You can't argue this topic because you haven't read Mein Kampf..
Is like saying:
You can't argue about any historical figure who has a book.
It's stupid, and just a way to get out of a hard question.
So, if you want to continue to use this as a weak defense then fine.
But you are still avoiding questions and refusing to get into an actual intellectual argument.
Here's what you can do, if you were smart:
Take whatever Hitler said in Mein Kampf and see if it lines up with historical records.
If it doesn't, then it's probably BS.
If it does, then you should look deeper into it.
Litteral quotes from Mein Kampf (translated):
"A state which in this age of racial poisoning dedicates itself to the care of its best racial elements must some day become lord of the earth.
May the adherents of our movement never forget this if ever the magnitude of the sacrifices should beguile them to an anxious comparison with the possible results."
"What reduces one race to starvation stimulates another to harder work."
"All the great civilizations of the past became decadent because the originally creative race died out, as a result of contamination of the blood."
These quotes are showing Hitlers true colors through Mein Kampf.
He might have had good intentions, but he did very very bad things to get there. Some of those things unforgivable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
Unpopular opinion:
The age for any type of adult activity should be raised to 25.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sidewalker
In the Hans Christian Andersen fairy tale, he describes the mermaid as having a “white skin.”
Andersen was a Dane, he lived in a place where anyone who wasn’t pasty-white (or the sun-damaged variation of pasty-white) was a rarity.
He was also writing explicitly for an audience that equated paleness with female beauty. Upper-class women in Andersen’s culture avoided suntanning; if your skin wasn’t pasty white, you were obviously someone who labored in the outdoors and weren’t a member of the “gentry”.
Andersen was a Dane, he lived in a place where anyone who wasn’t pasty-white (or the sun-damaged variation of pasty-white) was a rarity.
He was also writing explicitly for an audience that equated paleness with female beauty. Upper-class women in Andersen’s culture avoided suntanning; if your skin wasn’t pasty white, you were obviously someone who labored in the outdoors and weren’t a member of the “gentry”.
Created:
-->
@Elliott
When I said “I will concede that you may be right” that was actually a position of agreement
I know, I was just trying to finish up my point.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I'm just curious as to how does this argument go. Every single year, over 30,000 Americans die from car accidents. Are we going to ban cars and make people take public transit? No; the economic opportunity of saving all that money on building trans is a tradeoff to 30,000 lives per year; otherwise cars would be banned.
With cars, it's an individual's decision to drive a car, or live next to a city, so it's different than making a law where the border is not an individual choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
really? not even to learn about the "roots of hate" as ADL likes to call it
Yes.
Have you done your homework on how history played out.
Or did you just read Mein Kampf, and deny legitimate history?
Would LOVE to see that level of evidence for what is alleged of Hitler. Also what Hitler lie are you referring to, please?
.........literally take 10th grade world history class.
It's really not that hard.
I'd love to know too.
Well, if you're just going to deny it, then that's on you buddy.
Why try and defend Hitler? Out of all the horrible people you could have chosen, why Hitler?
Is it because you like Hitler? Or maybe you just like Kanye.
Are you really asking that? You kind of answered it by asking it.
Yes..............THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT LMAO!!!!
They were loyal to Hitler, and were controlling enslavement camps, from commands from the person they were loyal to--Hitler.
Go research it if you'r interested
You really don't want to argue about researching things. You can't even research basic middle school history.
let me put it this way: you've seen one side; I've seen two; and you can't be bothered to look at the second one. Not my fault.
I wouldn't care if Hitler wrote the most poetic and convincing book ever.
Still doesn't account for what legitimate history said he did.
You have seen both sides huh?
So, you are legitimately denying actual history, and believing a book Hitler wrote, and calling us dumb for not looking at the facts?
Wow..................
If you want me to answer the first two questions there you assume that I have the same understanding of what happened as you do, and I can tell that's not true. Bit of a broad question as well. Hitler did a lot of things, e.g. he created Volkswagen so people (Volk) could have affordable cars (Wagen).
God, you can't even answer simple questions.
With the knowledge that you have of Hitler right now, would you support him back then?
YES or NO.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
What kind of relationship?Where does it say in the Bible, that being a Christian is about having a relationship with God?
A relationship unlike any other.
More like a father to son type relationship.
Think of it like a marriage.
When you sin, you cheat. Cheating hurts your significant other. Sin hurts God.
The only difference is that all you have to do is ask God for forgiveness when you sin and he forgives you, because he loves you too much to not.
Are you speaking personal relationship or something else?
Yes, very personal.
Where does it say in the Bible, that being a Christian is about having a relationship with God? \
Hebrews 5:12-14:
"For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe."
1 Corinthians 3:1-2:
"And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able."
Created:
-->
@Stephen
That will be Pastors, Priests and any other holy roller that can speak with a loud commanding voice and loves to inform his congregation that he has spoken with god and received gods wisdom first hand.
In some situations, yes.
This is why when going to church you must not believe everything you hear blindly. You must line it up with what the Bible has to say first.
You forgot to add ; And hand over their last mite. The widows Mite. Luke 21:1-4
Yes, offerings too.
You certainly are behind in your bible studies, aren't you? "The goal" is, everlasting life. John 3:16
John 3:16:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
To want everlasting life isn't bad or a sin.
To want only that is.
Stop it! It is all about self preservation and securing your place in the here after in the presence of "the lord". Mathew 18:3. John 14:2.
No, it's to try to show others that works don't get you into heaven, only through faith, and the love of God can you do that.
Jesus! The relationship that you want with god is on a very poor foundation."They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might" Matthew25: 46. " 2Thessalonians 1; 9
Yes, and where does that punishment come from?
Themselves. Not God. They chose to separate themselves from God.
Look at the last part of that scripture.
"...away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
Oh, and to add on to what I said, the Title of Mein Kampf (My Struggle) proves my point even further.
When trying to gain power, you try to make people feel bad for you. Victimhood.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
and everything his enemies said about him, during his life and for almost 80 years since his death, is true, is it?p.s.: you can't tell me Mein Kampf is an invalid source of information on its author if you haven't read it. simple. you don't know what's in it. so you can't even know it shows Hitler in a good light, which you are trying to use as a reason to discard it.weak.(you could just read it, then maybe you'd know what you're talking about)
Not going to read a book by a guy who mass murdered millions.
Why would someone write a book, and purposefully admit they were wrong, and they purposefully killed millions?
No this is not a valid source of information when it comes to identifying what Hitler did in his life.
Would you believe a murderer, who lies and deceives in his alibi, only 2 minutes later to be shown guilty with DNA tests, camera footage, and eyewitness testimony?
No, you wouldn't. Because the actual evidence stacks up against that person.
Who ordered the killing of all of those Jews, if not Hitler?
Why were Nazi soldiers running the camps, and loyal to Hitler?
Why did Hitler kill himself, if he was truly innocent?
I can tell you that Mein Kampf is an invalid source of information, because (in court terms) the defendant wrote it. It is opinionated. It doesn't line up with actual historical evidence.
So, one is right, and the other is wrong.
Which do you believe, and why?
today? as in, is the world the same as it was a century ago? how can I answer that. really. it's like playing a game of would-you-rather
You are still dodging the question.
Do you support what Hitler did? Do you agree with it? Would you vote for him again under the same circumstances?
Simple questions really.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
At the school I was at, there was a rule that said you had to wear an ID, but nobody ever did. And nobody ever shot up my high school.
Ok.......
People don't obey rules.
People don't obey laws either.
That doesn't mean we should just take away precautions for people's safety.
The argument I made was that if an undocumented immigrant committed murder, it would be easy for the state to prosecute them. Murderers deserve death; deportation is too easy for them.
I also refuted this argument too, but you didn't feel it was important enough to add to your quoting of me.
Let me help you out:
Plus the murderer was caught afterward because of drug related charges, not from DNA analysis, and searching for him.
They found him because of drugs, and linked him to the murder with DNA. They did not find him simply with just DNA.
"Those willing to trade liberty for safety deserve neither and will lose both."(Founding fathers).
This is referring too losing freedom for safety. Taking precautions that don't affect the American people is not taking away anyone's freedom.
Define, "rise in crime". The only things that should be crimes in a country that values liberty are crimes that harm another person. If one undocumented immigrant commits a crime that harms somebody, they ALONE should be prosecuted for it, not every other undocumented immigrant.
But when you have a rise in crime and its coming from a source, you have to do your best to take out that source.
Your arguing as if there are only 10 immigrants actually committing crimes.
It's common knowledge that most people who cross the border illegally aren't going to follow our law.
Because they already purposefully decided to break it by crossing the border illegally.
The broke our laws even before entering into our country.
What do you think they will do when the get in.
R.0085fcb08899eff0a47eb730373b6013 (1190×774) (bing.com) states the opposite.
That is Mexican origin population, not immigrant settlement population.
So go after Fentanyl and the INDIVIDUALS that bring it in; not every undocumented immigrant that had nothing to do with fentanyl
Listen:
We don't have jurisdiction in Mexico, to go after the cartels.
So we have to instead defend our borders from those cartels.
We can't go after them because we can't.
So we have to cut them off before they get here.
And enacting border laws is how we do that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TWS1405_2
I think that when comes to racial roles in Disney, it all depends on the context.
If you take an old character and race swap them, I don't think it's a big deal, as long as it doesn't kill the character, or
the character in question doesn't have any historical/racial ties.
Take the little mermaid for instance.
They changed Arial to be black. I would be ok with this but the historical significance, is very concerning.
The original story of the little mermaid took place in the renaissance europe, where racial division was very high.
It wouldn't make sense to the story at all if Arial was black. Plus the original story emphasizes the red hair. Black people biologically don't have black hair.
So in this case, I am not fine with it, but I guess it depends on the context of the characters.
My solution is, instead of switching the races of characters, how about just make new ones.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
why not ask me a more specific question if you want an answer that will satisfy your curiosity.
I will ask you a clear cut question.
You live in Germany right now. Hitler is running for the same position as back in WW1, with the same political standpoint, and beliefs.
Would you support him?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
it's not about him.but you'd know that if you'd read itclue's in the title
Quick google search buddy;
Who wrote Mein Kampf?
Answer: Adolf Hitler
You can't use a book written by the same dude you are trying to defend.
That is superbly biased.
There is something called an outside source.
Guys, I think we found our Kanye for the website.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
I thought this was about not reading certain books of the Bible, not other books entirely.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
Mein Kampf was written 1923-1924 and published 1925-1926 so I doubt that by reading it one is 'denying history' (sounds familiar) of events that came subsequently. But you'd know that if you'd read it
Dude.........
A book written by Adolf Hitler is of course going to be saying good things about......Adolf Hitler.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I’d be fine with that, but I don’t think it’s the same. To provide security, all people have to do is walk through a metal detector. No fees equaling thousands of dollars have to be paid every time someone enters the school. An easy solution to mass shootings (that unfortunately my HS hasn’t implemented when I went there). If security costs thousands of dollars every time someone entered the school, that would be bad security. If the security involved just a metal detector, I would support that.
Ok, if you go to a school, you have to have identification right? Like the school has to know who you are, and what classes you are taking. Same with going to colleges.
A random kid from a different school can walk through a metal detector, but that doesn't make it right for them to still be their.
Schools are implementing ID tags because of the Uvalde shooting in Texas. I'm in school right now. I have to wear an ID as well.
Identification is for the safety of others and yourself.
So if the ONLY requirement to come into the US was you couldn’t bring in fetanyl, would you be cool with that? If that was the only requirement to not get deported, the vast majority of the undocumented would show they don’t have fetanyl and be granted citizenship or a green card.
Fentanyl is not the only reason I believe in restricting borders and IDs.
Just like being a part of a school, you have to be identified for safety reasons, and educational reasons.
Fentanyl is just proof of what I am saying to be true.
https://www.flgov.com/2022/03/30/man-who-brutally-murdered-daytona-beach-couple-during-bike-week-was-an-illegal-immigrant-with-multiple-prior-drug-charges/. If the undocumented murder, they can get caught by our wonderful police and the undocumented should have their head cut off for it; deportation is too easy for them (and too dangerous; they might murder people of their home country).
First sentence in this link:
"The Biden Administration’s dangerous immigration policies, as well as the soft on crime policies of the 9th Circuit State Attorney’s Office (Orange and Osceola counties), have once again resulted in the needless deaths of innocent Floridians."
This article is literally smashing down against open borders.
This article is going against your argument.
Plus the murderer was caught afterward because of drug related charges, not from DNA analysis, and searching for him.
They found him because of drugs, and linked him to the murder with DNA. They did not find him simply with just DNA.
I would argue my immigration policy is America first because we are able to pay off the debt with a policy that allows anyone who doesn’t bring in fetanyl in the country. I can send you my notes to prove it.
I am talking about American safety first.
The economy would get worse actually because of the rise in crime, that we have seen from the border crisis.
Law enforcement would be spending more and risking more lives just because of the border.
I don’t think this is true. Mexican immigrants tend to live close to Mexico (just like how Cuban migrants tend to live close to Cuba).
Let me rephrase. Immigrants who want to get away from the Mexican government tend to move further away.
In your view, this is the same thing. There is a fetanyl crisis, but I perfer the term, “border economic opportunity”, because of the potential of freedom of movement getting the US out of debt. Here’s the plan:
It doesn't matter what term you prefer.
American people/citizens, are dying because of Fentanyl coming over the border.
Economic opportunity should not be at the cost of even one American death.
Created:
Posted in:
Hitler didn't promise these things. He promised death for Jews and the Nazis voted for him. Don't compare left wingers or right wingers to the Nazis.Being Jewish is freedom.
Look to post:
#9
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fivesix
Why would I need to do thatI can speak for myselfWould be nice to know if people have read Mein Kampf, though. When I read it I read it to "learn my enemy" but didn't find much of an enemy there, more like a man who has been lied about for decades after his death, for some reason
Well you can deny history all you want, but history is history.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Elliott
When you say “accurate facts show that the world isn't actually in jeopardy” what are these facts?
"Renewable energy is not clean at all. Although while in use, renewable doesn’t emit anything, they do emit during development. Ed Ireland, PhD at Texas Christian University, said,“The reality is that wind and solar are dependent on fossil fuels. They cannot exist without oil and natural gas."
Renewable Energy that they are promising are actually more dirty than fossil fuels.
The Apocalyptic Claims about how we are all going to die unless we switch to clean energy is also a lie.
Climate change has always been happening, its just a way to control how people live their lives, to gain more control over the people.
Created:
-->
@Barney
Moderators you can close this forum.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
In fact, I think Christians should not read other books too much, since that would diminish the Bible's effect.
How would it diminish the Bible's effect?
Just curious.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Elliott
Of course that’s what he said, because promising to exterminate millions of innocent people, men women and children, isn’t a vote winner.I don’t think there is any evidence that the WEF (World Economic Forum) has similar plans for mass extermination.
What they are saying is basically, if you give me all this control, then I will help save the world.
But the accurate facts show that the world isn't actually in jeopardy. They know this so they are using this as a visor to get control.
So they know they aren't going to save the world from anything, so what do you think that they are going to do with that power.
Created:
-->
@Elliott
Within a totalitarian society all members would usually be oppressed including those within the Capital but they seem free to live their lives as they please.
Well, no...........
The people in the capital can't say certain things or else they will disappear.
The people in the capital have everything about their lives controlled by the government.
The whole point of the capital was too make it look like everyone is free, but in reality, the government is controlling what you eat, where you live, what you watch (the media), and no true source of accurate information.
Same with the other districts, but the difference between them, is the poverty.
The fact that Snow is called “President” suggests someone who is elected, but as I don’t think there is any mention of elections in the books and it is unknown if he was elected to the position democratically, so I will concede that you may be right.
There actually isn't any mention of any election.
And he has been president since the 20th hunger games since he was 23, so its safe to call it a dictatorship.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Hmmmm... don't see it. It was a bigger divide before. US was built on invasion and pillaging from before its day 1.
Black people blaming White people for their ancestors faults.
Same concept.
Created:
-->
@Elliott
When I said capitalist I meant a capitalist oligarchy, which is something I think we may be moving towards. And that is a system that would seek to stifle equal opportunity as those in power would have no wish to share that power for fear of weakening it.
Well capitalist oligarchy is very different from the capitalist society that we have here in America.
Even if it was similar, it doesn't reflect the Hunger Games, because like I said, the government system in the Hunger Games is a totalitarian dictatorship.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
"Appealing to the more conservative sectors of the German public,environmental ideology helped the Nazis as they utilized the notion of the Volk, the mythologicalideas about the German people and their land.1 Once in power, however, the policies of theNazis did not reflect much concern for the natural environment. Naturally when the war started,that became the main focus of the party. Therefore, the most important years to focus on are themid or late 1920s to the start of World War II in 1939. Among a number of other ideals,environmental ideology aided the rise of the Nazi Party by appealing in particular toconservatives, but also to the general ideology of German society. In reality, the actions of theleadership once in power generally contradicted this, making any environmental legislation orideology more propaganda than policy."
"Hitler offered something to everyone: work to the unemployed; prosperity to failed business people; profits to industry; expansion to the Army; social harmony and an end of class distinctions to idealistic young students; and restoration of German glory to those in despair. He promised to bring order amid chaos; a feeling of unity to all and the chance to belong. He would make Germany strong again; end payment of war reparations to the Allies; tear up the treaty of Versailles; stamp out corruption; keep down Marxism; and deal harshly with the Jews."
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
And how does worker become the Elite in this world and why should they wish to?
The workers/slaves to this system, don't want to become the elite. They want to leave the oppression, based on something that they didn't even do, but their ancestors did.
The U.S. is becoming more like the Hunger Games is what I am saying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
He did not at all run on that platform. He did however pretend to care for for working class in order to appear to be a form of Socialist and steal away the left wing into a hyper rebellious right wing faction that Trump and others have mimicked to date.
He did.
Look up the 3rd Reich.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Also, my reply to Stephen:
You certainly are behind in your bible studies, aren't you? "The goal" is, everlasting life. John 3:16
No, the goal is a relationship with God.
John 3:16: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his own begotten son, that whoever shall believe in him, shall not perish, but have eternal life."
Stop it! It is all about self preservation and securing your place in the here after in the presence of "the lord". Mathew 18:3. John 14:2.
Nope. People think wrongly of heaven and hell.
Heaven is a paradise, but the way you describe it is in God's presence eternally.
The gift of heaven won't be worldly things, but eternal peace and love. All of the things we do in heaven won't be like what we do on earth at all.
It will be infinite praise and worship. Infinite love and peace.
Hell is not a punishment for sinners, rather it's a place for the ones who rejected God on their own accords, and hell is separation from God.
So, all of Gods wonders, will be gone. Everything that he has ever created good, will be gone.
"They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might" Matthew25: 46. " 2Thessalonians 1; 9
Yes.
"They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might" Matthew25: 46. " 2Thessalonians 1; 9
Separation from the presence of the Lord = eternal destruction, because that is separate from Gods creation.
And I believe that I am correct in pointing out to you that you have posted your thread in the wrong sub forum. It should have been posted here>>>
Thank you for letting me know.
I was doing a bunch of political forums and must have just forgotten.
Created:
Some Christians are blinded by new teachings in the modern church, that strive to exploit God for financial gain.
Some think:
If I believe in God, go to church, and ask him to forgive me every time I do something bad, then I will go to heaven.
This is false.
The goal for Christians isn't to go to heaven. It is to grow a relationship with God.
The end goal is not safety for self, but relationship with the creator.
Hell is separation from the creator, not a punishment.
You chose.
Sorry I put this in the wrong forum title. My apologies.
Created:
-->
@Elliott
The world is controlled by a wealthy elite who live an unrestricted hedonistic lifestyle and are supported by an oppressed workforce.
No, it's quite the opposite in fact.
The workforce that you see has no opportunity to raise up in society whatsoever.
The actual government used in the films is a totalitarian dictatorship.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
But did he even attempt to fulfill his promises?
Created: