Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Regarding the so-called myth of the six million


Recommended Posts

Vicomte de Valvert: Monsieur, your nose... your nose is rather large.

Cyrano de Bergerac: Rather?

Vicomte de Valvert: Oh, well...

Cyrano de Bergerac: Is that all?

Vicomte de Valvert: Well of course...

Cyrano de Bergerac: Oh, no, young sir. You are too simple. Why, you might have said a great many things. Why waste your opportunity? For example, thus: AGGRESSIVE: I, sir, if that nose were mine, I'd have it amputated on the spot. PRACTICAL: How do you drink with such a nose? You must have had a cup made especially. DESCRIPTIVE: 'Tis a rock, a crag, a cape! A cape? Say rather, a peninsula! INQUISITIVE: What is that receptacle? A razor case or a portfolio? KINDLY: Ah, do you love the little birds so much that when they come to see you, you give them this to perch on. CAUTIOUS: Take care! A weight like that might make you top-heavy. ELOQUENT: When it blows, the typhoon howls, and the clouds darken! DRAMATIC: When it bleeds, the Red Sea. SIMPLE: When do they unveil the monument? MILITARY: Beware, a secret weapon. ENTERPRISING: What a sign for some perfumer! RESPECTFUL: Sir, I recognize in you a man of parts. A man of... prominence! Or, LITERARY: Was this the nose that launched a thousand ships? These, my dear sir, are things you might have said, had you some tinge of letters or of wit to color your discourse. But wit? Not so, you never had an atom. And of letters, you need but three to write you down: A, S, S. foot!

Vicomte de Valvert: Insolent puppy, dolt, bumpkin, fool!

Cyrano de Bergerac: How do you do? And I, Cyrano Savinien Hercule de Bergerac.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

There is a small number of survivors still alive, and some have written books.  Others have died in the last decade or two. There's talk of 6 million people of Jewish extraction.  There are also

Blaming devil spirits for everything was like the Easy Button in Way World. Got cancer?...devil spirits. Depression?... devil spirits. Substance abuse?...devil spirits.  . And if you don't understand

*sigh* NEVER jump IMMEDIATELY to the conclusion that something is supernatural.  Examine the more common, more mundane reasons FIRST.  If they don't work, then you can consider that among the pos

Play nice, people.  Everyone.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have deleted *some* off topic posts by both Allan and Raf, and a couple of others where the deleted posts were quoted. Obviously there are some I didn’t bother with for now at least.

This stuff needs to stop and posts need to stay on topic, which is the story referenced in Rocky’s original post on the thread.

Further posting which is off-topic, political or personal attacks in nature may result in the offender’s future posts needing moderator review in order to appear on GSC.
Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just started reading this.  I'm struck by (chapter 1) how Moishe the Beadle escaped being murdered and got back to the village to tell all exactly what was happening.  Nobody believed him.  Nobody thought such horrific treatment could be true.

I'm struck by the fact that there were many who warned us that TWI wasn't a safe place to be.  "It's a cult.  It's not good Bible teaching."  Did we listen?  No, we continued, thinking all was well and would be well.  We ploughed on into our own wonderland that became increasingly horrific year after year.  And now, we who have escaped on our own or in droves - are not believed, not listened to, are mocked, by those who choose to remain.

Bold speakers like Moishe the Beadle, and some of the people here - and of course many of the OT prophets - have ever been ignored and told that the bad thing foretold isn't going to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent points Twinky. There is a fallacy in the saying that hindsight is 20/20. I believe that history is recorded or remembered through the "corrective" lens of those viewing the event. The accuracy of the account depends upon the viewpoint of the observer and the veracity of the event depends upon the viewpoint of the listener. All of which could be completely true or completely false, but more likely will fall somewhere along the continuum of facts. The rewriting of history is a favorite passion of historians.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always thought of the expression, "Hindsight is 20/20." as being a way to express regret for a decision to do something or not do something. For example, "When I interviewed for the job, there were subtle warning signs I chose to ignore. Now, after a year, I have a clearer picture and regret the decision. Hindsight is 20/20.". That's just the way I've always interpreted it. I could be wrong, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, waysider said:

I have always thought of the expression, "Hindsight is 20/20." as being a way to express regret for a decision to do something or not do something. For example, "When I interviewed for the job, there were subtle warning signs I chose to ignore. Now, after a year, I have a clearer picture and regret the decision. Hindsight is 20/20.". That's just the way I've always interpreted it. I could be wrong, though.

That's a reasonable interpretation, but it IS a subjective/idiomatic expression so I don't see yours as necessarily contradictory to what Twinky and Flow7 said about it.

8 hours ago, Flow7 said:

Excellent points Twinky. There is a fallacy in the saying that hindsight is 20/20. I believe that history is recorded or remembered through the "corrective" lens of those viewing the event. The accuracy of the account depends upon the viewpoint of the observer and the veracity of the event depends upon the viewpoint of the listener. All of which could be completely true or completely false, but more likely will fall somewhere along the continuum of facts. The rewriting of history is a favorite passion of historians.

Yes, history is recorded through the subjective lens of those writing the record. There's also the expression, "history is written by the winners." Knowing some historians and archivists, I'll disagree with you about what their passion might be. They want to get it right, generally speaking. But they still have the filter of their education and experience.
 

17 hours ago, Twinky said:

I'm struck by (chapter 1) how Moishe the Beadle escaped being murdered and got back to the village to tell all exactly what was happening.  Nobody believed him.  Nobody thought such horrific treatment could be true.

I'm struck by the fact that there were many who warned us that TWI wasn't a safe place to be.  "It's a cult.  It's not good Bible teaching."  Did we listen?  No, we continued, thinking all was well and would be well.

That's a reasonable comparison even though the danger faced in the two scenarios was, for the most part not comparable. It strikes me that so many people have had the records of pandemic history, notably the 1918 Spanish Flu (might be labeled differently in records in other countries), and that it's clear that social distancing, wearing masks and frequent hand washing were established as effective practices to protect people during that pandemic. Yet, it's troubling that so many people in 2020 are oblivious and defiant... with far too many from their ranks ending up dead.

In March, right after it became widely understood that we faced a deadly pandemic, I was able to read a book about the 1918 Spanish Flu. 

My point is that Moishe's experience was hardly unique, as was ours with TWI. It seems to be human nature.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Flow7 said:

Excellent points Twinky. There is a fallacy in the saying that hindsight is 20/20.

I believe that history is recorded or remembered through the "corrective" lens of those viewing the event.

The accuracy of the account depends upon the viewpoint of the observer and the veracity of the event depends upon the viewpoint of the listener. All of which could be completely true or completely false, but more likely will fall somewhere along the continuum of facts.

The rewriting of history is a favorite passion of historians.

What you said seems to reflect a skepticism that does not see the importance of historians’ efforts to investigate the events, records, documents, facts, and human affairs of the past – and basically sounds like you are denying it’s possible to access the past. Did I get that right? Is that what you are saying?

Also, I think you may be conflating “20/20 hindsight” with what historians actually do. “Hindsight is 20/20 is a proverb that means it is easy to understand something after it has already happened. The expression hindsight is 20/20 is usually said in answer to an admonishment that the person should have known something would happen, or that the person made a bad decision. It is easy to see what someone should have done, after the situation is already finished.”  (from  grammarist.com    )…So basically 20/20 hindsight is a way of thinking about events or decisions that have already happened…in other words history. And implicit in the proverb of 20/20 hindsight is that there is no need for a corrective lens – the answer is obviously crystal clear.  

Could you please clarify what you mean by “rewriting of history is a favorite passion of historians.” Are you talking about historical revisionism?

I believe there is such a thing as legitimate historical revisionism which “entails the refinement of existing knowledge about a historical event, not a denial of the event, itself; that such refinement of history emerges from the examination of new, empirical evidence, and a re-examination, and consequent re-interpretation of the existing documentary evidence. That legitimate historical revisionism acknowledges the existence of a "certain body of irrefutable evidence" and the existence of a "convergence of evidence", which suggest that an event – such as the Black Death, American slavery, and the Holocaust – did occur; whereas the denialism of history rejects the entire foundation of historical evidence, which is a form of historical negationism.” (From   Wikipedia - historical revisionism    )

Edited by T-Bone
formatting and typos
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, T-Bone said:

legitimate historical revisionism which “entails the refinement of existing knowledge about a historical event, not a denial of the event, itself; that such refinement of history emerges from the examination of new, empirical evidence, and a re-examination, and consequent re-interpretation of the existing documentary evidence. That legitimate historical revisionism acknowledges the existence of a "certain body of irrefutable evidence" and the existence of a "convergence of evidence", which suggest that an event – such as the Black Death, American slavery, and the Holocaust – did occur; whereas the denialism of history rejects the entire foundation of historical evidence, which is a form of historical negationism.

YES!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My reference to the 20/20 hindsight was initially in response to the specific portion of the book that Twinky was referencing  - namely that no one in the village believed Moishe the Beadle regarding the horrors that he was warning them about. It was very much along the lines of Waysiders train of thought and is reflected in the remainder of the book by the consequences of the decisions made by the writer during those early warnings. If only he had listened and believed and left the village, all would have been different.

I think that as a colloquialism, the phrase is used primarily in a non-scholarly context, and as such is more of a linguistic idiom and does not reflect the dedication and efforts of true historians. It's always easier to ask  "what ifs" in hindsight than to predict probable outcomes. On a personal level, as Waysider mentioned, it's easier for an individual to review specific decisions and moments in time where certain events would have differt outcomes if different choices were made.  I totally agree that the definition T-Bone supplied is correctly applied to learning from our mistakes.

My last phrase about rewriting of history was made tongue in cheek and I was thinking along the lines of Monday night armchair quarterbacks critiquing the minutiae of Sunday's football games.

Given the gravity of the subject matter of the book "Night", I guess that was a bad time for attempting to inject humor. History and its preservation is a very important aspect of our lives and should always be considered within the context of the evidence as stated in T-Bone's post. No skepticism was intended nor meant to be implied.

Edited by Flow7
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Flow7 said:

Given the gravity of the subject matter of the book "Night", I guess that was a bad time for attempting to inject humor. History and its preservation is a very important aspect of our lives and should always be considered within the context of the evidence as stated in George's post. No skepticism was intended nor meant to be implies.

I appreciate the clarification. All I would say is that it is often difficult to effectively communicate humor, hence, why folks didn't pick up on it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I just finished the audio book. It is well suited to an audio narration.

 

The book is powerful and moving. It really opens one's eyes to the sheer magnitude of what happened. I kept finding myself wishing it would end a bit differently but real life has a tendency to do that.

 

Thanks for recommending it.

Edited by waysider
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the online version.  So hard to grasp that such should happen.  Such cruelty - and yet occasional great moments of compassion and kindness between father and son.  And other moments of hideous greed.

I too wished that it would be a different ending... so sad that Eliezer and his father were parted, at (as it were) one minute to midnight - just before their release.

And yet this sad story is just one of - of millions.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
On 6/29/2020 at 1:39 AM, Rocky said:

A local high school English teacher and I connected on FB a few days ago. I didn't tell her about Wierwille's obsession with a book called the Myth of the Six Million. But had I mentioned it, she would have known what I was referring to.

She recommended a book to me, Night by Elie Wiesel. It's the record of a witness. Mr. Wiesel was a child when he was taken to a concentration camp with his family.

This is not a discussion of politics then or now. My intent is simply to call attention to an original witness account of a significant era in 20th Century history.

It is available as a pdf file for no charge at the link above.

If you believe that history repeats itself, or at least rhymes, this book may interest you.

After I finish reading it, I might post a synopsis here.

Rocky, wow!!  I read that book several years ago.  What a great book, but it isn't an easy read.  EW won the Nobel Peace Prize, in 1988(?).  His books often portray his time spent in concentration camps, during WWII.  I don't think I could have ever forgiven my captors, for all the horrendous things, they did to me, let alone what they did to my family.  I think VPW, was a coward, for dodging the draft during WWII. My father served in the Army, during that war.  And then, VPW had the nerve, to teach that the Holocaust never happened!!  Boy, was I upset, when I heard his teaching on this in the AC in 1985!!  Not only, was he a coward, but he was also Anti-Semitic.  Six Million died because most of them were Jewish.  I think he denied the Holocaust, because his family was German.  He claimed he didn't fight in the war, because he didn't want to fight the Fatherland.  Bulls--t!!  He was a coward, and knew it.  The military is a hard life, but VPW wanted to take the easy, and safe way out, by staying out of the war.  When I found out that he was a Draft-Dodger, I lost what little respect, I ever had for him.  And when, he claimed the Holocaust, never happened, I stopped listening to whatever he said.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Hi Grease Spotters,

warning  :offtopic:   This might be off topic – but – please read to the end before you decide

I have been thinking about the treason, sedition and insurrection that unfolded at the U.S. Capitol January 6th 2021. There’s been a lot of follow-up to that as well as warnings by various security and intelligence agencies of more to come. I read an interesting article (posted Jan. 12th 2021 – written in light of the Jan. 6th storming of the Capitol) on CNN that talks about the hateful mindset that extremism fosters…the article  mentioned something that was surprising to me - that it is illegal in some countries to deny the holocaust – which is one of the reasons why I thought this was relevant to this thread…anyway, here are key excerpts from the article:

 “Extremism has a knack for metastasizing and coming back to wreak havoc upon its hosts. Once a cohort or society builds a hateful mindset, the hatred takes on a life of its own. Extremist ideology not only hurts a society's enemies, but also eventually attacks from within and harms the society from which it originated. I first started observing this phenomenon abroad -- and it saddens but does not surprise me that we are starting to see it haunt American democracy too…

…I recall a time in Germany, riding in a car with a German woman who was an authentic supporter of the OneVoice Movement I founded to foster Arab-Israeli understanding. She made a point of vehemently -- and sincerely -- condemning racism against Jews, but minutes later cursed out another driver and justified her tirade by casting slurs on Polish immigrants. She had superficially learned that the Holocaust was bad but had not internalized the dangers of bigotry against any group. If Polish people were not immune to her racism, to what other target would her hatred attach next?

While Germany has done a better job than many other nations to take concerted actions (like making Holocaust denial illegal) to discourage anti-Semitism, it is also experiencing a surge in neo-Nazism, particularly against Turkish immigrants. All nations are challenged to address the intolerant mindset at the root of racism; otherwise that intolerance eventually resurfaces and comes back to haunt us.”

from: CNN - There's only one way to stop violent extremists by Daniel Lubetzky

see also Wikipedia – the legality of Holocaust denial   

The Wikipedia article says there are sixteen European countries which includes Germany – that have laws against Holocaust denial – the denial of the systematic genocidal killing of approximately six million Jews in Europe by Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s.

It is interesting to note in Lubetzky’s CNN article – that he mentioned extremism metastasizing and coming back to wreak havoc upon its hosts – and further down in the same article,  Lubetsky observes Germany is experiencing a surge in neo-Nazism, especially towards Turkish immigrants.

Sorry if this seems off topic to this thread – but I thought this all is quite relevant especially with the few  "counterarguments" often presented by closet holocaust deniers.

Cancer is a group of diseases involving abnormal cell growth with the potential to invade or spread to other parts of the body. Hopefully someday there will be a cure for cancer. And figuratively speaking I don’t think there will ever be a wide-scale cure for the cancer of hatred. But I’m a believer in the “treatment of love” - -  practicing empathy and compassion and inspiring the same in others. Treating the cancer of hate one heart at a time.  :love3:

 

 

 

Edited by T-Bone
formatting and typos
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, T-Bone said:

And figuratively speaking I don’t think there will ever be a wide-scale cure for the cancer of hatred. But I’m a believer in the “treatment of love” - -  practicing empathy and compassion and inspiring the same in others. Treating the cancer of hate one heart at a time.

Last spring I read Valarie Kaur's memoir and manifesto of revolutionary love, See No Stranger. It's life changing (in a good way), especially for people emerging from fundamentalist cults.

51T2M6WyV2L.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, T-Bone said:

something that was surprising to me - that it is illegal in some countries to deny the holocaust

Wow, you didn't know that, T-Bone?  Well, I suppose with "free speech" in the USA, it's a different perspective.  Yes, it's illegal - and so it should be.  Germany, in particular, does not want neo-Nazis raising their heads and poisoning people's opinions.  Germany is ashamed of this incident in its past but acknowledges it (as it should) and isn't airbrushing it from history.

A country, indeed anyone, who doesn't remember history - hasn't got a proper foundation.  Is doomed to repeat old mistakes because it never took time to examine why that happened. 

A huge amount of European effort went into repairing Germany.  Do you know that the original EEC, forerunner of the European Union, took place between the enemies France and Germany, and some other countries?  So as to build strength for all of them, and interdependence so that one couldn't wage war on another without badly damaging itself.

 

11 hours ago, T-Bone said:

I have been thinking about the treason, sedition and insurrection that unfolded at the U.S. Capitol January 6th 2021. There’s been a lot of follow-up to that as well as warnings by various security and intelligence agencies of more to come. I read an interesting article (posted Jan. 12th 2021 – written in light of the Jan. 6th storming of the Capitol) on CNN that talks about the hateful mindset that extremism fosters…the article  mentioned something that was surprising to me - that it is illegal in some countries to deny the holocaust – which is one of the reasons why I thought this was relevant to this thread…anyway, here are key excerpts from the article:

 

You are right to think about this; it's been much on my mind too.  trump didn't get where he did on his own.  He tapped into an undercurrent of "disadvantaged" thinking, of poor-me, poor-my-country, we're being victimised.  It is exactly what Hitler did to mobilise disaffected people after the first world war - he took those who felt Germany had been blamed for that and felt poor-me about it; and mobilised them into a group that started the second world war.  And the disaffected in other countries happily supported that - at first.

The answer is not more oppression within a country.  It's finding out why the people are disaffected and why they want to have something different.  If there are legitimate concerns, they should be addressed, whether by better explanations or by dealing with underlying issues or by something else.  (There will always be those with spurious concerns, that have no basis in reality; they need to be dealt with differently.)

For a large country, the US is very insular and largely ignores lessons of history.  You have a very short (international) history yourselves, and largely ignore native American history, which of course is much longer.  Many Americans don't seem to have much of a concept of life (= life, values; not political systems) outside the US, which is rather sad.  Think bigger, think wider.  Do learn from the mistakes of others.  It's less painful than learning from your own mistakes.

Like billions of people, I'm shocked by events at the Capitol.  Do let these events be something that brings out the best of the US, not its worst.  trump has caused this boil to fester; lance it, drain that swamp.  It's going to be a difficult few months and years ahead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Rocky said:

Last spring I read Valarie Kaur's memoir and manifesto of revolutionary love, See No Stranger. It's life changing (in a good way), especially for people emerging from fundamentalist cults.

51T2M6WyV2L.jpg

Rocky,

That “One Voice” song is beautiful - nice arrangement musically and visually – thanks! I have Valerie Kaur’s book on my wish list – I’m slowly going through my reading list. Right now I’m reading “The Eye of God” by James Rollins… I’m taking a break from the real world  :biglaugh:  - the novel is a good thriller – I think Rollins has taken up the mantle of sci-fi and techno-thrillers worn by the late Michael Crichton…anyway – after I finish “The Eye of God” I’ll probably get into “Love Wins” by Rob Bell – I believe that’s another one of your recommendations – one of the books I got it for Christmas.

 

13 hours ago, Twinky said:

Wow, you didn't know that, T-Bone?  Well, I suppose with "free speech" in the USA, it's a different perspective.  Yes, it's illegal - and so it should be.  Germany, in particular, does not want neo-Nazis raising their heads and poisoning people's opinions.  Germany is ashamed of this incident in its past but acknowledges it (as it should) and isn't airbrushing it from history.

A country, indeed anyone, who doesn't remember history - hasn't got a proper foundation.  Is doomed to repeat old mistakes because it never took time to examine why that happened. 

A huge amount of European effort went into repairing Germany.  Do you know that the original EEC, forerunner of the European Union, took place between the enemies France and Germany, and some other countries?  So as to build strength for all of them, and interdependence so that one couldn't wage war on another without badly damaging itself.

 

You are right to think about this; it's been much on my mind too.  trump didn't get where he did on his own.  He tapped into an undercurrent of "disadvantaged" thinking, of poor-me, poor-my-country, we're being victimised.  It is exactly what Hitler did to mobilise disaffected people after the first world war - he took those who felt Germany had been blamed for that and felt poor-me about it; and mobilised them into a group that started the second world war.  And the disaffected in other countries happily supported that - at first.

The answer is not more oppression within a country.  It's finding out why the people are disaffected and why they want to have something different.  If there are legitimate concerns, they should be addressed, whether by better explanations or by dealing with underlying issues or by something else.  (There will always be those with spurious concerns, that have no basis in reality; they need to be dealt with differently.)

For a large country, the US is very insular and largely ignores lessons of history.  You have a very short (international) history yourselves, and largely ignore native American history, which of course is much longer.  Many Americans don't seem to have much of a concept of life (= life, values; not political systems) outside the US, which is rather sad.  Think bigger, think wider.  Do learn from the mistakes of others.  It's less painful than learning from your own mistakes.

Like billions of people, I'm shocked by events at the Capitol.  Do let these events be something that brings out the best of the US, not its worst.  trump has caused this boil to fester; lance it, drain that swamp.  It's going to be a difficult few months and years ahead.

That’s some great points, Twinky ! I like your sentence  “Germany is ashamed of this incident in its past but acknowledges it (as it should) and isn't airbrushing it from history.

About 20 years ago I started having a renewed interest in history. I bought an audio book – actually it’s more like a lecture series on CD –  Everything You’ve Been Taught is Wrong   - by James Loewen an American sociologist, historian and author – the “lecture series” invites the listener to look passed the airbrushing of the American mythology - of its beginnings and even gets into some issues of race and class.

 

I agree with your sentiment – but I’d like to fine tune – or rather mesh your ideas with my perspective. T***p has the charisma, and the platform  of power & influence as narcissist-in-chief, with the vocabulary and mentality of a fifth grade bully; I don’t believe he has the intellectual wherewithal to tap into an undercurrent of the supposed disadvantaged…perhaps T***p and his base function more like a two-way street or some weird insidious feedback loop . I watched a     PBS episode United States of Conspiracy      that was re-aired last night and it got me thinking how much they (T***p & his base) feed off of each other – and it made me recall the same dynamic between wierwille/Craig/other top leaders and the way corps when I was in residence – the empowerment that adulation grants.

 I tend to think of him as a one-man-puppet-government (in other words, he is the marionette-in-chief) and manipulating his strings are the extremists, white supremacists, neo-Nazis, conspiracy theory & fringe groups – and besides that he’s supported by some out-in-the-open-before God-and-everybody ambitious politicians, lawyers and other sycophants who have hitched their wagon to this cult leader…take note – some of these supposed “disadvantaged” groups like the white supremacists and neo-Nazis  seem to be cut from the same cloth and would like to maintain  - or where it is lacking  – impose the social, political, historical, financial, and institutional dominance by white people…hmmmmm as much as T***p re-Tweets conspiracy theories it makes me think of wierwille the unabashed plagiarist. 

T***p’s fascist tendencies does have a Hitler “smackness” to it  - did I just coin a new word ?   :biglaugh:          A    big lie  is a propaganda tactic   “The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".

The key to passing off a big lie is repetition. Wikipedia also notes that  Joseph Goebbels one of Hitler’s most devoted followers and the minister of propaganda for Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945, wrote that one should lie big and stick to it:

“Though the following supposed quotation of Joseph Goebbels has been repeated in numerous books and articles and on thousands of web pages, none of them has cited a primary source. According to the research and reasoning of Randall Bytwerk, it is an unlikely thing for Goebbels to have said

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

It is verified that Goebbels did put forth a theory which has come to be more commonly associated with the expression "big lie". Goebbels wrote the following paragraph in an article dated 12 January 1941, 16 years after Hitler's first use of the phrase. The article, titled Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik (English: "From Churchill's Lie Factory") was published in Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.

The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”

From     Wikipedia - a big lie     

 

Fast forward to present day… I was watching the house debate to impeach T***p and I was blown away by the statement one elected official made – referring to the Jan. 6th attack on the Capitol he said T***p could have stopped  that with just two words “I concede”. Here’s a couple of references to T***p usage of a big lie:

ABC News - T***p’s long history of claiming elections are rigged

CNN – the list of times T***p said he won’t accept the election results or leave office if he loses

 

…speaking of cult leaders and the attack on our democracy – I was a W.O.W. in D.C. way back when wierwille said we almost lost the country to the Illuminati…or some such bugaboo which he probably got “revelation” about – my guess is that he experienced irritable bowel syndrome trying to digest John Birch Society musings…well, let’s give wierwille some credit – he was only off by some 44 years.      :spy:

Edited by T-Bone
formatting and typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...