 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.196.176.121
In Reply to: Roberto Rossellini's "Open Door." Yes, it's posted by tinear on February 20, 2007 at 16:41:31:
"I was led to think of the US occupation of Iraq during, ironically, a German officer's speech wherein he mused how the Nazis were creating many enemies, no matter how "noble" the attempt to spread a superior ideology, by filling so many European graves.
The torture scenes, without showing any actual acts, are terrifying. Yes, I was reminded of Abu Ghraib, rendering, and Gitmo.
Funny how great works of art always are topical."Great works of art are "always" topical? Like the Mona Lisa? Or that oil of the fox hunt that sits in my living room? But I digress. It seems based on your ramblings that you were less led to the comparison between Iraq and Nazi Germany than you willingly walked the yellow brick road singing all the way. I am not sure how you were "led" to think of the U.S. occupation of Iraq when a German officer calls their mass murder of Jews, homosexuals, gypsies, mentally retarded, and, yes, even Catholics, "noble", as comparable with the U.S. desire to instill democracy in Iraq, no matter how misguided, in a country historically dominated by tyrants who subjugate their own peoples.
At the end of the day, if the Nazis were successful, there would be no Jews left in Europe, no Israel, which perhaps explains your attraction to the comparison, homesexuals, and no other deviant groups to water down the gene pool. While you may not agree with Gitmo, and Abu Ghraid (who would), the actions of some military personnel is in no way, shape, or form the same as a policy of mass murder perpetrated by a government. Last I checked, the U.S. government punished those who committed acts in Abu Ghraib and Gitmo. And while you may not feel the punishment fit the crimes, consider that after mass murders before and during WWII, Nazi Germany pinned medals on their muderers of innocents. To compare what the Germans did to those aforementioned groups before and during WWII with what took place at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo is ignorant, at best.
"The portrayal of several hideous characters as homosexual unthinkingly is cruel: the Nazis murdered many people for their sexual identities, alone."
More on this subject, I strongly recommend the film "Paragraph 175". I also remember seeing a French documentary, the name escapes me, about the plight of homosexuals in France following the Nazi occupation there.
Follow Ups:
....
It was not Bent. This is killing me. It was a French documentary with interviews with homosexual death camp survivors of the Nazi occupation, telling their stories, and the stories of friends who were killed for being gay. Quite absorbing.
Another one...
There is also a documentary " Celebration " made in 2001.
And this link...
Maybe one of the titles is what you saw?
Well on this link there is not only Bent.
You mean nothing was on the list that match your quest?
Obviously not...hum..I will make a more elaborate search tomorrow, let you know...
"topical." Female beauty is always of interest. Fox hounds? Still going on outside of jamesgarvinville.
We have instituted torture policies and prisons in which to torture. We have redefined what "torture" is to our services, allowing the CIA to operate outside of it.
One word to you: rendering. At some point, you may wish to study what the formerly named School of the Americas was.
We are less vicious than the Nazis. There. Are you prouder now?
" "topical." Female beauty is always of interest. "Well, "topical" is different than "interest." Perhaps if you would have originally written "interest", I would not have posted. Art is not always "topical", which your backtracking would seem to demontrate.
"Fox hounds? Still going on outside of jamesgarvinville."
Well, the painging in question was drawn by a German artist in 1927, when fox hunts were hardly "topical", so I guess it would not qualify as art? On other hand, given your backtracking as set forth above, I expect you now know this.
"We have instituted torture policies and prisons in which to torture. We have redefined what "torture" is to our services, allowing the CIA to operate outside of it."
Further proof that you can not see the forest through the trees, or process information in a cognitive fashion. To wit, your analysis seems to be that because the U.S. has prisoners, and the Nazi had prisoners, and there was torture under both, to varying degrees, the U.S. is like the Nazis, at least in respect to Iraq. Simple minded to be sure. Nazis did not torture to get information. Nazis did not torture to, as the U.S. would suggest, obtain information. The Nazis murdered innocent men, women, and children for no other reason that they were of the wrong nationality. No allegations they were members of a terrorist group. No allegations of any plots against the government. If you equate this fundamental difference as simply one being more "vicious" than the other, you are more pathetic than I gave you credit.
We are less interested in King Lear than the Elizabethans because we no longer are the colony of a monarchy?
Beauty is "topical."
It is eternal.
You nicely switched from "torture" to "murder."
James, you are so innocent.
How many have died for our goals in Iraq which, obviously, you believe are about spreading democracy and not empire.
Vietnam?
C. America?
S. America?
School of the Americas.
A torture training facility at Ft. Benning, since renamed and, perhaps, relocated.
We have a systematized torture program.
But we are better than the Nazis, oh yes.
Prouder?
"How many have died for our goals in Iraq which, obviously, you believe are about spreading democracy and not empire."Goals in Iraq about spreading democracy? I have no doubt that there are many reasons for us being in Iraq, probably none I agree with. I accept that democracy is probably one reason. William Jefferson Clinton, at the beginning of the Iraq war, was queried as to whether the war in Iraq is "worth" the loss of life. His reply was that if a strong democratic socity rises from the ashes, then the war would probably be worth the costs. I happen to agree with this position, even if I disagree with going in the first place. The same as if someone bet their life savings in Vegas, rolled the dice, and happened to win. I would probably have told them to keep their money in the bank, but since they won, I am happy for them.
Incidentally, according to Alexander Haig in an interview I watched on C-Span, the so called neo-cons are really democrats. He told how he was forced to hire Wolfowitz while in the Reagan administration, and cautioned Reagan that Wolfowitz, et al, we former democrats that lost power in their party when it moved to the left. They believed that the U.S. could force democracy at the tip of a gun. In short, this is the same philosophy that guided Democrats until the Iraq war.
As misguided as I think they are, the point is that I really do believe that Rumsfeld, Chaney, Wolfowitz and company believe that exporting democracy is possible. I think they believe this is a good thing, and Clinton would seem to agree, if the goal is accomplished. If the gamble pays off, can there be any doubt that a democratic Iraq, in which minority rights are respected, is better than under Hussein?
This is distinctly different than Nazi Germany, in which the Nazis were not pretending to better the situation of the citizens of Germany and the countries it conquered. They never pretended to be anything except eliminating those they deemed impure.
Define torture. Torture is different things to different people. Maybe you feel that keeping people in dark rooms is torture. Maybe it takes more, such as putting people in gas chambers until they have no breath. When the government of my neighbors and friends of color are being rounded up, perhaps I'll agree with you.
You have argued in the past that the rest of the world is better educated. Then why do more people from those better educated countries typically want to come here, rather than the myriad of other choices they have? Because, for the faults, it is still better here than in any other country. There is not another country in this world in which a person born into poverty, or of color, can raise as high in society and as quickly as in the U.S. Try being of poor and color in Great Britain. Why? Because out government, as imperfect as it is, is still better than any other at guaranteeing certain rights. If some misguided soles want to share some of those rights with others around world, I hardly equate that to murdering countless millions of Jews, Homosexuals, etc.
as
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
