(August 18, 2017 at 9:03 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: I seriously don't get why people waste so much of their time and effort trying to shoehorn moral ambiguity into a dilemma that I'm pretty sure a 5th grader, having been provided with all the relevant facts, could make the right call on.

I'm pretty sure it's for my infotainment.

Or maybe their conscience.

---

(August 18, 2017 at 9:09 pm)Brian37 Wrote: A -theist should not be questioning Thena or I, he should question blacks that support things that go against their own self interests, and the Civil War South was fought by men who went against blacks self intrests. 

He should actually be questioning himself ... but I doubt he can muster the spine or objectivity to do that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrol_36

A group of Neo Nazi's of Jewish decent

(August 18, 2017 at 8:58 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:

---

Wehrmacht Private Werner Goldberg2

http://www.jewishmag.com/158mag/hitler_j...ldiers.htm

http://rense.com/general43/jewserved.htm

Quote:As Many As 150,000 Jews
Served In Hitler's Military

Great analogy, so by A-Theist's logic Hitler was right because. he had Jews fighting for him. Well more likely that they fought rather than get gassed.  

Conversely I am quite sure some slaves in the South fought for the South, either because some few were fighting for their masters, or like some Jews who collaborated with the Germans to avoid  the backlash of certain immediate death, but that still would not make Slavery good anymore than the Holocaust was.

Quote from the 2nd article ""They thought 'if I serve well they're not going to hurt me and not going to hurt my family'," he said."end quote........

I bet the South had blacks that fought for them because, it was that, or immediately get murdered or have your family murdered by the slave owner or the state.

So what does that have to do with blacks or whites that were not around then? The statues are still a reminder with texts on plaques glorifying those men who like Hitler, did horrible things. And while it is still for most blacks, a horrible reminder in glorification context, it is nothing today that either blacks or whites should put in text that glorifies those men, or paints them as heros.

Blacks who are too young to remember what MLK went through, or even whites, cant cop out to "I didn't do it". I was born in 1966. But even in the 80s living in, what was at the time, the outskirts of the suburbs, I lived on a street full of bully bigots, and I heard every racial slur back then because those bigoted parents WERE alive to hand down that bigotry to the assholes I grew up with.

THAT is why you don't support keeping those memorials in the context of painting the men as heros. Not beause you did it, not because anyone is trying to gilt trip you, but because others, certainly not all, but still far too many, even today want to have that White Nationalist, nation here, like it was in the 1960s. Which is why we saw those frat boy bigots with the torches saying the same thing that the dressed up bigots with machine guns did the next day.

Because nobody should want a repeat of beatings and lynchings and segregation. Just like nobody should want another Holocaust. 

Indian Nazi troops

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Legion

---

Neo Nazi Native Americans

---

Black people fought for Hitler
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Arabian_Legion

---

Hispanic Neo Nazi's

IIRC, there was/is a sect of Judaism that believes the Holocaust was another upbraiding from their God since they had displeased him.

(August 18, 2017 at 9:55 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: IIRC, there was/is a sect of Judaism that believes the Holocaust was another upbraiding from their God since they had displeased him.

You can find a sect of Judaism that believe in any thing. 

(August 18, 2017 at 8:14 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(August 18, 2017 at 6:53 pm)Khemikal Wrote: A-T seems to think that having loyal house niggers means he's in the right. 

You know, for someone who is so intent on calling out the bigotry of others, you sure seem to enjoy using racial epitaphs. Just sayin'

I think it's hilarious that I can spout out explicitly racist language while no one doubts that I;m not a neo nazi peice of shit..meanwhile, a usual supsect like yourself (and the two useful idiots that kudos you) maintain that it's just -so- hard not to be mistaken for a filthy racist.

/ shrugs

(August 18, 2017 at 9:15 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrol_36

A group of Neo Nazi's of Jewish decent

I actually once saw a movie about a similar subject, but the circumstances were different, in that it was a single Neo-Nazi leader who just happened to be not only Jewish, but a former Yeshiva boy who became disillusioned with Judaism over a disagreement with a Rabbi over The Binding of Isaac, and decided to jump off the slippery slope and go full-on Neo-Nazi. To his credit, he at least has the good sense to not only not deny the Holocaust, but point out the crucial hole in the logic of Hitler-admiring Holocaust Deniers: " if Hitler didn't kill six million, why is he your hero?" It's called The Believer, and it's damn good; it even has an excellent early performance by Ryan Gosling.

It was also based on a real case of a man named Dan Burros, an associate of George Lincoln Rockwell who unnerved even him with his bizarre behavior (everything from fantasising about having Jews play a piano while it electrocuted them to bringing knish to party meetings.) Eventually, a journalist outed him as a self-hating Jew and he killed himself.

Let me see if I can give a view from across the pond so you can see how it looks.

Imagine a group of people who were misused for a long time, say children abused by paedophiles.

Now imagine that there were statues across town, lots of them, that venerated the paedophiles because they were paedophiles. They've been there for a while and this is pissing off some people who were abused as children, the persistence of the statues seems to give some legitimacy to paedophilia and other non-abused children like to keep them around as a reminder that their great grand daddies were paedos and it makes them more likely to look at kids and think they are sexy.

Now what do you think?

Should you keep the statues around?
They are historic and the people in them aren't actually abusing children on the statues, but everyone knows that that's why they are there.

What then?

Penn State had a statue which very closely fit that scenario (complicity in child abuse is equally as immoral as performing the acts themselves, imo.) Hard as it is to believe, people were pissed about that one coming down too.