Leni Riefenstahl Gets the Cold Shoulder in Russia.
Tom Sutpen
nevertheless one of the greatest filmmakers in history. The Asociated Press
brings us the latest thrilling chapter in The Adventures of Leni Riefenstahl:
Nazi-Era Filmmaker Visits Russia
ST. PETERSBURG, Russia (AP) -- Nazi-era propagandist Leni Riefenstahl
said Thursday that she does not regret her work but wishes people would
show her more kindness. Officials in Russia's second-largest city have
banned public screenings of her films.
The 98-year-old filmmaker and photographer is best known for the 1934
Nazi classic ''Triumph of the Will,'' both reviled and renowned as the
best propaganda film ever made.
Her visit to St. Petersburg came on the eve of the 60th anniversary of
Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union. Her films were to be screened at
a documentary film festival.
But officials in St. Petersburg on Wednesday decided to prohibit public
screenings of ''Triumph of the Will'' and ''Olympia,'' Riefenstahl's
film about the 1936 Berlin summer Olympics, after residents protested,
TV-6 television reported. The films will be shown at closed screenings.
''I don't regret what I did, but I always wish that toward me, as toward
every person, there could be more forgiveness and kindness,'' she said
at a news conference in St. Petersburg.
Riefenstahl was shunned in Germany after World War II, but she later
regained respect with her photographs of the African Nuba tribe and her
underwater photography.
Anti-Nazi emotions are still strong in Russia 56 years after the end of
World War II, especially in St. Petersburg, then called Leningrad, which
suffered a nearly three-year Nazi blockade. The Soviet Union lost some
27 million people in the war.
The festival's organizers said they were disappointed at the outcry over
Riefenstahl's films.
''We made films about (Soviet dictator Josef) Stalin -- why is this
worse?'' said festival director Mikhail Litvyakov. ''We need to learn
professional tolerance.''
*****
I'm sure the old opportunist can wring some favorable publicity out of
this setback. Oh well, History triumphs again, I guess.
T. Sutpen.
"Cinema is Truth, 24 times a second."-- Jean-Luc Godard
"Movies lie 24 times a second." -- Brian DePalma
"Kill Ugly Cinema!" -- Tom Sutpen
Will
Tom Cervo
After the first ten minutes?
John Savard
wrote, in part:
>''We made films about (Soviet dictator Josef) Stalin -- why is this
>worse?'' said festival director Mikhail Litvyakov.
That's a good question, even if it is not at all inappropriate to
continue turning the cold shoulder to those who helped Hitler.
John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html
John Harkness
John Harkness
On 22 Jun 2001 03:54:27 GMT, akir...@aol.commotion (Tom Sutpen)
wrote:
anthony gazzo
> Christ, isn't the bitch dead yet?
>
> John Harkness
>
>
it's interesting though, how her career went from mountain climbing
movies to underwater documentaries.
top of the world to the bottom of the sea.
after all, it began with..
mountain and the godly
then...
nazis who would be godly
then...
africans close to earthly existence
then...
the primordial stuff of the ocean.
somehow it makes sense.
Roger D. White
<<Christ, isn't the bitch dead yet?>>
What a sentence.
In only 6 words you manage to offend Christians, and cheapen the name of
the founder of that religion; express your ignorance of the life status
of an important film maker; use an unnecessary and vulgar description of
an elderly person; and all to express an utterly vicious thought.
You probably won't have to wait much longer; but when she does die, I
seriously doubt that you'll be much better off.
RW
John Harkness
But the world will be a better place when Hitler's publicist is
roasting beside her master in hell.
John Harkness
Tom Sutpen
phrased it as indelicately. While I don't believe Riefenstahl was a Nazi
ideologue, she was something perhaps even more dishionorable: An opportunist
who cozied up to one of the most murderous regimes in human history out of
nothing more than purely careerist impulses (see Ray Muller's documentary "The
Wonderful Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl" for the entire sordid saga). That
she is also one of the greatest film artists in history, while undeniable,
doesn't lessen my contempt for her any. She deserved far more at the hands of
Justice than she received. You cannot make excuses for her.
Mike O'Sullivan
Germany in the 1930s, we would all have behaved in an exemplary politically
correct manner?
"Tom Sutpen" <akir...@aol.commotion> wrote in message
news:20010623032713...@ng-mr1.aol.com...
John Harkness
<mi...@barnaby0.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>We are all comfortable in our conviction, are we, that in the context of
>Germany in the 1930s, we would all have behaved in an exemplary politically
>correct manner?
>
Any number of people decided NOT to work for the Nazis -- Goebbels
offered Fritz Lang the chance to run the German film industry, and he
left the country the next day.
Reifenstahl went to work for the Nazis nice and early -- nobody held a
gun to her head.
John Harkness
Sawfish
John, this is a really silly attitude. As vindictive as a first-grader who
has just learned about germs.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If we use Occam's Razor, whose razor will *he* use?" --Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John Harkness
>j...@attcanada.ca (John Harkness) writes:
>
>>On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 23:37:25 -0500 (CDT), ra...@webtv.net (Roger D.
>>White) wrote:
>
>>>John Harkness wrote:
>>><<Christ, isn't the bitch dead yet?>>
>>>
>>>What a sentence.
>>>
>>>In only 6 words you manage to offend Christians, and cheapen the name of
>>>the founder of that religion; express your ignorance of the life status
>>>of an important film maker; use an unnecessary and vulgar description of
>>>an elderly person; and all to express an utterly vicious thought.
>>>
>>>You probably won't have to wait much longer; but when she does die, I
>>>seriously doubt that you'll be much better off.
>>>
>>>RW
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>But the world will be a better place when Hitler's publicist is
>>roasting beside her master in hell.
>
>John, this is a really silly attitude. As vindictive as a first-grader who
>has just learned about germs.
>
>
Hey, I threw a party when Nixon died.
John Harkness
Calvin Rice
> From out of the very distant past emerges an odious woman who was
> nevertheless one of the greatest filmmakers in history. The Asociated Press
> brings us the latest thrilling chapter in The Adventures of Leni Riefenstahl:
Triumph of the Will in 1934, and Olympia in 1936, Hitler's invasion of
Poland (1939) was still years away. She did not, and no one did except the Nazi
leadership, have any idea of the horrible war and the Nazi atrocities that were
to come.
She has always refused to apologize, because she has nothing to apologize for.
She should be admired for that, for not giving in to irrationality. All
those hysterical people with 20/20 hindsight who think they would have
known what was coming from the Nazis are just naive dreamers.
Yeah, I know, lefties will say that she should have known that Hitler was
'right wing'. Well, at that time no one knew the horrors that either the
extreme left wing (Soviet Russia) or the extreme right wing (Nazi Germany)
were capable of. It's only your hindsight that makes you so wise and willing
to condemn the innocent.
-cr
John Harkness
>akir...@aol.commotion (Tom Sutpen) wrote in message news:<20010621235427...@ng-mr1.aol.com>...
>> From out of the very distant past emerges an odious woman who was
>> nevertheless one of the greatest filmmakers in history. The Asociated Press
>> brings us the latest thrilling chapter in The Adventures of Leni Riefenstahl:
>
>She is not, and never has been, an 'odious woman'. When she filmed
>Triumph of the Will in 1934, and Olympia in 1936, Hitler's invasion of
>Poland (1939) was still years away. She did not, and no one did except the Nazi
>leadership, have any idea of the horrible war and the Nazi atrocities that were
>to come.
>
>She has always refused to apologize, because she has nothing to apologize for.
>She should be admired for that, for not giving in to irrationality. All
>those hysterical people with 20/20 hindsight who think they would have
>known what was coming from the Nazis are just naive dreamers.
>
You have a charming lack of knowledge about history.
Anybody who read Mein Kampf would have known EXACTLY what Hitler was
up to.
Anybody who listened to Hitler's speeches would have known exactly
what Hitler was up to.
The Munich Post -- a newspaper that Hitler referred to as "the poison
kitchen" -- investigated and published stories investigating the Nazi
Party from the earliest days, in 1921, before Hitler had taken control
of the party. The Nazi party's terror tactics had been displayed --
the purge of his own troops, the "night of the long knives" took place
in mid 1934, before the Nuremburg rally Riefenstahl filmed.
There's an enormous difference between not knowing and turning a blind
eye, whether out of ideological faith or craven careerism.
The fact is, any number of people in Germany took one look at what was
going on and got the hell out -- many of them Jews who ended up in the
US -- half of Hollywood, it sometimes seemed like, what with Wilder,
Zinneman, Ophuls, Preminger, Siodmak, etcetera washed up in the
Pacific Palisades. Lang, as I mentioned earlier, was offered the
chance to run the German film industry, and declined.
Riefenstahl adored Hitler and worked with the full funding and
cooperation of the Nazi Party.
And she's NEVER apologized for it. She should've been strung up with
the rest of them.
John Harkness
John Reilly
news:3b3475c9...@nntp.attcanada.ca...
> On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 11:44:22 +0100, "Mike O'Sullivan"
> <mi...@barnaby0.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >We are all comfortable in our conviction, are we, that in the context of
> >Germany in the 1930s, we would all have behaved in an exemplary
politically
> >correct manner?
> >
>
> Any number of people decided NOT to work for the Nazis -- Goebbels
> offered Fritz Lang the chance to run the German film industry, and he
> left the country the next day.
>
> Reifenstahl went to work for the Nazis nice and early -- nobody held a
> gun to her head.
Also, Reifenstahl enjoyed the friendship of Hitler, and was greatly upset at
his death.
Hardly signs of a forced employee.
--
John
(Remove NOSPAM) to Reply
------------------------------------------------
Edmund Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?
Baldrick: Yeah, it's like goldy and bronzy, only it's made of iron.
John Reilly
LOL! I'm waiting for Thatcher. I'll send you an invite :-)
John Harkness
Im there -- I'll bring wine!
John Harkness
Tom Cervo
>
>LOL! I'm waiting for Thatcher. I'll send you an invite :-)
>
>--
>John
You don't understand Thatcher. She was talking about the Gulf war, Bush and
Saddam. Bush won, she said, yet he was out of power, and Saddam wasn't. "I
wonder" she said.
At this time Bush was indeed out of power, enjoying his retirement among
friends and well-wishers, taking keen enjoyment in the success of his children.
And Saddam was murdering the husbands of his children.
Power, according to Thatcher's view, is life--even if it's in a Middle east
shithole, maintained by a reign of terror. And she'll never know power again. I
hope she lives to be 200.
Tom Cervo
>Triumph of the Will in 1934, and Olympia in 1936, Hitler's invasion of
>Poland (1939) was still years away. She did not, and no one did except the
>Nazi
>leadership, have any idea of the horrible war and the Nazi atrocities that
>were
>to come.
The concentration camps were built, and full of trade unionists, intellectuals,
leftists and political opposition. Hitler had just concluded a bloody coup
against his own right. He was swearing hell and death against the Jews. His
storm troopers routinely humiliated Jews in the street.
She knew "nooothing, nooothing!"
Arminius
> Christ, isn't the bitch dead yet?
>
> John Harkness
I've had her in the pool (www.stiffs.com) for three years now. I doubt the
woman is ever going to croak.
--
Arminius
"I hate to see another tired man lay down his hand like he was going to quit
the holy game of poker." --Leonard Cohen
Calvin Rice
> You have a charming lack of knowledge about history.
> Anybody who read Mein Kampf would have known EXACTLY what Hitler was
> up to.
Then you haven't read it, because there was nothing in it to make
anyone expect a continental war and concentration camps.
> Anybody who listened to Hitler's speeches would have known exactly
> what Hitler was up to.
Then apparently you haven't listened to the speeches in Triumph of the Will.
Nothing but bland platitudes that would bore anyone to death.
> The Munich Post -- a newspaper that Hitler referred to as "the poison
> kitchen" -- investigated and published stories investigating the Nazi
> Party from the earliest days, in 1921, before Hitler had taken control
> of the party. The Nazi party's terror tactics had been displayed --
> the purge of his own troops, the "night of the long knives" took place
> in mid 1934, before the Nuremburg rally Riefenstahl filmed.
Nothing so far to make it disgraceful for Leni to make her film.
> There's an enormous difference between not knowing and turning a blind
> eye, whether out of ideological faith or craven careerism.
> The fact is, any number of people in Germany took one look at what was
> going on and got the hell out
But the point is, -when- did they get out, and how many. Obviously many
millions of Jews waited too late to catch on, so why do you blame
Riefenstahl for not catching on before 1939?
-- many of them Jews who ended up in the
> US -- half of Hollywood, it sometimes seemed like, what with Wilder,
> Zinneman, Ophuls, Preminger, Siodmak, etcetera washed up in the
> Pacific Palisades. Lang, as I mentioned earlier, was offered the
> chance to run the German film industry, and declined.
No doubt they were more left-leaning than L.R. That she may have been a
right-winger who liked Hitler before he showed his true colors, is no
shame for her.
> Riefenstahl adored Hitler and worked with the full funding and
> cooperation of the Nazi Party.
'Adored' is doubtful from what I've read, but 'Nazi Party', as horrible as
the phrase sounds now, was not anything more than a right-wing party,
as far as anyone knew, when Leni Riefenstahl worked with its funding.
> And she's NEVER apologized for it. She should've been strung up with
> the rest of them.
Hey, I acknowledged that she never apologized. That was my point. She
has nothing to apologize for.
> John Harkness
-cr
John Harkness
>j...@attcanada.ca (John Harkness) wrote in message news:<3b349d36...@nntp.attcanada.ca>...
>
>> You have a charming lack of knowledge about history.
>> Anybody who read Mein Kampf would have known EXACTLY what Hitler was
>> up to.
>
> Then you haven't read it, because there was nothing in it to make
> anyone expect a continental war and concentration camps.
>
Everything but. Virtually a revival of the Nuremberg racial purity
laws.
>> Anybody who listened to Hitler's speeches would have known exactly
>> what Hitler was up to.
>
> Then apparently you haven't listened to the speeches in Triumph of the Will.
> Nothing but bland platitudes that would bore anyone to death.
Those aren't the only speeches Hitler gave. Track down some of the
speeches gave in the 20s. Curl your hair.
>> The Munich Post -- a newspaper that Hitler referred to as "the poison
>> kitchen" -- investigated and published stories investigating the Nazi
>> Party from the earliest days, in 1921, before Hitler had taken control
>> of the party. The Nazi party's terror tactics had been displayed --
>> the purge of his own troops, the "night of the long knives" took place
>> in mid 1934, before the Nuremburg rally Riefenstahl filmed.
>
> Nothing so far to make it disgraceful for Leni to make her film.
>
working for a terrorist political organization, for starters. The list
of Nazi depredations against civil order go all the way back into the
early 1920s. Hitler went to jail for it, you may recall.
>> There's an enormous difference between not knowing and turning a blind
>> eye, whether out of ideological faith or craven careerism.
>> The fact is, any number of people in Germany took one look at what was
>> going on and got the hell out
>
> But the point is, -when- did they get out, and how many. Obviously many
> millions of Jews waited too late to catch on, so why do you blame
> Riefenstahl for not catching on before 1939?
Lang got out in 33, Wilder and the others not much later. Millions of
Jews weren't close to the centre of power. Riefenstahl couldn't claim
she had no idea what was going on. She wasn't off in the Schwarzwald
baking bread after all, she was at the centre of the party. Despiter
her later statements about how she dislike Goebblels, who tried to
interfere with her "artistic vision". And she hung with Hitler long
after 39. All the way to the bunker.
>-- many of them Jews who ended up in the
>> US -- half of Hollywood, it sometimes seemed like, what with Wilder,
>> Zinneman, Ophuls, Preminger, Siodmak, etcetera washed up in the
>> Pacific Palisades. Lang, as I mentioned earlier, was offered the
>> chance to run the German film industry, and declined.
>
> No doubt they were more left-leaning than L.R. That she may have been a
> right-winger who liked Hitler before he showed his true colors, is no
> shame for her.
>> Riefenstahl adored Hitler and worked with the full funding and
>> cooperation of the Nazi Party.
>
> 'Adored' is doubtful from what I've read, but 'Nazi Party', as horrible as
> the phrase sounds now, was not anything more than a right-wing party,
> as far as anyone knew, when Leni Riefenstahl worked with its funding.
Do you practice being stupid? Riefenstahl was right at the heart of
the party. She wept when she heard of his death.
> And she's NEVER apologized for it. She should've been strung up with
>> the rest of them.
>
> Hey, I acknowledged that she never apologized. That was my point. She
> has nothing to apologize for.
Being the head publicist for the third most murderous regime in the
20th century is nothing to apologize for? Welcome to my killfile. You
aren't worth arguing with.
Have a nice day.
John Harkness
>> John Harkness
>
> -cr
anthony gazzo
you are way too hard on her. had she lived in stalin's russia and
stalin had told her to be red parade movies, she would have.
artists are whores of moneymen and political a-holes.
she was just going with the flow. she was not a rabid antisemite nor a
murderous aryan ideologue.
anthony gazzo
> Have to agree with John Harkness here, though I probably wouldn't have
> phrased it as indelicately. While I don't believe Riefenstahl was a Nazi
> ideologue, she was something perhaps even more dishionorable: An opportunist
> who cozied up to one of the most murderous regimes in human history out of
> nothing more than purely careerist impulses (see Ray Muller's documentary "The
> Wonderful Horrible Life of Leni Riefenstahl" for the entire sordid saga). That
> she is also one of the greatest film artists in history, while undeniable,
> doesn't lessen my contempt for her any. She deserved far more at the hands of
> Justice than she received. You cannot make excuses for her.
>
> T. Sutpen.
>
i disagree. when it comes to opportunism, every filmmaker is a whore
or worse.
i mean we live in a democracy and look at the kind of movies that come
out of hollywood. i mean riefenstahl had to work under hitler.
what's the excuse of people in hollywood today? all opportunists.
all bungholes.
i think leni did what she had to do. in that regard, she was like
eisenstein who whored his talent out to the murderous commie pinkos.
but eisenstein was a great genius. i wouldn't rate leni quite that
high but she did have talent to burn.
and when she made those two great documentaries, the nazis hadn't yet
carried out their murderous deeds.
anthony gazzo
> On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 11:44:22 +0100, "Mike O'Sullivan"
> <mi...@barnaby0.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >We are all comfortable in our conviction, are we, that in the context of
> >Germany in the 1930s, we would all have behaved in an exemplary politically
> >correct manner?
> >
>
> Any number of people decided NOT to work for the Nazis -- Goebbels
> offered Fritz Lang the chance to run the German film industry, and he
> left the country the next day.
>
> Reifenstahl went to work for the Nazis nice and early -- nobody held a
> gun to her head.
>
> John Harkness
>
yeah, but fritz was half jew and probably knew his ass would get
skinned sooner or later. but look, richard strauss worked for nazis.
many artists did.
leni was wrong, she should come clean, but she was not the evil beast
of nazism. just a terribly gifted filmmaker who unwittingly made the
nazis look good.
it was her job to do it as well as possible just like alec guiness
felt it was a matter of honor to build the very best bridge for the
japanese in bridge over kwai damn.
anthony gazzo
don't forget to invite me to your party when the gipper goes.
anthony gazzo
the problem with leni has been she wanted to have it both ways. on
the one hand, she says all she did was make documentary films and
rather reluctantly at the behest of hitler. that she was just a hired
dupe.
but then sometimes she goes off like she was one of the great geniuses
behind fascist aesthetics of nazism, like she was a master honcho
craftsman who did much more than merely record nazi pageantry.
i'm willing to let the past go but leni should have come clean and at
the very least admit that she was an enthusiastic supporter of hitler
when she made those films. naive she may have been but she was a
player, not just a dupe.
anthony gazzo
and since when do artists know anything about politics? i mean had
jane fonda read up on stalinism and the nature of communist
totalitarianism, she should have foreseen that communism begats
gulags, boat people, the autogenocide in cambodia.
yet, the left often justified the black panthers who were maoists, and
noam chomsky who supported the khmer rouge is still considered a
respectable thinker.
if so, why hold riefenstahl to such high standard? she adored hitler
not because she cared about his ideology but because he gave germans a
sense of pride, fixed the economy, and ended the gloom and doom--for
awhile at least.
even many world leaders were impressed by hitler. and you think
riefenstahl was spineless, the fact is the powerful leaders of the
democratic world and even stalin sucked up to hitler.
and during that time, many fine artists supported stalin all over the
world. some even knew of the red terror but did it matter? no, all
that mattered was stalin was creating the NEW MAN and ends justify the
means. lillian helmann and her cronies for instance.
today, rage against the machine supports the maoist sandero luminoso
of peru. yet, where is the outrage? instead, mainstream outlets like
the rollng stone magazine gushes about these murderous pigheaded
leftwing louts.
this isn't to apologize for riefenstahl. i think she should have come
clean. it would have been better for her, but i think it's really a
matter of personality. she's one of those proud people who FOOL
themselves so completely that it's not so much a matter of her lying
as her inability to face any truth beyond what feeds her pride.
anthony gazzo
> "John Harkness" <j...@attcanada.ca> wrote in message
> news:3b3475c9...@nntp.attcanada.ca...
> > On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 11:44:22 +0100, "Mike O'Sullivan"
> > <mi...@barnaby0.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > >We are all comfortable in our conviction, are we, that in the context of
> > >Germany in the 1930s, we would all have behaved in an exemplary
> politically
> > >correct manner?
> > >
> >
> > Any number of people decided NOT to work for the Nazis -- Goebbels
> > offered Fritz Lang the chance to run the German film industry, and he
> > left the country the next day.
> >
> > Reifenstahl went to work for the Nazis nice and early -- nobody held a
> > gun to her head.
>
> Also, Reifenstahl enjoyed the friendship of Hitler, and was greatly upset at
> his death.
> Hardly signs of a forced employee.
victims of stalin were upset over stalin's death.
Sawfish
>"John Harkness" <j...@attcanada.ca> wrote in message
>news:3b3498b2...@nntp.attcanada.ca...
>> On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 12:42:18 GMT, m...@q7.com (Sawfish) wrote:
<SNIP>
>> >
>> >John, this is a really silly attitude. As vindictive as a first-grader
>who
>> >has just learned about germs.
>> >
>> >
>> Hey, I threw a party when Nixon died.
>LOL! I'm waiting for Thatcher. I'll send you an invite :-)
This is great news from the camp of those who fashion themselves
compassionate.
Really socks it to the old credibility index...
S D
people whom they know to be innocent and then do everything possible to
keep them in jail to be brutally assaulted in the face of new evidence,
our society which accepts, in fact eats up, hypocritical, self-serving
bullshit in place of candor is a much better place than Hitler`s
proposed paradise.
Will
> 'Nazi Party', as horrible as
> the phrase sounds now, was not anything more than a right-wing party,
> as far as anyone knew, when Leni Riefenstahl worked with its funding.
A perfectly legal entity. In fact, what became the ruling faction of
the NAZI party was not even its ultra right wing fringe; you can find
references to Hitler as a "moderate."
Will
experiencing hardship. It's military forces had not been supported to
the extent that many conservative Germans thought appropriate. Minority
groups and liberals were seen as crippling the economy of the country.
Taxes were very high.
So, as has happened elsewhere & when, a shift to the right occurred and
a leader came to power who was crude, intolerant, stupid, and
inexperienced but promised simple solutions with a simplistic lack of
practical detail. Sounded real good. Many people from the center became
swept up into it. I don't think you can condemn _all_ those supporters
for what happened once this leadership took things to what many of us
would see as their logical conclusion.
S D
Beautiful , at a time when the Indians were being slaughtered, Mexico
had its territory stolen, and the slave trade flourished, should be
taken to task as well. History is written by the winners.
John Harkness
Hitler wasn't stupid, btw. Crazy, but until he decided to invade
Russia, not stupid.
As to the rest, sure you can. There was no sustained resistance to
Hitler, after about 1934 -- heavy industry happily used slave labor,
nobody complained about their neighbours suddenly disappearing. The
Germans only relaxed their racial laws on citizenship two years ago,
allowing Turkish-Germans -- the German born children of immigrant
workers -- to become citizens. There's that whole deep-rooted
romanticism about nation and blood in Germany that's always waiting to
pop up, and Hitler released the jack in the box. Read Hitler's Willing
Executioners, or Ron Rosenblum's Understanding Hitler.
It's always been my problem with movies like Das Boot and Stalingrad.
Oh, look at those poor soldiers. They're not Nazis, they're just
ordinary people in a horrible situation. The hell with them. They made
a deal with the devil, or at least his apprentice. Then the bill came
due. It always does.
John Harkness
Mike O'Sullivan
legation in Dublin after the death of Hitler to express "the condolences of
the Irish government and people" When criticised for this he explained that:
" I certainly was not going to add to his (Hitler's) humiliation in the
hours of defeat".
"John Reilly" <jo...@NOSPAMthebigfilm.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9h2739$9f3$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
Calvin Rice
> Do you practice being stupid? Riefenstahl was right at the heart of
> the party. She wept when she heard of his death.
Clearly we have been reading different books.
> Being the head publicist for the third most murderous regime in the
> 20th century is nothing to apologize for? Welcome to my killfile. You
> aren't worth arguing with.
My entire point has been that you are arguing from hindsight. You have
yet to show otherwise.
> Have a nice day.
Same to you. Please keep your promise about the killfile.
> John Harkness
-cr
(P.S. Third most murderous? I hope someone takes that bait.)
John Smith
John Reilly wrote:
When you invite John H, count me in too! We need a Stone-esque film critique of
Thatcher, although this woman was much less complex than Nixon. Tricky Dicky at
least surprised us with the China affair, and apparently had positive things to
say about John Adams' opera "Nixon in China". Thatcher was just mean and
provincial with no surprises up her sleeves, just privatization, tax cuts and
vindictiveness against the less fortunate. Hell is far too good for her. If she
dies a miserable cruel death, the drinks are on me, lads.
John
John Reilly
> "John Reilly" <jo...@NOSPAMthebigfilm.co.uk> writes:
>
> >"John Harkness" <j...@attcanada.ca> wrote in message
> >news:3b3498b2...@nntp.attcanada.ca...
> >> On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 12:42:18 GMT, m...@q7.com (Sawfish) wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
>
> >> >
> >> >John, this is a really silly attitude. As vindictive as a first-grader
> >who
> >> >has just learned about germs.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Hey, I threw a party when Nixon died.
>
> >LOL! I'm waiting for Thatcher. I'll send you an invite :-)
>
> This is great news from the camp of those who fashion themselves
> compassionate.
>
> Really socks it to the old credibility index...
My compassion is reserved for the victims of her policies.
--
John
(Remove NOSPAM) to Reply
------------------------------------------------
Edmund Blackadder: Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?
Baldrick: Yeah, it's like goldy and bronzy, only it's made of iron.
>
John Reilly
news:20010623111633...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
As she already looks like one of the undead, she may last longer than that.
Charles Eggen
>akir...@aol.commotion (Tom Sutpen) wrote in message news:<20010621235427...@ng-mr1.aol.com>...
>> From out of the very distant past emerges an odious woman who was
>> nevertheless one of the greatest filmmakers in history. The Asociated Press
>> brings us the latest thrilling chapter in The Adventures of Leni Riefenstahl:
>
>She is not, and never has been, an 'odious woman'. When she filmed
>Triumph of the Will in 1934, and Olympia in 1936, Hitler's invasion of
>Poland (1939) was still years away. She did not, and no one did except the Nazi
>leadership, have any idea of the horrible war and the Nazi atrocities that were
>to come.
>
>She has always refused to apologize, because she has nothing to apologize for.
>She should be admired for that, for not giving in to irrationality. All
>those hysterical people with 20/20 hindsight who think they would have
>known what was coming from the Nazis are just naive dreamers.
>
>Yeah, I know, lefties will say that she should have known that Hitler was
>'right wing'. Well, at that time no one knew the horrors that either the
>extreme left wing (Soviet Russia) or the extreme right wing (Nazi Germany)
>were capable of. It's only your hindsight that makes you so wise and willing
>to condemn the innocent.
>
>-cr
A short history lesson from Germany during 1933:
January 30 - Hitler is appointed chancellor.
February 23 - Poprnography banned and homosexual-rights groups are
proscribed.
February 28 - A presidential decree gives Hitler emergency powers.
Civil rights are eliminated. Some SA concentration camps are
extablished near Berlin.
March 13 - The process of "co-option" begins: political, social, and
private life must be in line with Nazi ideology.
March 22 - Dachau, the first major concentration camp, is built,
originally for 5,000 inmates.
April 1 - Nationwide boycot of Jewish businesses and professional
people. All pamphlets issued by the Jehovah's Witnesses are banned.
April 7 - New public-employee laws are the first to exclude
non-Aryans.
May 2 - Leaders of labour unions are arrested; their headquarters are
occupied by the Nazis.
May 10 - Books "inimical to the state" are burned throughout Germany.
June 27 - SA squads storm Jehovah's Witnesses building in Magdeburg:
Bibles and books worth two million marks are burned.
June 30 - Addional laws are passed to remove Jews and non-Nazis from
the legal professions and the civil service.
July 14 - The Nazi Party is declared the only legal party. Laws for
the "protection of Hereditary health" are enacted (also called "laws
for the prevention of racially inferior offspring"). A euthanasia
program is developed, and is carried out six year later.
President Hindenburg died 2 August 1934, and on 19 August Hitler asked
the German people to approve his new powers; more than 90 percent did
so in a vote.
To say that Riefenstahl and the German people generally did not
realize where Hitler was going is ignoring reality or demonstating a
lack of historical knowledge. Anyone who stayed in Germany after
August 1934 was either a fool, a supporter, or a simpathizer.
Charles Eggen
Calvin Rice
If, as you say, "anyone who stayed in Germany after August 1934 was either
a fool, a supporter, or a sympathizer", then millions of Jews were fools.
Why cannot Leni Riefenstahl be merely a fool also? It is unreasonable to
have expected civilized people to expect the extremes to which the Nazis
went. It was unprecedented. Only hindsight, I say again, makes Riefenstahl's
detractors seem wise in this matter.
-cr
c...@teleport.com (Charles Eggen) wrote in message news:<3b3611a6...@news.teleport.com>...
Tom Cervo
>Executioners, or Ron Rosenblum's Understanding Hitler.
Yes to the second, no to the first--unless you want to read a thesis that got
puffed into a book.
Read Ian Kershaw's two volume biography of Hitler instead, or anything by
Kershaw--he's a long way past the thesis stage, and "working toward the
Fuhrer", his original insight, is alone worth the read.
anthony gazzo
and americans and canadians wiped out the indians. i mean we're all guilty.
anthony gazzo
yeah, and in america of that period, blacks were still kicked about by
whites, chinese americans were treated like vermin.
and stalin's russia... let's not go there.
Calvin Rice
> and americans and canadians wiped out the indians. i mean we're all guilty.
I've never wiped out an Indian, so don't lay your leftie guilt trip on me.
-cr
Helen & Bob
John Smith wrote:
But, aside from the general niceties, what DID you think of her, John?
Bob
Helen & Bob
anthony gazzo wrote:
> and americans and canadians wiped out the indians. i mean we're all guilty.
Really? Then, who the hell owns all the casinos going up out here?
Bob
John Reilly
news:22680de.01062...@posting.google.com...
Hehe, Gazza being called a leftie ;-)
Sawfish
>anthony gazzo wrote:
Lessee: what's the Shoshone word for "octaroon"? How do you spell "mafia"
in Chumash?
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The food at the new restaurant was awful--but at least the portions
were large!" --Sawfish
Sawfish
>"Calvin Rice" <os...@netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:22680de.01062...@posting.google.com...
>> manancie...@hotmail.com (anthony gazzo) wrote in message
>news:<176e6148.01062...@posting.google.com>...
>> > and americans and canadians wiped out the indians. i mean we're all
>guilty.
>>
>> I've never wiped out an Indian, so don't lay your leftie guilt trip on
>me.
>Hehe, Gazza being called a leftie ;-)
Yeah, life's great, isn't it? Always some nice ironies to savor.
Endlessly amusing...
Helen & Bob
Sawfish wrote:
> Helen & Bob <chil...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>
> >anthony gazzo wrote:
>
> >> and americans and canadians wiped out the indians. i mean we're all guilty.
>
> >Really? Then, who the hell owns all the casinos going up out here?
>
> Lessee: what's the Shoshone word for "octaroon"? How do you spell "mafia"
> in Chumash?
>
Hell, most of the California tribes are getting very rich from the Casino's. More
power to 'em, in my book.
Bob
John Harkness
We took their land and gave them smallpox, they gave us tobacco and
the gambling. Fair deal
John Harkness
anthony gazzo
indians gave us gambling? you mean them totem poles were really slot machines?
anthony gazzo
i don't feel guilty about that either as we sicilians have been the
most oppressed and exploited people on earth.
i'm just saying nazis were esp. bad but there was some nazi-like
qualities among many peoples the world over. the nazis only took them
feelings and prejudices to their extreme logical conclusions.
in a way, nazis opened our eyes to that side of us that sucked and was
murderous. after democracies defeated nazism and said that hitler
stuff was bad, they couldn't themselves justify prejudice and hatred
in their own countries. so in a perverse way, hitler did more for the
cause of antibigotry than any liberal.
just like stalin probably did more harm to communism than any
rightwing cold warrior.
anthony gazzo
> John Smith wrote:
>
> > When you invite John H, count me in too! We need a Stone-esque film critique of
> > Thatcher, although this woman was much less complex than Nixon. Tricky Dicky at
> > least surprised us with the China affair, and apparently had positive things to
> > say about John Adams' opera "Nixon in China". Thatcher was just mean and
> > provincial with no surprises up her sleeves, just privatization, tax cuts and
> > vindictiveness against the less fortunate. Hell is far too good for her. If she
> > dies a miserable cruel death, the drinks are on me, lads.
> >
> > John
>
> But, aside from the general niceties, what DID you think of her, John?
>
>
> Bob
margaret thatcher was one of the great figures of the 20th century.
god bless her.
she saved UK. that's all i have to say. she believed in business, in
hard work, in discipline. great britain had fallen behind for one
simple reason. socialism and powerful unions that suppressed
innovation. economocially, britain had stagnated while other nations
were surging ahead. its manufacturing base was technologically still
in the 50s in the 80s. its people had grown lazy and inefficient.
everyone wanted handouts. this culture of dependency on the state had
turned into a national epidemic. people were saying great britain was
finished. but then came thatcher!!!!!!
she restored pride. she taught people that getting rich is glorious.
that businessmen are creators and distributors of wealth, not vermin.
she was for the common man working to build industry and enterprise,
creating jobs and hope. british tradition only favored two sorts of
people: the lazy socialist intelletual louts always going yabba dabba
about workers having the right to be more lazy. and haughty snobbish
rightwing jerks who took positions in law and politics and acting like
they were too good for an honest day's of work. but thatcher said,
bullocks to both side. she was no rightwinger but a enterpriser. she
said, if you wanna create business and invest your time and energy and
make sacrifices and etc and whatnot and if you succeed, you're a damn
great person and hell with socialists and hell with british snobbery
against businesspeople. she admired businessmen and workers who got
their hands dirty. she wanted to cut taxes because the british
government taxed people like 90%. jesus, even leftist lennon wanted
to leave britain because the government took everything. like
harrison sang 'taxman..you suck!!'.
why should people who invest and make sacrifices turn over their dough
to the government which only fattens and expands a lazy bureaucracy
and makes the masses of people dependent and lazy on handouts?
by the time thatcher came along, UK had universal health care but
economically it was off the map. it was a 3rd rate country.
but thatcher came and changed all that. indeed, labor today is
thatcher in the 80s. they are for business, unexorbitant taxation,
etc.
GOD BLESS THATCHER!!!! she's my idea of a woman, anyday!!!!!!!!!
Calvin Rice
which he spoke was exactly what the lefties are always trying to place on
generations born long after the ones who did the harm. Sometimes one on
the right parrots a thought from the left, and vice versa. It happens.
-cr
m...@q7.com (Sawfish) wrote in message news:<99347870...@q7.q7.com>...
Roger D. White
"...and americans and canadians wiped out the indians. i mean we're all
guilty."
To which Calvin Rice replied:
<<I've never wiped out an Indian, so don't lay your leftie guilt trip on
me.>>
I don't believe Mr Gazzo meant you *personally*, Calvin; and you're both
right. But by the same token, can all Germans ( including Riefenstahl)
be judged guilty of similar genocide of the Jews? Probably Matthew
Bradey and certainly other artists, presented American governmental
figures in a positive light at the same time they were issuing the
slaughter of the native people of this country. I don't hear of any
particular scorn heaped on him.
~ Roger
John Harkness
Who said anything about all Germans?
And Matthew Brady wasn't, IIRC, funded by the American government. And
if you've ever seen Brady's photographs, he doesn't make anybody look
very glamourous.
Leni Riefenstahl was a Nazi, an inner circle Nazi, and unrepentant
Nazi who did their publicity. God, there's some cretins on this ng.
John Harkness
killfiling thread now.
Grativo
>against his own right.
I would correct this. It's the left of the Nazi party that got wiped out.
The Nazi groups that benefited the most by the purge were the industrialists
and army officers.
Grativo
Sawfish
>j...@attcanada.ca (John Harkness) wrote in message news:<3b3753b9....@nntp.attcanada.ca>...
>indians gave us gambling? you mean them totem poles were really slot machines?
Yes. And they are now sharing their culture with us, teaching us the
"double-down" ritual, etc.
Sawfish
You're on a roll, Tony. Essentially, right on the money...
TJNORT
altogether smarter man than the flashier Winston Churchill, whom Baldwin
outmanuevered on a regular basis. For example while Baldwin was much
criticized in 1936 by Churchill and others for appointing the unmilitary Sir
Thomas Inskip Minister for the Coordination of Defense, it was the much-derided
Inskip who decided to allocate more resources to RAF Fighter Command than were
previously intended. Without those resources, the Battle of Britain might well
have been lost. (Had Churchill's advice been followed before the war the
British in 1940 would have fielded a minimum of fighters and a plethora of
obsolescent bombers of the types that the Luftwaffe and German flak shot down
like so many clay pigeons during the Battle of France. One might note that the
prewar fighters vs. bombers debate has its echo in the current SDI debate.) It
is also perhaps a pity that age and declining health led Baldwin to retire in
1937, as he had no desire as he put it "to get this country into a war with
anybody for the League of Nations -- or anybody else." He went on to add, "If
there is any fighting in Europe to be done, I should like to see the Bolshies
and the Nazis doing it." The history of Europe might have been very different,
and probably happier, if Britain and France had gotten involved in a war with
Germany, if one was necessary, AFTER rather than before the Germans became
embroiled in a war with the Soviet Union that would have weakened perhaps
fatally both Naziiam and Soviet Communism. For one thing it is quite possible
that the United States would not have been required to intervene at least to
the extent that it did (and continues to do) in European affairs. (On the
other hand US involvement in a war with Japan was probably inevitable, given
the situation in the Pacific and East Asia that existed in the 1930s and early
1940s. However it is also possible that the additional maritime power that
France and Britain could have projected into the Far East if they weren't
involved in a European War, in combination with American maritime power (also
unencumbered by the demands of a European war) would have been sufficient to
deter Japan and encourage her to seek more peaceful solutions in the Far East
than were eventually the case. From an "imperial" point of view one might
point out that it was Japan and not Germany that dealt the first fatal blows to
the overseas empires of France (in Indochina) and Britain (in Malaya and
Burma). In fact it was at Singapore and not in Europe or Africa that Britain
suffered its greatest military defeat during the Second World War (and the
British records concerning Singapore were sealed for seventy-five years, if I
am not mistaken. There must have been much about the defeat that Chruchill and
others in the British government wanted to keep as long as possible beyond the
public gaze.)
I might add that a friend and I used to joke about the TV series CHURCHILL:
THE WILDERNESS YEARS that both Baldwin and Chamberlain were coming across as
more interesting and intriguing figures than Chruchil, to such an extent that
the progam might just as well have been retitled the I LOVE STAN AND NEVILLE
SHOW.
> the Cold Shoulder in Russia.
>From: manancie...@hotmail.com (anthony gazzo)
>Date: 6/25/01 9:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <176e6148.01062...@posting.google.com>
Calvin Rice
> Leni Riefenstahl was a Nazi, an inner circle Nazi, and unrepentant
> Nazi who did their publicity. God, there's some cretins on this ng.
> John Harkness
> killfiling thread now.
and then he tries to grab the last word by making his final statement and
killfiling the thread.
What an insecure jerk.
-cr
Roger D. White
Well, I must admit my Brady / Riefenstahl analogy *was* a little weak -
in detail, if not basic concept.
And while I haven't found any "cretins" in this mostly bright and warm
ng, I will say that one of the most telling indicia of littleness is the
unwillingness to be considerate toward those with whom one disagrees.
Now that I've had some experience with Mr Harkness' attitudes, I've
about concluded that his criticizing Riefenstahl is a little like having
one's cheap suit criticized by Emmett Kelly.
~ Roger
Tom Cervo
>Bradey and certainly other artists, presented American governmental
>figures in a positive light at the same time they were issuing the
>slaughter of the native people of this country. I don't hear of any
>particular scorn heaped on him.
Because they didn't.
The only high official who ever issued an order that could be called genocidal
was Sir Jefferey Amherst, who wanted his indian agents to issue smallpox
infected blankets to rebellious tribes. They refused.
And the only Native American tribe ever deliberately wiped out was the Erie
nation, an Eastern Woodland tribe. The Iroquois did it. All the rest suffered
through the malign neglect of men who should have known better--but that's
hardly genocide.
Henry Glenworthy
"anthony gazzo" <manancie...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> j...@attcanada.ca (John Harkness) wrote
> > It's always been my problem with movies like Das Boot and Stalingrad.
> > Oh, look at those poor soldiers. They're not Nazis, they're just
> > ordinary people in a horrible situation. The hell with them. They made
> > a deal with the devil, or at least his apprentice. Then the bill came
> > due. It always does.
Guess what? The Second World War is over. The Nazis lost.
> and americans and canadians wiped out the indians. i mean we're all
guilty.
'Fraid not. For one thing none of my ancestors had anything whatsoever
to do with injuring, let alone killing, an Indian. BTW, who are those
Indian-look-alike impostors scattered all over North America in
reservations?
--
"History is a better guide than good intentions.
Jeanne Kirkpatrick
===================================
Mike O'Sullivan
of the party that was in favour of creches in Ravensbruck camp for Jewish
mothers?
"Grativo" <gra...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010625152812...@ng-fo1.aol.com...
anthony gazzo
>
> And Matthew Brady wasn't, IIRC, funded by the American government. And
> if you've ever seen Brady's photographs, he doesn't make anybody look
> very glamourous.
>
> Leni Riefenstahl was a Nazi, an inner circle Nazi, and unrepentant
> Nazi who did their publicity. God, there's some cretins on this ng.
>
> John Harkness
> killfiling thread now.
if we can understand alida valli's undying love for cretin harry lime,
we can understand if not forgive leni.
people are weird. most blacks, even who know o.j. simpson is guilty,
supported O.J.
chinese still justify their murderous occupation of tibet.
japanese will not face up to nanking.
americans will not face up to hiroshima.
jews will not face up to oppression of palestinians.
arabs will not face up to sheer stupidity of islam.
hindus and muslims still hate eachother in india.
at least germans for the most part came clean and have denazified
themselves and have apologized profusely to everyone they harmed.
the problem with leni isn't really ideology. had she grown up in
stalin's russia, she would have kissed stalin's butt. had she grown
up in hollywood, she'd have kissed mogul ass. had she been born in
sicily she would have kissed mafia ass. she was an asskisser, true.
but what matter is she was also an asskicker as filmmaker and deserves
her artistic reputation.
but like jesus said, forgive and forget and enough with cheek
slapping.
anthony gazzo
> which he spoke was exactly what the lefties are always trying to place on
> generations born long after the ones who did the harm. Sometimes one on
> the right parrots a thought from the left, and vice versa. It happens.
>
> -cr
>
you're right. i mean germans born today aren't guilty of nazism. i
don't believe in collective guilt. but suppose nazis had prevailed
and a prosperous germany(that stretches across russia)had built their
wealth and empire upon the mass murder of millions. could germans
today glibly say they are not guilt of the past? whether germans of
this hypothetical present are still nazi or not, their well being,
privelge, and advantages have been built upon oppression and mass
murder of nongermans.
of course, the american case is different. most indians were wiped
off by disease, not genocide. and north america was sparsely
populated(at most 9 million indians in all of north america)before
white man came. so it was not the scale of murder that nazis were
going to inflict on the slavic folk.
also, the moral order of 19th century was different than that of mid
20th century. i mean even the indians believed in might is right and
were wiping eachother off before white man wiped them all off. so in
the moral climate of 18th and 19th century, the whole world, from
british empire to zulu tribe believed in 'if i can kick your ass, you
better kiss mine'. chinese, europeans, africans, arabs, turks,
everyone in fact.
but clearly by mid 20th century, with every corner of the globe
conquered and whites feeling progressive and a little guilty, that
sort of conquest and mass murder was no longer fashionable so hitler
was wrong and germans clearly went batty.
Man...an Ancient Race
"S D" <for...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:16818-3B...@storefull-217.iap.bryant.webtv.net...
> And I guess all those folks who furthered the myth of America the
> Beautiful , at a time when the Indians were being slaughtered, Mexico
> had its territory stolen, and the slave trade flourished, should be
> taken to task as well. History is written by the winners.
>
then winners must be the politically correct since they write history now.
it used to be history was written by winners. now it's written by whiners.
Calvin Rice
> but suppose nazis had prevailed
> and a prosperous germany(that stretches across russia)had built their
> wealth and empire upon the mass murder of millions. could germans
> today glibly say they are not guilt of the past?
Not enough time has passed. The children of Nazis are very much alive.
Even Leni Riefenstahl (whom I dont blame) is still alive. Whereas the
American slave-owners and Indian killers are more removed from the
present generation.
-cr
manancie...@hotmail.com (anthony gazzo) wrote in message news:<176e6148.0106...@posting.google.com>...
Sawfish
>j...@attcanada.ca (John Harkness) wrote in message news:<3b378ab9....@nntp.attcanada.ca>...
>> Who said anything about all Germans?
>>
>> And Matthew Brady wasn't, IIRC, funded by the American government. And
>> if you've ever seen Brady's photographs, he doesn't make anybody look
>> very glamourous.
>>
>> Leni Riefenstahl was a Nazi, an inner circle Nazi, and unrepentant
>> Nazi who did their publicity. God, there's some cretins on this ng.
>>
>> John Harkness
>> killfiling thread now.
>if we can understand alida valli's undying love for cretin harry lime,
>we can understand if not forgive leni.
>people are weird. most blacks, even who know o.j. simpson is guilty,
>supported O.J.
>chinese still justify their murderous occupation of tibet.
>japanese will not face up to nanking.
>americans will not face up to hiroshima.
>jews will not face up to oppression of palestinians.
>arabs will not face up to sheer stupidity of islam.
>hindus and muslims still hate eachother in india.
Christians are dumb enough to believe that their spiritual paycheck is in
the mail, and won't arrive until after they die.
Buddists managed to corrupt a body of good practical advice into yet
another cult of personality.
>at least germans for the most part came clean and have denazified
>themselves and have apologized profusely to everyone they harmed.
...and then some.
>the problem with leni isn't really ideology. had she grown up in
>stalin's russia, she would have kissed stalin's butt. had she grown
>up in hollywood, she'd have kissed mogul ass. had she been born in
>sicily she would have kissed mafia ass. she was an asskisser, true.
>but what matter is she was also an asskicker as filmmaker and deserves
>her artistic reputation.
>but like jesus said, forgive and forget and enough with cheek
>slapping.
Spot on, my gypsy friend.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. But give a man a boat,
a case of beer, and a few sticks of dynamite..." -- Sawfish
Sawfish
>os...@netscape.net (Calvin Rice) wrote in message news:<22680de.01062...@posting.google.com>...
>> I don't know Gazza from Adam, but unless he was being sarcastic, the guilt of
>> which he spoke was exactly what the lefties are always trying to place on
>> generations born long after the ones who did the harm. Sometimes one on
>> the right parrots a thought from the left, and vice versa. It happens.
>>
>> -cr
>>
>you're right. i mean germans born today aren't guilty of nazism. i
>don't believe in collective guilt. but suppose nazis had prevailed
>and a prosperous germany(that stretches across russia)had built their
>wealth and empire upon the mass murder of millions. could germans
>today glibly say they are not guilt of the past? whether germans of
>this hypothetical present are still nazi or not, their well being,
>privelge, and advantages have been built upon oppression and mass
>murder of nongermans.
>of course, the american case is different. most indians were wiped
>off by disease, not genocide. and north america was sparsely
>populated(at most 9 million indians in all of north america)before
>white man came. so it was not the scale of murder that nazis were
>going to inflict on the slavic folk.
>also, the moral order of 19th century was different than that of mid
>20th century. i mean even the indians believed in might is right and
>were wiping eachother off before white man wiped them all off. so in
>the moral climate of 18th and 19th century, the whole world, from
>british empire to zulu tribe believed in 'if i can kick your ass, you
>better kiss mine'. chinese, europeans, africans, arabs, turks,
>everyone in fact.
>but clearly by mid 20th century, with every corner of the globe
>conquered and whites feeling progressive and a little guilty, that
>sort of conquest and mass murder was no longer fashionable so hitler
>was wrong and germans clearly went batty.
Well, yes. That was the cusp of post-modernism.
Calvin Rice
> americans will not face up to hiroshima.
I'll face up to Hiroshima when the Japs (and I use the word mean-spiritedly)
face up to the horror of Pearl Harbor and the evil of starting a Pacific war
that so many young Americans had to die to win. Also let the Japs face up to
the death marches and the high rate of death in their POW camps, not to mention
the torture.
Why some people think it's not as bad to kill innocent U.S. servicemen as
for civilians to be killed by atomic bombs for the purpose of ending the
war is more than I can understand.
And don't tell me what Roosevelt might have known. That would only make him
one of the Japs. It wouldn't make the evil of what they did all right.
-cr
Will
> > americans will not face up to hiroshima.
>
> I'll face up to Hiroshima when the Japs (and I use the word mean-spiritedly)
> face up to the horror of Pearl Harbor
Governments kill. That's what they do.
The discussion issue is pretty much whether a cooperating, patriotic
citizen of a warring country that loses can later be honored for her
achievements by those on the winning side.
Had the Allies lost WWII I'd like to think that Frank Capra, for
example, could still be honored years later for his great film work,
including his propaganda films for the losing side.
But I guess there would be many Germans, Japanese, Italians,
Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Greeks, Polish, Czechs, and
Yugoslavs who would never forgive. Probably many Spaniards and Irish as
well. Possibly some Turks, the Vichi French, and major portions of
South America and Africa.
I wonder whether Frank Capra's "Why We Fight" series with its Japanese
& German caricatures would be regarded in the world's mainstream
culture much like "Triumph of the Will" is today.
BTW I don't know if any of you have seen the real hard core German
propoganda films, particularly the wretched anti-semitic stuff. Leni
Riefenstahl had nothing to do with this kind of thing. Olympia, for
example, would seem very familiar and enjoyable to a general audience
today (allowing for our epidemic attention deficit syndrome) as it set
the tone for films of the Olympics (Bud Greenspan, et al) forever
after. Except for the ... you could almost say unavoidable ... shots of
the host country's leader, this film is a celebration of humanity.
Steve Oldham
The problem with your argument is that there's no moral equivalence
between our conduct in the war and Germany's. I don't know if Capra
would have gone along if he were a german film maker but the fact is,
Riefenstahl did.
For a highly intelligent person like Riefenstahl to claim she had no
idea where Hitler was heading, especially considering the crowd she
hung out with, is ludicrous. Common sense tells me that she knew but
chose to follow the power.
Steve
anthony gazzo
>
> > but suppose nazis had prevailed
> > and a prosperous germany(that stretches across russia)had built their
> > wealth and empire upon the mass murder of millions. could germans
> > today glibly say they are not guilt of the past?
>
> Not enough time has passed. The children of Nazis are very much alive.
> Even Leni Riefenstahl (whom I dont blame) is still alive. Whereas the
> American slave-owners and Indian killers are more removed from the
> present generation.
>
> -cr
this is true. we can't blame modern day turks for ottoman empire
misdeeds nor modern day mongols for genghis khan.
besides, for every american injustice, there were 4 or 5 great
everlasting justices. i mean when we had slavery, rest of the world
did too, esp. nonwestern worlds. but put an end to it out of our own
volition. we are cool and ultimately just. we can be bad and mean
but ultimately we come around and uncle sam pats everyone on the
shoulder and passes out free beer.
anthony gazzo
okay, i'll play your game. the japs. what you say about them is true.
they were horrendously cruel buggers. just awful, often sadistic, and
what they did in asia simply outrageous.
but who opened up japan which was superduper isolationist? that idiot
american commodore perry. he said open up your ports or i'll blow
them kingdom come.
and who sold japan fuel and raw materials to conquer most of china?
yes, good ole USA which didn't give a fiddlestick about dying chinese.
and then who provoked japan into bombing pearl harbor? the cretinous
FDR who was a lunatic, but i'll give him credit for getting US
involved and defeating the scourge of nazism though i agree with pat
buchanan that had FDR played his cards right, he could have realized
the destruction of nazism and communism simultaneously.
anyway, hiroshima goes beyond all this. i don't think you should wipe
out civilian populations in this manner. not even nazi german civilian
population. any mass killing where the victims involve newborn babe
to elderly gramps breathing his or her last is crazy, insane, lunatic,
murderous. had the bomb been dropped on military base or on a mass of
japanese soldiers, then okay. horrendous as it is, it is war. but you
do not wipe out children, women, dogs, patients in hospital, even
those who oppose japanese war machine all indiscrimately.
the only time when such act is justifiable is when a nation is about
to be conquered by another nation. a desperate last measure act. for
example, had mexico had the Bomb when america was kicking its butt and
on the verge of taking much of southwest northamerica, then it would
have been justified in using the bomb. but US had clobbed japan so
bad, japan was on its last legs, its empire was virtually ruined, its
population was shellshocked and devastated. you don't use the bomb
when you're this far ahead. for this reason, harry truman the
so-called compassionate liberal must be remembered as a mass murderer
and a war criminal.
Mike O'Sullivan
Nazi past with good education of the younger generation, unlike the Japanese
who try to sweep the truth of, for example, the rape of Nanking under the
carpet, and even rewrite school history books, with the result that the
young generation simply do not know the horrific record of their ancestors.
"anthony gazzo" <manancie...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:176e6148.0106...@posting.google.com...
Roger D. White
Calvin, you make some very good points, and I applaud your sense of
humanity and compassion.
However, please keep in mind that without the bomb, the next phase of
the war would probably have been a massive invasion of Japan, which
would have resulted in a still greater, huge loss of American life. We
would have been up against an utterly fanatical enemy, prepared to fight
to the death, on their own soil.
I admit the bombings were about as brutal and barbaric as it gets, but
they're the ones who wanted to go to war. I'm not sure that only a
military strike would have convinced the Japanese to surrender. BTW,
I've heard that leaflets were dropped before the bombings, warning the
citizens to evacuate, but I'm not certain about that.
Truman's great moral delimma (which, as it turned out, he decided
quickly), was whether to do this horrendous thing, and end this long war
at once, or to needlessly sacrifice the lives of untold thousands of
*American boys* in a further, drawn out conflict.
I feel certain that judging from Japan's past atrocities, they wouldn't
have hesitated to do the same thing to us, if they'd had the bomb.
Another confirmation of Grant's "War is hell."
~ Roger
Calvin Rice
In your listing of the crimes of the U.S. you failed to mention that the
Japanese started the war (whether FDR was one of them or not) and you didn't
mention that the atomic bombs ended the war and saved American servicemen's
lives. Complaints about the horrors of the bomb should be addressed to
the Japanese leaders who brought that hell upon their own people.
-cr
Roger D. White
Oops, my previous remarks were meant, of course, as a reply to those of
Anthony.
Interesting thread, but what the heck happened to the idea of *movies*?!
;-)
~ Roger
Sawfish
After reading a moderate amount about the post-Meiji Japanese culture,
observing the culture in both it's current incarnation and also remnants
of the culture in 2-4th gen Japanese american, I'd say that the Japanese
leadership did not deserve the Japanese people. It was like The Prince and
the Pauper, but the prince never has a heart and wises up. Those assholes
spent the lives of their own people like Safeway coupons that come due
tomorrow--and merely to avoid having to admit that they made
serious strategic mistakes that anyone with a single gram of humility
could have foreseen and avoided.
S D
planned to attack US with germ warfare.
Tom Cervo
>& German caricatures would be regarded in the world's mainstream
>culture much like "Triumph of the Will" is today.
David Thomson took this same tack. It didn't work then--the "caricatures" were
almost entirely actual newsreel footage, meant as propaganda for their own side
and used against them. They may not have chosen pleasing pictures, but they
were real, and they were celebrating militarism. One test is that if you see
the actual film, it's appalling.
>Olympia, for
>example, would seem very familiar and enjoyable to a general audience
>today (allowing for our epidemic attention deficit syndrome) as it set
>the tone for films of the Olympics (Bud Greenspan, et al) forever
>after. Except for the ... you could almost say unavoidable ... shots of
>the host country's leader, this film is a celebration of humanity.
A celebration of flesh, perhaps, but not the stuff that fills it out. LR would
have been a hack if she never had the fortune to film a Nazi rally that was
practically staged for her cameras. Her films are like Hitler's
landscapes--devoid of people.
Tom Cervo
>though i agree with pat
>buchanan that had FDR played his cards right, he could have realized
>the destruction of nazism and communism simultaneously.
>
Praise from Caesar.
Calvin Rice
> Re: Hiroshima
Roger, you got the attributions wrong. Your reply should be directed
to the other guy. I'm the one who supports the a-bombing for saving
American servicemen's lives, and I'm the one who refuses to forget
Pearl harbor and all the other Jananese atrocities. I would have
nuked Tokyo too, if they hadn't hurried up and surrendered.
Calvin
anthony gazzo
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:56:44 GMT, Will <nos...@noway.com> wrote:
>
>
> The problem with your argument is that there's no moral equivalence
> between our conduct in the war and Germany's. I don't know if Capra
> would have gone along if he were a german film maker but the fact is,
> Riefenstahl did.
capra's propaganda films were even more odious than triumph of the
will. triumph emphasizes german pride and there is hardly any mention
of hatred for nonaryans. but capra films label japanese as subhuman
'japs' and appeal to the most murderous and jingoistic part of
american character.
>
> For a highly intelligent person like Riefenstahl to claim she had no
> idea where Hitler was heading, especially considering the crowd she
> hung out with, is ludicrous. Common sense tells me that she knew but
> chose to follow the power.
>
it was not a certainty that hitler would go to such extremes. indeed,
had france and britain not tried to appease hitler and stood firm,
there might have been no war, hitler might have concentrated on
building german economy and might have died a great statesman.
i mean look at malcolm x. he used to believe in black muslimism which
said whites are subhuman scum created by some scientist named yakub.
yet, so many blacks too him seriously while disregarding his race
theories cuz as ossie davis wrote, malcolm made downtrodden blacks
feel like a man.
and when mao the commie pinko took over china people knew he was a
hardline stalinist but so many chinese supported him and many chinese
americans went back to china to help mao build a new china.
in all these cases, the sense of renewed hope and pride for a fallen
people made people blind to the extremism that went with the restored
pride and hope.
even today, we have liberals praising murderous thuggish rappers as
truth tellers. black american leaders often go to africa to dally
with thuggish african leaders out of black brotherhood and pride
nonsense.
that's how the world is. name some of your heroes and i'll bet you
admire some people by neglecting to acknowledge their extremist sides.
anthony gazzo
> At least the present generation of Germans are facing up to the truth of the
> Nazi past with good education of the younger generation, unlike the Japanese
> who try to sweep the truth of, for example, the rape of Nanking under the
> carpet, and even rewrite school history books, with the result that the
> young generation simply do not know the horrific record of their ancestors.
>
actually germans go too far. i don't mind germans finding out about
the holocaust but young children shouldn't be told this in the current
manner.
what democracies need is a healthy skepticism. when young kids in
kindergartens are told to feel guilty for jews, you're not helping
them think; you're conditioning them like pavlovian dogs to love the
jew cuz jews are the best and past germans are scum. surely, this is
better teaching than nazi hatred but the methods are the same.
uncritical brainwashing of young kids. drumming kids with what is
right, no questions asked, especially when they too young to
understand the meaning of war, genocide, and other complex themes in
history.
anti-hitler youth is hardly better than hitler youth in creating free
thinking individuals.
as for the japanese, there is a reason. germany is surrounded by
democracies which have all come to terms with their abuses in the
past. french, italians, britains, germans, etc. have all pressured
eachother to face up to bigotry, warmongering, imperialism, etc. and
they have been democracies since end of world war II.
in asia, japan was the only democracy up until recently. so despite
japan's less-than-satisfactory democracy, the other asian nations were
more thuggish, murderous, cruel following world war II. china was
communist, south korea was military dictatorship, north korea was
communist, taiwan was military dictatorship, philippines was marcos's
playground. so, though japan was not a fullfledged democracy, it was
still better than these other asian nations and US needed japanese
friendship and didn't pressure japan to be a saintly little nation.
and the asian nations pressuring japan to clean up its history books
should clean up theirs. when will china admit to killing over 1
million in tibet? when will north korea admit it started the korean
war? and so on.
also, americans never faced up the madness of hiroshima and nagasaki.
in nagasaki, fully 1/4 of casualties were korean civilians brought to
japan to work like slaves. that kind of indiscrimate killing is
madness, pure and simple.
the best way to end all this is to say what's done is done and let's
not repeat it. and i dont' think japan is planning to invade china. i
don't think US wants to meddle in other nations' affairs. these days,
the only asians causing trouble are chinese and north koreans, both
still undemocratic and communist.
maybe we should provoke a war agains them and liberate taiwan once and
for all.
i'm losing my train of thought so i'll quit here.
anthony gazzo
I disagree. For one thing, if invading japan would have led to such
high casualities, why invade at all? japan was defeated. its
military power was in shambles. it had no friends or allies. it had
no raw materials. it was isolated. so why invade? why go for
unconditional surrender if the the only two options are invasion with
high casualities or mass murder of civilians by dropping the atomic
bomb?
but if we had to push for unconditional surrender, isn't it more
decent to sacrifice the lives of american soldiers than dropping a
bomb on children and women? i mean is the american soldier so
cowardly that he thinks 'gee, i'd rather we have pulverize babies,
children, mothers, grannies, infirm, etc. just so i don't have to
die'? is this the way american soldiers are trained to think? yeah,
war is hell, and no one wants to die but if i were a soldier and was
told it would have to me possibly dying or dropping a bomb on civilian
populations of an enemy nation and thereby vaporing everyone from baby
to grannie, i'd rather fight than have it finished that way.
that's just sick.
Calvin Rice
of profanity I can dream up. But that would be bad net behavior, so -
Have a nice day.
-cr
manancie...@hotmail.com (anthony gazzo) wrote in message news:<176e6148.01062...@posting.google.com>...
Steve Oldham
gazzo) wrote:
Yes, that's the way the world is but we as individuals don't have to
follow charismatic heroes. We can allow God to hone our conscience and
then follow that.
I agree that many people have done (and do today) basically what
Riefenstahl did. They're all cowards who go with the flow under the
banner of 'pride' or 'revenge' or 'equality' while disregarding their
conscience (if they still have one).
I don't have any human heroes in the usual sense. Hero worship is
dangerous to both parties.
Dylan's pretty good though.
Steve
Jeffrey Davis
Steve Oldham wrote:
>Dylan's pretty good though.
Bob Dylan?
Steve Oldham
wrote:
>
>
>Steve Oldham wrote:
>
>>Dylan's pretty good though.
>
>Bob Dylan?
>
Yep, him and Waits and V. Morrison...the big 3.
Steve
Sawfish
Dylan helped me grow up.
Yes. I, too, believed in heroes as a confused young man who was being
persued by Uncle Sam to serve in the muggy swamps that are Vietnam, there
to have my masculine equipment separated from me by some kind of booby
trap, most likely. So, the anti-war message of Dylan (and countless
others) was an easy sell to me and others like me. They became spokesmen
and heroes, and to a degree we conferred upon them the mantle of arbitter
of our moral ideals.
Then, a few years after I was fully and finally freed from threat of 'Nam
by a 4-F, I was listening to The Ballad of HUrricane Carter. Yeah, man!
Good stuff!
Not long after, Carter got a new trial. He was *again* found guilty, and
there were a lot of questions raised in my mind about just what kind of a
person he actually was. E.g., was he really a middle-weight contender who
could "take a man out with just one punch," but who "didn't like to talk
about it all that much. 'It's my job and I do it for pay. When the job is
over, I'd as soon be on my way.'"--as the song says?
The more I found out about Carter, the worse it looked for Dylan's
judgement. Finally, after Carter was release a few years abck and he got
on the interview circuit, I listened to him A LOT. It's my read that he's
a self-serving egotist who's none to bothered by moving nimbly in and out
of the factual truth, avoiding specific questions when it suits him. In
short, he may not have killed those folks in the bar that night, but we'll
never find out by asking him.
Once I realized that, I realized what a folly the whole mechanism was: to
allow people like Jackson Browne to do my thinking for me. And it gets
worse: there are people who let Alec Baldwin decide
moral/political/economic issue for them, as did other people defer to a
crass entertainer, Rush Limbaugh.
Time to grow up, huh?
--
--Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"I wouldn't want to belong to a club that would accept someone like me
as a member." --G. Marx
Jeffrey Davis
Steve Oldham wrote:
Heroes?
Grativo
>of the party that was in favour of creches in Ravensbruck camp for Jewish
>mothers?
You're missing the point. The people who got wiped out in 1934 were generally
the Socialist wing of the National Socialism. They were basically calling for
nationalization of German heavy industry and replacement of the German Army
with the street thugs who helped the Nazis get into power. Only after these
people were wiped out was Hitler able to reach out to the industrialists and
the army officers to consolidate his regime.
Grativo
Steve Oldham
Yes I've seen the Carter evidence on both sides and there's very
little doubt in my mind that he's guilty as hell. Dylan foolishly
followed his heart as he did with the song 'Joey' in which he fawns
over a vicious thug named Joey Gallo.
He said it himself..."Don't follow leaders, watch your parking
meters".
Steve