# 'Canada' Loves Nazis?



## Debby (Nov 26, 2014)

I just get prouder and prouder.....not.

"Canada was one of just three nations to vote against a resolution at the United Nations last Friday to fight the "glorification of Nazism.......The resolution was brought forward by Russia at the UN General Assembly's Third Committee, which deals with human rights. It calls on nations to combat "glorification of Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance." It also urges countries to take legislative measures to end all forms of Holocaust denial.
The United States and Ukraine joined Canada in voting against the resolution, but 115 other countries — including Israel — voted in favour. There were 55 abstentions."http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11/26/canada-united-nations-nazism-resolution_n_6228152.html


When ones own country fails to work with the majority of the world to decry one of the most evil regimes in the world's history, what is left to respect?


----------



## Geezerette (Nov 26, 2014)

Makes me not exactly proud to be American too. Just an example of the lengths some folks will go to protect "freedom of speech", no matter how disgusting & repugnant & totally false  the speech in question may be.


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2014)

Sorry?  Not sure what point you are making Geezerette.  Care to clarify?


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 26, 2014)

Geezerette said:


> Makes me not exactly proud to be American too. Just an example of the lengths some folks will go to protect "freedom of speech", no matter how disgusting & repugnant & totally false  the speech in question may be.




See... that's the thing about "freedom of Speech".....  it's Freedom of speech...  Not just speech you agree with... Not just speech that is sanctioned and approved by one segment of society.. it's about everyones right to speak.    Even Nazi's I guess... AND that's exactly the thing that makes ME proud to live in a free county..  Sorry you are not.


----------



## Debby (Nov 26, 2014)

Actually in Canada, we have laws against hate speech which the Nazi rhetoric (hate Jews, minorities deserve to die, the Holocaust never happened, etc.)would butt up against.  To me, morally, it's wrong to protect anything that could be designed to inflame and cause harm to any group, not to mention that it seems to me this abstention gives the finger to that law and coming from the very body that is supposed to be the ultimate guardian of that law, makes it even more reprehensible.

"Canada’s human rights hate speech laws are a constitutionally valid limit on freedom of expression, the Supreme Court has unanimously ruled in a landmark judgment......In upholding a definition of hatred first crafted by the Supreme Court in 1991, the current justices ruled that the hate speech section of Saskatchewan’s Human Rights Code addresses a pressing and substantial issue, and is proportional to its objective of “tackling causes of discriminatory activity to reduce the harmful effects and social costs of discrimination.”
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/02/27/supreme-court-upholds-canadas-hate-speech-laws-in-case-involving-anti-gay-crusader/

Because our law looks to protect the individual or groups from discriminatory speech that leads to harm, the fact that our government has chosen to ignore that and substantially protect the rhetoric of 'Nazi' groups, is an affront to the very law that our Supreme Court has upheld.  The only reason they did this is because the new government of the Ukraine is made up of neo-Nazi's and Nazi sympathizers.  In fact we just promised them $11 million in support.

A teacher in Alberta named James Keegstra was teaching anti-Semitism in his classes.  Would you protect that kind of teaching in your schools? 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/when-is-it-hate-speech-7-significant-canadian-cases-1.1036731 

This link:  http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraines-neo-nazis-demand-respect/5408092   gives another pretty clear idea of the thinking of the people in that government.  Note the attitude about 'Semites/Jews' that is mentioned here and there in the article.  

I would rather my government had spent $11 million and Canada's reputation on the ebola crisis in S. Africa, or feeding orphans or any other GOOD cause, but not giving it to beasts who worship the actions of Adolf Hitler.


----------



## Laurie (Nov 27, 2014)

A piece of nonsense.

When Russia presents a resolution on human rights the world should regard it with a jaundiced eye.

It often takes more courage to disagree with the mob.

Well done Canada.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 27, 2014)

The U.S. took in known Nazis right after the war to help with our science and intelligence programs.  Gave them freedom of person which is more important than speech for most...


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

Laurie said:


> A piece of nonsense.
> 
> When Russia presents a resolution on human rights the world should regard it with a jaundiced eye.
> 
> ...




Just a question Laurie, how much research have you actually done on Putin, Russia, their economy.....or are you just accepting what you hear on the BBC?

And are you in favour of governments ignoring the laws of their own land in favour of knee jerk emotionalism or a desire to suck up to other nations?  Because that's what it sounds like.

(Sorry for the double post- must be ice on our antennae so my computer access seems to have slowed down.  Didn't know it had already posted)


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

Ralphy1 said:


> The U.S. took in known Nazis right after the war to help with our science and intelligence programs.  Gave them freedom of person which is more important than speech for most...




Not sure if they were members of the Nazi party.. but they certainly were German Scientists.. many of them Jewish.  Can we hold all Citizens responsible for the actions of the government?   Oh wait... we always seem to... at least on message boards.

Yes debby.. we have hate speech laws also... as defined by USlegal.com




> Hate speech is a communication that carries no meaning other than the expression of hatred for some group, especially in circumstances in which the communication is likely to provoke violence. It is an incitement to hatred primarily against a group of persons defined in terms of race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, religion, ****** orientation, and the like. Hate speech can be any form of expression regarded as offensive to racial, ethnic and religious groups and other discrete minorities or to women.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

Ralphy1 said:


> The U.S. took in known Nazis right after the war to help with our science and intelligence programs.  Gave them freedom of person which is more important than speech for most...




What do you mean by 'freedom of person'?  Is that the same as saving the lives (for a price, i.e. their devastating research knowledge) of people who did terrible things and allowing them to escape the consequences of their actions?

As to your remark QS, I don't think the the average citizen is culpable for what their government does and particularly when that government is behaving reprehensibly and the citizenry is often ignorant of the why's of their actions.  It's my observations that governments have agenda's that too often the people don't have a clue about and they put a 'warm, fuzzy' face on it so the people think all is good.  

We don't get opportunities to vote on anything save who occupies the Big Chair.  But when it comes to other important issues, we're often considered to ignorant to be involved.  Case in point, when Brian Mulroney sold off al of the gold that belonged to the people of Canada back in the 80's.  It wasn't his to sell, but he did, because he was the government.   And he did it for his own benefit.  Friendship with good buddy Ronnie Reagan and a seat on the board of Barrick Gold.

Another case in point, when the Conservatives (current) changed the environmental laws that protected our northern lakes and rivers to allow mining to go in and do whatever they wanted without having to protect those bodies of water and this done, despite a Constitutional requirement that they consult with First Nations of the region.  We the people were never allowed to vote on these things despite their significance.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

Debby said:


> What do you mean by 'freedom of person'?  Is that the same as saving the lives (for a price, i.e. their devastating research knowledge) and allowing them to escape the consequences of their actions?



Again... the Scientists who came in to the US during WWII were predominantly Jews fleeing Nazi Germany.. NOT Nazis.  Yes SOME worked on the Atomic bomb, but the majority entered the scientific community in all areas and revolutionized US science, and inventions..  

http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/august/german-jewish-inventors-081114.html

U.S. patents increased by 31 percent in fields common among Jewish scientists who fled Nazi Germany for America, according to Stanford economist Petra Moser. Their innovative influence rippled outward for generations, as the émigrés attracted new researchers who then trained other up-and-comers.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 27, 2014)

Yes, we hung those who were of no use to us and brought in those who were.  Operation Paper Clip brought to the U.S. those who could help us with the Russian intelligence network,  but who were responsible for the torture and murder of their own citizens who were thought to be acting against the Reich...


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

Debby said:


> What do you mean by 'freedom of person'?  Is that the same as saving the lives (for a price, i.e. their devastating research knowledge) of people who did terrible things and allowing them to escape the consequences of their actions?
> 
> As to your remark QS, I don't think the the average citizen is culpable for what their government does and particularly when that government is behaving reprehensibly and the citizenry is often ignorant of the why's of their actions.  It's my observations that governments have agenda's that too often the people don't have a clue about and they put a 'warm, fuzzy' face on it so the people think all is good.
> 
> ...



That would be the same with the majority of Germans.  They couldn't control the actions of Hitler.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

I've heard that name 'Operation Paperclip' before.  Maybe I'll look at it later when I have a minute.


----------



## Ralphy1 (Nov 27, 2014)

Yes, and then there was the Rat Line that some catholic authorities used to get people like Eichman and Mengle to South America...


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

Martin Luther King said in his famous speech, "I have a dream that one day even the State of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice".  I think that's a dream that we should all focus on for the globe because we have become  a global village and when governments refuse to decry the rhetoric of Naziism, the possibility of that dream coming to fruition is further minimized.  

That's why I find my governments stance on this so terribly offensive (not to mention that it flies in the ties of our own Surpreme Court decisions).  These kinds of changes start with each individual (bottom up) and need the governments to stand behind them (top down) and with luck we meet in the middle to achieve the goal of peace.  Call me an idealist, but that's how I feel.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

You know QS, I just looked up Operation Paperclip (Ralph's comment) and came up with the following:

"Truman's order expressly excluded anyone found "to have been a member of the Nazi Party, and more than a nominal participant in its activities, or an active supporter of Nazi militarism". However, those restrictions would have rendered ineligible most of the leading scientists the JIOA had identified for recruitment, among them rocket scientistsWernher von Braun, Kurt H. Debus andArthur Rudolph, and the physician Hubertus Strughold, each earlier classified as a "menace to the security of the Allied Forces............To circumvent President Truman's anti-Nazi order and the Allied Potsdam and Yalta agreements, the JIOA worked independently to create false employment and political biographies for the scientists. The JIOA also expunged from the public record the scientists' Nazi Party memberships and régime affiliations. Once "bleached" of their Nazism, the scientists were granted security clearances by the U.S. government to work in the United States....."

which leads me to doubt that any of those scientists were Jews that America was trying to save or whatever.  

(The JIOA was the Joint Intelligence Objective Agency)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

Debby said:


> You know QS, I just looked up Operation Paperclip (Ralph's comment) and came up with the following:
> 
> "Truman's order expressly excluded anyone found "to have been a member of the Nazi Party, and more than a nominal participant in its activities, or an active supporter of Nazi militarism". However, those restrictions would have rendered ineligible most of the leading scientists the JIOA had identified for recruitment, among them rocket scientistsWernher von Braun, Kurt H. Debus andArthur Rudolph, and the physician Hubertus Strughold, each earlier classified as a "menace to the security of the Allied Forces............To circumvent President Truman's anti-Nazi order and the Allied Potsdam and Yalta agreements, the JIOA worked independently to create false employment and political biographies for the scientists. The JIOA also expunged from the public record the scientists' Nazi Party memberships and régime affiliations. Once "bleached" of their Nazism, the scientists were granted security clearances by the U.S. government to work in the United States....."
> 
> ...



Ok..  So I guess the article from Stanford was lying then..  I suppose Einstein was a murderous Nazi too?


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 27, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> See... that's the thing about "freedom of Speech".....  it's Freedom of speech...  Not just speech you agree with... Not just speech that is sanctioned and approved by one segment of society.. it's about everyones right to speak.    Even Nazi's I guess... AND that's exactly the thing that makes ME proud to live in a free county..  Sorry you are not.



I agree, freedom of speech is used by many people in America.  Not too long ago there were Satanists handing out pamphlets, etc. and people were in an uproar.  But if those of other religions can do the same thing, then the Satanists have the right to share their beliefs with others too.  I'm proud to live in a free country, and hope it stays that way.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> I agree, freedom of speech is used by many people in America.  Not too long ago there were Satanists handing out pamphlets, etc. and people were in an uproar.  But if those of other religions can do the same thing, then the Satanists have the right to share their beliefs with others too.  I'm proud to live in a free country, and hope it stays that way.



That was exactly my point.  You can't give SOME freedom of speech and not everyone.  That is what a free country is based on.  We may not agree.. and the spoutings of some may be odeous.. but that comes with freedom.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> Ok..  So I guess the article from Stanford was lying then..  I suppose Einstein was a murderous Nazi too?




What article are you talking about? 

From this article:  http://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/einstein.htm

German Propaganda Archive:

"*Background: *Since Einstein was Jewish, the Nazis had to argue that he was no scientific genius, but rather a typical Jew of limited abilities. This 1939 article comes from the _Mitteilungen über die Judenfrage, _a newsletter published by the Institut zum Studium der Judenfrage, the most prestigious of the Nazi research institutes on the “Jewish Question.” It is typical of much Nazi propaganda directed against Einstein. It makes, among other things, the interesting claims that there is nothing new about the Theory of Relativity, and even if there were, Einstein plagiarized it.*The source: *Fritz Redlin, “Das Judenporträt: Albert Einstein. Die ‘Sehenswürdigkeit’ von Princeton,”_Mitteilungen über die Judenfrage,_ 3 (9 March 1939), pp. 3-4.

Another link:  http://www.ppu.org.uk/learn/infodocs/people/pp-einstein2.html
goes on to point out that Einsteins property was confiscated by the Nazi's and where he had once believed an economic blockade would bring down that regime, he began to realize that it would take armed resistance and he began to press for an international peace force to prevent Nazi atrocities.


I guess it can be fairly said that no, Einstein was not a murderous Nazi.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> I agree, freedom of speech is used by many people in America.  Not too long ago there were Satanists handing out pamphlets, etc. and people were in an uproar.  But if those of other religions can do the same thing, then the Satanists have the right to share their beliefs with others too.  I'm proud to live in a free country, and hope it stays that way.



 If they are promoting their right to worship some non-existent entity under a full moon while dancing naked, then they have as much right as any Christian, Jew, Buddhist....but I think the minute that Satanists start to point to old ladies or old men or children or any groups of individuals as unworthy of life, et al, then their right to freely promulgate that violent hate speech becomes a non-starter. 

From Wikipedia:  
The *racial policy of Nazi Germany was a set of policies and laws implemented by Nazi Germany, asserting the superiority of the "Aryan race", and based on a specific racist doctrine which claimed scientific legitimacy. It was combined with a eugenics programme that aimed for racial hygiene by using compulsory sterilizations and extermination of theUntermenschen (or "sub-humans"), and which eventually culminated in the Holocaust. These policies targeted peoples, in particular Jews, as well as Gypsies, homosexuals and handicapped people, ethnic Poles,[SUP][1][/SUP] Russians[SUP][2][/SUP] who were labeled as "inferior" in a racial hierarchy that placed the Herrenvolk (or "master race") of the Volksgemeinschaft (or "national community") at the top, and ranked Russians, Romani, Serbs, Poles, persons of color and Jews at the bottom
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_policy_of_Nazi_Germany



 Nazi 'speech/doctrine' called for the compulsory sterilization or murder of anyone who didn't fit their ideal and neo-Nazi's have not strayed from that philosophy.  Is that really the kind of 'speech' that frees a world or moves it in the direction of peace?

Would you find it acceptable that those kind of people teach it in your schools?  Or here's a question that sort of relates to the issue but on a more contemporary level, how does this relate to the issue of cyber bullying?  Your child is getting vicious texts from someone that are threatening his life/happiness/safety.....is this 'acceptable' because of the requirement of freedom of speech?  Can you impinge on that awful persons right to say what he is saying?  What if he's hanging posters around the neighbourhood to the same effect that are causing your child untold distress?  Are there any moral/ethical limits to this 'free speech'?


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

Cyber bullying is a crime and not free speech.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> Cyber bullying is a crime and not free speech.




What's the difference?

If they both incite 'others' to disregard/hate/hurt another individual or group or simply threaten/hurt/endanger the emotional well being of the victim, what is the difference?

And what about some neo-Nazi teaching your grandchildren in their school to hate?  Does your free speech extend to him?


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

I'm not sure what your concern is.  No... Nazi's are not going to be invited into schools to teach Social Studies.  No.. it's not ok to cyber bully and cause harm.   Yes... it's ok to voice your political and religious beliefs in a open forum without prosecution.  Theres a difference and perhaps I'm not adroit enough voice it, But I understand it and I would think someone as intellegent as you would also.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Nov 27, 2014)

Debby said:


> Would you find it acceptable that those kind of people teach it in your schools?  Or here's a question that sort of relates to the issue but on a more contemporary level, how does this relate to the issue of cyber bullying?  Your child is getting vicious texts from someone that are threatening his life/happiness/safety.....is this 'acceptable' because of the requirement of freedom of speech?  Can you impinge on that awful persons right to say what he is saying?  What if he's hanging posters around the neighbourhood to the same effect that are causing your child untold distress?  Are there any moral/ethical limits to this 'free speech'?



I don't think any of those people are going to be hired as teachers in our schools to teach subjects like that.  But, I think in colleges, if a teacher has an opinion on something that they wish to share with the class, it is permitted to provoke some thought on the topic.  I think that a professor made some statements that were not favorable to America and its government, and there was some controversy about that, not sure what the result was, it was a long time ago.

If my child was personally getting vicious texts from someone threatening his safety or his life, it would be a criminal matter for sure.  I also think it's the parents obligation to teach their children right from wrong, so that if they see or hear any Nazi related talk or Satanic propaganda, they will take it for what it's worth and not let it affect their personal lives.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

We can all hope that people like James Keegstra don't get into our schools and teach our young people, but that's always a possibility.  

In 1984, Keegstra was stripped of his teaching certificate and charged under the Criminal Code of Canada with "wilfully promoting hatred against an identifiable group" by teaching his social studies students that the Holocaust was a fraud and attributing various evil qualities to Jews. He thus described Jews to his pupils as "treacherous", "subversive", "sadistic", "money-loving", "power hungry" and "child killers". He taught his classes that the Jewish people seek to destroy Christianity and are responsible for depressions, anarchy, chaos, wars and revolution. According to Keegstra, the Jews "created the Holocaust to gain sympathy" and, in contrast to the open and honest Christians, were said to be deceptive, secretive and inherently evil.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Keegstra

Is that any different from cyber bullying except without the 'cyber'?  That is the kind of law that we have in Canada, i.e. this kind of speech will not be tolerated in a country that protects the rights and freedoms of all.  Because while you might teach your kids right from wrong, others might not and might even encourage that kind of attitude and when it perpetuated by a 'respected' authority figure, doesn't that further encourage children that thinking like that is acceptable?

So a kid hears it from his parents, then he hears it from the teacher......and then he goes out and acts out violently against the group or individual that he's heard about.  Just like you can't yell fire in a theatre (what about your 'rights and freedoms') even for a joke, is it right to say the above knowing that some might act on your words?   In my opinion, freedom of speech ends if you are saying things that encourage others to harm another person.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> I'm not sure what your concern is.  No... Nazi's are not going to be invited into schools to teach Social Studies.  No.. it's not ok to cyber bully and cause harm.   Yes... it's ok to voice your political and religious beliefs in a open forum without prosecution.  Theres a difference and perhaps I'm not adroit enough voice it, But I understand it and I would think someone as intellegent as you would also.




People who have Nazi philosophies don't all have little Hitler mustaches and little swastika's sewn onto their shirts.  How will you know until they start speaking.  And if they begin teaching their philosophies to your kids, it seems to me that under your system, you don't have a lot of leeway.  If you fire him for his ideas, then aren't you impinging on his right to speak freely?

Political beliefs, religious beliefs, very different from saying that someone is (all the things Keegstra said about the Jews) and deserve to suffer/die.  I personally don't think there's any difference between what Keegstra did and someone using a computer to stalk and harass an individual.  The methods are different, but the result is the same and sometimes is the cause of people dying or getting hurt.  

Personally, I'm very glad that I live in a country where our Supreme Court enforces laws against hate speech.  Unfortuantely I also have a government that doesn't apparently give a rat's behind about upholding the laws of our country.

Anyway ladies, folks, it's been interesting and an education.  I had the opportunity to read up on the crap beliefs of a horrible group of people, learn about the hate laws in my own country and how our courts handle them and I learned the Einstein was a Jewish person and not a Nazi.  I'm done with this, but thanks for your involvement.


----------



## Laurie (Nov 27, 2014)

Debby said:


> Just a question Laurie, how much research have you actually done on Putin, Russia, their economy.....or are you just accepting what you hear on the BBC?
> 
> And are you in favour of governments ignoring the laws of their own land in favour of knee jerk emotionalism or a desire to suck up to other nations?  Because that's what it sounds like.
> 
> (Sorry for the double post- must be ice on our antennae so my computer access seems to have slowed down.  Didn't know it had already posted)



Enough to know that Putin is an ex-head in the KGB,  not generally known worldwide for their human rights record!

Russia's leaders have not changed much since Ivan the Terrible, and when considering Europe you must look back 500 years not 50, admittedly a difficult state of mind for most North Americans!


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

IMO... the only thing keeping Putin relevant these days is the fact that he can wave nuclear weapons around, and sells gas to Europe.  His economy is pathetic and all he can do is dream of the days when the USSR was a world power.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

So he was in the KGB.  America has the CIA who have been involved in covert operations, undermining individuals and governments for decades, kidnapping people and torturing them, and dumping them in foreign countries, gun running to drug cartels......and  George Bush Sr. was the Head of the CIA also.

Have you ever looked at America's record of abuses and support of abuses and base any moral judgement on that?  Cambodia at the time was neutral and America dropped the equivalent of 5 Hiroshima's worth of bombs on them.  500,000 civilians were killed. And apparently wherever the B52's dropped bombs, it became ridiculously easy for the Khmer Rouge to get volunteers, and these people with Pol Pot at their head went on to kill about 1.5 million people.

After two years in power, the Khmer Rouge were ousted and then the USA and China and Britain supported Pol Pot in exile.  And not only did they pay the buggers rent to the tune of $85 million, but they supported the Khmer Rouge government representatives as they occupied Cambodia's seat at the UN.

There's more to the story but I won't bore you with it.  And this is only one of numerous conflicts.  I am here comparing apples to apples while you are insisting that one of those 'apples' is an orange when the facts make it clear that they are both apples.

Of course I can't force you to believe any of this, but I know that if you really looked, you'd be amazed at how much of your thinking you would have to change.


http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-thatcher-helped-pol-pot/5330873


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

All this is important .... why?    PS... no one really cares about Cambodia and Khmer Rouge any longer...   We're into Muslims now..


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> IMO... the only thing keeping Putin relevant these days is the fact that he can wave nuclear weapons around, and sells gas to Europe.  His economy is pathetic and all he can do is dream of the days when the USSR was a world power.




Their economy was doing pretty good prior to the US and Canada and Europe and the Saudi's training their sites on them and screwing with their economy via sanctions and the manipulated oil price.  As of 2012, their debt to GDP was .6 compared to the US's 9.2.  Here's a link to a visual that shows the disparity really clearly:  http://kingworldnews.com/kingworldn...The_Gold_&_Silver_Smash_-_Just_Read_This.html

But here's something to think about as we all rub our hands in glee at the low price of gas.  OPEC (the Saudi's) are continuing to pump the same amount of oil despite the low prices but people are using less, so the surpluses are growing.  If this price stays or falls even further, there will come a time when it begins to impact the American shale gas industry.  Layoffs may be the result. 

*“Everybody is trying to put a very happy spin on their ability to weather $80 oil, but a lot of that is just smoke,” *said
Daniel Dicker, president of MercBloc Wealth Management Solutions with
25 years’ experience trading crude on the New York Mercantile Exchange. *“The shale revolution doesn’t work at $80, period.”  
*
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...e-against-american-market-russian-tycoon-says

So that expert in crude is saying that your shale industry doesn't work at $80 and today it dropped to $69 and the Saudi's don't seem interested in boosting the price back up.  So how long before this desire to destroy an economy of a country that did absolutely nothing begins to affect yours and mine?  

As for the nuclear weapons, isn't that a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black?


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

Debby.... I don't know what your fascination with Putin is... but it certainly outshines my interest in debating him..  He's not someone I give a whole lot of thought to ...  As for Nuclear weapons...  yeah... we have a whole bunch.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> All this is important .... why?    PS... no one really cares about Cambodia and Khmer Rouge any longer...   We're into Muslims now..




Pattern of behaviour, that's why it's important.  And then there's Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Somalia, Columbia..........the question is, who will be next?  Your military industry is making huuuuge profits on all of this, so for them, it's all good.  Who do you think has the most powerful lobbyists working Washington?  According to JP Morgan, shares in the military industry have risen 27,699% over the past 50 years.  

I find it impossible to dismiss the murders of 2 million people casually.

I'm fascinated with the willingness of the West to get rid of governments and now that includes Russia.  I've read several of his speeches and I've read about him from a couple of Americans who've had dealings with him for many years.  He's intelligent, he's cultured, he's well educated and speaks Russian and German fluently and has learned to speak English well enough to make a speech in it.  

His mother was a devout Orthodox Russian Christian and took him to church regularly as a child and he has strong religious beliefs.  And with Putin at the helm and no country hounding them into a hole, he was improving the broken economy of that country in significant ways.  And he's done this mostly without attacking other countries around the world and without the special benefit of holding the worlds reserve currency.  From what I've read, he's done a good job and he's popular with Russians.  

Those are the reasons that I find him interesting and the rabid and unfounded hatred of the majority of the world only makes him more interesting as I try to understand the human story that is going on here.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 27, 2014)

Debby said:


> Pattern of behaviour, that's why it's important.  And then there's Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Somalia, Columbia..........the question is, who will be next?  Your military industry is making huuuuge profits on all of this, so for them, it's all good.  Who do you think has the most powerful lobbyists working Washington?  According to JP Morgan, shares in the military industry have risen 27,699% over the past 50 years.
> 
> I find it interesting that you seem to accept the whole Cambodia, Khmer Rouge tragedy rather casually.  I find the very thought of the last moments of those (2 million civilians) totally appalling.



I'm impressed by your passion about the whole Asian thing...  I just don't have it.    Good for you.


----------



## Debby (Nov 27, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> I'm impressed by your passion about the whole Asian thing...  I just don't have it.    Good for you.




You know when I read about these kinds of things, I can't help but put myself in the places of these tragic people.  How would I feel if I had to live and die in that experience and the thought is so horrifying that I can't help but empathize.

Like I've said somewhere else here, I guess I'm an idealist and I look towards a world where we actually do care about the suffering of others and aren't satisfied to disregard it.  A world where we've finally begun to evolve to a level where it is unthinkable to the majority of humanity that any should suffer and where we actively work to stop it.   

The way I look at it, everything good started somewhere, with first one person, than another and another.....but it only happens when people talk about the bad things that are going on and point towards what is more beneficial to all.  I can't do much, but I can talk about these things, I can be a voice in that change.  

Humanity being what it is (greedy, greedy, greedy)improvements are slow in coming.  But they do come.  Once upon a time women couldn't vote, children had ropes tied around their waists so that if they died in the chimneys their bodies could be dragged back and if a man beat his wife and children to death, no one cared, and black people were slaves to rich landowners.  But we don't do those things anymore.  So there is hope.............but only if we talk about all these things.  In the silence and darkness, evil thrives.  That's just the way I feel.


----------



## Susie (Nov 28, 2014)

Debby said:


> If they are promoting their right to worship some non-existent entity under a full moon while dancing naked, then they have as much right as any Christian, Jew, Buddhist....but I think the minute that Satanists start to point to old ladies or old men or children or any groups of individuals as unworthy of life, et al, then their right to freely promulgate that violent hate speech becomes a non-starter.
> 
> From Wikipedia:
> The *racial policy of Nazi Germany was a set of policies and laws implemented by Nazi Germany, asserting the superiority of the "Aryan race", and based on a specific racist doctrine which claimed scientific legitimacy. It was combined with a eugenics programme that aimed for racial hygiene by using compulsory sterilizations and extermination of theUntermenschen (or "sub-humans"), and which eventually culminated in the Holocaust. These policies targeted peoples, in particular Jews, as well as Gypsies, homosexuals and handicapped people, ethnic Poles,[SUP][1][/SUP] Russians[SUP][2][/SUP] who were labeled as "inferior" in a racial hierarchy that placed the Herrenvolk (or "master race") of the Volksgemeinschaft (or "national community") at the top, and ranked Russians, Romani, Serbs, Poles, persons of color and Jews at the bottom
> ...


All the facts you cited from Wikipedia are true facts, Debbie.
The entire nation was brainwashed and severely punished if it did not follow Nazi directives and ideology.
To even suggest that its expression should be allowed under the guise of "free speech" seems strange.
Could it mean that 'National Socialism' is still not fully UNDERSTOOD?


----------



## Laurie (Nov 28, 2014)

"Have you ever looked at America's record of abuses and support of abuses and base any moral judgement on that?"

No, why would I?  I'm not judging America.

Putin was not just "in the KGB".  He was a senior officer,senior enough to influence policy.  No one gets to a senior level in the KGB without pretty much subscribing to policy.

No one denies that other countries, including my own, have people and policies just as ruthless, but the original post, and my response, was a bout a Russian resolution.


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 28, 2014)

To use the "Well YOU do it too" argument is kind of what grade school kids do when they argue.   It's done when a position cannot be defended any other way.  The next step would be a wedgie.


----------



## RadishRose (Nov 28, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> See... that's the thing about "freedom of Speech"..... it's Freedom of speech... Not just speech you agree with... Not just speech that is sanctioned and approved by one segment of society.. it's about everyones right to speak. Even Nazi's I guess... AND that's exactly the thing that makes ME proud to live in a free county.. Sorry you are not.



Agree


----------



## Susie (Nov 28, 2014)

Found this news item last night on theconversation.com.au: https://theconversation.com/crimina...est-law-is-an-ominous-sign-of-the-times-34790

Could this new law be considered an infringement on free speech?
Do you have similar laws in the U.S. which turns protest (free speech?) into a crime?


----------



## AZ Jim (Nov 28, 2014)

America and Canada paid dearly to defeat the _Nazis  _during WW2, there must have been a reason for the negative vote.


----------



## Debby (Nov 30, 2014)

Yes AZ, the reason is that the new 'government' of the Ukraine is made up of individuals who come from neo-Nazi sympathizing groups and with Canada (or should I say the current Harper government) trying so hard to be the tough guy and to keep up with the American administration, they've opted to support that government despite it's make up.  That is why they voted against the resolution.  Oh, that and the fact likely that it was put forward by Russia, who all through this, have been speaking in reconciliatory terms.

Putin (and this is for Laurie) was KGB but George Bush Senior was  a Director of the CIA and if you look at the known history of the CIA you will notice that their 'crimes' are no different from those attributed to the KGB.  So what exactly then is the point of repeatedly mentioning it?  Maybe Laurie, it's time the American voter actually started judging its government on it's foreign relations and vote accordingly. 

 And take note here, I said vote.  I didn't say organize a coup to take down an elected government which is where this all started.  $5 billion dollars it cost the American tax payer and all anyone gets worked up about is a man who has done a good job for his country without being a continuous aggressor.  Propaganda is a powerful thing isn't it?

Laurie, does it matter where a resolution comes from or is it more important WHAT that resolution is?  To suggest that a resolution to prevent the rise of that neo-Nazi abuse/violence should be ignored because a certain government put it forward is short sighted and I think opens the door to growth by the sorts of people that you 'don't want in your neighbourhood'.

And once again, for those who refuse to listen, Canada has hate crime laws and our Supreme Court has made decisions based on that and actually jailed and/or deported individuals because of it and strangely enough, those crimes that individuals were tried and convicted for have invariably been speech against Jewish people and no different from the rhetoric of Svoboda.  So it must be your contention that it is acceptable for a government to break the principle of it's own laws by supporting people/groups who espouse the same things that our Supreme Court has found against.  Amazing.


The US Has Installed a Neo-Nazi Government in the Ukraine
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-u-s-has-installed-a-neo-nazi-government-in-ukraine/5371554

(I think it's such an interesting photo-op:  American US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland standing there with a big smile beside a guy who is shown in another photo giving the Nazi salute (Heil Hitler right?))


----------



## QuickSilver (Nov 30, 2014)

And finally.....the wedgie..  lol!


----------



## Debby (Nov 30, 2014)

Excerpts from:  http://landdestroyer.blogspot.ca/2014/11/ukraines-elections-stabilization.html

'...OSCE, who had congratulated Ukraine on its elections, provides the answers in daily reports it has issued since beginning an extensive monitoring mission in the troubled Eastern European country in March 2014. It was during Ukraine's last elections that the OSCE reported on opposition parties being regularly intimidated or outright prevented from campaigning before the May 25, 2014 polls. Right Sector was mentioned at least once by name as intervening in political proceedings in an attempt to bar opposition members from participating...

...The BBC would even travel with ultra-right Neo-Nazi militants to the Communist Party headquarters in Kiev they had taken over. The office was ransacked and defaced with Nazi runes....

...Since then, the OSCE's daily reports have included activity by Neo-Nazi groups not only taking part in direct military action against Ukrainians in the east, but also in confronting opposition groups, protesters and politicians throughout the rest of the country. It is under these conditions of fear and intimidation by Neo-Nazis and other far-right extremists, that Ukraine's most recent round of elections took place.  It is no surprise that "stabilization" is expected, just as similar "stabilization" was seen after the Nazi Party seized power in Germany in the 1930's and overwrote or absorbed its opposition entirely as well....

...[FONT=Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif]Once again democracy's abuse by special interests across Europe and among their partners across the Atlantic in Washington is neither a victory for civilization nor the Ukrainian people, but rather a victory for those who seek "stabilization" through the eradication of their enemies. It is a "*stabilization" standing opposed to, rather than for civilized coexistence and compromise, representing domination posing as "democracy*." Each and every time democracy is abused in this manner, it denigrates its value as well as the legitimacy others derive from it....'[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif]This is what my government, the Eurozone and America are supporting and protecting.  Non-democracy including opposition intimidation and threats, violence, eradication....and all I can wonder is why does nobody care?  Oh well, if this goes as far as WW3, in all likelihood the answers won't matter.  Unfortunately until that happens these government officials with their agenda's will all live comfortably dishing out millions of dollars of taxpayers dollars to these Nazi lovers while it will be the Ukrainian population who will feel the cold and hunger and EU businesses and their workers who will suddenly find themselves struggling under the impact of sanctions. 

 It should be noted that America has given those Nazi lovers $5 billion thus far.  The military industry lobbyists must be thrilled.  Bonuses coming at Christmas yet again![/FONT]


----------



## Debby (Nov 30, 2014)

Well maybe it's time to close this thread huh folks?


----------



## Laurie (Dec 1, 2014)

Why?


----------



## Ralphy1 (Dec 1, 2014)

Uncle Santa...


----------



## Debby (Dec 1, 2014)

Laurie said:


> Why?




Why not?  Are you reading anything on the situation besides what ABC, NBC, NY Times, etc., are releasing?  Are you looking for outside information that would add to the discussion?

Right now I'm in the midst of reading a three hour speech that Putin gave at the Vauldai International Discussion Club, on October 24, 2014.  It was attended by  108 experts, historians and analysts from 25 countries, including 62 foreign participants, and included the former Prime Minister of France, Dominque de Villepin and former Federal Chancellor of Austria, Wofgang Scheussel among other notables.  What kind of research are any of the other participants in this discussion doing that would make it a worthwhile endeavour?  An exchange of ideas based on known facts constitutes a worthwhile endeavour, trading 'opinions' based on no information is pointless.



If you were to read it, you would hear Vladimir Putin reiterating over and over again, that there is a need for fairness and diplomacy on ALL sides.  That the agreement between the government of the Ukraine and the fighters in the east that was made at Minsk must be honoured by ALL sides and that Russia would do everything it could to help both sides work together and find a peaceful resolution to the impasse.  You would hear him not only decrying ANY governments attempts at interference in the business of other countries but you would hear him repeating frequently that Russia wants to do business with the world in a way that respects each country's autonomy even while Russia wants their autonomy respected.  


The information that is available through the American MSM is skewed or outright lies or ignores truths entirely.  The supporters of the current government burned alive 45 known victims including a pregnant woman and those who tried to escape the flames were beaten as they lay on the ground after jumping from windows.  This happened in Odessa as the previous elected government was being overthrown.  But if you go to CNN's website and search for Odessa Massacre, there is no entry.  Nothing.  I searched MSNBC's website and again, nothing. I also checked Canada's two major networks, CBC and CTV and again, nothing.  So this is who you are relying on for information.  I have to give credit however to the BBC because they did do a small piece on it.  And in case anyone is interested there is video available that shows the neo-Nazi supporters making their molotov cocktails and cheering as the building where peaceful protestors had taken cover, begins to burn. 


Just Google: Odessa Massacre video.


So Laurie, I ask why should we bother to continue the discussion?

http://eng.kremlin.ru/transcripts/23137  (this is the link to the speech the Putin gave at the Valdai Discussion Club in case anyone is interested)


----------



## Laurie (Dec 1, 2014)

No big deal.  If you think there's nothing more to be said, then don't say it.  However, I do not see that as a reason for restricting other people's free speech.

If anyone wishes to carry on, who are you to say they should not?


----------



## Debby (Dec 1, 2014)

Laurie said:


> No big deal.  If you think there's nothing more to be said, then don't say it.  However, I do not see that as a reason for restricting other people's free speech.
> 
> If anyone wishes to carry on, who are you to say they should not?




Never said anyone couldn't continue talking did I?  I 'asked' if it's time to shut it down. 

Do you have anything new ideas or thoughts on the matter to offer?  Do you have any comments on the numerous links and facts that I've proffered here?  Have you looked at any of those links?  What are your feelings on a government that refuses to uphold in principal the very kinds of laws that exist in it's own country? Any thoughts on the 42 people who were deliberately burned to death by those neo-Nazi's in Odessa?  What are your thoughts on a government that funds the overthrow of an elected government?  What do you think about mainstream media not giving people ALL the information that is easily available on a situation that has as much importance as this one?

I think that the safety of the world could very well be at stake as the situation in Ukraine/Russia and with American meddling carrying on and now the Canadian governments 'brown nosing' support, so I have no problem talking about this stuff.  I only suggested that as it seemed all had been said and there was a lull, perhaps 'maybe it's time we shut this down'.  But you go for it and bring along more information to further our understanding.


----------



## WhatInThe (Dec 1, 2014)

I see where most parties are coming from. Russia not only has history with NAZIs they are trying to drum up support and sympathy for THEIR causes. I see the US voting against it because we are the United States, not the United Nations. The UN produces resolutions and defacto treaties which the US Senate must approve for the US to follow. It's a slippery slope in multiple ways including you open the door even more to UN rule, not the US legislature, president or people. Also by singling out one party it opens the door to subjugating another party to similar resolutions which in turn could be used by the UN or a one world government to pick off opposing parties and thought one by one.

Just because one is against a particular piece of legislation doesn't not mean they are against the spirit of a law/resolution or do not already have such policies in place.


----------



## Debby (Dec 1, 2014)

Do you mean when Russia had to stop the Nazi's from overthrowing Stalingrad?  Considering how many died in those five months, I'd have a problem with Nazi's, 'neo' or otherwise, on my doorstep.  Wouldn't you?  And what have you read in the way of Putins speeches and answers to the questions we all want to know?   What he is hoping will happen is that ALL countries learn to respect one another, do business reasonably, with one another and for each country to respect the autonomy of every other country.  I've read a few speeches and that's what he is saying.

Why the USA didn't sign that resolution is because they have been funding and advising those neo-Nazi's who took over Ukraine.  Can't give them money and then sign a resolution calling for Not Supporting Them, right?

You want to talk about 'subjugating' by any one party?  You've just described the modus operandi of the American government.  I don't know if you are American, but if you are, that is how your country operates.  Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Libya, Syria, Cuba, Iran.  Sometimes its with wars that America starts then stops when the country is in shambles or it's done with sanctions.  And now Russia is in America's sites.

Behind the scenes, America puts pressure on other countries to go along with their sanctions.  France and Russia had a contract that they signed a few years before this all started.  France was going to build two ships for their navy.  The Russian sailors over the past four months have been training on it to take it home and it was to have been delivered a couple weeks ago.  America pushed France to refuse delivery (because of the sanctions you know), and it was anybody's guess whether the ship would be delivered and at the last minute, France refused to turn it over despite the contract and I believe payment had been accepted for it.  They will be fined and penalized for breaking this contract which was worth $1.24 billion.

The back story is that in June, America slammed France with a $9 billion dollar fine because they did business with Sudan, Iran and Cuba.  But the record now shows that they told France, that if they don't honour the contract, America will kindly waive $8.1 billion dollars of that fine, otherwise it's going to cost them $9 billion.   I'm not a law expert but I read one journalist calling it 'blackmail'.

So which country is actually guilty of subjugating others?

When the UN, the gathering of all the countries of the world and with a clear majority,  sign a resolution to not support the 'descendant' of one of the most vicious and violent political groups in the history of the world,  for any one country to not sign on without hesitation shows very clearly that they are in full support of that group.    If nothing else it is hugely symbolic in a very positive way to sign on because it shows a united commitment to fight a known evil.   And Canada and the US refused to sign it.

It seems to me that morally, there are no grey areas on a question like this.  And there is no 'they support the spirit of the law' and I only make that statement because there  is ample supported evidence of America's financial aid and guidance to that very same violent and vicious group.  I don't make this up and I don't point it out maliciously because my own government is right up there, doing it's best to act the big shot and cause trouble.  We are America's 'yes man' or 'groupie' or whatever you want to call it, in this endeavour.

Is this what we elect our governments to do?  Do we want them going around the world making trouble and fomenting unrest everywhere?  Putting us at risk of some kind of WW3?

Frankly, I don't know if this ship can be stopped before we all pay.  History will have to play itself out I suppose in whatever way it does.  But maybe, the more people who really know, maybe there is a chance that at some point in the future, there will be change.  Maybe when a new society has to start up from the scraps of humanity that survive and can crawl out of the rubble.  Do you think we'll have learned by then?  That making Peace is better than making War?


----------



## Laurie (Dec 2, 2014)

Debby said:


> Never said anyone couldn't continue talking did I?  I 'asked' if it's time to shut it down.
> 
> Do you have anything new ideas or thoughts on the matter to offer?  Do you have any comments on the numerous links and facts that I've proffered here?  Have you looked at any of those links?  What are your feelings on a government that refuses to uphold in principal the very kinds of laws that exist in it's own country? Any thoughts on the 42 people who were deliberately burned to death by those neo-Nazi's in Odessa?  What are your thoughts on a government that funds the overthrow of an elected government?  What do you think about mainstream media not giving people ALL the information that is easily available on a situation that has as much importance as this one?
> 
> I think that the safety of the world could very well be at stake as the situation in Ukraine/Russia and with American meddling carrying on and now the Canadian governments 'brown nosing' support, so I have no problem talking about this stuff.  I only suggested that as it seemed all had been said and there was a lull, perhaps 'maybe it's time we shut this down'.  But you go for it and bring along more information to further our understanding.



No, that's why I stopped posting on the original subject.

However, I have no objection to other people doing so, and, unlike you, have no desire to see the thread closed.


----------



## Debby (Dec 2, 2014)

Why are you trying to paint a particular 'agenda' on me Laurie?  It almost has a touch of animosity.  I think if you go back and reread comments 47, 50 and 52, you will see that I wasn't trying to 'shut it down' arbitrarily but was responding initially to what appeared to me to be a fading interest.  Not only that, but I also was becoming uncomfortable with the possibility that others here might view my comments as 'preaching' inasmuch as I seemed to be the only one bringing facts to the discussion which necessitates rather long comments.

And regarding your 'unlike you, have no desire to see the thread closed down', like I said, I started the thread and I can talk about this stuff at length.


----------

