Thursday, September 9, 2010

"Anti-fascists" grotesquely misnamed as usual

It doesn't take a huge amount of imagination to figure out how differently "700 bodies found in WWII grave" would be reported if the murderers had been fascists, rather than communists, or "anti-fascists seeking revenge on Nazi collaborators" as AP disarmingly puts it without even chucking an "alleged" in there. (Not that there's anyone around to allege anything about the victims, the journos just pull this stuff out of their arses because the alternative is to accept that there were two murderous totalitarian ideologies fighting in WWII, and we allied ourselves with one of them.)

The Telegraph has more on this evidence of the heroic victory of the "anti-fascists," including the information that "Slovenia alone has an estimated 600 mass graves containing the remains of at least 100,000 people." Hooray for our side!

21 comments:

Heine said...

I'm a bit slow tonight PM so excuse if I am not getting your post. I'd prefer the papers would call them communists rather than "anti fascists". I equate Nazis and Communists as 2 sides of the same coin.

I wish the media would also do the same.

onelaw4all said...

"there were two murderous totalitarian ideologies fighting in WWII, and we allied ourselves with one of them.)"

Yup.
That "allying with a totalitarian ideology" thing sounds bad.

On an unrelated note,, who are the current bedfellows/cheerleaders for global Islamification?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Redbaiter said...

I don't get the post either Clint, but I do know in all the time Milt has been present on the internet he's never posted anything that wasn't a cheer for totalitarian socialism.

Just another deeply mind fucked fascist bastard posturing as a "liberal" whilst doing all he can to impose his big powerful government political model on NZ.

Anonymous said...

"I equate Nazis and Communists as 2 sides of the same coin."

Yep. Coke or Pepsi.

Falafulu Fisi said...

PM said...
Hooray for our side

Who's OUR, here PM?

You mean us righties? You've never been part of OUR PM. You political views are against everything Western countries stand for. It is convenient for you to use, WE or OUR because you're living in a Western society (you pretend that you're part of the WE or OUR), but you're not since the majorities of your political views is against everything the West stands for. You're one of those that I label as a parasite on Western values. This means that you love living in a Western society (its wealth, freedom, advanced technology, etc) but simultaneously hates its ideology/values.

You're a hypocrite man.

Psycho Milt said...

I'd prefer the papers would call them communists rather than "anti fascists". I equate Nazis and Communists as 2 sides of the same coin.

It seems to me you got the meaning of the post perfectly, Heine. Redbaiter, on the other hand, remains as wilfully obtuse as ever.

On an unrelated note,, who are the current bedfellows/cheerleaders for global Islamification?

You're right, it's unrelated - completely unrelated. Still, why not? Global islamification is really only being pushed by Saudi Arabian wahhabists, using money from Saudi's oil wealth. The most important bedfellows/cheerleaders for Saudi Arabia would be the US administration, of whichever party.

Psycho Milt said...

Who's OUR, here PM?

I'm a citizen of NZ, so who is meant by "our side" isn't a huge mystery - which side NZ was on in WWII isn't a state secret. Your view that left-wingers are some kind of honorary foreigners just makes you look a loony.

Anonymous said...

"This means that you love living in a Western society (its wealth, freedom, advanced technology, etc) but simultaneously hates its ideology/values."

That is a very fair description of Milt. White-anters, all.

James said...

Hmmmm....to be fair to Mility hes not the worst lefty in existence...often times quite fair in fact.

But the point expoused in here..

"This means that you love living in a Western society (its wealth, freedom, advanced technology, etc) but simultaneously hates its ideology/values."

..doess tend to put him on the spot.

onelaw4all said...

Andrew McCarthy sums it up pretty well:

"For all their disagreements on matters like women's rights, gay rights and abortion, Islam and the Left are in harmony on big-picture matters: They are authoritarian, totalitarian in the sense of wanting to control all aspects of human existence, virulently anti-capitalist, and regard the individual as existing merely to serve the collective. Consequently, they have the same obstacle in common: our freedom culture - i.e., Western liberalism, U.S. constitutional republicanism, and their foundation, individual liberty. Historically, Islam and the Left ally when there is a common enemy. But I'd stress that what I am talking about here is an alliance, not a merger."

James said...

Probably why the slience from the lefty feminists re the stoning in Iran is so deafening....

http://thehandmirror.blogspot.com/

Maybe i haven't scrolled back far enough but Im stuffed if I can find any comment on it....

Psycho Milt said...

But the point expoused in here..

"This means that you love living in a Western society (its wealth, freedom, advanced technology, etc) but simultaneously hates its ideology/values."

..doess tend to put him on the spot.


I don't see why. Falafulu Fisi seems to be equating his own ideology/values with those of Western society and then berating me for not sharing "Western society's" values. He's talking bollocks, in other words. It's his values I don't share, not Western society's - my ideology/values are hardly unusual among Westerners, in fact I suspect they're a lot less unusual than Falafulu Fisi's.

Andrew McCarthy sums it up pretty well:

Really? He appears to me to be spouting bullshit. Let's see - thus far, I've pointed out that the most significant alliance between Westerners and the promoters of Islamic expansionism is that between the govts of Saudi Arabia and the United States, and you've pointed out that Andrew McCarthy thinks lefties and Muslims both hate freedom. It's not looking good, is it?

Probably why the slience from the lefty feminists re the stoning in Iran is so deafening...

I don't think there's really any scope for confusion about what the Hand Mirror authors think of that. Are you proposing that they're deliberately not mentioning it because they and the Iranian govt have some "common enemy," or that they think it's cool the Iranian govt is trampling Iranians' freedom? Or what?

James said...

"I don't think there's really any scope for confusion about what the Hand Mirror authors think of that. Are you proposing that they're deliberately not mentioning it because they and the Iranian govt have some "common enemy," or that they think it's cool the Iranian govt is trampling Iranians' freedom? Or what?"

I think its to tow the PC line which is....don't be critical of Islam because to do so makes you appear onside with capitalism and rightwingers.So yes...in a loose "my enemys emeny is my friend" sort of bizzare way they are indeed "allied" with Islam....against a common foe (to them).

A good sharp taste of Sharia Law up close and personal would be just the does of tough love some of these silly bints really need to wake them up to reality.

How about a test Milty? Go to HM and try and see if you can start and sustain a debate over the stoning...I don't rate your chances.

Psycho Milt said...

Well, no - one thing we can say with complete certainty is that feminist bloggers don't welcome men turning up to tell them what they should be blogging about. I don't find that particularly surprising, given that we don't take that kind of shit here either.

I'm struggling with this concept of yours that feminists need a dose of Sharia law to "wake them up to reality." It's really hard to distinguish this from the view that an Iranian ayatollah would be likely to take of them - and yet, you're claiming that the feminists are the ayatollah's natural allies?

James said...

"Well, no - one thing we can say with complete certainty is that feminist bloggers don't welcome men turning up to tell them what they should be blogging about. I don't find that particularly surprising, given that we don't take that kind of shit here either."

I thought that as you were an acceptable sort of "male" to them (self imasculated by leftism ;-) )you would be ideal as a go between to raise this issue there.


"I'm struggling with this concept of yours that feminists need a dose of Sharia law to "wake them up to reality." It's really hard to distinguish this from the view that an Iranian ayatollah would be likely to take of them - and yet, you're claiming that the feminists are the ayatollah's natural allies?"

Sigh...I meant (flipantly) that maybe they needed to see it up close and personal to get the point that its a major threat to them and its not just something that you watch on the net or TV that happens to someone else somewhere else.Like a sudden cold shower it might jar them to their senses re Islam and what Women can expect to suffer if it ever gained assendancy.

I bet there was many a Jew who,in hindsight, would have appreciated a heads up on what the Nazis were really like before they got established...don't you agree?

Psycho Milt said...

Not really - I don't think there were any Jews back then labouring under the delusion the Nazis had no problem with them. And you seem to be labouring under a delusion yourself - the cold, hard fact is that for us, events in Iran are things that are happening to people far away that we watch on TV and can do nothing about. This is as true for you as it is for authors at the Hand Mirror, and they are in fact not under even a vague, remote threat of having ayatollahs condemn them to death by stoning, and have absolutely no need to "wake up" to such a nonexistent threat. If their preference is to write about stuff they can maybe actually influence in some way, rather than doing the blokey thing of telling world leaders what they should do from the commanding platform of a personal blog, it's an understandable preference and really none of your business.

Heine said...

James, it's because you have a hardline muslim feminist as one of the main Hand Mirror authors.

But their silence is really quite tragic. Maybe I will put on my cast iron body suit and go ask them :)

James said...

PM: "Not really - I don't think there were any Jews back then labouring under the delusion the Nazis had no problem with them."

I think it was the scale of the "solution" the Nazis had in mind that was the kicker Milty.I have no doubt had the Jews known what was coming they would not have gione along as compliantly as they did...they would have fought tooth and nail all the way...as anyone would facing that situation.Just as Im sure if the HM authors were faced with the real threat of Sharia upclose and personal they wouldn't be as demure about it as they seem know.

"And you seem to be labouring under a delusion yourself - the cold, hard fact is that for us, events in Iran are things that are happening to people far away that we watch on TV and can do nothing about. This is as true for you as it is for authors at the Hand Mirror, and they are in fact not under even a vague, remote threat of having ayatollahs condemn them to death by stoning, and have absolutely no need to "wake up" to such a nonexistent threat. If their preference is to write about stuff they can maybe actually influence in some way, rather than doing the blokey thing of telling world leaders what they should do from the commanding platform of a personal blog, it's an understandable preference and really none of your business."

Germany 1930's....that couldn't happen here...

You obviously haven't been in Europe lately Milt...there is a very real prospect of Islam eventually becoming a significant presense there...indeed the Muslim attitude to Western women is being expressed via brutal rape in the Scandanavian countries.

Islamification of Europe is not the fantasy some people think it is...time will determine what happens and the outcome for Women.

James said...

To add....one would think that a blog run by feminists would at least say something regarding the most blatantly anti female issues of our times....rather then just fussing over non existent pay equity BS and getting upset about being called fat...jesus...:-^

Its like the Greens ignoring enviromental issues on Frogblog or Lindsay Mitchell passing up comment on the DPB...does not compute...sorry.


Clint....ahhhh,explains something.Ta!

Psycho Milt said...

James, the fact that you're wetting your pants about the terrifying Muslim bogeyman doesn't mean other people are obliged to.

James said...

No one siad they must Milty...just that you would think they would at least acknowledge the existence of the threat nop matter how remote.

Those who fail to learn from history and all that...