*Fear - Keep them scared. Turn in any/everyone who is not "Normal"
This is past starting to sound familiar and definitely sounding like Nazi Germany.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'meryl streep, james woods, holocaus, nazi, germany, jew, karl weiss, inga' to 'meryl streep, james woods, holocaust, nazi, germany, jew, karl weiss, inga' - edited by calvados

I may have to contest with that argument. Germans were the first modern nation to fully conquer and plunder its fellow imperial European power. But they weren't the first to be plundering in any exceptional level. I mean what qualifies as exceptional, really, when plundering basically means killing everyone and taking whatever you want? India and Egypt were considered non-white non-European nations, therefore safe to be exploited without much guilt. China and India were exploited to an industrial level too, but the Brits were focused on land ownership more than the artworks at the time. The artworks they just took from China without documenting anything because it was the 'conquer's right' to take from these uncultured savages without having to ask for it or give proper document. But France and Britain were of 'equal-stature' amongst European powers. They were 'SPECIAL'.

And there's also the definition of 'industrial'. Germans were highly organized and documented everything they did, which gives the impression that they were absolutely thorough and milked their subjects dry. But other European powers did the same exact shit to their conquered people, except they never provided evidence of their plunders simply because they were dealing with non-Europeans, hence they did not have to treat them fairly and take whatever they wanted without signing anything. They all did the same thing. There is no difference when it comes to looting.

The reason why there's such huge backlash against Nazi Germany is not only because of the holocaust, but because Germans were the first to break the invisible rule between the European imperial powers, in that they were n't suppose to treat each other like they did with 'foreign non-equals'. Nazis took European racism to another level and self-proclaimed themselves to be the 'best-white-people-of-all' and started treating their neighbors as inferiors. Nazis were 'exceptional' in the way that they were the first to break the unspoken rule between 'European superiors' by fully subjugating France. Germany fully CONQUERED France like they did with their colonies, and that was the main difference.

That's when all of Europe knew for sure that "okay, these guys aren't playing by the rules anymore." So I cannot accept the argument saying Germans were the first to loot in an industrial level, but rather the first to do it to a fellow traditionally 'superior' European people. Britain and France didn't do shit about the holocaust before the war. They sat and watched. It was when Germany treated France like a inferior colony nation that got Britain and France pissed off the most.

I was linking to one of the most well known "false flag" attacks of all time. My point wasnt about who did it, just the fact that it is done.

>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^csnel3:
With a name like chaosEngine , I would have assumed you knew why people do things like this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire
Yeah, you would imagine that I would jump straight to a comparison with Nazi Germany. Funny how I didn't that...

the problems of understanding arise when people give their power over to the powerful.they acquiesce to the very powers seeking to disempower them.
so we get things like "free speech zones" which are far away from the very thing being protested and most certainly no where near any business or government functions.

This is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Meaning, that government gets its power from the people. Further, this power comes down from the Most High God:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

Has the government strayed far from the intentions of the founders? The answer is a resounding yes. It is most certainly becoming a police state. This is the broader trend in the world, that will eventually coalesce into a totalitarian one world government.

this is not a lib/repub issue but an american issue.for decades the government has slowly chipped away at our civil liberties and given more power to itself.this is what governments do,this is what ANY powerful institution does=keep itself relevant and IN power and the ONLY thing power fears is?
the people.
again,not my opinion but historically accurate.

I agree that our government is corrupt and acts contrary to our interests. However, I am not an anarchist. If a government is infringing upon our inherent rights or direct commands given to us by God, then yes I think we have the right under God to disobey them. Protesting rich people doesn't appear to fall under that category.

this is about challenging authority.
you say that when a policemen gives a "lawful" order to disperse that should be the end of it.
i say:i question your "lawful order" as it hinders my right to assemble and give my government a redress of my grievances.

No, I say that if you receive an order from authority you can expect to be forced into compliance if you disobey that authority. My comment is about the way this incident was portrayed, as if the protesters were just arbitrarily sprayed without any warning.

As far as the occupy movement offering a redress of grievances, I hardly see how a bunch of marxists, and socialists waving communists flags, defecating in the streets, and shooting up in their tents addresses any relevant issue this country is facing. It started out with a point, and was quickly taken over by hippies, anarchists, and every other far left wingnut with a pet cause and a bucket for handouts.

Comparing this sad menagerie to the civil rights movement? Come on..

because "the people" are not multinational corporations with deep pockets who can influence legislators by way of lobbyists.we cant purchase the kind of time that a corporation can to make our case to a senator or congressmen.we cannot influence public opinion by way of tv commercials or entire networks.
but we CAN sit and stop traffic,or slow the flow of business and THAT is when they take notice.
and the response is always the same:
ignore.
and if that doesnt work?
ridicule.
if that fails?
co-opt in any way possible (see:tea party)
cant co-opt?
oppress,bully and intimidate by authoritarian means.
(guess which stage we are in now?)
and if that fails?
success.

This is just a shadow of what is to come. The future rule of the antichrist is going to make Nazi Germany look like candyland.



>> ^enoch:

the only way and i mean the ONLY way a peacef.
(guess which stage we are in now?)
and if that fails?
success.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

OK. Of course VideoSift is wildly biased. It's influenced strongly by the people who have collected here, the general makeup of the Internet -- and the ideology of its founders. As biased as it is, we want to be fair and tolerant to minority views, different cultures, religions and nationalities.

That's why what you say and do on VideoSift matters. I feel this every day. Even a simple comment upvote by me can cause real hurt. I'm sorry I upvoted DFT's comment. I honestly thought it was some good-natured banter between you two. It's hard to tell on the Internet. That's why I try to choose my words carefully. And (usually) even choose my upvotes carefully. My bad on that one.

Calling a German citizen a Nazi is also bad. I don't think you would do it at a dinner party to someone you just met. I'd ask you to leave my house. It's no more acceptable here. I read the comment that provoked your response. That was a little insensitive too, though as an American I would take that as good-natured ribbing. It's kind of funny.

Your response - and unwillingness to apologise for it - shows a lack of empathy and emotional maturity. You can definitely shout down the drainpipe here - and suitably, no one will give a shit.

I'm removing the hobble. VideoSift does not need martyrs. I'd honestly be sorry to see you go. I think you've contributed a lot to this community - but If you have to go - you'll be buried at sea in a cotton shroud. ;-)

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Okay, now that I'm able to properly respond...

I'm leaving the Sift for a week to take care of personal things, but I needed to bring this up. There's a bias on this site. Not that I don't rub people the wrong way, because I do. I can be a huge asshole, and I don't like it sometimes. But there's a total bias and it's bullshit. I've noticed people who get targeted are those in opposition to a certain ideological position. Specifically the left. And at one point I was part of the bandwagon. Look at the recent hobblings and bannings. Those in the majority band together and pick on people all the time, but let one person on the other side make a colorful comment and all the sanctimonious assholes come out of the woodwork to play the victim. Their mean comments get upvotes and praises. Ours get us hobbled or banned.

And my comment, which I refuse to apologize over because IMO wasn't that terrible and probably fitting, wasn't unprovoked. I'm no nationalist, but he (as always) mocked the culture of the US in this comment. It didn't bother me as much as my comment bothered him, but so what? In a not-so-subtle way I was cluing him into his nation's recent culture. Of killing Jews. Which is what Germany did within the last century. People shouldn't throw stones in glass houses, that's all. If he wants to play the nationalist card, then let him be a big boy about it. They may not like their recent "culture" but I don't particularly like ours either. But then again I'm not being a Nazi about others mentioning it.

Anyway, people have said a lot fucking worse on here than my trite and stupid comment. And I've had worse said at me. And who cares? I'm okay with it. DFT wants to spin a narrative about my film, taking personal shots at me, label me a narcissist. No problem. You even upvoted that comment. Volumptuous wants to call people jerks. Great. The world keeps turning. You don't have to lift the hobbling. I'll display it as a dirty reminder. Because although I do believe you try to be fair, I don't think you are at all. It's like Nazi Germany in here. Hail Siftler.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Calling a German citizen a Nazi without provocation is at best a supreme example of Godwin's rule - and at worst deeply insulting and insensitive.

Things you do and say on VideoSift matter. I refuse to let this place become an anonymous nihilistic drainpipe you can holler down. This is your official, non-expiring warning for a personal attack - and an apology might be in order.

Okay, now that I'm able to properly respond...

I'm leaving the Sift for a week to take care of personal things, but I needed to bring this up. There's a bias on this site. Not that I don't rub people the wrong way, because I do. I can be a huge asshole, and I don't like it sometimes. But there's a total bias and it's bullshit. I've noticed people who get targeted are those in opposition to a certain ideological position. Specifically the left. And at one point I was part of the bandwagon. Look at the recent hobblings and bannings. Those in the majority band together and pick on people all the time, but let one person on the other side make a colorful comment and all the sanctimonious assholes come out of the woodwork to play the victim. Their mean comments get upvotes and praises. Ours get us hobbled or banned.

And my comment, which I refuse to apologize over because IMO wasn't that terrible and probably fitting, wasn't unprovoked. I'm no nationalist, but he (as always) mocked the culture of the US in this comment. It didn't bother me as much as my comment bothered him, but so what? In a not-so-subtle way I was cluing him into his nation's recent culture. Of killing Jews. Which is what Germany did within the last century. People shouldn't throw stones in glass houses, that's all. If he wants to play the nationalist card, then let him be a big boy about it. They may not like their recent "culture" but I don't particularly like ours either. But then again I'm not being a Nazi about others mentioning it.

Anyway, people have said a lot fucking worse on here than my trite and stupid comment. And I've had worse said at me. And who cares? I'm okay with it. DFT wants to spin a narrative about my film, taking personal shots at me, label me a narcissist. No problem. You even upvoted that comment. Volumptuous wants to call people jerks. Great. The world keeps turning. You don't have to lift the hobbling. I'll display it as a dirty reminder. Because although I do believe you try to be fair, I don't think you are at all. It's like Nazi Germany in here. Hail Siftler.

In reply to this comment by dag:
Calling a German citizen a Nazi without provocation is at best a supreme example of Godwin's rule - and at worst deeply insulting and insensitive.

Things you do and say on VideoSift matter. I refuse to let this place become an anonymous nihilistic drainpipe you can holler down. This is your official, non-expiring warning for a personal attack - and an apology might be in order.

The same way the "Black" voice was far too loud or the "Jew" voice wasn't loud enough in Nazi Germany. Majority rules is retarded when the majority of people are also retarded. You should never create or maintain a law that inhibits the rights of others when those same rights are shared by everybody else. I don't see the negative of allowing gays to marry. Really there is none. The bible isn't the constitution...nor should it or its tenets be given ANY merit in our law making.>> ^quantumushroom:

If The Gay is genetic despite the variables of the spectrum, in the future the option to make a fetus 'not gay' will likely be offered. I neither condemn nor condone this inevitable tech.
The 4% indeed has a voice, right now it's far-too-loud, an imbalance that will have to find its center. When religious people state that, per their beliefs, they consider homosexuality wrong, they are made into 'hate criminals'. "Gay history" is now mandatory in at least one mexifornian school.
I'm all for personal freedom, but rights can't be spun out of thin air, and that's what's been happening.


>> ^rottenseed:
Sexuality and the hormones driving it falls on a spectrum and it involves several chemical processes. Since it's OBVIOUSLY not passed on from gay parent to gay child, that means straight people are having homosexual children at a rate of (4%?) or whatever it is.
And that 4% of the population deserves a voice. And the oppression of their rights should be of more concern than just 4% of the population. We should all be involved with maintaining one another's personal freedoms.>> ^quantumushroom:
The Gay is likely genetic, but that means in a few decades it can be "cured". And 4% of the population has no business steering an entire election.
Cain, unlike Obama, seems to understand the Constitution limits presidential power. Good on him.

I thought almost every viewpoint while watching this vid. The only thing I have to add is:

1. The guy was standing there facing a police officer with a pistol drawn on him. For three minutes. Facing a PISTOL BARREL. And he would rather argue than follow simple directions.

I think that is why the cop was stayed so tweaked -- that is completely irrational behavior and every moment shouted "alarm alarm."

2. Now we need a link to a study on how difficult it is to regain rationality after a flood of adrenaline and testosterone -- because the cop was wired on both substances. He was locked and loaded and was doing his training.

3. There is further proof that we aren't in a police state, blankie. This guy wasn't afraid of getting shot. He knew he wouldn't get shot. Can you imagine behaving that way to an SS officer or a brownshirt in Nazi Germany? No way.

>> ^DerHasisttot:

>> ^Gallowflak:
>> ^DerHasisttot:
Ahh the British and the Nazis. i had a course last semester analysing Britain's ongoing fascination with the Nazis. Conclusions: 1. British school history-courses are a catastrophe of american magnitude.
2. Empire? What Empire? We defeated the Nazis! What? Britain had concentration camps, torture and cultural genocides? ... erm ... But we defeated the nazis, and they were way worse than us! Hooray Britain!

Britain, in my experience, is aware of its own miserable history to the point of being self-flagellating. There's a massive emphasis in culture and education on the tudors and WW2, and it's almost ridiculous, but I really doubt it has anything to do with soothing the social discomfort to be had by reflecting on the crimes of the empire.
I don't know. WW2 seems pretty fucking important when it comes to modern history, considering how much that conflict defined the shape of the future world.


Of course WW2 and Nazis should be studied. But there is the difference between study and obsession. We had to do projects for the course, and one group knew a bunch of Bachelor of Education- students being teacher's assistants in the UK at the time. So the group created a survey to look at british student's perceptions of Germany. One question concerned, for example, the number of years the students had WWII as a subject. Out of 4 or 5 classes (all over the UK), all had had WWII in more than 2 years, focussed mostly on Britain vs. Germany. When asked to name something "bad" the British Empire had done, most of only one class could name the enormous slave-trade. When asked to name the things they most associated with Germany, Nazis came before the cars and the soccer team. (And if you look at the tabloids and even proper papers when a match is on, you'll see an abundance of Nazi-refernces.) A friend of mine got cursed out of a London cab for being German. Nick Clegg wrote an article about the obsession. Edit: Moar. I can't find the article I'm searching for. I'll look again tomorrow.


"Having world war 2 in more than 2 years" does not mean that you have studied it for the entire duration of that teaching year - i have covered 3 or 4 different topics 3 or 4 different times during the course of my secondary education (11-16). The word "in" is a big clue there. We also covered native americans, the tudors and stewarts, and the rest i forget because i've never been interested in studying history.

The rest of my points i'll list in brief list form;
1) I don't believe that's true, at all, that 4 out of 5 classrooms full of students had no person who knew about the slave trade during colonial britain. That's covered plenty.
2) I am wholly unsurprised that a bunch of SCHOOL CHILDREN who have spent the last few years covering nazi germany on and off associate germany with nazis over cars (which they can't drive and who cares where cars are made?) and a football team (which we probably play on average once in a 2 year period, mostly in friendlies). If you're older than about 18, your grandad was probably in the war, and your grandma lived during those times. The war was a tough time and we're proud of standing alone for a time.
3) You're reading the sun or the news of the world - tip for you, stop reading the sun or the news of the world.
and 4) I've been cursed out of a london cab for being northern.

PS. Two world wars and one world cup, doodahhhh doodahhhh! .... it's a joke.

Come on lad, get a grip. This questionnaire sounds like bollocks to me - i've experienced 3 student exchanges with german students, and everyone got on really well with no war/nazi/anything comments or insinuations. I could ask 10 strangers what they thought of germany and i'd probably get 7 saying they like em. I got along better with german kids on holidays to spain than i did with the english kids, hung out with them, learned german better, and still love the language now.

Perhaps you're looking for it?

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/05/30/a-study-of-humor-in-nazi-germany

Has this been published in Germany?

I think you're arguing whether or not this is a good system whereas I'm just stating that it's how it works. However, if we follow through on your example, those two men would probably face severe punishment (and/or death) for those actions because they went against the consensus of what the larger population thinks is moral behavior. Evolution by both natural and artificial selection.

While it's a subtle distinction, I believe it's an important one: There's a difference between making a decision based on your emotions and making a decision based on how it will effect other people. Yes, I believe that not causing harm or distress to other people is an objective base. I realize that's controversial.

I'm not arguing about whether it is good or not, I am saying it is madness. Witness the genocide in rwanda, or Nazi germany, or a million other examples of why morality by concensus and feeling is not moral by any definition. If it's all based on what people feel, and agree on, then if they feel that they don't like a group of people, and agree that they all should die, then in your world that's moral! The only thing that would stop such people would be judgment from another concensus. So basically, in your world anything people justify to themselves and get other people to agree on is moral behavior.

Do no harm is not an objective standard, that is such a simplistic way of looking at the world..there will always be exceptions. Such as defending your life, or someone else. You have to make judgments about right and wrong, what is good for more than yourself (which you have no way to determine), and do not harm doesn't cover them. If you had an opportunity to assassinate hitler, would you turn it down because of do no harm? What is the greater evil, killing him or letting him live? Why? For that matter, what makes hitler an objectively worse person than you are? Morality is always a moving target in your world; for it to be objective it can never move. It's insanity in every other case.

God told us that it's ok to beat a slave as long as we don't kill him. Only Israelites are above slavery.

In Exodus we're told that if a bull goes on a killing spree, the bull and the bull's owner are to be put to death. However, if the bull kills slaves, then the bull's owner owes the slaves' owners some cash.

The NT is a little softer (not surprisingly) on slaves, but still states that it's ok to own people so long as you treat them reasonably well.

Generally, were you ok with slavery and other immoral acts before your conversion? Did you really need to be told that these things were wrong? Or did you already know? I bet you already knew and I bet you were no less moral a person then than you are now.

I think you're utterly missing the point of what I have been talking about. It's not reading the bible that makes someone moral. Everyone has a God given conscience which tells them what's right from wrong. Murder is obejectively wrong because that is the law written on our hearts. However, that doesn't tell us how to live, it just gives us a general idea of what to do. That's why we need God to give us instructions on how to live a moral life

It's funny that you're railing against Christianity for slavery; Christians are the reason we abolished slavery. There has never been an abolitionist movement anywhere besides in the Christian west. Your morality by concensus failed to free any slaves, it took Christians to do it. The bible never says it okay to own slaves. Jesus taught that everyone is equal in the eyes of God. Anyone who follows that would know that keeping slaves was wrong. Gods message is progressive according to what people are ready to hear. The laws on divorce in the days of Moses were given because of the hardness of mens hearts. It took nearly 2000 years for people to be ready to free slaves..at the time, it just wasn't going to happen.

>> ^Sarzy:

I'm sorry, I thought I was debating with a vaguely rational person. "Death squad"??
I'm done.>> ^marbles:
>> ^Sarzy:
>> ^marbles:
>> ^Sarzy:
Yep, it's perfectly reasonable to respond to an argument that the discussion is going overboard with Nazi comparisons with a claim that we're in a POLICE STATE, MAN!!!11!!
/bizarro world

You're the one giving the cops a pass. Just doing what they were told right? That's no overboard comparison, so grow up. If you can't defend your statement then don't make it. The fact is there were plenty of apathetic and negligent people in Nazi Germany that sat idly by while people were rounded up and executed.
You would've fit right in. How's that for Nazi comparisons?

I can agree that American drug laws are ridiculous and in serious need of reform. But to make the statement that American drug policy is in any way analogous to what the Nazis were doing in the 1930s and '40s is asinine, and a little bit offensive, quite frankly.
As for whether these officers should have been there? No, probably not. But it's not exactly the murder of millions of people in terms of moral unambiguity. I'm sure someone could make the argument that drug laws need to be enforced with such vigilance (I won't make that argument, because I don't agree with it, but I'm sure someone could). I'm sure many of the cops in question have families to support. Are they supposed to quit their jobs because they disagree with American drug policy?
They identified themselves as best as they could, they went in, and they found themselves with an assault rifle pointed at them. Of course they shot the guy. There's nothing else they could have done, other than wait for the guy to start firing, and hope their kevlar protects them (which it probably wouldn't have against a gun like that).

Nice straw-man. The only thing offensive is your shameless pardon of the death squad. You can make all the excuses you want, it doesn't change the fact they busted his front door, stood outside behind a ballistic shield, and unloaded 70+ rounds. Guerena had probable cause to grab his gun. The death squad didn't follow their own rules of engagement and had no reason to fire. That is straight up criminal homicide.



You're done? what, apologizing for murderous thugs?
Good call!