What were British Royal ties with the Nazi regime? | The Guardian

[bhsmte]

"Immediately after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt issued Presidential Proclamations 2525, 2526, and 2527 to authorize the United States to detain allegedly potentially dangerous enemy aliens. The FBI and other law enforcement agencies arrested thousands of suspected enemy aliens, mostly individuals of German, Italian, or Japanese ancestry, living throughout the United States." (source)

According to Ursula, the gas chambers and most stories of inhumane conditions were a lie. So, who knows?

My main point remains, there were internment camps in the US as well - the Allies aren't pure as driven snow.

Sounds like the world according to Ursula.

 

[NightHawkeye]

The comment you were trying to use to say that the Guardian suddenly lost credibility was a quote IN THE ARTICLE by the editor of the Sun. So I apparently read the article better then you did.

Just No.

Karina Urbach was the only source quoted by Keith or the OP. She is actually with the University of London.

 

[Arcangl86]

Just No.

Karina Urbach was the only source quoted by Keith or the OP. She is actually with the University of London.

But the managing editor, Stig Abell, defended publication. “It is an important and interesting issue, the extent to which the British aristocracy – notably Edward VIII, in this case – in the 1930s, were sympathetic towards fascism,” he said.

There you go!

 

[NightHawkeye]

There you go!

Congratulations. You found a quote from the Sun.

Being as that quote wasn't referenced in the discussion between Keith and myself ... nor do I see it referenced anywhere earlier in this thread, what exactly is your point in bringing it up?

 

[keith99]

So you're suggesting that it more right for a government to discriminate against one culture which has been established for a few decades versus another culture established for hundreds of years?

No I am saying there is no comparison between interring recent immigrants from a foreign power one is at war with and creating extermination camps for part of what has been the local population for centuries many of whom have served the state well for generations.

 

[Arcangl86]

Congratulations. You found a quote from the Sun.

Being as that quote wasn't referenced in the discussion between Keith and myself ... nor do I see it referenced anywhere earlier in this thread, what exactly is your point in bringing it up?

Yea, the aristocracy firmly supported the Nazis.

Oh wait, they did not, so much so that Nazi aristocrat is an oxymoron. That tells me enough about the source.

You were saying?

 

[NightHawkeye]

You were saying?

As indicated already, the Sun was not part of the earlier discussion.

 

[ananda]

No I am saying there is no comparison between interring recent immigrants from a foreign power one is at war with and creating extermination camps for part of what has been the local population for centuries many of whom have served the state well for generations.

The other side suggests that there weren't extermination camps - there were concentration/internment camps, but not extermination ones.

 

[LoAmmi]

The other side suggests that there weren't extermination camps - there were concentration/internment camps, but not extermination ones.

They suggest this in the face of evidence that they do not show to be false. They claim it is false, but people can claim whatever they want. They bring nothing to the table that shows the photos are doctored or staged, to show that the testimony of those at trial was fabricated, to show that the records were fabricated. It isn't an objective search for the truth, it's simply denying anything that doesn't suit the world view they have crafted.

Let me ask you directly: Why would all this have been made up? What is the motive behind fabricating the Holocaust? I would really like you to answer the question directly and not be vague.

 

[ananda]

They suggest this in the face of evidence that they do not show to be false. They claim it is false, but people can claim whatever they want. They bring nothing to the table that shows the photos are doctored or staged, to show that the testimony of those at trial was fabricated, to show that the records were fabricated. It isn't an objective search for the truth, it's simply denying anything that doesn't suit the world view they have crafted.

I understand you have a vested interest in defending one side of the story, but did you watch any of the videos I suggested?

Let me ask you directly: Why would all this have been made up? What is the motive behind fabricating the Holocaust? I would really like you to answer the question directly and not be vague.

I don't know for sure, but it usually is about money and/or power. Who profits during and after a war?

 

[LoAmmi]

I understand you have a vested interest in defending one side of the story, but did you watch any of the videos I suggested?

I don't know for sure, but it usually is about money and/or power. Who profits during and after a war?

I watched a bit of it. I have trouble watching videos produced by people whom I consider to be the scum of the Earth. I didn't see any evidence put forward, merely assertions. If you'd like to present the evidence, I'll watch it but I won't watch that video.

Who did it? What was the motive? Who do you suspect?

 

[ananda]

I watched a bit of it. I have trouble watching videos produced by people whom I consider to be the scum of the Earth. I didn't see any evidence put forward, merely assertions. If you'd like to present the evidence, I'll watch it but I won't watch that video.

You claim to desire an "objective search for the truth". Are you being objective in defending one side of the story without knowing the full story from the other side?

Who did it? What was the motive? Who do you suspect?

I don't know who did it, or the motive. I suspect the Allied leadership, I suspect the Axis leadership, I suspect the bankers who financed the war and the rebuilding after the war.

What I do know is that there were suffering amongst the People (aka civilians) on both sides of the war. The Holocaust was against many peoples, Germans included.

Like I said, there are curious questions that can be raised about both sides of the story. I am not in one camp or the other.

 

[LoAmmi]

You claim to desire an "objective search for the truth". Are you being objective in defending one side of the story without knowing the full story from the other side?

I don't know who did it, or the motive. I suspect the Allied leadership, I suspect the Axis leadership, I suspect the bankers who financed the war and the rebuilding after the war.

Like I said, there are curious questions that can be raised about both sides of the story. I am not in one camp or the other.

Yes, I'm being objective. I've looked at the evidence, of which there is a ton. I've listened to first hand accounts by people who were there. I read the testimony of those on trial. I've seen the pictures that were taken. That's objective evidence. That I'm on one side of it due to the massive amount of overwhelming evidence doesn't mean I'm not objective. It means that the mass amount of overwhelming evidence should be enough to convince anybody who is objective. I view those who overlook such evidence, who dismiss it out of hand for no good reason, to be motivated by ill intent.


To what end was it fabricated? Who profited from it? What money was to be made from fabricating this specific story? You can't just keep saying I don't know if you're going to throw out suspects. What would they gain from it?

 

[ananda]

Yes, I'm being objective. I've looked at the evidence, of which there is a ton. I've listened to first hand accounts by people who were there. I read the testimony of those on trial. I've seen the pictures that were taken. That's objective evidence. That I'm on one side of it due to the massive amount of overwhelming evidence doesn't mean I'm not objective. It means that the mass amount of overwhelming evidence should be enough to convince anybody who is objective. I view those who overlook such evidence, who dismiss it out of hand for no good reason, to be motivated by ill intent.

You admitted that you couldn't watch the videos because you had a bias against them, so forgive me if you disagree, but I do not believe you're being objective. No offense meant, of course.

To what end was it fabricated? Who profited from it? What money was to be made from fabricating this specific story? You can't just keep saying I don't know if you're going to throw out suspects. What would they gain from it?

I think it is reasonable to say that money is to be made from rebuilding, obviously; that money was made from the establishment of the State of Israel; that endless money is being made on multiple fronts, from the unending middle-east conflict after WW2.

 

[LoAmmi]

You admitted that you couldn't watch the videos because you had a bias against them, so forgive me if you disagree, but I do not believe you're being objective. No offense meant, of course.

I think it is reasonable to say that money is to be made from rebuilding, obviously; that money was made from the establishment of the State of Israel; that endless money is being made from the unending middle-east conflict after WW2.

The video was presenting zero evidence to back up the claims. I also wouldn't watch a video from a person claiming all evidence that the Earth revolves around the Sun is fabricated and I view Holocaust deniers as being in the same boat. Wasting my time is stupid. Pure evidence or bust.

Rebuilding had to happen anyway, there was a war. Israel, yeah, that's the one that usually comes up. Yep.

 

[ananda]

The video was presenting zero evidence to back up the claims. I also wouldn't watch a video from a person claiming all evidence that the Earth revolves around the Sun is fabricated and I view Holocaust deniers as being in the same boat. Wasting my time is stupid. Pure evidence or bust.

Rebuilding had to happen anyway, there was a war. Israel, yeah, that's the one that usually comes up. Yep.

If you don't wish to examine both sides, that's your right. I see things differently.

As I see it, the State of Israel established by the UN, has nothing to do with the Kingdom of Israel as established by the Biblical god or supposedly to be established by the Biblical Messiah in the Bible.

 

[LoAmmi]

As I see it, the State of Israel established by the UN, has nothing to do with the Kingdom of Israel as established by the Biblical god or supposedly to be established by the Biblical Messiah in the Bible.

It doesn't. This has no relevance to the discussion though.

 

[ananda]

It doesn't. This has no relevance to the discussion though.

Sure it does.

Politicians (and clerics in their employ) of every stripe have guilted the people of the three major Abrahamic faiths using this red herring (UN's "Israel") to incite ongoing war, hatred, and violence ... and profit. This red herring has proven extremely profitable since the conclusion of WW2.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Allied and Axis leadership were both secretly on the same side. Using the Bible and the Koran and their veiled prophecies as "playbooks" to manipulate world events, and thus, the psychology of the masses, for profit. The People being the losers.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Allied and Axis leadership were both secretly on the same side. Using the Bible and the Koran and their veiled prophecies as "playbooks" to manipulate world events, and thus, the psychology of the masses, for profit. The People being the losers.

Disregarding that "Allied" and "Axis" have no current definition, it is certainly true that Palestinians and Israelis have been pawns for more than half a century in a complicated worldwide chess game. That conflict has now escalated into a regional war with not only no apparent end in sight but the very real possibility of expanding into a much larger, perhaps even global, conflict.

 

[ananda]

Disregarding that "Allied" and "Axis" have no current definition, it is certainly true that Palestinians and Israelis have been pawns for more than half a century in a complicated worldwide chess game. That conflict has now escalated into a regional war with not only no apparent end in sight but the very real possibility of expanding into a much larger, perhaps even global, conflict.

One wonders how Christians, Jews, and Muslims lived in harmony in the "holy land" before WW2 (excepting Crusades, etc.).

The People are indeed pawns manipulated by popes, kings, presidents, chancellors, bishops, imams, rabbis, etc. If not for access to global media and communication, I think most people would only care to live in peace with their families and loved ones, their thoughts only concentrated on their local communities. Globalism - directing the minds of the pawns to (unnaturally) concern themselves about larger, "global events" - all the while stoking religious fervor and related divisiveness - brings chaos, war, and profit.

Peace is not allowed.