mokwit

Asylum was given to someone facing criminal charge in KSA and extradition requests were not met.

You're right, it's not like Islamists have driven vehicles at high speed into crowds in Europe before, is it? [sarcasm] I think it is quite understandable for people to assume Islam when there is a frenzied knife attack or car attack on people just going about their business. More often than not that assumption would prove to be correct, would it not?

The US became an absolute laughing stock under Biden. It has completely lost respect. Don't take my word for it, ask Americans.

I have already answered that but you are using the tactic of demanding that i accept a very narrow definition that suits your purpose just as you did with U Turn and Manifesto in another thread. The board can judge for itself as to whether the rise of the Nazis was a function of conditions in Germany post 1918 in part caused by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, or whether as you suggest, if there was not a specific clause in the treaty of Versailles calling for the formation of the Nazi party the rise of the Nazis cannot be blamed on the terms of the Treaty (see how ridiculous you sound?, and everyone on the board can see it). As for citing Henry Ford, I deliberately chose that example to illustrate that anti Jewish views were not confined to Germany and seemingly actually fairly mainstream (was Henry Ford regarded as an extremist at the time?). In the UK, antisemitism seemingly started with Edward I. I think I threw it out but Bernard Baruchs autobiography has a photo of him with Henry Ford who he describes in the book as a good friend. Baruch as you know, was pivotal in the formation of Israel post WW2. Whether the friendship in the 20's ended with Ford's views in the 30's I don't know.

That too, but I couldn't remember the name and couldn't be bothered to look it up for an answer to you as you never argue your points, only deflect and insult. I would have thought mentioning his book by name pretty much covered that base. You'll have to explain the ''afire' reference to me. Now, your deflection aside, what about my points? In the absence of comment/counter from you I will assume you accept them as accurate.

You are being ridiculously pedantic to the point of childishness. Once again you are using the tactic of demanding that I accept an artificially narrow definition that suits your agenda. The terms of the Armistice created the backdrop against which the Nazi party could achieve traction. I suggest you read up on the chaos in Germany in 1918 and onwards into the 1920's and the economic and political conditions in the Wiemar Republic. The earliest of Hitlers speeches I can find online is 1921. I suggest you read that to educate yourself as to the backdrop. As for the US Nazi party, in the 1930's Germany was admired for having pulled itself out of the depression that still continued in other countries including the US (hint: it helps if you take control of your central bank). Quite possibly there was an element of antisemitism driving this also - a feeling that Americans were losing control to Jewish interests, This was the period in which Henry Ford wrote The International Jew. Antisemitism was not invented by Hitler, it was present in many countries before the war, and after.

How does criticizing the Deal Leader work out?

I could even tell them which building the weapons are apparently stored in if being told to drop them off there is a clue.

I did think that too, i.e. is he a minicab driver?

He was armed with a knife and a chopper.

The rise of Nazism according to Chomper. It started with the terms of the Armistice and the Wiemar Republic. I suggest you educate yourself beyond the 'as seen on TV' version if you are going to comment. There are some French made documentaries on youtube which seem to try and describe what happened in fairly neutral terms. Who are these uniformed jackbooted street thugs?

Could have been, I'm not on anybody's side and doubt that either side is whiter than white. I was just correcting our red forever friend as he was disparaging the side probably most ideologically in tune with him.

We know, but we're not allowed to speak of a syndrome on here anymore.

For some reason nothing pictured has any Nazi/SS insignia and saying a skull mask resembles SS 'Totenkopf' insignia is a bit of a stretch. Well done Police for seemingly thwarting an attack on people just being whoever they really are, but I think the link with Naziism is a stretch and Breivik to my knowledge never expressed any opinion on LGBT people, it was the mass immigration/Islamification. Being opposed to mass immigration is not right wing, and having anti gay feelings does not of it's own make someone right wing. Douflas Murray who gets called a neo nazi is gay. I reiterate my support for prevention on attacks on LGBT people, but i think they are putting 2+2 together to try and get a desired Neo Nazi 5. I have seen the MI5 Parliamentary report on supposed right wing extremists and it is ridiculous.

Was it yellow shirts in Lumpini? I thought it was the red shirts, who are more of a grass roots movement for equality movement than the maintenance of privilege orientated yellow shirts. I don't recall the cache of weapons and if there had been, bearing in mind the Army shot a number of people, one would always want proof that these weapons weren't planted to justify that.