Big, bad media

At the end of a Times review of a documentary about Joseph Goebbels, Jeannette Catsoulis issues this unbelievable thought fart:

At a time when much of our news and entertainment media is controlled by a handful of corporations, “The Goebbels Experiment” is a cautionary reminder that equal access to the machinery of ideas may be society’s most critical goal.

So she’s drawing an equivalency between big media companies — one of which pays her [and, full disclosure, me] — and the Nazis.

And they say bloggers need editors!

That sentiment is screwy on so many levels.

First, big newspapers, such as the one in which she writes those words, are not built for “equal access.” What does “equal access” mean? The words sound so good, so PC, but they’re meaningless. And what is the “machinery of ideas” but society itself?

Second, we now have unlimited of opportunities for access and you’re looking at one.

Third, this is an extreme example of the demonization of big media. Said it before, say it again: The big media dinosaurs are, indeed, consolidating because they must huddle together against the cold wind of the great access-giver, the giant scarcity killer, the amazing distribution devaluer: the internet. Media — and news and journalism with them — are a business. Face the reality. This cant about big, bad media has gone too far.

  • Rupert Murdoch is buying internet sites:

    The net a priority for the future: Going forward media reports indicate that News Corp is preparing to spend up to $2 billion on the internet. Murdoch has said that this is the group’s top priority as far as global expansion is concerned. It is said to be looking at buying a small internet search engine and is also developing its own mass entertainment website. The Fox sites that are present at the moment are more promotional in nature.

    So far this year, the company has spent more than $700 million investing in Web companies.

    For a list of what Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation already own, click here.

  • Ronbo

    Fourth, such specious, tendentious associations trivialize the *real* Nazis and their *real* crimes.

    Fifth, society may have one or two goals that are just slightly more “critical” than taking on big media.

    What a maroon.

    • susan wallace

      If you lived in Canada or in Europe you would not think that Eric is such an idiot. When Canadians or Europeans watch CNN or even worse Fox we know that the corporations control the media in your country and distort the truth.
      CNN reports on politics by having party spokesersons endlessly spout their talking points regarldess of what question is asked.
      It is not news or coverage of issues but it does allow CNN to claim it is not biased.

  • Big media companies are indeed in business and they wouldn’t be in business if they weren’t giving people what they want. Can’t say I respect much that’s written in the ‘official’ media. That’s why I turn to blogs because you get to read real people voicing real opinions who are not paid by a newspaper or a tv station and you can make up your own mind who’s talking bullfeathers and who’s flying straight. While I don’t think blogs will replace the big media anytime soon, I’m hoping they come to have a positive effect on media reporting in that it is the blogs that will help to raise their standard. I would like to see more reporters factoring in what real people are really saying, rather than getting by with telling us what we should be thinking. As time goes on I think it is inevitable that we will see a more informative and balanced coverage from every angle of an issue which can only be a good thing.

    It is in that withering crossfire of debate that you find on the best blogs that in my view will do the most to usher in the change.

    • susan wallace

      Do not count on internet to save you. Corporation are buying up sites and creating thousands more. Web masters have total control of what they allow or don’t allow to be posted on their sites.
      I have encountered several already dedicated to a particular point of view that allow you to post your comment but if you check back a few days later your post has disappeared with only the supportive posts remaining

  • Sorry, left out the last bit of the last sentence: It is in that withering crossfire of debate that you find on the best blogs that in my view will do the most to usher in the change BECAUSE that is where we find what people are really thinking.

    If an opinion has no merit, it will be exposed, even if ten million people subscribe to it. The same will happen to an opinion that does have merit, even if only one person subscribes to it.

  • I hope you can help. What is happening in US is driving me crazy.I try to be a good person, a compassionate and caring one. I live in suburban KC and we have big problems. We are headed for an alltime murder “record, ” our schools have problems, our inner city is a scary place to live yet thousands of people have to live there. Kids sleep on the floor to avoid being shot. In the news we read daily about bribes and corruption and influence peddling and we accept it. I was a salesman for 30 years and I had to deal with competotors who were dishonest. They didnt or couldnt beieve in what they were selling. I had customers who expected some form of perk to listen to me. I succeeded because what I was selling was superior, not because I tried to buy influence with th decision maker. Why cant big businee run the same way. We have a culture of greed and corruption that is so obvious on all levels that I cant believe we tolerate it We cant be this blind, can we? I believe that there is corruption at every level of govt. Ibelieve there is corruption in big business. i do not believe we are corrupt people individually. Im afraid that the powers that be know how to play us and pit us agaist each other over moral issues that distract us from fundamental evil s that are pervading our society and our influence in the world. I read in the paper yesterday that mr. rumsfeld wants a march in washington on sept. 11. Lets have it. I want it. this may be our chance to take our country back and show the world who we the people really are. It sort of worked in the 70s, I hope people will go to washington on sept 11 and bond together like we did after sept 11 2001.For a short while after sept 11 we were a caring and sharing people. It just didnt last. We’re right back to where we were before. It isnt right that we are seen throughout the world as the evil empire. We the people are not evil. How on earth can our govt and our leadership be so misrepresentative of what individual americans want US to stand for? As a young adult I was told to love it or leave itand for a glorious but brief period we the people forced a positive change. I am now an older adult and am having thoughts about leaving brcause I did love it and it is making me crazy to see what we represent to the world. I dont want to be the ugly american. Please go to washington on sept 11 with me and hopefully millions of other americans who care about who WE are and what we really stand for.

  • Skate

    Goebbels is one of the most successful propagandists in history. His methods are still used today by governments around the world, including the current administration–a fact that I don’t think you can refute.

    The moral outrage about “Nazi comparisons” is only justified if the comparisons are invalid. It doesn’t trivialize the Nazis to note that their propaganda techniques are still in use, it trivializes the significance of our current government using Nazi propaganda techniques.

    Don’t count the media dinosaurs out. Their profit motive, vast financial resources, copyright monopoly and lobbying power to create laws in their favor gives them powerful advantages that may not be beatable in the long run.

    The current administration doesn’t have the total control over the media that Goebbels had, but they are working on getting at least part way there.

  • paladin

    My personal rule is that anyone who mentions Nazis, Hitler or Jon Stewart, is immediately cast as an intellectual lightweight, and is to be dismissed.

  • Skate

    “My personal rule is that anyone who mentions Nazis, Hitler or Jon Stewart, is immediately cast as an intellectual lightweight, and is to be dismissed.”

    And yet this was a comment in response to a **documentary** about Joseph Goebbels! Talking about the modern world and how it might relate to history is the only way we can avoid the mistakes of the past. Would you have us remain ignorant of history just to appease people’s indignation about the Nazis?

    Goebbels is the father of modern propaganda. You can’t talk intelligently about propaganda with out talking about Goebbles. You can disagree with Jeannette Catsoulis’ conclusions but not with the idea of using history as a warning for today.

  • Goebbels is the father of modern propaganda.

    Actually, I think it would be more accurate to say that was Edward Bernays.

  • Skate

    Hubris wrote, “Actually, I think it would be more accurate to say that was Edward Bernays.”

    A fair point. Bernays is considered the father of modern public relations, which is a form of propaganda. Generally, I think, we use the term “propaganda” most commonly in the context of its use by governments. Goebbels is the father of modern government propaganda.

  • Skate, re: “The current administration … are working on getting at least part way there.” So what? Every government tries to do that. And of all the medias in this old world, imagining America’s marching to the drumbeat of a Goebbels-like instruction from a Republican White House is just too fantastic, even for science fiction.

    That said, I agree we should be able to discuss the Nazis, or anything else under the sun, freely.

  • Skate

    Noel Guinane wrote, “So what? Every government tries to do that. And of all the medias in this old world, imagining America’s marching to the drumbeat of a Goebbels-like instruction from a Republican White House is just too fantastic, even for science fiction.”

    And I would never have guessed that a male prostitute with no journalistic experience would would be given continuous Whitehouse press credentials to ask softball questions of the Whitehouse press secretary. The current administration is already beyond science fiction. Even the NYT was part of a credulous press in the pre-Iraq War bandwagon.

    The current Administration’s control over the press is more subtle than in WWII Germany, but insidious none the less.

  • What specifically makes Goebbels a “father” of anything? How about some examples of methods that you (Skate) believe are the seminal inventions or contributions of Goebbels?

  • Skate

    Laurence haughton says, “What specifically makes Goebbels a “father” of anything? How about some examples of methods that you (Skate) believe are the seminal inventions or contributions of Goebbels?”

    Well, why do you ask? Are you saying he isn’t?

    Goebbels main technique, and one that is used by the Bush Administration today, was the “Big Lie.” Essentially, repeating something over and over again until it becomes true. Granted, the term “Big Lie” originated with Hitler himself, but the thorough implementation of the Big Lie by Goebbels and the overwhelming pervasiveness and success of the German propaganda machine under Goebbels is why I have referred to him as the father of modern government propaganda. You are free to nominate your own candidate as well.

    In an interesting aside, here is the OSS analysis of Hitler’s techniques (via Wikipedia);

    “His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it. – OSS report page 51 ”

    Sounds like the Bush Administration’s policy to me. As for people who will get up on me for using facts to compare the current administration to WWII Germany–tough. If the comparison is valid it should be made. You can argue over whether the two circumstances are analogous but don’t try and get all huffy about looking to history for lessons about our modern world.

  • h0mi

    From Wikipedia:

    Goebbels’ technique, also known as argumentum ad nauseam, is the name given to the policy of repeating a lie until it is taken to be the truth (see Big Lie). For example, when Goebbels took ownership of the Der Angriff (lit., “The Assault”) newspaper, he attacked Berlin Police President Bernhard Weiss, calling him “Isidor” Weiss. Isidor is, to German ears, an insulting name with strong anti-Jewish connotations. This was done to such an extent that the public believed Isidor to be his real name, and he therefore became a figure of fun and ridicule.

    Kind of like “Chimpy McBushitlerburton” or varients.

    But argumentum ad nauseam isn’t new, nor limited just to Goebbels or the Bush administration.

  • paladin

    All this seems familiar: “never admit a fault or error; never concede there may be some good in your enemy…never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything…people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one, and if you repeat it frquently enough people will sooner or later believe it.” Sounds like Bill Clinton to me.

  • Skate, I think what you’re seeing and disliking is the fact that the Republican Party is in power and are taking a confrontational approach to what they view as a hostile liberal outlook in the media. It has always been this way and probably always will, particularly times when America is at war, but I wouldn’t worry too much. Bush will pass from the scene. Perhaps we will have another democrat in the White House, one hopes with a little more personal integrity than Clinton. Meanwhile, Goebbels is resting in his grave and the U.S constitution including all of its amendments still guarantees that a vocal liberal media can make a living.

  • I ask becasue I’d like to know. Currently I do not. It’s that simple.

    And I’m not knowledgable enough about the history of political manipulation and its many practitioners throughout time to nominate anybody as the father.

    But to the point, so Goebbels didn’t originate any tactics but he’s the father because of his implementation of (what you call) Hitler’s original thinking about telling outrageous whoppers and using repetition to make people think that something not true (or not completely true) is true.

    Again I’m no expert, but I would think one would have to do more than follow the leader to be considered the “father.”

    BTW those primary rules you quote sound like a lot of people. That might be because they are pretty vague and hard to measure.

  • Skate

    h0mi says, “But argumentum ad nauseam isn’t new, nor limited just to Goebbels or the Bush administration.”

    Didn’t say it was. You don’t have to be the inventor of a technique to be it’s most notable user. Propaganda was a hallmark of the German government in WWII, used to great effect. The success of Goebbels and Hitler was more than just any one technique, but the totality of their effort, which would later be emulated by other oppressive governments like Stalinist Russia. Goebbels didn’t invent government propaganda but he did help perfect it.

    If you have a better candidate for father of modern government propaganda, lets hear it.

  • Skate

    I think what you’re seeing and disliking is the fact that the Republican Party is in power and are taking a confrontational approach to what they view as a hostile liberal outlook in the media.

    True, I dislike the hostile approach the Republicans are taking towards the media, but this administration is the most secretive in US history. The President and his staff repeat false messages (“the end of major combat operations,” “the insurgency is “in its last throws,” is loosing “steam”), appear extensively on FOX news to the exclusion of other media outlets, create phony news spots (Karen Ryan), pay pundants to secretly tout Administration policy (Armstrong Williams), and outright lie (“the leaker will be fired”).

    There has never been a more secretive and manipulative administration in the history of the US. A cool headed comparison to WWII Germany is rational if we don’t wish to repeat history. This Administration along with the GOP is a well oiled, highly disciplined propaganda machine. Talking points (argumentum ad nauseum) are repeated verbatim by multiple shills. Dissent is not tolerated.

    Be vigilant, very vigilant.

    As for laurence, who wrote, “BTW those primary rules you quote sound like a lot of people. That might be because they are pretty vague and hard to measure.”

    I’d disagree. The fact that they fit so well is, perhaps, telling.

  • Skate

    The above top paragraph should be in quotes. (I miss the preview feature!!! I was trying to use a “quote” tag!)

  • You see the perfect fit but perhaps it’s just a Rorschach reaction.

  • Skate, I can understand your concern. I think it’s unfounded, but I see where you are coming from. As to the comparison with Hitler and Goebbels and Nazi Germany … the US really is light years away from their sort of totalitarianism. I too am concerned it’s inching towards a very watered down version of it, a tendency for which is a part of human nature, but I don’t think it’ll ever get anywhere close enough to really pose a threat to a majority of the people’s liberty. There will be some transgressions, but on the whole Americans love freedom, in all its glory and with all its warts, and love the legal process, too much to allow it.

  • Skate

    laurence says, “You see the perfect fit but perhaps it’s just a Rorschach reaction.”

    That is a valid possibility, however you may be doing the exact opposite! Your dismissal of my conclusion is out of hand as opposed to showing that my conclusion is wrong.

    Is the bush administration doing the following:

    “never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it. ”

    I’d say they are. While those could be considered common forms of government propaganda in a totalitarian society, are you going to argue they are techniques **our** government should be using on us?

    If you disagree, show me where I’m wrong.

  • LanceThruster

    I agree wholeheartedly with Skate. Despite other avenues available for getting factual information out into the public record, the vast echo chamber of the media giants with their corporate and political interests (some disclosed, some not) allows accurate dissemination of facts to be drowned out by the endless repetition of known falsehoods.

    Once these lies are broadcast and/or in print (to be regurgitated repeatedly), they become memes that are accepted as fact by those who stop investigating once they can find any thread to cling to in order to maintain their belief system regardless of any information that would discredit or alter that belief.

    I think BushCo and cronies are expert at using the Goebbels model to their advantage (not to mention other unsavory elements of fascist intimidation).

    Just look how many times the charge “un-American” is trotted out against those who seek merely to hold governent leaders accountable for their actions.

  • Like I said it’s too ambiguous to measure if its right or wrong. How can one tell if the public has been allowed by the administration to “cool off?” Do we track their TV viewing habits? What magazine articles they read? Watercooler chit-chat?

    “Never admit mistakes, concede there’s any good in your enemy, leave room, accept blame…” That’s all eye of the beholder stuff. Who do you have to admit a fault to to nullify that charge? Do you have to make a public spectacle of yourself? Did FDR or Truman concede the good in their enemies? Does any partisan?

    Big lies are believed sooner than little lies? Is there some reputable research to back that up? Considering all the white lies we tell others and swallow ourselves that conclusion seems questionable.

    You just wrote, “There has never been a more secretive and manipulative administration in the history of the US.” By what measurement? How do you compare the secretive nature of the FDR, Truman, Nixon or any other administrations? I can’t imagine how to weigh the truth of your statement so I can’t say you are wrong. But you don’t say what historical facts you used to arrive at your conclusion so I also can’t accept that you are right.

    But whatever, I think I get the message. Bush is a very bad man… a very, very bad man.

  • h0mi

    Just look how many times the charge “un-American” is trotted out against those who seek merely to hold governent leaders accountable for their actions.

    You mean “against those with whom (they) disagree”.

    I’ve seen all of the following groups of people referred to as unamerican:

    The Bush administration
    Michael Moore
    People who supported pulling Schaivo’s feeding tube
    People who supported the Federal government’s actions to stop the pulling of Schaivo’s feeding tube.
    Opponents of the Iraq invasion
    Supporters of the Iraq invasion
    Swift Boat Veterans
    John Kerry
    Opponents of Same sex Marriage
    Supporters of Same sex marriage
    Howard Stern
    Brent Bozell
    Rush Limbaugh
    Al Franken
    Ann Coulter
    Bill Maher

    In each case, the persons hurling the unamerican charge, the persons questioning the patriotism of the other was always someone who simply disliked or disagreed with what the “victim” was saying when it was being said.

    Did FDR or Truman concede the good in their enemies? Does any partisan?

    There’s also a question as to which enemy they refer to. Presumably they mean political enemy, and given that Bush actually praised Kerry’s war service, that clearly shows this premise to be false. I can’t find evidence of Kerry praising Bush, however.

  • Skate

    “Like I said it’s too ambiguous to measure if its right or wrong”

    I’d say that it could be a coding challenge for a qualitative statistical study, but I don’t think it is un-measurable. However, I don’t think you have to do a statistical analysis to have a meaningful comparison. You argue that maybe FDR or some other administration has used some of the techniques in question but you still haven’t denied the Administration is using the techniques described by the OSS.

    “Never admit mistakes”
    Bush has been asked this at least twice during the last election campaign and has never admitted any mistakes. He only joked that he might make some different appointments.

    “never accept blame”
    They still won’t concede that they should have planned the war better, nor will they accept responsibility for the prisoner abuse in Iraq or Guantanamo Bay.

    “never concede there’s any good in your enemy”
    This one is slightly more ambiguous, but calling people Evil Dooers and an Axis of Evil might qualify. But, they have said we are for the Iraqi people, not the government–so they may not pass this test.

    “Big lies are believed sooner than little lies?’
    Again with the requests for research. Do you have any that is contrary?

    None the less, it is a philosophy and one being used by the GOP and the administration. As Josh Marshall notes “Now we can see in full view what we’ve seen again and again in recent years, the favored tactic: terror by grand moral inversion, the lie so total and audacious that it almost knocks opponents off their feet…John Kerry decorated war hero? No, coward and showboat… Wilson, a whistleblower administration officials were trying to punish? A whistleblower calling out White House manipulated intelligence during the lead-up to war?

    Not at all. Rove was the whistleblower trying to knock down a campaign of disinformation from Joe Wilson. The audacity of it is enough to knock some people off their feet. ”

    Granted, the above is only an opinion, but so is everything you say. My opinion, at this point, is better illustrated.

    “You just wrote, “There has never been a more secretive and manipulative administration in the history of the US.”

    I think this one is true and demonstrably so, from the hiding of presidential papers that were scheduled to be released, denying congress access to documents they request for vetting nominees, hiding even the names of lobbyists who met with the Vice President, encouraging the routine denial of FOI requests, secret arrests, secret jails, secret detentions, secret briefs filed with a court who was requested to keep even the legal reasons secret, and even secret laws (the Fed won’t even disclose what law allegedly requires you to show ID at an airport). I’d say the secretiveness of this administration is an open and shut case.

    I’d say that my points are accurate and provable.

  • Skate

    h0mi says, “ush actually praised Kerry’s war service, that clearly shows this premise to be false. I can’t find evidence of Kerry praising Bush, however.”

    You conveniently forget that Bush would not condemn the Republican smear campaign against Kerry. High praise indeed.

    As for Kerry not praising Bush. Well, I’m not sure that is true, but if you can find evidence of Bush’s **war service** then you might have a point.

  • LanceThruster

    Without defending those who’ve used that ephitat or quibbling over each and every name on the list, I think that Bush is un-American for the damage he has done to the Republic and the way he violates both the spirit and letter of the law and Constitution. He is un-American for being part of multiple stolen elections. He is un-American for his blurring the line between church and state. He is un-American for lying to Congress and the American people in a time of national emergency. I think he is un-American for selling out the interests of individual Americans solely for the sakes of corporate interests. I think he is un-American for harboring those in his administration who have in all probability committed treason (true treason being the ultimate un-American act). I think he is un-American for squandering the public treasury like a drunken sailor (no offense to drunken sailors), without asking that those who’ve profited the most from our capitalist system to take on any additional load. I think he is un-American for the secretive nature he operates in, treating a free press like the enemy of freedom itself.

    I think if any of these description fit those on the other side of the aisle, so be it.

    I think Cindy Sheehan is a patriot in the truest sense of the word. Regardless of where one stands on the merits of her position, to speak truth (as one sees it) to power is the ultimate right and duty of the American citizen, and to be so thoroughly demonized (Plamed) by some is just downright….well, un-American.

    What I fear most is that in the consolidation of power by any means necessary, BushCo anti-patriots will turn this country on its head and make such actions truly “American”. They have quite a head start in their endless campaign to equate being against Bush with being against America.

    It is tragically ironic that the patriotism is questioned of those who refuse to fight in a war started by men who refused to fight in a war. For something Bush declares involves the future and safety of the free world, enlistment shortfalls seem unthinkable (have the Bush twins found a summer job yet?). It seems all the red state fair-weather patriots would be beating a path to the recruiting office to do their part. They must have other priorities.

    Maybe if they were approached in a language that appeals to them such as,

    “War is good business, invest your children!”

  • LanceThruster

    I would like to add that despite the outrage of comparisons of Bush and Hitler elsewhere, look at Hitler’s own words from Mein Kampf and see how it is mirrored by the tactics in use today (which is part of what prompted Mr. Jarvis’ entry in the first place).

    (from: )

    “The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands…”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 180-181.

    “In political matters feeling often decides more correctly than reason.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 173

    “All propaganda must be popular and its intellectual level must be adjusted to the most limited intelligence among those it is addressed to. Consequently, the greater the mass it is intended to reach, the lower its purely intellectual level will have to be.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 180

    “But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 184

    “It is a mistake to make propaganda many-sided, like scientific instruction, for instance… As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 180-181

    “[Propaganda] must be aimed at the emotions and only to a very limited degree at the so-called intellect… The art of propaganda lies in understanding the emotional ideas of the great masses and finding, through a psychologically correct form, the way to the attention and thence to the heart of the broad masses.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 180

    “[Propaganda] does not have multiple shadings; it has a positive and a negative; love or hate, right or wrong, truth or lie, never half this way and half that way…”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 183

    “[This is the] very first condition which has to be fulfilled in every kind of propaganda: a systematically one-sided attitude towards every problem that has to be dealt with…”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 182

    “The more modest its intellectual ballast, the more exclusively it takes into consideration the emotions of the masses, the more effective [propaganda] will be.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 180

    “For I must not measure the speech of a statesman to his people by the impression which it leaves in a university professor, but by the effect it exerts on the people. And this alone gives the standard for the speaker’s genius.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 477

    “The purpose of propaganda is not to provide interesting distraction for blasé young gentlemen, but to convince… the masses. But the masses are slow moving, and they always require a certain time before they are ready even to notice a thing, and only after the simplest ideas are repeated thousands of times will the masses finally remember them.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 185

    “When there is change, it must not alter the content of what propaganda is driving at, but in the end must always say the same thing. For instance, a slogan must be presented from different angles, but the end of all remarks must always and immutably be the slogan itself. Only in this way can the propaganda have a unified and complete effect.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 185

    “To whom should propaganda be addressed? To the scientifically trained intelligentsia or the less educated masses? It must be addressed always and exclusively to the masses.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 179

    “As soon as one point is removed from the sphere of dogmatic certainty, the discussion may not simply result in a new and better formulation, but may easily lead to endless debates and general confusion.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

    “The grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

    “I have already stated… that all great, world-shaking events have been brought about, not by written matter, but by the spoken word… While the speaker gets a continuous correction of his speech from the crowd he is addressing, since he can always see in the faces of his listeners to what they extent they follow his arguments with understanding and whether the impression and the effect of his words lead to the desired goal — the writer does not know his readers at all. The essential point… is that a piece of literature never knows into what hands it will fall, and yet must retain its definite form.”
    — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 469-70

  • Eileen

    Wow Skate/Lancethruster (give us a break with the name), you guy(s) seem to be quite hep to Hitler’s jive.

    Probably because of your buddy Amin al Husseini, the “Grand Mufti” and father of today’s jihad:

    “From The Muslim Brotherhood to the Third Reich
    Amin Al-Husseini / Adolf Hitler Connection



    Hitler Finds Arab Support [xiii]
    Arab Nazi political groups [xiv] spring up throughout Middle East:

    . Young Egypt. Led by Muslim Brotherhood member Abdul Gamal Nasser (future Egyptian President). Young Egypt’s political slogan “One Folk, One Party, One Leader” is a direct translation from German of Nazi slogan.

    . Social Nationalist Party in Syria. Led by Anton Saada [xv] (known as the Syrian Fuhrer)


    Husseini Meets Hitler’s banker
    Francois Genoud [xvi] , later known as the Swiss Banker of the Hitler’s Third Reich, travels to Palestine to meet Amin Al-Husseini for the first time. Their relationship will continue well into the 1960’s.


    Palestine Riots

    Weapon of Choice

    Suicide Squads

    Muslim Leaders assassinated

    Amin Al Husseini in Jerusalem during 1936 Riots

    Amin Al-Husseini is main organizer of riots. [xvii] He organizes suicide squads against the local authorities. Applies Nazi methodology of “systematic extermination” of any Arab suspected of less than total loyalty to Pan-Islamic vision of Muslim Brotherhood.

    Any “non-Islamic” element is a threat to his Pan-Islamic vision.

    Many Muslim and Christian Palestinian intellectual leaders and clerics assassinated for protesting Husseini’s Islamic terror.

    1936-1938. Murdered by Husseini’s men:

    Sheikh Daoud Ansari ( Imam of Al Aqsa Mosque), Sheikh Ali Nur el Khattib (Al Aqsa Mosque), Sheikh Nusbi Abdal Rahim (Council of Muslim Religious Court), Sheikh Abdul el Badoui (Acre, Palestine), Sheikh El Namouri (Hebron), Nasr El Din Nassr (Mayor of Hebron). Between Feb. 1937 and Nov 1938, Eleven (11) Mukhtars (community leaders) and their entire families slain by Amin al Husseini’s men.


    On Hitler’s Payroll
    Amin Al-Husseini visits Jerusalem German Consul. He meets SS Hauptschanfuehrer A.Eichman and SS Oberscherfuehrer H. Hagen to discuss “the Jewish question”. [xviii] Amin Al-Husseini subsequently receives financial and military aid from Nazi Germany. [xix] [xx]


    Mufti Joins Hitler In

    Jihad against Britain

    Amin Al-Husseini arrives in Rome, where he meets fascist leader Benito Mussolini, the genocidal butcher of Ethiopians in Africa. Mussolini vows to help the Palestinian cause against the Jews. From Rome, Husseini declares Fatwa-Jihad [xxi] against Britain. He preaches the notion of Pan-Islamism, with vision of Muslim unity to further his cause.

    Amin Al-Husseini: Root of Today’s Iraqi Tragedy

    Husseini-Tulfah [xxii]


    Pro-nazi coup
    Palestinian Volunteers to the Iraqi Army for 1941 Pro-Nazi Coup in Bagdad.
    Amin Al-Husseini instigates a pro-nazi coup in Baghdad, Iraq. Kharaillah Tulfah is his right-hand man. Tulfah is Saddam Hussein’s mentor and uncle. Germany sends weapons and aircrafts to Husseini. Coup fails. Amin Al Husseini in Bagdad with Rashid Al-Qailani, Leader of Pro-Nazi Iraqi Coup 1941


    European Jews Must Not Make It To Palestine
    Amin Al Husseini In Berlin during WWII.
    Amin Al-Husseini in Berlin meets [xxiii] with Adolf Hitler [xxiv] and is active in the decision to exterminate all Jews through the infamous Final Solution [xxv] .”

    And etc. Read all about it. Please.

    Islam requires that good little jihadis spout the taqiyya line, which basically reverses all facts in the universe and attempts to make those evil U.S. INFIDELS (and ESPECIALLY GWB) Satan.

    Fact is, Islamofascism IS Naziism personified. Only much, much worse. This tiime it’s not just the Jews they’re after, it’s the Jews AND ALL INFIDELS until the caliphate is achieved. You bet they know all about Hitler’s tactics.

    Boy(s) the gig is UP. Don’t you get it that WE GET IT??

  • Eileen

    “An Arabic translation of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf is being distributed by Al-Shurouq, a Ramallah based book distributor, to East Jerusalem and territories controlled by the PA. According to Agence France Presse (Sept. 8), the book, previously banned by Israel, has been allowed by the PA and is 6th on the Palestinian best-seller list. Bisan publishers in Lebanon first published this edition in 1963 and again in 1995. The book costs about $10. The cover, presented below, shows a picture of Hitler, a swastika, and the title in both German and Arabic. The translator, Luis Al-Haj, wrote the following introduction:

    “Adolf Hitler was not an ordinary man to be [forgotten] by the wheels of time… Adolf Hitler does not belong to the German people alone, he is one of the few great men who almost stopped the motion of history, altered its course, and changed the face of the world. Hence, he belongs to history.”

    “Hitler the soldier left behind not only a legend stained by tragedy itself; the tragedy of a state whose dreams were shattered, a regime whose pillars were torn down, and a political party that was crushed. Hitler was a man of ideology who bequeathed an ideological heritage whose decay is inconceivable. This ideological heritage includes politics, society, science, culture, and war as science and culture.”

    “The National Socialism that Hitler preached for and whose characteristics were presented in his book My Struggle, and whose principles he explained in his speeches before he took power, as well as during the 13 years he spent at the head of the German nation – this National Socialism did not die with the death of its herald. Rather, its seeds multiplied under each star…”

    Google “Mein Kampf Middle East Bestseller” to see 2005 sales rates in Turkey, Etc.

  • Eileen

    Interesting. A simple cut and paste somehow magically produced a smiley in the midst (which wasn’t part of the cut and paste). I guess we needed a little light around this place.

  • LanceThruster

    I am most definitely not Skate, if that is what you are implying.

    [unimportant trivia alert] The name “LanceThruster” was a creation for the online game “MegaWars” on CompuServe. While everyone else was picking crew names like “Capt. Kirk” and “Hans Solo”, I wanted something similar to “Flash Gordon” or “Buck Rogers” but still original. I was also partial to “Slartibartfast”. Most common reaction/question, “Are you gay?” A: Not that I know of, but not that it matters. I believe in civil rights but I’m not a minority either (other than atheist).

    You also seem to imply that to be against Bush’s “crusade” (which has been renamed several times – WMD Mission, GWOT, G-SAVE, GWOT again, CREEP PT. II, etc…) is to be for theocratic fascism. I am an atheist. I support the cause of freedom against religious totalitarianism such as espoused by Salman Rushdie or Ibn Warriq. That is not to say I am an enemy of Arabs, or Persians, or Muslims as a group.

    I also feel that Israel has been givien too much leeway in their actions against the people of the region and that this has fostered much additional strife and bloodshed. This is not to excuse the violence from the other side, just an acknowledgement that much of the story regarding Israeli oppression is downplayed or ignored entirely.

    I might try to cut and paste some examples later but many of the actions taken by Israel mirror those of the Nazis. Not on the same level but certainly with a desire for a similar outcome (having the problem go away). I would suggest having a look at the online book “When Victims Rule” to see what I mean. And before someone tries to label it as anti-Semitic, read the introduction that explains the need to discuss issues openly and honestly. This is exactly the approach I applauded Jeff Jarvis for when I first wrote him (although under my real name – WB). Many of the most eye-opening revelations were from Jewish historians themselves (such as Hannah Arendt). They were often admonished by Jewish groups, “not in front of the goyim.”

    So, it makes no difference to me if you counter that some other group does it too or does it worse. I am trying to maintain the level of freedoms we have known throughout our history (flawed, bloody, and hypocritical as it has been) and the mechanisms to keep it so (free press, representitive government, Bill of Rights, Constitutional powers to redress greivences against the government).

    Whether from the Hitler/Goebbels playbook or the pages of “1984”, or the warnings of Neil Postman (Amusing Ourselves to Death), or Noam Chomsky (Manufacturing Consent), I think the push to manupulate, deceive, subjegate, and destroy select sub-groups of the masses is just as dangerous (possibly more so) than Islamic Fascism. I can readily identify that I want no part of a Caliphate. I am not so sure I can convince my fellow citizens that a Xian theocracy is not any better and entails the same threat to freedom.

    Look at how we create a climate for failure with our other crusades; War on Drugs (war against our citizens, and those in drug producing countries), War on Poverty (war against integration, education, and economic opportunity – the perpetuation of the “what’s wrong with those people?” myth), the war against secular humanism (“they’re trying to kill our god!” – irrationalists insisting that the job of government is the exclusive branding of their belief system – the height of insecurity over its inability to stand on its own merits) and now we have the War on Terror (a rose by any other name). Do you not see the fallacy of saying, “it is not right to kill 3000 innocent people because you have a political beef” as we kill untold thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of innocent people because we have a political beef.

    It is being sold under the guise of trading freedom for security (which as you know from the quote means we should deserve neither).

    Where is this leading? The industrialists felt they could use Hitler to acheive their ends, and vice versa. We have a similar situation now. The coming wars will be over food/water (look at the take over of water resources by corporations in South America and India, and by the state in the Middle East) and race (group “X” just cannot blend in with modern society and forfeits their rights to belong in the world community). We will be the world’s policeman (see Thomas P.M. Barnett’s “Pentagon’s New Map”) but instead of ensuring freedom and democracy, we will be enforcing corporate dominionism over peoples unable to resist the juggernaut.

    Expect with the help of greedheads globally, more of the same inequity only worse.

    All thanks to the astute reading of human nature by Herr Hitler used by those who are not above a Reichstag fire or two (or three) of their own. Strap yourselves in, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

  • Skate

    Eileen seems to think that all people she disagrees with must be one person.

    She also has a history of calling people she disagrees with “terrorists.” You could be next…

  • Eileen

    Skate has a history of attempting to discredit those who provide truths about Islamofascism. Interesting, eh?

  • LanceThruster


    In order for me to get a better perspective of your takee on current events, could you share with me any of the discrepancies you see in the analysis of the 9/11 attacks? I ask because it seems to me that the bulk of the lies are not being spread by Islamofascists (as dastardly as they may be).

  • Eileen

    No time or interest in a blow by blow analysis of your comments, Lance/whoever you are – someone who admits to utilizing multiple fake names in this forum alone. Let’s put it this way, succinctly: I don’t agree with ANY of your base line premises, your purported facts Or analogies. The only thing we agree upon is this: “we’re in for a bumpy ride”. But it ain’t due to Bush “lies” or Bush administration “nazi tactics”. What UTTER TRIPE! To even suggest that terrorists are to be lauded and believed over the U.S. as in: “it seems to me that the bulk of the lies are not being spread by Islamofascists” tells us where your loyalties lie.

    You’ve only confirmed my earlier observations.

  • LanceThruster


    Thanks. That’s all I needed to know. Get your clock cleaned, have no credible rebuttal, declare “Victory!”, and skedaddle.

    Despite your mischaracterizations (check your reading comprehension), I have no “multiple” handles here. This is in fact the first thread I’ve commented on in BuzzMachine and the other comments (2 – quite complimentary to Jeff) were directly emailed to Jeff Jarvis under my real name (not “fake” as far as I know).

    GOP through and through. All hat and no cattle!

    A tip of the hat to Skate for his predictive abilities. You have indeed lumped me with the terrorist forces of violence and irrationality. Though I don’t think it was in the Mein Kampf quotes, you present a textbook example of one of their main ploys; accuse others of those things you are guilty of yourself (such as the Reichstag fire). You elect not to support your premises nor defend/deny the instances of lies, deception, and murder by your side, yet are quick to accuse me of same.

    I think you, and those of your mindset, are a cancer on this country, and will surely bring about its downfall. There are just too godd*m many of you, and those who appeal to your ego and laziness (too “smart” to need to examine your position) are sure that you will buy into their pack of lies.

    I found it interesting that there was not even one element of the 9/11 narrative that doesn’t give you pause, as something that just doesn’t add up and was worth questioning and further examination.

    And yet *I’m* the traitorous anti-American! FEH!

  • Pingback: FCC Allows More Media Consolidation, For All The Wrong Reasons | Peach Pundit()

  • Pingback: Sitges Carnival 2010()