" Yes some of your best friends are English I am sure."

I like England a hell of a lot more than you like America, hypocrite.

You are a twister and liar.

The Goebbels remark is supposed to be my comment on the mass rape of German women by the Russians, that's it. Something that most right thinking historians accept and condemn, but not you apparently. So much for your accusation that I formulate one ''every other post''. You are a twister and a liar.

Your anti-semetic accusation is based on my pointing out the exit of the Saudis after 9/11, you have nothing else but this. I fail to see any anti-semitism here. You are a twister and a liar.

I posted on this German genocide in their colony of South West Africa, and went on to say that it was a forerunner of the Holocaust itself, by employing this excellent reference: The Kaiser's Holocaust: Germany's Forgotten Genocide and the Colonial Roots of Nazism. I therefore, in your view, am engaged in some sort of whitewash of the considerably smaller scale British action in the Boer war. You are a twister and a liar.

You are not therefore proposing an causation of rape which embraces both genetics and the environment? You hypothesize that environmental factors are the sole causes of rape? You only give poverty and apartheid in your twisted response to the appalling rape figures for women, children and babies in South Africa.

Let's also however consider ideologies of male sexual entitlement, alcohol, childhood abuse, low educational standards, multiple sexual partners, pornography, violent computer games, poor marital relationships, weak legal sanctions....................
Trouble is that none of these fit in with your political agenda do they? When will you learn that correlation is not necessarily causation? My best bet is never, because you would rather twist and distort facts.

The 2 million myth comes straight from two Nazi propagandists who wrote "Woman in Berlin". One of them wrote under a pseudonym to hide from his past as a Nazi propagandist. Beevor accepted all neo-Nazi sources in his hitpiece on the Red Army, and the myth has pretty much relied on Beevor for any substantiation. So yes, you are regurgitating Nazi propaganda, full stop.

Which isn't surprising considering Fulham also questioned the number of deaths in the Holocaust.

http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?threadID=716401#717424

And I ask how is he not a Nazi? He also defends the Confederacy, claiming the war was about the tariff, not slavery, basically spewing any nonsense he can to defend the Slave Power.

And let's be clear, Fulham said absolutely not a single word of condemnation about the British concentration camps. He said not a word about the fact that the German idea for concentration camp, even word for it, was taken straight from the Boer War. He called it "concentrations of people" and then went on a tangent about the Kaiser. He did everything he could to deflect from British culpability, as he always done. He has never said a single word condemning a single historical crime done by the British government. Yet he feigns moral outrage about everybody else.

''This is the same guy who thinks the Irish should shut up and salute the British uniform after the Black & Tans were unleashed upon them during the First World War. ''

What I do say unequivocally and stand by, despite your prolonged campaign of twisting my words, is that the poor treatment of the returning brave Irish volunteers for the Allies in WW2 was wrong. Indeed many Irish people now say this as well. I have given references before and here is another from May of this year: http://www.irishcentral.com/story/roots/ireland_calling/the-irish-world-war-ii-shame---irish-soldiers-faced-hostility-after-arriving-home-153574625.html


I will further point out that until you were confronted by the evidence you brazenly denied any such thing happened at all. I suppose that it says a lot about you as a person that your denial has now amazingly turned to supporting the post war harassment of these brave men. And you call yourself a man of the left?!

"You are not therefore proposing an causation of rape which embraces both genetics and the environment? You hypothesize that environmental factors are the sole causes of rape?"

No, you are a twister and a liar. I'm giving primary emphasis to environmental factors. I said very explicitly there were likely many factors in the South Africa case. I never excluded other factors, liar. Go back and read the thread, that is if you are capable of reading, which I doubt.

"Let's also however consider ideologies of male sexual entitlement, alcohol, childhood abuse, low educational standards, multiple sexual partners, pornography, violent computer games, poor marital relationships, weak legal sanctions.."

Yes, let's consider them. And how many of these factors are also present in other countries? All of them. So you have to look at what is different, and apartheid is different, and many many people have commented on the role of apartheid in the emasculation of the black South African male, but I guess they're all monsters/apologists for rape too, right.

And anybody who completely dismisses the link between poverty and crime would be laughed out of any sociology/criminal justice class room. Oh that's right you think sociology is junk science and academia is full of brainwashing. And your latching onto any hairbrained conspiracy theory reflects your devotion to data and facts.

The fact is you can never prove causality, so I guess we're left with never being able to make sensible conclusions about contributing factors for any phenomenon, in Fulham's silly anti-scientific world.

Since when was worshipping the British Empire obligatory for the left? It's hilarious that you think I should bow down and kiss the boots of the British soldier in WWII when you just got done calling the Soviet Red Army the biggest mass rapists in history.

I asked before and I ask again. Why should the Irish feel 'ashamed' at not kissing the boots of Irishmen who fought for their oppressors when the Irish who volunteered for WWI came back to organize the RUC and Black and Tans? You have never provided an answer to this, as usual.

Remember kids. Smoking doesn't cause lung cancer. Correlation doesn't equal causation. Oh what a clever slogan.

PUTIN WRITES THIS: ''Which isn't surprising considering Fulham also questioned the number of deaths in the Holocaust.

http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?threadID=716401#717424''

This is the record of what I actually wrote in that thread, I challenge Putin to say something different:


Darwyn gave this as a reference:

From 4 million in 1945 (http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/wolzek/1948_AuschwitzPlaque.html)...

to 1-1/2 million in 1990 (http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/wolzek/1990_AuschwitzPlaque.html).

I recomend that, unless you are intersted in reading a selection of sickening racist diatribes, you steer well clear of his references.

AND

Santa I am not sure that I understand your response to my post. Could you please explain?

AND

Santa, I accept your apology, it's no problem. I understand your anger, even if it was misdirected on this occassion.

AND

I think that it is difficult to get an accurate death count because of the horrendous and varied nature of the killing. 5-6 million Jews (including c. 1 million children) are the constraints placed on it by reasonable historians. I think that these parameters have been arrived at by comparing pre- and post-war census records as well as the records kept by the Nazis themselves. Given the robustness of the evidence, I think thart one must question the motivation of those who wish to dispute it.

AND

Santa writes - ''My grandmother was in the camps, and before she died she had hallucinations of Nazis coming to kill her''

My father was among thr first to enter Belsen (n.b., liberated by the British) and the memories have never left him. Here is a flavour of them -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/holocaust/5111.shtml

Now it is obvious from the written record that Putin is indeed both a twister and a liar. There can be no clearer proof.

''I asked before and I ask again. Why should the Irish feel 'ashamed' at not kissing the boots of Irishmen who fought for their oppressors when the Irish who volunteered for WWI came back to organize the RUC and Black and Tans? You have never provided an answer to this, as usual. ''

Another example of twisting, I never mentioned WW1 but rather WW2. He knows this, it suits him to lie and twist to fit his argument, what a scumbag.

Not to bring up the past (friday) but redhouse, where you said 'The supposed moral superiority of the left never ceases to surprise me', I feel you made quite a mistake; there is no "supposed" moral superiority with the left, there just is moral superiority with the left.

"Another example of twisting, I never mentioned WW1 but rather WW2. He knows this, it suits him to lie and twist to fit his argument, what a scumbag."

Wow you are illiterate. The point, which should be clear to anyone who can read the English language, was that during WWI the Irish volunteers who came back to Ireland, - those that did come back - formed the RUC and Black & Tans. With *that experience* as a recent memory, WHY ON EARTH, should the Irish have greeted the returning volunteers for the British Empire with chocolates & roses?

Is that simple enough for you? Or should I break it down in three word sentences?

Mea culpa on rereading Santa's post.

I guess my questions wont get answered, as Putin found someone else to entertain him, and spew his shit at.

What questions? Your last post contained no questions.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/baobab/2012/10/education-south-africa
Interesting.