Slashdot Mirror

Socialists are for workers rights, the National Socialists were, to say the least, not.

Though Jews in Germany made up just 2% of the population, they owned about 60% of the companies and so were viewed as representing the capitalist class and in control of the economy.

Here is an interesting chart that appeared in a 1930's German paper. The caption :

A picture of German economic life in 1930: Each column shows a branch of the German economy, The figure to the left shows the total number of companies. The number of Jewish firms is shown by the black bar, the non-Jewish by the white bar. When one remembers that according to the 1925 census there were "only" about 555,000 religious Jews in Germany -- which means by a generous estimate no more than a million Jews by blood in 1930, there are 60 to 100 Germans for each Jew. This makes clear what it means when, for example, up to 60% of the German economy is led by Jews. (p. 36)

Nazis viewed themselves as representing average German workers versus Jewish capitalists.

Or consider this story from the book Der Giftpilz, an anti-Semitic children's book published by Julius Streicher:

Money is the God of the Jews

Liselotte looks out at the cottage window towards evening and talks to her mother about the hard way in which father has to work. She says:

"Do you know, mother, what I sometimes wish? I should like to be rich. Very rich! And with my money I would make people happy. I should love to help the poor!"

They go on talking. Liselotte asks:

"Tell me, mother, how does it happen that the Jews are so rich? Our teacher has told us at school that here are thousands of Jews in the world who are millionaires. And yet the Jews do not work. It is the non-Jews who must work. The Jew only trades. But one cannot become a millionaire by trading with paper, bones, old clothing and furniture!"

Mother explains how it is done.

"The Jew is quite indifferent when the cheated non-Jew goes hungry. Jews have no pity. They strive for one thing: -- money. They do not care two hoots how they get it."

Liselotte asks how they can behave in this mean way.

Mother answers:

"Child, one thing you must realise. The Jew is not a person like us. The Jew is a Devil. And a Devil has no sense of honour. A Devil deals only in meanness and crime. You have read your Bible, Liselotte. There it says the Jewish God once said to the Jews: 'You must eat up the people of the earth!' Do you know what that means? It means the Jew should destroy all other peoples. They should bleed and exploit them till they die. That is what it means."

Liselotte tries to understand these things.

Mother continues:

"Yes, my child, that's the Jew! The God of the Jews is gold. There is no crime he would not commit to get it. He has no rest till he can sit on the top of a gold-sack. He has no rest till he has become King Money. And with this money he would make us all into slaves and destroy us. With this money he seeks to dominate the whole world. All that is contained in the following saying:

'The Jew has only one idea in this world;
It is: Money, Money, Money!
By every kind of trick and device
To make himself immeasurably rich.

What cares he for scorn and contempt!
Money was and is his God!
Through money he hopes to lord it over us,
And achieve the mastery of the world.' "

You can't deny it. Nazism is a form of class warfare, with Jews representing the monied class. Hostile opposition to the monied class is a hallmark of many philosophies claiming to represent the workers and most of those classify themselves as socialist.

Bullshit, propaganda was a vital part of the NAZI regime. That's how they prepared the populace to accept eugenics, liquidation of the Jews and other "undesirables", and war against their neighbors. Part of their program was to spoon-feed this stuff to school children, as part of their curriculum, so that they would have proper "German" attitudes. For an example, see Der Giftpilz.

my former college has had a similar policy.

"The German CCC issued a Call For Papers.... The motto for this year, 'The Usual Suspects'..."

The Germans are going to be asking "the usual suspects" for their papers?

I think we all know how that went last time.

So will the conference keynote address be followed by the invasion of Poland again?

yet

While this might be true, you can't ignore the other factors of killing these people off, not only in lives, but in peoples emotions to the killings, and every other factor that could happen.

Hey, that's what advertising campaigns are for.

Also, you don't have to announce publicly that you're killing those people. You just have to convince the general population that the people with AIDS should be sent to concentration camps for their own good. Even in this day and age, most people will not believe that you're simply going to kill most of them off. Such a thing is too enormous to really comprehend.

The reason why that is not quite clear to you, is that perhaps because you have never been to Germany or spoken to any Germans who grew up in the post-war era...?

Look, I'm not German either, but I know that it was (is?) quite common that kids in Germany would read those speeches in school, undress that rhetoric, so as to make sure they'll never fall into that trap again.

It couldn't occur to you that when Richard Perle is calling for a total war, he's saying the exact same thing as Goebbels did in 1943, the Germans know that, because they've been through that speech countless times, and they know fanatism when they see it?

I can entirely believe the cited case is true, despite your claim that:

More to the point in this case, though, this doc got horrible representation if he or she lost this case.

The same year, a jury in Sharkey County, where I lived and practiced for eight years, awarded $10 million to the family of a man who had electrocuted himself by touching a pipe to a power line. As the treating physician in that case, as well as a resident of the county, I was interested in knowing what culpability the jury felt the defendant electric company had in the electrocution. One of the jurors told me, "Oh, we didn't think the electrical company did anything wrong, but this way the children will be taken care of."

There's no doubt some negligence exists in the medical industry, and wanton negligence should be punished. But the US legal system has turned medicine into a jackpot lottery enabled by sleazy lawyers. The result? Worsening medical care for us all. Read the essay in that link, and tell me you're not scared.

Actually, Joseph Goebbels never lied, at least about things which are not based on opinion. As far as the events of WWII, he was actually entirely honest.

First of all, lets remember the term "Nazi" was a British propaganda tool. The German People nor the members of the National Socialist Party referred to themselves as such. Just by using it, you acknowledge propaganda has value.

The big lie was first discussed by Hitler in Mein Kampf in reference to one of the reasons Germany lost WWI. Great Britain was the first country to use propaganda, and they became masters of it during WWI. Many would argue it became necessary after the disaster of the Boer War where hundreds of thousands of German settlers in Zimbabwe and South Africa were killed in concentration camps. Some serious anti-british sentiment was being spread around due to this event, and Propaganda was born in Britain.

During WWI, the trend continued. The Germans didn't use ANY propaganda. At most, newspapers would have cartoons of British soldiers acting like buffoons. The British published MANY releases on how evil and barbaric the Germans were. Hitler was simply pointing out that it makes sense for a government to realize active persuasion is NECEASSRY and if your enemy uses it, you will have a problem. Goebbels usually discussed Britain's more ridiculous lies. Today, we all thing of Nazis rounding up Jews and what not. That had NOTHING to do with the war however, and the British never made a case for the war on those grounds. Their argument was that Germany must be stopped because they were trying to take over the world. It doesn't matter Germany lacked the means to do so, and publically announced this to the world. It doesn't matter they had no interest in taking over the world. What does matter however is Great Britain controlled 2/3 of the world in 1939. It was extreme hypocricy to suggest the British had a any more right to the world as Germany.

On a side note, after the fall of France in 1940, France was allowed to keep her colonies, and the soldiers abroad were left to defend them. They never invaded her colonies. It probably would have been a great help to have done so, at least in Algeria but it didn't happen.

Here is a speech by Goebbels on this very topic.

That same site has many speeches by him as well. Try and dig up a lie there if you like.

Lets not forget the worst of the British lies. Only about 60,000 British died in during German bombing raids, the vast majority of which were directed towards military targets. Terror bombing was used, with the V-2 and such, but more to induce capitulation and not slaughter civilians. The British on the other hand destroyed whole cities, hundreds of thousands would die in a matter of days. Compare that treatment to the French... Their civilian casualties were in the hundreds. In the end, over 1.5 million German civilians would die. So much for the Geneva Convention.

Germany had the means to obliterate London from the face of the earth in 1940, but did not. What if the entire population had been gassed to death? Is there any chance Britain would have continued on? No. But as Goebbels and Hitler both said, their goal was to SAVE europe from nihilistic materialism which internationalism was foisting upon the world. They obviously failed in that regard, but that had no intention of destroying Europe.

Whatever else Goebbels and Hitler did, they did not lie to the world about their goals and aspirations. That is a British trait.

Don't make unsubstantiated statements. I am darned well aware of the damage these types of Microsoft malware can accomplish. I never said "don't patch", and you're silly (or worse) to put those words in my mouth. FWIW, all machines in my purview (friends, family, etc.) have been patched up well in advance.

My point, though, is that a college's IT department has no business forcing people to install shit on their machines. Today it's a patch. Tomorrow it's censorship software. (No shit: this was considered, and thankfully shot down, at my conservative Christian alma mater.) The hell with that. Personal machines are just that -- personal.

A compromise solution that I think we can both agree on would be to use SNMP to disable the switch ports of anyone caught propagating the malware until they could demonstrate patchedness. But don't walk around telling me I must install a certain piece of software on my machine. That's BS, especially since my OSes of choice (*nix family) are invulnerable to this shit and are far above the comprehension of the vast majority of my former school's IT department anyway.

I'll ignore all of your tinfoil hat / cave bullshit, since there are no grounds for that, and you're just trolling.

The term "Big Lie" is something which is often quoted as coming from Hitler, but that is not entirely accurate. German Prapoganda (The term "Nazi" was in fact a British propaganda tool, the Germans nor the National Socialist Party members referred to themselves as such) was in many ways much more accurate than allied propoganda at the time. Hitler did write extensively about the subject of Propoganda, most importantly in his book Mein Kampf. The term "The Big Lie" was not actually used however. The discussion focused more on how the British extensively used Propoganda whereas the Germans did little more then mock their enemies as idiots. Hitler also went into some detail about how propaganda is the art of selling an idea and rightly compared it to commercial advertising. I highly doubt Arie Fleischer would admit he is nothing more than an advertiser, selling the ideas pushed by the Bush administration. Whatever else Hitler did, he did not lie to the world about his goals, propaganda included.

The real usage of the term "Big Lie" by the Germans was mostly by Joseph Goebbels, the Propoganda minister. It was mostly in reference to the primary British argument for why Germany must be stopped. The British accused the Germans of plotting to take over the world, something you hear often today. It doesn't really matter this was never a stated goal of Germany, nor that they completely lacked the means and admitted as such. What matters is Great Britain already controlled 2/3 of the world in 1940. Not only was Britains lie without any basis in fact, it was incredibly hypocritical.

Here is a speech by Goebbels regarding this topic.

The proper analogy you should be making is SCO's claim that their rights are being infringed upon by Linux are as proposterous as Britain's claim that Germany wished and was able to control the world.

Ford's anti-Semetic work was called The International Jew. The Eternal Jew was published by the Nazi Party.

Annatar gloats:
"My dad happens to be a garbage man and often brings along an occasional system he's scavanged from the dumpsters along his route. Currently I have in my possession an old IBM Aptiva with some guys bank account information on it (He did his checking and stuff with it apparently), but worst of all I have what appears to be an old Gateway tower used to store Medical information for a major hospital in the area my father works. I have over 2 gigs of peoples medical history, including what they were put in the hospital for, insurance information, release dates ect. I should really do the honost thing and reformat it but its always fun to flip the thing on and just page through stuff."

I'm amused that you attend a Christian school, Ben. Fitting, not really surprising. Do you realize that you're sifting through real human beings extremely personal information for your own personal enjoyment? You got into college so I have to assume you're at least bright enough to theoretically know what you're doing is wrong.

So ...Ben Krygsheld, given your hometown and your extremely unique last name, how difficult do you think it would be for me to find out who your dad is, where he works, then determine the hospitals for which his employer provides service, inform them of this factoid, and let all higgeldy-piggeldy bust loose?

Hiring a good admin:
$80,000/yr.

Disposing of a hardrive correctly:
$5

Telling the world on Shashdot that you engage in criminal activity and implicating your father in the process...

Priceless.

You are going to have a very interesting week, genius. Nevermind that this page will be in Google's archive -- complete with your full name attached to it -- in a matter of days.

If this school is like the others that I'm familiar with, payment of fees do not entitle the student access to the computer network. I suppose it's possible that a school might have an "Internet access fee" line item on their annual bill, but I've never seen one. Instead, access to the computer network is a privilege that can be revoked at any time for, essentially, any reason.

Actually, my school (Calvin College in Grand Rapids, MI) has a $70 per semester fee for accessing the 'net from the dorms - otherwise the jacks are turned off. They even prohibit roommates from buying a hub and sharing the connection - you have to each pay. Of course, with a NAT-enabled wireless AP, they'd never know.

However, he probably was required to sign some kind of contract when he signed up for the service, maybe even in his housing contract somewhere, so the point is probably moot.

Similar here at Calvin, any CS student can get any MS software for free (apparently Calvin's subscribed to the MSDN or similar). Yet the programming labs and classes use Solaris/GCC

Mirror located here: kde-2.2.1. Have fun!

Brad Kuhn told me and some guys I was with that if we changed the name of our Linux users' group from "Calvin Linux Users' Group" to "Calvin GNU/Linux Users' Group" that RMS would come speak at our school for airfare. I didn't realize the extent of their anal retentiveness until now...

Look up information on the "Invisible Web" - islands typically untouched by search engines, where you need another site to "hop" to these nets of information - cool stuff can abound in these disconnected areas. Here are some links to get started with:

DirectSearch - Invisible Web Search

The InvisibleWeb

WebData.com - Invisible Web Search

InfoMine - Scholarly Internet Resource Collections

AlphaSearch - Invisible Web Search

IIRC, Slashdot even ran an article about this not too long ago - I think this is it, not sure...

Worldcom - Generation Duh!

First of all, I'm in favour of content control; parents should be able to control what their kids watch. I'm against mandating this in any way; adults should be able to choose what they want to watch.

Censorship is a two stage process; deciding what the content is (Is it obscene ?, Is it blasphemous ?), and deciding whether it's acceptable to the audience (Is something that is obscene to a homophobe acceptable to me ? Is $cientology blasphemy offensive to me ?). A rating scheme addresses the first part, but leaves the second choice up to me. Commercial censorware simply takes both choices on-board. My personal morals are not the same as those of the censorware author - why should I accept their choices as to what my kids should watch ?

Secondly, censorware typically applies ratings in an arbitrary and often naive manner -- the "Scunthorpe problem". Content authors are the best people to judge these ratings, and we should provide means for them to do so. OK, so the Trolls and the regular goatse.cx problem needs solving, but we should concentrate on this, not just abandon self-rating. After all, even a commercial Pr0n site wants a band of satisfied adult punters, not a bunch of under-age kids with stolen CC numbers, bringing the pr0n industry into disrepute (sic). Apart from the Trolls and a very few subversive sites, accurate self-labelling suits everyone's interests.

Finally, there's often no context to the decision made by censorware. Should every site full of pre-Holocaust anti-semitism be banned ? If you're a museum publisher (as I am) it's often a serious issue; how to have content that's related to an offensive subject not be confused with the offensive material itself.

By and large, I don't think these people are usually qualified educationally to make judgements about what is good science and what is not. If you ask scientific Christians about such things, you get a surprising different response. Check out the American Scientific Affiliation, a group which I believe generally consists of professionals in science who are Christian. They seem practically heretical sometimes from the standpoint of American Christian culture...

Abandon libc5. I just upgraded from RH5.1. After
postponing various upgrades ("I'll enable sound later, CD-R doesn't work, etc.") I got around to
them last night and said to hell with it and upgraded the kernel too. Hell of a lot sweeter
running 2.2.1 than 2.0.34! The goto 2.2 article was all
I needed (that and no fear of hosing my modules
and accidentally obliterating my old kernel due
to sleep deprivation).

Check out http://www-stu.calvin.ed u/~clug/users/jnieho38/goto22.html

http://www-stu.calvin.ed u/~clug/users/jnieho38/goto22.html