GOP Candidate and his Nazi SS Enthusiasms

As far as I understand this was a reenactment. Somebody has to play the bad guys.

Not a good move for a politician, though. If Arnold had ever played a Nazi in a Hollywood movie he probably wouldn’t be the governator, and if Reagan had played a Nazi in a movie he probably wouldn’t have become president.

But still, it makes me ashamed that liberals are taking this to the bank. We should be above such petty nonsense.

It’s weird enough that grown men play soldier.

Questioning the judgment of someone who wants to be a congressman is not petty. He thinks it’s ok to put on an SS uniform for entertainment. I don’t think it should be made out to be more than what it is, ie, it doesn’t mean he’s a Nazi. It does mean that he shows really poor judgment and a certain level of social retardation.

His statement said that he dropped out when his son “grew out of it.” LOL. His son grew out of playing soldier before he did? Weird. Fucking weird.

Was this guy dressing his son up in Hitler Youth outfits to match up with his own SS outfit? What the hell kind of parent does that? It’s hard to say that he’s actually anti-semitic personally based on what evidence is out there, but he so far seems to be exercising really poor judgement here. Dressing up as an SS guy is not even something that a person can do casually – the cost for the sort of uniforms and period-accurate equipment easily runs into the thousands of dollars before you even get into the costs of the “events”.

If these guys really gave a crap about re-enactment for “history’s sake”, then they can certainly volunteer for service with our real military in Iraq to get a real taste of what it’s like to be scared shitless under adverse conditions – instead of prancing about the woods pretending to shoot American soldiers, jews and gypsies. And if these guys are “too old” to sign up, then they shouldn’t be dressing as an “elite” SS unit, they ought to be dressing up as Volksturm units consisting of the too old, too young, and infirm.

Perhaps if they want this to be a historically accurate “re-enactment” they can have a certain number of people to play Russian or Ukrainian peasants they can question, abuse and then kill. Perhaps they can try retreating in winter snows while wearing summer-weight uniforms covered by the table cloths, women’s dresses, and bed sheets they loot out of abandoned homes along the way. Or perhaps in a summer re-enactment, they could spend hours trying to push vehicles stuck in melted permafrost mud a few meters down a crappy road while snipers take pot shots. Periodically they can come across large smelly pits filled with re-enactment bodies from roving Einsatzgruppen units – store mannequins of men, women and children piled in and around large amounts of grocery store meat that’s gone rotten. Because, hey, if these guys really gave a crap about re-enactment of history, they’d want to get the main features of war – death, fear, stress and unspeakable filth and horror.

Then I disagree with your “understanding”. It’s not as if they “had” to play the losing German side, because their friends were playing GI. They have a entire club dedicated to playing the Wiking division, a division of the Waffen SS. Your understanding is pretty weak. To them, wearing the SS lapels is being cool.

If it were just a matter of “somebody has to play the bad guys”, then guys would have to draw straws to see who would get stuck putting on the stock German uniforms. Much in the way that when as a kid we’d play army and some would have to play the role of being the “enemy” (commies, krauts, japs, or whatever pejorative-stricken enemy we could come up with). But these guys spend thousands of dollars to goose-step about in woods and fields when, according to Tom of Finland, the real nazis were fellating each other a lot. Just saying that if they care about historical accuracy, these guys dressing up as the SS might need to expand their activities.

With regards to the Wiking Division, re-enactment for “history’s sake” also wears a bit thin when the actors involved speak English during their re-enactments, and fight re-enactors posing as American forces, which of course the Wiking never did.
In my opinion, it’s got more to do with misplaced admiration than anything to do with an understanding of history.
But so what, politicians are ripe with misunderstanding many issues, of which history is the least of them.

He worked for Pat Buchanan’s presidential campaign-another Republican white supremacist.
He ran for Congress in the Republican primary…and lost. [/quote]He ran for a position on the Republican ticket for the primary…and lost. There is an ever so slight difference.[quote=“suiyuan31”]Which of Hal Turner’s views is in line with the Democratic Party?
White supremacy? Antisemitism?[/quote] While both of those positions have been a historic part of the Democrat party, remeber the KKK was started by Democrats, Turners’, political attachments have been as varied as his “platforms.”[quote=“suiyuan31”]His calls for the assassination of candidate Obama?[/quote] Again with the WORNG information (something of a habit with you it appears):
Turner was convicted for threatening to kill three Chicago judges. 2 of whom were/are very conservative judges.
“Judges Posner and Easterbrook (2 out of the 3 judges he threatened) are among the leading conservative judges in America.”
This conviction also poses something of a 1st Amendment conundrum. But thats another thread.

[quote=“suiyuan31”]To claim that Hal Turner is a democrat is just dumb.[/quote]Tongue-in-cheek comments are sometimes hard to properly post on chat boards. Its that nu-ance thing…lol.

To follow-up on Turner…Turner frequently called himself a libertarian and also a white supremacist. Yes, it appears he did work on the campaign of Pat Buchanan. More accurately Turner could be termed a fascist. But hardly a “conservative.”
At least by anyone with a smidgen of political knowledge and understanding of the terms involved in politics.

According to Wikipedia he was a paid FBI informant at one time. Perhaps even fairly recently. It might be plausible that he was an agent provocateur. That might be a good guess.
Used to identify dangerous people who he might draw to him and his “causes.” Not an unheard of tactic.
This first came to light as an old Czarist Russian trick coupled that was employed by the British Victorian police,
Employ and use a vocal and obvious nut case, identify who they attract, learn their methods and then haul them in when the time is appropriate.
Perhaps the FBI was finished with him called for him to be hauled in and “kept quiet” for a while?

Turners rhetoric, as racist and disgusting as it is, is no worse than that being currently employed the the followers of the current regime in its now last days of life.

Post moved to Hal Turner thread

Where it was edited, removed from context and poorly addressed by insertion of various strawmen.

But yer buddy joined in to help your failing replies…alas, to no avail…:smiley:

Where it was edited, removed from context and poorly addressed by insertion of various strawmen.

But yer buddy joined in to help your failing replies…alas, to no avail…:smiley:[/quote]
Uh huh. I didn’t edit any of your words…I only cut out the more incoherent parts. Everything you wrote is there in its blazing trail of ignorant glory for all to read.

He worked for Pat Buchanan’s presidential campaign-another Republican white supremacist.
He ran for Congress in the Republican primary…and lost. [/quote][/quote]He ran for a position on the Republican ticket for the primary…and lost. There is an ever so slight difference.

So, thanks for agreeing that white-power advocate Hal Turner is a Republican. I think the record stands that the GOP is the party with a present-day candidate who likes to dress up in SS uniforms and pretends to shoot uniformed American soldiers. I think that’s clear. Do you have anything you wish to add to that? I thought not.

[quote=“mofangongren”]
I think the record stands that the GOP is the party with a present-day candidate who likes to dress up in SS uniforms and pretends to shoot uniformed American soldiers.[/quote]
Didn’t he stop doing this several years ago? What political party doesn’t have members that have made serious lapses of judgement in their past?

[quote=“TheGingerMan”][quote=“mofangongren”]
I think the record stands that the GOP is the party with a present-day candidate who likes to dress up in SS uniforms and pretends to shoot uniformed American soldiers.[/quote]
Didn’t he stop doing this several years ago? What political party doesn’t have members that have made serious lapses of judgement in their past?[/quote]
:eh:
This is the kind of mistake that doesn’t get a ‘couple of years ago’ pass. He knew what the SS was about a few years ago. That would have been a mistake in 1945, '65, '80, '86, and today. Not only that, he didn’t apologize for it, but he made excuses that it was to bond with his son. If he would have said, “It was a total lapse in judgment and I was completely wrong”…well, then maybe. His reasoning was :loco:

Of course, one problem is that he was dressing up in an SS uniform with his son. WTF?!?

[quote=“suiyuan31”][quote=“TheGingerMan”][quote=“mofangongren”]
I think the record stands that the GOP is the party with a present-day candidate who likes to dress up in SS uniforms and pretends to shoot uniformed American soldiers.[/quote]
Didn’t he stop doing this several years ago? What political party doesn’t have members that have made serious lapses of judgement in their past?[/quote]
:eh:
This is the kind of mistake that doesn’t get a ‘couple of years ago’ pass. He knew what the SS was about a few years ago. That would have been a mistake in 1945, '65, '80, '86, and today. Not only that, he didn’t apologize for it, but he made excuses that it was to bond with his son. If he would have said, “It was a total lapse in judgment and I was completely wrong”…well, then maybe. His reasoning was :loco:[/quote]
:imp:
Why not? Why is it such an error? Because he’s a right-winger?
I see no need why he should apologize for anything, other than a faulty whimsical infatuation with the armed forces of Germany during WW2.
Sure, the Waffen SS is not the best choice for such admiration, but it must be said that at no time was the Wiking division under official sanction to commit atrocities, unlike some of the other SS divisions.
History is written by the victors, and as such, the Waffen SS has a whole has been stigmatised as a bunch of war criminals. When, in truth, the reality is far different. A vast body of soldiers has been condemned due to the actions of a few criminals. And Lord knows, the victorious allies surely made use of many criminals involved with the SS: Werner Braun, Richard Gehlen come readily to mind.
War, in case you have not directly experienced it, brings out the very best, and the very worst of the human psyche. Allied forces committed more than their own share of atrocities. And sometimes that means the enemy of one’s enemy is one’s friend, no matter their ideology. RealPolitricks!

Now, I mean not to be an apologist for the Nazis, or for the SS for that matter. All I mean is that it not right, or even accurate, to paint with such a wide brush.
Same goes for denigrating a GOP candidate. Either the voters will accept him, or they won’t. Just the same as they do with other candidates accused of far more heinous errors, such as drunk driving or swiping gov’t funds. Of course, no Democrat has ever done any of those things.

:whistle: :liar:

[quote=“TheGingerMan”]Why not? Why is it such an error? Because he’s a right-winger?
I see no need why he should apologize for anything, other than a faulty whimsical infatuation with the armed forces of Germany during WW2.[/quote]Not because he’s a right-winger, but because it’s a dumb thing to do. Infatuation with Nazis is more than likely a sign that the guy has a hard time looking at that period as anything but whimsical. He said on his press release that he did not mean to be offensive…how could he think this is anything but? Maybe I just don’t understand reenactment culture…actually, I’m sure I don’t.

[quote]Sure, the Waffen SS is not the best choice for such admiration, but it must be said that at no time was the Wiking division under official sanction to commit atrocities, unlike some of the other SS divisions. History is written by the victors, and as such, the Waffen SS has a whole has been stigmatised as a bunch of war criminals. When, in truth, the reality is far different. A vast body of soldiers has been condemned due to the actions of a few criminals. And Lord knows, the victorious allies surely made use of many criminals involved with the SS: Werner Braun, Richard Gehlen come readily to mind.[/quote]There’s nothing wrong with studying the history of that period and even looking at it without the modern biases. In other words, to evaluate 1939 without mixing up what was happening in 1945 is a preferred approach for understanding the period. But playing dress-up? There is no real meaningful outcome of that…no serious data…just a bunch of grown men running around looking like sympathizers. [quote]Now, I mean not to be an apologist for the Nazis, or for the SS for that matter. All I mean is that it not right, or even accurate, to paint with such a wide brush.[/quote]What wide brush is that? I really don’t understand your point here. [quote]Same goes for denigrating a GOP candidate. Either the voters will accept him, or they won’t. Just the same as they do with other candidates accused of far more heinous errors, such as drunk driving or swiping gov’t funds. Of course, no Democrat has ever done any of those things.[/quote]Again, this isn’t about this guy being a republican-not for me anyway. Criticizing someone dressing up as an SS officer is not partisanship. It shows poor judgment-and you’re right, people can make a decision about him based on everything about him, including this.

I think that dressing up in an SS uniform is the first sign that a candidate is likely not going to be my cup of tea. But, of course, there will be many Republican voters who will likely believe differently and cast their votes for Iott.

I don’t think Harry’s fit to be the king, either … bunch of inbred nitwits. With the outfits sitting around in his house’s attic, he could’ve gone to the party as Mountbatten.

Out of curiosity, does participation in historical reenactments necessarily equate to identifying politically with the characters one is portraying? :ponder:

If a candidate likes to participate in reenactments of the American Revolutionary War, and happens to like playing the redcoats, does it follow that he’s a British imperialist? How about if he’s participating in a reenactment of the American Civil War and chooses the South? Does that make him a champion of slavery?

Maybe, just maybe, there’s no connection whatsoever. Maybe it’s just a hobby.