David Miscavige versus Adolf Hitler

[Dulloldfart]

There is no similarity of David Miscavige to Adolf Hitler (except some fantasy speculation like "If Miscavige would run a country" and "If Hitler would run a Church").

I didn't comment on that at all. Read my post again. If you sat quietly for a bit maybe you wouldn't froth so much.

Paul

 

[michaelangelo]

There is no similarity between David Miscavige and Adolf Hitler (except some fantasy speculation like "If Miscavige would run a country" and "If Hitler would run a Church").

Would you ratheGestapo?

It's just a joke.

 

[Telepathetic]

Mr.Irving has balls.

TP

 

[Iknowtoomuch]

DullOldFart, are you celebrating your 10K-day by giving OSA what they need to smear ESMB? "Hitler revisionism at ESMB"?

There is no similarity between David Miscavige and Adolf Hitler (except some fantasy speculation like "If Miscavige would run a country" and "If Hitler would run a Church").

Miscavige builds houses prints books and loses his temper, while Hitler was responsible for starting wars and for thousands of deaths.

Would you rather get called by a Reg inviting you to an event or by the Gestapo?

Don't forget the OSA pranks.
And what do you think DM would be like if he were to get as much power as Hitler?
He's not evil till he's that evil right!

 

[Voltaire's Child]

I know Roland's doing one of those piss taking things some of you Brits love to do...but I do have to wonder...

Given a different set of circumstances, I wonder if DM would resort to genocide. I mean, he is a megalomaniacal nut...

 

[MrNobody]

Anonshaw, you were obviously right with your post:

Yes, I should have kept out of this mess. It's just disappointing and it saddens me to see how some people here in this thread obviously think. May they "enjoy" their new Führer if they ever find him. Scientology obviously wasn't enough for them.

Nonsense. Do you compare concentration camps with a musical chairs game?

Good question, but the answer of some people here would probably be: "WE WANT MORE ABUSE". I'll spare you my wishes for them.

Don't forget the OSA pranks.

<snip>

If it's OSA, then quite a lot of them have gathered in this thread.

I'll leave this thread alone now, there's nothing good in here anyway. For nobody.

 

[knn]

I didn't comment on that at all.

EXACTLY. You did not dissociate from Irving's revisionism, and even now you emphasize that you don't dissociate from Irving.

The major point is that Miscavige could claim how the criticism against his Church has reaches bizarre and laughable proportions:

"In a thread entitled 'David Miscavige versus Adolf Hitler' several posters even went so far as to compare the current religious services of the Church with the despicable actions of the Nazi regime. One of the accusers in that thread (who calls himself 'DullOldFart' and is a VIP poster at ESMB) was banned and SP-declared from our Church years ago and now seems to have found a new shelter at an online message board: He uses the already bizarre thread to spread the outrageous claims of David Irving, a discredited and convicted Hitler revisionist. As it turns out ESMB not only works for the criminal group Anonymous but also praises racists."
​

Now if Miscavige wanted he could also add (whether true or not, how is Emma ever going to disprove it easily?):

"What makes the Hitler-supportive behavior of DullOldFart exceptionally disgraceful is the fact that DullOfFART acts also in his role as Moderator3 (calling himself 'Thor', the German God of GASES). Hence these anti-semite inclinations are uttered by a high representative of the Board."
​

This is exactly the stuff that religiousfreedomwatch.org uses to discredit someone. And you know that Keith Henson went to jail for a joke about a "Tom Cruise missile"
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1030_3-6156516.html

Completely unnecessary.

Making fun of Miscavige is one thing. But bringing concentration camps into the discussions is way too touchy.

 

[knn]

It's just a joke.

On boards sarcasm only exists with smilies.

 

[Telepathetic]

Revisionism:reconsidering of accepted truths: the re-examining of long-established practices, views, or beliefs, especially when such re-examination is regarded as unnecessary or misguided.

Key words, "unnecessary" and "misguided." Based on what criterion?


TP

 

[Panda Termint]

I know Roland's doing one of those piss taking things some of you Brits love to do...but I do have to wonder...

Given a different set of circumstances, I wonder if DM would resort to genocide. I mean, he is a megalomaniacal nut...

Well he did use the phrase, "from the wrong side of the gene-pool" in his speech launching The Basics.
That ought to give us a clue.

 

[supafreak]

And as a good Christian he had no sex before marriage, right?

Yeah, especially not with one of his cousins who killed herself when he broke up with her.

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

Revisionism:reconsidering of accepted truths: the re-examining of long-established practices, views, or beliefs, especially when such re-examination is regarded as unnecessary or misguided.

Key words, "unnecessary" and "misguided." Based on what criterion?


TP

You're quite right about revisionism. It is meant to be a perjorative term. It is the job of historians to always look and revise. But David Irving is a quack in the sense that his data, and more significantly, the data he omits, wouldn't pass the inspection of an eigth grader. He has been proven wrong over and over again, but he persists. He ignors anything others say that disagrees with his conclusions yet other historians take what he says into account when they challenge him. Lucy S. Dawidowicz is one such example.

Irving is childish and is just throws intellectual tantrums when his data is not accepted. He is not accepted because he presents a shallow, amatuer approach. What he says may make it into tabloids or even someday American mainstream media, but it will never pass the picklock of professional historians.

As far as the six million dying in the camps, the figure comes from a compilation of mostly the records of payments made to the railroad companies who billed the Gestapo on a per capita basis. It is not likely that these railroad executives overbilled the Gestapo. That wouldn't be wise.

The fact that David Irving and others don't want to mention is that the number of people unaccounted for who would have been shipped to the camps is greater that the six million that the records show. Babi Yar, for example, isn't counted among those killed in the camps, nor are those who died in the Warsaw ghetto.

And as far as Anne Frank dying of disease, that is irrelevent. She was marked for extermination and if the inhuman conditions and mistreatment at the hands of the Gestapo caused her to die before she could be gassed, like many others, it doesn't change the point or the intent of the Nazis.

Irving, like some posters on this thread, take data out of context and claim that their data is exclusively correct and all the other millions of data and eyewitness accounts are irrelevant. Don't forget the Nazis bragged about doing this. The only denials by the Nazis on trial was that they didn't have a hand in it, not that it didn't happen.

I can't believe that someone on a computer keyboard years later can simply wipe away the tens of thousands of stories from eyewitness, victims as well as perpetrators, and simply believe it is all false. This is why holocaust denying is considered by some to simply be a sign of a mentally or emotionally disturbed individual.

I have talked to old GIs who liberated the camps. I've talked to an old Soviet soldier who liberated a camp. Some Ex on this board can callously write them off as Zionist and say their eyewitness accounts mean nothing because the Ex knows it was just all made up by a Zionist conspiracy.

But these men know what they saw. They fought in a war with their lives on the line every day. Sorry, but these were real men, not wussies with keyboards.

A relative of mine who landed on the first wave at Normady was captured a few days later and spent the rest of the war in a POW camp in Poland. The compound held Americans on one side and Red Army soldiers on the other.

In early 1945, when they could hear Soviet artillery getting closer, the SS marched the Red Army prisoners out into the adjacent field and machine gunned them all.

I'm sure someday there will be some smug old fart on a keybaord who will say such things never happened because he knows it all was a conspiracy because he has a link to some other wuss with a keyboard and that is his proof.

Like it or not, the holocaust denyers and conspiracy theorists on this board do play into the hands of OSA because they show exes to be stupid and simpleminded. The irony is that most of the OSA and GO people I have known over the years believe in the same conspiracies. But they will use these statements to make less of exes.

As far as David Miscavige compared to Hitler, Hitler used to run messages to the frontline trenches during bombardments. The bombardment in most cases lasted seven days in a row, 24 hours a day. Hitler continually ran messages back and forth. He was highly decorated for it. It was no small feat.

Hitler built up his organization from the ground floor, he didn't assume command of a functioning party and run it into the ground. Apart from whatever mental insanity Hitler may have have, what he did was no small feat. He was incredibly destructive, probably unmatched in history. He at one time conquered and destroyed nearly all of Europe.

David Miscavige's sphere of influence has been shrinking from the day he took control. There is no comparison.

The Anabaptist Jacques

 

[lkwdblds]

Some very good points

As far as David Miscavige compared to Hitler, Hitler used to run messages to the frontline trenches during bombardments. He was highly decorated for it. It was not small feat.

Hitler built up his organization from the ground floor, he didn't assume command of a functioning party and run it into the ground. Apart from whatever mental insanity Hitler may have have, what he did was no small feat. He was incredibly destructive, probably unmatched in history. He at one time conquered and destroyed nearly all of Europe.

David Miscavige's sphere of influence has been shrinking from the day he took control. There is no comparison.

The Anabaptist Jacques

Jacques makes some very good points in his post, a couple of which I copied above. Hitler probably out did DM when comparing their bravery in their careers prior to assuming power. DM was effective in his early career as a Commodore's Messenger and had the cunning to place himself on the direct comm line to LRH where he could censor all messages going in and coming out from LRH. He also had the balls to assert himself as LRH's successor and make that assertion stick. Regardless of what one thinks of him, his actions showed he has leadership ability plus the ability to take risks.

Hitler showed great ability in building his organization from scratch and also in rising from humble beginnings to controling nearly all of Europe. This was clearly a greater achievment than taking over an already existing C of S.

As far as actual evil goes, Hitler is in a class with himself and one or two other extremely evil and destructive people in all of world history. DM has not killed anybody yet. Beating up staff and degrading them and enjoying it is pretty evil but is not anywhere near Hitler's level of evil in destroying entire countries and races of people.

What if their dates and roles were reversed? What if DM had been born in Germany and had been in his early 20's at the end of World War I while Hitler had been born in 1969 into a Scientology family in the USA. It is impossible to predict what would have happened but I do not think that Hitler would have been able to set up death camps within Scientology but he undoubtedly would have risen high in C of S ranks and would have probably beaten and degraded many beings and taken joy in it. No one can say how DM might have ended up if he had been born into Nazi Germany. Since we can not say, I would give him the benefit of the doubt and would not speculate that he would ever participate in the death camps.
Lkwdblds

 

[degraded being]

I don't think Dm is so bad after all, relatively speaking, after reading this thread. There are people here who seem just as evil as he could ever be. The only other explanation is that they are stupid, which I don't think they are.

 

[michaelangelo]

1/ On boards sarcasm only exists with smilies.

2/And as a good Christian he had no sex before marriage, right?

1/Perhaps if you would just lighten up a bit.


2/Are you really serious?. A madman Adolf Hitler, world war two, millions killed and you are concerned if he had sex before marriage!. is that important to you or is it a joke?.

 

[Telepathetic]

You're quite right about revisionism. It is meant to be a perjorative term. It is the job of historians to always look and revise. But David Irving is a quack in the sense that his data, and more significantly, the data he omits, wouldn't pass the inspection of an eigth grader. He has been proven wrong over and over again, but he persists. He ignors anything others say that disagrees with his conclusions yet other historians take what he says into account when they challenge him. Lucy S. Dawidowicz is one such example.

Irving is childish and is just throws intellectual tantrums when his data is not accepted. He is not accepted because he presents a shallow, amatuer approach. What he says may make it into tabloids or even someday American mainstream media, but it will never pass the picklock of professional historians.

As far as the six million dying in the camps, the figure comes from a compilation of mostly the records of payments made to the railroad companies who billed the Gestapo on a per capita basis. It is not likely that these railroad executives overbilled the Gestapo. That wouldn't be wise.

The fact that David Irving and others don't want to mention is that the number of people unaccounted for who would have been shipped to the camps is greater that the six million that the records show. Babi Yar, for example, isn't counted among those killed in the camps, nor are those who died in the Warsaw ghetto.

And as far as Anne Frank dying of disease, that is irrelevent. She was marked for extermination and if the inhuman conditions and mistreatment at the hands of the Gestapo caused her to die before she could be gassed, like many others, it doesn't change the point or the intent of the Nazis.

Irving, like some posters on this thread, take data out of context and claim that their data is exclusively correct and all the other millions of data and eyewitness accounts are irrelevant. Don't forget the Nazis bragged about doing this. The only denials by the Nazis on trial was that they didn't have a hand in it, not that it didn't happen.

I can't believe that someone on a computer keyboard years later can simply wipe away the tens of thousands of stories from eyewitness, victims as well as perpetrators, and simply believe it is all false. This is why holocaust denying is considered by some to simply be a sign of a mentally or emotionally disturbed individual.

I have talked to old GIs who liberated the camps. I've talked to an old Soviet soldier who liberated a camp. Some Ex on this board can callously write them off as Zionist and say their eyewitness accounts mean nothing because the Ex knows it was just all made up by a Zionist conspiracy.

But these men know what they saw. They fought in a war with their lives on the line every day. Sorry, but these were real men, not wussies with keyboards.

A relative of mine who landed on the first wave at Normady was captured a few days later and spent the rest of the war in a POW camp in Poland. The compound held Americans on one side and Red Army soldiers on the other.

In early 1945, when they could hear Soviet artillery getting closer, the SS marched the Red Army prisoners out into the adjacent field and machine gunned them all.

I'm sure someday there will be some smug old fart on a keybaord who will say such things never happened because he knows it all was a conspiracy because he has a link to some other wuss with a keyboard and that is his proof.

Like it or not, the holocaust denyers and conspiracy theorists on this board do play into the hands of OSA because they show exes to be stupid and simpleminded. The irony is that most of the OSA and GO people I have known over the years believe in the same conspiracies. But they will use these statements to make less of exes.

As far as David Miscavige compared to Hitler, Hitler used to run messages to the frontline trenches during bombardments. The bombardment in most cases lasted seven days in a row, 24 hours a day. Hitler continually ran messages back and forth. He was highly decorated for it. It was no small feat.

Hitler built up his organization from the ground floor, he didn't assume command of a functioning party and run it into the ground. Apart from whatever mental insanity Hitler may have have, what he did was no small feat. He was incredibly destructive, probably unmatched in history. He at one time conquered and destroyed nearly all of Europe.

David Miscavige's sphere of influence has been shrinking from the day he took control. There is no comparison.

The Anabaptist Jacques

AJ,

I agree with you on the silly comparison made of Hitler verses Miscavige. I believe some of the comments made regarding this, at least mine, were done tong-in-cheek. But some on this Board might have missed it due to the missing .

I have not read nor listened enough of Irving's research on this subject, yet. I am doing so now. But I have heard other "quacks" who dared to question and they, as Irving, paid for it.

I really did not want to make any comments regarding this taboo subject for obvious reasons which you and others have pointed out. But I find the reactions alarming. Similar to mentioning the possible benefits of some psych drugs to a Silon. So, if you don't believe in the exaggerated claims made by the socially accepted Holocaust historian, you must therefore be evil. Sounds familiar...

Like Michaelangelo mentioned earlier... WWII *was* a Holocaust.I am embarrassed at the savagery that we ,as humans,showed for each other. No one nation, religion or race though should have a monopoly on the suffering that was endured.It seems propaganda to me when only one side of the story is addressed.

Where do you hear of the atrocities of Mao Zedong or Stalin or the Allies. Certainly, you don't hear of these quite as often. Where is the concern for those individuals from the Soviet Block, the Germans and their allies or the Chinese.Did they suffer any less? I say, let history give them equal time, that's all. Everyone here knows at least a little bit about the Jews. Excluding you, who else here knows anything or cares anything about the others I've mentioned. I certainly don't know as much and the little I do know was not always readily available.

But again, I agree with you and the others who believe that expressing dissenting views regarding this subject is a thing that could be used against Exes. So, should we stop making any more comments here?

For the record: I am not a fascist, communist, Scientologist or any other "ist."

I have been wrong in the past and no doubt will be( or maybe I am now) wrong in the future but believe me, I honestly want to, as best I can, find answers to those enigmas which present themselves in my life.I am no stranger to accepting information at face value but I am sincerely endeavoring not to so anymore.

TP

 

[michaelangelo]

AJ,

I agree with you on the silly comparison made of Hitler verses Miscavige. I believe some of the comments made regarding this, at least mine, were done tong-in-cheek. But some on this Board might have missed it due to the missing .

TP

Some very good points made here.

Re the above which I saved. I don't know how to post to a message the smileys and other little pics. Can someone tell me?.

 

[michaelangelo]

Just figured out how to post smileys.

 

[Telepathetic]

Michaelangelo,

You should, when clicking to answer a Thread, see to your right a box of all the and under that you'll see [more] where you'll find more of these. But I doubt that you have this feature because you would have notice it, it's right there.


On the top there is also a white "smiley face" that you can click on.

TP

 

[The Anabaptist Jacques]

AJ,

I agree with you on the silly comparison made of Hitler verses Miscavige. I believe some of the comments made regarding this, at least mine, were done tong-in-cheek. But some on this Board might have missed it due to the missing .

I have not read nor listened enough of Irving's research on this subject, yet. I am doing so now. But I have heard other "quacks" who dared to question and they, as Irving, paid for it.

I really did not want to make any comments regarding this taboo subject for obvious reasons which you and others have pointed out. But I find the reactions alarming. Similar to mentioning the possible benefits of some psych drugs to a Silon. So, if you don't believe in the exaggerated claims made by the socially accepted Holocaust historian, you must therefore be evil. Sounds familiar...

Like Michaelangelo mentioned earlier... WWII *was* a Holocaust.I am embarrassed at the savagery that we ,as humans,showed for each other. No one nation, religion or race though should have a monopoly on the suffering that was endured.It seems propaganda to me when only one side of the story is addressed.

Where do you hear of the atrocities of Mao Zedong or Stalin or the Allies. Certainly, you don't hear of these quite as often. Where is the concern for those individuals from the Soviet Block, the Germans and their allies or the Chinese.Did they suffer any less? I say, let history give them equal time, that's all. Everyone here knows at least a little bit about the Jews. Excluding you, who else here knows anything or cares anything about the others I've mentioned. I certainly don't know as much and the little I do know was not always readily available.

But again, I agree with you and the others who believe that expressing dissenting views regarding this subject is a thing that could be used against Exes. So, should we stop making any more comments here?

For the record: I am not a fascist, communist, Scientologist or any other "ist."

I have been wrong in the past and no doubt will be( or maybe I am now) wrong in the future but believe me, I honestly want to, as best I can, find answers to those enigmas which present themselves in my life.I am no stranger to accepting information at face value but I am sincerely endeavoring not to so anymore.

TP

Thanks for this thoughtful post.

Personally, I think there is something sinister about this being a taboo subject. There is overwhelming evidence that it happened, that's for sure.

But in my opinion making it illegal to advocate otherwise is a dangerous thing to do. For one, it stops historical investigation. Secondly, it lets emotions be the guide. This is a bad combination.

The exposition I would like to see is how much widespread involvement there was in the effort. This gets little atention, although there were a few books published back in the 1990s about it. If I remember correctly, only one of the books was quality work although the others were best sellers.

As far as other countries atrocities, as bad as they were, they were done as matter of expediency, not ideology. The trouble with the Nazis is that it was ideological and racial. Stalin, on the other hand, was an equal opportunity murderer.

The difference between Hitler and Stalin is that Stalin killed to get and hold on to power, while Hitlersought power so he could kill. also, Stalin knew when to stop, whereas Hitler couldn't restrain himself.

What makes the U.S atrocities so bad is the hypocricy. Our ideology was to protect the individual. The only reason the American people got into World War II is becasue we were attacked. We would have let the world burn if we could have.

The mistake with downplaying the Holocaust or avoid discussion about it is that it whitewashes the stark truth; that it was not an aberation by a few madmen. It was a coordinated effort by an educated and cultured population.

If the Nazi were simply madmen then the events of the war and attrocities would have no more significance than an earthquake. but the historical lesson is that intelligent, cultured men can lead an educated nation to unravel civilization itself.

That is the lesson we all had a taste of with our involvement in Scientology. We were good people and we were led to contribute to a bad thing.

I think that is why these kind of discussions keep poping up on this board.

The Anabaptist Jacques