Defending HItler

[laughing dog]

So you are telling me that laughing dog posted a defense of Hitler?

I gave your implicit defense of Hitler as an example.

I never gave any defense of Hitler, implicit or explicit.

Yes, you did. Your allegedly tongue in cheek comment about Stalin.

[
So you cannot give my non-existent implicit defense of your idol as an example of a defense of your idol.

My idol? You are babbling again.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

No. I did not at any time make any defense of Hitler. You are having a hard time separating your fantasies from reality. If you want a defense of your idol, don't look to something I didn't say, go ahead and defend your idol on your own.

 

[laughing dog]

No, I didn't at any time make any defense of Hitler.

Yes, you did. You said that Stalin killed more communists than Hitler. You admitted that in post 246. That can be used as an implicit defense of Hitler. You may not have meant it as a defense of Hitler but that is not relevant to the issue.

You are having a hard time separating your fantasies from reality.

That is truly ironic coming from libertarian.

If you want a defense of your idol, don't look to something I didn't say, go ahead and defend your idol on your own.

My idol? You are babbling.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Yes, you did.

No, no I did not.

You said that Stalin killed more communists than Hitler. You admitted that in post 246.

Yes, yes I did.

That can be used as an implicit defense of Hitler.

By an idiot perhaps.

You may not have meant it as a defense of Hitler but that is not relevant to the issue.

True, but the fact that it wasn't a defense of Hitler in any way, shape, or form is relevant.

My idol? You are babbling.

If you don't respect him so much then why are you trying so hard to find people defending him?

 

[humbleman]

Well gee, once again he said "I play his attorney". He is not saying these are his positions, he is saying he is taking these positions for the purpose of this thread.

Again.

At this point it is reasonable to conclude, absent looking inside his head, that he might be doing the devil's advocate job or defense attorney job. Maybe. Probably not, because as I pointed out in the "insult post", there are those who were waiting to pounce on anyone who took up the intellectual exercise and accuse them of expressing their actual viewpoints.

humbleman's defense is to acknowledge everything but the holocaust. That is not acting like a defense attorney because defense attorney's are not permitted to disavow actual facts. Which means he is doing a bad job, since he has done nothing to defend Hitler as a defense attorney. Disavowing actual facts is not playing devil's advocate either. Which means he has done nothing as a devil's advocate - which is also a bad job. This is basic reasoning.

Now, humbleman could have used your tongue in cheek comment about Stalin as a defense of Hitler - that Hitler killed fewer communists than Stalin. That would have been a better defense than the no defense of his, because
1) it has a factual basis, and
2) it is based on the reasonable conclusion that fewer deaths of communists is a better outcome than more deaths of communists.

As Mr. Hitler attorney I might ask the court to "verify" the facts.

Remember Simpsons court case? One of the "facts" (evidence) was the glove, the attorney asked the verification if the glove fits Mr. Simpson hand.

About Mr. Hitler and Mr. Stalin, my job as an attorney is not comparing leaders.

This is like to say, you drive at 70 miles per hour in a road where the speed limit is 50 miles per hour. Like you, several other drivers are traveling at 70 miles per hour and above. Police stop you and gave you a speed ticket. Then "you compare yourself with the other drivers" saying why police stop you when other drivers are doing the same and worst?

The answer of the police officer will be that you must take care of your driving. You don't need to compare yourself to the rest. Regardless if others are breaking the traffic law, you as well were breaking it. Police can't stop every car breaking the law, but if police caught you, then you and only you are responsible of your driving.

Neither the judge will exonerate you of paying the penalty after you claimed that other cars were also over speeding the way you did.

I guess that you won't make a good job defending anyone by the way you think or prepare your defense strategy.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I guess that you won't make a good job defending anyone by the way you think or prepare your defense strategy.

Yeah, LD's so bad at defending his guy that he can't even find other people defending his guy.

 

[humbleman]

I guess that you won't make a good job defending anyone by the way you think or prepare your defense strategy.

Yeah, LD's so bad at defending his guy that he can't even find other people defending his guy.

I'm afraid if LD has a real court case, he might confuse everything and end encouraging the jurors to send the judge to jail.

I know I have got into a huge trouble playing Mr. Hitler's attorney, but sometimes there is no better way to learn more deeply the past historical events. The Devil's advocate is the best description for this "job", you said it right.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, yes I did.

Thank for the admission.

By an idiot perhaps.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

You may not have meant it as a defense of Hitler but that is not relevant to the issue.

True, but the fact that it wasn't a defense of Hitler in any way, shape, or form is relevant.

But you admitted it above (twice).

[

If you don't respect him so much then why are you trying so hard to find people defending him?

What are you talking about - you and humbleman admit to it.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Thank for the admission.

I admitted I posted that Stalin killed more people than your man Hitler, I did not admit it was a defense of your man Hitler.

But you admitted it above (twice).

Admitting I posted that Stalin killed more people than your man Hitler and agreeing to your absurd claim that is a defense of your man Hitler are two different things. I never defended your man Hitler.

What are you talking about - you and humbleman admit to it.

Humbleman admitted to defending your man Hitler. I admitted to posting that Stalin killed more people than your man Hitler, I never admitted to defending your man Hitler.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I scanned this thread for defenses of Hitler.

In post 92, Underseer decided the best defense is a good offense and accused anyone who would speak ill of Hitler of wanting white genocide. I thought it was weird but think that about most of his beliefs.

In post 97, Sarpedon listed a few ways one might try to defend your man Hitler but didn't actually use any of them.

In post 239, Sarpedon said one might try to defend Hitler on the basis of him not being in his right mind due to drugs, but again didn't follow through.

I saw no post from me defending Hitler in this or any other thread. Any claims to the contrary are the fevered imaginings of the one making the claim, probably because he hopes to find more defenses of his idol. If he wants to defend his idol so badly, he should just defend him himself.

 

[laughing dog]

I admitted I posted that Stalin killed more people than your man Hitler, I did not admit it was a defense of your man Hitler.

It can be used as a defense of Hitler. At least it is based on facts.

Speaking of facts, Hitler is no more my man that Stalin is yours.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I admitted I posted that Stalin killed more people than your man Hitler, I did not admit it was a defense of your man Hitler.

It can be used as a defense of Hitler.

If you wish to use what is not a defense of your man Hitler as a defense of your man Hitler I cannot stop you from making that illogical and unsupported leap.

 

[laughing dog]

I admitted I posted that Stalin killed more people than your man Hitler, I did not admit it was a defense of your man Hitler.

It can be used as a defense of Hitler.

If you wish to use what is not a defense of your man Hitler as a defense of your man Hitler I cannot stop you from making that illogical and unsupported leap.

So not only have you admitted a defense of Hitler, you are now admitting Stalin is your man. Great job.

 

[humbleman]

So not only have you admitted a defense of Hitler, you are now admitting Stalin is your man. Great job.

Your insistence of including Mr. Stalin inside the case against Mr. Hitler has failed and won't be a cause for mistrial.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So not only have you admitted a defense of Hitler, you are now admitting Stalin is your man. Great job.

So you are claiming my statement, which was not a defense of Hitler, as your defense of Hitler. I've challenged you to provide a defense of your man Hitler, I guess you have.

Sarpedon twice mentioned ways that one might defend Hitler but never followed through. Underseer, humbleman, and laughing dog did all actually make an attempt at defending Hitler.

 

[laughing dog]

So not only have you admitted a defense of Hitler, you are now admitting Stalin is your man. Great job.

So you are claiming my statement, which was not a defense of Hitler, as your defense of Hitler. I've challenged you to provide a defense of your man Hitler, I guess you have.

Wrong again. I said your statement could be used as a defense of your man Hitler. And it could also be used as a defense of your man Stalin. Whether I would use it as a defense of your man Hitler or your man Stalin is a different question.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So not only have you admitted a defense of Hitler, you are now admitting Stalin is your man. Great job.

So you are claiming my statement, which was not a defense of Hitler, as your defense of Hitler. I've challenged you to provide a defense of your man Hitler, I guess you have.

Wrong again.

If you are not claiming it as your defense of Hitler, this you are not claiming it as a defense of Hitler, which is what I said in the first place.

Since you have stopped claiming it as your defense of your man Hitler, now you have to come up with your own defense of your man Hitler.

 

[laughing dog]

Wrong again.

If you are not claiming it as your defense of Hitler, this you are not claiming it as a defense of Hitler, which is what I said in the first place.

Since you have stopped claiming it as your defense of your man Hitler, now you have to come up with your own defense of your man Hitler.

I see no need to come up with a defense of your man Hitler or your man Stalin. Under the reasonable assumption that a defense is better than a non-defense, I showed that there was at least one defense better than the non-defense of your man Hitler given by humbleman.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Wrong again.

If you are not claiming it as your defense of Hitler, this you are not claiming it as a defense of Hitler, which is what I said in the first place.

Since you have stopped claiming it as your defense of your man Hitler, now you have to come up with your own defense of your man Hitler.

Under the reasonable assumption that a defense is better than a non-defense, I showed that there was at least one defense better than the non-defense of my man Hitler given by humbleman.

So you have gone from defending your man Hitler (but trying to credit me with the defense you were making) to not defending your man at all. Are you embarrassed to be seen defending your man Hitler?

 

[bilby]

Oh, sorry. I appear to have stumbled into the infants playground by mistake.

Do any of you children know where the adults are?

I would like to join your discussion, but I am having trouble keeping track of who is rubber, and who is glue.