Look at the parallels.They are stunning.

[KlatooBNikto]

1.One manufactured the Reichstag Fire to consolidate the hold of his people. The other has the WTC 9/11 disaster to create terror as a means to consolidate his power and stifle any opposition.
2. One strong armed a willing group of industrialists like Thyssen and Krupp and I.G.Farben by holding out juicy military contracts.The other provides tax cuts of monstrous proportions to business and dangles huge no bid contracts to his cronies like Halliburton, Raytheon, GE and others.
3.One successfully created a string of external enemies in Europe on a weekly basis to keep the entire population obedient to his commands. The current one creates fear of dark skinned foreigners lurking in every corner of the world out to get Americans.
4.The earlier one completely overcame the traditions of military discipline and forced the military to flout all international conventions; this one has forced the military to commit war crimes by absolving them from being prosecuted for these offenses.
5.The earlier one made puppets of all representatives in the Reichstag; the current Congress is just a rubber stamp for the American wannabe.
6.The previous dictator professed to be for the ordinary German soldier but left them to die in the snows fo Moscow, Stalingrad and other places in order to show his "will".The current one does not even pretend to show any concern for the dead and the wounded, whether civilian or military.Even associating with them seems to be beneath him.
7.The previous dictator would brrok no criticism of any kind; the current one has an army of sycophants who simply crop up whenever a distasteful episode from the past surfaces and promises to torpedo the carefully built image of his handlers.Criticism is drowned out by a mass of expletives unconnected to reason.Questions about this wannabe 's competence, honesty or fitness are simply not tolerated.

8.If anyone like lowly me even brings up these comparisons, they are castigated for being "out of the mainstream" or "conspiracy theorists".

In America at the dawn of the twentyfirst century, we are simply unable to call a spade a spade. That is our sad fate.

[Dangerman]

1. Good point there.

The similarities are stunning.

[mopaul]

2. don't git me started

[KlatooBNikto]

9. One of the statements by William Shirer in THE RISE AND FALL OF

THE THIRD REICH that has stuck in my mind was: How could the German people, probably the most culturally advanced of any European nations be swayed by an insignificant, ranting nobody with nothing to offer except hatred and vitriol at Jews, Gypsies and assorted Untermenschen?" I believe we are going to have to ponder the answers to this question soon ourselves.

[Cleita]

3. Many more similarities.

Both were unelected but slipped in on a technicality that made it legal. Both took an oath of loyalty to the Constitution and proceeded to ignore it and dismantle it from the beginning. After the Reichstag fire, President Hindenburg gave his chancellor almost unlimited power to seek out conspirators and conspiracies. We got the Patriot Act that has the same effect.

One openly persecuted his enemies with false arrests, internment without trial or by kangaroo court and hung them up on meat hooks towards the end of the Reich when defeat was in sight. The other engages in character assassination by spreading doubt about the fitness of his opponents through the propaganda media and other compliant liars to prove his point.

[KlatooBNikto]

4. Very good points.Missed them in my rant.

[Cleita]

6. Many many more too.

I will post as I think of them. I think we, who have detailed information on this era, should post a few of these similarites on a daily basis up to the election so that everyone reads them.

[KlatooBNikto]

7. I am thrilled that knowledgeable people like you exist and share

my fears of this man.Post away for all to look and share.Thanks.

[IronLionZion]

5. neo-cons are way out of the maintream

but remember to be afraid....be very afraid...darkies like me are coming for you!

[Cleita]

8. Mussolini in his own words.

This was posted yesterday.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2413173

Also, another DUer has a list of the fourteen signs of fascism.

[KlatooBNikto]

10. As Nixon used to say:"It is perfectly clear".

[bryant69]

11. So what is the most effective way to fight fascist America

Assuming you believe it is fascist?

I mean should we abondon our support of Kerry and begin organizing revolutionary cells?

I mean assuming your analysis is correct, what then do we do next?

Because I have to say, if we want to win the election, I don't think calling George Bush a fascist is the way to do it.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[KlatooBNikto]

12. We have no choice but to support Kerry.But among DUers we can still freely

discuss the fascistic nature of Bush's entire Administration.One does not preclude the other.

[slor]

13. I use this as part of my response...

to the French-bashing, Pro-Iraq war freaks that say, "If France had stood up, WWII could have been avoided" bs. I point out that there was a group of people that really could have stopped WWII, but were caught up in a nationalistic frenzy ,not unlike some elements of our own population, and that is the German people.

[KlatooBNikto]

14. A man I admire greatly William Shirer would have agreed with you.

[Cleita]

15. Also, the Britsh Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain

allowed Hitler to invade Czechoslovakia. He thought if he let him have Sudetenland he would stop invading countries. Does Tony Blair come to mind?

[KlatooBNikto]

16. I think Neville Chamberlain's fault was he was too gullible and

delusional.In the end, he thought he could buy peace by placating Hitler.Blair is cut from a different cloth.He has imperialist dreams of piggybacking on the American Colossus.He has stroked Bush's vanity which was large enough to start with and undervedly so.The biggest distinction between Chamberlain and Blair is that Chamberlain was himself not the aggressor, but Blair is.

[Cleita]

17. True. Their motives were sun and moon, but the fact is they

both allowed an imperialistic power to invade another nation without much hard evidence to back them up. Also, in Chamberlain's case, he violated a treaty with Czechoslovakia for the British to protect them in case another country did an act of military aggression against them.

In all these comparisons, there are stark differences, however, the MO and principals involved are so close in ideology that it's hard not to compare.