> > Every time I've seen a Tom Cruise movie, I go in thinking, This is
> > gonna stink out loud. And you know what? He's good. He delivers the
> > goods, with salt and pepper and napkins. Interview With a Vampire and
> > Minority Report? Just try to pick a fight with them - he hit the
> > ground running and kept the pace. He's a good actor.
>
> He's a one-note scenery chewer. Colin Farell jumped off the screen
> in MR compared to Cruise - who thinks thrashing energy around is
> acting.

Colin Farrell IS terrific - in Phone Booth, holy smokes, just great.
And he really did good in MR. BUT can he carry a big movie? Let's
hope he gets his chance - from what I hear his, um, cold sores are
seriously flaring up, and it's kinda hard to be pretty when yer
oozing.
>
> I thought he was gawdawful in Interview - not scary, not sexy, not
> evil, just manic Cruise trying to act.

Compared to Brad Pitt, the guy was amazing. But little Kirsten stole
the show.
>
> His popularity baffles me. See Tom Run, Run, Run! See Tom Believe
> Ernestly in a Cause! See Tom Shoot! See Tom Spit Line Readings like
> Bullets!

What is this, an opinionated gossip site? Honestly. If a guy can't
get good press here - well, words fail me. And if you want a second
opinion, the Knicks aren't looking so hot.
>
> He has struck me as just plain stupid for a long time. The boy ain't
> very smart and it shows in his movies.

I tell you, the minute he fired his agent and installed his sister?
Talk about stooopid. And you *have* to love the phrase "jumping the
couch." WTF happened since the undies scene in Risky Business? Oh
wait, he became an action figure. But a good one!
>

In article <Xns9901BC7D0F575agentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:

> Wasn't that the one that showed a lingering close-up and leisurely pan over
> "Guernica"? It wasn't part of standard PBS fare.

I don't remember, sorry. I watch all of those history documentaries,
PBS, History Channel, Military History Channel, Discovery, you name it.

Ilene B

In article <1175121790.469029.76920@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
"marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote:

> if I may digress, I get a knock on my door once a
> week. Jehovah's Witnesses.

Ha. They used to make the round in my neighborhood on Sunday mornings. I
had my own personal JW, a sweet guy named Ken, who used to show up when
I was sitting outside in the sun with my dogs after a Saturday night
shift. If the weather was pleasant, we'd talk. He never mentioned JW or
any such, and I made clear to him that I was an atheist. We talked
philosophy. I started to think I might convert him, but then they all
went away.

Once it was really cold and I engaged the two JWs from my open doorway.
I did ask, "What would you say if I invited you in for a goat sacrifice
in my kitchen?" Their script didn't allow them to crack a smile. They'd
just pray for me.

If I'm in a decent mood (since usually they come on Sunday and wake me
up with the dogs barking), I say, "I know from your worldview, you're
doing a good thing and mean well. But it's not my worldview and I don't
want to talk to you."

Once on one Sunday I was woken up, in turn, by the JWs, two Mormons, and
the Girl Scouts. grr

I do feel that, if people come onto your property to talk shit at you,
they get whatever they get. It seems so utterly rude.

Ilene B

In article <1175122516.940699.38510@d57g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote:

> Colin Farrell IS terrific - in Phone Booth, holy smokes, just great.

That's so true. Carrying a movie that is essentially a stage play.

I fear he'll go down the tubes of wasted promise, through substance
abuse and poor movie choices. What would he be great in?

Ilene B

"marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote in
news:1175121790.469029.76920@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

> On Mar 28, 6:06 pm, Ilene Bilenky <ile...@shore.net> wrote:
>> In article <Xns99019400EDD57agentsmithtwobloc...@207.115.33.102>,
>> Agent Smith <agent-sm...@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The official LDS church is flat against polygamy. The polygamist
>> groups appear to be more like personal cults, like Charles Manson,
>> only a bit less malevolent.
>
> That's my understanding as well - the polygamists are the extremists.
> That being said, and if I may digress, I get a knock on my door once a
> week. Jehovah's Witnesses. They always show up when I expect the
> plumber and I'm in my bathrobe.

Sorry, but do you always wait for the plumber in your bathrobe, and when
he arrives, do you give him a glimpse of the goods? Exactly which pipes
are you paying him to plumb the depths of, anyhow?

> Very nice and polite, but still.

Easily provoked if you mock their religion. I had a couple of them a
few years back, and before they introduced themselves, I asked what they
were selling. "We're not selling anything," he said. "We'd just like
to discuss the Gospel with you."

"Selling JEEEEE-sus, eh!!" I said, and the guy damn near put my eye out
with a rolled up copy of his pamphlet. I guess they're sensitive about
being mocked for their religion. For all their talk of faith and
devotion, I think they're pretty insecure about it. If you want to
except Jeeee-sus into your heart, you have to ignore an awful lot of
logical inconsistencies.

> And they travel in pairs, like Darth Mauls.

I thought Darth Maul was just one guy. I think you mean Dark Lords of
the Sith.

> It's like the Muslims, they want to politely convert you by force.

Good thing we're returning the favor. I think we should make Jihad
against *them*.

> This last time they excused
> themselves because they were only seeking Spanish-speaking people to
> convert.

Sounds fishy. Maybe they were looking for paths they can use to smuggle
people across the Mexican border. Good thing Latinos are devout
Catholics. I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but I'm relieved
to know that the Pope has those countries locked up pretty tight.

> I'm like, the religious version of telemarketers hung up on *me?*

Reminds me of the episode of Seinfeld, where the cultists didn't try to
recruit George.

>> I don't see why religious organization should be tax-exempt. Why?
>
> Me neither. And me a Catholic with no respect for the Vatican, so sue
> me. They have more gold than Fort Knox. Tax the bastards.

But then they'd have to sell their rare and valuable antiques and
collectibles. That would be like breaking up the Simthsonian or the
Louvre.

I think they should be forced to make every piece available for public
viewing. Nothing should be allowed to be displayed in private areas,
unless the public is given tours at least once a day. Hell, they could
probably make money from admission.

 
> I don't know what "Cruise delenda est" means, but I can guess, and I
> answer with a resounding and unequivocal 'yes.' That is *exactly* what
> this thread is. Cooze must be destroyed, and if you're not part of the
> solution, you're part of the problem.

The actual quote came from way back when, Punic Wars, "Carthago
delenda est" which translates to the city battle-cry "Carthage must be
destroyed." And frankly, I agree that the guy is a complete alien,
and S'tology is a fool's game, but maybe he'll come to his senses.

Okay, stupid humor time: If you're not part of the solution...

drumroll

...you're part of the precipitate.

On Mar 28, 7:03 pm, Agent Smith <agent-sm...@two-blocks-on-your-
left.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry, but do you always wait for the plumber in your bathrobe, and when
> he arrives, do you give him a glimpse of the goods? Exactly which pipes
> are you paying him to plumb the depths of, anyhow?

Hey! I live in a big apartment building, and waiting for the plumber
is like waiting for Godot. Days, weeks, years go by. I actually
called maintence today and said to the very nice girl who just got
hired, "There is no actual plumber, is there? He's never going to
show up." And I'm a writer, so getting dressed means I *have* to get
out of my bathrobe, and frankly, why should I get dressed for someone
who is not going to show up? It's not like prom night.

So the plumbers finally showed up today - yes, I was in my bathrobe at
three p.m - and they're like the Super Mario brothers, knew no
English, knocking everything into my bathtub
>
> > Very nice and polite, but still.
>
> Easily provoked if you mock their religion. I had a couple of them a
> few years back, and before they introduced themselves, I asked what they
> were selling. "We're not selling anything," he said. "We'd just like
> to discuss the Gospel with you."
>
> "Selling JEEEEE-sus, eh!!" I said, and the guy damn near put my eye out
> with a rolled up copy of his pamphlet. I guess they're sensitive about
> being mocked for their religion. For all their talk of faith and
> devotion, I think they're pretty insecure about it. If you want to
> except Jeeee-sus into your heart, you have to ignore an awful lot of
> logical inconsistencies.
>
> > And they travel in pairs, like Darth Mauls.
>
> I thought Darth Maul was just one guy. I think you mean Dark Lords of
> the Sith.
>
> > It's like the Muslims, they want to politely convert you by force.
>
> Good thing we're returning the favor. I think we should make Jihad
> against *them*.
>
> > This last time they excused
> > themselves because they were only seeking Spanish-speaking people to
> > convert.
>
> Sounds fishy. Maybe they were looking for paths they can use to smuggle
> people across the Mexican border. Good thing Latinos are devout
> Catholics. I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but I'm relieved
> to know that the Pope has those countries locked up pretty tight.
>
> > I'm like, the religious version of telemarketers hung up on *me?*
>
> Reminds me of the episode of Seinfeld, where the cultists didn't try to
> recruit George.
>
> >> I don't see why religious organization should be tax-exempt. Why?
>
> > Me neither. And me a Catholic with no respect for the Vatican, so sue
> > me. They have more gold than Fort Knox. Tax the bastards.
>
> But then they'd have to sell their rare and valuable antiques and
> collectibles. That would be like breaking up the Simthsonian or the
> Louvre.
>
> I think they should be forced to make every piece available for public
> viewing. Nothing should be allowed to be displayed in private areas,
> unless the public is given tours at least once a day. Hell, they could
> probably make money from admission.

I had a boss once who was JW, and he was veeery careful about it - he
and his wife would do the door to door thing, but he never tried it on
me. He was a pretty good boss - but then I caught him selling *my*
news stories as his to the AP, so go figure.

 
"Ilene Bilenky" <ileneb@shore.net> wrote in message
news:ileneb-95354E.17083828032007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> In article <Xns9901ABFD3A53Cagentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
> Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
>
>> Good insight. Wasn't the Cult of Nazism based on Norse Paganism, Odin
>> and Thor, or was there more to it than that?
>
> There was a good documentary on the quasi-religious cult of Nazism. I
> think it was called something like "The Occult Roots of Nazism." Seems
> they hit every pagan archetype in the book, and added modern grievances.
> Those who call that regime "atheist" couldn't be more wrong.

Alfred Rosenberg really was responsible for the
Aryan-National-Socialism-as-replecement-for religion business fairly early
(in Myth of the Twentieth Century) , although the occult business and
symbolic, rather than overtly religious, Nordic references really started
later, with the growing influence with Heinrich Himmler and his coterie.

You really can't blame the Germans as a people for buying into some of
Himmler's goofier ideas; they pretty much stuck with traditional religion
throughout the Third Reich.

The real cult of Nazism was the one Goebbels and company preached , in the
person of Adolf Hitler. Any faith system, including the pagan, that made
anyone or anything greater than Hitler, was a threat.

Combined with Himmler's nonsense, how Hubbardlike is that?

"marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote in
news:1175124102.576006.5460@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com:

> On Mar 28, 7:03 pm, Agent Smith <agent-sm...@two-blocks-on-your-
> left.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, but do you always wait for the plumber in your bathrobe, and
>> when he arrives, do you give him a glimpse of the goods? Exactly
>> which pipes are you paying him to plumb the depths of, anyhow?
>
> Hey! I live in a big apartment building, and waiting for the plumber
> is like waiting for Godot. Days, weeks, years go by.

Sorry, but if you're gonna throw me softballs, I'm gonna knock 'em out
of the park. If you're gonna be Lou Costello, I'll be Bud Abbott. If
you're gonna be a straight man, I'll be the comedian. If you're gonna
be ... well, I guess you get the picture.

Besides, if you know me very well at all, you know I'll damn sure never
to miss the opportunity to comment on a bored housewife sitting naked at
her computer all day. Now open up that robe and show me the goods,
baby.

> I actually
> called maintence today and said to the very nice girl who just got
> hired, "There is no actual plumber, is there? He's never going to
> show up."

You make me think of "Brail."

> And I'm a writer,

Aren't you the one who read the EC comics in the 50's? Anything new on
that front?

> so getting dressed means I *have* to get
> out of my bathrobe, and frankly, why should I get dressed for someone
> who is not going to show up? It's not like prom night.

Did you actually get stiffed on prom night? I guess that I shouldn't
feel so bad about being one of only two guys in my class to go stag.

> So the plumbers finally showed up today - yes, I was in my bathrobe at
> three p.m

I don't know how people can do that. If I'm not showered, dressed and
in the car by 2, I'll have a depressive episode.

> - and they're like the Super Mario brothers, knew no
> English, knocking everything into my bathtub

Did they do as much damage to something else as they did fixing the
plumbing. There oughta be a law that says contractors aren't allowed to
wreck stuff in your house.

>> > Very nice and polite, but still.
>
> I had a boss once who was JW,

Sherrif JW Pepper.

> and he was veeery careful about it

Do you mean that they would try to avoid people that they thought might
attack them?

> - he
> and his wife would do the door to door thing, but he never tried it on
> me.

They knew better than to drive away the reliable staff. Who cares if
they offend a stranger, but if they alienate a good writer, that can
cost them bigtime.

I once had a boss who tried to sell me on Jesus, but fortunately that
didn't have legs. I've gotta say that I actually find Christians to be
better bosses than most. At least they *think* they're displaying a
semblance of ethical behavior, even if the veneer is still as thin as
tissue paper.

I've had bosses that were just plain nut jobs, and I think that they may
outnumber the ones that weren't.

> He was a pretty good boss - but then I caught him selling *my*
> news stories as his to the AP, so go figure.

Isn't it the prerogative of boss to take credit for the work of his
underlings, or does that (koff koff) "tradition" not extend to writers.
Offices work on a pretty feudal model, so it's kind of like "droit de
seigneur.

"marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote in
news:1175123002.556472.48220@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com:

>> I don't know what "Cruise delenda est" means, but I can guess, and I
>> answer with a resounding and unequivocal 'yes.' That is *exactly*
>> what this thread is. Cooze must be destroyed, and if you're not part
>> of the solution, you're part of the problem.
>
> The actual quote came from way back when, Punic Wars, "Carthago
> delenda est" which translates to the city battle-cry "Carthage must be
> destroyed."

There ya go. That's exactly what I was saying. Cooze *must* be
destroyed, at any cost. "Destroy All Monsters!"

> And frankly, I agree that the guy is a complete alien,
> and S'tology is a fool's game, but maybe he'll come to his senses.

I might agree, if he were a rational man who hadn't been brainwashed so
efficiently. In that case, I'd say, if he just loses everything and
bottoms out, then maybe he'll see the error of his ways. But
Satantology's mind control techniques are far too scientific for things
to end that simply, and I think that he'll die before he'll let go of
his precious skin galvanometer. You're too optimistic about the power
of evil.

Sadly, he'll probably be able to nurse his fortune until he's old and
creaky, just like Mary Tyler Moore and Zha Zha, and never bottom out.
Once the fat paychecks stop, people learn *real* fast not to spend too
wildly. Look at how quickly K-Fed started acting like a grown up.

> Okay, stupid humor time: If you're not part of the solution...
>
> drumroll
>
> ...you're part of the precipitate.

I like it! I'm gonna use that in my act.

"Nurktwn" <nurktwn@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
news:460afcdc$0$17200$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:

>
> "Ilene Bilenky" <ileneb@shore.net> wrote in message
> news:ileneb-95354E.17083828032007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
>> In article <Xns9901ABFD3A53Cagentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
>> Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Good insight. Wasn't the Cult of Nazism based on Norse Paganism,
>>> Odin and Thor, or was there more to it than that?
>>
>> There was a good documentary on the quasi-religious cult of Nazism. I
>> think it was called something like "The Occult Roots of Nazism."
>> Seems they hit every pagan archetype in the book, and added modern
>> grievances. Those who call that regime "atheist" couldn't be more
>> wrong.
>
> Alfred Rosenberg really was responsible for the
> Aryan-National-Socialism-as-replecement-for religion business fairly
> early (in Myth of the Twentieth Century) , although the occult
> business and symbolic, rather than overtly religious, Nordic
> references really started later, with the growing influence with
> Heinrich Himmler and his coterie.

What were the details of the Occultism?

> You really can't blame the Germans as a people for buying into some of
> Himmler's goofier ideas; they pretty much stuck with traditional
> religion throughout the Third Reich.
>
> The real cult of Nazism was the one Goebbels and company preached , in
> the person of Adolf Hitler.

Yeah, pretty much all of the evil issued forth from the inner sanctum of
Hitler, Himmler and Goebbles, and perhaps their various wives and
lovers. I guess that the whole concept of the several Reichs was pretty
mystical and superstitious.

If the "Legend" of the Three Reichs was Goebbels invention, ya gotta
wonder if he really believed his own tall tales. That whole story has
schizophrenic delusions of grandeur written all over it. And he knew
that he was just making up stories, to deceive the masses, didn't he?

> Any faith system, including the pagan,
> that made anyone or anything greater than Hitler, was a threat.
>
> Combined with Himmler's nonsense, how Hubbardlike is that?

Megalomaniacal indeed. If Homeless Hitler had the education to
understand basic astronomy, maybe he would have tried to appoint himself
Lord of the Galaxy. But Hitler was much more practical than Raving Ron.
Hubbard just wanted money, but Hitler wanted to be Emperor of Europe.
His dreams were *much* bigger.

Ilene Bilenky <ileneb@shore.net> wrote in
news:ileneb-1C6FCD.17594228032007@comcast.dca.giganews.com:

> In article <1175121790.469029.76920@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> "marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote:
>
>> if I may digress, I get a knock on my door once a
>> week. Jehovah's Witnesses.
>
> Ha. They used to make the round in my neighborhood on Sunday mornings.
> I had my own personal JW, a sweet guy named Ken, who used to show up
> when I was sitting outside in the sun with my dogs after a Saturday
> night shift.

How is Saturday night in the madhouse, quiet or noisy?

> If the weather was pleasant, we'd talk. He never mentioned JW or
> any such, and I made clear to him that I was an atheist.

Are you an atheist or a humanist? People often confuse the two.

> We talked
> philosophy. I started to think I might convert him, but then they all
> went away.
>
> Once it was really cold and I engaged the two JWs from my open
> doorway. I did ask, "What would you say if I invited you in for a goat
> sacrifice in my kitchen?" Their script didn't allow them to crack a
> smile. They'd just pray for me.

As Alan Simpson recently pointed out, in a rousing debate, it's easiest
to make fools of the humorless.

> If I'm in a decent mood (since usually they come on Sunday and wake me
> up with the dogs barking), I say, "I know from your worldview, you're
> doing a good thing and mean well. But it's not my worldview and I
> don't want to talk to you."
>
> Once on one Sunday I was woken up, in turn, by the JWs, two Mormons,
> and the Girl Scouts. grr
>
> I do feel that, if people come onto your property to talk shit at you,
> they get whatever they get. It seems so utterly rude.

Not that they still won't wake you up, but why even answer the door any
more, if it's a stranger knocking? You know they just want to hustle
you.

In article <1175114244.699002.124500@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
"marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote:

> What is this thread, Cruise delenda est? Yes, he has *ahem*
> questionable principles, but give the guy credit - on screen, he's
> good. Just like after Mel Gibson had his rant, a Jewish friend of
> mine took me to see Apocolypto, saying, "Who cares what he said, I
> hear the movie's good." So we went. And the movie was pretty
> entertaining.

Mel Gibson's dad, Hutton Gibson has spoken at a couple Holocaust
Denier Conferences, besides is really out there with his Catholic
beliefs, he makes Opus Dei look liberal. I do have a problem that his
son hasn't condemn his father for speaking at Holcaust Denier meetings,
which are just window dressing for gatherings of Anti-Semitic hate
groups.

However, how he directed "Braveheart" was pretty good in the visual
aspect. The film is widely historically inaccurate, but the visuals for
the battle scene were top rate.

In article <Xns9901BC7D0F575agentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:

> Ilene Bilenky <ileneb@shore.net> wrote in news:ileneb-253189.17260928032007
> @comcast.dca.giganews.com:
>
> > In article <Xns9901BA1727CF4agentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
> > Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I saw that several years ago, when it was on PBS, but unfortunately I
> >> wasn't paying cloase attention and just running it in the background.
> >
> > Maybe there was more than one documentary, as I think the one I saw was
> > on History Channel or something like that. The subject could certainly
> > stand more than one documentary. It was fascinating.
>
> Wasn't that the one that showed a lingering close-up and leisurely pan over
> "Guernica"? It wasn't part of standard PBS fare.


This is an anecdote about "Guernica" that when a German Officer went to
find Picasso, and ask him if he was the one who created "Guernica",
Picasso's answer was "No, you did"

http://oaks.nvg.org/eg3ra2.html

comadreja <comadreja-t@comcast.net> wrote in
news:comadreja-t-EE68BD.21362328032007@news.giganews.com:

> In article <Xns9901BC7D0F575agentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
> Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
>
>> Ilene Bilenky <ileneb@shore.net> wrote in
>> news:ileneb-253189.17260928032007 @comcast.dca.giganews.com:
>>
>> > In article <Xns9901BA1727CF4agentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
>> > Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I saw that several years ago, when it was on PBS, but
>> >> unfortunately I wasn't paying cloase attention and just running it
>> >> in the background.
>> >
>> > Maybe there was more than one documentary, as I think the one I saw
>> > was on History Channel or something like that. The subject could
>> > certainly stand more than one documentary. It was fascinating.
>>
>> Wasn't that the one that showed a lingering close-up and leisurely
>> pan over "Guernica"? It wasn't part of standard PBS fare.
>
>
> This is an anecdote about "Guernica" that when a German Officer went
> to find Picasso, and ask him if he was the one who created "Guernica",
> Picasso's answer was "No, you did"
>
> http://oaks.nvg.org/eg3ra2.html

I heard that, and it gave me the impresion that Picasso was a snyde
political wag in the great tradition of Mark Twain and HL Mencken.

In article <460afcdc$0$17200$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
"Nurktwn" <nurktwn@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> "Ilene Bilenky" <ileneb@shore.net> wrote in message
> news:ileneb-95354E.17083828032007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
> > In article <Xns9901ABFD3A53Cagentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
> > Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Good insight. Wasn't the Cult of Nazism based on Norse Paganism, Odin
> >> and Thor, or was there more to it than that?
> >
> > There was a good documentary on the quasi-religious cult of Nazism. I
> > think it was called something like "The Occult Roots of Nazism." Seems
> > they hit every pagan archetype in the book, and added modern grievances.
> > Those who call that regime "atheist" couldn't be more wrong.
>
> Alfred Rosenberg really was responsible for the
> Aryan-National-Socialism-as-replecement-for religion business fairly early
> (in Myth of the Twentieth Century) , although the occult business and
> symbolic, rather than overtly religious, Nordic references really started
> later, with the growing influence with Heinrich Himmler and his coterie.
>
> You really can't blame the Germans as a people for buying into some of
> Himmler's goofier ideas; they pretty much stuck with traditional religion
> throughout the Third Reich.
>
> The real cult of Nazism was the one Goebbels and company preached , in the
> person of Adolf Hitler. Any faith system, including the pagan, that made
> anyone or anything greater than Hitler, was a threat.
>
> Combined with Himmler's nonsense, how Hubbardlike is that?

Another Person who gave the impression that the Nazis and/or Hitler was
anti-religious was Martin Bormann, given he edited many of stenographer
notes in Hitler's conversations from 1942-1945. Himmler was wrapped up
in Pagan Gods and Pagan rituals, along with certain Jesuit training that
he copied for the SS.

What the Nazi were very obsess about race, especially to them how
political systems and race were congruent. They combine Pan German
ideology, which had been around since the 19th Century, and was
influential in a heterogeneous places like turn of the Century Vienna,
with its many citizens of the Austro-Hungary empire. A combination of
Anti-Semitism that was prevalent in Vienna during the time Hitler lived
there, with a disgust of Communism. To the Nazis, Communism and Judaism
were pretty much one of the same. Alot of Hitler's thinking came from
many of the politcal pamphlets that many Austrian politicians would
publish to get votes, alot of them were filled with pure nonsense.

In article <460abf26$0$24726$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
"Nurktwn" <nurktwn@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> If the movie is made, it will be a must-miss. Unless Cruise portrays Roland
> Freisler.

Tom Cruise would make a good Roland Freisler. If they make this movie,
which I doubt, they won't film it in Germany...

In article <Xns9901ABFD3A53Cagentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:

> "Nurktwn" <nurktwn@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
> news:460abf26$0$24726$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:
>
> >
> > "Agent Smith" <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote in
> > message news:Xns99019400EDD57agentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.33.102...
> >> comadreja <comadreja-t@comcast.net> wrote in
> >> news:comadreja-t-DFC7F8.12514328032007@news.giganews.com:
> >>> You certainly seem well informed on the subject, and this is
> >>> obviously a
> >> story crying to be told. When the movie comes out, I'll skip the
> >> film read about it in a book.
> >>
> > It is a story *screaming* to be told, and that awful film with Brad
> > Davis doesn't count.
> >
> > The military resistance to Hitler dated to 1933 and a plan actually
> > was hatched in 1938 by many of the same men and women who were
> > executed in 1944, notably Generaloberst Beck, Generalfeldmarschall von
> > Witzleben and Admiral Canaris. The capitulation of Britain in the
> > Munich Agreement -- a popular triumph for Hitler -- put an end to
> > their plans.
>
> Are you sying that if Chamberlain hadn't rolled over for Uncle Adolfus,
> his owm men might have deposed him? If that's true, Chamberlain really
> was a fuck, wasn't he.

It wasn't that clear cut, General Beck and others made soundings to
British Intelligence if the British would be supportive of a coup, the
British, IIRC basically stated that Beck and others need to show some
actions that you are serious and enough broad support about getting rid
of Hitler and in terms defeating the SS which in some ways was a state
within a state, before they (the British) give stronger support.

Britain wasn't prepare for war in 1938, they had small defense budget
for years, exacerbated by the Great Depression, and kept their faith
that collective security with the other states in Europe would keep
Germany in check. Chamberlain in contrast to his predecessor, Stanley
Baldwin, was more interested in International/European Affairs, along
with British Public Opinion at the time that very much in favor not
miscalculating on a political event that spark another Great European
War. People like Churchill were looked upon as warmongers.
>
> > Apparently, the men and women of Der deutsche Widerstand (the German
> > Resistance) found Nazi cult-culture particularly troublesome and it
> > would be nastily ironic to think that modern cult members would try to
> > capitalize on their struggle.
>
> Good insight. Wasn't the Cult of Nazism based on Norse Paganism, Odin
> and Thor, or was there more to it than that?

Also German History from Dark Ages and Medieval ages,like Heinrich I of
Saxony. (Why Richard Wagner operas were popular with the Nazis, because
he combine Pagan beliefs with lots of early German Historical characters
like Heinrich I)
>
> > If the movie is made, it will be a must-miss. Unless Cruise portrays
> > Roland Freisler.
>
> As has been mentioned, Cooze should play Adolf. "He had no ticket!"

Bruno Ganz who played Hitler in the movie, "Downfall" (Der Untergang)
probably did the best perfomance of the monster for cinema. Cruise is
better off playing someone sinister disingenuous and clever like
Goebbels, or pompous like von Ribbentrop. Hitler and especially Himmler
have to be played by heavies, or actors who can play sort of pathetic
characters who wallow in their self pity.

comadreja <comadreja-t@comcast.net> wrote in news:comadreja-t-
47B0DE.21511828032007@news.giganews.com:

> Nazis [thought] political systems and race were congruent.

Given the current state of race relations and feminism, I'm not so sure
this isn't true. Liberals are more interested in the differences between
people than their similarities.

On Mar 28, 10:36 pm, Carlos The Jackass <Car...@Jackass.fag> wrote:
> comadreja <comadrej...@comcast.net> wrote in news:comadreja-t-
> 47B0DE.21511828032...@news.giganews.com:
>
> > Nazis [thought] political systems and race were congruent.
>
> Given the current state of race relations and feminism, I'm not so sure
> this isn't true. Liberals are more interested in the differences between
> people than their similarities.

Being a liberal, (but not a radical, just a humanist) I think we are
more inclined to live peacefully with our neighbors than argue with
them. I'm like, wtf with Norther Ireland? Methinks it's better to
get along than to fight or to try to change people's points of view.
Live and let live. Just, don't beat the kids or let the dogs bark all
night.

On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 02:36:55 GMT, Carlos The Jackass
<Carlos@Jackass.fag> wrote:

>comadreja <comadreja-t@comcast.net> wrote in news:comadreja-t-
>47B0DE.21511828032007@news.giganews.com:
>
>> Nazis [thought] political systems and race were congruent.
>
>Given the current state of race relations and feminism, I'm not so sure
>this isn't true. Liberals are more interested in the differences between
>people than their similarities.

While conservatives are all about bringing people together and making
everyone feel warm and fuzzy

On Mar 28, 8:22 pm, Agent Smith <agent-sm...@two-blocks-on-your-
left.com> wrote:

> Sorry, but if you're gonna throw me softballs, I'm gonna knock 'em out
> of the park. If you're gonna be Lou Costello, I'll be Bud Abbott. If
> you're gonna be a straight man, I'll be the comedian. If you're gonna
> be ... well, I guess you get the picture.

Oh all right, I get the picture. You wanna be Groucho? I get to be
Harpo and hang a leg when and where.
>
> Besides, if you know me very well at all, you know I'll damn sure never
> to miss the opportunity to comment on a bored housewife sitting naked at
> her computer all day. Now open up that robe and show me the goods,
> baby.

Hey you, I write and I am *always* very respectably dressed in my
jammies, thank you. Which are not revealing, I'm a single girl and
my apartment is overheated. Time to call maintenence again.
Housewife? Die now.
>
> Aren't you the one who read the EC comics in the 50's? Anything new on
> that front?

I have a collection of comics and paperbacks from that era - it's not
my era. I like vintage.
>
>
> Did you actually get stiffed on prom night? I guess that I shouldn't
> feel so bad about being one of only two guys in my class to go stag.

What's the big deal? The plumber didn't show. Again. Jesus. But
then I got *two* plumbers today - like it takes a committee to fix the
toilet.
>
> > So the plumbers finally showed up today - yes, I was in my bathrobe at
> > three p.m
>
> I don't know how people can do that. If I'm not showered, dressed and
> in the car by 2, I'll have a depressive episode.

I work at home, and don't need to get dressed to get depressed - it's
kind of the default mode.
>
> > - and they're like the Super Mario brothers, knew no
> > English, knocking everything into my bathtub
>
> Did they do as much damage to something else as they did fixing the
> plumbing. There oughta be a law that says contractors aren't allowed to
> wreck stuff in your house.

But you know, you always have to clean up the mess. Yes, they fix
stuff, but dang, you hafta get out the Windex and the vacuum after
they go. Today I just turned off the bafroom light for a few hours -
enough already. Cleaned up later.
>
> I've had bosses that were just plain nut jobs, and I think that they may
> outnumber the ones that weren't.
>
> > He was a pretty good boss - but then I caught him selling *my*
> > news stories as his to the AP, so go figure.
>
> Isn't it the prerogative of boss to take credit for the work of his
> underlings, or does that (koff koff) "tradition" not extend to writers.
> Offices work on a pretty feudal model, so it's kind of like "droit de
> seigneur.

Actually, not in this case - I had my stories, he had his, and he was
wrong, and once I politely called him on it, he was all Oh Oops.
Sorry! And that was the end of that - as long as you keep it all
good-natured, no harm no foul.

In article <Xns9901EA10369CAagentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:

> comadreja <comadreja-t@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:comadreja-t-85EE64.22362328032007@news.giganews.com:
>
> > In article <Xns9901ABFD3A53Cagentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>,
> > Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Nurktwn" <nurktwn@cfl.rr.com> wrote in
> >> news:460abf26$0$24726$4c368faf@roadrunner.com:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > "Agent Smith" <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote in
> >> > message news:Xns99019400EDD57agentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.33.102...
> >> >> comadreja <comadreja-t@comcast.net> wrote in
> >> >> news:comadreja-t-DFC7F8.12514328032007@news.giganews.com:
> >> >>> You certainly seem well informed on the subject, and this is
> >> >>> obviously a
> >> >> story crying to be told. When the movie comes out, I'll skip the
> >> >> film read about it in a book.
> >> >>
> >> > It is a story *screaming* to be told, and that awful film with Brad
> >> > Davis doesn't count.
> >> >
> >> > The military resistance to Hitler dated to 1933 and a plan actually
> >> > was hatched in 1938 by many of the same men and women who were
> >> > executed in 1944, notably Generaloberst Beck, Generalfeldmarschall
> >> > von Witzleben and Admiral Canaris. The capitulation of Britain in
> >> > the Munich Agreement -- a popular triumph for Hitler -- put an end
> >> > to their plans.
> >>
> >> Are you sying that if Chamberlain hadn't rolled over for Uncle
> >> Adolfus, his owm men might have deposed him? If that's true,
> >> Chamberlain really was a fuck, wasn't he.
> >
> > It wasn't that clear cut, General Beck and others made soundings to
> > British Intelligence if the British would be supportive of a coup, the
> > British, IIRC basically stated that Beck and others need to show some
> > actions that you are serious and enough broad support about getting
> > rid of Hitler and in terms defeating the SS which in some ways was a
> > state within a state, before they (the British) give stronger support.
> >
> > Britain wasn't prepare for war in 1938, they had small defense budget
> > for years, exacerbated by the Great Depression, and kept their faith
> > that collective security with the other states in Europe would keep
> > Germany in check. Chamberlain in contrast to his predecessor, Stanley
> > Baldwin, was more interested in International/European Affairs, along
> > with British Public Opinion at the time that very much in favor not
> > miscalculating on a political event that spark another Great European
> > War. People like Churchill were looked upon as warmongers.
>
> What are you, an apologist for Chamberlain's folly? You sound like an
> anti-war liberal to me. You sound like one of those people who says
> that no war is ever right, under any circumstances, even when there's a
> heavily armed bully working his way down the block, towards your house.

My politics have nothing to do with my previous statements. I was
trying to describe what was going on at the time of the Munich Agreement
in 1938. Chamberlain was widely popular right after signing the Munich
Agreement, because he was looked upon as diverting a crisis. Once
Hitler took over the rest of Czechoslovakia in 1939, Chamberlain made a
speech in Birmingham, UK March 17th, 1939 that set Britain on the path
of war, by guaranteeing Poland's borders.
>
> If one neighbor goes ahead and takes another, it's pretty certain that
> there's going to be a war. Otherwise, the only alternative is to roll
> over. I mean come on, "Please give us Czechoslovaia or we'll take it by
> force"?! Them's fightin' words, Tex.

At the time, the Munich Agreement was over the Sudetenland, not about
the whole of Czechoslovakia, once Hitler broke the Munich Agreement,
then Britain and France realize that only force was the way to deal with
Hitler and Germany.
>
> I think that Neville was just so gun-shy from WWI that he would have
> done anything to avoid another fight. That's no excuse, because it's
> cowardice, pure and simple. A real man knows when to back down and when
> to stand firm. "Please give us this country" is no time to back down.

Chamberlain was a politician, he was bamboozled by certain factions
and took a unrealistic view of certain things. WWI was not just another
war, but was the most destructive conflict in Human History up to that
time. Chamberlain also knew as well as the British Military
Establishment that the UK wasn't ready for another major war against
Germany. Their industrial base wasn't prepare at the time, nor many
inventions that helped Britain win the war, like the Cavity Magnetron
and the computer (ie the Colossus) were created until the war years.

I don't think what Chamberlain did at Munich at 1938 came from
cowardice, there was a heap of gullibility, naivite and a bit of
stupidity. Churchill was much more correct in his assessment of Hitler
at that time. Chamberlain changed course in March 1939, which put
Britain on the path of war. Look up Chamberlain and his speech he made
on March, 17th 1939.
>
> Even if their arms were depleted, that doesn't mean that they couldn't
> do anything. In such a situation, since they couldn't fight (yet), the
> proper thing to do is to start the factories cranking out the war
> materiel that would eventually allow them to fight. They can go onto a
> war footing without explicitly going to war. One must always wait until
> conditions are favorable to launch any kind of attack, even a counter-
> attack.

The British during the inter war years did invest alot in aircraft
production and design, which gave rise to the Rolls Royce Merlin Engine
and the Spitfire fighter plane. They also invested alot in new
technology like radar, which bear fruit during the Battle of Britain in
1940. It wasn't the lack of arms that made Britain and France weak as
so much as poor tactics that was a bane of Britain in its defeats from
1939-1942. Battles like France, Crete, the Atlantic, fall of Tobruk in
1942 were more to blame for bad military tactics and the superior German
military tactics of schwerpunkt and use of anti-tank traps, besides air
superiority.
>
> Chamberlain just sat there and took it up the ass, and he should have
> known perfectly well that he would be immediately betrayed. People who
> like conquering countries don't stop after just one. Dominoes fall, and
> Adolf overran a lot of territory before we finally started pushing him
> back into his shell. Besides us and the Brits, The Russkies were the
> only ones with the backbone to hold the line, no matter how brutal it
> got. Everything else fell like a house of cards.

Alot had to do with geography. Britain had the English Channel, (La
Manche) with diverted Napoleon as much as Hitler from invasion. Much
like "General Winter", as the Russian call the Russian Winter as an ally
in fighting wars, was a factor in helping push back the German from
Moscow in Dec. 1941, and with the Soviets' Operation Uranus that
destroyed the German 6th Army at Stalingrad.

Not all countries fell like a house of cards, the Greeks fought
against both the Germans and Italians on their own, and they fought
pretty hard. Many countries had resistance groups that fought until
liberation, whether in Holland, or how the Poles bitterly fought the
Germans during the Warsaw Uprising in 1944.



>
> >> > Apparently, the men and women of Der deutsche Widerstand (the
> >> > German Resistance) found Nazi cult-culture particularly troublesome
> >> > and it would be nastily ironic to think that modern cult members
> >> > would try to capitalize on their struggle.
> >>
> >> Good insight. Wasn't the Cult of Nazism based on Norse Paganism,
> >> Odin and Thor, or was there more to it than that?
> >
> > Also German History from Dark Ages and Medieval ages,like Heinrich I
> > of Saxony. (Why Richard Wagner operas were popular with the Nazis,
> > because he combine Pagan beliefs with lots of early German Historical
> > characters like Heinrich I)
> >>
> >> > If the movie is made, it will be a must-miss. Unless Cruise
> >> > portrays Roland Freisler.
> >>
> >> As has been mentioned, Cooze should play Adolf. "He had no ticket!"
> >
> > Bruno Ganz who played Hitler in the movie, "Downfall" (Der Untergang)
> > probably did the best perfomance of the monster for cinema.
>
> You know I still haven't seen that, even though I know perfectly well
> that it was an excellent film. I realize that the great playwrights
> have routinely made such a story work, but there's just something that
> puts me off to the idea of people locked in a room shouting at each
> other.
>
> > Cruise is
> > better off playing someone sinister disingenuous and clever like
> > Goebbels,
>
> You're right. His rat face gives him a very sinister countenance.
>
> > or pompous like von Ribbentrop. Hitler and especially
> > Himmler have to be played by heavies, or actors who can play sort of
> > pathetic characters who wallow in their self pity.

"marybones@verizon.net" <marybones@rcn.com> wrote in
news:1175139156.994620.17630@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:

> On Mar 28, 8:22 pm, Agent Smith <agent-sm...@two-blocks-on-your-
> left.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry, but if you're gonna throw me softballs, I'm gonna knock 'em
>> out of the park. If you're gonna be Lou Costello, I'll be Bud
>> Abbott. If you're gonna be a straight man, I'll be the comedian. If
>> you're gonna be ... well, I guess you get the picture.
>
> Oh all right, I get the picture. You wanna be Groucho? I get to be
> Harpo and hang a leg when and where.

You've done it again. Now come over here and hang your legs over my
shoulders.

>> Besides, if you know me very well at all, you know I'll damn sure
>> never to miss the opportunity to comment on a bored housewife sitting
>> naked at her computer all day. Now open up that robe and show me the
>> goods, baby.
>
> Hey you, I write and I am *always* very respectably dressed in my
> jammies, thank you. Which are not revealing, I'm a single girl and
> my apartment is overheated. Time to call maintenence again.

There you go again. You just can't keep from tossing me the Freudian
softballs. A single girl in an overheated place. That one's just too
easy. And jammies may not be revealing, little girl, but they're always
suggestive of bedroom activities.

> Housewife? Die now.

Sorry. So how is it that a sweetheart like you didn't get snapped up
years ago, but some nice guy who read EC comics in the fifties.

>> Aren't you the one who read the EC comics in the 50's? Anything new
>> on that front?
>
> I have a collection of comics and paperbacks from that era - it's not
> my era. I like vintage.

The fifties aren't vintage?

>> Did you actually get stiffed on prom night? I guess that I shouldn't
>> feel so bad about being one of only two guys in my class to go stag.
>
> What's the big deal?

There are a lot of myths and expectations attached to prom night. I
didn't get laid, and I didn't expect to. And from what I saw of the
other people at the all night parties didn't, either.

> The plumber didn't show. Again. Jesus. But
> then I got *two* plumbers today - like it takes a committee to fix the
> toilet.

You gotta find a better place.

>> > So the plumbers finally showed up today - yes, I was in my bathrobe
>> > at three p.m
>>
>> I don't know how people can do that. If I'm not showered, dressed
>> and in the car by 2, I'll have a depressive episode.
>
> I work at home, and don't need to get dressed to get depressed - it's
> kind of the default mode.

Don't you need to got out of the house? I'm self employed, too, but I
generally work in coffee houses. If I don't get out, I really start to
sag.

>> > - and they're like the Super Mario brothers, knew no
>> > English, knocking everything into my bathtub
>>
>> Did they do as much damage to something else as they did fixing the
>> plumbing. There oughta be a law that says contractors aren't allowed
>> to wreck stuff in your house.
>
> But you know, you always have to clean up the mess. Yes, they fix
> stuff, but dang, you hafta get out the Windex and the vacuum after
> they go. Today I just turned off the bafroom light for a few hours -
> enough already. Cleaned up later.

Nobody says it hs to be done immediately. I've got a messy bathroom
floor tht's over due for a cleaning. It'll get done, only behind
schedule.

>> > He was a pretty good boss - but then I caught him selling *my*
>> > news stories as his to the AP, so go figure.
>>
>> Isn't it the prerogative of boss to take credit for the work of his
>> underlings, or does that (koff koff) "tradition" not extend to
>> writers. Offices work on a pretty feudal model, so it's kind of like
>> "droit de seigneur.
>
> Actually, not in this case - I had my stories, he had his, and he was
> wrong, and once I politely called him on it, he was all Oh Oops.
> Sorry! And that was the end of that - as long as you keep it all
> good-natured, no harm no foul.

You did the right thing to quit, and it's too bad you couldn't bad mouth
him to some kind of writer's guild. Isn't it amazing the dishonest
things people do, and then just say "Oops sorry, no biggie." You'd
think that a Christian wouldn't be so immoral, but I'm sure he just
rationalized it away.

comadreja <comadreja-t@comcast.net> wrote in
news:comadreja-t-157D99.05185029032007@news.giganews.com:

> I don't think what Chamberlain did at Munich at 1938 came from
> cowardice, there was a heap of gullibility, naivite and a bit of
> stupidity.

My dear, those are the roots of cowardice.

>> Chamberlain just sat there and took it up the ass, and he should have
>> known perfectly well that he would be immediately betrayed. People
>> who like conquering countries don't stop after just one. Dominoes
>> fall, and Adolf overran a lot of territory before we finally started
>> pushing him back into his shell. Besides us and the Brits, The
>> Russkies were the only ones with the backbone to hold the line, no
>> matter how brutal it got. Everything else fell like a house of
>> cards.
>
> Alot had to do with geography. Britain had the English Channel, (La
> Manche) with diverted Napoleon as much as Hitler from invasion.

IMO, "Geography is destiny" has passed from the level of clever proverb
to cliched truism. Apparently Hitler himself knew perfectly well that
his fighting skills were limited to land warfare. He admitted aloud
that he knew nothing about naval warfare. Same for Nappy, I guess.

That would seem to be a rather substantial shortcoming for a man who
fancied himself a military genius of imperial greatness. The Romans may
not have conquered England, but at least they crossed the channel and
took out a healthy chunk.

> Much
> like "General Winter", as the Russian call the Russian Winter as an
> ally in fighting wars, was a factor in helping push back the German
> from Moscow in Dec. 1941, and with the Soviets' Operation Uranus that
> destroyed the German 6th Army at Stalingrad.

I didn't know that, but I'll have to remember it. In Russia, the
Germans stalled twice in the winter, in both WWI and WWII. I guess it's
kind of like the Afghan terrain, which is also a gerat ally to the
locals, and generally only understood by them.

Those Russkies really are some tough mofos, aren't they. They sure
fought us to a fifty year standstill, and built themselves one helluvan
expensive empire.

I just read about the Crimean War, which was England vs. Russia on a
northern peninsula of the Black Sea. During Brig. Gen. James Scarlett's
charge of the Heavy Brigade, which was a moment of great British
heroism, Scarlett's grossly outnumbered cavalry force charged into the
heart of a gigantic mass of Russian infantry and engaged them with
swords.

The heavy winter coats were so thick that they turned the British swords
almost like body armor. Their Russian winter hats were effectively
thick cloth helmets. But in the fourth assault of the engagement, the
4th Dragoon Guards penetrated completely through the Russian formation,
all the way from the right flank to the left. It was a rout,
nonetheless.

As Mrs. Cecil Woodham-Smith, the best historian of the Light Brigade's
ill-fated Charge, wrote. "The great Russian mass swayed, rocked, gave a
gigantic heave, broke, and, disintegrating it seemed in a moment, fled.
A great shout went up: from the troops fighting the battle, from the
Light Brigade looking on, from the heights, where the watchers hurrah-
ed, flung their hats into the air and clapped their hands; and Lord
Raglan sent an aide-de-camp galloping down with the message 'Well done,
Scarlett.' So great had been the tension, and so swift the change, that
men who only a moment before had been fighting like madmen steeped in
blood burst into tears." This woman really knows how to write.

> Not all countries fell like a house of cards, the Greeks fought
> against both the Germans and Italians on their own, and they fought
> pretty hard. Many countries had resistance groups that fought until
> liberation, whether in Holland, or how the Poles bitterly fought the
> Germans during the Warsaw Uprising in 1944.