“Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses - because somewhere down the track of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened.” - Dwight D. Eisenhower 1945
The image is a black and white photo of a large pile of human skulls and bones in front of a barbed-wire fence.
You must log in or register to comment.
You have been permanently banned from r/Conservative.
On the contrary, this is about what happens when Konrad Harris wins /s
As an indigenous person in Canada i know from personal experience that there are a lot of bastards everywhere that don’t want to believe a lot of things that happened in the past.
If you visit the Holocaust museum you can see the only known photos documenting the attrocities as they happened. Someone snuck a camera and film in to a Auschwitz prisoner who managed to take 4 or 5 grainy photos showing the guards piling and burning bodies.
https://www.auschwitz.org/en/gallery/historical-pictures-and-documents/extermination,11.html
These are probably the pictures you’re talking about.
Genuinely, Ike was the most recent Republican president that I truly respect. He was not perfect by a long shot, but he had his head on straight compared to many other politicians for a LOT of topics, considering the time in which he was raised, in the military, and serving as president.
That’s because he isn’t actually a republican. This was before the party switch.
The whole party switch thing is a bit of a misnomer, or mislead - the fact is, you had completely different worlds at the time. For example, Lincoln’s republicans supported the abolition of slavery, the abolition of alcohol, and westward expansion. The opposing democrats at the time supported white supremacy and protections of religious minorities. Then go forward a few years, and Democrats (like Wilson) wanted income taxes and silver-based money, while Republicans (like McKinley) wanted tariffs and gold-based money. Then after that, you get closer to what we know now, which is Democrats wanting larger government and welfare for the poor, while Republicans wanted less government and anti-communist foreign policy.
So there’s less of a switch and more of different gradual challenges to different shifting groups of ideologies. It just looks like a switch when you look at individual issues that look like they hold the same water as other issues today.
For example, you can have people that are absolutely for welfare, but also against religious freedoms; the poor need to be housed and fed, but everyone needs to be Christian. You could have then an opposing party that absolutely hates the idea of being theocratic, because they believe in the individual person’s freedom to be themselves, but at the expense of people who need support. Sort of the same way how Libertarians and mostly left circles can all agree that drugs shouldn’t be criminalized today, but have polar opposite beliefs for economic policies and government services.
Or smth idk I’m not an expert, I’m just taking a rly long shit
The only time I’ve ever heard it come up is in the context of slavery. So that’s probably why most people call it a switch. It’s a single issue.
Ah, no, it was civil rights about 100 years later.
That’s not my experience, and I’m describing my experience.
My experience is that people like to say “Democrats are the party of slavery”. And then someone else says “the parties switched”.
The parties did switch but it’s more complex than a black/white thing since political ideas have changed over the past 100 years. And as such, comparing is political parties of the current time to those of 180 years ago is absurd.
Dixiecrats switching to republicans is definitely a real thing and it happened around the 50s and 60s. In any event, which political party likes confederate flags is a decent question at this point. The party of Lincoln? That would be odd.
Isn’t he also the one that was responsible for overthrowing the democratic governments of a lot of countries he thought were too communist?
100%. Truman started the Cold War, and Eisenhower was the first Cold Warrior. Most notably he is the one who rejected the peace deal signed between the French and the Vietnamese communists, setting the stage for the Vietnam War. The Iranian prime minister was overthrown in favor of the Shah on his watch too.
Device information
Sync version: v24.03.26-14:56 Sync flavor: googlePlay Ultra user: false View type: Slides Push enabled: false Device: Armor_17_Pro Model: Ulefone Armor 17 Pro Android: 12?
If the Holocaust were happening today Liberals would support it.
Nah
They are currently supporting Kamala Harris, a candidate who has reaffirmed her support for sending weapons to the country currently enacting its own Final Solution. So yes.
Nah
Denial is a river in Egypt, you need to face reality.
It does suck that she seems to want to continue sending weapons to Israel. I don’t support that. But there are a zillion other reasons I do support her. Plus the other guy wants to “finish the job” and just wipe out Gaza. That’s worse, fyi
Can you source your claim?
I see this is your other line of attack, clown.
Hope you’re not defending the attack against Genocide.
With the power of generative AI and MAGA chucklefucks, now some bastard will just claim its a deepfake or a deepstate.
It sucks, and we’re not ready for it.
One reason we know that the moon landings were real is that the technology to fake them simply didn’t exist in the 1960s. They didn’t even have video tape back then, let alone computer graphics. Add to that the fact that almost everybody in the US got their news from one of 3 TV networks, or from newspapers that actually cared about and could afford to do real journalism. That means that when people saw the moon landings they knew they were witnessing something real. It was unfortunately also easy to cover up real things (like MK Ultra) when you only had to deal with 3 TV networks.
These days, especially for Americans, there are no authoritative sources of truth. (Australia has ABC, Britain has BBC, Canada has CBC, but the US has no not-for-profit news source that doesn’t have to worry about pleasing advertisers). Add to that that every kind of media is subject to “deepfakes” and other kinds of manipulation.
And, this now affects historical events. When people in 1969 witnessed the moon landing, almost nobody thought it was fake. In 1969 it would have been relatively easy to remove almost any doubts anybody might have. But, memories are faulty and it’s so easy to create fake evidence, that now even people who were alive and watching it live when the moon landing happened are now starting to doubt it.
In courts, we require evidence of various kinds because we know how unreliable people’s memories are. But, it feels like we’re heading for a future where your own memories may be more reliable than any research you’re able to do. And, we’re just not ready for that post-truth world.
Uhm… PBS/NPR exists and is frequently cited as the most trustworthy outlets.
That’s not the same at all.
Your stipulation was non-profit news that is trustworthy. How does PBS/NPR not meet that definition?
My “stipulation”? It’s really weird of you to consider what I said as a “stipulation”, rather than simply a description.
In any case, how does PBS/NPR not meet that description?
The BBC earns £5 billion per year in revenue. On the news side, it generates 120 hours of radio and TV output per day, and employs over 5000 journalists, including 50 different foreign news bureaus. It’s the world’s largest broadcast news organization. Canada’s CBC has a budget of approx $1.38 billion in CAD. CBC’s news operation is the largest news gathering operation in Canada and includes a 24 hour news network. Australia’s ABC has about a $1b/year budget, but in Australia news is split between two public broadcasters, SBS and ABC. Those two are the most trusted news sources in Australia, with the BBC as the 4th most trusted. The most trusted private network is ranked 5th.
If the US wanted something similar in its media landscape, it would have to have a budget of at least $10 billion, or $40b if it were to have a footprint similar to the BBC. How does that compare to the actual budgets of PBS and NPR? PBS is at well under $1b total, NPR is at only $250m Of that, the total government contribution between the two of them is $500m.
In every other major English-speaking country, the public broadcaster is the main source, and the most trusted source of news. They have significant budgets that they use to employ huge numbers of journalists. BBC, in particular, has such an immense news organization that it has a huge worldwide footprint, not just one local to the UK.
NPR and PBS just don’t compare. They may “exist”, but just barely.
Start voting for democrats if you want our PBS/NPR to get funded. Start donating just $5 a month. Start communicating with others about the importance of congressional protection and funding of these services.
Right, but if you read that link, you’ll see that that quote isn’t direct but instead a historians recollection of “words to that effect” from Ike. The following quote CAN be directly attributed to him:
I made the visit deliberately, in order to be in position to give first-hand evidence of these things if ever, in the future, there develops a tendency to charge these allegations merely to “propaganda.”
So this post is propaganda, but still based on truth
I’d still call it misinformation and miss direction
because you are a troll
Wellllll you’re entitled to that opinion
From his war memoir Crusade in Europe:
The same day [April 12, 1945] I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never felt able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain, however that I have never at any other time experienced an equal sense of shock.
I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that ‘the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda.’
Some members of the visiting party were unable to through the ordeal. I not only did so but as soon as I returned to Patton’s headquarters that evening I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for cynical doubt.
Eisenhower, the last good republican
The great works of Eisenhower while president of the US
Funding, and arming, paramilitary death squads to keep the price of super essential things like, like bananas, low by having the CIA create a coup in Guatemala. The resulting 40 year ethnic cleansing of Guatemalan natives. Project Ajax in Iran that over-threw their government for the Sha. Operation Haik which attempted to coup Indonesia in 1958. Purging the government of dissenters under the auspices of them being gay, and basically making the burgeoning lavender scare policy. Was instrumental in the formative days of what became the Vietnam war. Created, and authorized, policy that basically gave the US DOD and CIA cart blanche to interfere with foreign powers in the interest of the US’s industry.
These are just the things I can come up with off the top of my head.
He also initially opposed the removal of Mossadegh, went against Israel, France, and Britain to defend anticolonial efforts in Egypt, ended the Korean War, and cut support to the pro-US dictator Batista, which was extremely helpful to Castro’s victory.
The past is rarely simple. Men are capable of great mistakes and great evil while also being capable of great good and virtue. Not even getting into questions of institutional inertia.
We have to distinguish between the Dulles Brothers and Eisenhower. The brothers were two of the biggest gangsters to ever step foot in DC. Because they were allowed to run operations without the knowledge of the president and they lied and manipulated presidents is not completely clear what Eisenhower knew.
do you also buy that Reagan was unaware of the issues with the Iran contra too?
Kennedy would end up firing Allan Dulles because he had tricked Kennedy into Bay of Pigs. These guys had a reputation for misleading presidents.
Bush didn’t know the WMDs were a lie!
He probably didn’t know. Bush shuffled Cheney off to the margins and had Rummy resign in 2006 when he realized that he had been manipulated. From then on he leaned heavily on Condoleeza Rice. But the main thing is that the Dulles brothers were long gone.
I dunno, I had a lot of respect for McCain while he was still kicking. I might not have agreed with his politics but he was never malicious, unlike the majority of Republicans nowadays.
Yeah McCain was every Democrat’s favorite Republican. Dude just wanted to serve his country without all the social bullshit, can’t really fault that.
That’s revisionist
People didn’t like him until he went against Trump
That’s not true, I remember thinking I’d vastly prefer him to Bush.
He was a Republican and a good man. Modern Republicans celebrate god awful hate filled attitudes. Not much different from the far left, just opposing policies, really.
Not much different from the far left
Careful, reminding the tankies about the horseshoe upsets them, and there are a lot of tankies on Lemmy.
You’re not “reminding” tankies about horseshoe, you’re telling everyone you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about whenever you mention the term.
But socialists are openly angry so that means they’re the same thing as fascists.
found the tankie
🤡
I appreciate the sentiment and the intent and I’m not aiming this attitude at you, but i really don’t give a fuck. I am so incredibly tired of tiptoeing across egg shells on the internet. If someone can’t handle reading a sentence that contains an opinion or idea that they don’t agree with, then they need to quit being a complete fucking bitch or quit using the internet. The ability to offend is my right, and offense is a necessity.
not a tankie but I don’t like your attitude, it costs zero dollars and zero cents to not be like that. be nice.
I don’t care what you don’t like and I’m under no obligation to be nice.
This has been me being nice, it will only get worse from here.
Meh, he also nuked hundreds of thousands of civilians, under the pretense to stop the war. If the Japs had the nuke and used on civilians in the US and US won the war anyway, i am sure it will be remembered more than concentration camps
This isn’t factual. The first two Nuclear Devices were used without the knowledge of Eisenhower and was horrified when he learned of the aftermath. Someone else commented further down on his atrocities and while I believe the statements made, I cannot confirm those. I can confirm that he was kept in the dark about the use of nuclear weapons, and stopped a third device being used
You are right, I mixed him up with Truman.
Watch some dumbfuck compare this to Palestine
Yeah, I mean, it’s not like the Palestinians are having their homes and property systematically seized, or being forced into ghettos with brutal conditions akin to living in an open air prison, or being sent to torture camps, or being exterminating en masse. I mean, you’d have to be a real dumbfuck to think all of those things were happening right now.
that’s what happens when hamas uses human shields which they do and the one responsible for their deaths is solely hamas? is that too hard to understand?
OK, so let’s pretend that Hamas using human sheilds necessitates the killing of (at least, but probably more than) 40,000 people. I think that in most conflicts, when innocent hostages are. taken, the normal response isn’t to indiscriminately kill the hostages, but let’s ignore that for now.
How does that Hamas using human shields make it necessary for Palestinians in Gaza to live without clean drinking water for a decade before October 7th? How do human shields make it necessary to torture (tortures which include beating, rape, and the use of restraints so tight they havd led to amputations) Palestinians in prison camps? How does it justify Israeli settlers seizing homes in the West Bank, a territory that isn’t even controlled by Hamas? Because it doesn’t really seem like, “Hamas is hiding among civilians, so it’s hard to target them without hitting civilian targets,” can possibly justify any of those things.
Yes. You hid from literally every other point I made, and you were still spectacularly wrong, you sniveling coward.
are we in oct 2023?
Prior to the latest violence, Gaza’s water supply was already unable to meet the World Health Organization’s minimum requirement for daily per capita water consumption.
A 2020 study in the journal “Water” found the quality of the groundwater in the aquifer had “deteriorated rapidly,” in large part because it had been pumped out to meet the demands of Gaza’s large population quicker than it could be replaced by rainwater.
The aquifer is also polluted by untreated wastewater, leaving 96.2% of household water from the aquifer undrinkable, according to a 2020 report from B’Tselem, the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories.
Most literate genocide denier.
HuMaN sHiElDs
we literally have videos of IDF soldiers using Palestinians as human shields. There is no such proof for Hamas doing the same, and certainly not with tens of thousands of people simultaneously.
Israel is killing Palestinian children at higher rates than Jewish children died at Auschwitz: https://m.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-787742
source: hamas health ministry
The Jerusalem Post
Radical Islamic Terrorists
According to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, about 10,000 minors have died in the war from October 7 until January 8, which would be approximately 107 killed per day.
most literate islamist
If you prefer, this peer-reviewed Lancet study used death tolls from other conflicts to estimate that the “hamas health ministry” has wildly undercounted the dead (owing to their policy of only counting someone as dead when a body has been identified), and placed the estimated death toll above 85,000 as of August 6th.
