And when I do that you will no-doubt want some other qualifier on an issue that you (and I) don't even care about. Very instructive, Spamkönig.
Come on, Reverend, I promised I would settle for one German language quote. Just one from a Nazi bigshot where the National Socialists are referred to as "Nazis".
Define "settle." You settle and then what? I have to go on a wild-goose chase for nothing over something that neither of us even cares about.
The poor Reverend seems to be somewhat paranoid about me. “Settle” means that as soon as I have seen a German-language quote from a high-ranking Nazi official wherein the term “Nazi” or “Nazis” is used in such a way as to indicate that the Nazis called themselves “Nazis” and/or didn’t object to being so called, I’ll be satisfied and leave him alone.
I ask again: what is in it for me if I comply with your latest less-than-reasonable demand?
Funny question. If I well remember, it was the Reverend who stated:
The Nazis called themselves Nazis. I don't really see how it is derogatory.
And I hoped for an answer for this view.
If so, you should have expressed that more clearly.
It was provided by Herr Spearhead. My comment was humbly directed in response to Ovidius and not you, and my opinion was never a dogmatic categorical assertion in any case.
If so, the humble intention failed to show. See above.
You merely took issue and started making demands.
Exactly. I took the freedom of testing if Smith was able to back up a statement of his upon request.
And what makes you think that Goebbels would have allowed his copyrighted 1934 book to be incorrectly translated by Dr. Fiedler in 1935 if the word NAZI he considered derogatory, and which he only uses twice, with obvious affection, otherwise prefering to say "National Socialist(s)"?
Depends on what influence Goebbels had on the wording of the translation. Was it checked and approved by him? Who was this Dr. Fiedler, by the way? A German emigrant?
I don't know for sure but I think Fiedler worked for Goebbels. The book was published by the same outfit that published Mein Kampf in English, immediately after Goebbels published his book and under full copyright. With Goebbels having a very hands-on view of all matters of propaganda, especially his own books, I would think that he very-much approved it first.
If so, it should not be too difficult to confirm these quite reasonable suppositions by looking at the original German-language text of the quoted passages.
You're just digging a pit for yourself, Roberto.
Stop howling, Reverend. I'm not saying that you are necessarily wrong. I just require you to demonstrate that you are right, which is what I would feel compelled to do if I had stated that "Nazis" was what the Nazis called themselves. Which means that if you don't want to dig yourself in deeper, you should stop shooting the bull, get a German language edition of Goebbels' quoted statements and transcribe those that you think prove your point. As easy as that.
No, of course I am not necessarily wrong. If the situation was reversed you would plop down something from a Holo-site and all considerations of accuracy or bias would be expected to disappear. And the more important the idea the more Spam would be provided to buoy it.
Wrong, Reverend, as you well know. I would provide backup from sources on or off the web the reliability of which the Reverend can’t say much against, and he would react by feebly howling about “spam” the way he usually does.
I have already more than made my point!
I suggest you open a poll and ask the audience. As far as I’m concerned, you’ll have made your point when you show me the original German wording of the quoted passages, assuming that it coincides with the English translation in what concerns the term in question.
If you want me to do your homework in the slim hopes that another ace will not be found in my hand you are wasting my time and will have to make it worth my while.
Cut out the crap, buddy. Providing backup for a statement of yours is your
What I require from you is a commitment to better forum behavior in the future. Think about it! Yes, it requires a little humble-pie. You will have to admit that you can be wrong once in a while and strive to respect other posters who you might not agree with. You will have to show a little more reason and less prejudice.
Better don’t throw stones, Reverend. I may not be the only one who has realized by now that you’re sitting in a glass house.
That is what it will take to get me to fill out the ILL form and show you that last ACE.
A rather lame way of covering up the fact that you have nothing more to show. If you had, what better than showing it and getting nasty me off your back on this issue?