Adolf Hitler’s speech on 30 January 1939 and Lebensraum

[Gorque]

Every year thousands of people in western countries are killed by doctors,without their consent

I fail to see where in the article the term "without their consent" was mentioned.

[ljadw]

In 2013 half of the euthanasia deaths in Belgium were not reported to the commission who had as mission to control them .
The reason why is obvious .
The Box of Pandora has been opened resulting in countless abuses (see the Katrina killings in 2005 ) .
On 13 November 2021 The Economist wrote triumphantly:''In the West,assisted dying is rapidly becoming legal and accepted . ''
What is assisted dying? = Jones kills Smith,claiming that Smith was old and sick and wanted to die,but could not do it himself and asked Jones to do it .
And, it is obvious that most of these claims are unproved and even inventions .
In Belgium a second opinion is legally required for an euthanasia killing, but mostly it does not happen .
The reason here is also obvious .
A lot of such killings happen ,not at the demand of the patients, but at the demand of the inheritors .

[ljadw]

Daily Mail : 9 June 2010 :''Half of Belgium's euthanasia nurses admit to killing without consent . ''
And it is now more than the half .

[ljadw]

It is not on me ,80 years after the facts, to label the T4 Aktion orders as wrong,the same for the Katyn orders .Only the temporaries can label them as crimes .

Wait, what???

Anyone with a brain can state that the murders were crimes and wrong.

This is simply trolling.

I disagree : only the contemporaries can qualify something as a crime, not those who were not born when the murders happened .
Only the contemporaries could say that the crucifixion by the Romans of prisoners was a crime, not us who were born 2000 years later . As it was not a crime for the contemporaries, it can't be a crime for us .
80 years ago, the Katyn orders were not considered as crimes, thus why should they be crimes 80 years ago ?

Then why were the murders done in secret and why did the Soviets deny that they had murdered the Polish POW's? If was not a crime, then be forthright about it.

The executions/murders were done secretly because the public execution of 40000 persons would hurt the sensibilities of Western journalists and politicians .
The Moscow trials were done publicly and were supported by Western politicians and media. Why ?Because it is easier to defend the execution of 100 people than the execution of 40000 people .It is a question of numbers .
And the Poles were not POW's.Why ?
1 There was no war between Poland and the USSR
2 A lot of them were civilians .
Other point : as a lot of people you are confusing legal and fair .
A judgement/trial has only to be legal , but not to be fair .
For Katyn : unless someone can prove that the executions were illegal,and as long as the Russian courts have not nullified the executions,the conclusion must be that they are legal . It is not on a non-Russian court to say that executions in Russia were illegal. If such a court would say this, it would be a proof of imperialism,colonialism and racism .
Do Russian courts nullify the decisions of non Russian courts ? NO . Thus,...

[George L Gregory]

It is not on me ,80 years after the facts, to label the T4 Aktion orders as wrong,the same for the Katyn orders .Only the temporaries can label them as crimes .

Wait, what???

Anyone with a brain can state that the murders were crimes and wrong.

This is simply trolling.

I disagree : only the contemporaries can qualify something as a crime, not those who were not born when the murders happened .
Only the contemporaries could say that the crucifixion by the Romans of prisoners was a crime, not us who were born 2000 years later . As it was not a crime for the contemporaries, it can't be a crime for us .
80 years ago, the Katyn orders were not considered as crimes, thus why should they be crimes 80 years ago ?

So let me get this right, you don’t and you won’t condemn rapes and murders from years ago as morally wrong because you weren’t there at those times?

After the battle of Alesia ,Vercingetorix was captured,transported to Rome and was garotted there . A plain crime following todays morality . Do you expect me to condemn the execution of Vercingetorix ?
And,about the rapes and murders of the past : if they were not qualified as crimes by the contemporaries,why should I judge them with the morals of 2021 ?
The French King Louis Le Bel ordered to burn the Templars at the stake .This was considered legal in those days . Should I now condemn this ?Jeanne d'Arc suffered the same fate .Should the US Supreme Court now declare illegal the executions from Salem ?
And, I object to the use of ''morally '' wrong :morally wrong is what we ,today, are considering as morally wrong,not what did say our forefathers .In most time of human history,rape and murder were NOT considered as morally wrong .
People were /are not condemned because they did something that was morally wrong, but because they did something that was illegal.
During WW 2 a woman was executed in France,because she perpetrated abortions , now no one would importune her .Must I condemn the woman,or the judge ?
In some Muslim states people are executed for things for which they would not be punished in the West . Must I condemn this ? And why ?
After the war, several Nazis got the death penalty and were executed. If I were an opponent of the death penalty (which I am not ) should I condemn these executions ?
GI Eddie Slovik was executed at the end of the war . Why should I approve/ condemn his execution?
About Katyn : If I were Polish, I would use it as a weapon against Russia . But I am mot Polish, thus ...

You avoided answering my question and decided to rant as per usual.

If you honestly can’t see that rape and murder are morally wrong, including those that unfortunately happened in the past then there is something seriously wrong with you.

That BS isn’t even moral relativism, it is trolling.

[Gorque]

In 2013 half of the euthanasia deaths in Belgium were not reported to the commission who had as mission to control them .
The reason why is obvious .
The Box of Pandora has been opened resulting in countless abuses (see the Katrina killings in 2005 ) .
On 13 November 2021 The Economist wrote triumphantly:''In the West,assisted dying is rapidly becoming legal and accepted . ''
What is assisted dying? = Jones kills Smith,claiming that Smith was old and sick and wanted to die,but could not do it himself and asked Jones to do it .
And, it is obvious that most of these claims are unproved and even inventions .
In Belgium a second opinion is legally required for an euthanasia killing, but mostly it does not happen .
The reason here is also obvious .
A lot of such killings happen ,not at the demand of the patients, but at the demand of the inheritors .

From my recent reading, there are 4 types of legal Euthanasia: a.) active; b.) passive; c.) indirect and; d.) physician assisted euthanasia.

What you are referring to could be to a mix of non-voluntary euthanasia, a mix of passive and indirect, where the patient is brain-dead, in a coma, i.e. where the patient is unable to give consent and in the case of young children and involuntary euthanasia, that is against the wishes of the patient. Involuntary euthanasia is illegal, as far as I know, everywhere. Without knowing the specific breakdown it would be difficult to determine what category the above referenced are classified in. Since you have alleged that involuntary and non-voluntary euthanasia is rampant in Belgium, I'll leave it up to you to provide proof of this assertion.

I have an easier way of proving your assertions. With all of the involuntary killings, how many people have been convicted of murder through the employment of involuntary euthanasia. This is important for I see there was just such a trial in Belgium and the individuals involved were found "Not Guilty."

[ljadw]

Reply to post 95 :
You have first to define what is rape and what is murder .And the definitions of rape and murder vary from country to country and from century to century


The truth is that there is no such thing as murder or rape .
What this generation calls murder and rape was not murder and rape for our forefathers .
A murder in the 18th century in what is now Belgium was something different than it is today in present Belgium .One had the right to kill a burglar,something that is now forbidden .
In 2000 BC the Sumerian Code of Ur-Nammu said :If a man commits a murder,that man must be killed .
The problem is that the Sumerians had another definition for murder .
70 years ago,there were honor killings in Crete . Today there are honor killings in the Middle East and Europe and the societies where these killings occur do not consider them as murders .In the 19th century there were a lot of lynchings in the US ,they were considered as legal .Now they are considered as murder .
The same for rape : what in liberal Western Europe is considered as rape is not considered as rape outside liberal Western Europe .In the Philippines it is /was the custom that mothers were giving their minor daughters to missionaries,because to have a child of a missionary in the family ,was considered as a great honor .
Thus and again and again : there is no such thing as rape/murder with the same definition on the world .
And, morally wrong is something totally subjective : only the law can say if something is wrong .

[Gorque]

The executions/murders were done secretly because the public execution of 40000 persons would hurt the sensibilities of Western journalists and politicians .

You can do better than this.

The Moscow trials were done publicly and were supported by Western politicians and media. Why ?Because it is easier to defend the execution of 100 people than the execution of 40000 people .It is a question of numbers .

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic." Joe Stalin

That is just the opposite of what Stalin said. Go figure!

And the Poles were not POW's.Why ?
1 There was no war between Poland and the USSR So the Poles just "gave" eastern Poland to the Soviets?

2 A lot of them were civilians . Yes ~8,000 were non-combatants, which now, somehow, makes the killings a little less illegal?

Other point : as a lot of people you are confusing legal and fair .
A judgement/trial has only to be legal , but not to be fair . Ah, I see, the Soviet Union had laws on its books that sanctioned state murder. Good to know. Could you locate them for me. Afterall, you are the one making this assertion.

For Katyn : unless someone can prove that the executions were illegal,and as long as the Russian courts have not nullified the executions,the conclusion must be that they are legal . It is not on a non-Russian court to say that executions in Russia were illegal. If such a court would say this, it would be a proof of imperialism,colonialism and racism . So then why did the Soviet Union for the longest time deny that it had killed 22,000 Poles, hide the killings, tried to blame others for the killings IF THEY WERE LEGAL????

Do Russian courts nullify the decisions of non Russian courts ? NO . Thus,...

[ljadw]

In 2013 half of the euthanasia deaths in Belgium were not reported to the commission who had as mission to control them .
The reason why is obvious .
The Box of Pandora has been opened resulting in countless abuses (see the Katrina killings in 2005 ) .
On 13 November 2021 The Economist wrote triumphantly:''In the West,assisted dying is rapidly becoming legal and accepted . ''
What is assisted dying? = Jones kills Smith,claiming that Smith was old and sick and wanted to die,but could not do it himself and asked Jones to do it .
And, it is obvious that most of these claims are unproved and even inventions .
In Belgium a second opinion is legally required for an euthanasia killing, but mostly it does not happen .
The reason here is also obvious .
A lot of such killings happen ,not at the demand of the patients, but at the demand of the inheritors .

From my recent reading, there are 4 types of legal Euthanasia: a.) active; b.) passive; c.) indirect and; d.) physician assisted euthanasia.

What you are referring to could be to a mix of non-voluntary euthanasia, a mix of passive and indirect, where the patient is brain-dead, in a coma, i.e. where the patient is unable to give consent and in the case of young children and involuntary euthanasia, that is against the wishes of the patient. Involuntary euthanasia is illegal, as far as I know, everywhere. Without knowing the specific breakdown it would be difficult to determine what category the above referenced are classified in. Since you have alleged that involuntary and non-voluntary euthanasia is rampant in Belgium, I'll leave it up to you to provide proof of this assertion.

I have an easier way of proving your assertions. With all of the involuntary killings, how many people have been convicted of murder through the employment of involuntary euthanasia. This is important for I see there was just such a trial in Belgium and the individuals involved were found "Not Guilty."

The reality is that the consent of the patient is no longer required, thus that the doctor/nurse/helper can kill at pleasure and that most euthanasia killings are not/no longer reported .In 1991 there were in the Netherlands 1040 euthanasia killings without consent/knowledge of the patient. Five years later there were several such killings in New Orleans during Katrina .Only a few were reported .
Also in 1991 there were in the Netherlands 8100 deaths from overdose of pain medications intended primarily to end life rather than to relieve pain. 61 % without consent .
And the use of such overdoses has now become a routine : an old man/woman in a hospital of care home who suffers from cancer : the solution is to give him an overdose of pain medication ( morphine ,.)that will hasten his death. Even if he is unable to give his consent .
I know several cases of old ,sick, demented , corona patient who were euthanized without their consent .

[ljadw]

The executions/murders were done secretly because the public execution of 40000 persons would hurt the sensibilities of Western journalists and politicians .

You can do better than this.

The Moscow trials were done publicly and were supported by Western politicians and media. Why ?Because it is easier to defend the execution of 100 people than the execution of 40000 people .It is a question of numbers .

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic." Joe Stalin

That is just the opposite of what Stalin said. Go figure!

And the Poles were not POW's.Why ?
1 There was no war between Poland and the USSR So the Poles just "gave" eastern Poland to the Soviets?

2 A lot of them were civilians . Yes ~8,000 were non-combatants, which now, somehow, makes the killings a little less illegal?

Other point : as a lot of people you are confusing legal and fair .
A judgement/trial has only to be legal , but not to be fair . Ah, I see, the Soviet Union had laws on its books that sanctioned state murder. Good to know. Could you locate them for me. Afterall, you are the one making this assertion.

For Katyn : unless someone can prove that the executions were illegal,and as long as the Russian courts have not nullified the executions,the conclusion must be that they are legal . It is not on a non-Russian court to say that executions in Russia were illegal. If such a court would say this, it would be a proof of imperialism,colonialism and racism . So then why did the Soviet Union for the longest time deny that it had killed 22,000 Poles, hide the killings, tried to blame others for the killings IF THEY WERE LEGAL????

Do Russian courts nullify the decisions of non Russian courts ? NO . Thus,...

Without a Declaration of War,there was legally no war before 1939 . Something that was benefiting a lot of countries (neutrality act ) .
The USSR did not need laws that sanctioned state murder: as long as the USSR had no laws that did forbid state murder,there was no problem .
There were till one generation ago,no laws in most countries against air pollution, thus air pollution was not illegal .
And the SU was denying, hiding and blaming some one else,not because the killings were illegal ( they were as legal/illegal as those of the Purges ) but because it would help the Germans and the anti communists in Britain and the USA.If there was no war, it is very possible that the Soviets would have told the world about Katyn .
Katyn was as legal as T4 Aktion ( the judges of he Doctors Trials refused to condemn T4 ).No one in Britain, in the US and the USSR said that Katyn/T4 were illegal .
Why ? Because it was not their business : in those days ,governments were free to do what they liked in their countries .And also because it was politically not advisable to attack an ally in times of war .
There was nothing special about T 4 and Katyn :people were already killed in Germany for the same reason and much more people were killed in the USSR before Katyn . And no one was frowning. Not even when 300000 Chinese civilians were killed in Nanking .
Katyn was the business of Poland and the Soviets . Not of other people . T 4 was the business of the German people and the Nazi regime ( as long as it was limited to Germans only ) .Not of other people .Nanking was the business of CHina and Japan . Not of other people .
Before WW2 a lot of people in Britain wanted to use the USSR as an ally to stop Hitler ,although they knew what Stalin was doing . Churchill even said that the Soviet invasion of Poland was a good thing .Thus their attacks after the war on Katyn were only hypocrisy .

[Gorque]

In 2013 half of the euthanasia deaths in Belgium were not reported to the commission who had as mission to control them .
The reason why is obvious .
The Box of Pandora has been opened resulting in countless abuses (see the Katrina killings in 2005 ) .
On 13 November 2021 The Economist wrote triumphantly:''In the West,assisted dying is rapidly becoming legal and accepted . ''
What is assisted dying? = Jones kills Smith,claiming that Smith was old and sick and wanted to die,but could not do it himself and asked Jones to do it .
And, it is obvious that most of these claims are unproved and even inventions .
In Belgium a second opinion is legally required for an euthanasia killing, but mostly it does not happen .
The reason here is also obvious .
A lot of such killings happen ,not at the demand of the patients, but at the demand of the inheritors .

From my recent reading, there are 4 types of legal Euthanasia: a.) active; b.) passive; c.) indirect and; d.) physician assisted euthanasia.

What you are referring to could be to a mix of non-voluntary euthanasia, a mix of passive and indirect, where the patient is brain-dead, in a coma, i.e. where the patient is unable to give consent and in the case of young children and involuntary euthanasia, that is against the wishes of the patient. Involuntary euthanasia is illegal, as far as I know, everywhere. Without knowing the specific breakdown it would be difficult to determine what category the above referenced are classified in. Since you have alleged that involuntary and non-voluntary euthanasia is rampant in Belgium, I'll leave it up to you to provide proof of this assertion.

I have an easier way of proving your assertions. With all of the involuntary killings, how many people have been convicted of murder through the employment of involuntary euthanasia. This is important for I see there was just such a trial in Belgium and the individuals involved were found "Not Guilty."

The reality is that the consent of the patient is no longer required, thus that the doctor/nurse/helper can kill at pleasure and that most euthanasia killings are not/no longer reported .In 1991 there were in the Netherlands 1040 euthanasia killings without consent/knowledge of the patient. Five years later there were several such killings in New Orleans during Katrina .Only a few were reported .
Also in 1991 there were in the Netherlands 8100 deaths from overdose of pain medications intended primarily to end life rather than to relieve pain. 61 % without consent .
And the use of such overdoses has now become a routine : an old man/woman in a hospital of care home who suffers from cancer : the solution is to give him an overdose of pain medication ( morphine ,.)that will hasten his death. Even if he is unable to give his consent .
I know several cases of old ,sick, demented , corona patient who were euthanized without their consent .

Sources please!

[Gorque]

The executions/murders were done secretly because the public execution of 40000 persons would hurt the sensibilities of Western journalists and politicians .

You can do better than this.

The Moscow trials were done publicly and were supported by Western politicians and media. Why ?Because it is easier to defend the execution of 100 people than the execution of 40000 people .It is a question of numbers .

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic." Joe Stalin

That is just the opposite of what Stalin said. Go figure!

And the Poles were not POW's.Why ?
1 There was no war between Poland and the USSR So the Poles just "gave" eastern Poland to the Soviets?

2 A lot of them were civilians . Yes ~8,000 were non-combatants, which now, somehow, makes the killings a little less illegal?

Other point : as a lot of people you are confusing legal and fair .
A judgement/trial has only to be legal , but not to be fair . Ah, I see, the Soviet Union had laws on its books that sanctioned state murder. Good to know. Could you locate them for me. Afterall, you are the one making this assertion.

For Katyn : unless someone can prove that the executions were illegal,and as long as the Russian courts have not nullified the executions,the conclusion must be that they are legal . It is not on a non-Russian court to say that executions in Russia were illegal. If such a court would say this, it would be a proof of imperialism,colonialism and racism . So then why did the Soviet Union for the longest time deny that it had killed 22,000 Poles, hide the killings, tried to blame others for the killings IF THEY WERE LEGAL????

Do Russian courts nullify the decisions of non Russian courts ? NO . Thus,...

Without a Declaration of War,there was legally no war before 1939 . Something that was benefiting a lot of countries (neutrality act ) .
The USSR did not need laws that sanctioned state murder: as long as the USSR had no laws that did forbid state murder,there was no problem .
There were till one generation ago,no laws in most countries against air pollution, thus air pollution was not illegal .
And the SU was denying, hiding and blaming some one else,not because the killings were illegal ( they were as legal/illegal as those of the Purges ) but because it would help the Germans and the anti communists in Britain and the USA.If there was no war, it is very possible that the Soviets would have told the world about Katyn .
Katyn was as legal as T4 Aktion ( the judges of he Doctors Trials refused to condemn T4 ).No one in Britain, in the US and the USSR said that Katyn/T4 were illegal .
Why ? Because it was not their business : in those days ,governments were free to do what they liked in their countries .And also because it was politically not advisable to attack an ally in times of war .
There was nothing special about T 4 and Katyn :people were already killed in Germany for the same reason and much more people were killed in the USSR before Katyn . And no one was frowning. Not even when 300000 Chinese civilians were killed in Nanking .
Katyn was the business of Poland and the Soviets . Not of other people . T 4 was the business of the German people and the Nazi regime ( as long as it was limited to Germans only ) .Not of other people .Nanking was the business of CHina and Japan . Not of other people .
Before WW2 a lot of people in Britain wanted to use the USSR as an ally to stop Hitler ,although they knew what Stalin was doing . Churchill even said that the Soviet invasion of Poland was a good thing .Thus their attacks after the war on Katyn were only hypocrisy .

I'm in agreement with G. L. Gregory; You are trolling and with that, the Iggy list.

[henryk]

What happened in 1951 happened during the Cold War and the Cold War was the reason why US said that the Cheka was responsible . When the Soviets were allies, US remained silent although every one knew that the Soviets were responsible .
The claim that the Soviets were responsible was made for political reasons .

The evidence presented to the committee proved the Soviets were responsible. Do you disagree with the evidence?

[henryk]

Russia admits guilt:

After 80 Years, The 'Katyn Lie' Lives On In Russia - Radio Free Europe
https://www.rferl.org/a/after-80-years- ... 70317.html

Mar 5, 2020 ... Moscow would not begin to change its position until April 1990, when Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev admitted guilt and the official news ...

Gorbachev Documents Soviet Guilt at Katyn - Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html

Apr 14, 1990 ... Gorbachev Documents Soviet Guilt at Katyn ... Polish army officers during World War II and buried them in mass graves in a Russian forest.

KREMLIN ADMITS MASSACRE OF POLES - The Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/ ... 5525f2bba1

Apr 14, 1990 ... Polish President Wojciech Jaruzelski, who met today with Gorbachev, is scheduled to visit Katyn, near the city of Smolensk in western Russia ...

US 'hushed up' Soviet guilt over Katyn - BBC News
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-19552745

Sep 11, 2012 ... More than 22,000 Poles were killed by the Soviets on Stalin's orders. Soviet Russia only admitted to the atrocity in 1990 after blaming the ...

Russia admits guilt
https://m.day.kyiv.ua/en/article/day-af ... mits-guilt

Russia admits guilt. 70 years after the Katyn Massacre the Russian parliament finally acknowledges Stalin's personal culpability. 02 December 2010.

Katyn massacre - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre

The Russian president reiterated Russia would continue to declassify documents on the Katyn massacre and ordered to release the documents proving the guilt ...

Russia admits Stalin ordered Katyn massacre - ABC News
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-11-26/ ... re/2352788

Nov 26, 2010 ... The Soviet Union initially blamed the Katyn massacre on the Nazis and its guilt was only admitted by ex-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev just ...

Russia removes memorial to Katyn Massacre in new attack on ...
https://khpg.org/en/1588896084

May 8, 2020 ... It was only in 1990 that Soviet culpability was finally admitted. If, when it came to Soviet victims of Stalin's Terror, there was mounting

[ljadw]

Did Russia admit guilt or responsibility ?