You are completely overlooking the fact that the devil, of necessity, often appears as an angel of light. If he revealed his true nature, we would be repulsed. This is how I perceive the Clintons. They fit the description that Niccolo Machiavelli gave us in his book "The Prince". Interesting reading for anyone following this so called "election".
You're a little off the deep end. Nonetheless, they're BOTH flawed. Hopefully, whatever damage they do will only last a few years.. That's why I'm voting for Hillary because the impact of the appointments she makes to the Supreme Court will last a generation..
excon
This post was edited by excon at October 16, 2016 8:16 AM MDT
You didn't answer the question I asked PP. The Clintons are NOT the issue at all but here you are dragging them into it and making my question all about them. You hijacked it and didn't answer it. That does not sit well with me. It isn't my cuppa tea. This is the same old MO that rigid right Republicans do all the time. I expected more from you. My error. Thank you for your reply and Happy Sunday to thee.
This post was edited by RosieG at October 16, 2016 11:28 AM MDT
Right and you just asked in the most literal sense then I assume? That you just want others opinions of whether Hitler was a bad man or anyone who follows anyone crazy is crazy right? Like you just meant it literal... no hidden meaning in there at all I suppose ;)
The problem with your question aside from Hitler... is very subjective.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at October 16, 2016 11:12 PM MDT
Hitler was a crazy man that did a lot of drugs and grew paranoid.. back in that time they were testing with drugs and gave their army drugs who also became paranoid for the battle so yes he and they were bad men. However you know what's even more crazier? Americans in 2016 drudging up his name every time they don't like something. That is really insane to me and all from privileged first worlds in 2016 at that. The word Hitler has been thrown around so loosely these years and all at the expense of the actual victims of the holocaust.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 8, 2016 11:09 PM MST
Hitler was absolutely not only a crazy man but also demon possessed, you could see it in his eyes. he was known for delving into the supernatural and thus exposed himself to coming under the control of the ruler of the world. (1johhn 5:19)
History states Hitler was heavily involved in the occult, i'm not inventing this. he probably abused drugs too.
This post was edited by Autumnleaves at November 8, 2016 11:12 PM MST
Deny / attempt to re-direct the fact all you want , but hitler was a Christian . indeed he dabbled in the "occult " and studied other world religions , but he was a die hard christian . and came from a family of priests and bishops . even was on the verge of priesthood himself but got tossed into the army . he is one of your boys whether you want to admit it or not . denying a christian is to deny christ .. careful , i think i heard a crow 2wice on this page already ;-)
ps . the devil is yours to . from your storybook and from your heaven . quit trying to pawn off your "evil" characters on others .
cheers ;-)
ps . the bible says ,jesus used cannabis , and he anointed his disciples with cannabis oil , and directed them to do the same to their followers . food for thought.
This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 9, 2016 11:54 AM MST
Adolf Hitler was not mentally ill in a clinical sense, if that's what the OP means, certainly not when he took power, although he harboured a deep, festering hatred of the Jews and others. Few dictators are, and perhaps that's what is the most chilling aspect of their lives.
Hitler's contemporary ally then enemy, was Josef Stalin, of the USSR. He too was sane, but utterly ruthless throughout his regime; and if anything killed more people than Hitler although not in an industrially-systematic way. Both men seem to have become mentally unstable later in their regimes though; Stalin in particular becoming so untrusting that he launched pogroms against whole groups of people he thought plotting against him or The State, when they were doing nothing of the sort. They dared not do so!
Pol Pot was sane, highly intelligent, highly educated (degree from The Sorbonne) - but masterminded perhaps the least humane and most grotesque attempt at reconstructing one's own country the world had known till then. Death toll in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge: at least 2 million. Groups like Bokul Harun and ISIS are ideologically and intellectually similar to the Khmer Rouge, the Taliban not much different, although with politically and culturally very different motives and backgrounds to the Killing Fields tyranny.
The main difference there, is that the Taliban don't want to destroy their country as did Pol Pot. They want to run it as a ruthlessly dogmatic tyranny, as did Hitler in Germany and Stalin in Russia.
Chairman Mao was not "crazy" (whatever that means), but presided over a total death-toll much greater than Hitler's or Stalin's, largely through famine brought by dogma combined with incompetence - also features of Stalin's rule.
Someone who is "crazy" or "insane" or whatever other non-clinical term you like, might be psychotic and is certainly cruel and selfish; but would be unlikely to be able to plan, and to gather enough followers, to take over a country. He has instead to be intelligent and determined, but also manipulative, cold and calculating.
Benedict Arnold 