Why do the Nazis always come up in debates?

Wibbs · 04-02-2013 10:15AM

the_syco wrote: »

I think Hitler was the first government to ban smoking in the work place? Truly a futuristic visionary?

Yea they were about the first to throw money into research linking smoking to a range of illnesses. Hitler had been a heavy smoker in his younger days. Gave em up cold turkey and had a bee in his bonnet about smoke after that, so he supported anti tobacco laws and research.

Merch wrote: »

He was very animal friendly too

The nazi's signed in the first anti vivisection laws among a raft of other anti cruelty laws. For animals mind you. Concentration camp internees on the other hand...

Why do they come up in debates so much? Some of it even now would be a holdover of WW2 allied propaganda, which was bolstered by Hollywood. The scripts kinda write themselves and so does the production design. They're easy to turn into the ultimate black hatted baddies. "Funny accents" and all. Hell much of the influence and even design of the Daleks in Dr. Who was based on them.

As has been said, they're also more "local" than other nutjobs. More "western" and that I reckon troubles us in the "civilised west". Makes us uncomfortable and serves as a warning. Germany was one of the most civilised and technically advanced cultures in Europe*. If it could happen to them... kinda thing.

It happened bit by bit too. Few enough saw the threats to come. Indeed Nazi Germany in the 30's was seen by many as an economic and cultural miracle that arose from the ashes of rampant inflation, unemployment, poverty and civil breakdown of the great depression. They were admired in Europe and in the US. Charles Lindberg was among many to be impressed by them. Plus the biggest diaspora in America was German in origin.

In many many ways you could understand why Germans would have voted for Hitler and his party. You certainly get that impression when reading the thoughts of ordinary Germans at the time. If you weren't one of the groups considered "dangerous" by the new order, IE most Germans, they really looked like a good deal. They were giving Germans their jobs, their purpose and their pride back. Their pride a biggie after the prancing and mishandling of the allies after the Great War. When Hitler forced the French to sign their surrender in the same railway carriage that the Germans had in WW1, the whole of Germany got a hard on. It was very attractive and by the time it started to look pear shaped the regime had insured that the generation that had grown up in it were locked into that thinking.

But yea I reckon in a deep down way it's a vaguely culturalist, even racist(with a small R) thing about the Nazis. We expect that kinda thing of the "foreigner" after all, but not of "us". Japanese killed 20 million in Manchuria and we talk little of it today. No John Wayne movies in the archives. Stalin kills millions and we hear a little more, but not much. After the war, the Chinese interrogated the Japanese they had captured(not tortured either) and then sent them home. Hirohito died in his bed. As did Comrade Joe. The German high command and indeed anyone who looked "Nazi", had served in the SS etc was rounded up and many were executed, either with a trial attached or not. Many more starved to death or through disease. Often in the same concentration camps. Over one million German men never came home after the surrender had been signed and official hostilities had ended and you don't see or hear about that in Band of Brothers etc. We seem to need to pickle them in history, but an agreed history. Even research into the Holocaust is tricky. If it doesn't agree with the official history - and I'm not talking about bloody stupid Holocaust denier stuff - it's ignored, even legally banned from discussion in many states in Europe.

*as well as being the most agrarian at the time. When WW2 kicked off Germany could feed it's own people and was much more self sufficient than the UK for example. The latter heavily relied on imports.

Merch · 04-02-2013 10:52AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

And he relaxed some of the more restrictive gun laws imposed by the Weimar Republic.

I agree, although allowing people to keep 88's was a game changer. Eventually they were going to run out parking raum, someone probably parked by accident in Poland and we all know what happened then, it was like WW2, actually it was.

Wibbs wrote: »

Yea they were about the first to throw money into research linking smoking to a range of illnesses. Hitler had been a heavy smoker in his younger days. Gave em up cold turkey and had a bee in his bonnet about smoke after that, so he supported anti tobacco laws and research.

The nazi's signed in the first anti vivisection laws among a raft of other anti cruelty laws. For animals mind you. Concentration camp internees on the other hand...

Thats what I meant

As has been said, they're also more "local" than other nutjobs. More "western" and that I reckon troubles us in the "civilised west". Makes us uncomfortable and serves as a warning. Germany was one of the most civilised and technically advanced cultures in Europe*. If it could happen to them... kinda thing.

It still is one of the most advanced (civilised and technically).
So if it could happen to them and they were and are like that, so you're saying really, it could never happen to us

It happened bit by bit too. Few enough saw the threats to come. Indeed Nazi Germany in the 30's was seen by many as an economic and cultural miracle that arose from the ashes of rampant inflation, unemployment, poverty and civil breakdown of the great depression. They were admired in Europe and in the US. Charles Lindberg was among many to be impressed by them. Plus the biggest diaspora in America was German in origin.

Like the Body snatchers? now that is scary, so people would wake up one day, and it was like a few more Naxis then it was your friends and family, that must have been scary, still it'd make a good film, DNZ Day of the Nazi alien Zombies body snatchers,

In many many ways you could understand why Germans would have voted for Hitler and his party. You certainly get that impression when reading the thoughts of ordinary Germans at the time. If you weren't one of the groups considered "dangerous" by the new order, IE most Germans, they really looked like a good deal. They were giving Germans their jobs, their purpose and their pride back. Their pride a biggie after the prancing and mishandling of the allies after the Great War. When Hitler forced the French to sign their surrender in the same railway carriage that the Germans had in WW1, the whole of Germany got a hard on. It was very attractive, and by the time it started to look pear shaped the regime had insured that the generation that had grown up in it were locked into that thinking.

I dont really believe they got a majority of the populace, just enough to get in and rip up their constitution and laws.

What even the women got hard ons? and you find all these hard ons attractive?

But yea I reckon in a deep down way it's a vaguely culturalist, even racist(with a small R) thing about the Nazis. We expect that kinda thing of the "foreigner" after all, but not of "us". Japanese killed 20 million in Manchuria and we talk little of it today. No John Wayne movies in the archives. Stalin kills millions and we hear a little more, but not much. After the war, the Chinese interrogated the Japanese they had captured(not tortured either) and then sent them home. Hirohito died in his bed. As did Comrade Joe. The German high command and indeed anyone who looked "Nazi", had served in the SS etc was rounded up and many were executed, either with a trial attached or not. Many more starved to death or through disease. Often in the same concentration camps. Over one million German men never came home after the surrender had been signed and official hostilities had ended and you don't see or hear about that in Band of Brothers etc. We seem to need to pickle them in history, but an agreed history. Even research into the Holocaust is tricky. If it doesn't agree with the official history - and I'm not talking about bloody stupid Holocaust denier stuff - it's ignored, even legally banned from discussion in many states in Europe.

Not tortured, how do you know? I dont think the Chinese were that nice to them, its not like they sent Hirohito home, a lot of Japanese soldiers stayed in the countries they were in to rebuild, some at the behest and pay of the French and British in their occupied countries, like Vietnam.

*as well as being the most agrarian at the time. When WW2 kicked off Germany could feed it's own people and was much more self sufficient than the UK for example. The latter heavily relied on imports.

Caliden · 04-02-2013 11:30AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Merch · 04-02-2013 11:59AM

Caliden wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Is that applicable? it started referencing Nazis, its in the title
Im sure people use commie as in insult to end arguments too

Wibbs · 04-02-2013 12:05PM

Merch wrote: »

It still is one of the most advanced (civilised and technically).
So if it could happen to them and they were and are like that, so you're saying really, it could never happen to us

Nope that's not what I'm saying.

Like the Body snatchers? now that is scary, so people would wake up one day, and it was like a few more Naxis then it was your friends and family, that must have been scary, still it'd make a good film, DNZ Day of the Nazi alien Zombies body snatchers,

NOt that far off. Regimes like this that through a mix of attacking "other people" and propaganda and apparently real change for the good of your average Joe Citizen can slowly take over.

I dont really believe they got a majority of the populace, just enough to get in and rip up their constitution and laws.

Nearly 50% of the vote in the last election, through propaganda and intimidation. Still they needed a coalition partner to help him get the overall majority that allowed him to pass the Enabling act. That was the early 30's, by the late 30's their support base was much bigger and more grassroots.

What even the women got hard ons? and you find all these hard ons attractive?

eh? I think you're missing the point, but anyway.

Not tortured, how do you know?

Reports of the soldiers involved who went home.

I dont think the Chinese were that nice to them, its not like they sent Hirohito home,

Eh Hirohito was at home in his palaces in Japan and remained there as emperor until his death in the late 1980's. Compared to Germans they got off more lightly.

Capt'n Midnight · 04-02-2013 12:57PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Germany was one of the most civilised and technically advanced cultures in Europe*. If it could happen to them... kinda thing.

It happened bit by bit too. Few enough saw the threats to come.

It keeps needing to be said that some people look at the USA that way too

It's a society that accepts a lot of violence and barely questions the use of troops abroad "My country right or wrong"

At least the Chinese play the long game, Hong Kong wasn't an issue because they were going to get it back after 99 years.

It also needs to be said that during the scramble for Africa and other colonies at the time the Europeans, Americans, Japanese and Ethiopians treated their new subjects pretty badly. (sorry can't remember if the Russians were still expanding and how they treated their new crew)

Cool Mo D · 04-02-2013 01:07PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope that's not what I'm saying.

NOt that far off. Regimes like this that through a mix of attacking "other people" and propaganda and apparently real change for the good of your average Joe Citizen can slowly take over.

Nearly 50% of the vote in the last election, through propaganda and intimidation. Still they needed a coalition partner to help him get the overall majority that allowed him to pass the Enabling act. That was the early 30's, by the late 30's their support base was much bigger and more grassroots.

The Nazi's never got close to 50% of the vote - their best election was in 1932, where they polled 37.4%. Since the Nazi's and Communists combined had over 50% of the vote, the German parliament was deadlocked. The final election was called in 1933, and the Nazi's were down to 33% of the vote - which they interpreted as a warning to seize power before their support evaporated. Previously, many Germans had voted for Hitler as a protest against the traditional parties, but the Nazis support dropped fast when the Germans saw what they were like actually in office.

In the late 1930 Germany was a totalitarian dictatorship, so it's nonsense to say the party was more popular - all dissent was brutally crushed. They always had a hardcore grassroots support, but nothing like 30% of the electorate.

Merch · 04-02-2013 02:53PM

Wibbs wrote: »

NOt that far off. Regimes like this that through a mix of attacking "other people" and propaganda and apparently real change for the good of your average Joe Citizen can slowly take over.

In a manner of speaking, I wonder were those films ever about pervasive propaganda and about rooting out dissent?

Nearly 50% of the vote in the last election, through propaganda and intimidation. Still they needed a coalition partner to help him get the overall majority that allowed him to pass the Enabling act. That was the early 30's, by the late 30's their support base was much bigger and more grassroots.

30% figures, maybe even less

Reports of the soldiers involved who went home. Eh Hirohito was at home in his palaces in Japan and remained there as emperor until his death in the late 1980's. Compared to Germans they got off more lightly.

I think Hirohito was at home alright, wasn't much chance of him slumming it in the trenches, apparently he was working on the forerunner of the sega mega drive, he knew that was a sure way they could beat the US.

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

It also needs to be said that during the scramble for Africa and other colonies at the time the Europeans, Americans, Japanese and Ethiopians treated their new subjects pretty badly. (sorry can't remember if the Russians were still expanding and how they treated their new crew)

I think saying they were treated pretty badly is a huge understatement

Cool Mo D wrote: »

The Nazi's never got close to 50% of the vote - their best election was in 1932, where they polled 37.4%. Since the Nazi's and Communists combined had over 50% of the vote, the German parliament was deadlocked. The final election was called in 1933, and the Nazi's were down to 33% of the vote - which they interpreted as a warning to seize power before their support evaporated. Previously, many Germans had voted for Hitler as a protest against the traditional parties, but the Nazis support dropped fast when the Germans saw what they were like actually in office.

In the late 1930 Germany was a totalitarian dictatorship, so it's nonsense to say the party was more popular - all dissent was brutally crushed. They always had a hardcore grassroots support, but nothing like 30% of the electorate.

Id say that is accurate, I thought I saw something at one stage where their vote was 17%

IM0 · 04-02-2013 03:09PM

OP wrote:

why do nazis always come up in debates

grammer usually

Capt'n Midnight · 04-02-2013 03:32PM

IM0 wrote: »

grammer usually

Sideshow Bob was a Nazi :eek:

Wibbs · 04-02-2013 04:27PM

Cool Mo D wrote: »

The Nazi's never got close to 50% of the vote - their best election was in 1932, where they polled 37.4%. Since the Nazi's and Communists combined had over 50% of the vote, the German parliament was deadlocked. The final election was called in 1933, and the Nazi's were down to 33% of the vote

Nope in 33 the Nazis won 43.9% of the vote, up from 32

In the late 1930 Germany was a totalitarian dictatorship, so it's nonsense to say the party was more popular - all dissent was brutally crushed. They always had a hardcore grassroots support, but nothing like 30% of the electorate.

Certainly it was a totalitarian state, however IMHO there has been a bit of re jig about Hitler's support base, that it was only a few bad apples and the rest went along with it or were too afraid not to. Makes for fewer unsettling questions from today's generation about their grandparents and great grandparents. Not unlike every Irish person having an uncle in the GPO, there tends to be a bit of every German person had an uncle who fought Hitler. Look at the stats. Pre war concentration camp numbers which included communists and other political prisoners and from 35 other groups like Jews stood at around 25,000. That's out of a population of 60 odd million Germans, with a further 10 odd million after Austria got annexed. Even if you add the couple of thousand executed or "disappeared", hell add 10,000 to that figure, even triple it, that's a tiny percentage of the population. If you read some of the post war memoirs of Germans involved, the vast majority(with exceptions like unrepentant Nazi Rudel) are ashamed by what came out about atrocities etc, but vanishingly few say they were anti Nazi party beforehand. They had issues with eejits like Goering alright and how the war was being lost, but were generally very supportive of the overall regime, especially the anti communist stance. This goes double for the kids who grew up through the reich and hitler youth etc(naturally).

One of my hobbies/collections of junk

over the years from waaaay back has been collecting early autobigraphies of german participants in WW2. Not just them. I'm not like the priest in Father Ted with the Nazi room, or Dr Strangelove stifling a stiff armed salute. :eek::D . The allies story is more generally known, so the "other angle" interested me early on. I was also interested in their justification of the guys at the sharp end. I preferred the early ones because I loved the old stylee dust jackets(and they used to be pennies to buy) and with a few they had extra bits before they were updated in later editions for more "politically sensitive" times. The memories were fresher too.

The general gist is as before, ashamed of what came out(and none I've read so far gave any indication they knew what went on. Riiight), but were supportive. As were their families and friends. One guy whose name escapes, ex Waffen SS, describes an uncle in law of his, from Norway or somewhere who used to joke about Hitler and his funny tache and how the community didnt take kindly to this disrespect at all. You get the impression other high up members of the party, the Goerings and the Himmlers were up for some hushed ridicule at times, but not Adolf, or what the party and Germany were up to(officially). The real dissent came later, when it was too late.

Cool Mo D · 04-02-2013 07:48PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope in 33 the Nazis won 43.9% of the vote, up from 32

I did get my figures mixed up - they won 37.4% in March 1932, 33% in November 1932, and then came close to a majority in 1933. However it's extremely debatable that the 1933 election was democratic - the Nazi's were openly using the the SA to break up left wing party meetings, murdering opposition candidates, and firing non-supporters from government jobs. They also closed down opposition newspapers, and managed to ban the Communist party from participating in the election while arresting its leaders. Basically, all left wing opposition to the Nazis was violently prevented from contesting the election.

I think it's a bit unfair to say that because there were relatively few concentration camp prisoners before the war, the population were generally Nazi supporters. I think it's fair to say many millions of Germans were convinced Nazis, and antisemitism had a long and deep-rooted history in Germany, but most people kept their heads down and didn't rock the boat, much like the population in Soviet backed communist regimes after WWII.

Many of those who did support Hitler did for a variety of reasons - often a fear of Communism rather than a real liking for Hitler. I would say that anyone who really was a nazi believer would have joined the Nazi party while they were in power - there was no down side at the time, and plenty of benefits. That gives 13% of the population who were members of the party at its height, and, I think, a fair estimate of the parties core support.

Somewhat ironically, the Nazi heartlands in Prussia where they could manage convincing electoral majorities, are now part of Poland.

entropi · 04-02-2013 07:55PM

Caliden wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

I did nazi this one coming at all!

Thread was Godwin'd in the first post hehe.

Merch · 04-02-2013 08:15PM

Cool Mo D wrote: »

I did get my figures mixed up - they won 37.4% in March 1932, 33% in November 1932, and then came close to a majority in 1933. However it's extremely debatable that the 1933 election was democratic - the Nazi's were openly using the the SA to break up left wing party meetings, murdering opposition candidates, and firing non-supporters from government jobs. They also closed down opposition newspapers, and managed to ban the Communist party from participating in the election while arresting its leaders. Basically, all left wing opposition to the Nazis was violently prevented from contesting the election.

I think it's a bit unfair to say that because there were relatively few concentration camp prisoners before the war, the population were generally Nazi supporters. I think it's fair to say many millions of Germans were convinced Nazis, and antisemitism had a long and deep-rooted history in Germany, but most people kept their heads down and didn't rock the boat, much like the population in Soviet backed communist regimes after WWII.
Ireland.
Many of those who did support Hitler did for a variety of reasons - often a fear of Communism rather than a real liking for Hitler. I would say that anyone who really was a nazi believer would have joined the Nazi party while they were in power - there was no down side at the time, and plenty of benefits. That gives 13% of the population who were members of the party at its height, and, I think, a fair estimate of the parties core support.

Somewhat ironically, the Nazi heartlands in Prussia where they could manage convincing electoral majorities, are now part of Poland.

Wasn't Bavaria the heartland?
Hitler has left the building!

Kinski · 04-02-2013 08:56PM

Pottler wrote: »

Leaving aside his pogroms and ethnic cleansing, anyone whose idea of having hundreds of thousands of conscripts herded at machine gun point into the enemys guns, with the man in front having a gun and some meagre ammunititon, to be picked up by the man behind when he fell and so on, and so on, had utterly no regard for human life or his own people.

If the unarmed, half starved conscripts faltered, they faced a line of machine gunners(their own) behind them who would open fire on them for their "cowardice".

Many conscripts in the First World War met similar fates. IIRC, Stanley Kubrick's film Paths to Glory (loosely-based on a real incident) is about a French CO who - despite orders from his superior - refuses to shell his own troops when they reject orders to leave their trenches in the face of heavy German fire.

Merch · 04-02-2013 08:58PM

Kinski wrote: »

Many conscripts in the First World War met similar fates. IIRC, Stanley Kubrick's film Paths to Glory (loosely-based on a real incident) is about a French CO who - despite orders from his superior - refuses to shell his own troops when they reject orders to leave their trenches in the face of heavy German fire.

I believe post 76 was the end of it, lets hear no more of it now.
If you disagree with me, you aren't just like Hitler, you are worse

markesmith · 04-02-2013 09:39PM

Ranicand wrote: »

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/?pagination=false

The above debate is a mute point anyway.

Chairman Mao Zedong killed between 20 to 80 million people depending on who you believe.

Hitler was the excess of the right wing.

The other two were the excess of the left wing.

Hitler was evil no doubt what the left wing never is mention Stalin and Mao.

Now some will say but Hitler was racist however Stalin went after and killed countless Christians.

My point in the 20th century the left wing and the likes of Stalin who crated the ideas of hate speech and Political correctness killed far more then the Nazis.

I think the real lesson to be learned is to avoid following like sheep.

All 3 shut down free speech and had gun control.

From another thread:

Ranicand wrote: »

I engage in long monologs on narrow subjects.

dj jarvis · 04-02-2013 09:53PM

Stinicker wrote: »

The Nazi's did alot of good things also but these have been airbrushed from History. The Autobahn for example. Nazi's were actually left wing because they were National Socialists, i.e. Socialism for Germans but not other races. Hitler never massacred his own people either compared to Stalin and Chairman Mao. Hitlers big mistake was to attack the Russians before having defeated the UK; the rest is history really; but Communism also whilst flawed had its own good merits and ask any old normal non rich person in Eastern Europe today and most would tell you they had an easier less stressful life with guarantees before the Berlin Wall fell.

i think the population of Berlin and hamburg would beg to differ , and that is not counting his own troops he sent to their deaths , the 6th army is a prime example , out of 100,000 prisoners taken at Stalingrad as few as 5,000 survived to be repatriated , the Russians might have killed them but Hitler sentenced them to death by refusing to allow them to surrender

that being said, for slaughtering your own its mao , stalin then hitler

Cool Mo D · 04-02-2013 10:54PM

Merch wrote: »

Wasn't Bavaria the heartland?

No it wasn't. Hitler was most popular in what used to be Prussia, since that was the most authoritarian, conservative and militaristic state pre-unification, which was had a strong streak of anti-semitism historically, as well as parts of Prussia being taken from Germany after WWI.

Bavaria was one of the most anti-Hitler regions, because after unification, the protestant majority in Germany sought to reduce the power of the Catholic church. Bavaria is a mainly Catholic region, and was pretty ambivalent about being part of a unified Germany, and pan-German union was the centrepiece of Hitlers ideology.

Ranicand · 05-02-2013 12:02AM

markesmith wrote: »

From another thread:

Yes from another thread I was not trying to hide it.

Why bring it up here?

Count yourself lucky I have not started a thread on the size and shape of the Universe.

Yet.:D

Kat1170 · 05-02-2013 12:31AM

Soup Nazi's ...................... they are the WORST kind

laugh · 05-02-2013 01:24AM

How long have you thought it was "Mute point" OP? http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moot_point

Ranicand · 05-02-2013 01:27AM

laugh wrote: »

How long have you thought it was "Mute point" OP? http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/moot_point

And now the spelling police hot on the heals of the PC brigade.:D

Yes my spelling is rubbish.

ArtSmart · 05-02-2013 01:35AM

Why do the Nazis always come up in debates?

Because Everyone Already Expects the Spanish Inquisition.

Capt'n Midnight · 05-02-2013 02:43AM

ArtSmart wrote: »

Why do the Nazis always come up in debates?

Because Everyone Already Expects the Spanish Inquisition.

That's because the Spanish Inquisition give you a month's notice to attend.

Wibbs · 05-02-2013 10:39AM

Cool Mo D wrote: »

Many of those who did support Hitler did for a variety of reasons - often a fear of Communism rather than a real liking for Hitler.

Yea, the anti communism vibe is by far the most consistent thing of all the memoirs and recollections I've read over the years. Real fear/hate of the idea.

I would say that anyone who really was a nazi believer would have joined the Nazi party while they were in power - there was no down side at the time, and plenty of benefits. That gives 13% of the population who were members of the party at its height, and, I think, a fair estimate of the parties core support.

Oh sure CMD, but my contention would be that the general background support was higher than may be comfortable to admit now. Certainly by the late 30's.

Wibbs · 05-02-2013 10:43AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

That's because the Spanish Inquisition give you a month's notice to attend.

Now there's an institution that has been hyped up to a crazy degree. Oh the Inquisition(s) had their moments and no mistake, but it wasn't nearly as "evil", nor daft as it's often made out to be either. Much of that comes from Protestant reformation propaganda. Indeed on the blasphemy/witchcraft front Protestant courts in the UK alone executed many more "witches" than the Inquisitions ever did.

Gbear · 06-02-2013 01:02AM

Wibbs wrote: »

Now there's an institution that has been hyped up to a crazy degree. Oh the Inquisition(s) had their moments and no mistake, but it wasn't nearly as "evil", nor daft as it's often made out to be either. Much of that comes from Protestant reformation propaganda. Indeed on the blasphemy/witchcraft front Protestant courts in the UK alone executed many more "witches" than the Inquisitions ever did.

I think it was more the sadism and brutality.

And they did kill quite a few people.

I think I read either 10's or 100's of thousands of people but can't remember where.

Capt'n Midnight · 06-02-2013 01:21AM

Gbear wrote: »

I think it was more the sadism and brutality.

And they did kill quite a few people.

I think I read either 10's or 100's of thousands of people but can't remember where.

After the initial flurry the Spanish Inquisition settled down.

There are many instances of people when given the choice of a civil trial or the inquisition chose the later because there were regulations on what tortures could be used and how long they could be used for. On the other hand the local civil authorities didn't have any such restrictions.

Also it's reckoned that the procedure was to show the implemenets of torture and explain their workings to the victim in the hope of a quickly persuading them to co-operate.

The main thing to remember is that the printing press was invented in Protestant Northern Europe and guess who featured in some of the first political pamphlets ?

ArtSmart · 06-02-2013 01:21AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

That's because the Spanish Inquisition give you a month's notice to attend.

em, the answer is

'Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition'

or don't you know your Pythonisms?

Why do the Nazis always come up in debates?

Comments