patriotism?

[Flying Pig]

He ruled out "conventional" diagnoses, such as Borderline Personality... and comes up with something else... Which, in my opinion, is sheer crazy

However, that doesn't mean it didn't occur (especially weird sexual behaviors that were alleged)... it just meant he couldn't scientifically claim it.

That way madness lies, I'm afraid. Pun not intended.

 

[Formaldehyde]

And because he doesn't have "major psychoses" means he can't be crazy?

"Insanity" typically connotes just that. Legally, an "insane" person cannot be held responsible for his acts.

 

[kochman]

"Insanity" typically connotes just that. Legally, an "insane" person cannot be held responsible for his acts.

Legal definition, sure... we never got to hold Hitler's trial though... which would have involved a full psychiatric evaluation.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Just as it did with all the other Nazis during the Nuremberg trials, none of which apparently even used the insanity defense?

 

[kochman]

Just as it did with all the other Nazis, none of which apparently even used the insanity defense during the Nuremberg trials?

First off... so what?
Second off, you have your facts incorrect, again...
Rudolf Hess went that route.

Hess's attorney pleaded that he was insane but the tribunal ruled that he had to stand trial.

The Nuremburg Trials, as military trials, had different rules than civil or criminal trials in the modern USA. They were not allowed to claim insanity.

 

[Formaldehyde]

First off... so what?
Second off, you have your facts incorrect, again...
Rudolf Hess went that route.

I stated "apparently". The source I checked stated that nobody at Nuremberg used that defense.

http://www.aish.com/ho/i/Inside_the_Nuremberg_Mind.html

Neither the psychiatrists’ interviews nor their findings were part of the trial; none of the defendants, after all, had pled an insanity defense. This was, rather, a study commissioned by the United States government to find out if and how the defendants’ brains were different from that of other people, what would have caused them to perpetrate the unspeakable evil they did. The team would visit each prisoner in his cell, a tiny space furnished only with a steel bed mounted to the wall, a flimsy table, and one chair, on which either the psychiatrist or the translator would sit, the other sitting on the bed next to the prisoner.

"So what"?

And "second off", when have you ever shown my facts were "incorrect" before?

 

[kochman]

I stated "apparently". The source I checked stated that nobody at Nuremberg used that defense.

http://www.aish.com/ho/i/Inside_the_Nuremberg_Mind.html

"So what"?

Hess' lawyer tried it, so, you were wrong. Regardless, it had nothing to do with Hitler's mental state... he was a unique person, and shouldn't just be lumped in with anyone and everyone who was a Nazi... He was THE Nazi, and set himself apart from every human in history.

And "second off", when have you ever shown my facts were "incorrect" before?

Repeatedly. The PTSD debate comes to mind readily. Definitions of words, and use of words, and understanding of concepts, numerous times.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The source I used apparently was. "So what"?

You keep mentioning the PTSD thread even though you could never show a single thing "wrong" with my source that even stated essentially the same as yours.

And you even claim to be an English teacher, yet you frequently make simple grammatical errors like confusing "there" with "their" along with frequently misspelling and misusing common words.

But again, "so what"? Why do you continue to try to discuss me instead of the topic in situations such as this? Does it actually contribute to the discussion? Or are they simply attempts to make someone else stop posting?

 

[kochman]

The source I used apparently was. "So what"?

You keep mentioning the PTSD thread even though you could never show a single thing "wrong" with my source that even stated essentially the same as yours.

And you even claim to be an English teacher, yet you frequently make simple grammatical errors like confusing "there" with "their" along with frequently misspelling and misusing common words.

But again, "so what"? Why do you continue to try to discuss me instead of the topic in situations such as this? Does it actually contribute to the discussion? Or are they simply attempts to make someone else stop posting?

You still fail to grasp that Hitler was not evaluated, that we have record of... that's the so what...

Anyhow, maybe check more than one source? I'm glad it wasn't wikipedia at least, so we're making progress.

Have been an English teacher, actually. Not my current profession.

I make typos while multitasking at work, etc, we covered this. It's excusable and common.
That's wholly different from failing to understand basic meanings of words and concepts that are being presented to one's self.

Just go back to the PTSD thread, and you will see it.

 

[Flying Pig]

And you even claim to be an English teacher, yet you frequently make simple grammatical errors like confusing "there" with "their" along with frequently misspelling and misusing common words.

I claim to be English, but I still type like a monkey on crack at times!

 

[kochman]

I claim to be English, but I still type like a monkey on crack at times!

Vee musst haff perfektshon!

 

[Glassfan]

Lessons of Casablanco Still Apply...


"Round up the usual suspects." -Rains/Bogart/Bergman.

"The backstory on "Casablanca" is a good one, offering complex lessons in patriotism even today..."

Spoiler :

(CNN,7Jul12, Nicolaus Mills) -- This year marks the 70th anniversary of "Casablanca," and although we are a long way from 1942, watching the film's romantic leads, Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman, sacrifice their wartime love still touches us.

The backstory on "Casablanca" is a good one, offering complex lessons in patriotism even today.

Few films have benefited as much from the real-world geopolitics surrounding them as "Casablanca," which opened on Thanksgiving 1942, when the nation was well into World War II, at New York's Hollywood Theater. Just 18 days earlier in Operation Torch, the Allies had invaded North Africa with a force of 65,000; among the cities they quickly captured was Casablanca.

"Casablanca" was helped even further by the politics surrounding Operation Torch, which at its outset involved getting French Vichy forces in North Africa to accept a ceasefire through a deal with Adm. Jean-Francois Darlan, who had collaborated with the Nazis after the defeat of the French army in 1940. The intrigue of "Casablanca" thus had its real-life counterpart in intrigue Americans had read about in their papers.

"Casablanca" reminded Americans of how completely their thinking had changed in the months since Pearl Harbor. Prewar America had much to apologize for in its international affairs. In 1939 the United States government failed to aid the Jewish passengers on the German ocean liner St. Louis when they were denied entry into Cuba and forced to return to Europe, and two years later the country was still not anxious to face facts about the wars raging in Europe and Asia.

Humphrey Bogart's Rick Blaine is the embodiment of an America that has finally grasped the threat of fascism. On the surface, Rick is little more than the owner of a café in French Morocco, who insists, "I'm the only cause I'm interested in." But as his personal history emerges, Rick turns out to be anything but the cynic he pretends to be.
The turning point in "Casablanca" occurs when Rick's former lover, Ilsa Lund, played by Ingrid Bergman, shows up at his café with the Czech resistance leader, Victor Laszlo (Paul Henreid), her husband. Rick faces a dilemma. He still loves Ilsa, who acknowledges that she also loves him, but if he wants to help Laszlo escape from the Nazis, he cannot resume his relationship with Ilsa, who is Laszlo's main support.

Rick's solution to his dilemma comes when he tells Ilsa that she should stay with Laszlo, then supplies the two of them with stolen letters of transit that will get them safely to Lisbon.

Rick's refusal to put his own needs before those of Laszlo -- and by extension the war effort -- reflects his priorities and his patriotism, but what makes Rick's sacrifice so powerful is that it is unaccompanied by chest pounding or sentimentality.

"I'm no good at being noble," he tells Ilsa, "but it doesn't take much to see that the problems of three little people don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world."

To help Ilsa and Laszlo escape, Rick must shoot the ranking German officer in Casablanca and reach an arrangement with the corrupt French chief of police. Neither decision bothers Rick, who at the end of "Casablanca" heads off to a free French garrison with the police chief while telling him, "Louis, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship."

The remark is filled with irony and humor, but remains serious. It reflects Rick's refusal to let the ambiguity of his choices get in the way of his waging war to the best of his ability.

Today, "Casablanca" speaks to audiences very differently from how it did in 1942 or even when it was part of the Bogart revival that began in the late 1950s at the Brattle Theater in Cambridge. "Casablanca's" call to arms and Bogart's cool no longer resonate as they once did. But what does resonate in our post-9/11 world is Rick's complexity. Rick is a loner who won't let his idealism get the better of his pragmatism. He will not give in to the Germans, who are the real power in Casablanca, but he refuses to do anything that needlessly exposes him to arrest. He walks a moral tightrope with understated brilliance.

These days it is easy to imagine Rick applauding America's decision to aid Libya's rebels, worrying about our ongoing war in Afghanistan, and wondering what we might do to get other countries to help us stop the bloodshed in Syria.

Given Rick's choice of friends, it is clear that he would not be overly fastidious about choosing allies -- if he believed their cooperation could save lives.

 

[Formaldehyde]

That seems to be far more about nationalism than patriotism, especially the part about what Rick would supposedly do today.

 

[Traitorfish]

Can you not just leave a dead horse lying?