VIDEOS-PICTURES: Russian war atrocities. Also, the criminal sinking of the Wilhem Gustloff (Document IIWW)

[THENAUSEA]

VIDEOS-PICTURES: Russian war atrocities. Also, the criminal sinking of the
Wilhem Gustloff (Document IIWW)



http://www.thenausea.com/russia.html





DISCLAIMER: "The nausea" is a non-profit project of different individuals
all over the world. This is NOT a "politically correct" web. We do not share
any particular political tendency except our rejection to violence in every
way. We believe that getting close to first degree violence will avoid any
patriotic or romantic fantasy about war. Children DO NOT have any
nationality. They should not suffer. Their lives, our lives can never be
replaced. Our aim is to distribute information to everyone that demands it.
Every information will NOT be manipulated before being posted. You can help
just resending this email to everyone who is sensitive to this topic.

[drdoody]

Post by THENAUSEA
VIDEOS-PICTURES: Russian war atrocities. Also, the criminal sinking of the
Wilhem Gustloff (Document IIWW)
http://www.thenausea.com/russia.html

I hate to burst your bubble, but your website sucks. Look to Ogrish
for gut-wrenching inspiration. Your pics are, for the most part, trite
and uninspired and the videos are small and of too poor a quality to
be really entertaining.

Also, the Gustloff wasn't "naked". She was sailing with a destroyer
escort, which Marinesko had to maneuver his boat underneath to get a
good shot. And the sinking happened at night and in bad weather, which
if you think about it, makes identification of a ship difficult at
best. And the Gustloff was most likely sailing without running lights,
to make her a harder target for enemy subs and aircraft. Marinesko
most likely didn't know that he was firing upon a hospital ship. For
all he knew, he was firing upon a large freighter filled with soldiers
and materiel.

Before you triumphantly announce yet another crime perpetrated by a
government, be sure to check your facts.

Doc

[Richard J]

Post by drdoody

Post by THENAUSEA
VIDEOS-PICTURES: Russian war atrocities. Also, the criminal sinking of the
Wilhem Gustloff (Document IIWW)
http://www.thenausea.com/russia.html

I hate to burst your bubble, but your website sucks. Look to Ogrish
for gut-wrenching inspiration. Your pics are, for the most part, trite
and uninspired and the videos are small and of too poor a quality to
be really entertaining.
Also, the Gustloff wasn't "naked". She was sailing with a destroyer
escort, which Marinesko had to maneuver his boat underneath to get a
good shot. And the sinking happened at night and in bad weather, which
if you think about it, makes identification of a ship difficult at
best. And the Gustloff was most likely sailing without running lights,
to make her a harder target for enemy subs and aircraft. Marinesko
most likely didn't know that he was firing upon a hospital ship. For
all he knew, he was firing upon a large freighter filled with soldiers
and materiel.
Before you triumphantly announce yet another crime perpetrated by a
government, be sure to check your facts.
Doc

Doc, facts aren't important to people like this as long as they can try
to knock the object of their affections.

Teflon

[drdoody]

Post by Richard J

Post by drdoody
Before you triumphantly announce yet another crime perpetrated by a
government, be sure to check your facts.
Doc

Doc, facts aren't important to people like this as long as they can try
to knock the object of their affections.
Teflon

Oh, I can see the guy's bitch perfectly clearly. The sinking of a ship
full of civilians and wounded soliders is a disgrace. And even had
Marinesko known that the Gustloff was carrying what she was, there is
a chance that he would have fired on her. It's slim, but considering
the level of mutual hatred between the USSR and NAZI Germany during
the end stages of WWII, it is definitely not inconceivable that he
would have fired on the ship anyway. And Marinesko wasn't exactly an
angel. According to some accounts, some of his crew actually had to go
wrestle him from a brothel and sober him up onboard the boat before
undertaking the mission. All of this makes for a great story about a
drunken, whoremongering monster prowling the baltic sea, waiting for a
juicy hospital ship to send to the bottom. And this might not be too
far from the truth; we may never know.

But to change the historical facts, well documented ones, at that, to
fit your own distorted veiw of history? That's inexcuseable. Even if
you're right in taking your side of the argument, embellishing,
omitting and/or manufacturing points to bolster your position
completely negates anything you have to say, right or wrong.

This is why the moderates in any political group are often
overshadowed and discredited by the extremist components of their
movement who are often more than willing to resort to any tactic to
"win" the argument. This is why DP retentionists are generally seen as
bloodthirsty "Deathies", hell-bent on offing any offenders guilty of
anything more vile than driving while talking on a cellphone. By the
same token, this is also why abolitionists are generally seen as
lily-livered, tofu-munching, pacifist "Bleeding Hearts" who simply
don't understand the darker side of humanity. In reality, both veiws
are, for the most part, wrong. Retentionists, in my experience, are
usually very pragmatic people who see the death penalty as a
distasteful, albeit necessary means of eliminating proven lethal
threats to humanity at large. Abolitionists are usually well-meaning
humanitarians who don't see the point in killing as a means of
punishment for killing.

Although the majority of these two political groups are made up of
fairly reasonable people, those majorities are generally completely
eclipsed by a relatively small fraction of frothing extremists. Which
is a real pity as both sides have genuinely good points.

Doc

[Richard J]

Post by drdoody

Post by Richard J

Post by drdoody
Before you triumphantly announce yet another crime perpetrated by a
government, be sure to check your facts.
Doc

Doc, facts aren't important to people like this as long as they can try
to knock the object of their affections.
Teflon

Oh, I can see the guy's bitch perfectly clearly. The sinking of a ship
full of civilians and wounded soliders is a disgrace. And even had
Marinesko known that the Gustloff was carrying what she was, there is
a chance that he would have fired on her. It's slim, but considering
the level of mutual hatred between the USSR and NAZI Germany during
the end stages of WWII, it is definitely not inconceivable that he
would have fired on the ship anyway. And Marinesko wasn't exactly an
angel. According to some accounts, some of his crew actually had to go
wrestle him from a brothel and sober him up onboard the boat before
undertaking the mission. All of this makes for a great story about a
drunken, whoremongering monster prowling the baltic sea, waiting for a
juicy hospital ship to send to the bottom. And this might not be too
far from the truth; we may never know.
But to change the historical facts, well documented ones, at that, to
fit your own distorted veiw of history? That's inexcuseable. Even if
you're right in taking your side of the argument, embellishing,
omitting and/or manufacturing points to bolster your position
completely negates anything you have to say, right or wrong.
This is why the moderates in any political group are often
overshadowed and discredited by the extremist components of their
movement who are often more than willing to resort to any tactic to
"win" the argument. This is why DP retentionists are generally seen as
bloodthirsty "Deathies", hell-bent on offing any offenders guilty of
anything more vile than driving while talking on a cellphone. By the
same token, this is also why abolitionists are generally seen as
lily-livered, tofu-munching, pacifist "Bleeding Hearts" who simply
don't understand the darker side of humanity. In reality, both veiws
are, for the most part, wrong. Retentionists, in my experience, are
usually very pragmatic people who see the death penalty as a
distasteful, albeit necessary means of eliminating proven lethal
threats to humanity at large. Abolitionists are usually well-meaning
humanitarians who don't see the point in killing as a means of
punishment for killing.
Although the majority of these two political groups are made up of
fairly reasonable people, those majorities are generally completely
eclipsed by a relatively small fraction of frothing extremists. Which
is a real pity as both sides have genuinely good points.
Doc

Don't forget that the United States Navy sunk a transport carrying US
and British POW's during W.W.II as well. It wasn't marked as such, and
no notification was given by the Japanese, but it happened. Sometimes
in war, such things occur.

Teflon