Was Hitler Good At Public Speaking?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11024182/Ukip-MEP-Hitlers-powers-of-public-speaking-are-an-inspiration.html

Strange that this hasn't been entered up for ridicule, by the anti-UKIP brigade?

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

Your analogies could work, take The films of Leni Riefenstahl if another was to use some of his expertise at film making to produce films of more palatable subject matters, then why condemn that person?

Regarding your Gary Glitter analogy, that is an entirely different matter, if a young pop star was to impersonate the shamed Glam Rock star, that would be a definite no, no.

But taking on board that Glam Rock was a very successful past music craze, then if a present day star could reintroduce it successfully in the present era, why not?

[emmie]

sorry i have watched footage of Hitler endless times, he rants, off message, is not always coherent, no a good orator not even close. He appealed because the stupid people he was preaching to would have listed to a sausage if it said the right things, read some of Max Hastings works, articles on the war and Hitler, and then watch footage of Hitler, he spits, drools and is not clear, i would never put him in a category of great orator. He had a message that the Jews were vermin, he said it loud and clear, that was it, that they were the reason Germany and the world was in a mess, then he set his dogs of war onto them, to exterminate as many as possible, and almost succeeded.

[mikey4444]

Would it be OK to invoke Jimmy Saville at a conference of trainee charity fund raisers, just because he was very successful in the art himself ?

[emmie]

no, he was a scheming, conniving paedophile, who got by on his celebrity and the times he lived, worked in, he wouldn't be given the time of day now.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// "A leading member of the General Medical Councile has defended a seminar which taught young GPs to emulate Dr Harold Shipman's practice standards because the murder was "evil" but “had an impeccably spotless waiting
room". ///

Stop now SP you are getting rather silly.

[sp1814]

AOG

Exactly...with the glam rock analogy, it could be argued that Gary Glitter indeed was the king of that musical format. He sold more records than any other glam artist and certainly had the highest profile.

Furthermore, he produced a series of excellent pop songs in the early seventies. Really popular 'hands in the air' kinds of song.

However, subsequent events make him a less than ideal candidate for emulation.

Therefore, like Hitler (and it is true that he was an extremely effective orator), it would be prudent to choose someone else as an example for the UKIP Youth.

Like Churchill.

[mikey4444]

You are right of course emmie, and its this inappropriate use of a name that is the point here.

If Ethridge had not mentioned Hitler, we wouldn't be talking about the issue at all. It would be a minor interest to UKIP but of no concern to us whatsoever. Instead, this twit has brought his party in disrepute and exposed it to ridicule. UKIP foot in mouth time, all over again. I wonder Farage has run off to a sanitorium somewhere

[mikey4444]

Hasn't not has.

[EDDIE51]

This question is going way off track, it just asks 'was Hitler good at Public speaking'? to which the answer has to be 'Yes'.
emmie ALL politicians say what the audience wants to hear, they use the media to manipulate the public into thinking what they want them to think and then tell them to vote for them so they can put it into effect.
Just think of the current 'anti immigrant and anti Europe' policies we hear today, no politician would get anywhere here today if they stood up and said we need more immigration and greater ties with Europe even if that is what they think in private.
Of course once they get into power all the rhetoric and empty promises
can be conveniently forgotten.

[anotheoldgit]

emmie

Perhaps the reason he chose Hitler, was because he managed to tell a nation what they wanted to hear at that particular time, how else would a WW1 corporal and disillusioned artist, become the Chancellor of Germany?

So it makes sense for any political party that wishes to rise in public option is for them to take lessons from an expert.

[EDDIE51]

As to Gary Glitter, Michal Jackson was many many times worse but Jackson was so rich he was able to buy his way out of being convicted by paying his victims parents tens of millions of $ to refuse to give evidence. As a consequence Jackson is still widely played and respected while Glitter is vilified .
Even the judge in the Jackson trial was recorded as saying he was certain Jackson was guilty but due to the refusal by the victims Mother to give evidence he had to order a not guilty verdict!

[sp1814]

Was Hitler good at public speaking?

Yes.

Should an MEP who represents a party which is lampooned as being full of racists and fruitcakes use him as a touchstone?

No.

It just seems a little naive.

[mikey4444]

Naive is too small a word SP !

[sp1814]

EDDIE51

Michael Jackson wasn't convicted but retained his celebrity because the public decided that they believed him.

Gary Glitter was convicted in a court of law. There was no doubt in anyone's mind that he was a paedophile.

Also, how can you say that Michael Jackson was 'many times worse' when he wasn't convicted?

[sp1814]

mikey4444

I'm also not too sure of the spelling and I've got bog all idea how to enable spellcheck on my new laptop.

Perhaps that's a task for this afternoon.

[royfromaus]

EDDIE51

Michael Jackson wasn't convicted but retained his celebrity because the public decided that they believed him.


I think you will find the biggest majority of the public do not believe he was innocent.


Also, how can you say that Michael Jackson was 'many times worse' when he wasn't convicted?



He told you why, he splashed out millions upon millions to keep people quiet

[anotheoldgit]

Now you don't expect sp to criticise Jackson in any way do you, you know the reason?

But wait a minute.............

[mikey4444]

Don't ask me SP ! Perhaps a question in Technology is in order ! Some clever clogs will come back asap I should imagine.

[Orderlimit]

Another silly non-story and the usual silly off topic rants about nothing.

[sp1814]

EDDIE51

Sorry - you're right. I was wrong to say 'the public believed him'. That was a sweeping statement which is untrue. There are many who don't believe he was a paedophile and there are many who do.

And I do not believe for one moment that the 'hush money' was indeed that. The money paid to Jordy Chandler's family was meant to bring the case to a close.

His lawyers would have advised him that it could have gone either way, and either way, he would have been stuffed.

Remember - he was found innocent of all charges in his court case (The People of the State of California v. Michael Joseph Jackson). There were 18 charges.

Personally, the reason I sway to believing that Michael Jackson wasn't a paedophile is that there were not enough victims coming forward. For someone in Michael Jackson's position (extreme fame, wealth and a flipping fun fair in his back garden) I would have expected literally dozens, if not hundreds of kids to start coming forward with accusations, once the Jordan Chandler case cropped up.

Just look at Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter, Jonathan King, Cyril Smith.

Paedophiles don't just attack one or two kids...it's an ongoing compulsion. That didn't fit with the Jackson story.

I urge you to read this Wiki page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_child_sexual_abuse_accusations_against_Michael_Jackson

It's quite illuminating.