Don't apologize! stand strong against the leftist tide of political correctness!

Well, the fact that my name is "Funkychinaman" means I can't be THAT politically correct.

I do want to keep it civil though.

That being said, I'm not some sort of godless turtle-neck and tweed jacket wearing coffee-shop socialist drone of the politically correct left. I've always been pretty conservative, though I'm far more libertarian now than I was in college. But one thing conservatives are known for that remains true of me is being tough on crime, and that includes crimes against humanity. (How's that for a segue?)

"Nigger" is more convenient than "African American".

The term trooper or Mann was replaced in 1941 with the term Schütze or Rifleman in the Waffen-SS which is the equivalent to Private in the US Army.

I know what you are saying it's just in the credits the actors are listed as X so that is what should be put down. We list the actors characters as what is in the credits and verified by IMDb nothing more or less. IMFDB has more and more industry people looking through it so it's best to keep it to what the credits say.

Theres nothing convenient about having your teeth knocked out... I just refer to people of African descent as black

I just say "that guy"

And what do you say when somebody responds to you with "Which guy?"

That gentleman of African descent over yonder

"you mean the black one?"
whatever....

Gentlemen political correctness or not this thread is straying onto thin ice. I understand that everyone is making a statement about words and the meanings that we give to them. Point taken. Let's get back on with the original topic and give the George Carlin action a rest.

I agree with BurtReynoldsMoustache, even though his sardonic reply was a little ham handed. Per "Jap" I don't buy the bullshit line that it's just a quicker way to say Japanese. Throughout the 20th century it was used as a racial epithet, so to ignore that is to be intentionally dense. IMFDB frowns upon ANY racial epithet, not because we're being politically correct, but that we want to respect ALL good contributing members of all races and that means not insulting them.

Who's the foxy lady in your av?

Well, I looked in IMDb, and all the SS people were listed as either SS guard, SS NCO, SS enlisted man, or SS officer, so I'll pull up a chart of SS ranks and label accordingly.

When you say industry people, you mean people from the movie-making industry? Or do you mean another industry, one that isn't run by Jewish liberals who hate Nazis more than anyone?

Individually IMFDB ALWAYS put what the credits say. And I have no problem in generically describing SS personnel as guards, officers, etc. But you're missing the point that it is not wrong to call them soldiers when so many of their divisions were sent to fight like soldiers, regardless of what the post war organizations decided.

And you're getting close to becoming a pain, I'd watch it. Lest you start to sound more and more like POI.

If I got snarky, I apologize. Then again, I wasn't the only one, and I certainly wasn't the one who dropped an N-bomb in here.

What is it the "pain" here? Is our continued presence here only at the pleasure of the mods? We're having a historical debate, and no one should take offense to that, and besides, I have apologized for any unintentional offense I may have caused. And unlike others, I have tried to stay on topic.

If they were listed as SS guard, SS NCO or SS officer than that is how they should be listed on your page.

When I say industry people it is ones who work in the film industry like myself and others who are starting to look at IMFDB as a source of information.

Your cool as debate on subjects does gets the blood pressure up. I for one disagree with some of the Nuremberg trial outcomes. The big one is listing an SS soldier as part of a criminal organization. I am sure that was mostly at the behest of the Russians who's hands were bloodier then the entire SS. During World War II the one's with the cleanest hand were the British and Commonwealth Army as the rest of the allies hands were just as dirty as the Germans.

How exactly was the Commonwealth the least guilty of the belligerent parties?

The fight between the Western Allies and Nazi Germany wasn't as bloodthirsty as the fight between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, but since the Western Allies were on the receiving ends of the Malmedy Massacre, Oradour-sur-Glane Massacre, the St. Anna Massacre, and the Ardeatine Massacre, which were all perpetrated by the Waffen-SS, I don't think the Western Allies really cared if the Russians wanted to be harsh.

Pay attention in AP History next time. But the short version is, the Germans treated the Soviets like crap, and when the shoe was on the other foot, the Soviets gave as good as they got, some would argue, even worse. The German were close to the British. Their monarchy has German roots, and the Duke and Duchess of Windsor were known to be a little too friendly towards the Germans, even after war broke out.

Well, unfortunately there were documented cases where our own forces had proof of standing orders to shoot prisoners. This specifically happened AFTER Malmedy even though that massacre of our prisoners seems to have been spontaneous on the part of the German, but OUR shooting of unarmed Germans WAS documented as a written order. Sad Stuff. Also if you dig through the many archives of World War II photographs, you'll see some that will disturb you in a different way. There is an infamous photo of SS soldiers (mostly teenagers between 13-17) standing in front of a wall with their hands up as some American GIs are shooting them dead with M1A1s. Of course these are the bad actions of a few, but they are added up and the government responsible must own up to them as well as the good stuff.

My own father, who was a WW2 vet, spoke of some of the "johnny come latelys", late war enlistees who towards the END of the fighting came charging into Europe looking to bag themselves a "Kraut or two". These noobs were despised by the experienced War Vets. A lot of the new guys were completely happy to shoot surrendering troops, in violation of the Geneva Convention (BTW). If you read enough first person accounts of WW2, you'll realize how crappy War is and how brutal things become (even more so than the 'official' story).

From what I heard, the Brits committed the LEAST amount of objectionable behavior, which is surprising considering how brutal the Brits had been in other wars.

Dial back your attitude, man. And don't whine about free speech and debate, blah blah blah. It's not the content of the discourse, it's the delivery.

And crying about how your 'free speech rights' to be a dick is being trampled by the evil 'mods' is a quick way to end up on someone's shit list.

Sorry about that.

I'd like to point out that the concept of "war crimes" is a very recent development in human history. For thousands of years, it wasn't just acceptable for soldiers to murder, pillage, and rape, it was expected.

FCM here are the oath taken by Germans during the reign of Adolf Hitler

Here is the oath by Heer, 1934 to 1945
Soldiers=I swear by God this scared oath: I will render unconditional obedience to Adolf Hitler, the Führer of the German nation and people, Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, and will be ready as a brave soldier to risk my life at my time for this oath.

Here is the oath by Waffen-SS 1941 to 1945
I swear to thee Adolf Hitler as fuhrer and chancellor of the German Reich loyalty and bravery i vow to thee and to the superiors whom thou shalt apoint obedience unto death so help me god

Here is the oath by German Public officials=I swear: I shall be loyal and obedient to Adolf Hitler, the Führer of the German Reich and people, respect the laws and fulfill my official duties conscientiously, so help me God.

Here is the oath by SA =As a member of the storm troop of the NSDAP i pledge myself by its flag to be always ready to stake life and limb in the struggle for the aims of the movement, to give absolute military obedience to my military superiors and leaders, to bear myself honorably in and out of service, to be always companionable towards other comrades.

Here is the oath by Hitlerjugend oath=In the presence of this blood banner, which represents our Fürher, i swear to devote all my energies and my strength to the savior of our country, Adolf Hitler, i am willing and ready to give up my life for him, so help me God.

Here is the oath by NSDAP oath=I pledge Allegiance to my Fürher Adolf Hitler, i promise at all times to show respect and obedience to him and to any leaders he may appoint for me.

Here is the oath by Heer, pre 1934
Soldiers=I swear by almighty God this sacred oath: I will at all times loyally and honestly serve my people and country and, as a brave soldier, I will be ready at any time to stake my life for this oath.

So you can see the that all of Germany swore an oath to this man. So say the SS is the only one that swore an oath to him is incorrect.

I think there may be philosophical differences between swearing to risk your life as a soldier and swearing obedience until death. To me, one is "I'll risk my life for this job while I have it," and the other is "I'm yours to do with until I die." One is for x number of years, and the other is for life. Then again, that's just the way I'm reading it. Why not just take identical oaths then?

It's interesting that the SA didn't swear their oath to Hitler himself, even when he was the undisputed head of the NS movement. But then again, I guess they only changed it after getting rid of the SA.

While I'm not conceding, I just don't see this going anywhere. I'm willing to simply agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Saying "let's agree to disagree" is the coward's way to concede.

No, it's recognizing that no one is making any headway. Isn't discretion the better part of valor?

Uh, everyone else reached that point many posts ago......:mad:

Heh, point taken.

Pretty much. The oath was changed (for the Heer at least) from swearing allegiance to the state to swearing it to the Fuhrer after the death of President Hindenburg on August 2nd 1934, with the Heer as a whole taking the new oath on August 8th, over a month after the Night of the Long Knives.