Similarities between the Third Reich and the Bush administration
by Heathen and Zepp

Both used tragedies to promote the takeover of their countries and lay the groundwork for their wars. Both had previous knowledge of the tragedies, but let them happen for political reasons.

Both had reasons for war. Bush is for oil, Hitler for expansion of the German people.

Both came into power by less than democratic means. Hitler by the Enabling Act Bush by the USSC.

Both ignored treaties that were in their way. Hitler The Treaty of Versailles Bush numerous treaties including Kyoto and many UN declarations.

Hitler withdrew Germany for the League of Nations. Bush has alienated the UN.

Hitler used the SS to infiltrate and sabotage other foreign governments; Bush is using the CIA to the same effect.

Both used the power of the government against any and all opposition in their own countries.

Both used the citizenry to spy on each other to ferret out dissidents.

Both trampled on the Rights of the citizens of their own countries, ignoring the Constitutions when it was in the way of their goals.

Both made allies in the regions they wanted to control. Hitler had Mussolini, Bush has Sharon.

Both use(d) propaganda to its full advantage, convincing the media to suppress any stories that would be hurtful.

Both made patriotism the most important part of their regimes.

Both used war as a means of blinding the people to the oppressions of their leadership

Both used or want to use internment or concentration camps to remove dissidents.

Both held secret trials against their detractors. Members of the population simply disappeared.

Whenever a country conceded to demands to forestall invasion, Hitler and Bush both made even more stringent demands.

Both made it clear that they will have war no matter what the rest of the world thinks.

In 1938 Hitler declared that he would invade Czechoslovakia unless his demands were met. When the demands were met in part, he invaded anyway. In 2002, Bush made the same declaration towards Iraq.

Both took full advantage of a "crime against the people"; Hitler, the burning of the Reichstag, and Putsch the attack on 9/11. In both instances, questions were raised as to whether the attacks were a complete surprise, and there were even allegations of culpability.

Both used threats and coercion against the legislature in order to intimidate and extend power. Hitler actually sent brownshirts in. Putsch used Fleischman and Rumsfelt to convey threats to the Congress, and ordered the FBI to investigate members of Congress for supposed
leaks.

Both claimed powers far beyond those of their office. As Chancellor, Hitler on paper had roughly the same powers as the British Prime Minister. As President, Putsch needed Congressional consent to wage war, and was not empowered to rescind any laws.

Both, as their most immediate acts, moved to policize the judiciary, and bring it under the control of the executive. Both vowed to do something about "liberal judges."

And now: ways in which Hitler was a better person than Putsch:

Hitler actually served in combat, receiving medals for valor and for being injured in the line of duty. He sneered at Germans who used social standing and connections to secure safe positions well away from the fighting.

Hitler's relatives were above reproach, with no hint of drunkenness, drug abuse, licentiousness or crass behavior.

Hitler himself did not drink, and was never arrested for impaired driving.

Hitler was capable of stringing ten words in a row together without screwing it all
up.

Hitler, while willing to use the religious whacks and the industrialists to his own ends, was not a patsy to either group, no matter how often their aspirations dovetailed.

Images courtesy of Bartcop.com