Napoleon, Hitler, bush???

[greenbriar]

History has proven that men who let the power go to their head end up losing more



Did you know Napoleon had a one inch peter???

[skywalker_5]

1. Bush is WAY more dangerous

than Hitler ever dreamed of becoming.

[greenbriar]

2. but all three started with the claim

"for the working class"


"just one of the folks"

[Syncronaut Seven]

3. Hitler was somewhat intelligent

Not so, our boy king. History tends to be unkind to butchers George.

[rzemanfl]

4. Hitler only had one testicle. n/t

[AntiCoup2K4]

5. If you believe Nostradamus, then they have other things in common.

Nostradamus predicted there would be three antichrists and that the third would be the worst. Most serious fans of his work agree that Napoleon and Hitler were 1 & 2.

Of the third and final antichrist, Nostradamus refers to him as "Mabus the king of terror". Could "Mabus" be short for MAssachussettes Bush? (given the New England orgins of the family and their criminal empire.

The names Nostradamus predicted were never an exact match. Adolf was described as "Hister" in his writings, and Bonaparte was originally called "PAU NAY OLORON" an anagram of "Napaulon Roy" (Napoleon King)

As far as Napoleon having a "one-inch peter" I never heard that before, but it IS an interesting fact that the reason his hand is tucked inside his jacket in his famous portrait is that it had become badly withered from syphillis:wow:

Maybe it affected other body parts as well?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

6. I don't think Napoleon should be mentioned in the same group

Napoleon was a brilliant man, who did let power go to his head, it is true. But Napoleon at the beginning was fighting to keep France's revolution alive. France had an internal war and was simultaneously fighting external wars, and the European Nobility wanted to crush the revolution as it threatened their despotism. Napoleon was fighting all of the old artistocracies of Europe. In every country that Napoleon conquered, he freed the Jews, giving them equal rights with all other citizens, in Germany, in France, in Italy, in Poland. For example, when Napoleon conquered Italy and ended the Republic of Venice, his troops tore down the gates of the Venice Ghetto and gave Jews there the same rights as other citizens of Venice, a privilege they had not enjoyed before. If he had been wiser, Napoleon would have continued to pursue this ideal that he possessed at the beginning. For example, instead of occupying and suppressing the Spanish, he should have freed the people from the King and let them have self-determination. But whereas Napoleon brought many new rights to the people in the lands he conquered, such as the Jewish example I mentioned, Hitler murdered people in the lands he conquered, including the Jews.

Mention Napoleon along with Alexander and Cesar, perhaps, brilliant men who let themselves get carried away with power and glory. But he wasn't a bloody murderer and exploiter like the other two individuals you mentioned.

[greenbriar]

8. maybe during the French Revolution Napoleon was good for the

bourgiouis but after that he got power hungry and installed Friends and Family into positions...


sounds a LOT like bush to me

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

10. Yes, he was a conqueror, but he instituted many civil liberties

Here's an article on the Napoleonic Code that Napoleon participated in drafting, that I copied. Napoleon felt he had no choice against the despots of Europe, including the British Crown. He either had to defeat their armies in battle or have them invade France and end the enlightenment of the revolution. He did place his family members in power in the lands he conquered. His reasoning was that his authoritarian Empire was better than the despotic empires he was replacing. As mentioned regarding the Jews and others, he brought liberty and equal rights (for the most part) to Europe. Remember that Europe at the time was in the hands of Kings and Monarchs, who kept millions of people under virtual slavery. The civil liberties that he instituted are breathtaking for the time, if you care to read. Whereas Napoleon brought civil rights, Bush and Hitler eliminated rights. Napoleon was a genious, as well, maybe one of history's greatest military strategists and battlefield generals. And also a man of courage who often placed himself in harm's way at the head of his troops. When did Bush ever do that?

By Robert Burnham

Napoleon's most lasting effect on France and much of the world was the set of civil laws that he instituted that still bears his name to this day. This code was so impressive that by 1960 over 70 different states either modeled their own laws after them or adopted them verbatim. The Code Napoleon took the over 14,000 decrees that had been passed under the Revolutionary Government and simplified them into one unified set of laws. The Code had several key concepts at its core:

1. Equality of all in the eyes of the law
2. No recognition of privileges of birth (i.e. noble rights inherited from ancestors.)
3. Freedom of religion
4. Separation of the church and the state
5. Freedom to work in an occupation of one's choice
6. Strengthening the family by:
* Placing emphasis on the husband and father as the head of the family
* Restricting grounds for divorce to three reasons: adultery, conviction of a serious crime, and grave insults, excesses or cruelty; however divorce could be granted by mutual agreement, as long as the grounds were kept private.
* Defining who could inherit the family property

The Code in effect did several things:

1. It preserved the social aims of the Revolution.
2. It protected the interests of the rising middle class.
3. It guaranteed civil liberties.

Despite these strengths, in the eyes of the modern world the Code had several weaknesses, particularly when it pertained to women and minors:

1. A woman could not vote.
2. A wife owed obedience to her husband, who had total control over their property.
3. A unmarried woman had few rights and could not be a legal guardian or witness wills.
4. It was easier for a man to sue for divorce on grounds of adultery, while a man had to cohabit with his mistress for two years for his wife to justify a divorce.
5. If a man surprised his wife in bed with another man, he could kill her legally. If a woman did so, she could be tried for murder.
6. Minors had few rights. (A father even could place his child in jail for up to six months.)
7. Illegitimate children had no rights of inheritance.

In balance, the Code Napoleon survived for many many reasons, in spite of its flaws. "The Code contributed greatly to Napoleon's achievement of helping France turn away from the past. It cemented the ideas of freedom of person and of contract (including the right to enter any occupation), equality of all Frenchmen, and freedom of civil society from ecclesiastical control. As the first truly modern code of laws, the Code Napoleon for the first time in modern history gave a nation a unified system of law applicable to all citizens without distinction. By providing uniformity of laws it further promoted the national unity fostered by the Revolution. Its entire outlook gave a further impulse to the rise of the bourgeoisie. A threatened disintegration of the family under the Convention and the Directory was sharply halted, and the family once again became the most important social institution." (Holtman; p.98)

[forgethell]

11. That has been the fate

of most revolutions ever since.

[BushIsBurning]

7. I know whatever Bush has fits between the gap in Condiliar's teeth...

[greenbriar]

9. bwahahaha

as I am wiping my screen clean