SiouxFanatic Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I have a GI Joe of General Erwin Rommel in Nazi regalia. Does that mean I'm a Nazi? This truly reminds me of the movie "Rat Race" where the guy goes to the 'Barbie' Museum but it's actually a Nazi Barbie Museum and they steal Hitler's car and crash it into a WWII Veterans ceremony...heh Back to the point there's no reason to argue what a deceased man did and did not do. What's done is done. Quit living in the past. Move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jloos Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Ralph was an amatuer historian, WWII in particular. He did have these parties. But he also had Churchill parties, Stalin parties and Hirohito parties. The stuff about him printing "Hitler was right" stickers is completely false. Saying, "I saw it on the internet" does not prove it was true. Ralph's WWII collection is impressive and is not solely nazi artifacts. He has Japanese, Russian, American, British and likely other items from WWII. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagies Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I have a copy of Mein Kampf at home that I plan to read. Guilty as associated..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slap Shot Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 For the sake of the argument, let Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckysieve Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 No, it clearly shows that your reading comprehension sucks. Engelstad publicly apologized for both the parties and admitted that they were stupid and insensitive. He paid a big fine. For the rest of his life, he never made the same mistake again. Please get your facts straight. If he knew the party was stupid and insensitive then why did he do it again two years later? That's why I'm convinced he's a racist and a nazi sympathizer. He offended A LOT of people with the first party and then he did it again knowing full well what kind of reaction it would get. And stop using the fact that he donated lots of money to different organizations as a way of defending these parties. Even racists can donate money, but it doesn't change the fact that they're racists. But I would like some Sioux fans to answer my original question. If he knew the party was stupid and insensitive then why did he do it again two years later? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Pretend that we accept the accusation (I don't accept it but I'm trying to make a point) - asserting that he donated to charity is pretty dang irrelevant. If some KKK member in the 60 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 f he knew the party was stupid and insensitive then why did he do it again two years later? And thus, my comment about your reading comprehension is proven. But I would like some Sioux fans to answer my original question. If he knew the party was stupid and insensitive then why did he do it again two years later? He didn't. For God's sake, learn to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 The stuff about him printing "Hitler was right" stickers is completely false. Kinda funny that an article in the Las Vegas Review Journal cited above by PCM states that very thing. That being said, I agree with Ralph's own opinion on his actions, "not only stupid but insensitive." As far as being a Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer (there is a big difference between the two) I think we should give the deceased the benefit of the doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 - asserting that he donated to charity is pretty dang irrelevant. I beg to differ. The character assasination perpetrated by certain fans of the maroon and gold is the reason I address his philantrophy. Unlike a KKK philantropist, if there is such a thing, Ralph did not designate his contributions to only a certain color, class, type of person, or one with particular political affiliations. His philantrophy was not in response to the reaction from people who are upset at his Hitler party. His philantrophy preceded that so there is not now nor was there then any contributions made by the Engelstads as a means to "atone for bigotry, hatred and prejudice". His philantrophy, IMHO, is further evidence that he is not a Hitler loving, Jew hating bigot as expounded by fans of the marron and gold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 But I would like some Sioux fans to answer my original question. If he knew the party was stupid and insensitive then why did he do it again two years later? If you check your timeline, he made his statements after the second party. This is from the Las Vegas Review Journal story about the FBI investigation. Within days of the control board's visit, the Review-Journal reported Engelstad had on April 20 in 1986 and 1988 hosted parties in that room celebrating Hitler's birthday. It was later revealed he had commissioned a painting of him wearing a Nazi uniform and produced "Hitler Was Right" bumper stickers. Engelstad issued an apology stating, "I despise Adolf Hitler and everything he stood for." Less than a week later, he held a news conference to acknowledge the Hitler parties were "not only stupid but insensitive." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IowaBison Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 His philantrophy, IMHO, is further evidence that he is not a Hitler loving, Jew hating bigot as expounded by fans of the marron and gold. I don't know if I go quite that far, what tells me, in conjunction with everything else, was that Ralph was human (somewhere in the gray with the rest of us). Too many folks try to paint others, Ralph in this case, as prostitutes or Madonnas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slap Shot Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I beg to differ. The character assasination perpetrated by certain fans of the maroon and gold is the reason I address his philantrophy. Unlike a KKK philantropist, if there is such a thing, Ralph did not designate his contributions to only a certain color, class, type of person, or one with particular political affiliations. The above is grossly out of context, but I'll respond with the following: 1. Gopher fans aren't the only people that have insisted on sticking with the belief he's a Nazi and someone's college hockey affiliation is irrelevent - the accusaation is either legitimate or it's not. 2. I think you missed my point - if the guy was actually a bona find Nazi sympathizer, who cares if he donated to charity? Does a child molestor deserve our sympathy because he read stories to children he didn't molest at the local library? Now - here's the imporant part - if you neglect to read the following bullet point you fail to comprehend my overall thoughts on this topic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. I don't think he a was a Nazi and I don't think the discussion has any merit. You'd perfer to treat the issue as if it's merely a matter of opinion as to whether or not Engelstad was a Nazi sympathizer or whether he associated with extremist groups. My only intent was to assert I don't see any point in accusing him of being a Nazi or Nazi sypathizer. If I worded it poorly and it came across amore than that then mea culpa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nd1sufan Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Making mistakes doesn't make you a bad person. No one died in what Englestad allegedly did. But it is quite amusing how what Englestad did somehow relates to the $110 million dollars he gave to UND to do whatever they want with it. Whether UND chose to name it after him or not, I don't know.Yeah, you can do whatever you want with this $110 million dollar gift, but first I'm going to build a $110 million dollar arena with it, then you can spend whatever is left. Do you think if it was actually a gift to UND that they had any control over, they would have spent every penny on the arena? My guess is they probably would have used at least half on other things to benefit the university. My guess (and its only an opinion) is that Ralph never made a donation that didn't have strings attached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 Yeah, you can do whatever you want with this $110 million dollar gift, but first I'm going to build a $110 million dollar arena with it, then you can spend whatever is left. Do you think if it was actually a gift to UND that they had any control over, they would have spent every penny on the arena? As originally made, the donation was for $100 million, half of which was to go for a new hockey arena and half of which would be for UND to spend as it desired. Problems arose when the legislature passed a resolution requiring that the new arena be self-sufficient before UND took ownership of it and a new UND president arrived who appeared to lean toward changing the Fighting Sioux nickname. That's when Ralph decided to spend his money the way he saw fit. It was his money and his prerogative. My guess (and its only an opinion) is that Ralph never made a donation that didn't have strings attached. Which makes him no different from many people who donate money to universities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 My guess (and its only an opinion) is that Ralph never made a donation that didn't have strings attached. Yeah, you're right on there!! I, myself, with my own two eyes, have seen those wheelchair recipients cutting out poker chips with those strong wheel turning hands and fingers they all have and then in order to get the chips juuuust flat enough they roll over them with their wheel chairs. The little ridges on the side of the chips are made with their teeth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sicatoka Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 For this conversation assume the date is June 6, 1944. It's "D-Day." The Allied troops are storming the Normandy beach. The end of the Third Reich is at hand (but we don't know it yet). Ralph Louis Engelstad is a 14 year old boy in Thief River Falls, MN. (DOB: Jan 28, 1930) How many people that boy knew never came home? Would that cause some strange facination with WWII? He spent some very formative years (ages 9 to 15) with his life dominated by WWII. Collecting cars and other significant items from Allied and Axis forces only makes sense. Did he do some really dumb things (with his collections) along the way, things he apologized for? Yup. Don't we all do dumb things now and then? But would collecting things make him a Commie, a Nazi, a Doughboy, or a Kamikazi (sp)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckysieve Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 And thus, my comment about your reading comprehension is proven. He didn't. For God's sake, learn to read. What do you mean he didn't? Are you saying he only threw one party? It's a fact that he threw two of them separated by two years. Maybe you need to learn how to read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckysieve Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 Did he do some really dumb things (with his collections) along the way, things he apologized for? Yup. Don't we all do dumb things now and then? I guess that's where we differ. I don't put throwing a Hitler birthday party(twice) in the category of doing something dumb. It's far worse than that and you know it. Quit making excuses for him. What he did was flat out disgusting and so is anyone who defends these parties he threw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 PCM- In lieu of just flat out quoting your reply in this thread to buckysieve in which you cite the FBI investigation, I'd like to say thank you for that post. I don't feel like there's anything more to be said. PCM said it straight. End the fixation. If for nothing else, let the dead rest in peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckysieve Posted June 7, 2006 Author Share Posted June 7, 2006 PCM- In lieu of just flat out quoting your reply in this thread to buckysieve in which you cite the FBI investigation, I'd like to say thank you for that post. I don't feel like there's anything more to be said. PCM said it straight. End the fixation. If for nothing else, let the dead rest in peace. The FBI report found that he's not a nazi. I never said he was a nazi. Nothing will ever change the fact that he threw two birthday parties for the most hated man in the history of the world. That's all I need to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyMom Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 I've been reading this conversation for a couple days, it confuses me as to why there is a thread on it. Here's my $0.02. It's a good thing that some of you have NEVER make bad decisions or mistakes....so that you can cast stones on those of us who have. You can sit and say that one person made a bad decision and call them on the carpet for as long as you want. Truth is that we all make mistakes. It's what you do and how you react after you make that mistake that matters. You can sit here and call names and judge and do whatever you want, but someday you are going to be the one that makes the mistake. The you'll wonder why you were so hard on the person that made the mistake in the first place. It's kinda like spreading rumors- it's all fun and games, until it's about you.....then it doesn't really feel too good does it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprig Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 That's all I need to know. And it's all you care to know. So crawl back into your hole and end you obsession with siouxsports. You won't be missed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 What do you mean he didn't? Are you saying he only threw one party? What did I just say here? Perhaps you should check with the Sylvan Learning Center in your area to see if they have any openings in remedial reading courses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choyt3 Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 And it's all you care to know. So crawl back into your hole and end you obsession with siouxsports. You won't be missed. I second that. Is it 1988 again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCM Posted June 7, 2006 Share Posted June 7, 2006 The FBI report found that he's not a nazi. It said more than that, but given your limited reading skills, I'm not surprised that you missed the other key points. I never said he was a nazi.Oh, right. You said in this post that Engelstad was a racist and a Nazi sympathizer. Plus, you're defending someone who said he was a Nazi. What should we conclude from that? Where is your evidence that Engelstad was a racist? Nothing will ever change the fact that he threw two birthday parties for the most hated man in the history of the world. That's all I need to know. And Mel Brooks made movies containing jokes about Hitler and Nazis. Does that make him a racist and Nazi sympathizer in your eyes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.