Timeless : Lindbergh Episode: Liberals Stike Again?

I know I do not know everything in American history but I took university level American history and got straight A's. The class can't do a deep dive into everyone so I just remembering learning Charles Lindbergh crossed the Atlantic in the Spirt of St. Louis and later his kid was kidnapped and murdered and that made kidnapping a Federal crime. But in tonight's episode they barely mention that stuff and go off on a tangent about how Lindbergh was a Nazi. They made it sound like the guy went on to gas people himself and the Nazis gave him a medal for it. Did this episode twist some stuff and apply some 2017 liberal views on 1930's Charles Lindbergh?

Lindbergh received a medal from Germany in the 1930's before the war and most major events leading up to it. He received it for being a pilot and he was in Germany at the behest of the U.S. military and the American Embassy approved this medal. That is not what I got from this episode tonight. They made it sound like he got the medal because he agreed with Nazi views and acted on them.

Lindbergh was against The U.S. getting into WWII. Many Americans were at the time. This was not a crazy view to have at the time. Sure Lindbergh was a misguided bigot. But what I find more troubling is that the people in this episode say they should kill him because of this. Is this really the thinking of the left in America today? That is more un-American than anything and more aligns with Nazis. Right after this episode I watched StarTalk with Neil deGrasse Tyson and Bill Maher, two very left-wing people, and they talked about how in the past few years many liberals have gone so far left it is ridiculous. And how they are only for free speech if they agree with it. They are not for free speech if they don't. I think liberals need to go back and watch a great liberal movie from the 1990's called The American President and pay attention to the President's speech at the end where he says:

---

"America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours."

---

I do believe that the writers of this show play with historical accuracy. I think they do it on purpose to show that if someone did go back in time it would screw up the original facts.

In the first couple of episodes they showed us what was supposed to happen, and then how it got screwed up. They don't do that anymore, because it is all screwed anyway, due to their time traveling to a certain degree. So now what all the characters in the show think is actual history may be or it may not be the correct version at all. Anyway, that is my take.

Ras555,

The only changes I really have noticed are in the characters present day when they come back from a trip to history.

I am a liberal and I have noticed the very liberal slant to this show. I think it is pretty obvious most episodes. I don't think it has anything to do with the time travel in the show and everything to do with the writers' current 2017 political views.

Also, they are guilty of constantly judging people in history and holding them to a 2016-2017 standard. I believe I read somewhere before you are not supposed to do that. Especially, do it and leave out the context in which the person was living in history. Obviously with the passage of time, knowledge of history (future events for the people they are judging), hindsight being 20/20, etc., I am sure if we were to go back everyone in history would be a d!ck. To use the writers' favorite word toward historical figures. Just like I am sure if someone were to come back to this time a hundred years or more from now they would probably hate this show and judge it just as harshly.

---

Also, they are guilty of constantly judging people in history and holding them to a 2016-2017 standard. I believe I read somewhere before you are not supposed to do that. Especially, do it and leave out the context in which the person was living in history

---

Not just that, but arguing that it is OK to murder someone because of his 'backward' views.

Just imagine somebody coming from the future and murdering you because you were eating a hamburger. When in the future, animals have the same rights humans do and what you are doing is considered murder and cannibalism.

Still, in 2017 it is perfectly allright. Eating meat is normal to you.

This is basically the problem. Leftists want to rewrite history, they want to ban the study of classical philosophers from schools because their views are 'wrong' in 2017, they want to rename streets because the people they are named after were 'wrong' they want everything that went wrong in history corrected, then erased from public knowledge, so they can build a future where nobody has to be burdened by the thought of some long-ago forefather being mistreated by somebody else's forefather. Because that HURTS.

It is all very Stalinist and I find it frightening that people really think this way.

Caribbean_Smurf,

---

"Not just that, but arguing that it is OK to murder someone because of his 'backward' views."

---

So you noticed this too! THANK YOU! I am glad someone else noticed this in the episode. I like how everyone else either missed this or is purposefully ignoring it and trying to deflect to "it was because of Rittenhouse." That was not the context of that conversation. It was because of his future (and many temporary) views.

My hope is all these people committing Presentism and trashing people from centuries ago because they didn't hold left-wing views of 2017 all get the same treatment in the future. I hope future people trash the hell out of them.

---

"It is all very Stalinist and I find it frightening that people really think this way."

---

I just read that some people want to take down the Washington Monument and Jefferson Memorial in Washington. It is not only Stalinistic but very much like ISIS or the Taliban. Who have gone out of their way to destroy historic structures that either don't fit with Islam or are older than Islam.

Ras555,

I just looked it up because I could not remember the name. It is called, "Presentism" and it is a BAD THING and this show is guilty as fvck of doing this most episodes and it has turned me off to the show and this was the show I was looking so much forward to this past fall.

---

"In historical analysis, presentism is the anachronistic introduction of present-day ideas and perspectives into depictions or interpretations of the past. Some modern historians seek to avoid presentism in their work because they consider it a form of cultural bias, and believe it creates a distorted understanding of their subject matter. The practice of presentism is regarded by some as a common fallacy in historical writing."

---

There are only TWO episodes left and the rating of this show dropped off. I wonder if others were also turned off like I was? I am guessing this show won't be back for a second season.

---

I do believe that the writers of this show play with historical accuracy.

---

Play with? They just shove it in a blender and then make up whatever they want. Just like most liberals.

You have many question, Mr Sparkle. I send you premium answer question, hundred percent!

The kidnapping happened LATER as you said and had nothing to do with the episode's plot.

Lindbergh WAS a Nazi sympathizer and on this FICTIONAL show it was suggested that it was due to a Rittenhouse influence.

Nobody wanted to kill Lindbergh in this episode.

You're reading way too much into things.

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

Yorick_Brown,

I only watched the episode once, live, but was there not a scene where Flynn and Lucy are discussing views that Lindbergh would go on to have and Flynn suggests that they kill him because of these said views?

Didn't they also make it sound like he LATER received a medal from the Nazis because of his views? They left out the part he received the medal way before the war for being a great aviator. Not because he was a bigot and Nazi sympathizer. Which he fought in the war for us against the Axis powers and later toured concentration camps and was disgusted by them. But all of that was left out for some reason in this episode.

---

I only watched the episode once, live, but was there not a scene where Flynn and Lucy are discussing views that Lindbergh would go on to have and Flynn suggests that they kill him because of these said views?

---

Flynn wants to get rid of anyone that is connected to Rittenhouse.

---

Didn't they also make it sound like he LATER received a medal from the Nazis because of his views? They left out the part he received the medal way before the war for being a great aviator. Not because he was a bigot and Nazi sympathizer. Which he fought in the war for us against the Axis powers and later toured concentration camps and was disgusted by them. But all of that was left out for some reason in this episode.

---

That 'reason' is that they only had an hour and this wasn't about Lindbergh!

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

Yorick_Brown,

---

"Flynn wants to get rid of anyone that is connected to Rittenhouse."

---

Flynn suggested killing him not because of the Rittenhouse connection but because of his views THIS TIME in the conversation I am referring to.

---

"That 'reason' is that they only had an hour and this wasn't about Lindbergh!"

---

No but the show had just enough to go out of their way to trash the guy. Which seems to be a theme of this show. Like I said above, the show is guilty of Presentism almost each week.

---

Flynn suggested killing him not because of the Rittenhouse connection but because of his views THIS TIME in the conversation I am referring to.

---

No, it was because of his Rittenhouse connection all else is irrelevant.

---

No but the show had just enough to go out of their way to trash the guy. Which seems to be a theme of this show.

---

A Nazi sympathizer always deserves to be trashed. But they weren't doing that in this episode. They simply stated the facts about him. That he was under control of his father and Rittenhouse. That they wanted him to appear as a Nazi sympathizer publicly as a distraction. If anything the show made him look like a good guy who didn't really sympathize with the Nazis but did so because he had no choice due to his legacy

And btw, you are no liberal. So don't flatter yourself The Left is not at all extreme Left. The fact that you say that means you are not a liberal because you obviously do not know what exteme leftism is. Also if anything is extreme nowadays it is the Right. They are so far to the Right, they are equivalent almost to Nazis though not quite there yet. But sooner than later they will be

Also Lindbergh got that medal from Germany because he was a "friend" of Germany. It being about his aviation was nothing more than a smoke screen

---

A Nazi sympathizer always deserves to be trashed.

---

Werner von Braun wasn't a Nazi sympathizer. He was a card-carrying Nazi.

Werner von Braun couldn't claim, "Oh, I was only an opportunist. I only joined the Nazi Party to advance my career. I never believed that racist crap, and I privately thought there disgusting idiots."

Why?

Because the rocket factories he managed exploited the labor of tens of thousands of starving jewish slave laborers who were being methodically worked to death.

The Werner von Braun episode gave him the same get out of jail card as the shameless opportunists in the US military.

Note how many Americans are unconcerned that America held 770 individuals in Guantanamo on flimsy innuendo, and never gave them a meaningful chance to hear the justifications for their detention, and never gave them a meaningful chance to defend themselves. No one likes seeing an obviously innocent guy go free, on a legal "technicality". But, for most of the Guantanamo captives, if they had been give a fair trial, the technicality that would have freed them was that they had been innocent, were not associated with any crimes.

Americans justify the brutal indefinite detention of these men while rationalizing throwing the principle of the presumption of innocence into the trash can.

---

A Nazi sympathizer always deserves to be trashed.

---

A lot of Nazi-sympathizers didn't even know about the Holocaust until well after the war when all was revealed. It is not. That. Simple.

Exactly. Everyone here is committing Presentism. I looked this up last night and what I read it appears once the war broke out (which he fought in for us against the Nazis) he changed his opinions and was disgusted by the Holocaust. lrsk and others are being too black and white and ignoring facts that don't fit their liberal hate du jour. He isn't even worth responding too once he went off on personal attacks and calling the right-wing Nazis. Give me a break. Sure Lindbergh was a misguided bigot but his views also changed and he was a lot more complex than that.

---

Sure Lindbergh was a misguided bigot but his views also changed and he was a lot more complex than that.

---

Maybe so but the episode was about none of that.

You're inferring a pro-liberal bias where none exists.

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

---

A lot of Nazi-sympathizers didn't even know about the Holocaust until well after the war when all was revealed.

---

They did actually. Not to the full extent but they did.

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

---

A lot of Nazi-sympathizers didn't even know about the Holocaust until well after the war when all was revealed. It is not. That. Simple.

---

Yeah

I can accept a German telling me that they didn't know that the Nazis had an archipelago of death camps. But they would have had to know that their Jewish neighbors had their property expropriated, and that they were shipped away.

Some parents choose to have the family pet euthanized, for various reasons, and then lie to their children tell them that the beloved pet is now living on a farm, where they can sit in the sun, or chase butterflies.

Although there is a vast difference in scale, there are significant parallels between the Nazi death camps, and the more recent American torture camps. Some Germans claimed they didn't know the Nazis had death camps. Similarly, today, a huge fraction of the US populace are completely OK with the USA torturing tens of thousand of captives.

Years from now, or decades from now, when it is clear that there had never been any meaningful ties between most of those individuals and terrorism, those torture apologists who are willing to speak on this issue at all, will make very similar claims to the Germans who claimed they didn't know the Nazis were operating death camps. They will say something like, "How was I supposed to know almost none of those thousands of guys my government tortured had any meaningful tie to terrorism!"

Well, the answer is two-fold: first, honor American values, like honoring the principle of innocent until proven guilty; second, look at the public record for one's self.

You do realize that Flynn is the bad guy in the show, don't you?

you re gonna need a bigger boat.

---

No but the show had just enough to go out of their way to trash the guy. Which seems to be a theme of this show. Like I said above, the show is guilty of Presentism almost each week.

---

The episode actually had a sympathetic view of Lindbergh and stop with the presentism babel.

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

---

The kidnapping happened LATER as you said and had nothing to do with the episode's plot.

Lindbergh WAS a Nazi sympathizer and on this FICTIONAL show it was suggested that it was due to a Rittenhouse influence.

Nobody wanted to kill Lindbergh in this episode.

You're reading way too much into things.

---

This!

Sounds like you have your head way up your ass when it comes to politics op

This liberal PC - BS is why Timeless keeps dropping in the ratings. Why do the writers feel the need to inject their anti-White agenda into every episode? The Whites from history are all portrayed as evil, whereas the blacks are benevolent. This type of agenda just turns people off.

Kurt_Stein,

I am also wondering if this is the case as to why the ratings have dropped off. I know the people behind the show can't figure out why people aren't watching and they are literally begging people to watch the show. I have a feeling it is not coming back for a second season.

It is beyond obvious to me that there has been a backlash against liberal politics and ideas in the country the past year. From the flopping of Ghostbusters, Birth of a Nation, to NFL ratings being down, and the election where Dems not only lost at the Federal level but also lost many races at the state level. To me I see a big rejection of the left in a lot of areas.

That of course won't stop people on the left. Like Bill Maher says, people on the left constantly think the country is a certain way filled with all these diverse and liberal people but that is a wish and not reality.

What the hell does the NFL have to do with politics?

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

Yorick_Brown,

NFL ratings were down this year. Many people attributed this to Colin Kaepernick's protest.

---

Why do the writers feel the need to inject their anti-White agenda into every episode?

---

There is none.

---

The Whites from history are all portrayed as evil, whereas the blacks are benevolent.

---

There was prevalent racism back then so that WOULD be featured. However, there have been plenty of positive white historical figures that have helped the trio.

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

"The Whites from history are all portrayed as evil"

Really? Ernest Hemingway was portrayed as evil? Harry Houdini was portrayed as evil? Ian Fleming? Robert Lincoln? Those are a few white characters I remember that were not portrayed as evil white men. HH Holmes was portrayed as evil. Do you want to whine about that?

Not to mention Mason the BLACK guy who created both time machines and is a stooge for Rittenhouse.

He's been sinister from very beginning.


Hate-watching says more about the viewer than it does about the show.

It's a fictional tv show. There is nothing that says tv shows have to keep historic facts when writing. And yes, I know unfortunately there are people who believe what they watch is all factual. There are people who still believe reality shows are all real. There really is not much to be done about that. Except maybe schools will go back to teaching all kinds of history, instead of bits & pieces.

maryrosenkranz,

I think you are being too easy on this show and its writers by ginving them a fiction pass. It is not fiction in the parts where they are discussing history and usually trashing the people.

Also, take a look at the show's Twitter and they are saying things like, "FACT: This guy was an a55hole." I believe they tweeted out last night that Lindbergh was a bad guy or something to that effect. And the real fact is it is not as black and white as that.

---

I know I do not know everything in American history but I took university level American history and got straight A's.

---

Well, then, you've missed some things

Lindbergh was well known as a racist and anti-semite. Indeed, a while back PBS did a show on this:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/lindbergh/sfeature/fallen.html

Here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_F48oaOskI

Apparently you are paranoid about some "liberal" twisting history. Well, in this case this show (Timeless, which critically I don't think is very good as a show, but not because of so-called "twisting" of history) paints Lindbergh in a light he deserves.

---

Charles Lindbergh crossed the Atlantic in the Spirt of St. Louis and later his kid was kidnapped and murdered and that made kidnapping a Federal crime. But in tonight's episode they barely mention that stuff

---

Flynn shot down the Spirit of St. Louis.

And the Lindbergh baby doesn't get kidnapped until March 1932 - five years after the episode takes place which is why they didn't mention the incident.

Nazis sympathizer or not, Charles Lindbergh was class-A douche.

---

Secret European children
Between 2003 and 2005 it was revealed that, beginning in 1957, Lindbergh had established sexual relationships with hatmaker Brigitte Hesshaimer (19262003), who had lived in the small Bavarian town of Geretsried and with whom he had three children; her sister Mariette, a painter living in Grimisuat with whom he had two children; and with Valeska, an East Prussian aristocrat who was his private secretary in Europe and lived in Baden-Baden, with whom he had a son and daughter (born in 1959 and 1961). All seven children were born between 1958 and 1967.

Ten days before he died Lindbergh wrote to each of these European mistresses, imploring them to maintain the "utmost secrecy" about their relationships after his death. The three women (none of whom ever married) all managed to keep their affairs secret even from their children, who during his lifetime (and for almost a decade after his death) did not know the true identity of their father, whom they had only known by the alias Careu Kent and they had only seen him when he briefly visited them once or twice per year. However, after reading a magazine article about Lindbergh in the mid-1980s, Brigitte's daughter Astrid deduced the truth; she later discovered snapshots and more than 150 love letters from Lindbergh to Brigitte. After Brigitte and Anne Lindbergh had both died, she made her findings public; in 2003 DNA tests conducted by the University of Munich confirmed that Lindbergh had fathered Astrid and her two siblings.

Reeve Lindbergh, Lindbergh's youngest child with Anne, wrote in her personal journal in 2003, "This story reflects absolutely Byzantine layers of deception on the part of our shared father. These children did not even know who he was! He used a pseudonym with them (To protect them, perhaps? To protect himself, absolutely!)"

According to Rudolf Schrck, author of Das Doppelleben des Charles A. Lindbergh ("The Double Life of Charles A. Lindbergh"), his wife Anne Morrow Lindbergh was unaware that Charles had led a double life from 1957 until his death. A family reconciliation with the German family members later took place with Reeve Lindbergh being actively involved.

---

Hate-watching says more about the viewer than it does about the show.

Limbergh was also a suspect in his baby's disappearance at the time

WHY are there jackas/es like you who have to turn EVERYTHING EFFING THING INTO A POLITICAL RANT AGAINST LIBERALS, THE LEFT, DEMOCRATS. WHATEVER????

WHY can't idiots like you just *beep* enjoy it as a *beep* show??

Geez I get so sick of this when it has NOTHING to do with the show.

Maybe IMDB is getting tired of rants like yours which is why they are shutting down comments. I get sick of them too.

Grow up and go to places of which there are THOUSANDS where politics can be yelled to each other, and all that.

WHY do people like you have to come here and ruin this. IT IS NOT A VALID QUESTION.

IT IS A FREAKING TV SHOW.

They who give up liberty to
obtain a temporary safety deserve
neither liberty or safety

---

WHY are there jackas/es like you who have to turn EVERYTHING EFFING THING INTO A POLITICAL RANT AGAINST LIBERALS, THE LEFT, DEMOCRATS. WHATEVER????

WHY can't idiots like you just *beep* enjoy it as a *beep* show??

Geez I get so sick of this when it has NOTHING to do with the show.

---

Most Hollywood television shows and movies are written by liberals, and therefore show the world from a liberal point of view. If you're a liberal, you see this point of view as completely natural and don't even notice it.

However, as a conservative, it's extremely apparent to me. I manage to ignore it for the most part, otherwise my choices of finding entertainment from Hollywood would be limited. It's only when they go completely overboard (for example, what SNL has been doing lately) that I find it unwatchable.

But I understand the complaints from my fellow conservatives, and I find funny the cries of liberals to 'just enjoy it', when they're not even slightly tolerant of any conservative viewpoints. Believe me, if the shoe was on the other foot, and Hollywood was conservative, you'd notice it.

Threads like these are why these boards are closing

Absolutely.


They who give up liberty to
obtain a temporary safety deserve
neither liberty or safety