Poles and Russians (among other ethnic groups) were considered "under-people" and Nazis planned for at least partial extermination of them. The remainder was supposed to serve as slaves/cheap labour. So yes, in these cases the killing was at least to some extent ideologically, racially motivated too.

It's all fine for them to be a humble "common carrier" when this gets them subsidies: https://www.techdirt.com/artic... but it's oh so scandalous when it doesn't pay.

Full disclosure is the general rule, and in most cases you will easily find information on funding for particular research. But in this case (it's not just about Willie Soon) you have a long-running, well organised campaign of financing climate change denial. AEI (Big Oil money) used to pay 10k plus travel and expenses for conference papers questioning IPCC reports. Go ask your scientist friends when was the last time they were paid ten grand for a conference paper, take note of their dropping jaws.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The principle is called full disclosure, has nothing to do with the inquisition, and is required by every respectable scientific journal and research institution. Willie Soon's problem is not that he had received money for research (all kinds of industries finance all kinds of research all the time), but that he failed to disclose the fact (well, bragging to his sponsors about his papers as "deliverables" certainly didn't help his reputation either). A wider disclosure check is not inappropriate in this context.

Again: inflation is completely beside the point -- it has little to do with people losing "faith" in a currency. Loose monetary policy, the main cause of inflation, is not decided by people's "belief" in a currency, but by central banks/governments. You can lose your "faith" all you want to, but you'll still need to drive that lorry of hyper-inflated cash to the IRS office -- that is, you'll need to earn it/buy it. It doesn't matter in the slightest that it will be worth half of its current value tomorrow.

Inflation has nothing to do with it. Regardless of inflation, the mark and the Zimbabwean dollar were still earned and traded -- because you still needed them to pay taxes. People's "belief" in a currency doesn't matter much in this respect: as long as you have to pay taxes in US dollars, you will still earn/buy dollars, and the currency will still have value. If the government loses its "faith" in the currency, now that's a different matter -- if seashells become accepted as a legal tender, you might see the dollar crash. It's as simple as that. As long as you have a tax-collecting state, the tender used for taxing will keep value.

No. The USD only has value because you have to pay your taxes with it and/or the government makes an explicit promise ("legal tender") that it will accept taxes paid with it. "Fiat" doesn't equal "virtual".