Dave McGowan On Stalin

[robertdreed]

DE, I'm still stuck with this medieval AOL connection, and it's curtailed my link surfing. <br><br>At any rate, it's become obvious to me that there are ample safeguards in place on this board against inaccurate, wholly unfair and biased information originating with the lunatic fringe of the Right Wing. <br><br>But the Right isn't the only generator of false and misleading information. And if no one else is going to challenge innacurate or arguable claims emanating from Left sources, I will. <br><br>Note that I haven't demanded that proldic stop posting, much less demanding that he do so merely because I have reservations concerning his choice of links. I'm simply not that threatened by him, and I don't think that he's "corrupting the board." <br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 11/30/05 2:03 pm<br></i>

[Dreams End]

None of that really explains what you find of merit in Mr. E's posts, so much so that you would go to the ridiculous extreme of the ole "swastikas have other uses too" ruse when I had already provided some of the table of contents for other articles on that site which clearly show what their use of the swastika was about (i.e. holocaust parody, etc.). That was on the same post as the gif of the swastika symbol. <br><br>No one said you had demanded that proldic stop posting but even if you had, who cares? Only one person gets to make that decision on this board. I've had people demand I stop posting...sent email directly to Jeff. Yawn.<br><br>I was just curious why Mr. E merited support from you, even with the "safeguards" against rightwing whackos. You just trying to keep us on our toes?<br><br>Here's what you said earlier in this thread:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>My main point on this topic thus far- for some reason, I feel the need to rephrase and reiterate it- is that I'm thankful that I've availed myself of a wider variety of information sources on historical questions than I've gotten as a result of random encounters with on-line polemic essayists, and their often slim- or, even more often, non-existent- selection of bibliographical sources. Whatever the views expressed- whether they be rock-ribbed defenses of the status quo, iconoclasm of the most radical variety, or anything in between...a command of persuasive rhetoric is no substitute for depth of erudition. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I was just curious who you were talking about as relying on this type of information. It isn't proldic, of course, as he just hand transcribed a chapter out of a book by Parenti. A book. B-O-O-K. <br><br><br>And you might find Dave McGowan's reading list to be rather interesting. You can find it here:<br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Reading_List.html">davesweb.cnchost.com/Reading_List.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Like many online writers, Dave prefers to provide references that one can link to online. This does not mean he doesn't utilize books. Sheesh. He does speculate a great deal about things one is unlikely to find overtly mentioned in books, but he does label it as speculation when he does so.<br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[robertdreed]

"I was just curious why Mr. E merited support from you, even with the "safeguards" against rightwing whackos. You just trying to keep us on our toes?"<br><br>Actually, it's easier than that. I knew you would be on your toes. Therefore, I don't have to be. <br><br>My comments on proldic refer to the fact that I have no intention of hounding him off of the board. I'm extending the same courtesy to Mr. E. Based on his total of two posts, I see no reason to pre-empt his comments. In my opinion, people deserve more of a grace period than that. <br><br>I don't mind a pro-Stalinist presence on this board, although I prefer it to be up-front. I find it a novelty, actually- in contrast to the Nazis and racists, who in my years of on-line experience have been drearily ubiquitous, not to mention monomaniacal. <br><br>As for the bulk of the rest of your queries, I've answered them in previous posts. <br><br>"I was just curious who you were talking about as relying on this type of information."<br><br>In the context of this discussion- Dave McGowan, of course. I was hoping for a broader and deeper bibliography than the one he provided. More generally, that comment was aimed at a grand selection of Internet political polemicists, crypto-archaeologists, perpetual motion machine engineers, UFO investigators, alternative history theorists, etc. that I've encountered on all sorts of websites, not merely the Rigorous Intuition discussion board. <br><br>I'm going to excuse myself from further inquiry, for now. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 11/30/05 7:07 pm<br></i>

[slimmouse]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>It's because the very comments at the outset were the same coded language, "Jews run the world" ideologies that keep popping up all over this board. There are ways to talk about international finance and capitalism that are not nearly so simplistic. And almost without fail, those who do resort to this simplistic view of banking conspiracies get take their cue from theories such as you'll find on heretical.com.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br> And why, In your best estimate DE, might that be ?<br><br> You seem to be extremely talented at spotting the double/triple/quadruple bluff in much of the conversation on this board.........or should I say some of it <p></p><i></i>

[mr e]

As I explained above, folks, the page I referenced -- which has information which can be independently verified -- happened to have been one of the first that came up in a cursory Google search in the interests of satisfying the demands of the skeptics here. <br>Unlike perhaps some people, I don't have all day to craft replies to RI posts ... this is not my job. <br>I know nothing about the site and did not inspect the home page of the site prior to using the information. It should be understood that using generic historical information appearing on a site does not constitute a blanket endorsement of the the site or the views of the site's owners. But some people have a tough time with that concept, so perhaps I'll have to use a standard disclaimer when citing any source.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[slimmouse]

<br><br> You post about this or that, and then suddenly......WHAM !<br><br> And funnily enough (and you can ALL check this for yourselves) it extends to any number of subjects, which an ordinary guy blessed with a trillion hours of reading couldnt match.<br><br> Dreams indeed do often end on here. <p></p><i></i>

[mr e]

Meanwhile, it'd be nice if someone would seriously respond to the actual substance of my post, rather than to the agenda of the website where I happened to have found some of my material ... which is in any case available from other sources. But I guess we'd rather create a tempest in a teapot. <p></p><i></i>

[mr e]

Meanwhile, it'd be nice if someone would seriously respond to the actual substance of my post, rather than to the agenda of the website where I happened to have found some of my material ... which is in any case available from other sources. But I guess we'd rather create a tempest in a teapot.... <p></p><i></i>

[slimmouse]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Meanwhile, it'd be nice if someone would seriously respond to the actual substance of my post, rather than to the agenda of the website where I happened to have found some of my material ... which is in any case available from other sources. But I guess we'd rather create a tempest in a teapot<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->.... <br><br><br> Like I said. <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

sorry e, just got home.<br><br>I'll respond.<br><br>It's bullshit.<br><br>If we don't judge by the site that you linked to, then we can at least judge by the article you chose to post. Especially the excerpt. Which only named Jewish Bankers. <br><br>We can also judge your logic abilities by how you also referenced Sutton, who not only refutes the anti-Semitic line, but also the very people your quote tags as the bad guys. so, Sutton thinks it's bullshit too.<br><br>Qutb's post DID specifically respond to the "banking" angle with some good points which you have not addressed. So if you want response to the "substance" of your post...go reread his post and start there.<br><br>slimmouse said:<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><br>And funnily enough (and you can ALL check this for yourselves) it extends to any number of subjects, which an ordinary guy blessed with a trillion hours of reading couldnt match.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>That's either a compliment or an accusation. Be just a tad clearer...b/c one of those is not allowed on this site. <p></p><i></i>

[mr e]

Why discuss facts when you can just shriek ANTI-SEMITISM!<br><br>I almost forgot to reply to this thread. I guess it's because since I grew up up, I began to get oh so bored with Internet ad hominem mudslinging and the people who engage in it, who are so courageous when hiding behind Internet anonymity! <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :lol --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/laugh.gif ALT=":lol"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>I have already made the point about facts standing or falling on their own merit -- no need to reiterate that. (The fact that DE apparently was not paying attention to what I actually wrote, but only to the evil machinations of the Vast Worldwide Anti-semitic Conspiracy that exists in his/her head, is not my fault.) <br><br>I've supported my points about communism, fascism and international finance more than adequately, with citations, not ad hominems. Anyone interested in the truth and capable of reading and comprehending English can understand the information and find scads more of it within a few seconds. <br><br>But for some, no amount of information will suffice. They will always find some excuse to reject it, or subtly change the subject. Some -- no matter how impeccable the source -- <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Jewish</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> sources, even! -- will always enjoy twisting <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>any and every fact offered </em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> into proof of "anti-semitism." (Large segments of the Old Testament prophets, if I quoted them here, would be instantly condemned as "anti-semitic" as well.) You can't win, so I'm just not going to play the game. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>