please read and comment

by **Col Quisp** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:43 pm

when I said all are welcome here. This thread is indeed absurd.

by **professorpan** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:25 pm

Anti, you are one stubborn dude, I'll give you that ;-) My point -- and this is my final word on this poor, beaten horse -- is that Qutb's not-quite-letter-perfect transcription of your asinine question to me (asking whether I was a Jew or a Mason) did not alter the meaning or content of your question. The slight, erroneous change in sentence structure does not show any intent to to smear, deliberately misinterpret, or malign you. If I asked "Anti, are you a Communist, or a Freeper?" and someone misquoted my question as as: "Are you, Anti, a Free Republic type? Or a freakin' Pinko?" The question still remains the same. So what if the words are slightly changed? The value of the statement is the same. Why you can't understand that is beyond me.

by **heath7** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:36 pm

I am mindfucked by what has happened to this thread, and this board, since yesterday. The atmosphere seemed hopeful when I last posted; since then its surreally turned bewildering and menacing. I agree with masonic's 'bottom line' (whoever you are masonic, and whatever your agenda, your words have made many cogent points). Jeff has made it perfectly clear that not only will he abide by authoritarian laws (which would have been understandable), he will unhesitantly apply the John Hancock of his reputation to authoritarian laws. I suspect I should now just ball up and roll away, but... Jeff, I know you've always frowned on discussion of Holocaust investigation. Is there something that I've missed previously? Is this thread the first time you've stated categorically that you support laws prohibiting the investigation of history? I am uncomfortable with your general use of the term Holocaust revisionist. What I proposed in my last post on this thread, about creating our own multi-faceted, air-tight argument against agendas such as IHR, would that too be considered revisionist? I am left stunned by your Certain tone. You know that you could have left some cookie of comfort for us who are merely, honestly, trying to hone our big picture, instead it feels like you've told a sizeable chunk of us to simply fob off.

by **slimmouse** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:45 pm

Here are 2 statements, from a link which got firepitted Prof, to help you dissect the intricacies of this game here <blockquote>Quote:<hr>In my column, I stated that "While Israel has no legitimacy and is not recognized by any international body as a ‘representative’ of the Jewish people worldwide but rather as the state of the Israeli people who are citizens of it...," the Sun quoted me as saying that “Israel has no legitimacy.”<hr></blockquote> Heres another ; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>As for the political rally, which took place on Wednesday April 17, 2002, I was one of countless speakers. I spoke out and asserted the following: “"Like white South Africans who felt threatened under apartheid and who only felt safe when they gave up their commitment to white supremacy, Israeli Jews will continue to feel threatened if they persist in supporting Jewish supremacy. Israeli Jews will only feel safe in a democratic Israeli state where all Jews and Arabs are treated equally. No state has the right to be a racist state.” The Spectator misquoted me as saying that Israel is “a Jewish supremacist and racist state,” and that “every racist state should be threatened.”9 When I protested the misquotation, the Spectator journalist who wrote the story, Xan Nowakowski, apologized and informed me via E-mail that she did not even attend the rally and got the quotes from another reporter. She assured me that the newspaper would run a correction. After a back and forth for almost a week on E-mail, the Spectator ran the correction on April 24, 2002.<hr></blockquote> And heres how the Chinese whispers game then spreads; <blockquote>Quote:<hr>However, two major pro-Israeli propagandists, namely Martin Kramer and Daniel Pipes, would insist on reproducing the misquote in articles that they wrote to newspapers and that they posted on their websites. On June 20, 2002, Martin Kramer, an Israeli academic who teaches at Tel Aviv university, posted an article on the Middle East Forum website titled “Arab Panic,” in which he attacked a number of Columbia professors, myself included.<hr></blockquote> In fact, have a look at the entire article; <a href="http://censoringthought.">censoringthought.</a> org/massadresponsetoreport.html Now, Ive seen more than my fair share of this kinda stuff from a few on this board. I hope you understand, therefore that it IS important.

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:37 pm

Is this thread the first time you've stated categorically that you support laws prohibiting the investigation of history?  sigh I don't consider what Ernst Zundel does to be a sincere "investigation of history." Anyone who does, I hope they would pause to consider Zundel's agenda, politics and associates. Anyone who, having done so, still thinks Zundel is engaged in truthseeking, should find another board on which to post.

by **MASONIC PLOT** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:39 pm

All excellent points Heath. I think it is very sad that everyone is now slinging mud at eachother. I doubt any of us on here are really "Jew Haters" nor do any of us really think the Holocaust didnt take place. This is about one thing: LAWS THAT PREVENT AN HONEST INVESTIGATION OF HISTORICAL EVENTS. Today its the Holocaust and tomorrow its 9-11. "You 9-11 deniers are filth you should be arrested and thrown in prison for thought crimes." There will absolutely come a time, likely very soon, where it will be considered illegal in the United States to question the official version of WTC attacks. Thanks to those of you who support current laws that forbid alternative holocaust investigation, IT IS COMING. Again, I have never once heard ANYONE say that the Holocaust did not happen. Sure it happened, and many many innocent people died, millions to be sure. But questions about the official story remain and I personally would like some answers to those questions. Matter of fact I would like to post a list of those questions right here on this thread but I have been forbidden from doing so by the likes of Jeff Wells and those who support the laws that make me a criminal for doing so. Jeff, nobody is saying that because you post many controversial things about pedophiles, drug runners, Scientologists and Moonies that you automatically have to support "Holocaust Revisionism." None of this has ANYTHING to do with Jews, Nazis or Gas Chambers. The issue is much much larger. It is about a persons RIGHT TO QUESTION THE PARTY LINE regardless of who is involved, how many died and what the circumstances surrounding their deaths were. What is really at issue here is the State's use of propaganda to warp the minds of the masses and our attempts to cut through the web of lies and deceit and see things how they really were. This you call "Holocaust Revisionism or Denial" I call it honest historical investigation. Propaganda is REAL. BOTH the NAZIS and the JEWISH PEOPLE have utilized propaganda campiagns to strengthen thier respective positions on this matter and each of us have an obligation AND A RIGHT to expose its use no matter how offensive or painful it may be to either side.

by **heath7** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:43 pm

Jeff, so you are confident that the law in question will only ever be used against Zundel types?

by **Rigorous Intuition** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:49 pm

is Holocaust revisionism is intellectually, politically and morally repugnant, and will never be welcome here. This is an anti-fascist board, and I will not let it become a platform for apologists of Nazi genocide under the guise of an "honest investigation." To those who want such a discussion, find it elsewhere. This thread, and this topic, is closed.

please read and comment

I was wrong

Re: Professorpan

Re: THE BOTTOM LINE

Two Statements, and how to twist an argument.

Re: THE BOTTOM LINE

Listen to heath

Re: THE BOTTOM LINE

My bottom line

Who is online