9/11-investigator explains the Holocaust

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matthew Ellard said:
Rubbish. I asked you you show us this email you sent requesting evidence a month ago and you ran away. You never sent any such email. Prove me wrong by posting a copy of the email you sent here.
Click to expand...
.
Full headers included
.
 
little grey rabbit said:
This is the sort of behaviour which causes outsiders reading to label JREFers "spastics"
Click to expand...
.
Since the only one I've ever known to use that phrase to describe "JREFers" is a certain flop-eared troll, try to imagine how little I care.

Where's that draft letter you wanted critiqued?
.
 
little grey rabbit said:
This is the sort of behaviour which causes outsiders reading to label JREFers "spastics"

I personally don't mind, but I thought you might appreciate a heads-up
Click to expand...

That holocaust deniers are calling JREF members spastics on another forum? Well that makes sense as they certainly don't have any real arguments to put forward.

How are you going with showing us the email you sent to confirm the soap? All you need do is copy it and past it here and remove your name and address. It should take 30 seconds unless of course you lied and never sent any such email.
 
Maja said:
Really? In the world outside JREF, asking to see the headers of an e-mail is considered a spasm? :confused:
Click to expand...

It is certainly considered rather strange and peculiar behavior. And not a normal request by any stretch of the imagination.

Incidentally "spastic" is not my word and not one that I would choose. But it does capture rather neatly the "special needs" nature of more than a few people in this thread.
 
Last edited:
So you are saying that, in the world outside JREF, asking for evidence is "strange and peculiar behaviour", even an indication of "special needs"? That all the sane people out there in the outside world just accept everyone else's words at face value?
 
Maja said:
So you are saying that, in the world outside JREF, asking for evidence is "strange and peculiar behaviour", even an indication of "special needs"? That all the sane people out there in the outside world just accept everyone else's words at face value?
Click to expand...
I am not sure I understand what you are saying. Views of normality differ from sub-culture to sub-culture.

In my various faces, I have never come across one where demands to inspect emails were made over mundane matters. Why on earth would I make up a claim like that? If they think that the Hague does have an archival holding of human soap and that they would readily supply the reference number why don't they take the 3 minutes to write, like I did, with as yet no reply.

Hope that answers your question. For me and my background, these demands are strange and peculiar. For all I know you regularly post on forums where you take flash contents of emails to prove meaningless points, until I found JREF that wasnt the case.
 
little grey rabbit said:
I am not sure I understand what you are saying. Views of normality differ from sub-culture to sub-culture.
Click to expand...
Then I can only conclude that you come from a, how shall I put it, very peculiar sub-culture.

In my various faces, I have never come across one where demands to inspect emails were made over mundane matters.
Click to expand...
I'd hardly call an email asking for details on soap made of human matter to be a mundane matter.

Why on earth would I make up a claim like that?
Click to expand...
Why indeed? Could it be because you didn't think anyone would call you on this?

If they think that the Hague does have an archival holding of human soap and that they would readily supply the reference number why don't they take the 3 minutes to write, like I did, with as yet no reply.
Click to expand...
Probably because they aren't that interested, unlike you? And who knows, The archives in The Hague might have something better to reply to rather strange requests?

Hope that answers your question. For me and my background, these demands are strange and peculiar. For all I know you regularly post on forums where you take flash contents of emails to prove meaningless points, until I found JREF that wasnt the case.
Click to expand...
If it's a meaningless point, why did you bring it up? Clearly you didn't think it was meaningless until someone asked you to bring the goods to the table.
 
Amazer said:
Probably because they aren't that interested, unlike you? And who knows, The archives in The Hague might have something better to reply to rather strange requests?
Click to expand...

That is the business of archives, to know what is in their holdings to have them catalogued and to respond to such requests. After all, if the IPN had sourced their "human soap" from the Hague archives they must have gone through a similar process.

I did give them the evidence reference number it was submitted as by the Soviets, USSR-393, to help them. There was really anything else I could be expected to provide.
As a rule, most exhibits were returned to the authorities who provided them in the first place. So that, for example, the alleged flayed human skin that was displayed as from Buchenwald ended up, IIRC, in the Smithsonian.
 
little grey rabbit said:
That is the business of archives, to know what is in their holdings to have them catalogued and to respond to such requests. After all, if the IPN had sourced their "human soap" from the Hague archives they must have gone through a similar process.

I did give them the evidence reference number it was submitted as by the Soviets, USSR-393, to help them. There was really anything else I could be expected to provide.
As a rule, most exhibits were returned to the authorities who provided them in the first place. So that, for example, the alleged flayed human skin that was displayed as from Buchenwald ended up, IIRC, in the Smithsonian.
Click to expand...

It would be my guess that the archive is under no obligation to reply to just any request. Perhaps they have a few rules and regulations that you need to comply with before they are willing to entertain requests?
 
Amazer said:
It would be my guess that the archive is under no obligation to reply to just any request. Perhaps they have a few rules and regulations that you need to comply with before they are willing to entertain requests?
Click to expand...

What specific kind of rule and regulation would you think was appropriate before supplying the archival number of human soap - (should they actually have a holding)?

Shouldn't they be obliged to inform the applicant as to why they were declining the request?
 
Until you post the email, we will never know.

ETA - Here is help. Go to "sent" in your email program. Find the addy for the archives. Click that email. Copy the body, and paste back here. Until you do this, we spastics skeptics will consider you to be untruthful about this particular matter.
 
Last edited:
carlitos said:
Until you post the email, we will never know.

ETA - Here is help. Go to "sent" in your email program. Find the addy for the archives. Click that email. Copy the body, and paste back here. Until you do this, we spastics skeptics will consider you to be untruthful about this particular matter.
Click to expand...

I somehow doubt that our little rabbit actually wrote that mail.
 
Ya think?

ETA - he/she is posting in the 9/11 subforum, and some of the content appears to indicate that this is all some grand experiment in human behavior. Odd.
 
Last edited:
Curious, all his postings in other threads seem to leave him no time to copy and paste the email he sent to the archive at Den Haag.
 
carlitos said:
Ya think?

ETA - he/she is posting in the 9/11 subforum, and some of the content appears to indicate that this is all some grand experiment in human behavior. Odd.
Click to expand...

And a very interesting experiment it is. Fascinating subject is little grey rabbi.
 
friggin' hell.

This is the first and last time I do this. Here is the reply from the ICJ April 12
Dear Sir or Madam,

We acknowledge good receipt of your message and thank you for your interest in the Court's website.

Your message has been forwarded to the Department of the Court's Registry dealing with the issues you addressed. This Department will send you a reply in due course.
Click to expand...

I should add, I wrote previously on the same subject when the Polish Human Soap story first came out. So I have no doubt that I won't get a reply. This time I gave them the USSR-393 number under which it was submitted as evidence.
But as I said, with the other Greuelpropaganda artifacts, they were mostly returned to the agency that supplied them, so human skin and lampshades are found in museums in the USA (where they belong) not solemnly stored in some Hague basement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom