Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 11,494
Show me where I've connected those dots - you can't, because I've done no such thing.
Show us where you have condemned dot-connectery by twoofers.
Show me where I've connected those dots - you can't, because I've done no such thing.
You have done no such thing.
You linked to Scholars for Truth and Justice, whose most famous member (even if he is not the leader, Jones is still very much the public face of STJ9/11) has chronic and continuing associations with nazi-sympathizers. STJ9/11 thus far has done nothing to reign in Jones.
You linked to http://www.truthmove.org/content/2008-declaration/
Which is a dead link.
Finally you linked to 911research, who not only provides numerous links to David Griffin, Steven Jones and Morgan Reynolds, all of whom have close ties to nazi-sympathizers but even has at least one direct link to Eric Hufschmid.
The fact remains that the twoof movement has done absolutely nothing to distance itself from racism and bigotry.
And you all feel fine about it.
So how about you answer my original question? What, if anything, are you going to do with these people after your little revolution since you refuse to do anything now?
I'll say it again, Gregory:
LC cited the "American Free Press," DG Griffin gives interviews on white power radio, Steven Jones works with Holocaust Deniers and Alex Jones runs banner adds for racist publications.
The very cornerstones of your sick little movement have been citing and working with Nazi scum from day one and show no signs of stopping. So whether or not there's a policy against teaming up with such vile people is of no relevance if your "leaders" continue to do so.
I consider the cornerstones to be The Press For Truth Group, Paul Thompson, Ray McGovern, Cynthia McKinney and Dennis Kucinich.
GU said:Please back up your accusations with specific references.
I consider the cornerstones to be The Press For Truth Group, Paul Thompson, Ray McGovern, Cynthia McKinney and Dennis Kucinich.
Please back up your accusations with specific references.
You'd certainly be in the minority on that one, Gregory.
The story on DR Griffin's radio appearence is on the second forum page, if not the first, while the LC-AFP links are verifiable by watching one of the first two editions.
As for the rest, you know how to use the search function.
I've taken a quick look at the AFP site. I see a considerable bias against Israel but I don't see anything supporting naziism or even anti-semetic. My father was persecuted by the Nazis so I am not unsensitive to these issues. I didn't get to the Revisionist History section yet. I'll get back to you on that one and DRG.
AFP = Willis Carto. I cannot believe that an educated person does not know who he is, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Check out the books he published when he controlled Noontide Press. Does The Myth of The Six Million ring a bell? (Ask MaGZ, I'm sure he keeps a dog-eared copy under his pillow.)
You'd certainly be in the minority on that one, Gregory.
The story on DR Griffin's radio appearence is on the second forum page, if not the first, while the LC-AFP links are verifiable by watching one of the first two editions.
As for the rest, you know how to use the search function.
You have done no such thing.
You linked to Scholars for Truth and Justice, whose most famous member (even if he is not the leader, Jones is still very much the public face of STJ9/11) has chronic and continuing associations with nazi-sympathizers. STJ9/11 thus far has done nothing to reign in Jones.
You linked to http://www.truthmove.org/content/2008-declaration/
Which is a dead link.
Finally you linked to 911research, who not only provides numerous links to David Griffin, Steven Jones and Morgan Reynolds, all of whom have close ties to nazi-sympathizers but even has at least one direct link to Eric Hufschmid.
The fact remains that the twoof movement has done absolutely nothing to distance itself from racism and bigotry.
And you all feel fine about it.
So how about you answer my original question? What, if anything, are you going to do with these people after your little revolution since you refuse to do anything now?
So? Context is key- if there is something anti-semitic in an article, we should condemn the article, not the general "link" to AFP. Do you think Alex Jones/LC should have a disclaimer that says they don't necessarily support all views of people they cite? What about Nick Terry (Historian of the Holocaust), does he need a disclaimer when quoting Hitler?GregUrich said:I have recently started a thread on The 9/11 Forum to highlight this issue. Not that I have ever been a fan of Alex Jones or a consumer of his "products", but I fear that many people, such as I, have been ignorant of these associations.
No, this is yet another example of JREF smearing truthers with illogical claims.This is a good example of how truthers can find important information on JREF and why I try to maintain constructive relationships with many of the people here.
So? Context is key- if there is something anti-semitic in an article, we should condemn the article, not the general "link" to AFP.
I have not rejected anything because it was "supplied by the government". I have rejected certain "evidence" from the government due to use of torture to gain information, contradiction to several other lines of testimony, lack of corroboration, etc. TM has used important information supplied by the government, FDR is a case in point.TheLoneBedouin said:And is this the same standard you hold for "government" sources that provide evidence for the official version of events? The staggering irony here has already been pointed out, but it bears repeating.
You mean Nist? I reject its conclusions because it ignores certain data, bases its conclusions on unsupported assumptions, and uses logical fallacies (see the September Stundies Thread for my nomination).johnny karate said:And yet you dismiss out of hand a 10,000 page technical document simply because it comes from a government agency.
So? Context is key- if there is something anti-semitic in an article, we should condemn the article, not the general "link" to AFP. Do you think Alex Jones/LC should have a disclaimer that says they don't necessarily support all views of people they cite? What about Nick Terry (Historian of the Holocaust), does he need a disclaimer when quoting Hitler?
No, this is yet another example of JREF smearing truthers with illogical claims.
@GregoryUruch
Please read this article. I'm not a fan of Alex Jones either, but I'm definitely not a fan of ADL propaganda tactics.
@JREF
Show me the specifics or STFU.
Wikipedia said:Carto and several Spotlight staff members and writers have since founded a new newspaper called the American Free Press. The paper includes articles from syndicated columnists who have no direct ties to Carto or his organizations.
...
In 2004, Carto joined in signing the New Orleans Protocol on behalf of American Free Press. The New Orleans Protocol seeks to "mainstream our cause" by reducing internecine warfare. It was written by David Duke.
So? Context is key- if there is something anti-semitic in an article, we should condemn the article, not the general "link" to AFP. Do you think Alex Jones/LC should have a disclaimer that says they don't necessarily support all views of people they cite? What about Nick Terry (Historian of the Holocaust), does he need a disclaimer when quoting Hitler?
No, this is yet another example of JREF smearing truthers with illogical claims.
@GregoryUruch
Please read this article. I'm not a fan of Alex Jones either, but I'm definitely not a fan of ADL propaganda tactics.
@JREF
Show me the specifics or STFU.
You mean Nist? I reject its conclusions because it ignores certain data, bases its conclusions on unsupported assumptions, and uses logical fallacies (see the September Stundies Thread for my nomination).
Its not a bare assertion fallacy. Like I said, look in the September Stundies thread for my nomination of NIST.JKK said:Bare assertion fallacy. Show me the calculations that disprove any of NIST's conclusions. Show me the consensus within the scientific community that rejects the NIST Report. Failing that, please explain to me why I should believe what you tell me about it.