Question for twoofers who are NOT anti-semites

[TheLoneBedouin]

Some JREFers may be attempting to smear the truth movement, but it is clear that the truth movement has smeared itself by association with these repulsvie organizations. I think it is reasonable to expect statements from Alex Jones and Jason Bermas that they condemn racist and pro-nazi ideas.

Fair enough. But you do agree that citing articles, even hundreds of articles, written by an anti-semite does not make you an anti-semite.

The fact that Bollyn is extensively sourced in 9/11 skeptics' literature, combined with the fact that his employer, the American Free Press, has neo-Nazi associations, gives defenders of the official 9/11 myth effective ammunition with which to attack their critics. Although publications of the American Free Press are generally free of racist, white-supremicist, or anti-Semitic content, its sister publication, The Barnes Review overtly promotes such ideologies.

The fact that such associations serve as a means to dismiss 9/11 skepticism, does not mean that the dismissal is logical.

 

[Myriad]

Fair enough. But you do agree that citing articles, even hundreds of articles, written by an anti-semite does not make you an anti-semite.

It depends on why you're citing them. If you're citing them in support of your own cause, I'd say that yes, in my opinion that does make you an anti-semite.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[SDC]

Concur with Myriad. If you sup with the devil, you need a long spoon. To clarify: if you use material from lying anti-semitic scum, you associate with them, and in fact you are effectively one of them.

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

It depends on why you're citing them. If you're citing them in support of your own cause, I'd say that yes, in my opinion that does make you an anti-semite.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Yeah- that makes sense . Did you know Hitler was a painter? Suppose Hitler had written a book on painting? Does citing him as a source for a certain painting technique make you anti-semitic? As I said, context is key, and all the more so when AFP is "generally free of racist, white-supremicist, or anti-Semitic content".

 

[MaGZ]

What price are you willing to pay for your refusal to divest your movement of the malignant, hate-filled racist scum who you are currently marching alongside.

Do you think that on the day after the revolution, that the Nazis in your midst will simply say "Thanks for letting us come along, we just wanted to see a really good fight" and that they will then pack their bags and go home?

What are you going to do when the nazis start calling in the favors they have done you?

How will you answer when Kevin Barrett asks that he be made Attorney General of the United States? When Christopher Bollyn demands to be made Secretary of State? Or when Micheal Rivero, Darryl Bradford Smith or Eric Hufschmid wants to chair the new Department of Racial Purity?

You've made it clear over the last seven years that you won't do anything about the monsters in your midst before your eventual victory. That being the case, you need to consider now, what you are truly willing to do to show that at least half of you really don't have anything against the jewish, or any other non-white, people.

You should preferably do this before your post-revolutionary starts building FEMA camps for real.

The Israelis learned of the 9/11 planned attack and let it happened. This important point will grow and resonate in the Truth Movement in the coming years and there is nothing you or anyone else can do about it.

 

[SDC]

Magz is telling a naughty, naughty untruth. But her postings are always like that. The scamp!!

ETA: I am going to refer to her as a "Nazi admiring Pimpf" and see what happens. Elsewhere, I have said that "Pimpf" is a perfectly decent German word which means "adolescent male." So the "her" is contradictory. If I should say "him" that's OK with me and I am happy to be corrected.

Pimpf.

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

I am going to refer to her as a "Nazi admiring Pimpf" and see what happens.

Do you have any evidence that Magz is a "Nazi admiring Pimpf"?

 

[MaGZ]

Read my history, Alex. I don't have the "blind faith" that you accuse us of.

Your movement has a nazi problem. Are you going to do something about it now? Or wait till they've already rode your coattails into positions of power?

You seem to think Whites will someday be able to set thing right in the US and Canada? Why are you so optimistic?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Read my history, Alex. I don't have the "blind faith" that you accuse us of.

Your movement has a nazi problem. Are you going to do something about it now? Or wait till they've already rode your coattails into positions of power?

You seem to think Whites will someday be able to set thing right in the US and Canada? Why are you so optimistic?

Your post doesn't make a lick of sense as a response to what Sword_Of_Truth said...

 

[Myriad]

Yeah- that makes sense . Did you know Hitler was a painter? Suppose Hitler had written a book on painting? Does citing him as a source for a certain painting technique make you anti-semitic?

One cite, or several hundred?

Yes, I might question your motive for choosing Hitler from among countless available examples of practitioners of any given painting technique, especially if your assessment of the technique were overall favorable. Anti-semitism (as a motivator of a generally pro-Nazi agenda) would be the most likely motive.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

You seem to think Whites will someday be able to set thing right in the US and Canada? Why are you so optimistic?

I was wondering when a question like this would pop up in this thread.

Yes, I am optimistic. I believe that human nature being what it is, evil like yours (along with most other evils) will continue to exist in one form or another. But I am optimistic that with education, effort and a force of arms wielded by good men, people like you will be kept in your proper place. Occasionally, someone like you might forget his place and get uppity, but law enforcement and watchful civilians will put you back down. And people of all races and most religions and philosophies (except yours) will live in relative harmony.

When I talk of this purely hypothetical twoofer revolution. I am talking to the twoofers delusions. I am addressing the make believe world they live in wherein they actually think this will happen. One thing I find with them is that they are dimly aware of your prescence among them but they just aren't really thinking about you. Just as President Bush has been faulted for not knowing what to do with Iraq following deposing a true brutal dictatorship the twoofers aren't figuring out a plan for what to do after their imaginary victory.
And their failure in this respect is telling.

As to whether I believe this will actually happen in the real world, I'm already on record here as stating adamantly that you will not even get your new investigation.

The number of people whining and bitching needed to get a new investigation is far below what you would need to electorally defeat an existing government. And that is far below what you would need to elect your own regime. And that is far below what you would need for an actual revolution.

Bottom line, MaGZ, truthers are no threat of any real kind, they are in no danger of acquiring power that no responsible grown up will let them have. That means you won't get any either.

 

[Disbelief]

Do you have any evidence that Magz is a "Nazi admiring Pimpf"?

You have been here long enough in various guises to know MagZ'z posting history. If you can't remember, look it up.

 

[SDC]

"Nazi-admiring" is I think well documented and I doubt Magz would deny it, anyhow.

As for "Pimpf..." native speakers of German may correct me as to current usage but historically it has meant an adolescent male. I don't know Magz's age, or even his/ her sex, but I'm willing to gamble on referring to Magz in this way. I find Pimpf an amusing-sounding word (in English!), and I believe it qualifies as an entertaining "false friend" in the history of English's development as a Germanic language.

If Magz wants to report me, or you on his/ her behalf, go ahead. He/ she seemed to get irritated when someone was not wrist-slapped for calling him /her "Nazi boy," while he/ she was sanctioned for calling someone else "Jewboy."

Well, back to wachting on the Rhine.

 

[Nick Terry]

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?

There's a difference between quoting a tainted repellent source and relying on it. If I said '"Hitler claimed in his speech of 30 January 1939 that the Jews would face extermination if they started a new world war - footnote: speech of 30 January 1939, reproduced in Domarus page x" then this is a relatively accurate paraphrase of what Hitler, major world statesman, said, on 30 January 1939.

However, if I said 'democracy is spreading through the Middle East - footnote: speech by George W Bush', that would be frickin' ridiculous as Dubya is not a noted authority on the region. Likewise if I said '300,000 Spanish Nationalists were murdered by the Republicans in 1936 - footnote: speech by A. Hitler, 30 January 1937', this would be a) stupid and b) repeating a vast exaggeration for political purposes, aka a 'lie'.

Sounds like some people round here need a proper education in source evaluation. Here's an apposite remark:

Faurisson is a practitioner of what might be called the Method of Crucial Source, a favorite among cranks. The Method consists of seizing upon a phrase or sentence or sometimes a longer passage from no matter where, without regard to its provenance or reliability, to "prove" a whole novel theory of history or the universe. More often than not the Source in question is a newspaper item ­- after all, what cannot be found in some newspaper somewhere, at some time.

 

[CHF]

I see MagZ is back...our local member of the Twoofen-SS.

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

One cite, or several hundred?

Yes, I might question your motive for choosing Hitler from among countless available examples of practitioners of any given painting technique, especially if your assessment of the technique were overall favorable. Anti-semitism (as a motivator of a generally pro-Nazi agenda) would be the most likely motive.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Well, one claim was "LCF citing AFP". I believe that was 1-2 cites (though CHF refuses to source his claim).
It is a huge assumption to say anti-semitism is the most likely motive. Perhaps he is the best example, or the only example, of that particular technique.
This analagy is not the best. Alex Jones is even more tenuously linked to "anti-semitism" than the above (his is a three way link from the anti-semitic Carto to AFP to Jones). A better analogy would be a monograph which cites a long-time co-author of Pascual Jordan. Such monographs do exist (in fact, monographs which cite Jordan directly are even more common).
Again, given the dubious nature of some of AFP's links (not their actual content), I would say it would be reasonable to ask for a disclaimer from Jones' website. But it is completely illogical to say that because they don't have one, they are anti-semitic.
BTW, I am against AJ having so many links to AFP, only because it hurts the truth movement when detractors make illogical claims of anti-semitism.

 

[Elizabeth I]

I see MagZ is back...our local member of the Twoofen-SS.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Interesting how LB creates distance with the 3-way link.... Carto to AFP to Jones?

Carto is AFP. So it's a single link. Carto's AFP to Jones.

Why doesn't Alex just address this? We know from the great microchip debacle that he and Bermas trawl here for info. And he goes on for hours on every topic under the sun. Well, except this.

And I'd like to again salute Gregory. Not just for the ability to adjust to new evidence when presented, but for actually acting on it.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Well, one claim was "LCF citing AFP". I believe that was 1-2 cites (though CHF refuses to source his claim).

I'm going to borrow a page from Cracked.coms "Was 9/11 a conspiracy".

For instance, Loose Change is filled with screen grabs of newspaper headlines that mention things like missing planes and bombs at the World Trade Center... but all of those shots are from the American Free Press...


...A Neo-Nazi newsletter obsessed with the Zionist takeover of the world (yes, that's DavidDuke.com on their "links" page).

Every time you see a newspaper headline in Loose Change, it's pretty much always from the American Free Press.

Meanwhile, I had a good chuckle the first time I saw the Loose Change end credits, (ed. note the prominence of Christopher Bollyn) where they boast research done by "Killtown."

Now, memory told me "Killtown" was a white 80's rap group...

...But a quick Google search turns up a "Killtown" who is a member of the Loose Change forums. Here we have him talking about, you guessed it, how the Holocaust was no big deal.

Word.

But hey, which of us wouldn't hitch our wagons to some neo-Nazis if it meant career advancement? That doesn't make him a bad person, does it?

 

[deep]

Show us where you have condemned dot-connectery by twoofers.

I put people like that on my ignore list - that's what it's for.