XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.conspiracy, alt.law-enforcement
From: roger@
In one age, called the Second Age by some,
(an Age yet to come, an Age long past)
someone claiming to be Seneca wrote
in message
:
>"Roger" wrote in message
>news:2bd9677fa1314cab29428ec9379fd928@news.teranews.com...
[ . . . ]
>>
>> Or would you like to try to make the case that any of those links
>> which do not simply quote the term are *not* of an anti-semitic
>> nature? Any of them at all?
>There are 50,700 of 'em, Roger. Go ahead and check 'em all yourself and tell
>me what you think.
Find *one* that uses it, not as a quote, which is *not* demonstrably
anti-semetic.
Just *one*.
>One thing is certain: the term is commonly used and those who use it (or,
>like yourself, read it) understand perfectly well what it means.
Yes, it means anti-semites will use any smear against those they hate,
regardless of any notion of the truth, and by and large are fairly
unimaginative, preferring instead to parrot what others have said as
long as it justifies their hatred.
>> >All the "irrational hatred" seems to be coming from your side of the
>> >debate.
>> >Anyone who disputes or even questions something presented as historical
>> >fact, but for which there is no physical evidence and no logical reason,
>> >you call an "anti-Semite."
>> Lie, given the mountains of evidence for the historical fact of the
>> Holocaust.
>What has that to do with me?
"Anyone who disputes or even questions something presented as
historical fact, but for which there is no physical evidence and no
logical reason, you call an 'anti-Semite.'"
To what historical fact do you refer as having no evidence or reason,
if not the Holocaust.
>>>> And why must you lie to justify your hatred?
>Why must you always characterize any viewpoint that differs from your own as
>"hatred"?
I demonstrably don't.
>I don't hate anyone connected with this issue, individually or
>collectively.
Demonstrably false.
>I merely comment on, and criticize where necessary, those
>things that require commentary or criticism.
"... with no concern as to whether my commentary or criticism is based
on anything but my hatred, as my continual referral to a normal
business transaction involving a service contracted for by the buyer
and offered by the seller as a "tax," and attempts to differentiate it
from other such services on the sole criteria that Jooos are involved
amply demonstrates."
>I object to being lied to.
But not to lying.
And you object when no lie has been told.
>I object to being taxed to support or advance the cause of any tribal group.
You tax your abilities in an attempt to advance the cause of Holocaust
denial and anti-semitism in general.
>I object to attempts to suppress free speech on this or any other issue.
And yet not a peep out of you regarding the attempts by irving to
silence his critics on an ongoing basis...
>And
>so on. I don't hate the liars, demagogues, propagandists etc. but they
>should be exposed for what they are. That's all.
Which is why your irrational hatred is exposed every time you crawl
back out from under your rock...
>> >Anyone who raises an eyebrow at well-organized
>> >pressure groups and propagandists who seek to promote their
>> >co-religionists'
>> >national socialism and brutal aggression at the expense of the American
>> >taxpayer, you call an "anti-Semite."
>> Of course, you have yet to demonstrate any of this, yet present it as
>> a given.
>You can demonstrate it yourself. Get a mirror. You are a living
>demonstration of what I'm talking about.
As someone that exposes your propaganda? Absolutely.
Now, would you care to explain what the American taxpayer has to do
with your lies about Kosher certification?
>> Why must you lie to justify your hatred?
>Why must you always characterize any viewpoint that differs from your own as
>"hatred"? I don't hate anyone connected with this issue, individually or
>collectively. I merely comment on, and criticize where necessary, those
>things that require commentary or criticism. I object to being lied to. I
>object to being taxed to support or advance the cause of any tribal group. I
>object to attempts to suppress free speech on this or any other issue. And
>so on. I don't hate the liars, demagogues, propagandists etc. but they
>should be exposed for what they are. That's all.
Same responses as above.
>> >Anyone who notices that such
>> >well-funded pressure groups on an international scale seek to suppress
>> >free
>> >speech and open inquiry (unfortunately with much success in Canada and
>> >Europe), you call an "anti-Semite."
>> Of course, you have yet to demonstrate any of this, yet present it as
>> a given.
>>
>> Why must you lie to justify your hatred?
>Why must you always characterize any viewpoint that differs from your own as
>"hatred"? I don't hate anyone connected with this issue, individually or
>collectively. I merely comment on, and criticize where necessary, those
>things that require commentary or criticism. I object to being lied to. I
>object to being taxed to support or advance the cause of any tribal group. I
>object to attempts to suppress free speech on this or any other issue. And
>so on. I don't hate the liars, demagogues, propagandists etc. but they
>should be exposed for what they are. That's all.
"mark" cannot justify zir lies...
>> >Hasn't it occurred to you that you (and the other Dershowitzniks) are
>> >gradually but inexorably reducing the term "anti-Semite" to perfect
>> >meaninglessness?
>> No, because it isn't meaningless, no matter how much you'd like to
>> pretend that it is.
>Anti-Semitism is generally taken to mean "Jew hatred," as many on your side
>of the argument have said over and over. You're claiming that even though I
>don't hate Jews I have "Jew hatred"? Does that really seem sensible to you?
>
>Mark
No, "mark" -- because you demonstrably *do* hate the Jews, it is
*entirely* sensible.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
