7 February, 2009
We Will Not Protect Bad Ideas from Public Scrutiny
Posted by Socrates in Bradley R. Smith, Holocaust, holocaust racket, Socrates at 1:13 am | 
Permanent Link
by Bradley R. Smith (not sure what Smith means by “Holocaust” here. “Deaths by starvation/disease,” perhaps?):
7 February, 2009 at 4:46 am
Posted by Smith on his blog:
“In 1967 blacks earned 54 cents for every dollar made by whites, but by 2005 they had increased to 57 cents for every white dollar. That meteoric rise of three cents in 38 years means it will take more than 500 years for them to achieve dollar parity with whites. Of course there may be a speedier closing of that awesome gap now that Obama is in the White House ; like maybe only 400 years?”
7 February, 2009 at 9:54 am
Herein I find a major problem:
“We could easily say that since this particular ad is extreme in nature, it should be suppressed.”
No matter what speech is allowed, the Jews still define the type of speech. Why should discussing an historical event be considered extreme? Would denying slavery as cause of the Civil war be considered extreme? Would saying that Israelis are lying, thieving, murderous, bastards be considered extreme? How about if we apply those same sobriquets to Arabs? How about when the jews labels someone “anti-Semitic” or a “neo-Nazi” for not agreeing with them, is that extreme? How about when such labels cost one their livelihood? Should such slander be considered extreme in the same manner as when one shouts “Fire!” in a crowded theater? For me, the jews ability to continue a lie as monsterous as the HollowHoax is about as extreme as it gets. So we find that one man’s idea of extreme is another man’s idea of rational. So who is defining the type of speech we use and how might definitions impact the freedom of speech? If one reads Bradly Smith’s ad with the opening idea that this is “extreme” speech how might that color a preconception of his message? While free, can such labeling be considered fair speech?
To the credit of the editors of the “The Jambar” they do address this very issue:
“But then, who defines extreme? If we start to suppress the voices we don’t believe in, it would start with this ad, but could spill over into far less volatile areas.”
The problem here is found in the phrase “we don’t believe in.” In this we find the fundamental question, how do we come to believe as we do? Belief is matter of acceptance without verification or substantiation. One does not believe in truth for truth exists. One must only believe in lies for all truths can be verified by testing. This is why one must “believe” in the Hollowhoax, for it will not withstand testing.
7 February, 2009 at 10:48 am
The problem with trying to come to grips with the holocaust is, the word is nebulous. If one said that jews were put into labor camps where they died from malnutrition and diseases that would be an accurate description. However, the word holocaust has a host of meanings such as, death squads, gas chambers, ovens, soap made from jews fat, lampshades, concentration camps, rivers of blood oozing from the earth, 6 million, and a host of other things proven or not proven, no matter. What we do know for a fact is Germany was pretty tired of the jews screwing up their country and wanted to rid themselves of the pest. How they did it is clouded in mystery since the jews are the only ones who are allowed to discuss this historical event.
7 February, 2009 at 6:09 pm
I wouldn’t call being placed in holiday work camps a “holocaust”. I would call it an all expenses paid vacation. Pretty sweet deal.
;-)
7 February, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Waldo Star..nebulous..one word sums it up nicely.
Oh so crafty are these tassel tugging Jews. Keep us all in the dark and feed us bullshit. But we have to admit, we for so many years have allowed them to getaway with it.
One sure way for you Americans to help the cause of stopping the Jews is to stop listening to their hatred stories. The Americans have been brainwashed into thinking that the whole of the Mid East is against them. And with this mindset they further believe that it is only the Jews who can protect them. But of coarse at the cost of a Jewish ransom.
Stop feeding the cancer and watch it feed upon its self.
Stop the power of the Jew and all that goes with him will be eradicated.
8 February, 2009 at 1:39 am
“If one said that jews were put into labor camps where they died from malnutrition and diseases that would be an accurate description. However, the word holocaust has a host of meanings such as, death squads, gas chambers, ovens, soap made from jews fat, lampshades, concentration camps, rivers of blood oozing from the earth, 6 million, and a host of other things proven or not proven, no matter.”
Nice distinction, Waldo. Many thousands of Jews probably did die from malnourishment and typhus. Had the Jews stuck to the truth, they might have earned a only few billion from their sob story. Since they are Jews and greedy by nature, they embellished the story to the point of absurdity, thereby scamming hundreds of billions from the gullible goyim. Maybe Bishop Williamson will be the one to break the wall surrounding the myth of the holocaust.
8 February, 2009 at 2:33 am
Like Blackshirt says, who cares about the damn Holohoax? If the lying, neurotic Jews and their weak-minded Goy followers want to believe it happened, let them. The facts are available to anyone who wants them. If they don’t want the facts, then don’t force them to change their minds. Just add those people to the Shit List and we’ll deal with ’em later.
8 February, 2009 at 10:58 am
“The otherwise fine editorial asserts that I call into question “whether the Holocaust actually occurred,” which can mislead the reader. While I do question “gas chambers,” gas chambers are one thing, the “Holocaust” another. We should not conflate them. Never mind that it is commonplace among mainline journalists and even academics to do exactly that.”
———————————————–
I witnessed this last night on Fox News during a segment on Bishop Richard Williamson.
Here is another example of blatant dishonesty on the ultra-left Huffingtom Post website:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/24/bishop-richard-williamson_n_160598.html
8 February, 2009 at 12:29 pm
With all due respect to Mr. Smith’s adept semantic play, can what “the Holocaust” connotes to the majority of our people be reconciled with concentration camps and forced labor sans attempted extermination? No, if the truth comes to predominate in the minds of our people “the Holocaust” will be no more.
What Mr. Smith is obviously doing is attempting to wither the sacredly held notion of “the Holocaust” without making a frontal assault on it. It may well be a worthwhile tactic.
8 February, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Like I said before, Bishop Williamson WILL recant, and he will do it with a smile on his face. You can bet on it.
;-)
9 February, 2009 at 11:29 am
Yup, he will get on his hands and knees begging for forgiveness from the Jews, insisting he never meant to imply he was an anti Semite, which, of course, is the worst crime imaginable.