Nazism nyet? Not yet

I agree logic and reason are certainly in order.

from the shoah foundation website:

The Interview
Between 1994 and 1999, the Survivors of the Shoah Visual History Foundation—now the USC Shoah Foundation Institute—interviewed nearly 52,000 survivors and other witnesses of the Holocaust. The Institute interviewed Jewish survivors, homosexual survivors, Jehovah’s Witness survivors, liberators and liberation witnesses, political prisoners, rescuers and aid providers, Roma and Sinti (Gypsy) survivors, survivors of Eugenics policies, and war crimes trials participants.

After developing an interviewing methodology in consultation with Holocaust historians, psychologists, and experts in the field of oral history, the Institute trained 2,300 interviewer candidates in 24 countries, hired 1,000 videographers, and recruited more than 100 regional coordinators and staff in 34 countries to organize the interviewing process in their respective regions. Interviewer Guidelines and Videographer Guidelines ensured that the interviews would be conducted with a consistent approach.

After each interview was completed, the Institute provided the interviewee with a copy of his or her videotaped testimony, which average 2 hours and 30 minutes in length."

Now let's see, exactly how many of these have turned out to be ... fantasists and liars? I can't find more than a handful, but I'll be generous and say that there are 50 that are exaggerated, or embellished by time or simply lies. This obviously proves that the shoah foundation is nothing more than jew propaganda (despite all the other victims and participants it interviewed) because how can anyone trust the record of a archive that is 99.999% ACCURATE!


As for fantasist liar propagandists one doesn't have to go any farther than PF to see their hatred, their narrow mindednessm, their intellectual dishonesty and their ridiculous notion that they can get away with such crass and desperate accusations.

pathetic jack, seriously pathetic.

 

[video=youtube;U3Eo8b4kueU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3Eo8b4kueU[/video]

 

Unless he was misquoted, I do know better than Gruner. I have already destroyed his major complaint on meeting Wiesel. Wiesel speaks romanian. oooooppppppss.

Obviously you don't know better. Always taking the word of the loonies, never vetting them because they fit so snuggly into that warm cubbyhole of hate.

 

oh some wit.

one helluva lot more than 0.001% thats for darn sure.

 

Captain Distortion strikes again.

Its not a snivelling apology, it is an explanation that when a user searches on jew, a ton of offensive stuff is returned and google is explaining that if the user want information on the jewish religion or jewish people etc, to use alternative search words. That isn't snivelling, but you are whining.

there certainly are people with sick obsessions. I've even met a few here.

 

How many were chosen to feature in The Last Days?

Why select the least plausible?

 

It's a fair point, to which you come back with a made up stat.

 

Yammer...yammer...yammer...'explaining'...and who demanded it?

 

I will take his word over your word.

 

Zionist PR has not told everyone all jews are really zionists. Your premise is incorrect, which is becoming an increasingly regular event with you. An incorrect premise means the rest of your jew hate scree is based on an incorrect assumption.

And look you are assuming that zionist have laid claim to all jews as if they were one group. You laid claim to zionists being all one group of dispicable racist murders and infestations of your body politic.

Gee jack, first you want it one way then you want it the other way, depending on what viscious little scree you wish to regurgitate for our amusement.

Let's see.
feel free to add to the list. I can imagine you sitting at your computer with one of those spinning lottery cages next to you. You give it a spin, pull out a ball and on it are words like:

hateful, judgement by stereotype, government/political control, agitators, subversive, greedy, murderous, disloyal, global conspiracy, global financial control, holocaust fraudsters,

You pick out half a dozen or so and then compose yet another jew hating scree. Repeating the same thing over and over again. No new material at all, just re=inventing the wheel time after time.

If you take this to be a constructive criticism of the content of your posts, you might actually improve.

 

Of course you would. I prove him to be a liar and you will naturally take his word.

Just can't stand it when one of your vaunted sources turns out to be yet another whacko.

He lied about meeting wiesel. Wiesel speaks romanian, yiddish, french and english. qu'elle suprise.

He got nowhere with his lawsuit. He has gotten nowhere with his 20 years of research. so naturally you believe him. I shouldnt be surprised, you even believe leuchter which is even a bigger stretch.

 

to quote your pal M.

who the fek cares?

 

guess you aren't up on all my posts trashing your nonsense ones.

 

really? out of the 53000 interviews, how many do you know to be "fraudlent", the work of fantasists and liars to use your terms.

Get back to me when you have a list. I have looked and there ain't even a dozen. but keep trying.

 

That's your view.

MY view is different.(see how that works, gee)

But maybe I am wrong, maybe others will come back and tell me all the times that global media have made the distinction between Zionism and Judaism...

 

Yup.

Sounds about right, is that the job spec to get into AIPAC?

 

Yes.

I would take the word of him v some bloke on the internet that defends all things Zionist Jew.

And?

 

The ADL must have, else they would not have gone snivelling to Google about it..

 

Well, the rest must have been less convincing than the scat based fantastist, Irene Zisblatt, otherwise they would have used one of the others.

 

I realize you only consider evidence or accusations from deniers, but I tend to examine the full range of evidence and opinion before making up my mind.

here is a scholarly examination of Irene Zisblatts story, an identification of inconsistencies etc. and a reconstruction of her biographical timeline.


http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.ca/2010/01/irene-zisblatt-diamond-girl-fact-or.html

Final conclusion
My research clearly shows that Irene Weisberg Zisblatt is not only a survivor of Auschwitz and the Holocaust, but that she, indeed, has an interesting and instructive story to tell. A story of endless humiliations and extreme suffering, but also of survival against all odds. It would be similar to those that hundreds of survivors can tell or have already told. It certainly would be less adventurous than that which she tells. But it would be in accordance with the historically established facts. Irene Weisberg Zisblatt should tell her story about survival at Auschwitz without exaggerations and implausibilities. It then would be a really true story, worth to be told and retold and to be listened to.

 

oh look its a piece of wit.

 

NO that is a cop out. When you make such definitive statements you have to be prepared to back them up with fact. the trouble is you can't so all you are really doing is setting up a rhetorical anecdotal hypothesis (at best) with which you then proceed to regurgitate some jew hating scree.

It is one of your more common practices.

 

Why can't you just accept that her claims were a combination of untruths and exaggerations? That's not to deny that she didn't suffer of course. I don't think Jack is claiming that.

 

Sometimes, it is all there is left, when one is faced with a fundamentalist.

 

@TMR;

Again, I would ask, if someone of the means of Spieberg had access to 53,000 witnesses, or whatever the figure was, WHY did he evidently pick three that are so clearly not telling the freaking truth?

Is Spielberg a Jew hater that wanted to put Jews in a bad light...