Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Carolyn Yeager
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:55 pm

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby Carolyn Yeager » 9 years 5 months ago (Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:11 am)

Kageki wrote:
The Warden wrote:
History shows even in the face of facts, jews will disregard it and carry on. People are still claiming Frank and Wiesenthal as evidence. When and if Wiesel is exposed, the jews will call the people deniers and haters and go about their daily activities of brainwashing.

I'm merely stating that the expectations of people behind the Wiesel Files are too high and unrealistic. Define insanity, and compare it to the previous exposures of frauds.



I'm not really sure why the need to make a fuss about expectations and such though. Are you saying debunking anything is completely worthless? Certainly any debunking adds to the cause.


You hit the nail here, Kageki. Why so much disturbance and complaint from The Warden about what Someone Else is doing in revisionist work? It makes no sense. Naturally, "jews will disregard it and carry on." Who expects anything else from jews?
Also saying "I'm merely stating that the expectations ... are too high and unealistic." Does he know what they are? He keeps demanding to know, but they are clearly stated in the Mission Statement. Is he unhappy that he wasn't consulted about the project? Ironic he brings up insanity -- in my previous post I replied to him that "I believe you might be insane" (and I meant that as a sincere observation, not an insult), but the moderator removed it.

Kageki wrote: This Wiesenthal article doesn't seem to be related to the Holocaust itself though. Just that he didn't go hunt a Nazi as he claimed so it's not as big in my view. The sacred Holocaust is still maintained and thus would make sense why it made to the media.


Correct. Debunking Wiesenthal will not debunk the entire Holo Hoax; the same with Wiesel -- it will debunk only his personal hoax. That's enough. The purpose of Elie Wiesel Cons The World is to debunk Wiesel. As it says under the banner: A website dedicated to exposing the false testimony of the world's most famous holocaust survivor. Simple. All the fuss from The Warden seems quite misplaced -- no one here os agreeing with him, yet he obstinately continues to attack this project. Why?
In Jewish history there are no coincidences ... Elie Wiesel
Learn more at http://eliewieseltattoo.com

Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour http://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-unde ... uided-tour

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby The Warden » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:18 am)

Kageki wrote:You really think Wiesel is that easily replaced? I don't think so.


Yes, I do. History has shown when the jews have one of their prominent representatives derailed, they simply prop up another one.

Kageki wrote:Anne Frank's diary is still being called authentic so that matter isn't settled yet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_ ... _the_diary


Wikipedia is not an accurate source for much of anything, much less the Holocau$t
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6175

Kageki wrote:This article on Wiesenthal is very recent so give it some time. You especially need to give it time for rebuttals and let the dust settle. I'm not really sure why the need to make a fuss about expectations and such though. Are you saying debunking anything is completely worthless? Certainly any debunking adds to the cause.

This Wiesenthal article doesn't seem to be related to the Holocaust itself though. Just that he didn't go hunt a Nazi as he claimed so it's not as big in my view. The sacred Holocaust is still maintained and thus would make sense why it made to the media.


Wiesenthal has been a known fraud for years.
Just ask Hannover about his avatar picture. :cheers:
But nothing has changed. Fraudulent Holo-icons are like flat tires to Zionism; They throw a spare on and keep rolling.

As far Wikipedia giving Revisionists a fair chance at telling the truth, I don't believe you'll see such a thing.
I don't want to change the topic, but the following article on Wikipedia and Race shows it shouldn't be considered an asset to revisionism. I think it shines some light on the "powers that be" over at Wikipedia:
http://www.amren.com/features/200807wikipedia.html
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby The Warden » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 9:50 am)

Carolyn Yeager wrote:Why so much disturbance and complaint from The Warden about what Someone Else is doing in revisionist work?


Irony?
One can say the same of your work about Wiesel.
You've already stated you agree taking Wiesel down won't serve much purpose in the grand scheme of the Holocau$t, but when someone criticizes you, that somehow makes it a "forum felony".

Carolyn Yeager wrote:Also saying "I'm merely stating that the expectations ... are too high and unealistic." Does he know what they are?


How can anyone know what they are? I've asked you several times to explain, in your own words, what the expectations are, only to be met by constant dodging. You've created an atmosphere that makes people assume your expectations. One has to think you would welcome the opportunity to state them to clear the air and remove assumptions.

Carolyn Yeager wrote:He keeps demanding to know, but they are clearly stated in the Mission Statement.


The mission Statement is vague and doesn't go into detail past the actual exposure of Wiesel.

For the "umteenth" time: What expectations do you have if the exposure becomes well known?

Carolyn Yeager wrote: Is he unhappy that he wasn't consulted about the project?


Surely you jest. Your project is the definition of "go nowhere", and could be handled by a trained monkey. All the work was done by others. The person (or people) putting together a site dedicated to it is (are) nothing more than a glorified messenger(s). Eric Hunt can't attach his name to the project equal to the amount of his input because everyone considers him a "crazy person who attacked Wiesel" and has a vendetta. Mattogno's work on the documentation is the only redeeming quality of this project, and there's a reason he doesn't bother with these petty stages. The work is done, and anyone who references Wiesel can simply show Mattogno's work to dispute anything claimed by Wiesel. Gruner is hardly considered a reliable source because of some of his other claims(admitted by Hunt in one of the myriad of Wiesel threads), but it turns out his claims against Wiesel are founded.

So where does that leave you? You're the person heading up the project that has a mission statement that contains a dead end.

Carolyn Yeager wrote:Correct. Debunking Wiesenthal will not debunk the entire Holo Hoax; the same with Wiesel -- it will debunk only his personal hoax. That's enough.


"Enough" for what?

Carolyn Yeager wrote:The purpose of Elie Wiesel Cons The World is to debunk Wiesel. As it says under the banner: A website dedicated to exposing the false testimony of the world's most famous holocaust survivor. Simple.


"Exposing the false testimony of Wiesel" for what purpose?
How many times must one ask you for the expectations of exposing Wiesel?
He's already been exposed by Gruner, Hunt, and Mattogno; What is the end to your means?

Carolyn Yeager wrote:All the fuss from The Warden seems quite misplaced -- no one here os agreeing with him, yet he obstinately continues to attack this project. Why?


Is that what this is all about for you? Agreement?
It's common knowledge that everyone agrees exposing Wiesel is a good thing, but no one seems to know what that exposure is going to accomplish down the line, and as shown previously, history is not in your favor if you have any plans of doing any damage to the Holocau$t as a whole.
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

Carolyn Yeager
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:55 pm

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby Carolyn Yeager » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 11:47 am)

The Warden wrote:
Kageki wrote:You really think Wiesel is that easily replaced? I don't think so.


Yes, I do. History has shown when the jews have one of their prominent representatives derailed, they simply prop up another one.


Warden is required to back up this blanket statement with demonstrable examples if he expects it to mean anything. His general opinion is of no value. He should do some work for a change.

The Warden wrote:
Kageki wrote:Anne Frank's diary is still being called authentic so that matter isn't settled yet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Diary_ ... _the_diary


Wikipedia is not an accurate source for much of anything, much less the Holocau$t
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6175


The world believes the A.F. D. is authentic in spite of what revisionists have shown. A special web site debunking the A. F. D. would be a good idea. Of course, that takes someone doing some work, instead of just entertaining themselves on a forum.

The Warden wrote:
Kageki wrote:This article on Wiesenthal is very recent so give it some time. You especially need to give it time for rebuttals and let the dust settle. I'm not really sure why the need to make a fuss about expectations and such though. Are you saying debunking anything is completely worthless? Certainly any debunking adds to the cause.

This Wiesenthal article doesn't seem to be related to the Holocaust itself though. Just that he didn't go hunt a Nazi as he claimed so it's not as big in my view. The sacred Holocaust is still maintained and thus would make sense why it made to the media.


Wiesenthal has been a known fraud for years.
Just ask Hannover about his avatar picture. :cheers:
But nothing has changed. Fraudulent Holo-icons are like flat tires to Zionism; They throw a spare on and keep rolling.


The Warden is not a competent judge of what has changed. Again, he offers only his very negative opinion, no facts or research to bolster what he says. Thus The Warden is just like the "hoaxters" on this forum, whom he wants us to call "Exaggerationists," a word which will never catch on or mean anything, in that he throws out "arguments" that have no basis in the actual facts, or are just empty discussion with hoaxters, signifying nothing of real meaning. If one looks at his history on this forum, one will find his posts are mostly negative downplaying of all revisionist efforts that are focused and directed at specific targets. He has been criticizing any data that would prove Elie Wiesel was not a camp inmate from the start, going back to the Famous Buchenwald Photo discussion. Now he pretends that it won't make any difference, or that it's already been done sufficiently. He also "misunderstands" and "misinterprets" quite often. Strange fellow, this "Warden."
In Jewish history there are no coincidences ... Elie Wiesel
Learn more at http://eliewieseltattoo.com

Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour http://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-unde ... uided-tour

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby The Warden » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:07 pm)

Carolyn Yeager wrote:Warden is required to back up this blanket statement with demonstrable examples if he expects it to mean anything. His general opinion is of no value. He should do some work for a change.


You want me to back something up that hasn't happened yet?
Are you delusional?

IN the past, Wiesel replacing Wiesenthal is a perfect example, and has been noted several times in this thread.

Carolyn Yeager wrote:The world believes the A.F. D. is authentic in spite of what revisionists have shown. A special web site debunking the A. F. D. would be a good idea. Of course, that takes someone doing some work, instead of just entertaining themselves on a forum.


Carolyn Yeager (as we know the name here) cannot take criticism. This technique of reversing and diverting the attention is more commonly known as Zionism.

Carolyn Yeager wrote:The Warden is not a competent judge of what has changed. Again, he offers only his very negative opinion, no facts or research to bolster what he says. Thus The Warden is just like the "hoaxters" on this forum, whom he wants us to call "Exaggerationists," a word which will never catch on or mean anything, in that he throws out "arguments" that have no basis in the actual facts, or are just empty discussion with hoaxters, signifying nothing of real meaning. If one looks at his history on this forum, one will find his posts are mostly negative downplaying of all revisionist efforts that are focused and directed at specific targets. He has been criticizing any data that would prove Elie Wiesel was not a camp inmate from the start, going back to the Famous Buchenwald Photo discussion. Now he pretends that it won't make any difference, or that it's already been done sufficiently. He also "misunderstands" and "misinterprets" quite often. Strange fellow, this "Warden."


A "negative opinion" is allowed according to the world renowned authority, Carolyn Yeager.

You are free to bump up the thread containing the Buchenwald photo. I fully admitted my mistake, and for you to linger on it shows more of your flaws.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but you've used the term "Exaggerationists" as well.
http://forum.codoh.com/search.php?keywo ... mit=Search
Apparently, you thought it had worth until your ego was hurt.

I don't criticize the Wiesel data, only its value and your lack of direction.



Moderator, end this incessant behavior shown by Carolyn Yeager. I know she's afforded some leash, but this is unacceptable.
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

User avatar
Moderator3
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby Moderator3 » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:42 pm)

Warden:
Moderator, end this incessant behavior shown by Carolyn Yeager. I know she's afforded some leash, but this is unacceptable.
Warden, it seems to us that you're not helping the situation. I ask both of you to raise the level of debate, leave the Ad Hominem behind.

Carolyn Yeager
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:55 pm

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby Carolyn Yeager » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 12:52 pm)

The Warden wrote:
Carolyn Yeager wrote:Warden is required to back up this blanket statement with demonstrable examples if he expects it to mean anything. His general opinion is of no value. He should do some work for a change.


You want me to back something up that hasn't happened yet?
Are you delusional?

IN the past, Wiesel replacing Wiesenthal is a perfect example, and has been noted several times in this thread.

Carolyn Yeager wrote:The world believes the A.F. D. is authentic in spite of what revisionists have shown. A special web site debunking the A. F. D. would be a good idea. Of course, that takes someone doing some work, instead of just entertaining themselves on a forum.


Carolyn Yeager (as we know the name here) cannot take criticism. This technique of reversing and diverting the attention is more commonly known as Zionism.

Carolyn Yeager wrote:The Warden is not a competent judge of what has changed. Again, he offers only his very negative opinion, no facts or research to bolster what he says. Thus The Warden is just like the "hoaxters" on this forum, whom he wants us to call "Exaggerationists," a word which will never catch on or mean anything, in that he throws out "arguments" that have no basis in the actual facts, or are just empty discussion with hoaxters, signifying nothing of real meaning. If one looks at his history on this forum, one will find his posts are mostly negative downplaying of all revisionist efforts that are focused and directed at specific targets. He has been criticizing any data that would prove Elie Wiesel was not a camp inmate from the start, going back to the Famous Buchenwald Photo discussion. Now he pretends that it won't make any difference, or that it's already been done sufficiently. He also "misunderstands" and "misinterprets" quite often. Strange fellow, this "Warden."


A "negative opinion" is allowed according to the world renowned authority, Carolyn Yeager.

You are free to bump up the thread containing the Buchenwald photo. I fully admitted my mistake, and for you to linger on it shows more of your flaws.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but you've used the term "Exaggerationists" as well.
search.php?keywords=Exaggerationists&terms=all&author=Carolyn+Yeager&sc=1&sf=all&sr=posts&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search
Apparently, you thought it had worth until your ego was hurt.

I don't criticize the Wiesel data, only its value and your lack of direction.



Moderator, end this incessant behavior shown by Carolyn Yeager/Trude. I know she's afforded some leash, but this is unacceptable.


:lol: This is unbelievable. I love it when irresponsible "evaders" [how about that term?] hang themselves with their own rope.
Let me just go through this quickly. Wiesel replaced Wiesenthal?? Just when was that? :lol: Is that the only example you can come up with? I think you said, "History has shown ..." And just now you referred to it as "something that hasn't happened yet." :roll:

"Carolyn Yeager cannot take criticism." Why is The Warden so intent on criticizing Carolyn Yeager and what Carolyn Yeager is doing? Why is that an issue with The Warden?

Your "mistake" with the Buchenwald photo would not be brought up again if you weren't continuing to make the same "mistakes" with understanding the Elie Wiesel challenge.

I used Exaggerationists as a consideration toward you, and also as a reference to your using it, but not that I really think it's a helpful term. I don't, and so now that that has been brought up, I won't use it again. Good luck with it. My ego is certainly not hurt by you and I think I've said that before. Therefore you said it before. :roll:

You don't criticize the Wiesel data, but it's value. Hmmm, a fine distinction. Too fine, I would say, to have any value in itself. And MY lack of direction. I think, in saying that, you have given yourself this: :blackeye:

You're asking the Moderator to end my incessant behavior?? What behavior? You come onto my threads with nothing worthwhile to add, seeking to undermine them. When I respond to your wild charges, you cry foul. THAT is very Jewish, indeed. I was wrong, though, when I deduced you might be insane. I now think you are just not very bright.

I hope lots of viewers read this real fast, because I don't expect it to stay up very long.
In Jewish history there are no coincidences ... Elie Wiesel
Learn more at http://eliewieseltattoo.com

Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour http://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-unde ... uided-tour

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby The Warden » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:06 pm)

Moderator3 wrote:Warden, it seems to us that you're not helping the situation. I ask both of you to raise the level of debate, leave the Ad Hominem behind.


Mod3, I've made several attempts to get an answer to the same question worded six ways to Sunday. The rest is brought about by her avoidance.
This thread is full of the blatant abuse of forum policy set up to avoid the "level of debate" seen here. If the question was answered in the first place, this "level" would be non-existent. The root of the problem is obvious.

Please instruct her to answer the pending question:
What are her, in her own words, expectations of Wiesel being exposed?
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

Carolyn Yeager
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:55 pm

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby Carolyn Yeager » 9 years 5 months ago (Mon Sep 20, 2010 1:13 pm)

Moderator3 wrote:Warden:
Moderator, end this incessant behavior shown by Carolyn Yeager. I know she's afforded some leash, but this is unacceptable.
Warden, it seems to us that you're not helping the situation. I ask both of you to raise the level of debate, leave the Ad Hominem behind.


Moderator,
What Ad Hominem am I engaging in? What I am saying can be demonstrated. What The Warden is saying is out of left field and he fails to back any of it up with truthful examples; it remains only an opinion. I have certainly not "gone after him," but if I question or refute any of his opinion-based statements, he just repeats more of them. That is not proper forum behavior. I am trying to be fact -based and I reply to what is actually said. I would like to ignore him, but I do defend my work. However, I'm not going to answer purposely* provocative questions that are intended to force answers that have already been answered. If the answers don't satisfy him, that is his problem. I am not required to "satisfy him." This is an abuse of this forum by The Warden.

*He has already made his opinion known, many times, that he see no purpose for my Elie Wiesel web site. Therefore his "question" is meant only to be destructive. Many others here have given their thoughts on why it is important, as I have. His obsessive badgering of me is not meant to be productive.
In Jewish history there are no coincidences ... Elie Wiesel
Learn more at http://eliewieseltattoo.com

Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour http://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-unde ... uided-tour

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby Balsamo » 9 years 4 months ago (Tue Sep 21, 2010 5:29 pm)

The Warden,

I don't know where you are living; nor your age.
So maybe Elie Wiesel is not very popular in your area.

Elie Wiesel is one of the pilar and even founder of what is called by Finkelstein the Holocaust industry.
His book night is the best selling "surviror's" book, with more than 13.000.000 copies sold dor which he recieved in 1975 the "Holocaust Memorial Award".
In 1978, he is chosen by President Carter to become Chairman of his "President's commission on the Holocaust" the USHMM will be created thanks to it a couple of years later
Elie Wiesel will be chosen to do the opening speach of the Holocaust Memorial Museum.
He is one the most decorated fellow in the world and a nobel prize

Even more recently he presided the Commission on the Holocaust in Romania (2004) and did his famous trip to Auschwitz with Oprah (2006)

In Europe and France, the guy was just everywhere during the 80's and early 90's. He was refered to as an international wise man. He was one of the President Mitterand who ruled the French republic for 14 years best friend, until he discovered the president past.

So in my perspective, it is logical for deniers to try to knock over this pillar.

I don't tkink it is relevant with the Historical event per se, but it would surely arm the industry.
I would add that this could also damage the image if the State of Israel...but in this case, this already done...at least in Europe

Can it be done? i doubt it, but that is my opinion.
For this thing, i would say to mrs Yeander...go and get him if you can! I hate people who uses history or human tragedies for their or other's interests.

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby The Warden » 9 years 4 months ago (Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:07 pm)

That's fascinating, Balsamo. :roll:

And just like when they created "Wiesel The Great" the moment Wiesenthal was exposed, they'll prop up another one if and when Wiesel is exposed, even though he already has been by Mattogno, Gruner, and Hunt, and nothing has changed. They have so many to choose from between Lipstadt, Zimmerman, Van Pelt, and the rest.

Carolyn Yeager (as known here) used to post as Trude. The minute Trude stopped posting, Yeager (as known here) appeared and took the reigns of the Wiesel discussions.Trude was the only one who was involved in the recently mentioned Buchenwald photo discussion which was brought up by none other than Yeager (as known here). Trude took offense in the same manner to any questioning about Wiesel. Same demeanor.

This forum has allowed a name change and it's obvious she's afforded much leeway based on what you've read, whichever person she really might be. The only question is... Which came first?
Either way, there's a very distinct reason why the Carolyn Yeager we've been reading here at CODOH can't answer the question directly about the expectations of the Elie Wiesel Cons The World site. Simple references to what the site claims are all that's allowed when assuming someone's identity.

Since I'm not a moderator and don't have access to IP addresses, I can't prove this statement, so I'll call it a theory.
The moderators are welcome to confirm or deny it since they have access to the information.
But they'll delete it and probably ban me.

So be it.
Shenanigans.
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

User avatar
Webmaster
Administration
Administration
Posts: 411
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby Webmaster » 9 years 4 months ago (Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:29 pm)

The Warden wrote:Since I'm not a moderator and don't have access to IP addresses, I can't prove this statement, so I'll call it a theory.
The moderators are welcome to confirm or deny it since they have access to the information.


Since you probably didn't read our Rules/Guidelines let me show you what it says:
Note:
By default, this software collects IP numbers. That portion of the software has been disabled, visitors to the site now have an IP number of 0.0.0.0. This was done as a precaution against the police states that are prevalent throughout Europe (Austria, Germany, France etc.).



Want some proof of that?
screenshot.jpg

The Warden
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:28 pm
Location: 'Murica!

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby The Warden » 9 years 4 months ago (Wed Sep 22, 2010 8:34 am)

Since Carolyn Yeager has cleared it up in another thread viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6177 that she is in fact, Trude, I'll apologize to the staff for my assumption that the forum had access to such things. It was my impression that, no matter what, if someone was to post anything illegal, the forum had to have the information to turn over to the authorities. Fortunately, Carolyn Yeager admitted this, otherwise your post wouldn't confirm or deny since ALL the members would have the same IP, according to your post.

This strict adherence to the rules seems to be selective. I've asked the question numerous times. I've asked the moderators to enforce the rules. Apparently, as long as you respond instead of answer directly, or if you don't like the intent of the person asking, you can avoid the rule which is clearly stated:

No 'dodging'. When questioned or challenged, you must respond or leave the thread.


Someone is more than welcome to explain how: When someone asks the expectations of the exposure, the person responds by saying the expectation IS the exposure. But when references are made by the same person to the exposure being "good enough", and I ask "For what?", the response is this:

However, I'm not going to answer purposely* provocative questions... I am not required to "satisfy him." Therefore his "question" is meant only to be destructive. Many others here have given their thoughts on why it is important, as I have. His obsessive badgering of me is not meant to be productive.


I guess when someone asks me a question from now on, I'll simply tell them I don't like their intent and I don't have to answer because I'm not here to satisfy them. After all, I "responded", right?

I like this place because it's strict, but if it's only applied to certain people, then it defeats the purpose.
Would you rather I start an entire thread dedicated to the expectations of one person involved with the Wiesel exposure?
Whatever they are, since the question still hasn't been answered.
Why the Holocaust Industry exists:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2A81P6YGw_c

SevenUp
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:54 pm

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby SevenUp » 9 years 4 months ago (Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:32 am)

The Warden wrote:Since Carolyn Yeager has cleared it up in another thread http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6177 that she is in fact, Trude, I'll apologize to the staff for my assumption that the forum had access to such things. It was my impression that, no matter what, if someone was to post anything illegal, the forum had to have the information to turn over to the authorities. Fortunately, Carolyn Yeager admitted this, otherwise your post wouldn't confirm or deny since ALL the members would have the same IP, according to your post.

This strict adherence to the rules seems to be selective. I've asked the question numerous times. I've asked the moderators to enforce the rules. Apparently, as long as you respond instead of answer directly, or if you don't like the intent of the person asking, you can avoid the rule which is clearly stated:

No 'dodging'. When questioned or challenged, you must respond or leave the thread.


Someone is more than welcome to explain how: When someone asks the expectations of the exposure, the person responds by saying the expectation IS the exposure. But when references are made by the same person to the exposure being "good enough", and I ask "For what?", the response is this:

However, I'm not going to answer purposely* provocative questions... I am not required to "satisfy him." Therefore his "question" is meant only to be destructive. Many others here have given their thoughts on why it is important, as I have. His obsessive badgering of me is not meant to be productive.


I guess when someone asks me a question from now on, I'll simply tell them I don't like their intent and I don't have to answer because I'm not here to satisfy them. After all, I "responded", right?

I like this place because it's strict, but if it's only applied to certain people, then it defeats the purpose.
Would you rather I start an entire thread dedicated to the expectations of one person involved with the Wiesel exposure?
Whatever they are, since the question still hasn't been answered.


Consult a therapist. This type of idiocy, endlessly repeated, is annoying.

You are not asking a question, you are making a criticism. I think I probably agree with the criticism. OK, you've made it now, how many times? 10? You want to go for 20?

Here is the essence of the matter, Carolyn Yeager is using her own name and actually trying to do something to stop the hoax. We should be applauding her ! And Eric Hunt. And F. Berg. And the graves challenge guy. These guys/girls should have complete run of this forum !

SevenUp
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 2:54 pm

Re: Wiesenthal exposed as a fraud; Wiesel is next

Postby SevenUp » 9 years 4 months ago (Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:52 am)

The Warden wrote:
SevenUp wrote:Here is the essence of the matter, Carolyn Yeager is using her own name and actually trying to do something to stop the hoax.


And all I want to know is her expectations of what she's doing by gathering the work of others.

Want it in question form, here's two:

What do you, SevenUp, believe are the expectations of exposing Wiesel?

What exactly will the exposure do to "stop the hoax"?


She is EXPOSING THE HOAX. That is her expectation. That what she is trying to do. How many times do you have to be told the obvious?

Will this lead to world peace? Who in hell knows.

Is it an effective strategy? Again, who knows.

The medium is the message is the point here .... here we have a public person saying that the holocaust is hoax. How many such people are there? Not many ! Not you, not me. That in itself is the most important thing. You are freaking sniping from complete anonymity. Ok, so am I. When you are able to give us your name and what not, then maybe you can criticize CY's efforts. Not before.

And, I'll go further. I note that the moderator banned the NAFCASH challenge guy ..... a public hoax denier. I have a proposed rule for the forum, no anonymous editing or banning of public deniers by the forum. Who are the moderators? If Bradley Smith wants to ban someone, so be it, he's paid his dues. But some anonymous moderator banning the nafcash guy? No.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests