Things changed for me... [MAYBE NOT] Muehlenkamp

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:05 pm)

Once the first bodies are encountered they are left in situ and not disturbed. The bodies are photographed as evidence and any bullets and other ballistic evidence retrieved from the site before the grave is covered up and camouflaged in order not to allow graverobbers to loot and desecrate it.



What this really means is:

Once we make a claim of a mass graves existence, no one else will be able to check our work. And since revisionists are not invited along to veryify our claims, we haven't proven a thing. Just like our previous claims, you'll just have to take our word for it that we really did find mass graves.


And how do you retrieve "bullets and other ballistic evideence" without distrubing the bodies? Are we to believe that the bullets are just laying on top of the bodies? (Aren't the "bodies" skeletons?) And what other "balistic evidence" could he be talking about except shell casings?

What utter nonsense.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:11 pm)

Drew

Have Belzec and Chelmno actually vanished from the nafcash website? If so, why?



Why don't you ask them?


Drew

Is Muehlenkamp going to continue to bitch about people not accepting his low standards of evidence so that he won't have to answer Treblinka's 30 questions?



Sounds plausible.


Why don't you ask him?

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:15 pm)

I admit, it was somewhat rhetorical as I have been making note of his evasions.

So how about it?

Muehlenkamp:

"...Chelmno, at Belzec (both of which camps, incidentally, have disappeared from the NAFCASH challenge – Gerdes must have got cold feet)"

Have Belzec and Chelmno actually vanished from the nafcash website? If so, why? Because they would refuse to accept the work of Kola on Belzec as evidence since it was not backed up by anything? Is it also because they wouldn't accept as evidence that polish article that talked about the theft of teeth and gold...the same article that could produce a photograph of the perps but not the stuff they stole?


Funny, when I do an EDIT - Find On This Page I can find Belzec a few times. I wonder what Muehlenkamp means. Perhaps it's not part of the massive nafcash challenge anymore like Treblinka is? Is that the correct interpretation to take of what Muehlenkamp is trying to convey? If so, is he ultimately correct? I guess I will have to search nafcash to find their list of challenges and see if they don't mention Belzec.

Even if Muehlenkamp turns out to be correct Belzec is gone from their challenge list, it's still gone because no sane revisionist would accept as evidence for example, unsubstantiated kola graphs of belzec and lack of photos of stolen teeth and gold (ala the polish article). So even if he was right, he still wins nothing for his side.

Edit:
It seems that nafcash only has treblinka under their monetary challenge. In the text, they consistently talk about Treblinka only.

Lest you think there must be some truth to the alleged Treblinka holocaust

(That’s the psychology of the big-lie technique at work)



The National Association of Forensic Historians TM presents

THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE TM

* * * * *

$100,000.00
REWARD

For locating / proving the existence of just one grave that contains just one tenth of one percent of the alleged mass murder.

* * * * *



NO REMAINS = NO TREBLINKA HOLOCAUST

To illustrate just how easy it is to debunk the big lie that burning bodies makes them magically disappear, look at the following (chapter 4.3) from Arnulf Neumaier’s THE TREBLINKA HOLOCAUST: “Regarding the claim that the 870,000 corpses were eliminated completely without any trace, we must consider the quantities of ashes that remain… The ash content of a human body makes up about 5.6% of the body's weight; given a 132 lb. body, this comes to 7.3 lbs. The remains from the 870,000 burned bodies would thus have weighed 6,351,000 pounds, all of which (according to the witnesses), were then thrown back into the pits, which would be easy to find in the quantity alleged by the witnesses. It must also be noted that in the “incineration” of corpses under the conditions specified by the witnesses, the bones would not have turned to ash, but would have remained as bones.”

So what’s the jews response when it’s conclusively demonstrated that burning bodies on pyres doesn’t make them magically disappear? “Why, the Germans obliterated all the evidence by crushing the bones,” they shriek. To illustrate how absurd this is, and how easy it is to debunk the crushing-the-bones-equals-obliteration thesis, take a look at these photos of the REAL HOLOCAUST that the allies inflicted on Dresden Germany. (Please view photos 0030.jpg through 0041.jpg.) And what’s the jews response when it’s conclusively demonstrated that crushing bones doesn’t make them magically disappear either? “Why, those evil geniuses reburied the bone fragments in the huge mass graves and then covered it all up with a layer of soil,” they screech. Do you understand the insanity of this? If burning the bodies and crushing the bones doesn’t “obliterate all evidence” of mass murder, then how can the simple act of covering the bones and teeth with dirt do the trick?

Even though the so-called “holocaust expert” Yitzhak Arad testified in the John Demjanjuk trial that: “No trace of the extermination operation remain,” the fraudulent “skeptic” MICHAEL SHERMER claims that he’s used the methods of science to prove that the alleged millions of pounds of bone fragments and tens of millions of teeth at Treblinka (and Sobibor) really do exist! What’s wrong with this picture? To illustrate the sophistic machinations that the holocaust industry (which of course includes Shermer and his “Skeptics” Society) has gone through to make this fraudulent claim, look at this montage of quotes from Shermer’s spurious novel-as-true-history - Denying History: “The purpose of this book is to… show precisely, with solid evidence, how we know the Holocaust happened… we must obey the rules of reason and apply the tools of science… Historians both discover and describe the past, just as natural scientists… we can use the methods of science to… marshal the evidence and apply tight logic… This process is practiced by all scientists… historical scientists, geologists, paleontologists and archaeologists, to prove that anything in the past happened… We must review the physical evidence.”

What physical evidence? If Shermer, who insists that he must see compelling evidence before he believes anything, has proven the holocaust via the scientific method, then he must have located / proven the existence of tons of bone fragments and millions of teeth that proves the alleged Treblinka holocaust, right? But why then can’t the jews, who are so incredulous that rational people reject their asinine magically disappearing jew “theory,” locate / prove the existence of so much as one single bone fragment or tooth at Treblinka? And why do you think the jews have declared a literal MODERN INQUISITION to silence skeptics of the official holocaust story and punish those who wish to investigate and expose this historical fraud?

Of course, those were all rhetorical questions. Jewish propaganda exemplified by Shermer’s Denying History is nothing but pure Orwellian rectification of history; damage control to counter the harm that the holocaust truth movement is doing to their sinking ship of lies. THE HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY has sophistically attempted to elevate the study of history into a “science,” then use this newly manufactured science to prove their false history, thus; claiming to repudiate real science without offering an iota of scientific / physical evidence for the alleged Treblinka holocaust. Not a single grave, or even so much as a single bone fragment or tooth! The truth is; the “science of history” claptrap was contrived to create and compound complication and confusion. They’re trying to blind you with sophistically manufactured science just in case you have the common sense to see through their maliciously manufactured history.

So if Shermer and all the other officially sanctioned holocaust “scholars” can’t offer an iota of tangible physical evidence to back up their fraudulent claim that the alleged Treblinka holocaust has been scientifically proven, then what’s left for the true believers to cling to in justifying their continued belief in the orthodox version of the story? Why - the perfect crime / magically disappearing jew “theory” of course! It simply boggles the mind that it’s necessary to explain to these so-called educated adults (just as you would to a three-year-old child), that by covering something up with dirt you’re not actually making it magically disappear. (And we haven’t even touched on the most asinine claim of all - that the Germans were able to burn these millions of bodies by the ingenious “discovery” that by stacking the bodies “just right,” they’ll “catch” fire and magically burn all by themselves - just like fire logs!) Just as astonishing is the fact that even after seeing conclusive proof that the Treblinka holohoax is nothing but one physical impossibility after another and that the latest jewish holocaust is the most grossly exaggerated event of the 20th century, the true believers are totally unaffected by the truth. Why? Because they would then have to admit that the fraudulent Treblinka holocaust is a literal JEWISH CONSPIRACY, and that would make them (gasp!) an anti-Semite!

RECAP: So what exactly is the significance of the fact that this fraudulent holocaust within the holocaust is a malicious lie? First, the pure extermination center myth cannot stand if the Treblinka cornerstone is pulled. And if the Treblinka holohoax is debunked, then the equally synthetic pillars of Belzec, Chelmno and Sobibor become untenable and the fraudulent “pure extermination center” legend collapses. And without the pure extermination center canard, the official version of the final solution becomes untenable, ergo - no extermination program.

As you can see, it's Treblinka, Treblinka, Treblinka. However, Belzec and Sobibor are labeled as frauds. Since nafcash has implied that Belzec and Sobibor are legends like Treblinka, then it stands to reason that though they are asking for a reward on Treblinka, they would also accept evidence for money in regards to Belzec and Sobibor. You see, once you do a little reasoning, you can figure out their intent and also the spirit of their words. So all they would need for Belzec and Sobibor is evidence. However they require a higher standard of proof than the lower, non photographically or videotape documented kind Muehlenkamp is demanding they accept.

I think I have solved the riddle here. Nafcash is offering a reward for Treblinka, but they would not be opposed to evidence being furnished on Belzec and Sobibor. The door is open on those two, despite what Muehlenkamp is claiming.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:30 pm)

Drew, I think you have forgotten:


There's supposed to be 33 mass graves at Belzec, 10 at Sobibor, 6 at Treblinka and 5 at Chelmno which, in total, allegedly contain the remains of over 2 million jews.

So here's my challenge to you Drew.

Prove to us that just one grave at each of these sites actually exists, then tell us how much human remains exist in each of your chosen grave, then prove it.



Remember how you replied drew?


I can't. And I doubt others can either.



You seem to be just rambling on now.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:37 pm)

So now that you seem to see that I haven't gotten sucked in by Muehlenkamp and won't thanks to you furnishing names like Gerdes and further reading resources and, you want me to do what Muehlenkamp should be doing himself? Proving the exterminationist claims? Why? I don't believe that so I don't have to support it. I'm not rambling. I'm explaining to you that I have learned a lot more in the last few days and my lack of belief in the Reinhardt camps is still there and is probably rising at the very least. It was hoped that in my transformation, you would see me abandoning the idea that maybe they have us on the Reinhardt camps. The lack of evidence and stunning Muehlenkamp admissions that were quoted to me were just what I needed and wanted to show that there isn't even the possiblity of maybe.

If even my altering of the topic title [OR MAYBE NOT] doesn't clue you in as to how I'm still a revisionist at heart, then I'm going to keep rambling until you finally get it.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:53 pm)

Drew

The lack of evidence and stunning Muehlenkamp admissions that were quoted to me were just what I needed and wanted to show that there isn't even the possiblity of maybe.



Excellent!

Now let's see you turn the screws on him.

Throw him a high and tight one with the 30 Treblinka questions he's running from.

He's oh-fer 33 on belzec and 0h-fer 101 on Sobibor.

Stevie Wonder can hit better than him.

Don't you want to see him oh-fer 30 on Treblinka?

Come on drew, let's see you throw him some real chin music.

Let's see who's got who drew.

Make the challenge drew.

Bean him with the challenge and let's see if he's got the balls to charge the mound.

You've got a whole team behind you drew.

Challenge him.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:38 pm)

It'll take some time.

viewtopic.php?p=38184&#p38184
I'm a late comer to the Reinhardt camps Friedrich. So forgive my rookie state of mind. I am unable to provide detailed resources or commentary on these Reinhardt camps as I have spent the last few years on the zyklon b issue and the gas chambers and thus the work of Zundel, Cole, Rudolf, Leuchter.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:13 pm)

Drew

I'm a late comer to the Reinhardt camps...



Non sequitur drew.

I don't get it. You've been playing softball with Muehlenkamp for how long now?

Debating minutia about Belzec and Mottagno.

And here you have the opportunity to bean him with the 30 Treblinka questions.

And you refuse.

Drew, he's hitting 0.00 after 134 trips to the plate.

He's afraid to even get into the batter’s box.

And you're afraid to pitch to him?

Why would you want to let him off the hook like that?

It doesn't smell right drew.

How hard would it be to challenge him to stop running and answer 30 simple questions?

Why would you not want to do that?

Look, I'll show you how easy it is drew.


Hey Muehlenkamp, why do you refuse to answer nafcash's 30 questions about Treblinka?

I challenge you to answer them you spineless coward.


Come on now drew. You have a dialogue going with him, I don't.

My challenge means nothing. He doesn't know me from Adam.

People are going to be even more suspicious of you if you can't even challenge Muehlenkamp to answer 30 simple questions.

It'll look like there's something more going on than meets the eye.

What are you afraid of drew?

He's already shown what a coward he is by dodging the questions.

Don't you want to see those questions answered?

Odd, I thought you wanted to learn things about the Reinhardt camps?

What could be a better learning experience than to watch Muehlenkamp dance around those questions?

Come on drew, challenge him.

I've already done it. Now let's see you turn up the heat.

If you don't, people will think your trying to protect him from further embarrassment.

Challenge him drew.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:54 pm)

I don't get it. You've been playing softball with Muehlenkamp for how long now?

First you say I have made good criticisms of him in the Belzec thread which you are thankful for. And then you call it softball?

Debating minutia about Belzec and Mottagno.

I've already said, minor points in red text don't make up for the lack of science backing Kola's depicitions from 1999 in Belzec. Besides, those were somewhat important points that I discovered. It did me some good. Plus I like to read at least some stuff from the other side. Which is why I said as much as I did the first time round in the Belzec thread. Something you were thankful for apparently.

And here you have the opportunity to bean him with the 30 Treblinka questions.

And you refuse.

Where are they?

Come on now drew. You have a dialogue going with him, I don't.

My challenge means nothing. He doesn't know me from Adam.

I don't have a dialogue with him. He just knows I exist and he took the time to write a response to me because he still views this place. Chances are, he will have seen you too give a week or two. I'm sure the title of this topic grabs his attention.

People are going to be even more suspicious of you if you can't even challenge Muehlenkamp to answer 30 simple questions.

It'll look like there's something more going on than meets the eye.

What are you afraid of drew?

He's already shown what a coward he is by dodging the questions.

Then what is there to prove. After being given new information this week, I have stated why that polish article about teeth and gold theft is absurd and why kola's core samples are not to be trusted like the samples from Sobibor since as someone pointed out, tests on the ash could be done to determine their origin and it was never done (unless I'm wrong on that third and last detail and am in need of correcting). Muehlenkamp goes, "Well what else are they?" The fact that he has to ask proves those tests weren't done to prove their origin. As I said, you can't forget to document something you claim to want to document unless you don't like the answer you know you are going to get.

Come on drew, challenge him.

I've already done it. Now let's see you turn up the heat.

If you don't, people will think your trying to protect him from further embarrassment.

Challenge him drew.

If my writings on this board were enough to grab his attention the first time, that means I have in effect challenged him again simply by posting. Why photos of Belzec grave robbers but not the teeth and gold itself? Why no scientific tests done to determine the origin of the ash at Sobibor? Someone said it could be done to figure out the true origin, so why hasn't it been done?

I'm going to go back over this and the Belzec thread for more stuff. Maybe I can add some more questions of my own to my own personal list. Plus, I may find those 30 Treblinka questions again if I look hard. Or you telling me where they are would help.

Pepper
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 8:47 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Pepper » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:09 pm)

Drew

Maybe I can add some more questions of my own to my own personal list. Plus, I may find those 30 Treblinka questions again if I look hard. Or you telling me where they are would help.


I never posted them here. I got them from a friend who got them from nafh. I saw them posted somewhere else recently, but I can't remember where. Sorry.

I'd contact nafcash.com


Edit:


I'd post them right now, but there are photos with the file and I don't know how to upload photos.

Maybe you can do it when you get them from nafh drew.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:19 pm)

Just went to nafcash.com. Can't find 30 questions anywhere.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:36 am)

Latest entry on his blog.

Friday, September 18, 2009
Gerdes Returns To CODOH As A Sockpuppet
In January 2009, Greg Gerdes was banned from CODOH for plagiarism. He has now returned in this thread, as a sockpuppet called 'Pepper', to cajole the novice Drew J, who is either extremely gullible or pretending to be so in order to win points for his continual back-flips (pretending to doubt the revisionist case then being miraculously reconverted to it by the flimsiest of 'show me a tooth' arguments). Will the moderator grow some cojones and ban this sockpuppet? Will Drew J develop greater critical reasoning when he realizes that he has been talking to a sockpuppet all week?


So now that I bring up the absurdity of the polish article having a photograph of robbers of teeth and gold, but not the actual gold and teeth itself, he calls this a flimsy retort. Me demanding photographic evidence that should have come into existence since there was plenty of opportunity, is flimsy. Okay Robert. Whatever you say Roberto Muehlencrap. :lol: Sorry Robert, but you can't not document evidence when you have ample opportunity unless there is none to document. You know it and I know it. And it's pissing you off which is why you call my logical demand for a photo that should have come into existence when the robbers were caught and photographed (polish article), flimsy. You don't prove it by showing me a photo or explaining away absurdity of the polish article having a photograph of robbers of teeth and gold, but not the actual gold and teeth itself. You just engage in namecalling. That's not science I'm afraid. I'm to guess no explaining away will happen soon right? yeah, probably never.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:44 am)

They're talking about this topic over at rodoh.
http://r o d o h forum.yuku.com/topic/7771/t/Things-Have-Changed-For-Me.html

shyster #1

If you go to the same thread now, you will see that Drew has been held to account by no less that TFSFC himself (posting as 'pepper'), and has found himself wanting.

Surely everyone with a brain must realise that this debate between Roberto and Mattogno is of the old theological form.

Why anyone would seriously treat with Kola's Belzec nonsense is for them to answer.

nickterry #2

I do find the Mattogno-bashing among true believer deniers increasingly hilarious.

Gerdes bullied Drew J with his trademark repeat posts, not waiting for his erstwhile discussion partner to even respond. Shyster, are you going to try and claim that 'Pepper' does not come across like a complete asshole in that thread? I'd like to see you try. THINK for a minute about the fact that you have just thrown over the leading guru in revisionism in favour of an asshole who runs a website from Montana, who is incapable of civilised discourse even among his own kind.

shyster #3

I'm confused as to why anyone that genuinely believed the Holocaust was a Hoax of some kind would perceive in the first instance any kind of intrisically valuable output coming from the very institutions that are responsible for the maintenance and continuation of that Hoax. Actually I'm not that confused, it was probably simply the pursuit of the tried and tested strategy of taking the fight to your enemy on their own ground. It has surely backfired though in this case. Giving Credence to pencil annotations where physical evidence has not been demonstrated in even the most basic way was probably an ill considered ploy. We need a Clear Water Revival, and I don't object to the Gerdesian approach; it may not be rolling down the river, but's it's certainly a bad moon arisin'.

deathonacracker #5

What institutions are these and please list them all. Nearly every major University teaches a course on the Holocaust so please explain the connections with between these entities.

Tell me also if there is a need to maintain a continuation of the history of the Spanish Inquisition as well. I had to read Candide to start with and it was far more entertaining than Hard Times I must admit. So students are forced to read Voltaire. This brings me to Dickens and the Industrial Revolution so there must be a institutional need to maintain this history as well. Why would that be?

Ya know? Like why?

Mike


nickterry #6

RE: shyster

Then you not only have you formally admitted your utter intellectual bankruptcy, you have also shown yourself to be signally tone-deaf to the nuances of putting across an effective argument. Gerdes doesn't argue, he shouts.

My point, which you have obviously missed completely, was not simply that exalting a chimp like Gerdes over the one revisionist author who has produced any sustained output, full stop, ever, is downright odd. It was also that you seem totally unable to accept that Gerdes is the last thing you want as a posterboy for your 'cause', unless that cause happens to be internet trolling. Even as internet trolls go, he is fairly hopeless, since he has even gotten himself banned from ideologically sympathetic venues. He is downright aggressive, and clearly loves nothing more than to pick a fight with whoever is passing by. That he picks a fight with one of his own kind, rather than using persuasion, reason and politeness, sums up this asshole to a tee. The entire thread smacked of a waverer being bulled into line by a cult enforcer.

shyster #7
I'm not sure that bourgoise etiquette is going to facilitate the dislodging and overturning of this paradigm.

It's a commonplace in business marketing and politics that simple messages, much repeated, are the most remembered and succesful. You are an academic so you might not appreciate this, but repeating a mantra -a simple, easy to understand mantra - can be worth a thousand naval gazing academic convolutions and verbose meanderings of the word.

Is this simply a propaganda war? Your fellow lunisemites like the Pooshoodog and mathis seem to think so. So does Roberto. Mr Gerdes has idenitifed his target, has decided that he is debating within the context of a propaganda war, and not a real debate (just like your buddies), and has picked a memorable, precise, and unambiguous message to aid his attack. You don't need telling that his influence will spread a thousand times further than a 'drew' because of it. Mattogno built is reputation on considered argument and by avoiding controversy (so to speak); but to place trust in the output of the Holocaust Industry itself and argue on those terms was probably brave, but maybe a little stupid and foolhardy (as he is now discovering).

nexgen586 #8

You are wasted aren't you? An academic can't know that a lie repeated often enough will tend to be believed. Jesus! You've not addled away a bit too much of your brain power on coke, business seminars and blue sky thinking, have you?

As far as your justifying the antics of our Mr Gerdes is concerned, he's only one more big fish in a small pond of nazis.

You'd probably agree with kiwichap too, right?

Not turning away from Jewish fables...

By my skim reading are you just excusing the supposed failure of a Mighty Intellect like Mattogno's to best RM and also his style of Revisionism like the pom pom girl that you are? That's bizarre.

The way in which Gerdes forced Drew to back down made me want to puke.

Show me a grave Drew..

Why did he not tell him to stop his interfering? Gerdes does not want to debate, he is a Nazi who wants to shut down all debate and thus reduce the fates of millions of people to simplistic lies and force those who do not accept it his way to swallow his crap. He's fucked up. Like you. Like Codoh.

Sorry.

"NexGen"


So now pepper you are a bully. I will admit you did come on a but strong but you did at least ask for evidence. I did learn from you and you did give me further reading material. Those questions where Muehlenkamp answered No a lot were intruiging. I never knew that about him. As for them calling you Gerdes, I kind of thought you might be since you kept saying, "evidence Drew. Evidence" which was characteristic of the posts by the poster named Gerdes on VNN. Whether you are or not, I just didn't make a big deal of it like these guys because unlike them, I am concerned more about evidence and arguments. Which as you can see from my last quoted post on Muehlenkamp's latest blog entry, is not really forthcoming (polish article case - albiet just one example).
Last edited by Drew J on Sat Sep 19, 2009 2:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Drew J
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:13 am

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Drew J » 1 decade 2 months ago (Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:55 am)

Drew J wrote:Latest entry on his blog.

Friday, September 18, 2009
Gerdes Returns To CODOH As A Sockpuppet
In January 2009, Greg Gerdes was banned from CODOH for plagiarism. He has now returned in this thread, as a sockpuppet called 'Pepper', to cajole the novice Drew J, who is either extremely gullible or pretending to be so in order to win points for his continual back-flips (pretending to doubt the revisionist case then being miraculously reconverted to it by the flimsiest of 'show me a tooth' arguments). Will the moderator grow some cojones and ban this sockpuppet? Will Drew J develop greater critical reasoning when he realizes that he has been talking to a sockpuppet all week?


So now that I bring up the absurdity of the polish article having a photograph of robbers of teeth and gold, but not the actual gold and teeth itself, he calls this a flimsy retort. Me demanding photographic evidence that should have come into existence since there was plenty of opportunity, is flimsy. Okay Robert. Whatever you say Roberto Muehlencrap. :lol: Sorry Robert, but you can't not document evidence when you have ample opportunity unless there is none to document. You know it and I know it. And it's pissing you off which is why you call my logical demand for a photo that should have come into existence when the robbers were caught and photographed (polish article), flimsy. You don't prove it by showing me a photo or explaining away absurdity of the polish article having a photograph of robbers of teeth and gold, but not the actual gold and teeth itself. You just engage in namecalling. That's not science I'm afraid. I'm to guess no explaining away will happen soon right? yeah, probably never.


Oh, and take a look at this r o d o h version where Roberto is tangling with Mr. Berg about Muelenkamp saying we only have conjecture or whatever that topic is called. On page six.
http:// r o d o h forum.yuku.com/topic/7769/t/Muhlenkamp-claims-revisionists--quot---conjectures-rhetoric.html?
Repeating his imbecilic "lie" accusations instead of substantiating them, claiming victory and running away with his tail between his legs - that's my Freddy.

Hmmm. Kind of like how he runs away from my above bolded logical point and avoids it in his latest blog entry when he could have addressed it.

Mojo
Member
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 4:46 pm

Re: Things have changed for me... [OR MAYBE NOT]

Postby Mojo » 1 decade 2 months ago (Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:25 am)

Sorry to go off topic but, what's this about Gerdes being banned here for plagiarism?


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests