Is that the best you can do? Jews concealed their jewishness and Stalin was not good at statistics. And that's your proof that holocaust is a myth, right? Keep up the good work. FYI Russian KGB kept absolutely perfect track of every citizen and knew absolutely everything about everyone i.e. nationality, parents, relatives, place of birth, residence, jobs etc. Communist censuses were absolutely accurate and Stalin's antisemitism did not surface until several years later, it was not a concern in the late 40s.
Stalin preferred to blame his own deportations of Jews on the Nazis. He also had interest in perpetuating the Holocaust story, because it helped to keep attention away from his own crimes. Stalin was known for fabricating lot's of ''evidence" against everyone he didn't like, so he should not be trusted on anything. The KGB didn't exist at that time. Stalin himself attacked the Jews massively during the âGreat Purge,â which took place in 1937 and 1938.
Stalin preferred to blame his own deportations of Jews on the Nazis. Stalin never deported jews. Period. Did not happen. He wanted to in 1953-1954 if I am not mistaken but he died. He also had interest in perpetuating the Holocaust story, because it helped to keep attention away from his own crimes. Stalin was known for fabricating lot's of ''evidence" against everyone he didn't like, so he should not be trusted on anything. Nothing about the holocaust is based on Stalin's testimony or his "fabrications". The KGB didn't exist at that time. Stalin himself attacked the Jews massively during the âGreat Purge,â which took place in 1937 and 1938. So KGB was called the GPU then, big fucking difference. More importantly Stalin attacked everyone during the Great Purge, jews, russians, ukrainians, uzbeks, christians, muslims, atheists. No group was singled out and no group was spared. In fact many of your anti-semitic brethren believe that the jews in the russian government, not Stalin were behind the Great Purge. You people sure want to have it both ways.
I didn't like her comments, but I didn't do anything to pressure advertisers....or whine to Baron about it. I have never said that Coulter should be censored. Forced to wear a muzzle perhaps, but not censored...
But the democratic grassroots did pressure the advertisers, did force many of them to cancel their ads on Coulter's site, did censor her. Yet you did not criticize their actions as vigorously as you now criticize the banning of a Nazi. Hmm, let me guess, you did not criticize the campaign targeting Coulter's advertisers at all, you were completely silent on that issue. But your voice in defense of a Nazi is loud and clear.
So the democrats did something in reaction to Coulter...so? They are practicing politics, I am not. ET members are practicing politics by crying to daddy...I am not. Now concerning your post in general, what does that have to do with ET? What does that have to do with me? What does that have to do with Baron? What does that have to do with the babies that couldn't handle Publisher's post and point of view that they went crying to mommy? I have said I don't agree with Coulter, I think she barks like a dog...but I don't believe in censorship of her puke. I am not fearful that "weak" people will read her comments and think them legitimate simply because she is a perpetual guest on Fox News Right Wing Fanatic talking heads shows. I am defending the so called "Nazi" and his/her right to post here at ET, as much or as often as he likes. Nothing stops those who disagree with the posts from ignoring them, or countering what they think is false with their point of view of what they think is the truth. I am not saying the whining babies and klones here at ET don't have the right to complain, they do, I just see them as whining little babies who practice a double standard as the whiners consistently practice their own form of hate speech toward liberals, Muslims, socialists, other ET members...or any other group or person they disagree with. The only thing that is loud and clear here...as usual, is that your post is filled with logical fallacy fallacy after logical fallacy, but of course that is your M.O. It may be hard for a small minded black and white thinking dogmatic fanatical personality like you to grasp, but I can support someone's right to free speech, even when I don't agree with their point of view.
It has everything to do with your double standard. You keep silent when Coulter is censored, you're up in arms when a Nazi is.
What double standard? Your inability to think logically is glaring. You are presenting a straw man argument after strawman, which is about all you ever do. Man, completely pathetic, you must be reading from Karl Rove's playbook...
Coulter is censored, Z10 is silent, Publisher is censored, Z10 is loud and clear. Or how about this double standard: Israel fires a missile into Gaza, Z10 starts a thread about it, the Palestinians fire a hundred missiles into Israel, Z10 starts zero threads about it.
Here is the framework of your continual logical fallacy. Fact 1. A comments on something person B does. Fact 2. A does not comment on something person C does that is similar. 3. Therefore person A supports person C's actions. Conclusion 3 is a logically flawed conclusion, as conclusions 3 cannot be known on the basis of fact 1 and 2. You are just guessing, incorrectly I might add. Not commenting on person C is not necessarily supporting person C. That in a nutshell is your flawed logic...repetitively engaged in when you have no defense of the position you support. It is similar to the false dilemma of Bush's repetitive logical fallacy that you are either "with us or you are with the terrorists." http://skepdic.com/falsedilemma.html