Historicity of the Jewish Holocaust

[Fadix]

Originally posted by Darorinag "Irrelevant points"? Yet you never took the time to prove me wrong, did you? Yet you seem to know it's irrelevant.. Hmmm!!

Anyway, glad to have you at least a bit neutral this time around. We don't see that happening usually.

It's fine and dandy not to want to participate in a discussion for no reason - it is only when you claim that you're not going to discuss it because my points are irrelevant that I have my doubts about your reasons.

Anyway... nice debate we had going there. at least the thread wasn't deleted. that's a start.

peace,

dan

Liar, when we "prove" you wrong, you still don't accept it and lie.

Here few that you still maintained even after proving you wrong.

-You never have read Hilbergs work like you have claimed having read it.

-You never have admited being Den.

-You did not read all the Judge transcript like you claimed having read it.

-You did not take the quote in question from a Book.

-You had no idea of the name of the Shooting organization. I asked you to give it countless numbers of times, you were not able to give it... when I have named it, finally you claimed you knew it.

-You have not read Irving. You did even not knew he was a revisionist in the first place.

-You have not read any work from the other "side" like you have claimed you have read. I asked you to just name one book, you were unable to do so.

-You have tried to pass a quote from Leutcher as your own.


I can continue like this long and long and long, you are a total ignorant regarding the subject, each time I discuss about a subject you jump on google and run a search and come up later claiming to know of what you are talking about. You even jumped in the Einstein discussion, while you have not a slightest idea regarding the theories in question, but since he is a Jew, he must have been a cheater. Right?

Pathological liar.


Readers, I am not making that up, read with what pathological lying is associated with.

"Pathological lying, though, can be thought of as being associated with a select few psychiatric diagnoses, which normally have their onset during adolescence. Namely, these are Conduct Disorder and Antisocial Personality Disorder."

Or.

"Increased lying has been seen with a number of psychiatric diagnoses such as ADHD and Bipolar Disorder."

Here more:

"The authors report a case in which pathological lying is associated with right hemithalamic dysfunction as shown by [99mTc]HMPAO SPECT brain scanning. This association has not been demonstrated previously and is noteworthy because it supports the hypothesized roles of the thalamus and associated brain regions in the modulation of behavior and cognition." ( Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1992; 4:442-446)

[Sip]

Originally posted by Darorinag On can easily come to the conclusion that you could be sued for sharing anyone's IP. I am sure Admin will not be pleased with this if I tell him that one of his moderators is admitting she shared an IP across boards.

Dan, I am not a moderator here. Here's a partial list of the IP addresses of people who have accessed this thread with times and dates. So sue me. What are you talking about "suing" for "sharing" a public piece of info?

130.xxx.100.56 - 30/Mar/2004:00:01:13 -0500
24.xxx.220.209 - 30/Mar/2004:00:40:26 -0500
152.xxx.252.199 - 30/Mar/2004:01:24:08 -0500
216.xxx.102.222 - 30/Mar/2004:01:30:44 -0500
24.xxx.232.35 - 30/Mar/2004:08:33:32 -0500
24.xxx.241.65 - 30/Mar/2004:09:11:48 -0500
130.xxx.100.190 - 30/Mar/2004:09:16:28 -0500
24.xxx.241.65 - 30/Mar/2004:09:20:13 -0500
213.xxx.138.82 - 30/Mar/2004:10:45:32 -0500
130.xxx.27.210 - 30/Mar/2004:11:27:05 -0500
198.xxx.210.59 - 29/Mar/2004:22:14:20 -0500
66.xxx.199.11 - 29/Mar/2004:23:02:21 -0500

Note I have masked the second byte but I think it won't be hard to verify I am not making these numbers up.

[Fadix]

Yeh! bwahahahahaha!!! I guess he is freaked up now...

[dusken]

I got freaked up once. Then I left the club because it was a man.

[Darorinag]

Dan, I am not a moderator here. Here's a partial list of the IP addresses of people who have accessed this thread with times and dates.

You can't know the IP addresses of those who don't post, unless you are online too and are checking the online list and are a moderator.

Btw, IPs are not public piece of info per se. It is public only in the sense that the owner of the website you are visiting may see them, but that is irrelevant. You many not post people's full IP addreses on forums, or share them with others.

Anyhow, I already stated that I am not going to reply to off-topic posts. Now contribute to the thread.

I got freaked up once. Then I left the club because it was a man.

Let's get back on-topic. I am wondering why Fadi boy ignored my post about Vrba. And Milch.. hmmm!!!

[Sip]

Originally posted by Darorinag You can't know the IP addresses of those who don't post, unless you are online too and are checking the online list and are a moderator.

Not true. You can know. Posting or not posting doesn't make a difference. But I agree. Let's move back to the original topic as the IP address question etc has been beaten to death.

[Darorinag]

Originally posted by Seapahn Not true. You can know. Posting or not posting doesn't make a difference. But I agree. Let's move back to the original topic as the IP address question etc has been beaten to death.

From my (limited?) knowledge of bulletin board software, only administrators (and by some tweaking moderators) can see the IP addresses of members. Members can't see (and should not see) the IP addresses of other members.

So, anyway - Seapahn, what do you think about the Vrba cross-examination? (Note that you don't have to have read 500 books in order to reply to this. I posted part of the cross-examination transcript in one of the previous pages of this thread). No one commented on that, and I am wondering what people think about it. Any thoughts welcome.

[Fadix]

Originally posted by Darorinag





Let's get back on-topic. I am wondering why Fadi boy ignored my post about Vrba. And Milch.. hmmm!!!

Hey Jerk, don't make it sound like you have the upper hand in anything. I told you I will answer... I don't have the time right now, even if I am on off simester I still have less time than you on at full simester. You pass last on my lists of pririoties... I do not suffer from a psychiatric illness which will hit me as a panic attack with a racing heart like you, everytime one answer and that you leave everything your homeworks or everything that usually passes as first for a sane person. And after you cry and come here the last day at the night before the day that your homeworks are sheduled for and you cry not having done anything.

Look Jerk, that was not off topic at all, you are the one evading everything... I can bring everything you evdaded here which you will never answer, while when I answer, I answer everything... and here Mr. run a google search and have learned two names and is farting them here...

Jerk, answer my question here and stop evading it.

Why should anyone continue discussing with you when he knows that he could present anything which could not be refuted or discussed and undeniable fact, but that you will still not accept it and twist it.

This has exactly to do with the Den question Jerk, like it has to do with the Hilberg question, like the Judge question, like Irving question, etc... Jerk, I have shown that you were a pathological liar whom still deny things that the facts are undisputable, like you have denied being Den after every evidences, like you have lied about Hilberg, even when I presented the undeniable evidences how you could not have read it...

You have refused EVERY honest discussions, you have lied back and forth, again and again in EVERY SINGLE post in this thread Dan and now you tell me i have ignored one of your posts? Dan, do you realise that probably you are even not fooling yourself and even less any other readers?

Pathological liar, answer me, how can we trust you, trust that you will admit something, when even after being faced with UNDENIABLE evidences you still play the bonehead and still maintain the same lie, when both you and me and everyone else knows you lie?

Do you see now why I call you a pathological liar Dan?

Try to find me calling others Jerks in turkish boards, or pathological liars, even after all their lies I do not call a person pathological liar just to attack him, I am calling you a pathological liar because you are one, probably it is linked with your other psychiatric conditions(including psychosis).

Dan, Dan, Dan... again that bring us the Den story Dan, you are doing with your own lies what you have done in your forum when you have attacked and made fun of the moderators that were saying that you were Den. You are trying to make all this look like if you are handling the discussion and that people are trying to evade it. Jerk, reread all the posts, and this time after having taken your meds, maybe you will realise how a fool you were looking like twisting and twisting, cornered in more then an occasion and evading, changing the subject, playing with insignificant words that have absolutly nothing to do with the discussion.

Now, in order to "prove" that you can accept an evidence on its face value, admit being Den, admit not having read Hilbergs book, admit not having read Irving, of not having read the rest of the judge transcript... let start with those ones... clean yourself and show us that you can admit something when the evidences shows us that you are lying so obviously...

The question now is, will you admit or not... but here for everyone to read, they will see that obviously you will NOT!!! Talking of evasion, everyone sees whom is evading.

Jerk, do you think that I will evade a jerk like you having the internet as only sources of information?

[Fadix]

Edited by loseyourname: Guys, this isn't a smear campaign. If you want to insult each other, go to the insult thread.

[Darorinag]

With regards to the population numbers, I guess Fadi found a different explanation between May 26, 2002 and March 2004 - he no longer believes that "from 1945 to 1948 it was the time of the baby boomers and that from statistics Jewish increase rate was one of their biggest in their history of existance." Now he believes that Jews inflated their population numbers. I guess during the span of 2 years, he had to find a more believable explanation.

http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/thread?forumid=178855&messageid=1022354854&lp=1022419436

Hehe, I should like to hear what Fadi boy has to say about this.
But as usual, he will resort to personal attacks. Mark my words.

Notice the pattern, Fadi calls someone on that forum a "clown."

"G---- you are a clown, playing with numbers like this is really pathetic..,. idiots like you bring fantasmes into reality and act as barriers for the recognition of the genocide..."

Do you want more proof that you cannot have a normal discussion without resorting to labelling people, Fadi? And btw, I still have you on ignore. As I said before, if you want me to read your reply (i.e. not having wasted your time in posting something knowing that I wouldn't be seeing it), PM me and tell me you're done with the name-calling. It's really easy. Just one click away. You can do it.

Does anyone recognise the name Sulzberger? Was he Jewish by any chance? So we have:

16.5 million from The World Almanac (which quotes the American Jewish Committee)

Minimum of 15.7 million and maximum of 18.6 million from the NY Times.

Both coming from Jews. Now subtract the 6 million from 16.5, and you will have 10.5 million.

16.5 million - (minus) 6 million = 10.5 million.

So we have: 15.7 (using the lowest for the benefit of the exterminationists here) - 10.5 = 5.2 million.

5.2 million in about 10 year's time means:

1424 Jewish births per day for 7 days a week, 365 days a year.

Net increase of 1424 / day.

Or 33% increase in the world Jewish population between the years 1938 and 1948.

Assuming that 60% of the 10.5 million were females, EACH and EVERY Jewish woman (and I haven't taken out those who are incapable of procreating - that would increase the number of children per woman even more), would have to have 12 children.

An increase of 5.2 million per decade would mean the following:

For 50 years, a 165% increase in Jewish population. Which would mean that the current Jewish population should be about 42 million. Allowing the error margin to be +/- 10, that would mean a minimum of 32 million.

There are now around 13.2 million Jews around the world.

Figures.