Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
Even the Bernie supportershave been given the finger at this point. Ask a Bernie supporter 6 months ago what they think of Joe Biden and it would not be anything nice. Not that Bernie would have even done anything about the real financial criminals but I somewhat sympathize with their views.
The Gliewitz false-flag story is based off the signed testimony of one person ( Alfred Naujocks ) at Nuremberg.
LOL. Getting really random now. NONE of the things you cited were in the message Postman called lies.
What about Germar Rudolf? He is not at all a "Nazi" but has done some of the most work on Holocaust Revisionism.
I am interested and will check it out. Revisionism and apologism are not the same thing, but then picking the rules is kind of unfair of me. Its quite possible that there are scholars who are committed to getting it right who do not have an agenda of hate. Everything I've seen cited (possibly excepting Rudolf) quite clearly has an agenda.
Companies don't censor. They conduct business. Governments censor (or not). Companies are free to do whatever they want (that is what freedom means) so long as they don't discriminate on the basis of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. Unless it comes to baking a cake for a gay wedding. Because somehow that isn't discrimination.OK.
If the Revisionists were right ( see picture attached for clarity ) wouldn't that be inherently Nazi apologism?
Its a good question, and ultimately it is why it is hard to police. But also why it is so necessary to do so.
Since Amazon sold the same books for years and decided all of a sudden to stop selling them, refusing to offer any sensible explanation besides their guidelines, and without justifying how the exact same content can respect/cease to respect those from one day to the very next, the only logical explanation is they censored them out of fear of pressure groups.
And so you lied .
To comeback to the subject of anti revisionist laws in a majority of industrialized nations, the reason for this censoring is not, as you wrote, that it consists in "Nazi apologism/ horribly contrived/inconsistent/hateful/self-serving motivation."
The true reason is that they cannot answer the arguments put forward by the revisionists, and in order to avoid the topic, they resort to brute force.
And here's your second lie.
Regarding the subject of the trillions of dollars in reparations reserved exclusively for one genocide and not for others, the fallacy is totally relevant, and has nothing to do with whataboutism as revisionists very much put in doubt the said genocide.
That's your third lie.
You welcome.
LOL. Are you trying to be silly now? I'll pretend you are serious, although I am really not sure. Who cares what the explanation is? I mean, you care, and you don't like it. But, what, you want congress to pass a law saying that once you sell a product you have to sell it forever? Yes! Hello McRib! They changed their mind for a reason you don't like, lol. Seriously? Something should be done! This is a thing up with which I shall not put!Since Amazon sold the same books for years and decided all of a sudden to stop selling them, refusing to offer any sensible explanation besides their guidelines, and without justifying how the exact same content can respect/cease to respect those from one day to the very next, the only logical explanation is they censored them out of fear of pressure groups.
And so you lied .
To comeback to the subject of anti revisionist laws in a majority of industrialized nations, the reason for this censoring is not, as you wrote, that it consists in "Nazi apologism/ horribly contrived/inconsistent/hateful/self-serving motivation."
The true reason is that they cannot answer the arguments put forward by the revisionists, and in order to avoid the topic, they resort to brute force.
And here's your second lie.
Regarding the subject of the trillions of dollars in reparations reserved exclusively for one genocide and not for others, the fallacy is totally relevant, and has nothing to do with whataboutism as revisionists very much put in doubt the said genocide.
That's your third lie.
You welcome.
I know, right? I walk around Silicon Valley and think "Where are all the men" and then I realize: half the "women" are trannies! That's where the men went!
Since Amazon sold the same books for years and decided all of a sudden to stop selling them, refusing to offer any sensible explanation besides their guidelines, and without justifying how the exact same content can respect/cease to respect those from one day to the very next, the only logical explanation is they censored them out of fear of pressure groups.
And so you lied .
To comeback to the subject of anti revisionist laws in a majority of industrialized nations, the reason for this censoring is not, as you wrote, that it consists in "Nazi apologism/ horribly contrived/inconsistent/hateful/self-serving motivation."
The true reason is that they cannot answer the arguments put forward by the revisionists, and in order to avoid the topic, they resort to brute force.
And here's your second lie.
Regarding the subject of the trillions of dollars in reparations reserved exclusively for one genocide and not for others, the fallacy is totally relevant, and has nothing to do with whataboutism as revisionists very much put in doubt the said genocide.
That's your third lie.
You welcome.
Trannies . . .
You tell me, you are the one that brought them into a conversation on . . . <checks notes> Ray Peat and Stalinism.
