COMMENTS:
She's no intellectual.
But you have to pity her & understand her state of denial, she's obviously deeply fucked up by the actions of her forebears. I wonder if she ever asked her Japanese granddad what he did in the war?
I already told her that whatever he did has no bearing on her at all.
But still, must be some simmering guilt bubbling away....
So very sad.
Voted : Lovelynice is a cowardly nazi
What kind of user spends much of their time on this site denying the Holocaust, the Rape of Nanking and other Japanese war crimes? A right wing fascist (Nazi). I have yet to see her deny that she is a Nazi (sympathizer) either.
Lovelynice is friends with users like Tank_girl and meteor7 (aliases) who deny the Holocaust. Take a look at their favorites. All of these users log in from Japan and have similar stories. They cut and paste the same way. Tank_girl and meteor7 directly cut and paste information from neo-Nazi websites word for word. I have proof of this. They will say they didn't get it from neo-Nazi websites (despite exact word for word, punctuation, spacing), but they won't tell where they did get it from. These users are lovelynice's friends with who she joins in on denying the Holocaust.
What is really sad is that ken_from_dublin allies himself with them on the 9/11 ballots. Really sad as ken used to be a really decent user with good ballots.
People - You must know what I am going to say - Step away from the crazy person, dont make eye contact and walk away.
You dont need to win a debate with a conspiracy theorist and it is impossible anyway as they inhabit a world where common sense, logic and facts are irrelavent. Widehead, you have nothing to prove to anyone, least of all a dim bulb conspiracy nut.
It isn't rational to deny the holocaust and the various japanese war crimes.
To do so would suggest that she is either imbalanced or in horrible denial.
I think name-calling is the wrong way to persuade someone. That much being said, there was a lot of denial of denial in a recent ballot. She said in effect that everyone that doesn't agree with holocaust denial is in "denial" because they deny deniers. And is the holocaust or the Rape of Nanking "feel good"? Maybe a few facts of history are denied more than the rest because they make some people feel bad.
One can only assume she has trouble seeing what she writes, the white hood can obscure the vision and the reason
A character assassination ballot. Cool a Free Ride, *All Aboard*.
Let it go man.
"Can't we all just get along?"- R King, c.1992
Lovelynice has more integrity than all you epistemological deniers put together including the sneaky coward who posted as a 'guest user' to slither under Lovely's karma block, we need more Lovelynices on B&W.com, people who have the courage of their own convictions and who aren't prepared to go through life as a passive mass media zombie, believing everything they read and hear and questioning nothing.
Mojo put her finger on the problem today, she is afraid to post a controversial ballot because she fears that she could be subjected to the same vilification that Lovelynice bravely subjects herself too in the defence of free speech.
it doesn't count when you defend your own accounts.
Should I care? O.o
"including the sneaky coward who posted as a 'guest user' to slither under Lovely's karma block"
If one had to enter a comment as a guest user in order to avoid a karma block that's hardly cowardice is it?
It's a little bit sad though.
And Ken, when you've finished sticking up for the Nazi sympathizer you may just want to look VERY carefully at just what it is you are being so chivalrous for.
Oh and what's with the 'all truths' bullshit?
Everyone has a right to their opinion unless it differs from mine.
Mr Sheepy there are somethings that are simply not a matter of opinion.
That 6 million Jews were slaughtered in the holocaust is not my opinion - it is a fact.
BIG difference.
My comment was only a joke, wideheadofknowledge, so lay off.
My politics are often attacked, but noone can say I dont genuinely believe them to be true.
Showing up an ignorance is not 'attacking a truth', Ken, just because you believe something to be true, does not make it so.
I purposely steer away from your conspiracy ballots, as I personally find most of them pretty ludicrous and based on supposition and conjecture, but YOU believe it, so whatever points I made to the contrary would be of no consequence.
I am the LAST person to be swayed by the media, but I am persuaded by real evidence, something that inst required of those who claim that the holocaust is fiction.
wide, you can't possibly think they're seperate people.
Voted : Lovelynice is a misunderstood genius
Somehow, I knew the Anti-Semite card would be pulled from the deck.
"And Ken, when you've finished sticking up for the Nazi sympathizer you may just want to look VERY carefully at just what it is you are being so chivalrous for."
By wideheadfknowledge.
Lovelynice is NOT a Nazi sympathizer, you know that, stop being ridiculous.
"And Ken, when you've finished sticking up for the Nazi sympathizer...."
By wideheadfknowledge.
Lovelynice is NOT a Nazi sympathizer, you know that, stop being ridiculous.
Whoops! The first post didn't register as the site overloaded with visitors so I had to come back, then just pruned it.
...and steelhamster, in case you didn't realise it your comment up above is a mass of self contradictary nonsense.
You obviouslty don't know the first thing about my 9/11 ballots, which are based around scientific evidence and eyewitness accounts - not " pretty ludicrous....supposition and conjecure", you're talking pure and utter crap there.
Just as well for you you don't post on them for your sake.
Mind you, feel free to comment on them whenever you like, we'd like to hear yur take on it, or better still post your own ballot debunking it seen as you seem to know so much about how the official story is true.
There's a challenge for you - take me on in a 9/11 ballot debate and we'll take it from there?
Deal?
I've done extensive research on 9/11 and I know the Governments Official account is pure non sense. I won't go as far as They did it, But I wholly believe they are complicit. Check the Project for a new American century website if you want motive.
"Lovelynice is NOT a Nazi sympathizer, you know that, stop being ridiculous."
by Ken_from_Dublin
Her arguments are sympathetic to the motives and ideology of the neo-nazi movement.
She (and it appears you too) fail to question just WHY certain groups of people are actively denying the holocaust. These people are not working from some pure motive of trying to uncover some alledgedly hidden 'truth' they are anti-semetic, racist neo-nazis who lecture about how misunderstood Hitler was whilst giving out swastikas at book signings.
The evidence you produce isnt the 'truth', its a conclusion based on theories and supposition.
The whole 9/11 affair does have spurious elements, but joining the dots between loosely based conjecture isnt fact.
If you produce solid evidence, then I shall by all means look at it, until then I remain skeptical
Post the ballot steelhamster!
See you there at dawn, pistols at the ready, I look forward to it.
Ken ->  
WHOK..... do you understand this philosophy;
"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
~ Voltaire
Those words crystallise what democracy and free speech is all about.
Never forget that.
Ken: defending the right of a person to free speech is not the same as being forced to accept whatever they have to say without question.
I would not deny Mr. Phelps his first amendment rights, but I will continue to crticize every word that comes out of his mouth. Reread the constitution, no where does it guarantee the right to unchallenged free speech.
that doesn't apply when you don't think or believe anything you say. it doesn't apply toliars.
Just for a balanced disposition Steel, The Government hasn't been able to produce any solid evidence either. The Official Report is just as quetionable if not more so.
"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
You can't disagree on facts, Ken.
Opinions are one thing - facts are entirely another.
"The Government hasn't been able to produce any solid evidence either."
that airplanes crashed into 3 buildings and a field killing thousands?
you're confusing that with them saying they had no hard evidence (as in physical, forensic evidence) tying the hijackers to al-quaeda.
Opinions are one thing - facts are entirely another.
by wideheadofknowledge
And your opinion about Lovelynice being a Nazi sympathiser is factually incorrect and merely an opinion, glad that's been cleared that up.
^^^that
Neothe1~
Of course I refer to hard evidence connecting it to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. I didn't think it necessary to spell that out, My bad.
"your opinion about Lovelynice being a Nazi sympathiser is factually incorrect"
The Cambridge dictionary defines 'sympathy' as supporting or agreeing with someone's views.
Neo-Nazis such as the IHR do not believe the holocaust occured (or that the death toll was 'only' in the hundred of thousands). Lovelynice agrees with andsupports this point of view. Technically speaking she is therefore a Nazi sympathizer.
Thanks for your time.
"Of course I refer to hard evidence connecting it to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda."
they have no physical evidence. but the bin laden "confession" pretty much clears that up, in spite of the bad translation
"Of course I refer to hard evidence connecting it to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda."
they have no physical evidence. but the bin laden "confession" pretty much clears that up, in spite of the bad translation
wide, why do you continue to adress ken's accounts as seperate people?
Pakistan arranged for Bin Laden to surrender to US authority prior to the invation of Afghanistan. I will address the peticulars later.
I seriously doubt the Alleged Bin Laden confession is legit but I will review it for clarity.
Voted : Lovelynice is a misunderstood genius
"The Cambridge dictionary defines 'sympathy' as supporting or agreeing with someone's views."
by wideheadofknowledge
You are reduced to indulging in the spurious ambiguity of subjective semantics to justify your own biased, ill informed and misguided opinion.
Lovelyice is no neo-Nazi, no way! - this is getting even more ridiculous, I'm surprised at you Widehead', you'll be calling her a KKK member too next the way things are going.
"Lovelynice agrees with and supports this point of view. Technically speaking she is therefore a Nazi sympathizer."
Thanks for your time.
by wideheadofknowledge
Pure nonsense, for obvious reasion that I'm not going to waste my time going into here, I read somewhere that the American Red Cross put the number in the hundreds of thousands, I don't know if that is true or not but I hope it is for the sake of the other five million plus, but that's just as horrific as if it was six million, it's still murder on an industrial scale, there was an evil intention of genocide too in my opinion, but by your logic anyone who questions the stats is a neo Nazi, utterly ridiculous and morally irresponsibe.
I hope it was only a few hundred thousand instead of six million, I wish it was zero in fact!
you have a very hard time with proof, don't you? drop the act. nobody wants you or your sockpuppets here.
I hope it was only a few hundred thousand instead of six million, I wish it was zero in fact!
by Ken_from_Dublin on Wed Dec 13, 06 3:50pm
You're getting all confused here, Ken.
I think that virtually all of us wished that the holocaust didn't happen but that doesn't make it morally acceptable to make the jump - "I wish it was only a hundred thousand that died in the holocaust - I'll try and prove that it was."
Why do almost all legitimate historians (those with relevant qualifications) agree that the death toll of the holocaust was 6 million Jews? Because of one or two unverified eyewitness accounts? Because of confessions obtained under duress or torture? Because of some unspecified Zionist plan?
No, no and no! The estimates have been arrived at by different scholars working independantly over many years, in different fields.
As it stands right now the ONLY western scholars that would 'revise' the numbers dead down into the hundreds of thousands are right wing, neonazi, antisemetic racists.
Refuting the death toll, revising the numbers of dead in such a way and trying to argue that the slaughter of Jews was morally equivalent to the bombing of Dresden makes you a Nazi sympathizer.
Why? Because you are agreeing with and supporting neonazi ideals.
It's like someone saying: "I believe that whites are more superior to blacks because God made it that way. However, I don't sympathize with racists and I am not a racist myself."
Absurd, contradictory and utterly reprehensible.
You're missing the whole point of my argument WHOK!
What moral difference does it make whether it was quarter of a million or six million innocents who were murdered?
" A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths, a statistic." - Stalin.
It was still attempted genocide.
This is just an arguement based on the accuracy of the information regarding the death tolls, as far as I know according to impartial demographic records the worldwide Jewish population was reduced by less than half a million after world war two.
If his is true then Thank God I say it wasn't six million, because some of my favourite people of all time are Jewish.
Sacha Baron Cohen aka 'Borat' being my latest comic genius/hero.
Woody Allen s another fave of mine.
Are we arguing about moral equivalency here? I thought not.
My last post was about the motives of those who question the holocaust and what it means to agree with or support them in their challenge.
The reality is that 6 million DID die whether we like it or not.
The question to ask is "How did we arrive at that figure?" which is perfectly legitimate and easily answered. Those who challenge it do so for purely disgusting reasons.
" The reality is that 6 million DID die whether we like it or not.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Dec 14, 06 6:12am"
That's not a reality, nor is it a proven fact. It's widely promoted assumption, but there isn't much real basis for it, and many arguments against it. If the claim was factual, there would be no need for those infamous laws against "holocaust-denial" in Germany and scholars could investigate openly
*runs away from the drama*
I honestly thought this ballot was going to be about Oskar Schindler, or I wouldn't have opened it. I have to agree with socal_sweetie. *runs away from drama!*
"It's widely promoted assumption, but there isn't much real basis for it"
Ouch.
Just a quick question: Are you anti-semetic?
Just a quick question, why are you always attempting to insinuate that everyone who disagrees with you is an anti-semite?
The only people who seriously attack the truth of the Holocaust are anti-semetic, neo-nazi or just plain stupid.
If you're claiming not to be the first two we'll accept stupidity as your feeble excuse.
"The only people who seriously attack the truth of the Holocaust are anti-semetic, neo-nazi or just plain stupid.
by wideheadofknowledge on Fri Aug 10, 07 8:03pm "
So, for some reason you think that a tirade of insults replaces rational argument? Somehow it doesn't seem like you have anything more than insults.
" If you're claiming not to be the first two we'll accept stupidity as your feeble excuse.
by wideheadofknowledge on Fri Aug 10, 07 8:03pm"
How about we look at what you just posted? You throw insults instead of rational argument, you censor and karma block comments which prove you to be wrong, and you seem to think that these are sufficient by themselves. To me that proves more about you, then it does about what you claim to be true.
Calling a spade a spade is not an insult.
Look at the IHR - the "respectable" and "scholarly" face of denial.
They are not nice people.
Ask yourself - why align with these people against almost ALL of the legitimate historians and investigators?
Pick up free swatikas at book signings much?
"Calling a spade a spade is not an insult
by wideheadofknowledge on Sat Aug 11, 07 6:57pm"
But revisionism is not about spades, and neither are those who seriously doubt the holocaust look anything like spades. Nor are the majority of revisionists anti-semites or neo-nazis despite your unfounded accusations and insults.
In other words, you just like to call them names like you were a little kid in a playground.
"Look at the IHR - the "respectable" and "scholarly" face of denial.
by wideheadofknowledge on Sat Aug 11, 07 6:57pm"
Not denial, they seek proper investigation and revision if necessary, which considering the amount of claims of the holocaust myth which go straight against scientific fact, is perfectly reasonable. IHR is only one tiny group in Australia. CODOH is much larger, and requires that even in their debates that insults not be used, that members stick to scientific facts and what is provable - which has the result that those members on the site which defend the holocaust myth frequently get proven wrong. Your empty accusations of 'anti-semite' show how hollow and empty your own claims are. You resort to insults because you can't prove any of your claims.
"They are not nice people.
by wideheadofknowledge on Sat Aug 11, 07 6:57pm"
^^^ Says the hypocrite who calls people names like neo-nazi and anti-semite^^^
Imho, you are definitely not a 'nice person'. Neither is FiddleFaddleOnLSD.
"Ask yourself - why align with these people against almost ALL of the legitimate historians and investigators?
by wideheadofknowledge on Sat Aug 11, 07 6:57pm"
If the majority gets it wrong, then they get it wrong. The majority of historians got it wrong about the builders of the Great Pyramid too. They used to claim that it was built by slaves, now we know that the Great Pyramid was built by volunteers and that they had labour unions.
The majority of historians used to label the era between the fall of the Roman Empire and Middle Ages as being the "Dark Ages", but now have dropped that term because their assumptions about an age of barbarism were proven wrong.
The majority of historians used to claim that the Battle of Agincourt was for centuries was an engagement in which the English army, though overwhelmingly outnumbered 4 to 1 by the French army, pulled off a stunning victory. Recent research found that the French only outnumbered the English and Welsh 12,000 to 8,000, and that the English had exaggerated the numbers for patriotic reasons.
If there were a universally accepted view of history which never changed, there would be no need to research it further. Many historians who write revisionist exposés are motivated by a genuine desire to educate and to correct history. Many great discoveries have come as a result of the research of men and women who have been curious enough to revisit certain historical events and explore them again in depth from a new perspective.
There is nothing more natural than the "revision" of history, and nothing more ordinary. Time itself modifies the perspective not only of the historian but also reveals facts and evidence previously either hidden, lost, forgotten, buried, or censored.
Truth needs dissent to thrive, liberty needs testing to endure, history needs "revision" to be accurate, pretty or not, likable or not.
"Pick up free swatikas at book signings much?
by wideheadofknowledge on Sat Aug 11, 07 6:57pm"
Do you? You seem more familiar with the idea than I. Or is this just another one of your ridiculous ad hominem attacks because you can't use rational debate?
Calling as nazi a nazi is not an insult. Merely a statement of fact.
Calling someone a nazi when they aren't is not a statement of fact, it's an insult. What's wrong with you that you can't debate anything without calling the other person various insulting epithets? It suggests that you aren't as confident in your claims as you pretend.
Nonsense. Do a bit of reading about denial. Read some stuff that argues against it. It'll do you good.
Don't just stick to the sites and sources that reinforce you ideas. Challenge them.
Nonsense yourself.
Labelling someone as something which they are not, does not make your claim true.
If you're so well read on the holocaust, then why can't you deal with the flaws mentioned other than by calling anyone who points out those flaws various names and insults? It seems that you don't have any confidence in your claims because you resort to insults.
We also all know that you, widehead
practice deliberate censorship.
When Lovelynice posted the following, you chose to karma block it from the very first time. She reacted by posting it again, but it was you had already karma blocked the first post of it - because it proved your claims that SIX MILLION number weren't a magic mumbo jumbo number game to be wrong.
This is the transcript of a document printed just after WW-1 and used in a speech, as well as spread by leaflets.
....
The Crucifixion of Jews Must Stop!
By Martin H. Glynn
(Former Governor of the State of N.Y.)
From across the sea SIX MILLION men and women call to us for help, and eight hundred thousand little children cry for bread.
These children, these men and women are our fellow-members of the human family, with the same claim on life as we, the same susceptibility to the winter's cold, the same propensity to death before the fangs of hunger. Within them reside the illimitable possibilities for the advancement of the human race as naturally would reside in SIX MILLION human beings. We may not be their keepers but we ought to be their helpers.
In the face of death, in the throes of starvation there is no place for mental distinctions of creed, no place for physical differentiations of race. In this catastrophe, when SIX MILLION human beings are being whirled toward the grave by a cruel and relentless fate, only the most idealistic promptings of human nature should sway the heart and move the hand.
SIX MILLION men and women are dying from lack of the necessaries of life; eight hundred thousand children cry for bread. And this fate is upon them through no fault of their own, through no transgression of the laws of God or man; but through the awful tyranny of war and a bigoted lust for Jewish blood.
In this threatened holocaust of human life, forgotten are the niceties of philosophical distinction, forgotten are the differences of historical interpretation; and the determination to help the helpless, to shelter the homeless, to clothe the naked and to feed the hungry becomes a religion at whose altar men of every race can worship and women of every creed can kneel. In this calamity the temporalities of man's fashionings fall away before the eternal verities of life, and we awaken to the fact that from the hands of one God we all come and before the tribunal of one God we all must stand on the day of final reckoning. And when that reckoning comes mere profession of lips will not weigh a pennyweight; but deeds, mere intangible deeds, deeds that dry the tear of sorrow and allay the pain of anguish, deeds that with the spirit of the Good Samaritan pour oil and wine in wounds and find sustenance and shelter for the suffering and the stricken, will outweigh all the stars in the heavens, all the waters in the seas, all the rocks and metals in all the celestian globes that revolve in the firmament around us.
Race is a matter of accident; creed, partly a matter of inheritance, partly a matter of environment, partly one's method of ratiocination; but our physical wants and corporeal needs are implanted in all of us by the hand of God, and the man or woman who can, and will not, hear the cry of the starving; who can, and will not, take heed of the wail of the dying; who can, and will not, stretch forth a helping hand to those who sink beneath the waves of adversity is an assassin of nature's finest instincts, a traitor to the cause of the human family and an abjurer of the natural law written upon the tablets of every human heart by the finger of God himself.
And so in the spirit that turned the poor widow's votive offering of copper into silver, and the silver into gold when placed upon God's altar, the people of this country are called upon to sanctify their money by giving $35,000,000 in the name of the humanity of Moses to SIX MILLION famished men and women.
SIX MILLION men and women are dying -- eight hundred thousand little children are crying for bread.
And why?
Because of a war to lay Autocracy in the dust and give Democracy the sceptre of the Just.
And in that war for democracy 200,000 Jewish lads from the United States fought beneath the Stars and Stripes. In the 77th Division alone there were 14,000 of them, and in Argonne Forest this division captured 54 German guns. This shows that at Argonne the Jewish boys from the United States fought for democracy as Joshua fought against the Amalekites on the plains of Abraham. In an address on the so-called "Lost Battalion," led by Colonel Whittlesey of Pittsfield, Major-General Alexander shows the fighting stuff these Jewish boys were made of. In some way or another Whittlesey's command was surrounded. They were short of rations. They tried to get word back to the rear telling of their plight. They tried and they tried, but their men never got through. Paralysis and stupefaction and despair were in the air. And when the hour was darkest and all seemed lost, a soldier lad stepped forward, and said to Col. Whittlesey: "I will try to get through." He tried, he was wounded, he had to creep and crawl, but he got through. To-day he wears the Distinguished Service Cross and his name is
Abraham Krotoshansky.
Because of this war for Democracy SIX MILLION Jewish men and women are starving across the seas; eight hundred thousand Jewish babies are crying for bread.
In the name of Abraham Krotoshinsky who saved the "Lost Battalion," in the name of the one hundred and ninety-nine thousand and nine hundred and ninety-nine other Jewish boys who fought for Democracy beneath the Stars and Stripes won't you give copper, or silver, or gold, to keep life in the heart of these men and these women; to keep blood in the bodies of these babies?
The Jew Has Helped Everybody But The Jew.
In the world war the Jew has helped everybody but the Jew. "Over there" he helped in camp, in council and in conflict. "Over here" he helped the Red Cross, the Y.M.C.A., the Knights of Columbus, the Masons, the Salvation Army and everybody else. So now is the time for everybody to help the Jew, and God knows now is the time he needs it.
From out of the gloom of this war every other race, save one or two, has snatched a ray of sunshine. But amid the encircling gloom there is no light for the Jew "to lead thou me on." The war is over for everyone, but the Jew. The knife is still at his throat and an unreasoning and unreasonable century-old lust for Jewish blood opens his veins. The Jew in Roumania, Poland and Ukrainia is being made the scapegoat of the war. Since the armistice has been signed thousands of Jews in Ukrainia has been offered up as living sacrifices to diabolical greed and fanatical passion -- their throats cut, their bodies rended limb from limb by assassin bands and rabid soldiery. In the city of Proskunoff one day a few weeks ago the dawn saw the door of every house wherein lived a Jew marked as a shambles for slaughter. For four days, from sunrise to sunset, fanatics plied the dagger like demons from hell, stopping only to teat with hands adrip with the blood of Jewish victims. They killed the men; they were less merciful to women. These they violated, and then they killed. From a purpose to a fury, from a fury to a habit ran this killing of the Jews, until within four days the streets of Proskunoff ran red with blood like gutters of a slaughter house, until its homes became a morgue for thousands of slaughtered human deings whose gaping wounds cried out for vengeance and whose eyes had turned to stone at the horrors they had seen. As Hon. Simon W. Rosendale, aptly paraphrasing Bobby Burns' thought, in his speech not long ago, said it is the age-old story of "man's inhumanity to man that makes countless thousands mourn." For as it has been at Proskunoff, so has it been in a hundred other places. The bloody tale hath repetition ad nauseum. It is the same tear-stained story -- the same old stain upon the escutcheon of humanity. Verily, Byron was right when he wrote:
Tribes of the wandering feet and weary breast
Whither shall ye flee to be at rest?
The wild dove hath her nest, the fox his cave,
Mankind their countries, Israel but the grave.
to a place in the sun, and the crucifixion of Jews must stop. We repeat the war is over for everybody, but the Jew. Like Isaac the knife is at his throat, but unlike Isaac no power seems able to stop the steel from thirsting for his blood. But some power the world must raise up to prevent this decimation of a deserving race. For the peace of the world a League of Nations let us have by all means; but for the Humanity of the World, to give justice to the Jew and other oppressed peoples on earth, let us have a Truce of God! -- Albany Times Union.
I've seen this multi-identity bullying, trolling and self arguing before. Grow up you cock.
DOK quotes an article out of context. Of course, using that particular article in an attempt to hurl anti-semitic diatribes is common for every neo-Nazi website. As you will also notice, DOK and her alias trolls (ie, Lovelynice) are obsessed with posting on Holocaust ballots (denying it of course), posting pro-Hezbollah, pro-Hamas and pro Iran propaganda and of course the 9/11 conspiracy rubbish. Of course, shilling for these causes exposes her for what she is. First and foremost - an idiot, second as a propaganda shill. She never comes up with an original thought or unique way of looking at things. It is cut and paste always. No matter how often you prove this shill wrong, she keeps cutting and pasting. Its all so very predictable. Visit the 9/11 conspiracy and neo-nazi websites and you can predict everything she will say.
Lovelynice... I mean DOK, Why are you so obsessed with Jews if you aren't a cowardly Nazi? You are a Nazi troll and nothing more. You should have been expelled long ago.
DoK, you have put SPAM in the comment area. Write your own views and arguments and cite your sources.
Academic dishonesty is not big or clever.
(DOK quotes an article out of context.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Wed Aug 15, 07 7:10am)
No, it was very relevant and definitely in context. The point was very clear - the six million claim is just some magic number often used before.
(DoK, you hav
by wideheadofknowledge on Wed Aug 15, 07 8:24am)
It's not spam. It's evidence.
I think you just don't like anyone seeing evidence which opposes your claims.
(As you will also notice, DOK and her alias trolls -
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Wed Aug 15, 07 7:10am)
Insult, insult, insult, insult and ad hominem attacks.
Yet you can't provide one iota of proof to support any of your claims.
(Academic dishonesty is not big or clever.
by wideheadofknowledge on Wed Aug 15, 07 8:24am)
I agree, so why do you practice it so often? Do you think that ad hominem attacks and insults replace logical argument and evidence?
You also rated down the same comment by a full -5 twice
Received karma rating of : -5 from wideheadofknowledge
For the Ballot comment#1175297 @ Bestandworst.com.
Received karma rating of : -5 from wideheadofknowledge
For the Ballot comment#1175297 @ Bestandworst.com.
Which proves that you aren't honest in debate.
I've nothing to hide. I'll continue to rate down SPAM in the comment area.
You must have a lot to hide, when you rate down the same comment TWICE.
It's not spam anyway. It's a legitimate post.
It's not a legitimate post. It's a copy and paste of a huge irrelevant article that you seemingly do not understand.
Let's hear YOUR thoughts not those of right-wing hatemongers.
Sure, provide us with links and cite your sources but don't copy and paste someone else's words wholesale into the comment area.
It's simply not necessary - and I will continue to rate it down.
(t's not a legitimate post
by wideheadofknowledge on Wed Aug 15, 07 10:17pm)
It is a legitimate post. It was legitimate from the very first time it was posted by Lovelynice. You rated it down until the point where it was karma blocked in a deliberate attempt at censorship.
You just don't want anyone seeing the evidence that the six million claim is only a magic number important to Jewish culture, most likely being used as part of zionist propaganda to manipulate other Jews. That it was used so many times already before the Nazis ever came along to be blamed, makes the often repeated defense of the "six million jews" claim very suspicious. In parts of Europe (such as Germany), this has been pushed by lobbyists to such an extent that even saying the deathtoll was only 5.9 million could result in a prison term.
(I will continue to rate it down.
by wideheadofknowledge on Wed Aug 15, 07 10:17pm)
Which only proves that you like to censor others in debate, and that you are not honest. Only gets worse when everyone can see you frequent use of insults such as calling someone a nazi, anti-semite, and other childish name-calling.
Martin H. Glynn was a Catholic who happened to use the number 6 million. It's called a coincidence.
Here's how it works. We read stuff or watch stuff, process the information in our brains and write down our own thoughts and arguments , claims and counterclaims. We can cite our original sources.
What we don't do is copy sources wholesale and paste them into the comment area. That, my friend, is SPAM.
And one more time for the hard-of-thinking: A person who supports the ideals of the Nazi regime in terms of their attitudes towards Jews can, in all fairness, be termed an anti-semite and a Nazi.
You only find it insulting because either your cover has been blown or you are actually so ignorant that you don't realise the horror of the political ideals you are aligning yourself with.
And before you get bent out of shape - I mean ignorant in the sense of not knowing something. It's not an insult.
So come on - rise to my challenge on ballot #106535. Strange how quiet you've gone when asked a REALLY simple question.
(Martin H. Glynn was a Catholic who happened to use the number 6 million. It's called a coincidence.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Aug 16, 07 8:07pm)
Except it's not. The speech and document were intended as Zionist propaganda to influence other jews, because the six million killed number was (and is) important symbolism for the time of promise.
Catholics can be zionists too. There are Christian Zionists and Jewish Zionists. So just because he's Catholic does not rule out him being a Zionist believer. I don't know why you even thought that it did.
(A person who supports the ideals of the Nazi regime in terms of their attitudes towards Jews can, in all fairness, be termed an anti-semite and a Nazi
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Aug 16, 07 8:07pm )
That however doesn't excuse your ridiculous use of insults such as anti-semite and calling people nazis when they aren't. You are also trying to make yet another ad hominem attack by implying that anyone who disagrees with holocaust mythology is a nazi or anti-semite when they are not either.
Stop the crap and grow up.
( You only find it insulting because -
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Aug 16, 07 8:07pm)
No, I find your deliberate use of INSULTS to be INSULTING.
Get it? That should be very simple to comprehend.
(Strange how quiet you've gone when asked a REALLY simple question.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Aug 16, 07 8:07pm)
Strange how you seem to believe that everyone else lives on the internet all the time like you apparently do. I have a life beyond being on this site, which is why I'm so very rarely a visitor here. I can only post for a short time before having to do other things.
Someone on this site also likes to totally DELETE other people's posts. I distinctly recall posting a response to you on that ballot and it's no longer there. It was deleted.
I can't delete your posts - and I wouldn't want to.
(Well done Beauregard!
by Jinn_the_Kafir on Thu Sep 07, 06 12:14am)
More like what a lying fool you are Beauregard.
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Fri Aug 17, 07 8:31am
Why would you find some old and closed ballot to insult me on Lovelynice? Why would any sane and reasonable individual go to a ballot that has not had a comment on it since November 14, 2006 and insult me out of the blue?
I will tell you why. It's because you troll around this site spaming the votes, making insulting comments and basically looking for trouble. You have a need to create hostility so you can start an argument with people. It won't work. You are so exposed and mocked and laughed at, that you have absolutely no credibility. On the other hand, Wideheadofknowledge is well liked, respected and appreciated. You must be jealous of him.
First of all dipshit of khitai. The article is in reference to World War 1. Citing an article from that war to attempt to disprove a proven fact is bogus and cowardly.
Martin Glynn was the CATHOLIC governor of New York. He wasn't a Jew. He was a social and political activist. He was instrumental in the founding of the Irish state of Ireland.
If you were to actually READ the article instead of cut and pasting without reading you would understand that he was talking about the starvation not extermination or anything related to the Holocaust. If you don't believe where she is getting this info, just do a search on it. It reveals all you need to know. It also answers the ballot question.
What you are doing DOK, is defaming the good name of a good man. That's sad and pathetic. How dare you do this to someone who dedicated his life to helping others. Not that I would expect you to be above this tactic.
Once again, he was CATHOLIC.
FIRST OF ALL
Catholics can be zionists too. There are Christian Zionists and Jewish Zionists. So just because he's Catholic does not rule out him being a Zionist believer. I don't know why you even thought that it did.
The speech and document were intended as Zionist propaganda to influence other jews, because the six million killed number was (and is) important symbolism for the time of promise.
What I am doing, is pointing out FACTS. One of those FACTS being that the number SIX MILLIION is an important part of Jewish religious culture, and therefore not credible.
I will tell you ...
by Beauregard on Mon Aug 20, 07 5:41am
All you're engaging in is AD HOMINEM ATTACK.
It's meaningless. Try citing facts next time.
Next we will hear DOK or herself guest user posting (most likely this because she's a coward) something about Glynn being a Zionist. A Zionist is simply someone who supports the existence of Israel. Nothing more. It doesn't mean the support of everything Israel does. Just support of their existence. Ranting "Zionist" is just being used as a camouflage for hating Jews. Its used frequently by Nazis, terrorists and brainwashed Arabs who unfortunately never get access to an unbiased media. Instead all they get is their fascist leaders blaming all of their problems on "Zionists" (ie, Jews). The problem of course is with the corrupt fascist leaders.
Historically, famous non-Jewish "Zionists" have included: Winston Churchill, Queen Victoria, President Woodrow Wilson, British Prime Ministers Lloyd George and Arthur Balfour, President Harry Truman... well pretty much every American president, the governments of France, the UK, and many others. Also, early on several ARAB leaders supported the establishment of Israel. I could go on with many more. So, next time she rants "Zionists!" on a ballot its really about her attempt to denounce anyone who is or supports Jews. She'll also try to slander people like Glynn. A great man. Oh by the way... Churchill had a nice quote on Zionism: "Let me make this clear. I am a Zionist". So, he's evil too? A hell of a lot better than the toxic waste dump pond scum you are. Wait... I'm being mean to to the pond.
See, the real issue here with Dok and the aliases is that they don't want Jews to have their own country. They would rather persecute them and treat them like 2nd class citizens in whatever country they are. For them, Jews forever being without a place to call home is ideal. Of course, Jews should just trust Arabs, Europeans, etc.... they've never slaughtered Jews have they?
Glynn being a Zionist.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Mon Aug 20, 07 11:22pm
He was. Zionism is an IDEOLOGY. It not only belief in Israel. You try to oversimply the reality with excuses, but you can't avoid the point that Glynn was a Zionist. If he wasn't, then he wouldn't have wrote that speech.
The point proven by speech remains true as well; it's evidence that the "six million" claim is nothing new, and has been used many times before.
Your claim that he was only referring to World War One is false too, because as can be easily seen by the document, he was referring to claims of six million dead. There wasn't any six million Jews killed during World War One.
( See, the real issue here with Dok and...
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Mon Aug 20, 07 11:22pm)
Ad Hominem attack of no relevance to this debate. Again you write meaningless accusations but avoid facts.
(Ranting "Zionist" is just being used as a camouflage for hating Jews.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Mon Aug 20, 07 11:22pm)
Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong. Always when you make that claim or anything like it, you will be WRONG.
Mentioning Zionism is just mentioning Zionism. It's an ideology. Like Communism, Capitalism, Feminism, or any other "-ism"
Some people don't agree with Zionism. You try to confuse the issue by pretending Zionism is Jewish, but it's not. You even proved yourself wrong in your pretense that Zionism is Jewish by citing Churchill - so you shot yourself in the foot. Congratulations - you proved my point.
(She'll also try to slander people like Glynn.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Mon Aug 20, 07 11:22pm)
When? I'm waiting for that to happen too, especially as I don't see anything slanderous in mentioning that he was a Zionist. It's a statement of fact. You've effectively even agreed with it.
Now that you're in agreement with that he is a Zionist, you've managed to prove my point for me. The speech was a Zionist speech, and him being Catholic is irrelevant to that.
Now why would his speech mention the "six million" number more than 20 times when six million Jews hadn't died, starved, been exterminated, or whatever during World War One nor by 1919? Can you explain this?
Btw, as regards you claims of me using aliases, I can only say isn't time for you to grow up and drop those Ad Hominem attacks of yours. I'm using a proxy setup right now just to post here because of censorship of the internet where I live. If that comes out the same as someone else, then lucky them, they must be using the same company.
But you would continue with your unfounded accusations anyway.
Zionism is IDEOLOGY. There's no requirement of Zionists to be Jewish, so disagreement with it's political ideals or it's proponents has nothing to do with Jews or antisemitism because Zionists are not required to be Jewish, although many Zionists are Jewish, there are also many Zionists who are Christian. It's an international political movement.
will tell you ...
by Beauregard on Mon Aug 20, 07 5:41am
All you're engaging in is AD HOMINEM ATTACK.
It's meaningless. Try citing facts next time.
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Mon Aug 20, 07 11:21pm
Okay, is it me, or do other people see how absurd you're being? You attack me in this ballot by posting
(Well done Beauregard!
by Jinn_the_Kafir on Thu Sep 07, 06 12:14am)
More like what a lying fool you are Beauregard.
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Fri Aug 17, 07 8:31am
What attack? It's factual that you engaged in an attack on me, as is proven in your quoted comment above. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see no attack coming from me, but everyone can clearly see them coming from you. Why? Either you are not reading this ballot correctly, or you are very unbalanced, because I see you making the Ad Hominem attacks. Where are the ones you are saying I am making?
So you deal in facts and show them now.
And I can see quite a lot coming from you - YOU DEVOTED AN ENTIRE BALLOT TO IT.
That's the difference.
Instead of dealing with the facts about 9-11, because you couldn't answer the relevant questions, you chose to make Ad Hominem attacks against ALL THOSE WHO WERE SKEPTICS about 9-11.
That's a very big difference.
Deal with the facts, and drop the Ad Hominem argument and I'll do the same. But don't dare try to claim that I started it with you, because you began a ballot devoted entirely to Ad Hominem argument.
Come on, DoK - rise to my challenge on ballot #106535. Strange how you have managed to ignore clear and open debate when it's offered on this subject.
Here, even easier for you, DoK.
ballot #106535
Received karma rating of : -5 from Daughter_of_Khitai
For the Ballot comment#1176355 @ Bestandworst.com.
SPAM - telling lies is what you do apparently
Yes, and if you want a Karma war, you can have one.
Okay DOK. Here is a direct challenge to you. You seem to think you are free to post your BS and then when others post facts, you say they are not facts and proceed to demand proof.
Here are 2 comments you made. I demand to see your proof of these accusations you make against another user.
For a good example of FiddleFaddlOnLSD vote spamming and being caught, see ballot 112757
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Tue Aug 21, 07 2:21am
More of him being caught out the discussion on ballot 115603
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Tue Aug 21, 07 2:22am
So DOK, show your proof, or are you just engaging in Ad hominem attacks as you accuse me and everyone else who disagrees with you of doing? Prove what you accuse him of please. Show your evidence. Since you obviously have a total double standard, it's time someone called you on it.
( Prove what you accuse him of please. Show your evidence.
by Beauregard on Wed Aug 22, 07 6:10am)
Already did. Do you bother reading before you copy & paste? I cited the ballot numbers to check.
I rated you down just once for your comment before. Not twice, or three times, or four times. Just once and once only.
You have however, decided to karma bomb by rating me down FOUR TIMES in comparison to my ONCE.
Interesting that you proved my point for me; you are only interested in making personal attacks and not in evidence.
I hardly see that rating you down JUST ONCE is some kind of challenge to a "karma war"
But since you chose to rate me down FOUR TIMES, it does prove my point very, very, very well.
No, you ranted about others giving negative karma and then because you are so enraged that you have been exposed as a fraud, that you turn around and give me negative karma because I helped, along with many others, to expose you.
Nothing proves your point DOK. You don't seem to see it, but all of us do. You are a hypocrit. You speak with a forked tongue. You criticize others for the very things you do. You go on attacks and then accuse others of doing it.
You accuse people of things with no facts, then turn around and demand facts from others. The reality is, you are a hypocrit.
And yes, I gave you 4 negative karmas because you only gave me negative karma out of rage that we caught you lying as usual. Too bad if you don't like it, but they were justified because they in fact, were negative ratings due to the fact that you are hypocritical and I find it offensive, as do most.
Interesting that you proved my point for me; you are only interested in making personal attacks and not in evidence.
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Wed Aug 22, 07 7:03am
But once again, you cannot be so thick or mentally ill to not see that facts have been presented to prove you are a fraud. If you want me to post all of it again, I will be happy to do so.
You're the one that contributes nothing. All you do is to cut and paste the same comments you've made under your other aliases. Where are your sources? Where is your factual proof?
You accuse others of vote spamming. Like you obsessively demand of others, prove it. Where is your proof?
It's actually funny watching you at this point. You're rude, arrogant, nasty, and a hypocritical liar and then you have the audacity to turn around and demand proof when you yourself show none and then turn around and accuse people of attacking, when in reality, it is you who does just that. Want me to keep going?
have you quite finished with personal attacks yet?
Or are you going to continue proving me right?
Proven you right? In your warped mind only. I continue to prove you wrong and I continue to prove what we all think as being factual. It's funny how you think that if you say something, it makes it true. Do you really want to challenge me to go and get the rest of the evidence? So you keep being a hypocrit. Keep attacking people and then say you're being attacked. Keep demanding evidence and never putting up any of your own. Keep calling people who disagree with you liar and shill. Keep it up. Your character and honor are in total shambles and you have no one to blame but yourself
NEVER in the ENTIRE HISTORY of steel & concrete tower buildings has it been possible for a building to collapse at near freefall speed into their own footprint without it being a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
You should also be aware, that NIST could not prove it happened without an controlled demolition either. Their simulations repeatedly could not simulate the actual collapse of WTC 1 and 2, with the empirical evidence, and they finally gave up and stopped at "poised for collapse" because the buildings would not collapse in the simulations. Everything after that in their report is just assumption to explain WHAT THEY COULD NOT SIMULATE WITH THE EMPIRICAL DATA!
by Coldcircuit on Mon Jul 17, 06 6:24pm
NOT ONCE in the ENTIRE HISTORY OF STEEL-FRAMED TOWER BUILDINGS has such a building collapsed at nearly freefall into it's own footprint without a controlled demolition.
I dare you to cite such an event and prove it happened.
by Lovelynice on Mon Aug 21, 06 9:12pm
So really DOK, you don't just copy and paste the same words written by your other aliases. In fact, you do change them a bit, but oddly, they are so identical in so many ways that there is no way that 2 different people worte those comments above. And obviously you lie if you claim it was a copy and paste, because they are not identical.
Since you are so obsessed with proof, here is more.
HOW DID SO MANY PEOPLE GET IT SO WRONG ABOUT 9-11?
serious ballot by wideheadofknowledge
ACTIVE Thu Aug 24, 06 - Mon Feb 09, 09
Bill Manning, editor of the 125 year old Fire Engineering magazine, noticed a strange difference between the WTC investigation and other major fire investigations in New York City’s history. Manning wrote "Did they throw away the locked doors from the Triangle Shirtwaist fire? Did they throw away the gas can used at the happy land social club fire? That's what they're doing at the World Trade Center."
by Lovelynice on Fri Aug 25, 06 5:53am
In calling for a new investigation, some structural engineers have said that one serious mistake has already been made in the chaotic aftermath of the collapses: the decision to rapidly recycle the steel columns, beams and trusses that held up the buildings. That may have cost investigators some of their most direct physical evidence with which to try to piece together an answer.' -- NY Times
by Lovelynice on Fri Aug 25, 06 5:54am
"I find the speed with which potentially important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling" -- Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer; fire protection engineering department, University of Maryland and WTC collapse probe member quoted in NY Times (December 25, 2001)
by Lovelynice on Fri Aug 25, 06 5:54am
'A growing number of fire protection engineers have theorized that "the structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers"- Burning Jet Fuel 'NOT ENOUGH' to Have Crumbled WTC: Investigators//NYDailyNews
by Lovelynice on Fri Aug 25, 06 5:54am
Now, please notice the comments made by Numanx, on December 10, 2004, and you can see they are identical to the ones Lovelynice made above.
WHY ARE PEOPLE STILL TRYING TO FIND OUT WHY THE TWIN TOWERS COLLAPSED?
by Guest_597cc
ACTIVE Sun Jun 20, 04 - Fri Mar 16, 07
Bill Manning, editor of the 125 year old Fire Engineering magazine, noticed a strange difference between the WTC investigation and other major fire investigations in New York CityÂ’s history. Manning wrote "Did they throw away the locked doors from the Triangle Shirtwaist fire? Did they throw away the gas can used at the happy land social club fire? That's what they're doing at the World Trade Center."
by Numanx on Fri Dec 10, 04 3:51pm
'In calling for a new investigation, some structural engineers have said that one serious mistake has already been made in the chaotic aftermath of the collapses: the decision to rapidly recycle the steel columns, beams and trusses that held up the buildings. That may have cost investigators some of their most direct physical evidence with which to try to piece together an answer.' -- NY Times
by Numanx on Fri Dec 10, 04 3:59pm
"I find the speed with which potentially important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling" -- Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer; fire protection engineering department, University of Maryland and WTC collapse probe member quoted in NY Times (December 25, 2001)
by Numanx on Fri Dec 10, 04 4:00pm
'A growing number of fire protection engineers have theorized that "the structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers"- Burning Jet Fuel 'NOT ENOUGH' to Have Crumbled WTC: Investigators//NYDailyNews
by Numanx on Fri Dec 10, 04 4:05pm
DOK, you're going to try and tell us that they are 2 different people? One makes the comments in 2004 and then Lovelynice makes the exact same comments, identical to each other, all the same, about 2 years later? Please give us all some credit. You're the liar. Now you can't say that is an attack because I met your criteira. I posted proof and, you call everyone liar.
More proof.
WHAT SHOULD WE DO WITH ABU ZARQAWI IF HE IS CAUGHT ALIVE?
by manofletters
Too late to catch him. He's dead, even if some political fools like to pretend otherwise. The Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (who had a prosthetic leg) was killed by the USA during their early bombing campaign in April 2003 when they blew up his house. The claims that he is still alive are false, and there are four COMPLETELY DIFFERENT voices on the beheading videos and audio-tapes that have all been claimed as being him, which is impossible since the guy is dead. DEAD. Completely dead. Never coming back and never will kind of dead. Can't torture him, because he's dead. Can't do any of those things listed on the ballot so far, because he's dead. Get over it, and stop being so gullible about believing that he's alive and leading al-Queda because he isn't.
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Mon Oct 04, 04 7:34am
NOW THAT ABU MUSAB AL-ZARQAWI IS DEAD...
by ABC
ACTIVE Thu Jun 08, 06 - Fri Jun 08, 07
The Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (who had a prosthetic leg) was killed by the USA during their early bombing campaign in April 2003 when they blew up his house. The claims that he was still alive are false, and there are four COMPLETELY DIFFERENT voices on the beheading videos and audio-tapes that have all been claimed as being him. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed back in April 2003, over 1 & 1/2 years before the Bush & Blair lying govts started blaming him for the Nick Berg Beheading video.
by Coldcircuit on Jun 12,2006 10:33:45 am
So again about 2 years apart, virtually identical comments. Yet you can't claim the lie that you cut and pasted, because while they are virtually identical, there are some differenceces. But anyone who can read can see that mush of it is identical. So what, you copied and pasted some parts but not others? Why? Why would you copy only some parts of another users comment? Makes no sense. What does make sense is that you are all the same person and you sign in and out to get the replies made by one of your aliases to answer for another.
"More proof.
by Beauregard on Wed Aug 22, 07 12:05pm"
More proof of copy and paste. Yes, horrible isn't it?
This is boring, Beauregard, whoever you are.
When you finish with your Ad Hominem argument, let us know so that we can get back to actual debate with FACTS, please.
There is no us DOK. No one can stand you or your alias names. You got caught. Its been proven and evidence given. You DOK name was one of the less used and now it seems to be the personality of choice for you to use for now. But don't say us like other people were on your side. People can't stand you and its not because of your 9-11 views, its because you're a liar and a nasty one at that.
Yes, I got caught COPY AND PASTING.
That's all you've shown.
But you will just continue your campaign of Ad Hominem no matter what I say.
You won't deal with any facts related to debate.
Beauregard, the real truth is that you hate it when people disagree with you.
People like you, who chose censorship over FACTS, and hated to see anyone deal your excuses about 9-11 any kind of blow, forced out most of the other people who were passionate about debating 9-11. You hated hearing anyone smash your arguments and tear apart the Official Conspiracy Theory promoted by the Bush Administration.
That is your ONLY motivation. Instead of debating 9-11 with RELEVANT FACTS, you chose to use Ad Hominem argument.
Once again, you're reverting back to your Lovelynice name. You said the same words to me when you were using that alias. Shall I get those words and show them here?
The facts DOK, is that you have been caught lying. You're rude, disrespectful and nasty and you dare to deny what all of us know to be fact. I present facts, as do others and look at your lame respons "I got caught copying and pasting" bull! You got caught flat out lying. You have attacked people for not using facts and the whole time, you're just copying and pasting the same crap from one of your user names to the other and how that you're caught, you think you can just dismiss it? We won't let you.
Nobody is going to keep the same exact comments on their computer for years, and years, and years, in some kind of document file. When pressed for time and asked to present the same information, again, again, and again - the best way to deal with it is simply COPY AND PASTE it.
The reality of debates about 9-11, is that trolls like you will ignore that their argument has already been answered with replied to. Why bother re-typing an entire reply when it's much quicker to find that answer which beat your excuses about 9-11 already. Simply COPY AND PASTE it.
All you've proven is that many people on this side are guilty of COPY AND PASTE.
Rude? Disrespectful? Compared to who? You? I don't think so. Aren't you the one using Ad Hominem instead of dealing with debate using facts relevant to debate?
What a crock.
WHAT SHOULD WE DO WITH ABU ZARQAWI IF HE IS CAUGHT ALIVE?
by manofletters
ACTIVE Tue Aug 03, 04
Too late to catch him. He's dead, even if some political fools like to pretend otherwise.
The Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (who had a prosthetic leg) was killed by the USA during their early bombing campaign in April 2003 when they blew up his house. The claims that he is still alive are false, and there are four COMPLETELY DIFFERENT voices on the beheading videos and audio-tapes that have all been claimed as being him, which is impossible since the guy is dead. DEAD. Completely dead. Never coming back and never will kind of dead. Can't torture him, because he's dead. Can't do any of those things listed on the ballot so far, because he's dead. Get over it, and stop being so gullible about believing that he's alive and leading al-Queda because he isn't.
by Daughter_of_Khitai on Mon Oct 04, 04 7
NOW THAT ABU MUSAB AL-ZARQAWI IS DEAD...
by ABC
ACTIVE Thu Jun 08, 06
The Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (who had a prosthetic leg) was killed by the USA during their early bombing campaign in April 2003 when they blew up his house. The claims that he was still alive are false, and there are four COMPLETELY DIFFERENT voices on the beheading videos and audio-tapes that have all been claimed as being him. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed back in April 2003, over 1 & 1/2 years before the Bush & Blair lying govts started blaming him for the Nick Berg Beheading video.
by Coldcircuit on Jun 12,2006 10
WHAT SHOULD WE DO WITH ABU ZARQAWI IF HE IS CAUGHT ALIVE?
by manofletters
ACTIVE Tue Aug 03, 04
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed back in April 2003, over 1 & 1/2 years before the Bush & Blair lying govts started blaming him for the Nick Berg Beheading video. If he turns up alive, then he's either immortal, or an undead vampire.
by Numanx on Sat Sep 11, 04 6
So you claim it was just a copy and paste? Because if you copy and paste its identical. You can see above that some is identical and some has been added to. And what, Coldcircuit on June 12, 2006, virtually 2 years after Numanx and DOK made the comment, she found herself needing a comment on the same topic and thought "hmmm, 2 years ago, Numanx and DOK made comments on this topic. I'll search pages and pages of their comments to find it, then I'll just use it? Who believes that?
|
