THE DERAILING ROOM

A place to relax and socialize - to muse, think aloud and suggest
Post Reply
simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6943
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by simonshack » Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:34 pm

jumpy64 wrote: And even if somebody unveils media fakery, as we do here, they can allow that because they’re still home free until nobody dares to point the finger directly at them. I think that’s why they seem so sloppy in their psyops sometimes. They feel they have nothing to fear, their control being so total, and even protected by absurd laws in many countries.
Precisely. In fact, the biggest question I had back in 2007 (as I uploaded my September Clues documentary online) was: "WHY such sloppiness? Why didn't they do a better of job of that CGI / cartoon movie - using top notch / hyper-realistic Hollywood techniques? They obviously just didn't care - and probably preferred saving a few bucks by hiring a cheap B-movie director...

All is so much clearer to me today - knowing what sort of folks were behind the 9/11 hoax. I will admit it took me some time to fully realize the depth of their arrogance - and the extent of their control over the international media. Yet, they can't get enough of it: as we have seen, they have also infiltrated the alternative media wherever possible - and of course, even set up their own phony 'truther organizations'. Yet, this is STILL not enough for these ultra-wealthy, paranoid control freaks: they also find it necessary to persecute tiny, honest independent / alternative media outlets - using illegal "laws" designed by themselves. Only today, in fact, I was alerted (by private e-mail) to an umpteenth such case of vile harassment, this time in Canada. That's right, it seems that "hate speech laws" are not only a European curse anymore - sheesh, that Wikipedia map I posted the other day needs some urgent updating!


The ARTHUR TOPHAM case

Arthur Topham, the founder of http://www.radicalpress.com/ has been persecuted (for the last nine years or so) by one of Canada’s largest Zionist Jew lobby organizations, B’nai Brith Canada - with threats of up to 2 years of imprisonment.

Read all about it here: http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publis ... -writings/



full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IeRN8wWiqc

Let it NEVER be said that these shameful Zionist persecutions 'do not happen'. They do. All over the world.

*********
Here is hoping that Tim in Canada (of Fakeologist.com) will show interest in this Canadian scandal.

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by jumpy64 » Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:18 pm

simonshack wrote:Only today, in fact, I was alerted (by private e-mail) to an umpteenth such case of vile harassment, this time in Canada. That's right, it seems that "hate speech laws" are not only a European sham anymore - sheesh, that Wikipedia map I posted the other day needs some urgent updating!

The ARTHUR TOPHAM case

Arthur Topham, the founder of http://www.radicalpress.com/ has been persecuted (for the last nine years or so) by one of Canada’s largest Zionist Jew lobby organizations, B’nai Brith Canada - with threats of up to 2 years of imprisonment.

Read all about it here: http://gogetfunding.com/canadian-publis ... -writings/
(I have just made a donation to Arthur's cause - as I can only imagine how much it sucks to be in his situation.)
I just learnt about the Topham case myself a couple of hours ago, Simon, and I'm glad you mentioned it.

I read an interesting article about it at http://henrymakow.com/2015/10/talmud-ra ... crime.html

In it, the Jewish dissident researcher Henry Makow suggests to Topham the following:
If i were in your position, I would defend myself by reading excerpts from the Talmud and demand to know why Jews haven't been charged with hate crimes. Just the news that this is your defence should put the fear in them.
Then Topham writes back to Makow to tell him that his lawyer had the same idea, since the prosecution is using the writings of Elizabeth Dilling, that quote the Talmud and have also been linked to here.
Today was the day that my counsel began to cross examine the ex police officer Terry Wilson who testified throughout the earlier part of the week. As you may already be aware, one of the online books that the Crown is using as evidence to prove their case is Elizabeth Dillings book The Jewish Religion: It's Influence Today. I'm sure you're familiar with it. Anyway, seeing as they introduced it defence was able to argue as to its authenticity (as per the sections of the Talmud that Dilling quotes throughout the book).

My counsel asked the former detective if he had read the book and he said he had read it (the online version). He asked Wilson if he had read the Talmud. He said he hadn't. Then asked Wilson if he had checked out the footnotes to the various quotations to ascertain whether or not they were reliable and could be sourced to the actual text. Wilson said he hadn't done that either.

After confirming that Wilson hadn't done anything but read the online text and then concluded that the book was anti-semitic and hateful he then established the fact that Wilson wasn't an "expert" in determining what "hate" was; only that he relied upon the definition used in the Keegstra Case as a guideline.

This opened up the door for my lawyer to select some of the more gross and controversial instances contained in the Talmud which related to sexual issues, and children, etc. He carefully read them out to the jury and had Wilson acknowledge that each selection conformed to the book. The jury of 8 women and 4 men sat there and listened to an assortment of rather perverse and loathsome behaviours. When my counsel finished reading them, the day's proceedings ended.

All the while he was reading them out Crown Counsel sat there squirming and playing with her pen and the Justice and the witness were daunted by the whole episode. Earlier on Wilson had been testifying and lauding the Talmud as one of the Jews "Holy" books and attempting to convince the jury that any negative criticism of it was just pure anti-semitism and hatred.

Just what effect it had on the jury remains to be seen, but I don't think it left them with a very good taste in their mouths.
I bet it didn't!

And then he concludes with another piece of good news:
This afternoon Gilad Atzmon arrived in town. He's our Expert witness and will be testifying after Rudner on "Jewish identity", etc. It's a great honour to have Gilad come half way around the world to assist me in this trial. I hope to send out another report this weekend.
I'll be looking forward to it.
Last edited by jumpy64 on Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by Critical Mass » Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:32 pm

jumpy64 wrote: 1) Jews (or better JPMs, but with the more or less conscious, or maybe even unconscious, support of their co-religionists) run Hollywood and the news media in America and in most of the world

2) and that, since they run the media, they must be responsible for media fakery?

In fact, they seem to have both the means (control of the media, the banking system and politics) and the motive (weaken the goym to better control them, and to ultimately deliver them well brainwashed out of any identity to the upcoming Messiah, like Christopher Jon Bjerknes says) to commit the crimes we accuse the “perps” for.

And also the “modus operandi” seems to correspond. The Talmud teaches to lie to the Goyim and cheat them whenever necessary and never admit it (you can read an interesting article about this at http://www.rense.com/general92/talmud.htm)
I agree with everything you've written but I will point out that one thing 'the Jews' or JPM do not (and probably cannot) directly control are the military.

It is 'gentile' officers who 'liberated the extermination camps' (later downgraded to concentration camps), 'gentile' officers who 'tried' to intercept the 'hijacked planes', 'gentiles' who dropped the nukes.

It is, of course, 'gentiles' who 'liberate' Muslim countries...


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpdeNcH1H8A

The majority of this media fakery (certainly the major events) appears to be performed by and condoned by the various militaries of this world.

Additionally (and specifically) do 'Jews' run the NYFD?

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by jumpy64 » Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:45 pm

Critical Mass wrote:I agree with everything you've written but I will point out that one thing 'the Jews' or JPM do not (and probably cannot) directly control are the military.

It is 'gentile' officers who 'liberated the extermination camps' (later downgraded to concentration camps), 'gentile' officers who 'tried' to intercept the 'hijacked planes', 'gentiles' who dropped the nukes.

It is, of course, 'gentiles' who 'liberate' Muslim countries...

The majority of this media fakery (certainly the major events) appears to be performed by and condoned by the various militaries of this world.

Additionally (and specifically) do 'Jews' run the NYFD?
Thank you, Critical Mass. Yours is certainly an important point to investigate. I hope that you or someone else will be able to follow up on this, and maybe give us some more specific leads to follow.

I'll try to find something myself too. In general, I tend to think of militaries and secret services as people who follow the orders of whoever is in command, but I'm sure something more specific can be found.

Of course, I don't think JPMs can control everything directly, so accomplices are always needed, and of all races.

But I think the master plan has their signature all over it.

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:09 pm

Great campaign! I just donated what I can.

I noticed that Topham guy refers to the secret Masonic organization threatening him as being supported by the B'nai Brith gang. I think that area of the conspiracy is very interesting. Just as it's strange there is a document for psychopaths to adopt as a(n un)holy script — the Talmud — it's "funny" that there is a secret club connected to it that has a number of other strange qualities:

Men only (mostly). Invitation only. Ranks. You make a pact with them that the secrets learned within are punishable by death, from the hands of your fellow members.

Oh, but it's just a "volunteer" organization with people "curious" about "morals", selling mints and raising money for Sunday fish fries, "Bible" studies and dirt pits they call playgrounds.

I realize that we don't really talk about Masons much and how crazy this concept is, or how prevalent their symbols are in America (I wonder why they are) but this is at least the second time that casual dips into the research of the Talmud (and Jewish "anti-hate" groups abusing the word "hate" for their own nefarious ends) has brought up the point that Masons or Masonic temples have something to do with how conspiratorial secrets are kept/exchanged. I wonder if one of the "secrets" that can be learned about in such organizations as Masons, Knights of Columbus (ostensibly "Catholic" version of Masons), Lions, Kiwanis, Toastmasters, Rotary, Freemasons, Oddfellows, Optimists International (shudder — doublespeak much I wonder?), Shriners (the pedophile Masons working in children's hospitals) or any of the others is why they are so content to protect Talmudists or vice versa.

Girl versions like the Rainbow Girls have some pretty odd texts to recite to one another, such as:
Worthy Advisor: “Sister of Charity, you will re-cover the Pot of Gold that its contents may remain forever secret and hidden from the outside world ...”
http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/masonicmu ... %20Set.htm

I am not sure how familiar readers here are with this phenomenon: a drive through America makes it quite plain how an "open conspiracy" manifests in a political state as large as the U.S.A. Each township is incorporated to do business with larger states, and almost every town you drive through will be plastered with various fraternities that backwardly claim to not discuss "religion" or "politics", even while not admitting atheists and putting their thumbs in every town organization. Here are just a few examples. I don't want to flood the topic with unnecessary pictures but you could literally fill an entire forum with images of the groups claiming to do "service" for various towns around America.
02-welcome-sign-blmurch-fl_sm.JPG
507c21396ff93.image.jpg
1993992489_faa97bb636.jpg
For that matter, what is Russia doing with a Masonic double-eagle head on its flag? What is the deal with roadkill flattened eagles all over everything anyway? What is Jewish/Mason-controlled Disney/CBS doing writing articles about what Masonry is or isn't? Why do some of the buildings look like proud accomplishments to a political religion (that of course, is never discussed within) while others look like abandoned, boarded-up churches or businesses — are Masons disinterested in sunlight for some reason?

Anyway, I think it's interesting that organizations practically screaming that they are keeping secrets are something we still — as a species — have failed to pry open and find what may be inside. Could it just be because we find openly evil intentions more offensive and easier to attack than the power of truly secret conspiracies? Or could it be that they are the two — secretive fraternities and openly dogmatic declarations of some inhumane "superiority" — part of one and the same culture? Perhaps we need to recognize these symbols (and therefore how they have been abused) to make them lose their stupid "mystique" that hypnotizes so many into joining. I would congratulate us on recognizing all the signatures jumpy64 mentions, but I am still not so willing to use the language proffered to us. Why do people "snap" and join these organizations, or rise in their ranks to the top? Swearing allegiance to Talmud or the Protocols or something like it might be one of the prerequisites for the JPM branch. I just don't see what makes the most evil characteristics of those things a "Jewish" signature as much a secret one. Who is a minion of whom? Who amongst these insane people would allow themselves to be "lesser" to another?

In answer to what Critical Mass' wondering how the military fits in, I believe the "joint" between the Talmudic conspiracy and the Military conspiracy (and the Jesuit one for that matter) may be Masonry. And Disney/NASA is the ooze that is squeezed out of that encounter, if it isn't the delusional core of the batty people behind it. Of course, they are using Flat Earth as a DBA. By being average people insisting on better science and critical thinking, humanity may finally present a true challenge to their disgusting self-declared "authority". They have to make us think we are stupid and "missing out" and try to convince us we are sparring with them directly, while they design the next cockroach den to hide in.

---

P.S. It would be naive of me to say all that these fraternities do is totally evil. Of course, they do give some money to charities and schools and hospitals and so on. However, my argument is that the main thrust of what they do is keep the mechanisms of the power structure in place in try to appease people and make them thankful for that power structure and not find alternatives. Just saying that hypothetically if we were to break them, the gears of the machine would blast open and expose the people doing the cranking.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Critical Mass
Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:33 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by Critical Mass » Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:42 pm

In answer to what Critical Mass' wondering how the military fits in, I believe the "joint" between the Talmudic conspiracy and the Military conspiracy may be Masonry.
I'm pretty convinced that this is correct... but then we get into which dog is wagging who's tail territory.

When one looks into things like national sports, national architecture & 'founding fathers' we see obvious signs of control that make a Joel Stein article look crass by comparison.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8DMH4YX00M

One also wonders about such things as 'dancing Israeli' and 'Joshua Goldberg' stories.

Either way it is apparent that a bunch of very deeply ill people are involved in these relentless lies... and many of them are 'Jewish'.

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by jumpy64 » Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:42 pm

hoi.polloi wrote:Swearing allegiance to Talmud or the Protocols or something like it might be one of the prerequisites for the JPM branch. I just don't see what makes the most evil characteristics of those things a "Jewish" signature as much a secret one. Who is a minion of whom? Who amongst these insane people would allow themselves to be "lesser" to another?
The connection between Judaism (or Jewish supremacism) and Freemasonry could be investigated more in depth, but for now I can give you some pretty clear pointers to the fact that the latter is absolutely subordinated to the former. Or, to use your expression, Freemasonry is a minion of Judaism.

The Freemasons' own books admit this. On page 249, "Duncan's Ritual and Monitor", states that Freemasonry is subservient to Judaism, and notices that a recipient of the Royal Arch Degree pledges himself "For the good of Masonry, generally, but of the Jewish nation in particular".

And "An Encyclopedia of Freemasonry", Philadelphia, 1906 declares:
Each Lodge is and must be a symbol of the Jewish temple; each Master in the Chair, a representative of the Jewish King; and every Mason a personification of the Jewish workman.
Freemasonry is admittedly based on the rites and rituals of the Jewish religion and on the mysticism of the Jewish Kabbalah

In fact, on October 28, 1927, The Jewish Tribune of New York newspaper printed that
Masonry is based on Judaism. Eliminate the teachings of Judaism from the Masonic Ritual and what is left?
The famous "American" rabbi Isaac Wise (1819-1900) wrote in "The Israelite of America", March 8, 1866:
Masonry is a Jewish institution whose history, degrees, charges, passwords and explanations are Jewish from beginning to end.
"The Protocols of the (Learned) Elders of Zion" (4:2) clearly state the intention to use subservient Goyim as scapegoats:
Gentile masonry blindly serves as a screen for us and our objects, but the plan of action of our force, even its very abiding-place, remains for the whole people an unknown mistery
Benjamin Disraeli, Jew, Prime Minister of England, writes in "The Life of Lord George Bentick":
At the head of all those secret societies, which form provisional governments, men of the Jewish race are to be found.
"La verite israelite", Jewish paper 1861, IV, page 74:
The spirit of Freemasonry is the spirit of Judaism in its most fundamental beliefs; it is its ideas, its language, it is mostly its organization, the hopes which enlighten and support Israel. It’s crowning will be that wonderful prayer house of which Jerusalem will be the triumphal centre and symbol.
"Jewish Encyclopedia", 1903, Vol, 5, page 503:
The technical language, symbolism and rites of Freemasonry are full of Jewish ideas and terms . . . In the Scottish Rite, the dates on official documents are given according to the era and months of the Jewish calendar, and use is made of the Hebraic alphabet.
B’Nai B’Rith Magazine, Vol. 13, page 8, quoting rabbi and mason Magnin:
The B’nai B’rith are but a makeshift. Everywhere that Freemasonry can admit that it is Jewish in its nature as well as in its aims, the ordinary lodges are sufficient for the task.
There are many more equally revealing quotes, but I think you're getting the idea.

And believe it or not, there is such a thing as "happy minions", it seems. I never understood this, but there are many who like to serve people they perceive as powerful, and even evil.

The mysterious (to me, at least) pleasure of ass-kissing. Maybe is to teach it to kids that they make animated movies like "Minions".

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6943
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by simonshack » Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:54 pm

*
Just to keep things on track - here's a question raised by Jumpy in his introductory post of this thread:
jumpy64 wrote: No, really, what do you think is the strongest dogma in our current society? What is the only thing that you can't question without being defined a "negationist", as if just by questioning a specific event in history (as you're allowed to do with any other historical fact) you could be deemed capable of negating anything. How much more Orwellian can all this get?
Well, we are all allowed to question the masonry. We are all allowed to question the military. Hey, we're actually allowed to question almost anything - as the continued existence of this forum shows !

The only question is: for how long will we be allowed to question - let alone call for a ban of the...ehrm... "Holy Genocidal Book"?

John Kaminski does just that, in this fine essay : http://johnkaminski.info/pages/tales_of ... talmud.htm

Here's Kaminski mirroring exactly my thoughts : <_<
"Anyone who calls themselves the chosen group or god's elite should be immediately hospitalized for clinically provable paranoia. They should also be prevented in perpetuity from owning a gun and all their property should be RICO acted into the public treasury (and not Bush's father's pockets)."

Kham
Admin
Posts: 225
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 9:30 am

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by Kham » Sat Oct 31, 2015 10:06 am

Jumpy wrote:What is the only thing that you can't question without being defined a negationist
Seems to me that the premise of the question sets up a single paradigm as it uses the word 'only', as in there are no other questions.

There are many things we question that would define us as negationists: holocaust, moon landing, 9/11, Sandy Hook, etc.

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by jumpy64 » Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:07 pm

Kham wrote:
Jumpy wrote:What is the only thing that you can't question without being defined a negationist
Seems to me that the premise of the question sets up a single paradigm as it uses the word 'only', as in there are no other questions.

There are many things we question that would define us as negationists: holocaust, moon landing, 9/11, Sandy Hook, etc.
Technically you are right, because the term negationism, which always has a negative connotation, should be applied, in general, to the "denial and distortion of established historical facts" (while in reality some people just legitimately question such facts), and it is "usually related to the denial of war crimes or crimes against humanity" (RationalWiki definition). As a matter of fact, though, it is almost exclusively used in relation to the "denial" of the Holocaust.

Have you ever heard of anybody who doesn't question the Holocaust narrative but has been defined a negationist just for "denying" other historical facts? Maybe it's happened, I don't know, but the first thing anybody thinks when hearing the term "negationism" is Holocoust denial. And in fact, that particular denial is the only one legally punishable in several Western countries, as Simon has repeteadly detailed here. But if you know of any other historical facts that it is a crime to "deny" (maybe in other parts of the world), please let us know too.

Anyway, the fact remains that, in parts of our Western world, it is a crime only when you "deny" (i.e. question) the Holocaust.

Seneca
Member
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by Seneca » Sat Oct 31, 2015 8:33 pm

jumpy64 wrote:Technically you are right, because the term negationism, which always has a negative connotation, should be applied, in general, to the "denial and distortion of established historical facts" (while in reality some people just legitimately question such facts), and it is "usually related to the denial of war crimes or crimes against humanity" (RationalWiki definition). As a matter of fact, though, it is almost exclusively used in relation to the "denial" of the Holocaust.

Have you ever heard of anybody who doesn't question the Holocaust narrative but has been defined a negationist just for "denying" other historical facts? Maybe it's happened, I don't know, but the first thing anybody thinks when hearing the term "negationism" is Holocoust denial. And in fact, that particular denial is the only one legally punishable in several Western countries, as Simon has repeteadly detailed here. But if you know of any other historical facts that it is a crime to "deny" (maybe in other parts of the world), please let us know too.

Anyway, the fact remains that, in parts of our Western world, it is a crime only when you "deny" (i.e. question) the Holocaust.
This is from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_ ... egislation:
Armenian Genocide denial

Legislation
Some countries, including Greece,[7] Slovakia,[125] Cyprus,[9] and Switzerland[125] have adopted laws that punish genocide denial. In October 2006, the French National Assembly, despite the opposition of foreign minister Philippe Douste-Blazy,[126] passed a bill which if approved by the Senate and signed into law, will make Armenian Genocide denial a crime.[127] On October 7, 2011 French President Nicolas Sarkozy said that Turkey's refusal to recognize the genocide would force France to make such denials a criminal offense.[128][129] On December 22, 2011, the lower house of the French legislature approved a bill making it a crime (punishable by a year in prison and a fine of 45,000 euros) to publicly deny as genocide the killing of Armenians by troops of Turkey's former Ottoman Empire.[130] On January 23, 2012, the French Senate adopted the law, which criminalizes the denial of genocides, including the Armenian Genocide in France.[131] However, on February 28, 2012, the Constitutional Council of France invalidated the law, stating, among other things, that it curbs freedom of speech.[132] After that the French President Sarkozy has called on his cabinet to draft new legislation to punish those who deny that the mass killing of Armenians by Ottoman troops is a genocide.[133]

Issues regarding deniers
The first person convicted in a court of law for denying the Armenian genocide is Turkish politician Doğu Perinçek, found guilty of racial discrimination by a Swiss district court in Lausanne in March 2007. At the trial, Perinçek denied the charge thus: "I have not denied genocide because there was no genocide.".[134] After the court's decision, he said, "I defend my right to freedom of expression." Ferai Tinç, a foreign affairs columnist with Turkey's Hürriyet newspaper, commented, "we find these type of [penal] articles against freedom of opinion dangerous because we are struggling in our country to achieve freedom of thought."[135] Perinçek appealed the verdict. In December 2007, the Swiss Federal Court confirmed the sentence given to Perinçek.[136] Perinçek then appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, and in 2013 the Court ruled that Perinçek's freedom of expression, as enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, had been violated.[137] The Grand Chamber ruled in favour of Perinçek on 15 October 2015.[138][139] (see Perinçek v. Switzerland).

In October, 2008 the Swiss court ruled that three Turks were guilty of racial discrimination after having claimed that the Armenian Genocide was an "international lie." The European representative of the Party of Turkish Workers, Ali Mercan, was sentenced to pay a fine of 4,500 Swiss francs ($3,900), two others were ordered to pay 3,600 Swiss francs.[140] In October 2010, the Swiss Federal Court confirmed the verdict.[141] In December, 2013 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Switzerland violated the principle of freedom of expression. The court said that "Mr Perincek was making a speech of a historical, legal and political nature in a contradictory debate"[142]

In November 1993 American historian Bernard Lewis said in an interview that calling the massacres committed by the Turks in 1915 a genocide was just "the Armenian version of this history".[143] In a 1995 civil proceeding a French court censured his remarks as a denial of the Armenian Genocide and fined him one franc, as well as ordering the publication of the judgment at Lewis' cost in Le Monde.[144] The court ruled that while Lewis has the right to his views, they did damage to a third party and that "it is only by hiding elements which go against his thesis that the defendant was able to state that there was no 'serious proof' of the Armenian Genocide; consequently, he failed in his duties of objectivity and prudence by expressing himself without qualification on such a sensitive subject".[144]
Last edited by Seneca on Sat Oct 31, 2015 8:44 pm, edited 4 times in total.

ICfreely
Member
Posts: 1078
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 5:41 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by ICfreely » Sat Oct 31, 2015 8:35 pm

Ciao Jumpy,

I was wondering if you’ve looked into the 1972 Olympics. The anti-Semite/Amalekite baton was passed from Aryan West (Germany) back to Aryan East (Iran) on the world’s largest stage. It seems to have the prints of the rushin’ hands and roamin’ fingers of the mossadomites all over it. The obvious question is, “Why in the hell did ‘Palestinian terrorists’ (funded by Iran’s theocracy) kidnap & ultimately kill Israeli athletes in order to gain sympathy worldwide?" Seriously!

Also, it might interest you to know that the Mossad played an integral part in establishing the SAVAK for Iran’s Shah. One of the main reasons he became hated by his own people was due to SAVAK’s shenanigans. Anyhow, after the successful ‘Glorious Islamic Revolution’ which brought the Indian-born Khomeini ‘back’ to Iran – straight from Paris no less - he kept satan’s little helpers but officially ‘shut down SAVAK.’

I don’t mean to derail your research. I just thought I’d offer you this low hanging fruit because there’s a Pinocchio angle to the story!

P.S.
Here's an example of how not to post. I'm sure you can do a better job of deconstructing this ziop!
http://nodisinfo.com/black-september-ol ... tack-hoax/

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by jumpy64 » Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:07 am

Seneca wrote:This is from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_ ... egislation:
Armenian Genocide denial
Thank you, Seneca, that's interesting to know. But from reading your document I gather that the only punishment actually meted out in the end was the one franc fee to the American historian Bernard Lewis...

What I mean is that to me this is just a sideshow to the benefit of the main event, the only one that really counts, that is the punishment of denial of the Jewish Holocaust.

It's like when the Anti-Defamation League describes itself as a "premier civil rights/human relations agency" which purports to "fight anti-Semitism and all forms of bigotry, defend democratic ideals and protect civil rights for all". Of course it can't say: "We're only here to protect Israeli interests". They have to sugarcoat their mission by pretending to serve also other interests.

In the same way, fighting other forms of negationism can help to justify the punishment of Holocaust denial, so that someone can say that it is a question of general principle and not of just protecting the official narrative of one specific event.

As for me, I think any historical event can and should be questioned, so any form of punishment for expressing different point of views on history is an attack to freedom of expression, an endorsement of the insidious "thought-crime" concept.

simonshack
Administrator
Posts: 6943
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy
Contact:

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by simonshack » Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:19 am

jumpy64 wrote: As for me, I think any historical event can and should be questioned, (...)
You dangerous thinker, you ! :P


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx4dM5KoqU0

jumpy64
Banned
Posts: 288
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: "Hiding in Plain Sight: Reflections on an Open Conspirac

Unread post by jumpy64 » Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:25 am

simonshack wrote:
jumpy64 wrote: As for me, I think any historical event can and should be questioned, (...)
You dangerous thinker, you ! :P
You got me, Simon! I stand guilty as charged :ph34r:

Post Reply