"I think this information came originally from David Irving, so we should look into it in detail."
-- presumably what you mean is that we should not assume it is correct, but equally, I don't think we should assume that your assertion that "this information came originally from David Irving" is correct either, especially because the important question is where it came from originally . If you are not familiar with this requirement, it is called 'sourcing' and I often call for it! If indeed you saw it on David irving's web page, whyever you may have been browsing that, you might make some effort to trace it back a little further, rather than just use your vague recollection as an opportunity to smear him for unreliability.
Zionists have infiltrated Al Qaeda? Could it be Mossad IS Al Qaeda?
DéjàVu Adam Gadahn and here
Oh...not THAT tape again *yawn*
Talking of Irving and so on, I attended Robert Faurisson's court appearance in Paris yesterday in the company of Lady Michèle Renouf. Faurisson spent a couple of hours giving the judge a resumé of all his views, findings, and observations on Holocaust historiography and polemics - which the judge probably knew already - but failed to address the actual issue, which is whether or not he should be held legally responsible for the fact that opinions he expressed in a telephone interview with an Iranian journalist were broadcast via satellite back into France, where they are illegal under the Fabius-Gayssot law. Faurisson holds he was not informed that this would occur, and assumed they would only be used in Iran, where they are perfectly legal. A judgment is expected on October 2, I believe.
Irving: I owe a lot to IDF and their ilk. If Irving was never blacklisted, I'd probably never have read the best books about WWII around today. I also read the libel case, two feet of paper. I'm no barrister, but it was very clear that Judge Gray did a hatchet job on Irving.
Irving strikes me as being outstandingly consciencious with his sources; and yes, he doesn't like zionists, but considering the treatment he and his family has had from aforementioned IDF and similar bodies, I find that quite understandable. That said, he's no more rabid than the average poster in here.
So get specific or get off Irvings back.
On the same note, the word "Al-Qaida" is also peculiar. The Quran uses "Al-Qaidoon" to refer to people who make excuses and chicken out of jihad. For example,
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/qura...an/
004.qmt.html
Chapter 4, Verse 95: Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward.
Here "Al-Qaidoon" are the believers "who sit (at home)." "Al-Qaida" is the noun -- the act of sitting.
Interestingly, the verses just before this talk about the terrible punishment for believers who kill other believers, which Al-Qaida seems to do with shocking frequency:
Chapter 4, Verse 93: If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (For ever): And the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him.
What does all this mean? These are just all small clues about the somewhat odd and peculiar nature of this organization called Al-Qaida.
Interestingly, the verse in between from the same chapter (The Women) seems to address precisely the issue of Adam Perleman.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/qura...an/
004.qmt.html
4:94 O ye who believe! When ye go abroad in the cause of Allah, investigate carefully, and say not to any one who offers you a salutation: "Thou art none of a believer!" Coveting the perishable goods of this life: with Allah are profits and spoils abundant. Even thus were ye yourselves before, till Allah conferred on you His favours: Therefore carefully investigate. For Allah is well aware of all that ye do.
So the Quran's advice is to take Adam at his word but also to investigate carefully.
shades of Steven Schwartz going sufi
On a similar note, there is the extremely odd and interesting case of Yvonne Ridley.
Yvonne is a British journalist who has been married both to a PLO colonel (Daoud Zaaroura) [1] as well as to an Israeli Mossad agent (Ilan Roni Hermosh) [2]. She snuck into Afghanistan before the invasion and was arrested by the Taliban near Jalalabad while in a burka [3]. Eleven days later she was released. After her release she read the Quran and converted to Islam. Here is a video interview in which she explains her conversion [4].
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yvo...i/
Yvonne_Ridley
[2] http://www.counterpunch.org/dillon1.html
[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk/homeground/
...ne_ridley.shtml
[4] http://video.google.com/
videopla...046509315492036
On the other (other other other other) hand, seems to me that conversion is often a polarizing experience. Some personalities tend to sway strongly between poles, as if magnatized. It could be more a commentary of the absence of, longing for core identity of this fellow than anything else. Not sure, just sayin...
I meet rather a lot of people who have converted to Islam, and obviously the factors that lead them to convert are ones which already had resonance in their previous belief systems - in fact, I think the commonest, or at least most easily admitted, is the fact that Islam has maintained certain taboos which used to exist in Catholicism but have lapsed, such as that against usury. This doesn't mean there is no usury in the Muslim world, but it does mean that, like Marxists, they have something attractive to meditate upon : the fantasy of a world without it. Many simply think the economic theory that blames usury rather than 'capitalism' is the more accurate, and here their views coincide with those of the inter-war Right.
I thought it was funny that the April 2006 Al-Zawahiri video had a Star of David motif on the background drapes. Was it a subtle message for those in the know?
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORL.../zawahiri.tape/
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/
WORL...ry.zawahiri.jpg
Well, I think a lot have to do with the concept (man made) of Trinity, why Christians convert to Islam.
Myra, you really think people convert simply because of theological dissatisfaction?
Dear Brethren, the War With Israel Is Over
BY YOUSSEF IBRAHIM
July 7, 2006
As Israel enters the third week of an incursion into the same Gaza Strip it voluntarily evacuated a few months ago, a sense of reality among Arabs is spreading through commentary by Arab pundits, letters to the editor, and political talk shows on Arabic-language TV networks. The new views are stunning both in their maturity and in their realism. The best way I can think of to convey them is in the form of a letter to the Palestinian Arabs from their Arab friends:
Dear Palestinian Arab brethren:
The war with Israel is over.
You have lost. Surrender and negotiate to secure a future for your children.
We, your Arab brothers, may say until we are blue in the face that we stand by you, but the wise among you and most of us know that we are moving on, away from the tired old idea of the Palestinian Arab cause and the “eternal struggle” with Israel.
Dear friends, you and your leaders have wasted three generations trying to fight for Palestine, but the truth is the Palestine you could have had in 1948 is much bigger than the one you could have had in 1967, which in turn is much bigger than what you may have to settle for now or in another 10 years. Struggle means less land and more misery and utter loneliness.
At the moment, brothers, you would be lucky to secure a semblance of a state in that Gaza Strip into which you have all crowded, and a small part of the West Bank of the Jordan. It isn’t going to get better. Time is running out even for this much land, so here are some facts, figures, and sound advice, friends.
You hold keys, which you drag out for television interviews, to houses that do not exist or are inhabited by Israelis who have no intention of leaving Jaffa, Haifa, Tel Aviv, or West Jerusalem. You shoot old guns at modern Israeli tanks and American-made fighter jets, doing virtually no harm to Israel while bringing the wrath of its mighty army down upon you. You fire ridiculously inept Kassam rockets that cause little destruction and delude yourselves into thinking this is a war of liberation. Your government, your social institutions, your schools, and your economy are all in ruins.
Your young people are growing up illiterate, ill, and bent on rites of death and suicide, while you, in effect, are living on the kindness of foreigners, including America and the United Nations. Every day your officials must beg for your daily bread, dependent on relief trucks that carry food and medicine into the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, while your criminal Muslim fundamentalist Hamas government continues to fan the flames of a war it can neither fight nor hope to win.
In other words, brothers, you are down, out, and alone in a burnt-out landscape that is shrinking by the day.
What kind of struggle is this? Is it worth waging at all? More important, what kind of miserable future does it portend for your children, the fourth or fifth generation
We, your Arab brothers, have moved on.
Those of us who have oil money are busy accumulating wealth and building housing, luxury developments, state-of-the-art universities and schools, and new highways and byways. Those of us who share borders with Israel, such as Egypt and Jordan, have signed a peace treaty with it and are not going to war for you any time soon. Those of us who are far away, in places like North Africa and Iraq, frankly could not care less about what happens to you.
Only Syria continues to feed your fantasies that someday it will join you in liberating Palestine, even though a huge chunk of its territory, the entire Golan Heights, was taken by Israel in 1967 and annexed. The Syrians, my friends, will gladly fight down to the last Palestinian Arab.
Before you got stuck with this Hamas crowd, another cheating, conniving, leader of yours,Yasser Arafat, sold you a rotten bill of goods — more pain, greater corruption, and millions stolen by his relatives — while your children played in the sewers of Gaza.
The war is over. Why not let a new future begin?
Why throw in a reference to David Irving (wasn't he the guy with the spurious Hitler diary?)... when the newspapers of record lay out the simple facts of Gadahn/Pearlman's life (the LA Times with an evasion which I noticed at the time I wanted to learn more about this kid).
Why traffic with Holocaust deniers? The fact is that the US is being screwed over by a series of plots involving a magnification of small fish into great white Al-Qaeda sharks, the better to rip off the taxpayer and the better to impose prior restraints on speech as well as to dismantle the entire "liberal" system of presumption of innocence, right to a trial, etc. Someone there is who hates our freedom, and I tend to think it is not someone in Arabia, who couldn't care less.
So, while acknowledging that Hitler and the Nazis were totalitarians who took innocent life, attempting to wipe out the Jews of Europe, I also note that some people subjected to totalitarianism find it sweet to be in the driver's seat. There is also no shortage of a white supremacist nativist element in this country willing to look the other way while the rights of minorities are trampled.
Hitchcock's "The Lady Vanishes" comes to mind.
Also, finally, one should understand that in the US there are organizations such as Chabad which teach racial supremacy for Jews as well. They bend the twig to get the kind of tree they want.
It is hard to imagine that this kid Adam Gadahn works for the al-Qaeda portrayed after the embassy bombings and the USS Cole. However the post-9/11 al-Qaeda may be a horse of a different color, and it is mighty convenient to the forces of authoritarianism.
So now Israel has invaded Lebanon.
What's Israel's real motivation? Ask yourself:
IF Israel and the U.S. were about to attack Iran or Syria, would Israel keep all its military hardware in Israel (inside the Green Line), where it would be an easier target for counterattack, or would it find excuses to move its weapons into the occupied territories and Lebanon, where Palestinians and Muslims would be de facto human shields?
IF Israel and the U.S. were about to attack Iran or Syria, wouldn't the most strategic location for Israel's ground forces be in the occupied territories, adjacent to many Muslim countries that might be tempted to come to Iran's aid (Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia)?
Rowan Berkeley
Theological dissatisfaction?
What is Christianity without the doctrine of Trinity (man made)?
I read this extract recently:
There are six versions of the Trinity and I will call them models
Model A (The Polytheistic Model)
There are 3 indivisible All-Powerful Gods. You may worship any of the 3 Gods and the other two will not have a problem with that. The 3 Gods love each other and are always in harmony. The God, known as The Son, is the preferred of the 3 Gods for worship.
Model B (The Man-Worship Model)
There is One indivisible All-Powerful God. Jesus is a man. The Holy Spirit is a Spirit of Revelation. You may not worship anyone other than God. However, you may use Jesus as an intercessor to God. If you direct your worship to Jesus, then God is more likely to accept it than if you direct your worship straight to God.
Model C (The Puppet Model)
There are three distinct beings known as The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. Neither of them is the indivisible All-Powerful God. God controls all three beings by his will and they do not have a will of their own. They are in essence lifeless. However, you may worship any of the three of them to get to God. Direct worship to God is not allowed. You must worship one of these three beings.
Model D (The Divisible Model)
There is one All-Powerful God. He is able to split himself up into parts (however, the terminology is 'persons'). These parts of God are themselves lesser Gods. Neither of these lesser Gods is the All-Powerful God. Each lesser God has his own will. Each one is able to work independantly of each other and they have varying capabilities. However, they can recombine at any time to form the one All-Powerful God. You can worship any of the lesser Gods. Or if you prefer you can worship the All-Powerful God (that is formed from their combination).
Model E (The Multiple Names Model)
There is one All-Powerful indivisible God. His names are Jesus, The Holy Spirit and The Father. And it is just one God.
Model F (The Impossible Model)
Model F attempts to take either Model C or Model D and improve it.
(i) Improving Model D
There is one All-Powerful God. He can split himself up into separate parts forming lesser Gods as in Model D. Now, we know that these three Gods are different because they are formed from different parts of the original one All-Powerful God. However, we are going to upgrade each part of God to be the same All-Powerful God that he is only a part of. Its like taking a piece of Cake and cutting it into slices. We know that each slice is different because they are different parts of the same Cake. However, we are now going to call each individual slice the same entire Cake that it was cut from. Now that we have done this, we can safely say that each part of God is the same entire God that he is a part of. And thus, any part of God may be worshipped.
(ii)Improving Model C
We have three distinct beings known as The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit. Neither of them is the one indivisible All-Powerful God because God controls them and they are just lifeless entities. Now, we are going to say that actually The Father is God and is not controlled by him. Therefore, The Father is very literally the being identified as God. But because God is indivisible and the The Father is distinct and different from The Son and The Holy Spirit, then God cannot be the The Son or Holy Spirit. However, we will persevere. We now are going to say the same thing for the The Son and The Holy Spirit that we said for The Father. Since The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit are distinct and different, then if the one All-Powerful indivisible God becomes one of them he cannot be the other two. But we said (through perseverence) that God is all three. So basically, God is the Father and isn't the Father (because he is one of the other two). God is the Son and isn't the Son (because he is one of the other two). And God is the Holy Spirit and isn't the Holy Spirit (because he is one of the other two). And thus, any of the three may be worshipped (even though you are and you aren't worshipping God at the same time).
Model G (The Turn Model)
(i) Three different Gods
There are 3 Gods, however, only one God can exist at any time. They each take turns to exist. How this is even done is unknown.
(ii) One God
There is One indivisible All-Powerful God. He chooses to take on varying forms at various times. God is a being that changes in appearance over time but he only ever has one appearance at one time.
The second biggest mistake made by Church Fathers was when they made Arius's belief a heresy.
But lucky for Arius, that he didn't end up like his friend, George.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda
states that al-Qaeda means "the foundation" or "the base".
Robin Cook states in 2005 that al-Qaeda is a database of all the Jihadeen that enrolled for action in Chechnya and Afghanistan.
He expresses doubt on the official story about 9/11 and al-Qaeda, indicates he's thinking of getting back into politics against Blair, dies shortly after of a 'heart attack'
For the record, Al-Qaeda was set up by Pakistan's ISI agency, with assistance from the CIA, to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. It detours along the way to asssist drug lords in Kosovo and Afghanistan, ends up destabilising Afghanistan. Now a convenient boogeyman for the west, it consists of a few hundred videographers and internet mullahs urging western muslim youth to 'attack the infidel'
Hire a researcher double quick, X, before you get swarmed by Irving's fans!
The link is http://fpp.co.uk/online/04/10/
Pe...lman_video.html and you'll note someone else brought this to his attention in 2004, and he attributes this (follow the sequence please)to a Christian Science Monitor article which quotes a Drudge Report leak that ABC News is sitting on footage of an 'American Voice' of al-Qaeda threatening further attacks on the US.
First you have the Republican's leaker of choice, Drudge, leaking inflammatory leaks which brings a CSM report from Pakistan, which forces ABC News to release the video, just before, tadaaa! the 2004 US elections.
Irving's contribution is interesting;
in his comment he states
" My own guess is that Pearlman was hoping to pass himself off as a native Arab. The fair skin gave him away, as did the fair skin of the five "Muslim" men standing behind the (already dead?) victim in the famous Nick Berg video: not only was their skin fair, but one wore a wedding ring, which Muslim men do not. A Gold ring, at that: which metal again Muslims eschew in their ornaments.
Next time, perhaps a liberal application of Amber Solaire is called for"
My own guess is that Irving was ok as long as he went on researching WWII history, but as soon as he started expressing conspiratorial doubts about the little 'video moments' we've been getting since 9/11, he was toast 
Myra,
Jesus offers us the notion that no one can know God.
But if you must have an idea of God we are asked to know Him as a Father. A Good Father.
But Christ tells us that no one can come to the Father but through his Son, the Son of Man.
As proof of our Fathers love for us He would send to those who believed in Him and His Son, His Love. A beautiful mythos (In original Greek, meaning a "truth").
Within this triune dialectic is a profound understanding of the principles necessary for knowing the intimate relationship which participates in what is called the spiritual mystery of being.
The Father as Active lover and Son as Receptive beloved, the Holy Spirit as the Love itself, is the joyful message of the Holy Trinity.
All three of these "persons" participate in a process of esoteric/exoteric meditations of what we call God.
It becomes an intimate spiritual/human relationship which acknowledges man as the finite manifestation of an infinite God. It is a process of love that brings us closer to the very center of the essence and the source of our own individual divine nature. It reminds us of who we and others are.
If the Son is receptive to the Father's active Love He is also Active in His response to the Father. But without the Spirit of Love (active and receptive) there is no point to the dialog.
This Trinity has nothing to do with gender. If one really tries to understand this they may consider that in order for Christ to become man it would have to be through Women. The new Eve of the "sensible" world. Matrix, Matter, Mother. It is interesting to note that men have nipples because in the first trimester he is female until the process of the fetus determines otherwise. What came first, the seed or the fertile soil?
Therefore, the masculine is historically often designated as a reminder of a "Supra-sensible" origin as the cause and the feminine, Sensible, the effect. Both are complimentary and necessary to understand an insight to this phenomenological and ontological aspect of the mystery of relationship.
In the words of a great 20th century German phenomenologist, Edith Stein, "God is not knowledge, God is love."
Faith is not about reason, logic and science. It is about the active relativeness, response to love of the "other" and the Creation. Ironically, it is the same faith that built the great and beautiful church's, cities and its art work, literature and even the sciences.
"I am in the world but not of this world." Since I was a Catholic child I was often reminded that we have one foot in this world and one in the other. Is this why sociological research has noted that Catholics in the Western world have the least fear of death and have an easier acceptance of death then other religious denominations?
Yet, the faith, understands mans imperfection, not passively, but actively.
Pearlman is really old news. He was exposed by Michael Rivero more than a year ago.
What I am interested in is the claim that he went to Austria to actually be arrested!
It's claimed that he was compromised by the Zionist as being caught as a pedophile. Is there any truth that he was forced into cooperating with the Zionist? Anything to this?
Any thoughts?
You are talking about Irving again, not Pearlman : I have no idea where the pedophile story comes from but it sounds extremely silly. I wouldn't even repeat a story like that without googling around and trying to find a source for it. The source would probably be the explanation, if you see what I mean.
I don't think he wanted to be arrested, I think he was lulled somehow into a false sense of security - after all the original Austrian arrest warrant was decades old.
Le Pen is going to be back in court soon for 'minimising Nazi brutality' - again, notice the theological undertone here : it is blasphemy to deny that the Nazis were in all respects evil, just as it would have been, four hundred years ago, to deny this of Satan.
Isn't advocating torture a terrorist act according to the Patriot Act? When does this scumbag get sent to Guantanamo?
Enough with the Bible lessons already.
The Old Testament is a history of the world's biggest assholes, as told by the assholes.
I agree - to me the idea that traditional theology, Christian or other, has real import is laughable. However, the holocaustian or holocaustic religion is much more relevant and has its own theology, in which 'the Jewish People' count as collective Messiah, sacrificed for man's sin but miraculously resurrected in the form of the state of israel, and this is not just a metaphor, it is supposed to be a positivistically proven fact.
Irving: My guess is, that he is being toasted (erh... as in burnt) for the Dresden-thing, Hitler's War being a proxy-target. His detractors wouldn't want to draw attention to the English war crimes.
I noted something scary: in Beevors Berlin - The downfall, the last two pages are inserted by someone clearly not Beevor. This post scriptum is a large exculpation of the British warfare and a blackwash of any and all German alive during the Hitler era, the drift being that the entire German population was unrepenting nazis, not an attack on the nazis per se, but on the Germans . The PS stresses, that Dresden as well as the destruction of Germany in its entirety, was the Germans own fault for starting the war. The Germans are being portraited as hypocrite whiners, the SHAEF interrogators were "shocked" that the Germans used the word "terrorangriffe" instead of "luftangriffe", by the German resentment when they spoke of the allied air forces, etc., etc. "Beevor"'s diagnose is explicitly stated: The entire German population suffers from "residual nazism"
The clear purpose of the post script is to dispel any notion that the English (Allied) did not adhere to the Geneva Conventions, and that every single war crime was perpetrated by the evil Germans.
This squares with my belief, that Dresden is the real reason Irving is being smeared. I mean, the guy didn't express any opinion on holocaust until the smear campaign started.
(Speaking of sources earlier, I'd have to admit I'm not entirely sure of the last postulate. It's been a long time since Irving was on my agenda.)
well, yeah - but more generally the effective mass brainwashing of Western publics requires super-clear categories of absolute good and evil, without undertones of ambiguity.
... all the while installing ambiguity where this is needed. In a few years, we'll be unable to remember a time when "terrorist" was not a denomination of a race.
I met a girl at a party a few weeks ago: she thought that "purportedly" was synonymous with "indisputable". That's mass media for you. She was a jurist at the Ministry of Helping Swarthy Foreigners to the Boat, a case worker, deciding who should be granted asylum and who should be repatriated. We discussed Afghanistan, I held that the country had descended into near anarchy. She was very condescending: everything was, as a matter for purportedly fact, dandy in Afghanistan. The Afghan state had it's freedom-oozing tentacles spread out to cover the last hamlet. And take her word: she knew a lot more about it than I. Read her: she has access, first class stuff not disclosed to the commoner. Confidential, of course, but take her word. Taliban? Warlords? Spooks? Poppies? She was genuinely flabbergasted, didn't believe a word I said.
Come to think of it, language may not be so easy to subvert, it fights back. Language will birth new words for purportedly or suborn other words to fulfill that function. It's the people that are the problem, not the media. You have the media you want. And the rulers you deserve, alas.
Did she extend this interesting form of knowledge to the word "allegedly" as well - can one for instance say "experts allege that...?"
All this reminds me a bit of Lacan's "sujet supposé savoir", "the subject supposed to know".
Tiger Eye: Thanks for sharing that. I have always felt a deep affection for Christians who are moved by God's love to acts of kindness. I have received this kindness in the darkest days of my life and my heart cannot deny this.
I confess to a fondness for Irving: a historian that relies on original documents rather than secondary sources! Totally unlike the mass media: poop from pundits and 'experts'
He also sent a kind email to me once regarding my father which I much appreciated.
While I hate the way these rumours are being spread over the Internet, the fact is that his reputation is being destroyed while he is unable to respond.
The only source for Irving's alleged homosexual pedophilia I could find is Daryl Bradford Smith, of http://www.iamthewitness.com who relies on Internet writer John Birdman Bryant at http://www.thebirdman.org
Bryant quotes an obscure 1994 book by English writer Alexander Baron, "The Churchill Papers, Revising the Revisionists, unmasking David Irving"
There is NO corroborated evidence listed ANYWHERE that proves or even lists any sort of pedophilia.
I wonder why if it were true Irving never was charged in Britain, or this was more widely publicised by his enemies. Instead they spread these rumours in this manner, because simply, they don't have to bear the burden of proof.
Their 'proof': an unflattering photo of Irving on Smith's site;
a pornographic drawing of Irving that is supposed to be the cover of Baron's book!
and Google Key West, which is David Irving's American address, and you see it has a large gay population, ergo, Irving must be gay! This is beyond crap, and Daryl Bradford Smith should be ashamed of himself for singlehandedly spreading it all over.
The other rumours which I regret having to mention but feel they must be countered:
Irving's mother was Jewish. So what?
He was unable to pay off some of his loans from supporters. Well duh, he had to fight an expensive legal battle against paid off witnesses funded by wealthy Jews in the process of which he lost his home, contact with his family, his papers, all his original documents, his life's work?
That he's being blackmailed by Zionists, that he went to Austria to get arrested, that he was set up to disappoint his legion of (fair weather) fans? Crap.
He might be sexually omnivorous? Again, so what?
That at times he may have been forced to compromise? Perhaps, but that's his humanity.
This is a man who at his own expense defended Ernst Zundel at his Canadian trial and helped win the Supreme Court ruling which exonerated him.
He was one of those who fought for Historical Truth, and I still for the life of me can't understand why he's listed as a 'Holocaust denier'.
He was beaten up in the streets of London and his assailants got away free.
He has fought epic battles in court to defend his reputation, but also, YOUR right of speech.
He provided access to all his books free on his site http://www.fpp.co.uk
His research and writings will stand forever as the definitive writings on Churchill, on WWII.
He was a giant and small people, resent giants.
Send him a card, buy his books. I look forward to his next one!
Well I have exchanged emails with Al Baron about this and he swears that Irving committed an indecent assault against him, during a visit he made to Irving's home, many many years ago, and that the drawing illustrates the outcome.
Personally, I find this more or less impossible to believe. Al Baron is a peculiar person, with a quite extensive website of his own, full of somewhat erratic opinions concerning the Jewish question. He is rather an eccentric, in the English tradition.
His audio interview with Smith is downright offensive : it is full of inconsequential slurs on practically everyone he has ever met associated with revisionism.
I've been working for a long time on filling the vast gaps in my understanding of Christian theology. Thanks Tiger Eye, for that insight into thinking about the Trinity.
All the blabbing nazis (there seems to be nothing else) here are of course lovers of a falsifier of history called Irving. And other nazis like Le Pen, Faurisson etc.
They are like the nazis who rule Israel, the US, Russia, China, the EU, Al Qaida etc. like one rat is just like the other. A bunch of evil, sadistic liers alltogether.
Mankind's dominant types are all cannibals like the nazis and have always been - for 10000 dreadful years. They are simply a global natural desaster, which will wipe out themselves from the earth and take all of us with them in a few years from now.
The old testament, the Koran etc. is just the usual pack of lies and propaganda from the ruling bunch of evil idiots, just like all the religious nazi-nonsense you can read here.
If anyone needs proof of a person's innocence, it's by the quality of the enemies they attract; David Irving vs the anonymous troll whom I now once and forevermore name Gollum.
(Tolkien based the character of Gollum on a South African Jew he knew)
This is the same troll who started out by calling himself thucidydes II
The dam has burst at AmericaBlog's news blackout on Israel's recent provocations...and the responses are sweepingly critical of Israel. About time.
I understand perfectly well how it's so easy for "the nazis" here to "identitfy" every opponent: it's because "they" "are" "all" one single idiot. As soon as anyone else writes, he assumes those others must do as he does himself.
Oooooooo--the feared nazi smear. Better than being a not-see, and turning a blind eye to the west's war on Islam.
This is why I asked about Irving's recent status:
http://www.iamthewitness.com/
Dar...ith_Irving.html
or
http://www.hoolinet.com/CurrentE...93/
Default.aspx
It's confusing, especially since I hadn't heard of Irving before the
report that he was brought before a Belgium court charged with "Holocaust"
denial.
Especially since he was charged for something he was supposed to have said 12 or 15 years ago!
Where was the British Government's outrage for this absurd charge? And where was academia in England in defending a fellow historian and researcher?
Do you see the reason for wondering if something else is really going on?
I can't see anything on Darryl Bradford Smith's site to suggest that he is anything other than a provocateur. It seems to me characteristic of the real provo to (a) appear from nowhere, and (b) immediately start accusing everyone who is established on the scene of being provos.
As for Hoolinet, um ... it's a satire site.
The reference to "Belgium court", my error. I meant Austrian court.
Mj and trouvere,
Thank you!
All institutions are faulty whether religious or secular. I understand that faith is a personal journey.
Atheist are often more kinder and authentic then believers. We all have our limitations and troubles. But kindness and understanding never injured the integrity of a person exposed to the heaviness and uncertainties of life.
Suffering and joy are opposites sides of the coin of life. To allow ourselves to experience both, even simultaneously at times (like the loss of a loved one), is what makes us human.
Anonymous,
I agree with you! The "Old Testament is a history of the world's biggest assholes, as told by the assholes."
Even the "history" part has yet to be proven according to most of the worlds archeologist and half of those in Israel itself! They can't find it! Even its own text is contradictory to physical proofs!
That's why it was rejected by Jews. One is fictitious literalism and the other, New Testament, is a Hellenic mythos (originally the Greek word mythos meant a truth. The mystery schools of Judea found a universal living truth, the Gosples [Old English from the Greek "euangelion", meaning the "Good News"] rather than a dead exclusive one).
You made a true statement!
Now the Koran, on the other hand, you should live by every word.
Rhy,
Peace be with you.
Re The very strange saga of Adam Gadahn, there is an intriguing possibility. When he went into Death Metal music for a year or so, it may have been because he was steered that way by handlers who regarded that as a gateway to neonazi groups.
Who were his handlers? As Xymphora says, the grandfather of Gadahn probably was the central figure. As an important Anti Defamation League figure, he might have been interested in spying on neonazis as well as on Muslims. But there may well have been other handlers who were more professional ion handling spies, iniformers and possibly agents provocateurs.
This may or may not open a new avenue of investigation into possible ties between the ADL and the FBI.
You know whats funny about this Adam guy?
The FBI lists Gadahn's aliases as Abu Suhayb Al-Amriki, Abu Suhayb, Yihya Majadin Adams, Adam Pearlman, and Yayah.
Adam Pearlmen is his REAL name! Adam is the grandson of the late Carl K. Pearlman; a prominent Jewish urologist in Orange County. Carl was also a member of the board of directors of the Anti-Defamation League, which was caught spying on Americans for Israel in 1993, much as AIPAC has been caught up in the more recent spy scandal.
Don't believe me? check this yourself: www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html
Myra,
I trust you have read Boethius' De Trinitate from his opuscula sacra not just Augustine's De Trinitate. You may have issues with the Trinity as a Muslim (sypathizer?) but you should know that Catholics have problems with Islam's notion of Allah due to your Neo-Platonic monism and the Jewish/Gnostic diaspora of the 5th and 6th centuries. The Trinitarian issues does not begin or end with Arius.
Very nice resource--thank you. residence delfino vieste la concessione di contributi comitato di verifica per le cause di servizio
navy federal credit union mortgage navy federal credit union mortgage navy federal credit union mortgage // property hazard insurance property hazard insurance property hazard insurance
Commenting by HaloScan
