Thursday, May 15, 2014

Germar Rudolf's True Feelings about Jews

Can be read on page 39 of this report, which quotes Germar thus:
If the Holocaust is seen as a unique collection of lies, then the sole pillar supporting international Judaism's legitimacy will collapse. The idol of substitute religion will disintegrate. The possibility of extorting more billions from Germany on account of its alleged obligation will likewise collapse. The possibility of obligating America to eternally rescue the Jews from new Holocausts through endless donations of money will likewise collapse. World sympathy for the greatest liars and swindlers in the history of mankind will likewise collapse. Europe's second attempt to establish a lasting enclave in Palestine against the will of the Arabs, similar to the crusades, will likewise collapse. And finally, the future Arabia, which will be unified and self ruling without Jewish, American or European occupiers and colonial powers, will develop irresistibly. This explains why the Jews and Jewish dominated media and politicians everywhere defend these (Holocaust) lies and repress the prophets of truth by all means possible.

53 comments:

Tesla said...

A very interesting look into the details of a modern day witch trial.

Jonathan Harrison said...

Except that the witches weren't caught out repeatedly lying. Nor were they vicious antisemites. That doesn't mean I condone Rudolf's imprisonment. Our policy at HC is against criminalization of HD.

Tesla said...

Sure they were. They were caught "lying", "kidnapping small children", "worshipping the devil" and all sorts of "vicious" things. If the similarity escapes you, I can only wonder why.

Every time I debate the Holocaust with a believer that person tells me "...but I'm completely against the imprisonment". But still thousands are persecuted in Western countries every year. Funny, isn't? I wonder who is actually the liar here.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Another essential difference is that the witches weren't sentenced on account of a behavior they had actually engaged in (for the obvious reason that such behavior was physically impossible). Not so Rudolf, who was sentenced on account of actual and proven actions/statements of his, which happened to be criminalized in the country in which he was tried for them.

Yet another difference is that the trial against Rudolf was conducted according to defendant-friendly procedural laws which forbid coercing a defendant, give a defendant the right to defend himself with the help of an attorney, and require the crime that the defendant is accused of to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt for the defendant to be convicted, among other benefits that people accused of witchcraft never enjoyed.

So while one may rightly criticize the existence of laws that criminalize hate speech in certain countries, comparing Rudolf's trial with a witchcraft trial is just silly polemyzing.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«Every time I debate the Holocaust with a believer that person tells me "...but I'm completely against the imprisonment". But still thousands are persecuted in Western countries every year. Funny, isn't? I wonder who is actually the liar here.»

Quite a hysteric we have here, and I wonder where he/she got those "thousands" from, already because I didn't know there were nearly that many "Revisionists" around.

I also wonder what opponents of "Revisionism" are supposed to do against hate speech laws that criminalize Holocaust denial in certain countries, other than manifest their disagreement with such laws. Should they petition against such laws?

Talk about petitions, I have circulated one against German laws criminalizing Holocaust denial on this blog, which I intend to submit to the Bundestag's petition committee as soon as it has at least 100 signatures.

I'm sure our new guest will be glad to help me by putting his or her name under that petition, which he or she may find under this link.

Nathan said...

-"thousands"are persecuted in Western countries every year-
The last I heard of was that dumbass, Toben. And that was last year. Some idiot also waxed on about Proven liar Nick Kollestrom being "persecuted", but IIRC that was more of his colleagues getting sick of his stupidity and wanting nothing more to do with him. Something that is perfectly within their rights. Also last year.
And people accuse Jews of "whining" about antisemitism.

- I wonder who is actually the liar here.-
Given the above drama, you.

Tesla said...

So how many have signed this petition?

Considering the fact that you frequently reveal the identities of holocaust revisionists as part of your debating techniques, obviously as a means to threaten and discourage them from further debate, this petition is just as deceitful as the rest of the crap you post on your blog.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«So how many have signed this petition?»

Follow the link and you'll see.

«Considering the fact that you frequently reveal the identities of holocaust revisionists as part of your debating techniques, obviously as a means to threaten and discourage them from further debate, this petition is just as deceitful as the rest of the crap you post on your blog.»

Trying to chicken out behind a smokescreen of baseless accusations and invective?

How typical for a "brave" defender of the "Revisionist" faith.

Don't be afraid to put your name under the petition. Disagreeing with hate speech laws is not a crime in Germany.

Come on, what are you waiting for?

Tesla said...

Baseless accusations - so you actually deny *that*? What a filthy liar you are.

Speaking of hysterical - how is that bipolar disorder of yours going? Still up and down?

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«Baseless accusations - so you actually deny *that*? What a filthy liar you are.

Speaking of hysterical - how is that bipolar disorder of yours going? Still up and down?»

I must have hit some raw nerve, judging by the reaction.

And there's no substantiation of the "filthy liar" accusation, which is no surprise.

Could I please have the name of the anonymous coward who is trying to insult me?

Tesla said...

"Could I please have the name of the anonymous coward who is trying to insult me?"

Oh, I wasn't trying to insult you. I just thought you wanted to talk about psychiatry, since you mentioned hysteria...

Tesla said...

"Yet another difference is that the trial against Rudolf was conducted according to defendant-friendly procedural laws which forbid coercing a defendant, give a defendant the right to defend himself with the help of an attorney,"

What a bunch of baloney. Neither the defendant nor his attorney can defend holocaust denial in Germany, since that would lead to yet another prosecution for holocaust denial. The German attorney Sylvia Stolz had to spend several years in prison simply for defending her clients. And this is the kind of legal justice you defend.

So stop pretending you are against this, will you, since we all know you would prefer having "holocaust deniers" in jail or shot, just like in previous times(I see one of your contributors has the communist flag on his youtube account - what a surprise). You obviously can't debate them, therefore your only means of defense is to out their names to make sure the corrupt legal systems of the Western regimes take care of the rest.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"Yet another difference is that the trial against Rudolf was conducted according to defendant-friendly procedural laws which forbid coercing a defendant, give a defendant the right to defend himself with the help of an attorney,"

What a bunch of baloney. Neither the defendant nor his attorney can defend holocaust denial in Germany, since that would lead to yet another prosecution for holocaust denial. The German attorney Sylvia Stolz had to spend several years in prison simply for defending her clients. And this is the kind of legal justice you defend.»

You're mixing up the judiciary and the legislative. The German legislative has made Holocaust denial a criminal offense. The judiciary has to follow the law of the land, and decide whether someone accused of having engaged in Holocaust denial as defined by law is actually guilty of this offense. Rudolf had all the means offered by German procedural law to defend himself against the accusation that he had engaged in Holocaust denial as defined by German law. Unfortunately for him, the proof that his writings and statements constituted Holocaust denial in the sense of the legal definition was overwhelming.

«So stop pretending you are against this, will you, since we all know you would prefer having "holocaust deniers" in jail or shot, just like in previous times(I see one of your contributors has the communist flag on his youtube account - what a surprise). You obviously can't debate them, therefore your only means of defense is to out their names to make sure the corrupt legal systems of the Western regimes take care of the rest.»

Actually debating hollering hysterics like you is a piece of cake and can be great fun. And yes, I would like to see laws against Holocaust denial revoked, for two reasons. One is that, as the German legal scholar I quoted in my petition text pointed out, stupidity (which is what Holocaust denial essentially amounts to) should not be a criminal offense. The other is that I don't want stupidity to be given a chance to gain notoriety by whining about "persecution". Being duly ridiculed is all the faithful followers of the "Revisionist" religion deserve, and their behavior (just look at your own) makes that a rather easy task.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"Could I please have the name of the anonymous coward who is trying to insult me?"

Oh, I wasn't trying to insult you. I just thought you wanted to talk about psychiatry, since you mentioned hysteria...»

An anonymous coward, as I said.

Tesla said...

"You're mixing up the judiciary and the legislative. "

No, I'm not mixing up the judiciary and the legislative - I'm stating the simple fact that you can't defend yourself against charges of "holocaust denial" in Germany, because then your lawyer will be charged with "holocaust denial" as well. Thus your statement was false. Again, it's you who mix things up here, as your downplaying of this seems to indicate that you are unable to distinguish right from wrong.

Your labeling of me as a "hysteric" just fits the pattern of psychological pathologization you marxists are so famous for(yes, that is what you are). That your own history of psychological illness is posted all over the Internet just makes it more funny.

Have a nice day, Donkeykamp, and be careful with that Moclobemide.

Tesla said...

"An anonymous coward, as I said."

Maybe if you had some arguments to defend your case, you wouldn't be so obsessed with my person.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"An anonymous coward, as I said."

Maybe if you had some arguments to defend your case, you wouldn't be so obsessed with my person.»

Actually my arguments are way better than my opponent's, and as my opponent well knows, my interest in his person is related to his personal attacks. If my opponent doesn't want his treasured anonymity challenged, all he has to do is refrain from such attacks.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"You're mixing up the judiciary and the legislative. "

No, I'm not mixing up the judiciary and the legislative -»

Of course you are, by attacking the judiciary for enforcing the law of the land.

«I'm stating the simple fact that you can't defend yourself against charges of "holocaust denial" in Germany, because then your lawyer will be charged with "holocaust denial" as well.»

Nonsense. You can defend yourself against charges of Holocaust denial by arguing that you didn't make statements or publish writings that qualify as Holocaust denial according to German law. What you cannot do is defend yourself against charges of Holocaust denial by arguing that there is no such thing as Holocaust denial because there was no Holocaust. Just as you cannot defend yourself against charges of theft or murder by arguing that there is no such thing as theft or murder.

«Thus your statement was false.»

Nope, I made an appropriate distinction you were unable or unwilling to make.

«Again, it's you who mix things up here, as your downplaying of this seems to indicate that you are unable to distinguish right from wrong.»

I'm not downplaying anything, but you are a) blaming the wrong people (the judiciary for enforcing the law of the land, instead of the legislative for making the law) and b) blowing the issue out of proportion (by making an big bloody fuss about something no worse than a cynical propagandist's misfortune in running afoul of overdone hate speech legislation, which doesn't exactly move me to tears). People shouldn't face criminal charges for being deluded fools or lying skunks, that much we can agree on. But it doesn't change the contempt I feel for such people.

«Your labeling of me as a "hysteric" just fits the pattern of psychological pathologization you marxists are so famous for(yes, that is what you are).»

So now I'm a supposed to be a marxist because I pointed out the hysterical nature of your behavior (which must have hit one of your raw nerves, considering how you still go on about it). You're becoming increasingly amusing, genius.

«That your own history of psychological illness is posted all over the Internet just makes it more funny.

Have a nice day, Donkeykamp, and be careful with that Moclobemide.»

And here our fine friend is getting personal again. From the safety of an alias, as befits the cowardly piece of trash he has amply shown to be.

Tesla said...

"Nonsense. You can defend yourself against charges of Holocaust denial by arguing that you didn't make statements or publish writings that qualify as Holocaust denial according to German law."

I guess your ignorance of this matter is at the same level as your arrogance. You obviously haven't studied the case of lawyers such as Syliva Stolz. In any case, your argumentation constitutes a side point that can be likened to saying the witch can defend herself by proving she isn't a witch. It is interesting to note that that was exactly what happened in many cases of witch trials. No matter how absurd these cases were, the inquisitors managed to put some apparent justice to it with their bizarre beliefs. Your ramblings about "legislative" versus "judiciary" is just that.

"And here our fine friend is getting personal again. From the safety of an alias, as befits the cowardly piece of trash he has amply shown to be."

The problem with you people is that you never understand it when your proclaimed enemies are answering you with your own language. Which is why you always end up getting mowed into pits.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"Nonsense. You can defend yourself against charges of Holocaust denial by arguing that you didn't make statements or publish writings that qualify as Holocaust denial according to German law."

I guess your ignorance of this matter is at the same level as your arrogance. You obviously haven't studied the case of lawyers such as Syliva Stolz. In any case, your argumentation constitutes a side point that can be likened to saying the witch can defend herself by proving she isn't a witch. It is interesting to note that that was exactly what happened in many cases of witch trials. No matter how absurd these cases were, the inquisitors managed to put some apparent justice to it with their bizarre beliefs. Your ramblings about "legislative" versus "judiciary" is just that.»

What's wrong with your "witchcraft" comparison is that there's no such thing as witchcraft in the real world, whereas there is such a thing as the behavior described in Section 130 (3) of the German Criminal Code:

"(3) Whosoever publicly or in a meeting approves of, denies or downplays an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the kind indicated in section 6 (1) of the Code of International Criminal Law, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding five years or a fine."

I suggest you make your comparisons less far-fetched (to put it politely) by trying to liken Rudolf to someone tried for heresy by the Inquisition on account of a scientific theory that ran against the beliefs of the day. The problem with that comparison would be that Rudolf did exactly the opposite of what such heretic had done: instead of trying to counter religious/ideological nonsense with reason, he tried to counter reason with ideologically motivated nonsense. But at least it would be marginally less silly than your "witchcraft trial" parallel.

«"And here our fine friend is getting personal again. From the safety of an alias, as befits the cowardly piece of trash he has amply shown to be."

The problem with you people is that you never understand it when your proclaimed enemies are answering you with your own language.»

Did I attack you by bringing up a health problem of yours that you once mentioned on the internet? Not that I remember.

And if I had sunk to such lowliness, I would have done it writing under my own name, and you would have the opportunity to seek satisfaction if you felt like doing so.

See the difference?

«Which is why you always end up getting mowed into pits.»

Interesting imagery you use in your wishful thinking - "mowed into pits". It evokes the image of people being mowed into pits with automatic weapons, doesn't it?

Tesla said...

"What's wrong with your "witchcraft" comparison is that there's no such thing as witchcraft in the real world, whereas there is such a thing as the behavior described in Section 130 (3) of the German Criminal Code: "

There is nothing wrong with my comparison. That it isn't similar to witchcraft trials in all aspects doesn't make it wrong.

You seem to completely fail to grasp the point that trials against someone for their beliefs in history, science or whatnot, is wrong - whether that person is right or wrong, rational or irrational, or whether it is a judicial or legislative matter, is irrelevant.

"Did I attack you by bringing up a health problem of yours that you once mentioned on the internet? Not that I remember."

No, of course not, since I don't have any mental health problems, and if I did, I wouldn't be so careless as to post them under my full name - especially if I had the habit of being an Internet loudmouth like you.

"Interesting imagery you use in your wishful thinking - "mowed into pits". It evokes the image of people being mowed into pits with automatic weapons, doesn't it?"

Yes, of course.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"What's wrong with your "witchcraft" comparison is that there's no such thing as witchcraft in the real world, whereas there is such a thing as the behavior described in Section 130 (3) of the German Criminal Code: "

There is nothing wrong with my comparison.»

Let's see: Witchcraft doesn't exist, Holocaust denial does. Witchcraft trials involved the most brutal forms of coercion, trials before German courts are conducted according to defendant-friendly procedural rules, which among other things rule out any form of coercion. Two things wrong already, where are the right ones?

«That it isn't similar to witchcraft trials in all aspects doesn't make it wrong.»

I still have to see the right parts of the comparison. Care to point them out?

«You seem to completely fail to grasp the point that trials against someone for their beliefs in history, science or whatnot, is wrong»

Of course it's wrong, and I never said anything to the contrary. But there's a difference between pointing out the wrong of such trials and the silly hyperbole of your "witchcraft trials" parallel.

«- whether that person is right or wrong, rational or irrational, or whether it is a judicial or legislative matter, is irrelevant.»

It may be irrelevant to you whether a court of justice is not guided by or violating defendant-friendly procedural rules or trying someone in accordance with such rules for having violated a legal hate speech provision that should not exist. It's not irrelevant to me.

«"Did I attack you by bringing up a health problem of yours that you once mentioned on the internet? Not that I remember."

No, of course not, since I don't have any mental health problems, and if I did,»

I wouldn't hold that against you, as I'm not a lowly character like you are.

«I wouldn't be so careless as to post them under my full name -»

Wise precaution as the internet is full of lowly skunks of the "Tesla" variety, who will go as low as attacking a person on account of that person's having suffered from what is arguably one of the most unpleasant ailments around.

«especially if I had the habit of being an Internet loudmouth like you.»

The forum conversation about my depression took place in 1999, well before I have my first internet encounter with one of Hitler's willing defense attorneys. And as to the "Internet loudmouth", it's hard to miss the obvious self-projection.

«"Interesting imagery you use in your wishful thinking - "mowed into pits". It evokes the image of people being mowed into pits with automatic weapons, doesn't it?"

Yes, of course.»

Thanks, it fits the profile you have been presenting.

Tesla said...

"Let's see: Witchcraft doesn't exist, Holocaust denial does. Witchcraft trials involved the most brutal forms of coercion, trials before German courts are conducted according to defendant-friendly procedural rules, which among other things rule out any form of coercion. Two things wrong already, where are the right ones? "

I have seen "right-wing extremists" being dragged naked into the street by the secret, state police in Germany, who then proceeded to beat them with sticks. Have you? Your "defendant-friendly procedural rules" is just hogwash. Their treatment is only surpassed by Guantanamo Bay, but my guess is it won't be long before we have similar camps for nationalists also. The Jews are relentless in their persecution of anyone who opposes them.

"I still have to see the right parts of the comparison. Care to point them out?"

I have done that many times already.

"I wouldn't hold that against you, as I'm not a lowly character like you are."

I don't "hold that against you" - I simply point out the laughable in your typical, Marxist usage of psychiatric terms when your own diagnoses are all over the Internet.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"Let's see: Witchcraft doesn't exist, Holocaust denial does. Witchcraft trials involved the most brutal forms of coercion, trials before German courts are conducted according to defendant-friendly procedural rules, which among other things rule out any form of coercion. Two things wrong already, where are the right ones? "

I have seen "right-wing extremists" being dragged naked into the street by the secret, state police in Germany, who then proceeded to beat them with sticks.»

In one of your nightmares, or in actual fact? In the latter case, where in Germany and when is that supposed to have happened, and what's the name of that "secret, state police" you are talking about?

«Have you?»

No, but I'm amused to see one of Hitler's willing defense attorney's waxing indignant about what would have been no more than a case of police brutality, if it happened.

«Your "defendant-friendly procedural rules" is just hogwash.»

Police brutality may hit extremists of the right and left, and also non-extremist citizens, even in a constitutional state of law. It doesn't imply that the courts of justice in such state don't give defendants a fair trial according to defendant-friendly procedural laws. You'll have to do better than mixing apples with oranges if you want to demonstrate German procedural laws don't protect the defendant or that German courts don't abide by such laws.

«Their treatment is only surpassed by Guantanamo Bay, but my guess is it won't be long before we have similar camps for nationalists also. The Jews are relentless in their persecution of anyone who opposes them.»

Shall we take that as just some more of your rhetorical hyperbole, or shall we assume that you're paranoid? You seem to be obsessed with "the Jews" and their supposed evil doings.

«"I still have to see the right parts of the comparison. Care to point them out?"

I have done that many times already.»

I didn't notice, and I don't think I missed something.

«"I wouldn't hold that against you, as I'm not a lowly character like you are."

I don't "hold that against you" - I simply point out the laughable in your typical, Marxist usage of psychiatric terms when your own diagnoses are all over the Internet.»

So because I had a case of MDD (which I sincerely hope you'll never have, as it's one of the worst things that can happen to you), I'm supposed to refrain from pointing out your obviously hysterical behavior?

Ah, and please keep repeating the "Marxist" BS. It further illustrates the cloud-cuckoo-land you live in. Marxists and Jews in every corner, threatening the Aryan race, right? :-)

Tesla said...

Your fishing around my identity is beginning to become tiresome. I am of course never going to give you the slightest bit of information in that regard, as I am sure it will be passed on to the local Antifa/authorities in no time.

According to your own posts on Usenet, you suffer from a recurrent mental illness that is associated with such serious symptoms as psychosis and mania. So to your continued allusions to my claims and beliefs being a result of mental illness, I can only point out that this is coming from someone who is potentially psychotic himself. And one who, in the same Usenet post, attacks his doctor - the very hallmark of that patient group.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«Your fishing around my identity is beginning to become tiresome. I am of course never going to give you the slightest bit of information in that regard, as I am sure it will be passed on to the local Antifa/authorities in no time.»

You seem to be suffering from paranoia, my friend. And I'm not "fishing around" your identity by asking you to sign my petition. I want more signatures on the petition, that's all. I happen to know who you are and where you live. But relax, there's no Antifa that I have any contact with, and reporting you to authorities would be against my principles.

«According to your own posts on Usenet, you suffer from a recurrent mental illness that is associated with such serious symptoms as psychosis and mania.»

It may but need not be associated with that, and in my case it was just associated with feeling miserable to the point of wanting to die.

«So to your continued allusions to my claims and beliefs being a result of mental illness,»

... don't exist anywhere outside your own fantasies. One doesn't have to suffer from a mental illness to stick with "Revisionism". Hating Jews and/or admiring Nazi Germany and/or being a white supremacist or the like will do nicely.

«I can only point out that this is coming from someone who is potentially psychotic himself. And one who, in the same Usenet post, attacks his doctor - the very hallmark of that patient group.»

Psychosis is characterized by seeing, hearing or believing things that aren't real. Which is not my problem, but what you have written might lead one to suspect that it is yours. I hope for you that this is not the case.

Tesla said...

So, let's see, for some reason you've found out where I live, but you're not going to use it for anything. And you say my opinions on Jews etc. lead you to believe I am psychotic, but then you suddenly turn around and say that is just part of my fantasies. Hm.

This isn't very logical, is it?

Sounds to me like you're on the verge of something, but can't quite figure out which leg to stand on.

"Psychosis is characterized by seeing, hearing or believing things that aren't real."

Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that. Psychosis is a state of mind where the patient confuses his own emotions with the real world. His emotions *become* what he senses, and this leads to a form of logical incoherence whereby everything the patient thinks, says or writes is tailored to his emotions at that particular moment. It can be quite hard to spot, but can usually be triggered if you know which buttons to push.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«So, let's see, for some reason you've found out where I live, but you're not going to use it for anything.»

That's not what I wrote. I wrote that I happen to know who you are and where you live but do not intend to use that information for the purposes you fear I might use it for.

«And you say my opinions on Jews etc. lead you to believe I am psychotic, but then you suddenly turn around and say that is just part of my fantasies. Hm.»

Again, that's not what I wrote. What I wrote was this:

«Psychosis is characterized by seeing, hearing or believing things that aren't real. Which is not my problem, but what you have written might lead one to suspect that it is yours. I hope for you that this is not the case.»

«This isn't very logical, is it?»

What exactly does not seem logical to you?

«Sounds to me like you're on the verge of something, but can't quite figure out which leg to stand on.»

Actually I’m making clear points. One is that contempt for "Revisionism" doesn't necessarily imply favoring the criminalization thereof, rather the contrary. The other is that bringing up an opponent's medical history as a negative, as you have done, is a behavior that suggests a lowly kind of character.

«"Psychosis is characterized by seeing, hearing or believing things that aren't real."
Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that. Psychosis is a state of mind where the patient confuses his own emotions with the real world. His emotions *become* what he senses, and this leads to a form of logical incoherence whereby everything the patient thinks, says or writes is tailored to his emotions at that particular moment. It can be quite hard to spot, but can usually be triggered if you know which buttons to push.»

Why, you seem to know more about psychosis than I do. Congratulations on your superior knowledge, and I hope for you that it is not based on personal experience.

Tesla said...

So you just happen to know who I am and where I live...right. Your dancing around with ambigious threats is becoming tiresome.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«So you just happen to know who I am and where I live...right. Your dancing around with ambigious threats is becoming tiresome.»

As you know more about psychosis than I do - isn't feeling threatened for no reason also one of its characteristics?

Tesla said...

Who says I'm feeling threatened? I've had crazy skimask-wearing communists running after me with a fireaxe. I know the difference between the dangerous ones and the ones who just can't argue without making ambiguous threats.

Arthur Crump said...

Tesla I was just going to advise you to give up, but on second thoughts please carry on, as I'm really enjoying watching you get humiliated.
It's like watching Oscar Wilde debating with Benny from Crossroads !!!

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«Who says I'm feeling threatened? I've had crazy skimask-wearing communists running after me with a fireaxe.»

Like you saw the "secret" German police taking naked Nazis into the street and beating them there, I suppose. You seem to keep mixing up your nightmares with reality.

«I know the difference between the dangerous ones and the ones who just can't argue without making ambiguous threats.»

He doesn't feel threatened but sees "ambiguous threats" in my stating this:

«And I'm not "fishing around" your identity by asking you to sign my petition. I want more signatures on the petition, that's all. I happen to know who you are and where you live. But relax, there's no Antifa that I have any contact with, and reporting you to authorities would be against my principles.»

Alles klar. :-)

Tesla said...

Arthur Crump, thanks for joining in. I'm sure Oscar Wilde needs all the male cheerleaders he can get. He was, after all, a homosexual pederast. Some people also believe he suffered from various mental illnesses, including bipolar disorder, but that comparison was possibly not intentional from your side?

Tesla said...

"Alles klar. :-)"

"I know who you are and where you live" is the hallmark sentence of people who make online threats, yes. That doesn't mean I actually feel threatened by you. You seem to be too much of a coward.

bhigr said...

Lot's of name calling here. The real question is: Is anything that Rudolph says actually true or not? Let's analyze his statement.

"If the Holocaust is seen as a unique collection of lies, then the sole pillar supporting international Judaism's legitimacy will collapse."

I don't think the holocaust is the sole pillar for supporting Judaism, but it is the most important pillar. This pillar will surely collapse, if and only if the Holocaust turns out to be false. Who would disagree? At some point people will find out - regardless of laws prohibiting the dissemination of this information.

"The idol of substitute religion will disintegrate. The possibility of extorting more billions from Germany on account of its alleged obligation will likewise collapse."

If the Holocaust is false, this surely will happen, since the holocaust is the justification for this, right?

"World sympathy for the greatest liars and swindlers in the history of mankind will likewise collapse."

If the most unique and vicious crime of mankind, the holocaust, turns out to be wrong, well then the holocaust originators are going to be the most vicious liars of mankind, right? But, since most Jews truly believe in the Holocaust, they cannot be called liars. But, possibly, sympathies for Jews as a whole would diminish as well, ... just like sympathies and support for all Germans - both guilty and innocent Germans - has been affected by the holocaust.

Did I miss anything?

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"Alles klar. :-)"

"I know who you are and where you live" is the hallmark sentence of people who make online threats, yes.»

That may be so in your world. It is not so in mine.

«That doesn't mean I actually feel threatened by you. You seem to be too much of a coward.»

... says a fellow who hides in safe anonymity to someone who writes under his own name and makes no secret of where he can be found. The self-projection is obvious.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«At some point people will find out - regardless of laws prohibiting the dissemination of this information.»

Those laws shouldn't exist because no one should be punished for being a deluded fool or an inveterate liar, but since when does ideologically motivated garbage qualify as information?

«Did I miss anything?»

You mean, apart from the fact that the assumptions underlying Rudolf's predictions (e.g. the «extorting more billions from Germany» - BS) are utter nonsense outside Rudolf's fantasy world, and that his musings reveal the fellow's true feelings about Jews? Nothing at all.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«Arthur Crump, thanks for joining in. I'm sure Oscar Wilde needs all the male cheerleaders he can get. He was, after all, a homosexual pederast. Some people also believe he suffered from various mental illnesses, including bipolar disorder, but that comparison was possibly not intentional from your side?»

Not that I’m interested in our anonymous coward's private life, but could it be that the associations he made reveal something about his secret wishes and tendencies?

Tesla said...

"Not that I’m interested in our anonymous coward's private life, but could it be that the associations he made reveal something about his secret wishes and tendencies?"

As in the theories of dr. Freud? Yet another sign that you believe in unscientific, Jewish bullshit.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"Not that I’m interested in our anonymous coward's private life, but could it be that the associations he made reveal something about his secret wishes and tendencies?"

As in the theories of dr. Freud? Yet another sign that you believe in unscientific, Jewish bullshit.»

Actually I believe in nothing, and thanks for yet another of your self-portraying comments.

Kevin said...

A bit off-topic, but still important.

Roberto Muehlenkamp: In the blog post regarding the petition the link to the RODOH forum where you can ask questions/comment on the petition itself that links here redirects to Yuku's homepage. Is there a thread on the new RODOH forum (rodoh.info) that it can be linked to to fix this? Thanks.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Kevin,

The petition blog was written at the time of the old RODOH forum, which was eventually deleted by Yuku. That's why the link no longer works. On the current RODOH forum there is no thread about the petition, as far as I know.

Tesla said...

"Actually I believe in nothing"

Of course. Like most uneducated people you think science is about proofs. That is the authoritarian, Jewish "science" of the Freudian sect in a nutshell.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«Of course. Like most uneducated people you think science is about proofs. That is the authoritarian, Jewish "science" of the Freudian sect in a nutshell.»

Whereas "educated" people not subscribing to the "Jewish" notion of science apparently hold that science is not about checking a theory against evidence, but about non-testable speculations. And that's called "Aryan" science, I guess.

Tesla said...

"Whereas "educated" people not subscribing to the "Jewish" notion of science apparently hold that science is not about checking a theory against evidence, but about non-testable speculations. And that's called "Aryan" science, I guess."

I don't know where you get this fantasy from. Your own uneducated guesses, I presume.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«"Whereas "educated" people not subscribing to the "Jewish" notion of science apparently hold that science is not about checking a theory against evidence, but about non-testable speculations. And that's called "Aryan" science, I guess."

I don't know where you get this fantasy from. Your own uneducated guesses, I presume.»

Looks like my friend means to tell me that the correct term is not "Aryan" science. Must be "White" science, then.

Tesla said...

Science as we understand it today (most of us anyway) arose in Europe among people who were predominantly White, yes. It's mostly based on the negative epistemology of the old Greeks (often summed up with Socrates' "I know one thing: that I know nothing") who were a 100% Indo-European (White) people.

What's your point?

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«Science as we understand it today (most of us anyway) arose in Europe among people who were predominantly White, yes. It's mostly based on the negative epistemology of the old Greeks (often summed up with Socrates' "I know one thing: that I know nothing") who were a 100% Indo-European (White) people.

What's your point?»

The one you just helped me to make, especially with the «100% Indo-European (White) people».

Thank you.:-)

Tesla said...

You mean the point that it shocks your ideological roots to be confronted with the astounding fact that modern science was developed by Whites?

I think we're getting closer to finding out who you are, Mr. Muehlenkamp.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«You mean the point that it shocks your ideological roots to be confronted with the astounding fact that modern science was developed by Whites?»

I'm not shocked at all, actually. It's just a matter of utter indifference to me what race or ethnicity developed modern science. Whereas it seems to be very important to my interlocutor that it was the White race, which in turn speaks volumes about my interlocutor.

«I think we're getting closer to finding out who you are, Mr. Muehlenkamp.»

No mystery there at all. Unlike my White Supremacist interlocutor, who believes in the superiority of the White race (as he defines it) and wants to keep it from mingling with races he apparently holds to be inferior, I'm a person who doesn't give a damn about anyone's racial or ethnic background.

Tesla said...

Of course you are indifferent to racial background; the thesis that race is not important to anything is one of the central parts of the Frankfurt school's line of marxism. Today it is usually followed up by calling anyone who disagrees a "nazi" or a "White supremacist".

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Oh, the good old "anyone who disagrees" mantra.

Not anyone who disagrees, but Tesla's professed concerns about foreign immigrants threatening the "European race" at the behest of "the Jews", which I recall having read in one or more of his posts, clearly shows where the fellow comes from.