Nazi Granny

Yeah, as was tried to be shown to you, you have a hateful prejudice that you are not willing to admit to.

Q: What sort of mindset, takes pleasure from a harmless, 93 year old lady being persecuted in the courts and imprisoned?

A: Your’s Jeff. 🙁

You are now trying to alter the ’crime’ and to deny what you wrote damning her, in order to avoid acknowledging your hate motivated schadenfreude.

Firstly the law she has infringed is not in any sane society equal to driving a vehicle that could be lethal if the driver is not qualified or capable. The infringed law is not protecting anyone from injury or danger or disadvantage. She is not infringing anyone else’s rights. We are talking about an unethical, tyrannous ’thought crime’ law, and one instigated effectively by an alien, occupying power. 

Secondly, if we take your example, where you say your “grandmother persisted in driving without a license”.
That is not the case here.
It would be if your grandmother drove without a license in 2015 and 2016, some years ago. She was charged, sentenced, appealed and eventually four years ago in 2018 was sent to jail for two years.
Upon her release, she was again charged for the same offence ’committed’ four and six years ago.

And then a hate-motivated American says it served her right for persisting in driving without a licence.

And when it is pointed out she can’t fairly be damned so hatefully for ‘persisting’, for something done BEFORE she was sent to jail, the American goes into denial.

Yeah! America! Land of the free. Er... unless you pose questions exposing the flaws in a racist, slanderous, anti-German, pseudo-historical narrative.

Ah-ha. So.... this proves you ARE in denial! 🙂
As I just demonstrated your insistence she is “persisting” in breaking a law, is false. 

And denial would also explain your refusal to acknowledge that, PLUS to admit your false comparison about driving licences.

You really need to be careful with your use of the word denial. My understanding is that word usage is forbidden here.

Been-there, here are the facts of Nazi granny’s case.

Ready?

This recent court case dealt with her appeals of the two instances you described. The court actually sentenced her but she appealed so she remained out while her appeal was heard. The court rejected her appeals so now she has to appeal again. Now she was in prison for two years for a separate incident. The reason why I made the comparison I did is she is a consistent offender based upon German law.

A little history:

She was found guilty and fined/sentenced in 2005, 2007, 2009, 2015, 2016, 2018 and then these two recent incidents (2022). She is a repeat offender and as one of her judges said she shows no remorse for any of these incidents. So, yeah, eventually the courts are going to come down hard on someone like this. You don’t have to like it, I don’t have to like it but that’s the reality.

First, that whole “lies, exaggeration….” business is just you engaging in your own type of denial. You are certainly entitled to think that. It doesn’t mean I have to take it seriously.

Second, you really need to get over it. That self-righteous twaddle and whining just makes you look like a giant baby. That’s what the press calls her and I find it amusing so I’ll continue to call her that. If you don’t like it I’m afraid you’ll just have suck it up, buttercup. I’ll simply ignore and delete any further whining about it. So you may as well save yourself the trouble of typing it out or copying and pasting it.



I also showed why I said “persistent.” It’s not my problem if you conveniently skipped over it.







I think it’s funny when you tell me how I’m thinking as if you could really know.

Oh, it’s so cute you think I don’t consider issues with witnesses when I read history.

You know how I counterbalance that? By seeing not only what people like Eli Wiesel said but what people like Rudolf Hoess said. Or what people like Perry Broad said. Or what Oscar Groening said (who consistently said deniers were full of it) or what Kremer wrote in his diary. I look at documents so I can square how they relate to witness statements and not the weird guessing that Holocaust deniers engage in (it was an air raid shelter, no…it was a “gassifier” (whatever that is) etc. with no known connection to any reality.





Ha ha! 🤣😅 Ok. If you say so.
[/quote]

I do.


Yeah! That’s the point that you keep denying: that you DO find the persecution of a 93 year old woman ”amusing”.
[/quote]

No, I find calling her Nazi granny amusing. I think charging and convicting her over her beliefs a waste of time.

The next bit is you trying that pointless psychoanalysis and attempt to read my mind. So it’s gone. You can type that stuff if you like. When I reply it will simply be deleted and ignored. Last warning on that, it will not be addressed by me again. You can waste your time on that bibble babble but any sentence I see from you that includes it will be deleted and ignored. If you actually say something pertinent then I may selectively delete the stupid bits. Or I’ll simply ignore the whole thing.

I didn’t skip over it. I showed how it was wrong.
[/quote]

If she’s been dragged into court multiple times over the same reason over the last 15 years, then yes, it’s persistent.



Nope.

And the rest of this is irrelevant attempts to tell me what I am thinking and the usual whining about “believers.” Tossed into the scrap heap and ignored. As it will be going forward.

Jeff (numbers) wrote:

Rudolf Hoess who was tortured for at leas three days before he signed a confession. Curious how he signed a confession supposedly written by him in English. Curious how he confessed to being responsible for the deaths of 3.5 million people even though the current number of "victims" has been reduced to 1.5 million. Even though his guards bragged about how they "prodded" (read beat the sh!t out him) with axe handles as part of a sleep deprivation program.

You betcha', Jeff, Hoess's confession is the cornerstone of the entire holyhoax fable. Especially the four million victims at Auschwitz...oh wait a minute...he really meant the 1 to 1.5 million victims. Maybe you should try one of Nessie's excuses. Three and a half million was just a minor mistake. Perhaps he was just using "emotive language" because he was so traumatized by the enormity of his crime. Perhaps he was just exaggerating; bragging on his murderous feats. At any rate, Hoess is no doubt the most honest and credible witness of the entire holyhoax...or something.