|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 5, 2022 16:06:27 GMT
..you think I don’t consider issues with witnesses when I read history? What a fascinating dodge! 😮 And to such a simple question. You do this little thing where you insist on “yes or no” answers. I’m sorry if you think I’m going to play along. I’ll answer how I see fit but thanks for playing. The next bit is you yammering about mindset. As I warned you, anything attempting to discuss my mindset or read my mind will be discarded and ignored. If I see “mindset” then my assumption will be you trying your usual BS about psychoanalyzing someone you simply don’t know. What deniers do is attempt to twist the meanings of documents to suit their particular need. But calling something an air raid shelter with no supporting statements or documents doesn’t make it an air raid shelter. It’s just a wild guess. I have deleted all the irrelevant crap about hating, etc. As was stated previously, all attempts to discuss my mindset, what I believe, how I think, etc. It’s irrelevant and the usual garbage been-there tactic. You can write it, I will not read or respond to it and it will be deleted in my follow up. Because it’s simply not true. Now, I permitted this but just to be clear: No, I’m not amused by Germany wasting its time prosecuting an old woman. I am amused by the “Nazi grandma” name. Now that is clear, any attempt by been-there to tell me that I find the thought of imprisoning an old woman amusing will be deleted and discarded. I have made my position on this clear. Any attempt to read my mind or tell me what I am feeling will be deleted and discarded. Been there can write it. I’m under no obligation to respond or acknowledge it. I’m under no obligation to include it in my reply. You are certainly welcome to call it “persecution” if you like but that is an opinion. The fact is what she is engaging in is illegal under German law. Germany will enforce its laws regardless how you or I feel about them. This last bit falls under the conditions I set above.
|
|
|
Post by been_there on May 5, 2022 17:18:26 GMT
What a fascinating dodge! 😮 And to such a simple question. You do this little thing where you insist on “yes or no” answers. First Jeff denies gives an answer that refers to the exaggerations and lies inherent in Holocaust lore as a ”denier’ thing. Then when asked if he can not admit a few named individuals famously lied and exaggerated, he dodges the question. Now again, its not him dodging a simple question. No, no. Instead he sees it as some kind of trick! 😮🙄 Then after a ”last warning” regarding exposing how his replies here show his avoidance and denial, he gives another warning in yet another reply about ”mind-reading’. It’s bizarre! He wants to express his thoughts, but exposing the logical inconsitency of them is verboten! And with multiple ”warnings”’!! Hmm? Back onto what others are doing and thinking. Othersvwho he doesn’t know! Erm.... is that not ’mind-reading’ then? No. Apparently that is what others do when they expose his racist disregard of persecuting an old lady for thought-crimes four and six years ago. Anyway, back to further warnings... 🙂 It is clear to me Jeff is in denial about his antipathy to Ursula Haverbeck. I don’t expect him now to see it. It’s obviously not something he is proud of, so is trying to disown it. But his words here remain. And as was noticed by others, his schadenfreude was obvious. The hypocrisy is evidently not something H-believers like being pointed out to them, nor can easily to admit to.
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 5, 2022 18:32:21 GMT
You do this little thing where you insist on “yes or no” answers. First Jeff denies gives an answer that refers to the exaggerations and lies inherent in Holocaust lore as a ”denier’ thing. Then when asked if he can not admit a few named individuals famously lied and exaggerated, he dodges the question. Now again, its not him dodging a simple question. No, no. Instead he sees it as some kind of trick! 😮🙄 No, it’s just the standard been-there BS where you pose something or ask a close ended question. I will answer how I choose and the manner of my choosing. Period. Your acceptance is not required. I answered in a clear fashion. You can accept it or not. I’ve deleted the irrelevant twaddle and continued on with the relevant part. You are under the mistaken impression that I haven’t read denier authors and the stuff they post on-line. Calling a gas chamber an air raid shelter is simply false if there is nothing to back it up. It’s a guess in a silly attempt to change history so to not acknowledge the truth. So when I say deniers calling a gas chamber an air raid shelter a guess then that’s not mind reading, that’s reading and comprehending what they said. A cursory glance shows me this is a been-there rant. If he wishes a discussion about this he can remove the ranting and try again.
|
|
𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸
🕵️
𝕲𝖊𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖕𝖔𝖑𝖎𝖟𝖊𝖎
Posts: 1,457
|
Post by 𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸 on May 5, 2022 22:25:55 GMT
So when I say deniers calling a gas chamber an air raid shelter a guess then that’s not mind reading, that’s reading and comprehending what they said. A cursory glance shows me this is a been-there rant. If he wishes a discussion about this he can remove the ranting and try again. Jeff (numbers) This part of the forum is for friendly discussion, in this case on "Nazi Granny" who is really a political prisoner. If we wish to discuss gas chambers, pits and draglines, we can force ourselves to head to "Nessies" neck of the woods.
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 5, 2022 23:12:39 GMT
So when I say deniers calling a gas chamber an air raid shelter a guess then that’s not mind reading, that’s reading and comprehending what they said. A cursory glance shows me this is a been-there rant. If he wishes a discussion about this he can remove the ranting and try again. Jeff (numbers) This part of the forum is for friendly discussion, in this case on "Nazi Granny" who is really a political prisoner. If we wish to discuss gas chambers, pits and draglines, we can force ourselves to head to "Nessies" neck of the woods. Agreed to the one (off topic comments but I’m not the only one off-topic) but I’ll disagree with political prisoner. She is simply in violation of German law.
|
|
𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸
🕵️
𝕲𝖊𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖕𝖔𝖑𝖎𝖟𝖊𝖎
Posts: 1,457
|
Post by 𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸 on May 5, 2022 23:53:39 GMT
All political prisoners are in violation of some law.
|
|
|
Post by Turnagain on May 6, 2022 4:01:57 GMT
LOL! Suuuuure, Jeffy, Hoess taught himself perfect English while a prisoner 20 years previously so that it became his preferred language. Of course he used English to admit his guilt of mass murder. Everyone believes that.
Jeff wrote:
Curious that he used a number from Eichmann when he actually knew the exact number of victims at A-B that were killed there during his tenure as commandant. Tell us, Jeff, why did he do that?
Of course Hoess's confession wasn't a cornerstone of the holyhoax fable. Just a minor detail that went almost unnoticed amongst all the other "evidence". It wasn't considered "sensational" even by the marsupial escapades at Nuremberg. The documents from the Polish underground, the steam chambers of Treblinka and so on were considered to be much more damning of the Germans.
Jeff claims that Hoess knew the correct number of gassing victims at A-B but preferred to testify what Eichmann told him. He then disputed that number but Jeff doesn't say when or what the actual numbers were. Neither does Jeff explain why Hoess, who both spoke and wrote perfect English was tortured for at least three days to obtain that confession. Why was that necessary, Jeff, and why was a confession made under duress allowed as evidence at the Nuremberg marsupial escapades?
Only a moron would accept Hoess's "confession" as being a true account but then I am dealing with Jeffy (numbers).
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 6, 2022 5:25:53 GMT
All political prisoners are in violation of some law. But how is she a political prisoner when what she believes is some silly conspiracy?
|
|
|
Post by been_there on May 6, 2022 5:33:11 GMT
I doubt anyone has not noticed there is a trial ongoing between two ‘celebrities’ fighting each other to protect their reputations. The case is about domestic physical abuse. And both are accusing the other of it.
Because they are ‘celebrities’ the msm are giving it prominent, day-by-day One aspect of the trial that I doubt many will give much thought to, I believe exposes the lies and denial of Jeff-numbers in his continued hate-motivated approval of the persecution of Ursula Haverbeck for comments she made 4 and 6 years ago.
Persistent persecution, which Jeff dishonestly asserts is due to her ’persistent’ law-breaking.
Here is what I see as the relevant aspect in the two trials to Jeff’s dishonest argument and denial. Both the celebrity actors have discussed openly their own and each others ILLEGAL drug habits of THE PAST!!!
Question: So why weren’t they both arrested and charged for illegal drug possession! Answer: Er, could it be because it happened in the past? Erm, maybe 4 and 6 years ago?
Racist, anti-German, hate-motivated, person-in-denial: ’No. The law says no possession of illegal drugs. So if the state decides to charge them it IS because they are persisting in breaking US Law.
🙄🤪
|
|
𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸
🕵️
𝕲𝖊𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖕𝖔𝖑𝖎𝖟𝖊𝖎
Posts: 1,457
|
Post by 𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸 on May 6, 2022 5:36:30 GMT
But how is she a political prisoner when what she believes is some silly conspiracy? Some would suggest it is you who believe in a conspiracy, a hoax no less. Nazi Granny was born in 1928, was at the impressionable age of 13 at the height of the third Reich. She was National Socialist, still is. proud of it like so many other Germans today. The law is just an excuse to shut her up and make her pay for non existent sins.
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 6, 2022 6:15:30 GMT
LOL! Suuuuure, Jeffy, Hoess taught himself perfect English while a prisoner 20 years previously so that it became his preferred language. First, you should be grateful that I taught you something that you didn’t know. Second, I didn’t say anything about “perfect” or “preferred.” Work on your reading comprehension, there’s a good fellow. Oh, Turnagain? Insults and related Turnagain garbage will simply be deleted. Who knows? Unlike been-there I don’t claim to be a mind reader. If I had a guess I assume it was an attempt to shift blame to someone conveniently absent at the time. Right, now you are learning. His confession is not a cornerstone to the history of the Holocaust. It’s a piece but not the only piece. The IMT wasn’t based around the Holocaust nor was it a Holocaust trial. It was a trial of the highest members of the Nazi government the Allies had in custody at the time. Sure it was brought up and evidence provided. But it was not centered around it. I’ve forgotten how much you struggle with the basics and how you struggle with reading comprehension. The IMT and subsequent trials used a variety of evidence, from testimony to German documents. Evidence is a piece of the puzzle. Jackson actually preferred that the IMT rely mostly on German documents, he thought documents were more reliable. Oh, yeah, again, I have to walk you through the basics. I’m sorry, Turnagain, I think the people I talk with have at least basic knowledge but I realize with you I need to be a bit more specific. Hoess wrote his memoirs while imprisoned in Poland awaiting his execution so, sometime in the Spring of 1947. This is what Hoess wrote: I forgot that Hoess mentioned he had trouble remembering, mea culpa. He gave that number based upon what he was told by Eichmann which does contradict what he testified to at the IMT. What is interesting is that the number he gave at the IMT and his memoir contradict the number the Soviets gave. I never said his English was “perfect.” You made that up in your head. Only a moron would babble about a confession without considering Hoess’s memoirs plus what other SS personnel said about Auschwitz. Only a moron would solely rely on a confession without considering what Hoess said actually lined up with what documents and other testimony later said.
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 6, 2022 6:51:03 GMT
One aspect of the trial that I doubt many will give much thought to, I’ve barely given that trial a moment’s thought. If she keeps breaking German law then it is persistent…. Courts consider not only what is in front of them but similar convictions that occurred in the past. I gave you a timeline which shows several convictions over the past 15 years or so. It is the definition of persistent. I deleted the silly yammering but just to touch on an actual, semi-valid point: If the couple used drugs repeatedly then we can say they are persistent drug users and abusers….addicts. It’s a pattern of behavior that leads us to that conclusion. Understand? We can call it persistent. Now let’s relate that behavior to arrests. If either one kept getting busted for possession, DUI’s and DWI’s, public intoxication…the court considers that during sentencing. The US actually has classes of defenders that places them under first offense, second offense, third offense…the penalties increase during every step because the person is showing they can’t stop doing the behavior even after penalty. IOW they are engaging in a persistent behavior that keeps getting them arrested. You can see examples here, note fines go up, prison time increases…. wisconsindot.gov/documents/safety/education/drunk-drv/owi-penchrt.pdfI assume Germany does the same. As for why they aren’t arrested during court for admitting to drug use…. I suppose the judge could issue an arrest warrant depending on how long ago the offense was (statute of limitations) but I don’t know why they would. Saying you did drugs a year ago seems like a kinda hazy reason to arrest someone. They were compelled to testify in civil court but the drug use wasn’t why they were testifying. It might be the basis of a search warrant but that seems like an iffy proposition getting a DA to sign off on it and a judge to order it.
|
|
|
Post by 𝐎𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐝 on May 6, 2022 7:13:43 GMT
Gentlemen please keep 'the lounge" for friendly conversation, no animosity please. Discussion of Auschwitz etc can be discussed elsewhere more appropriate. Keep this space reserved for the lady under discussion.
|
|
|
Post by been_there on May 6, 2022 7:17:45 GMT
LOL! Suuuuure, Jeffy, Hoess taught himself perfect English while a prisoner 20 years previously so that it became his preferred language. Who knows? Unlike been-there I don’t claim to be a mind reader... Ha ha! 🤣😅 Well here is proof that Jeff has no legitimate argument. As I have NEVER “claimed” to be a mind-reader. Just the opposite, in fact. I ONLY claimed to be able to read Jeff’s replies. 🙂 So all this dishonest argument, just to avoid simple facts about Ursula Haverbeck’s persecution for past thought-crimes, and Jeff’s hate-motivated illogical insistence that alleged thought-crimes that happened six years ago are ” persistent law-breaking’. Obfuscatory pedantry from the faithful true-believer. As I remember it, Höß’s english was by his own admission, extremely basic. So the FACT being dodged is that he could NOT have dictated the confession in English that he was tortured into signing. The other FACT being dodged, is that confessions made after torture are not accepted as reliable evidence. Er... accept for this holocaust mass-gassing mythology. 🙂 Read more on that here
|
|
|
Post by Turnagain on May 6, 2022 8:22:54 GMT
Jeff (numbers) wrote:
That Hoess wrote his confession in English speaks for his preference for that language over German, his mother tongue. That or the supposed confession beaten out of him by his Jew interrogator is worthless as a factual document. Jeffy stoutly stands up for the validity of a coerced confession and Hoess's preference for English as his principle language.
At any rate, this thread is supposed to be about Ursula Haverbeck and her persecution for speaking the truth. If Jeffy wants to carry on with his Hoess fantasy he can do so in Nessie's forum or start a new thread. I cheerfully admit to not having much interest in the Jew's lies about Auschwitz-Birkenau. The impossibilities described for not only the AR camps but the A-B complex are obvious to anyone except for those with an axe to grind or the most gullible of dimwitted fools.
|
|