RD was offended and bummed out that 911Blogger wouldn't publicize the conference; was he being blacklisted for some reason? I didn't think so. I knew that Barrett bad been removed from the 911Blogger blogroll back in May of this year, so I suspected this involved only Barrett.
And I was right. The administrator, "Reprehensor" (who, it turns out, met RD at the Vancouver conference a couple years ago), phoned RD today to explain that three people have been permanently blacklisted from 911Blogger:
1. Bill Deagle. For being an all-around whackjob. Talks about bioplasmatic astral entities, micronukes bringing down the World Trade Center towers, and modified attack baboons. Claims he's one of the two witnesses described in the book of Revelation, and that Pindar the Reptilian Overlord asked him to be his understudy on three occasions.
2. Alfred Webre. For believing in ultra-weird sh** like "time travel whistleblowers" and the "black nobility" (Danish and Belgian Satanists who secretly control almost everything). I asked him to clarify his definition of the Black Nobility in Vancouver, and he just mumbled something like, "Well, um, they're Danish. And they're Satanists." Later he called me an "accessory after the fact to war crimes" because I questioned his contention that chemtrails are designed to make people more suggestible. (He told us at the conference that Vancouver had been sprayed heavily in the days leading up to the conference. Never mind that wind patterns and ever-changing atmospheric conditions wouldn't make such controlled spraying easy or at all practical.)
3. Kevin Barrett. For dissing the site on at least one occasion, co-hosting a radio show with Professor Jim "Holographic Airplanes" Fetzer, and having guests like John Lear and Laura Knight-Jadczyk (an alleged alien contactee/cult leader/scam artist) on his shows.
RD was surprised by the inclusion of Webre, because he was actually quite impressed by Webre's plan to set up a Citizen's 9/11 Tribunal. Nothing has come of that concept so far, however, and when I told RD more about Webre's beliefs in the Black Nobility, "walk-ins" (people who are possessed by aliens), time-travel whistleblowers, children who can kill with the power of their minds, etc., he finally decided it would be best to remove the dude from his Facebook list.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Raining on the Parade
I'd forgotten how difficult it can be to take an ethical stance when everyone around you either doesn't want to address the issues, or doesn't give a shit about them. It makes me wonder why I even bother. It won't change anything, and I'll just be branded a meddlesome bitch who's trying to undermine everyone's hard work.
Barrett sent an email to RD yesterday in which he insisted that nearly everything in his Wikipedia entry (aside from his birthdate) is incorrect, and that he didn't write the infamous Holocaust letter. But then he went on to say that when he referred to the Holocaust as a "myth", he meant "myth" in the scholarly, academic sense, just as 9/11 is a myth. But wait. Didn't he say he didn't write the letter?! So where and when did he refer to Holocaust education as a "myth"?! And he's a Truther, so clearly he believes that the conventional knowledge of 9/11 is a real myth, right? I'm more confused than ever.
I'm also more disturbed about Holocaust denialism and anti-semitism within the Truth movement. My digging yesterday unearthed more examples:
- Eric D. Williams was the original organizer of the 2007 9/11 Accountability conference in Chandler, AZ, until controversy over his book The Puzzle of Auschwitz surfaced. But he still attended the conference, and panelists fiercely defended him against charges of denialism, demanding that a journalist who asked questions about his involvement in the conference be removed. This, despite the fact that Sander Hicks spotted a swastika on his laptop screensaver. While he doesn't want to be called a denier, Williams believes Treblinka and two other camps never existed and that Auschwitz was a comfy place complete with a swimming pool for prisoners (it was actually for guards). On the Meria radio show, he asked the usual revisionist questions: Why was the plaque at Auschwitz changed from 1.1 million to 6 million? How could the ovens have cremated so many bodies?
Is his book a scholarly examination of the Holocaust, though? You decide. It references Institute for Historical Review material and David Icke.
- Truth activist Don Harkins of Idaho defended David Duke for attending a denial conference in Tehran in 2006.
- Eric Hufschmid wrote one of the first books on 9/11 Truth, Painful Questions. Hufschmid refuses to self-identify as a Holocaust denier, but his other work speaks for itself. Most disturbingly, Truthers still reference and defend Painful Questions and set aside the issue of Hufschmid's other opinions as "irrelevant". One such Truther is Kevin Barrett. As late as last year, he asked Amy Goodman to sign his copy of the book (she politely declined, but told him she supports a new investigation into 9/11). This was right before he said she should be convicted of war crimes and publicly hung (he later apologized for the hyperbole, but not the statements themselves).
- Captain Eric May writes on "the Jewish problem" and the "Zionist-controlled media". He also regularly issues false flag operation warnings that turn out to be bunk. May insists he's not anti-semitic (are you noticing a pattern here?), because he's referring to a minority of Jews and also criticizes Christian Zionists.
All of these people are still embraced by the majority of Truthers. I'm getting the feeling that when Barrett's attendance at this conference is put to a vote this weekend, I'll forever after be known not as the person who took a stand against what I know to be wrong (affiliation with anti-semitism and Holocaust denial, questioning the reality of the Holocaust), but as the bitch who ruined this wonderful conference and tried to silence the voice of Truth. Even RD argued that he doesn't know anything about Hufschmid, so why should it matter what else he believes? Why shouldn't his work be held in esteem alongside David Ray Griffin's? He argued that nearly every Truther holds some aberrant belief that others could find objectionable (Mormonism, UFOs, God-like powers in the case of David Shayler, etc.), so why should someone be ignored on the basis of their beliefs or questions about the Holocaust?
I don't know. They just should. When it comes to Holocaust denial, racism, hate, etc., all bets are off for me. I have a line in the sand. Barrett, to my mind, has crossed it. I want nothing to do with him. Period.
Barrett sent an email to RD yesterday in which he insisted that nearly everything in his Wikipedia entry (aside from his birthdate) is incorrect, and that he didn't write the infamous Holocaust letter. But then he went on to say that when he referred to the Holocaust as a "myth", he meant "myth" in the scholarly, academic sense, just as 9/11 is a myth. But wait. Didn't he say he didn't write the letter?! So where and when did he refer to Holocaust education as a "myth"?! And he's a Truther, so clearly he believes that the conventional knowledge of 9/11 is a real myth, right? I'm more confused than ever.
I'm also more disturbed about Holocaust denialism and anti-semitism within the Truth movement. My digging yesterday unearthed more examples:
- Eric D. Williams was the original organizer of the 2007 9/11 Accountability conference in Chandler, AZ, until controversy over his book The Puzzle of Auschwitz surfaced. But he still attended the conference, and panelists fiercely defended him against charges of denialism, demanding that a journalist who asked questions about his involvement in the conference be removed. This, despite the fact that Sander Hicks spotted a swastika on his laptop screensaver. While he doesn't want to be called a denier, Williams believes Treblinka and two other camps never existed and that Auschwitz was a comfy place complete with a swimming pool for prisoners (it was actually for guards). On the Meria radio show, he asked the usual revisionist questions: Why was the plaque at Auschwitz changed from 1.1 million to 6 million? How could the ovens have cremated so many bodies?
Is his book a scholarly examination of the Holocaust, though? You decide. It references Institute for Historical Review material and David Icke.
- Truth activist Don Harkins of Idaho defended David Duke for attending a denial conference in Tehran in 2006.
- Eric Hufschmid wrote one of the first books on 9/11 Truth, Painful Questions. Hufschmid refuses to self-identify as a Holocaust denier, but his other work speaks for itself. Most disturbingly, Truthers still reference and defend Painful Questions and set aside the issue of Hufschmid's other opinions as "irrelevant". One such Truther is Kevin Barrett. As late as last year, he asked Amy Goodman to sign his copy of the book (she politely declined, but told him she supports a new investigation into 9/11). This was right before he said she should be convicted of war crimes and publicly hung (he later apologized for the hyperbole, but not the statements themselves).
- Captain Eric May writes on "the Jewish problem" and the "Zionist-controlled media". He also regularly issues false flag operation warnings that turn out to be bunk. May insists he's not anti-semitic (are you noticing a pattern here?), because he's referring to a minority of Jews and also criticizes Christian Zionists.
All of these people are still embraced by the majority of Truthers. I'm getting the feeling that when Barrett's attendance at this conference is put to a vote this weekend, I'll forever after be known not as the person who took a stand against what I know to be wrong (affiliation with anti-semitism and Holocaust denial, questioning the reality of the Holocaust), but as the bitch who ruined this wonderful conference and tried to silence the voice of Truth. Even RD argued that he doesn't know anything about Hufschmid, so why should it matter what else he believes? Why shouldn't his work be held in esteem alongside David Ray Griffin's? He argued that nearly every Truther holds some aberrant belief that others could find objectionable (Mormonism, UFOs, God-like powers in the case of David Shayler, etc.), so why should someone be ignored on the basis of their beliefs or questions about the Holocaust?
I don't know. They just should. When it comes to Holocaust denial, racism, hate, etc., all bets are off for me. I have a line in the sand. Barrett, to my mind, has crossed it. I want nothing to do with him. Period.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
I'm Out
The Truth conference here is just 3 weeks away, and as of today I have completely removed myself from every aspect of it. I was going to help out where needed on the day of the conference, despite my distaste for some of the comments made by Kevin Barrett about Amy Goodman and others (he hopes to see them tried for war crimes and publicly hung). But looking deeper into his thoughts on the Holocaust, I am sickened. I was already aware of the email in which he referred to Holocaust education as a "destructive myth" and said he could "not dismiss the claims of Green, Irving, even Zundel". That was bad enough. Now I have learned that, when he was still head of the Muslim Jewish Christian Alliance, he regularly posted the boy-who-cried-wolf "false flag operation" warnings of Captain Eric May... a guy who writes about "the Jewish problem" and the "Zionist-controlled media".
He also (in a Feb. 2007 newsletter) referenced Bin Laden's denial of 9/11 involvement via public-action.com and Carol A. Valentine. This website is full of Holocaust revisionist links (Barnes Review, IHR, Zundelsite, etc.) and features a page on "The American Coup d'Etat and the War for Jewish Supremacy". The most disturbing aspect of this is that Barrett could have gotten the same info from a number of non-revisionist sites, including Prison Planet and 911Review.com.
An anti-Truther in the area has already contacted the conference venue to warn them that a "Holocaust Denier" will be in attendance, and he reports (truthfully?) that the venue owners will halt the conference if any Holocaust-related statements are uttered. This has caused some stress to R. and the other promoters, who hired Barrett strictly for his 9/11 expertise. R. points out to me, correctly, that Barrett is scheduled to speak about covert operations in relation to 9/11, not WWII or anything related to it. That's true. It is also true that Barrett founded and headed the MUJCA as an interfaith organization, that he denies being anti-Semitic and has even expressed disdain for anti-Semitism.
But I am deeply, deeply disturbed by the number of connections between Barrett and the revisionist/denialist movement. I want no part of this conference and will not be attending or supporting it in any way from this day forward. Whatever R. and the other organizers decide to do about this is their own business; R. is planning to call an emergency meeting and put Barrett's participation in the conference to a vote.
My decision is made.
He also (in a Feb. 2007 newsletter) referenced Bin Laden's denial of 9/11 involvement via public-action.com and Carol A. Valentine. This website is full of Holocaust revisionist links (Barnes Review, IHR, Zundelsite, etc.) and features a page on "The American Coup d'Etat and the War for Jewish Supremacy". The most disturbing aspect of this is that Barrett could have gotten the same info from a number of non-revisionist sites, including Prison Planet and 911Review.com.
An anti-Truther in the area has already contacted the conference venue to warn them that a "Holocaust Denier" will be in attendance, and he reports (truthfully?) that the venue owners will halt the conference if any Holocaust-related statements are uttered. This has caused some stress to R. and the other promoters, who hired Barrett strictly for his 9/11 expertise. R. points out to me, correctly, that Barrett is scheduled to speak about covert operations in relation to 9/11, not WWII or anything related to it. That's true. It is also true that Barrett founded and headed the MUJCA as an interfaith organization, that he denies being anti-Semitic and has even expressed disdain for anti-Semitism.
But I am deeply, deeply disturbed by the number of connections between Barrett and the revisionist/denialist movement. I want no part of this conference and will not be attending or supporting it in any way from this day forward. Whatever R. and the other organizers decide to do about this is their own business; R. is planning to call an emergency meeting and put Barrett's participation in the conference to a vote.
My decision is made.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
