[Donald E. Pauly]

For newcomers and those like Bev who have not read this thread, I repost an interesting analysis by Hadding. He keeps figuring stuff out before I do. It is not clear whether he is a lucky guesser or has some secret that I have not figured out. He correctly observed that Jew trafficking in White women was old news 20 years ago. Steele never did claim that he was investigating such trafficking. Hadding sees a sinister motive in the Steele cheerleaders. All is does it give -JC an excuse for off topic posts. It would be better if he posted on the Tooth Fairy's antics.

Originally Posted by Hadding

What issue is it on which Ed Steele has posed such a threat?

http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t...4&page=92#1837

June 20th, 2011 #1837
Hadding
Senior Member

Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,653

The Jewish involvement in trafficking women is already so well known that the State of Israel has had the United Nations breathing down its neck about it.

The notion that anything Ed Steele could say would significantly add to the controversy is ridiculous. If anything, the Jews would just say, Aha! Here is the proof that this is an anti-Semitic canard because the Aryan Nations' lawyer Ed Steele is saying it! The message would be: Ed Steele = Aryan Nations = kook. And they could get away with that characterization, since if you surveyed 1000 Americans at random you would be lucky to find even one that has a vague idea of who Steele is.

I don't believe that it would even get to that level, though, because frankly Steele is boring and not likely to attract much attention. Assuming that Steele's book did contain something damaging, all the Jews would have to do to suppress the book would be to refrain from promoting it.

I understand that you have to grossly overstate Steele's influence in order to make the frame-up conspiracy-theory that has been parroted for the past year seem slightly credible.

You might want to consider also that some of those promoting the frame-up conspiracy-theory may have had less-than-pure motives.

I think for some the motive has been simply that it is easier to tell people what they want to hear than to try to get them to heed reason. There is a segment of the WN public that thrives on stories of conspiracy and persecution. Perhaps it would reduce sales, donations, and listenership to buck the current by telling these people that they are wrong, especially since the consequence might be that these lunatics would denounce the one that tried to get them to reason. It's so much easier to go along with the crowd.

But consider this too: it is not in the interest of WN to take a violently antagonistic posture toward the government. That would be self-destructive, since the government can crush us if we give them an adequate excuse. This kind of drama encourages that kind of dangerous posture.

So far as "putting the man away" is concerned, the Mission Impossible defense and all the people who supported it have accomplished that.