|
July 14th, 2008 | #641 |
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
|
Face it, Slammy duece, you'll never be anything more than bug juice on the windshield of her life!
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together. |
July 14th, 2008 | #642 |
gassed at least 5 times
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Wolzek (get it?)
Posts: 1,176
|
She's the dog shit I try to avoid.
__________________
RabbitNoMore But all jews do speak in absolutes though. Just like you. ----------- Define idiot |
July 14th, 2008 | #643 |
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
|
Since when do kikes try to avoid shit?
Generally you revel in it!
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together. |
July 14th, 2008 | #644 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
|
Free speech; the discerning recognize it as a self regulating paradigm; it allows intelligence and stupidity to parade.
Is there a dogshit that you seek out, Slameth?
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
|
July 15th, 2008 | #645 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
July 15th, 2008 | #646 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
|
Quote:
|
|
July 15th, 2008 | #647 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: TriState
Posts: 7,208
|
could it be?
|
July 15th, 2008 | #648 | |||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
|
Quote:
Quote:
Is the above correct, Mr. Gerdes, or is it not? YES or NO? Quote:
What happens then? I’ll tell you: regardless of what has been published in SKEPTIC or ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, hoaxer Gerdes will say that the challenge requirements have not been met and he will therefore not pay a cent. Then I might consider opening a lawsuit and having a court of law decide whether or not the requirements of the challenge have been objectively met by the proof published in SKEPTIC or ARCHAEOLOGY magazine. However, as Gerdes can point to his recent "clarification" and argue that meeting the challenge requirements does not grant a legally valid and enforceable claim to the reward, trying to obtain the reward money in court would be a waste of time. I might obtain a moral victory if the court finds that the proof submitted objectively meets the challenge requirements, but I will never see a cent of the reward because Gerdes never made a binding commitment to pay the reward in case the challenge requirements are met by proof published in SKEPTIC or ARCHAEOLOGY magazine. Is that so or is it not, Mr. Gerdes? YES or NO? If "YES", you’ll have confirmed (if that confirmation was still necessary) that your challenge is a hoax. If "NO", i.e. if I should have misunderstood you (which I don’t think is the case), then please expressly confirm that submitting proof which objectively meets the requirements of the challenge will grant the applicant a legally valid and enforceable claim to the reward. This means that if the reward is not paid, the applicant can claim the payment before a court of law, the respondent in such lawsuit being the association called NAFCASH and, assuming that law holds Gerdes liable for the association’s debts, also the private citizen Greg Gerdes. Quote:
Quote:
I’d say any attorney and any court of law would slap that assertion around your ears, Mr. Gerdes. What you may argue is that the above clarification should have been on the NAFCASH site from the very start, for whoever might consider the challenge to be clear about what the conditions are. As I already made understood in post # 624 under http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...&postcount=624 , my issue is not what the amount of the reward is on the day the required article in SKEPTIC or ARCHAEOLOGY magazine is published. It will be what it will be then. What I want to make sure is that the requirements for claiming the reward, whatever its amount, will still be the same on that day. So again my question, Mr. Gerdes: Present requirements for the main reward: Proof of a specific mass grave’s exact location and its exact dimensions, and proof that the grave in question contains the remains of at least one percent of the victims murdered at the respective camp according to the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. Present requirements for the "bonus" The mass grave must be from Sobibor, and the applicant (who must be one of a limited number of named individuals) must furthermore prove that the mound of ashes of the victims of the Sobibor extermination camp on the Sobibor memorial site, pictured below: is actually a mound of human ashes, i.e. that it consists of or is filled with human ashes. Are the above unchangeable "fundamental requirements of laying claim to the reward offered" in the sense of your above-quoted addition, Mr. Gerdes? Two answers to this question are possible: Answer 1: YES, the present requirements of the challenge described above are unchangeable "fundamental requirements of laying claim to the reward offered", which will be the same on the day proof to meet the requirements is published in SKEPTIC or ARCHAEOLOGY magazine, whenever that happens, as they are today. Answer 2: NO, NAFCASH is free to expand these requirements or otherwise shift the goalposts whenever they feel like doing so. So which is it, Mr. Gerdes? Answer 1 or Answer 2? Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||
July 15th, 2008 | #649 | |||
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
|
Quote:
Quote:
...It is simply a fact. That's a judge, in a kangaroo court, stating Jewish law. The proof is right there. Quote:
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
|
|||
July 15th, 2008 | #650 | ||||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
|
Quote:
a) Prof. Kola did not or not only locate the mass graves by probe drilling (of which one would not expect anything to be visible on a posterior video) but (also) carried out excavations; b) What excavations he did were excavations of the whole area of every grave and not just small probing excavations to obtain some further information about what the drilling had revealed; c) What excavations he did were not covered up for protection against being disturbed by the weather or by people at the end of the investigation. Quote:
Quote:
The news agency speaks of “excavating”, but news agencies are often wrong about what they report. It may also be that Reuters used the term in a broader sense that includes core drilling. Prof. Kola’s "uncovered", on the other hand, may mean drilling (one might say that the Belzec mass graves were uncovered by core drilling, for instance), excavation, or both. We can’t tell from Prof. Kola’s quoted statement, assuming it was correctly translated from Polish. Your fellow true believer quoted in my post # 610 under http://www.vnnforum.com/showpost.php...&postcount=610 mentioned only probe drilling, unless I missed something: Quote:
If there was no excavation instead of or following the probe drillings, the likeliest possibility is that Reuters either considered core drilling a form of excavating or got their information wrong, not that Kola falsely claimed to have done something he had not done. Quote:
Quote:
Just keep exposing your nervousness and making a fool of yourself with your infantile "have you already this-and-that" questions, Mr. Gerdes. I’m enjoying the show. |
||||||
July 15th, 2008 | #651 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
|
Quote:
If he had left out the invective and the imbecile pretense that what he will now clarify is evident from what is presently stated on his website, one might even suspect that he was having a lucid moment. |
|
July 15th, 2008 | #652 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The quote refers to Section 452(h) of the California Evidence Code, the text of which you find under http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/ca...ebody=&hits=20 . Section 452, see under http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...0&file=450-460 , has the following wording (emphases added): Quote:
|
|||||
July 15th, 2008 | #653 | ||||
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
|
Quote:
Feigning ignorance; pretending not to understand is what a liar does as a last resort. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
|
||||
July 15th, 2008 | #654 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,001
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
July 15th, 2008 | #655 | |||
Member
|
[quote]
Quote:
So, Holocaustian Priest, I do not believe your "high court" - the evidence is shoddy; based entirely upon "eyewitness" reports - and no court I respect convicts and condemns based solely on 'eyewitnesses' - for they each have a different version of the crime and the criminal. Physical Evidence, forensic and scientific, ect, and proof beyond reasonable doubt, must back up all eyewitness versions. You ought to be glad that there are Folks who care enough to deny the holocaust. Most folks my age are indifferent to it, and indifference is the highest form of rejection. In the case of Holocaustianity, indifference should be fought. Despite the fact that questioning the holocaust is the jews biggest fear, they would indeed prefer indifference since they are not challenged by it; no, jews and Holocaustians need to be held accountable for their Lies and deceit re the Hoax. And, they will continue to be forced to address the questions raised by Revisionists. For, this is one jewish lie that cannot be made into a religion; a theme based on belief, faith and acceptance. As the truth becomes more exposed, Holocaustian, your fakery will fall down like a house of cards. And, that is the jews greatest fear. Not that people will forget; but that they will no longer believe, when the evidence or "articles of faith" prove to be false and an outright lie. Revisionists have created more than reasonable doubt; they have proven the Lie. It's up to you Holocaustians to shore up your faith by evidence and proof. For whether you like it or not, Holocaustianity is not a faith. It is not to be accepted at face value as some holy truth - concocted by the juden as emissaries from from their desert god. Facts, evidence, dna, Proof based upon logic - not belief - are required and, due to the enormity of the Lie, and the heavy price America and Europe paid and continue to pay at the altar of Holocaustianity, the proof had best be above reproach or question - there will be hell for you pay in the near future if you jews do not do this. You will FINALLY get your holocaust. A real one, one that will not have to be made up. And, there will be no eyewitnesses left to lie. This is my generation speaking. You Holocaustians have to answer to us now. And, we have been exposed to all the propaganda, every lie. And, still we do not believe. A survey was conducted on Eastern University campuses, re whether one 'believed' in the 'Caust - I do not recall the exact percentage of those who wrote no, and added a short essay as to why they could not believe [lack of evidence, too much hype, illogical; ect] - but the majority who did enter "no" was overwhelming. This is what you Holocaustians are up against, and these are the folks the Revisionists are to be writing for. We are the future and the future belongs to us. Quote:
Quote:
It's coming. The worm has turned for the jews. Last edited by EireannGoddess; July 15th, 2008 at 09:03 AM. |
|||
July 15th, 2008 | #656 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,046
|
Quote:
|
|
July 15th, 2008 | #657 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
|
I thought I would share the latest email exchange I had with Roberta:
Roberta wrote: This is about whether or not the requirements that must be met by whatever you mean by "proof" - and if you keep yelling that the term is self-evident I'm entitled to conclude that you submit to reasonable standards of proof, i.e. those that are applied in criminal investigation and historical research - will be frozen for the purpose of my future submission of evidence to the challenge. By requirements I mean the following: Requirements for the main reward: [quote]You must prove the grave’s exact location and its exact dimensions - however, to qualify for the reward; You need only to prove that the grave contains the remains of just one percent of the alleged mass murder.[quote] Requirements for the "bonus": Mass grave must be from Sobibor + applicant (from limited number of named individuals) must furthermore «prove that Sobibors alleged “giant pile of human ash” is actually composed of human ash». This is not about the amount of the reward. It is also not about what evidence is considered by you to meet the challenge requirements. It's only about the challenge requirements themselves, about what one must prove to be "eligible" for your reward. Greg Gerdes replied: This will not change: You must prove the grave’s exact location and its exact dimensions - however, to qualify for the reward; You need only to prove that the grave contains the remains of just one percent of the alleged mass murder. The Sobibor bonus reward will read: * $5,000.00 SOBIBOR BONUS REWARD! - If the winner of THE FINAL SOLUTION FORENSIC CHALLENGE TM does so via Sobibor, NAFCASH TM will donate $5,000.00 in the winners name to the – SOBIBOR ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT if said winner can also prove that Sobibors alleged “giant pile / mountain of human ash” is actually comprised of human ash. And will not change. Your brain damage / mental illness / low IQ severely impairs your ability to communicate effectively Roberta. Maybe in the future you can have your mommy assist you with your communications? |
July 15th, 2008 | #658 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
|
Roberta:
Quote:
The very simple requirement of having any such alleged proof vetted by "Skeptic" and Archaeology magazines is intended to limit those who lay claim to the reward to serious applicants only. What I didn't want to happen is to have every mentally ill / retarded holocaustian in the world bothering me with "proof" that in no way, shape or form could be considered proof by any sane / rational human being. But, as anyone can see, that isn't exactly the case, because as Roberta has shown, certain mentally ill / brain damaged / low IQ people can still try to get around my "only serious applicants only please" attempt by simply wishing that certain requirements are what she wants them to be. Apparently, Roberta doesn't have the mental capacity to understand the difference between becoming eligible to lay claim to a reward and meeting the requirements necessary to receive a reward. Only a jew / mental ill... Roberta: Quote:
If in fact you do meet the requirements to receive the reward, you will receive the reward. Roberta: Quote:
Roberta: Quote:
|
||||
July 15th, 2008 | #659 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,129
|
Let's remind Retardo again of this simple fact:
Quote:
|
|
July 15th, 2008 | #660 | |||||
Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 535
|
Quote:
Substantiation is apparent to the honest reader, biased or not. This self deception is habitual; a means of not having to admit error. Thus you stand, untouchable, above all others including international Jewry's think tanks, which insist on censorship. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Fear not the path of truth for the lack of those upon it.
|
|||||
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|