Germany "Convicts" Bishop Williamson
#31
(04-16-2010, 06:34 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote:
(04-16-2010, 03:20 PM)Bonifacius Wrote:
(04-16-2010, 03:17 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote: No one minds censorship. Censorship for Catholic ends is a good thing. For Jewish ends it's a bad thing,

But a lot of people are completely disinterested and see this as censorship for the sake of sanity and against Naziism, not for the sake of Jewish interests. 

Any public figures you could name?

Pope Benedict XVI.  I bet he *SINCERELY* believes that 6,000,000 Jews were killed and views it as a matter of truth not to let the numbers be diminished.  That is over and above his concern for Jewish opinion. 

And I was NOT talking about politicians who need to worry about Jewish opinion.  Millions of people who don't give a damn about Jewish opinion have been taught and accept that, as surely as Abe Lincoln really lived, 6,000,000 Jews died in the Holocaust.  To question this does indeed cause them as much consternation as if someone were to deny that blacks were ever slaves or that Communism was bad, etc.  At worse, you could call these people ignorant.  But not malicious. 
Reply
#32
Then it is our duty to inform them that they've been hood winked.
Reply
#33
I guess what it comes down to, regardless of the legitimate worry of playing into the hands of Nazis (the few that are left in the world), is if Bishop Williamson did his research and is right. I agree that it's possible that people can be motivated by nothing necessarily sinister in believing the official account of the Holocaust.
Reply
#34
(04-16-2010, 07:03 PM)stvincentferrer Wrote: I guess what it comes down to, regardless of the legitimate worry of playing into the hands of Nazis (the few that are left in the world), is if Bishop Williamson did his research and is right. I agree that it's possible that people can be motivated by nothing necessarily sinister in believing the official account of the Holocaust.

Well, I know this much.  If his research into German atrocities during WWII is as shoddy and stupid as his research into September 11, then he is wrong.  Granted, there is an awful lot of historical distortion, such as surrounded the Crusades and the Inquisition.  But even there, the atrocities that accompanied the Crusaders' sack of Jerusalem and of Constantinople cannot be denied.  Hopefully, Bishop Williamson has just followed his contrarian streak past the point of legitimacy.  But a lot of people will look at this and see it as invidious to the memory of the victims of Naziism. 
Reply
#35
(04-16-2010, 07:07 PM)Bonifacius Wrote: But even there, the atrocities that accompanied the Crusaders' sack of Jerusalem and of Constantinople cannot be denied. 

I wouldn't call them "Crusaders" when they attacked Constantinople because they weren't even supposed to be there. A mass abandonment of the mission is just "desertion" not a reflection on the original mission.
Reply
#36
(04-16-2010, 07:01 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: Then it is our duty to inform them that they've been hood winked.

That's just what Bishop Williamson said in his sermon in which he said that the Twin Towers were brought down by explosives.  So I guess it's also Bishop Williamson's job to inform you that you've been hoodwinked, because that's exactly what he thinks of everyone who thinks that planes flown by Mohammedans downed those buildings.  I think that example pretty much shows why Bishop Williamson is not the man to be out there un-hoodwinking people.  



He too is hoodwinked, and he is fanatical on the subject.  
Reply
#37
(04-16-2010, 07:11 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote:
(04-16-2010, 07:07 PM)Bonifacius Wrote: But even there, the atrocities that accompanied the Crusaders' sack of Jerusalem and of Constantinople cannot be denied. 

I wouldn't call them "Crusaders" when they attacked Constantinople because they weren't even supposed to be there. A mass abandonment of the mission is just "desertion" not a reflection on the original mission.

This is true.  I stand corrected.  But men who had gone out on Crusade managed to become so corrupt as to desert and commit these atrocities. 
Reply
#38
No the difference is bonifacius is the jews themselves at certain places and certain times have lowered their sacred number. Yet people r punished for actually chalanging the montrosity f it all. So one can just use the jews numbers and show it can't be fact if it keeps changing.
Now for u to say its the same of 911 u nust show that ever since 911 the gov has first said it was mohams then said it it controlled demolishin then said it was alians and through all this the numbers and locations keep changing with the facts. Once it was fact lamp shades were made with jewish fleshm false
Once it was fact that assembly lines would break skulls with hammers false
It doesn't take allot of work to show people hhow such a story can change so many times yet still remain fact.
Reply
#39
(04-16-2010, 07:20 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: No the difference is bonifacius is the jews themselves at certain places and certain times have lowered their sacred number. Yet people r punished for actually chalanging the montrosity f it all. So one can just use the jews numbers and show it can't be fact if it keeps changing.
Now for u to say its the same of 911 u nust show that ever since 911 the gov has first said it was mohams then said it it controlled demolishin then said it was alians and through all this the numbers and locations keep changing with the facts. Once it was fact lamp shades were made with jewish fleshm false
Once it was fact that assembly lines would break skulls with hammers false
It doesn't take allot of work to show people hhow such a story can change so many times yet still remain fact.

So do you agree that Bishop Williamson is not a reliable judge of historical matters.  He does not admit the distinction you just made between the two cases.  He is emphatic about 9-11. 
Reply
#40
Bonifacius, do you reject 9/11 being an "inside job" after studying the issue from both sides?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)