And then one day...

[_MissTish]

Before I get any farther into this, I want to put up a disclaimer and state that my wife is Jewish.

Some of my in-laws are Orthodox Jews.

Some of my best friends are black.

[_EAllusion]

Since Smokey is going into a little detail making OG Nazi arguments, think about what he is saying and how that compares to how modern "nationalists" talk about George Soros. Replace this specific Jewish person's name with generic references to the Jews. How do those arguments compare?

[_Res Ipsa]

I note that you still won’t provide any kind of reference or citation that explains the 25,000+ edits.

There will be no citing of something that doesn't exist.

Don't let your weak efforts here paint you as nothing more than a lying neo-nazi stück scheiße. I expect more from someone pretending to be a woke member of the Nu Master Race. Just post your list of edits. Any of them.

Well, that would depend on how one counts the edits. I don’t know how many total editions have been published, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there were around fifty. Suppose you counted edits like this: each difference between the original diary and the loose pages is an edit, each change between the original diary or the loose pages and Otto’s original typed manuscript is an edit, Otto did at least a couple revised drafts of his manuscript, so count each change between those drafts as an edit, then count any change an editor made between the version sent to the publisher And the final as an edit, then do the same process for each and every edition ever published, and you could get to a very high number. So, I wouldn’t dismiss Smokey‘s number out of hand. I’d just want to know how the edits were counted.

Of course, demanding that I explain 25,000 editorial decisions is absurd, as it’s clear I didn’t make any of them. Anne might still be around to explain hers, but... Oopsie. Otto’s long dead. And one would have to ask any of the dozens of editors involved with the various published editions why they made the editorial decisions they did. But the main thing is that editing author’s drafts for publication is a normal part of the book publishing process. So the presence of edits isn’t an anomaly that requires explaining.

Most importantly, no editing that took place after Anne wrote the original manuscripts affects the authenticity of what she wrote. And the denier argument is that she never even wrote a diary. See, for example, the article Smokey cut and payed way up thread.

[_canpakes]

Most importantly, no editing that took place after Anne wrote the original manuscripts affects the authenticity of what she wrote. And the denier argument is that she never even wrote a diary.

Oh, I've asked him about that, too. He's incapable of answering the question.

[Guest]

Since Smokey is going into a little detail making OG Nazi arguments, think about what he is saying and how that compares to how modern "nationalists" talk about George Soros. Replace this specific Jewish person's name with generic references to the Jews. How do those arguments compare?

I can't take him seriously when he babbles on about the Bolshevik Revolution, communists etc., while ignoring significant players like Sir George Buchanan, J.P. Morgan, Alfred Milner and William Boyce Thompson, because those names won't fit into his purpose.

[Guest]

LOL, It truly is Holocaust denier Opposite Day. Smokey is not going to approach the holocaust like an investigator looking for the truth would investigate. He’s going to play Holocaust Denier Calvinball, where we make up arbitrary and contradictory rules of evidence, where the only evidence that ever counts is evidence that the Holocaust is a hoax.

And Smokey, your attempted disclaimer is hilarious. If you think that would actually protect you from prosecution, you’re completely delusional. I am curious though. How many nobody Americans have been arrested for denying the Holocaust on an “obscure” website while traveling in Germany or other countries?

One more thing, after the sheer volume of lies you’ve told in this thread alone, can you give the folks here one good reason why they should believe a single word that comes out of your mouth. If you told me the sky is blue, I’d run out and check for myself. That’s the level of credibility you’ve earned by your behavior to date.

But do proceed with Scooby Doo investigates the end. Spoiler alert: when they rip the villain’s mask off at the end, it’s (((Teh Jewz))).

[Guest]

It is absurd to go any further then the distorted history of the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. Smokey's telling of this complicated matter is insane. There were Jewish leaders of many parties socialist and constitutionalist and monarchist alike. But Jews were predominantly moderate. The main reason a rather non-trivial number of Jews supported the Red Army was because of the chaos that was created from the pograms of 1881-82, 1903, 1905 as well as WWI which was largely fought across the pale of settlement where most of Russian Jews lived.This chaos scattered Jews east and west across the border to the Austrian Empire and into the heart of Russia. The abdication of the throne by Nicholas the II was totally unexpected and the new government was extremely open to the Jewish population by giving them equal treatment under the law and citizenship after the pale of settlement was eliminated. In two votes following the regime change the majority of Jews voted as they pretty much always had moderate center. There were more Menshivik Jews then Bolshevik supporters and vast scatterings into other parties and coalitions. Things get complicated with the regime change but it was the Red Army that was against anti semitism not the White. Therefore the Jews that held hands with the Red held reluctant hands with the party because they were the non-murderous and more embracing group that was not murdering them and allowing them rights after the devastating elimination of the pale of settlement. The ensuing horrible travesty's that followed with collectivism and such could not possibly be foreseen by the Jewish population or any of its leaders early on.

To reference one prior leader of the white who was fiercely anti-semitic and who left the country as a betrayal to whites misunderstands completely politics, ethnicity, race and many wars and pograms in ways that are baffling to understand how Smokey can possibly believe what he is writing. To characterize Marx as a Jew that somehow is part of a Jewish Cabal is also ridiculous. He repudiated his Jewish religion and thought of Jews as capitalists and with disdain. Trotsky had Jewish heritage but that is about it. If you enjoy quoting Solzhenitsyn how about, "If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them." Gulag Archipelago. History always allows for several narratives particularly when your issuing simple ones. It concretizes much better when you get into the deep parts.

mikwut

[_Res Ipsa]

Since Smokey is going into a little detail making OG Nazi arguments, think about what he is saying and how that compares to how modern "nationalists" talk about George Soros. Replace this specific Jewish person's name with generic references to the Jews. How do those arguments compare?

I can't take him seriously when he babbles on about the Bolshevik Revolution, communists etc.l, while ignoring significant players like Sir George Buchanan, J.P. Morgan, Alfred Milner and William Boyce Thompson, because those names won't fit into his purpose.

You had me at “seriously...”

[_Smokey]

It is absurd to go any further then the distorted history of the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. Smokey's telling of this complicated matter is insane. There were Jewish leaders of many parties socialist and constitutionalist and monarchist alike. But Jews were predominantly moderate. The main reason a rather non-trivial number of Jews supported the Red Army was because of the chaos that was created from the pograms of 1881-82, 1903, 1905 as well as WWI which was largely fought across the pale of settlement where most of Russian Jews lived.This chaos scattered Jews east and west across the border to the Austrian Empire and into the heart of Russia. The abdication of the throne by Nicholas the II was totally unexpected and the new government was extremely open to the Jewish population by giving them equal treatment under the law and citizenship after the pale of settlement was eliminated. In two votes following the regime change the Jews voted as they pretty much always had moderate center. There were more menshivik Jews than Bolshevik supporters. Things get complicated with the regime change but it was the Red Army that was against anti semitism not the White. Therefore the Jews that held hands with the Red held reluctant hands with the party because they were the non-murderous and more embracing group that was not murdering them and allowing them rights after the devastating elimination of the pale of settlement. The ensuing horrible travesty's that followed with collectivism and such could not possibly be foreseen by the Jewish population.

To reference one prior leader of the white fiercely anti-semitic leader who left the country as a betrayal to whites misunderstands completely politics, ethnicity, race and many wars and pograms in ways that are baffling to understand. History is To characterize Marx as a Jew that somehow is part of a Jewish Cabal is also ridiculous. He repudiated his Jewish religion and thought of Jews as capitalists with disdain. Trotsky had Jewish heritage but that is about it. If you enjoy quoting Solzhenitsyn how about, "If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them." History always allows for several narratives particularly when your issuing simply ones. It concretizes much better when you get into the deep parts.

mikwut

This post is is filled with misspellings, misuse of words and almost demented failures of syntax. It spins around like a whirlwind "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

[_mikwut]

Smokey,

I do apologize, I should have just stated simply for you you don't nearly know what you are talking about.

mikwut