WordWolf

Next one.

" The entire point of something like this is to hand-make it.

Just as you have used Old England in a hobby of your own."

"Look at all of the detail... and everything here has some significance?"

"Do unto others-then run."

"Relax. Do you understand 'relax'?"

"Yes-a little piece of dark chocolate."

"'Omelet', ja, to be, or not to be, that is the question!"

"And this is the answer! *smack* Dumbkopf!"

"After the meal, you will want an after-dinner mint.

You will need an after-dinner 'mint' to pay for the bill!

But ve, of course, haff conquered inflation.

Just as ve conquered Poland. And Czechoslovakia..."

"No, I'm wearing black for my poor, departed husband."

"Oh... how long's he been gone? "

"Ten minutes. He won't be back till 1."

"Drink and sex. That's what killed your uncle - drink and sex!"

"Yeah. He couldn't get either, so he shot himself."

"With the way you treat me, people would think I was the cook here."

"Not if they came to dinner."

"How do women get ahold of your Lotharios?"

"Not as often as I'd like..."

WW.......yeah, that's for sure.

FOR 16 YEARS..........(1941-1957) wierwille stayed put in the church system collecting his paychecks. Sure he spinned it to his advantage, claiming that all this time he was "working the word" trying to tap the resources for abundant living.

And finally, ten more years transpire before vpw has a pfal class ready to market in the late 60s. But this is STILL not enough for the small-time, 51 year old ohio preacher. He sets his sights on engrafting hefner's and doop's leadership and work to further jump-start the pfal cookie-cutter-campaign.

It's no wonder that in pfal.....VPW HIGHLIGHTS THOSE WHO ARE SPIRITUAL HITCH-HIKERS.

He knew it well.

:blink:

Considering that he took Leonard's class in 1953 and began TEACHING Leonard's class

(announcing it was his OWN class and calling it something else) in 1953,

it sure took him a long time before he had a "ready to market" class.

It seems more like they delay was more until he was able to get a cheap

headquarters from which he could operate without being held accountable to

a group like his denomination,

and the delay in getting an audience. After all, a DECADE of "his class" -1953 to 1963-

produced a tiny group, and it was only once he had the audience provided by

the hippies that the group experienced anything approaching large growth.

Even his OWN accounts put his numbers low before that, and we have yet to hear

from posters (with the possible exception of Peter W, since I don't know what

year he heard of vpw) predating that, and we certainly have had no first-person

accounts from times before that. All GSCers-and virtually all people in twi history-

effectively consider twi to exist from THAT point, because THEIR connection began

at that time.

Although I use the phrase "hijacking the hippies" because I think it's become a

phrase recognizable for the specific incidents of that time,

I agree that CARJACKING might be a more appropriate phrase-

that vpw CARJACKED Leonard's class, Stiles' book, Bullinger's books,

and Heefn3r and Do0p's ministries,

and claimed they were his own.

"Old Timers"?

They either.....

#1. got booted, M&A, asked to leave, told to leave, ect.

OR

#2. Woke up and smelled the Coffee brewing on the outside of TWI ( in some cases Pre-GSC days).

:)

They just redefine what "Old Timer" means.

After all, they redefined "the First Corps" once all the First Corps actually left

the FIRST time, and called the second corps "the First Corps."

Then, once all of them were gone, they rounded up all the old-timers still

connected with twi, and labelled THEM "the First Corps",

making them the third "First Corps" and the only "corps grads" who never

entered the corps.

Taking the pickle-jar and labelling it "apple-butter" has a long, proud tradition in twi.

[Here we have a PERFECT example of the hallucinations and tortured logic

necessary to deny the Holocaust.

I shall narrate.]

"but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender."

Did you or did you not say this, WW?

YOU DID.

So quit denying it.

[First, WTH has to invent denials from me. I've been quoting and requoting

this simple sentence-whose meaning continues to elude WTH.

We all knew I said it the first time.

"Quit" denying it? I'd have to START denying it first.

So, he's inventing stuff to begin with.]

Remove the parenthesis from WW's quote and what do we have?

(You can do this with a parenthesis to quickly establish the truth of what has been said. That's a basic rule of grammer, dont'cha know.)

[What I know is that WTH has to delete part of my sentence to get

something to disagree with. When you remove part of the word of WordWolf,

you no longer HAVE the word of WordWolf. :)

What's his source for this supposed ironclad "basic rule of grammer"

that allows him to chop up a sentence?

Apparently, he's taking this completely on the authority of vpw, a man with a degree

in THEOLOGY (specializing in HOMILETICS) and considering him an expert

on ENGLISH "GRAMMER" (or English Grammar, which is probably meant to be the

same thing.) Making a supposed expert out of someone who's a layman in that

field is popular in Holocaust denial, but not so much anywhere else.

THIS is how WTH finds something to disagree with-

by adding to the word of WordWolf (he added nonexistent denials)

and subtracting from the word of WordWolf (he removed part of the sentence when he didn't like it.)]

What WE have is: but it seems that every Holocaust denier ... is a VPW defender.

That's the point WW was making and still is making from his initial post.

[As most layman know, you can't remove a parenthetical note if the meaning of the

sentence is changed by removing it-as it was in this case.

I only ADDED the parenthetical note on the off-chance there were readers

too slow-witted to properly contextualize that I was speaking SPECIFICALLY of

our discussion HERE when I was discussing HERE, as opposed to some imaginary

discussion anywhere else. It seems that I needed more heroic measures to

enable the slackwits to keep up.

If I was REQUIRED to find ways to enable them to keep up with plain English

in discussion, I'd be frustrated now- one of them seems determined to MISUNDERSTAND

even plain English which includes explanations.

Since I'm not, this just looks sad in a funny way.

I didn't need to do anything to make this look sillier.]

Quit back-peddling WW. If what you initially wanted to say really was, "it seems that every Holocaust denier on the GSC is a VPW defender", then you certainly wouldn't have used a parenthesis and you certainly wouldn't be back-peddling now to make your point.

[i made a point I have not changed- and I used punctuation correctly-

and any native English-speaker should not have trouble understanding either.

WTH is either mentally-deficient or determined to distort what I said no matter

how clear and straight-forward it is.

Since he does that with evidence for the Holocaust as well, I'm not being singled out.

Ignore what he wants to ignore, invent what he wishes, and change meanings at will-

THIS is how one manages to pretend it didn't happen.]

YOU purposely used a parenthesis to imply and implicate that every Holocaust denier is also a VPW defender, - then you went on and used the parenthesis to single out "certain" GSC posters that YOU happen to believe are Holocaust deniers & VPW defenders. But that's no surprise to me anymore than this is a surprise:

[WTH has now rushed forward, piling invention upon invention, and completely

rewritten my post into something he can disagree with.

Does anyone other than WTH read all those changes into my posts?

Anyone else unable to understand what I mean (when I use parentheses?)]

You (and others here) are also promoting and parroting the same claim on GSC the Holocaust Promotion Lobby is promoting every where else - which is: Holocaust Revisionist=Holocaust Denier, because holocaust revisionism jeopardizes the agenda of the Holocaust industry --- just like the people here who defend VPW/TWI/PFAL etc. on GSC jeopardizes your personal agenda against VPW/TWI, etc.

Maybe it will come as a shock to you (and perhaps to others here) to learn: HOLOCAUST REVISIONIST'S DO NOT DENY THE HOLOCAUST!

So why are they labeled: "Holocaust deniers" by the Holocaust Promotion Lobby if they don't deny the holocaust?

[Here's a simple analogy - This is like Trinitarian's claiming: "People who don't believe in the Trinity also deny Jesus Christ!" It's not always true non-trinitarians deny Jesus Christ, they just deny the Trinitarian view of who Jesus Christ is.]

Similarly: Holocaust Revisionists don't claim that Jews didn't suffer. They don't argue the fact that Jews were, in fact, unwanted in Germany, and that there was a state policy to remove them as a "parasitic people" harmful to the country. It is absolutely true that Jews were incarcerated and often treated cruelly. They were seen as the enemy, just as in our times the "Nazis" are seen as the enemy of entrenched oligarchies, as we frequently hear people being called these words that are so often said in hate: Nazi, neo-Nazi, white supremacist, anti-Semitic, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

What revisionists do claim and argue is, that there was no state policy that called for the "mass extermination of the Jews" or any other unwanted minorities. The Allies, independently and singly, interrogated 26,000 functionaries of the National Socialist regime immediately after Germany's defeat, all based on the same set of questions. Some people have thought of lying for their own benefit by implicating others. That's what the Holocaust Promotion Lobby and the Holocaust industry have been doing for decades - but then, that's "par for the course" around here.

WW claims there must be some "blindness" on my part, yet I see and realize this is something he has beome a master at, especailly when it advances his own agenda regardless of whom he slanders or might libel in the process. Apparently he is very perturbed by what I SEE.

[Even when it's explained, WTH can't see he's got an intellectual blindspot.

He even feels free to reinvent the meanings of more words,

like "slander" and "libel".

And he thinks I've got emotion about his posts other than mild amusement.

Well, it makes him feel important if he does, so I suppose I can let him have

SOMETHING.

I mean, he doesn't have the evidence on his side-he has to rely on invented

"evidence" and ignore the real evidence.

He doesn't have logic on his side-he needs to rewrite my words in order to

degrade their meaning.

He barely operates in modern English-relying on incorrect meanings of all

kinds of things (rules of grammar, meanings of words)-so he doesn't have

THAT.

So, he needs SOMETHING.]

Ok, another show.....

"Do unto others-then run."

"Relax. Do you understand 'relax'?"

"Yes-a little piece of dark chocolate."

"'Omelet', ja, to be, or not to be, that is the question!"

"And this is the answer! *smack* Dumbkopf!"

"After the meal, you will want an after-dinner mint.

You will need an after-dinner 'mint' to pay for the bill!"

Well,

I'm game to keep this moving.

So, the next song.

"You're in hiding,

And you hold your meetings.

We can hear you coming.

We know what you're after.

We're wise to you this time-

We won't let you kill the laughter."

Something made me think of this recently... :)

It's my PERSONAL OPINION

that vpw was IMAGINING he was some sort of international phenomenon

back when he began teaching in Payne and Van Wert.

However,

it wasn't until he "hijacked the hippies" in 1968-1970 that he had any

kind of REACH or IMPACT- since THEY had REACH and IMPACT.

Until then, he was an engaging speaker (since 1941 or so),

who had a pretty good class (BG Leonard's, since 1953)

and a pretty good textbook (JE Stiles' since 1953),

but very few people to heed it.

That's why he was still FULL-TIME an employee of the Evangelical

and Reformed Church.

Furthermore,

he had no qualms using their facilities and supplies to run his

little enterprise on the side, which is dishonest among

the unbelievers-even THEY know that's wrong. vpw had no

problem with it, however.

It wasn't until he was able to get land tax-free that he made any

kind of move. (The Wierwille family farm- he bought out his

brothers and made it an asset of a non-profit, so he could escape

taxes and still use the land how he wanted.)

For all the badmouthing he did of the church he came from,

he had no problem taking their paycheck and using their facilities

for well over a decade, and only moved when it was financially

advantageous to him. So much for personal integrity....

Anyway,

it's my OPINION that the first time he rewrote his history

to any major degree was when he met the hippies,

and began setting forth that himself was some great one,

and it was only about 1970 when we start hearing

"God spoke to me, and showed me snow".

He now had a whole new audience who weren't around

to know he was lying about exclusive Bible knowledge and

so on.

So, the REAL start of twi was in the end of the 1960s.

In the late 1950s, we had a small group that nobody ever

heard of.

Dear Mike-It sounds like you are doing the attacking not me. I have don't have a lot of time and have never heard of you being attacked. If you need help you can always ask for it and I would be glad to help you. I have nothing against you. But I am not going to defend what I said. I believe it stands on it's own.

Aside from this the point of my post was that the leadership of twi were doing things contrary to the Word by their actions.

They didn't want to change and they would annialate anyone who got in their way. They defienately had an evil agenda.

Oldies-there is not point in bringing up the gory details. The idea I was trying to get across that no matter what anyone said the twi leadership were not going to change and they had enforcers to make sure no one could question them. No harm in you asking though. Thanks

You were correct,

and this was a good idea for a thread, a pair of silly posters notwithstanding.

Too bad you can't expect more civility from supposed fellow Christians, but there you go.

What went on in TWI went beyond simple disagreement. There was something wrong with you if you suggested that the leaders were wrong.

Rascal,

Well, there it is, ALREADY, the charge of derailing.

[Watch as he claims he's getting the charg of derailing,

and then attempts to derail the thread in the same post....

(snip)

***

NOR is it the case that I simply (as you put it) “promote your personal agenda here at greasespot...”

What I have to offer is not my personal impressions, but the actual record: book, magazine, and tape. It’s not simply my personal agenda, but a SPEAKING UP that we need to look at the actual history, the facts of what we were taught, and not trust our HUMAN memories so much.

***

page 1, even.]

You wrote: “I don`t know what you expect when you are attempting to promote a doctrine that placed so many of us into the darkest of spiritual bondage Mike.”

I expect to be able to discuss it with those who believe in free speech, and want to discuss ideas and not personalities. I expect people with integrity.

[Actually, when offered that, Mike complained because reasonable,

rational posters paid attention and refuted him on every point,

which he also interpreted often as refuting THEM.

So, what Mike's complaining about is not the ability to DISCUSS-which

he has-

but the ability to HAVE HIS POSITIONS EMBRACED-

which he can't enforce.

Woe betide Mike for being disagreed with!

He's just like Nelson Mandela, who was put in jail for being a political dissident!

]

And, jut to set the record straight, I am NOT promoting a doctrine like the one that placed you in spiritual bondage. I have fought against the TVTs (Twi Verbal Doctrines) here bigtime. It was the TVTs that brought the darkness, not the written doctrines.

inconsistent, unnecessary, and not based on anything sensible.

Hm, it's not completely dissimilar to the doctrines that afflicted us

before after all....Never noticed that before...]

***

So, I speak up, that we need to see that the same human errors in emotional thinking are taking place here in some, just like before.

I speak up, that we did not get it right. We failed to absorb much of the written teaching, forgot another huge portion, and added in a lot of garbage, resulting in the TVT bondage that you and others STILL seem to be overly sensitive to. Get a grip. The books are pure.

[That is your OPINION. Your OPINION has been considered, your evidence has been

examined. Both have been found wanting.

But you're welcome to hang out and participate here anyway.

You're even permitted to use that welcome to spit on the welcome and complain

about your ability to post here.

It's silly and senseless, but you're permitted to do that to a point.

(ALL speech has limits, including mine and yours.)]

The same human phenomenon happens to me here, when I speak up.

[You get fired, kicked out of a group, and family and friends are told to shun you

because you're serving the devil, when you speak up?

That's typical of what polar bear was talking about.

YOU get people who disagree with the content and style of your posts,

and are asked to keep them to the appropriate forums and threads.

Except to those eager to see the two as the same thing, they don't resemble

each other at all.]

When I speak up about the lack of clothing (accurate memory of the written teaching) that some strut around in here, then I'm subject to the SAME KIND of attacks.

forgetting that.

And nobody kicks you from a group and tells your friends and family to shun you.

It's not the same thing. Disagreement =/= shunning and persecution.

Nobody follows you off the GSC to harass you. twi has done that.

Woe is you for not having a popular opinion!

Cry me a river.]

I question the integrity of your complaint, polar bear, because I don't see you huffing and puffing when I'm attacked thusly.

[since there's no connection-and you're not "attacked", let alone "thusly", there's no problem

with the integrity of polar bear's complaint or anyone else's complaint about twi

going after people and punishing them for asking questions.]

It's not just you, though. There are some who decry the lack of speaking up BACK THEN, and then turn right around and try to silence me here. I'm thought of as a problem that needs to be limited.

You're NOT welcome to post at twi-where NOBODY is welcome to post, have you noticed that?

We disagree with you- which is hardly "silencing" you.

Even though you're hallucinating some connection to polar bear's legitimate topic

about twi suppressing thought and discussion.

That you can even post, claiming you're being suppressed,

shows you're not being suppressed.

If you WERE, you wouldn't be able to post about it.

See how simple that is?

Of course you don't.]

I see blindness in many posters here, as they repeat the same human errors here as they did back then, like ganging up on the unpopular idea people, and totally ignoring their input.

[We considered your "input", and concluded it makes very little sense AT BEST,

and lacks understanding at many levels. That's not "ignoring".

Furthermore, we've considered MANY unpopular ideas here, and they all got a fair

hearing. People have been free to consider, ask questions, and draw their own

conclusions. In some cases, they rejected them as unsound. In other cases,

they accepted them as sound.

In your case, it's been rejected as unsound, and your response has been to

claim the grapes were sour after all and that's why you don't want any.]

WTH:

"I don't recall making any claim that these Holocaust revisionists are also poster's here at GSC. I don't even know where you got that idea."

Well, WTH,

I actually explained it already, but it seems you missed it.

It was in the very post you quoted.

I shall quote myself and you and show it AGAIN.

Please try to follow along this time.

==

WordWolf said:

I'm still curious why there are people who keep saying that vpw was neither anti-Semetic, nor pro-Nazi in any way,

and never taught along those lines,

and yet the only times we EVER see ANYONE denying the millions of Jews and non-Jews imprisoned and killed for the

"crimes" of being different by Nazi Germany during World War II,

these are people who are enthusiasts of vpw,

and feel the need to defend both the public image of vpw and the public image of Holocaust denial.

Is this connection supposed to be accidental?

I'm not saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier,

but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender.

(I expect there may be some vpw defenders who are NOT Holocaust deniers,

but there don't seem to be any GSC Holocaust deniers who are NOT vpw defenders.)

WTH read this, quoted it-including the part where it specifies it's referring

specifically to posters on the GSC and came back with

Here's a logical question for you WW - that is, if you can provide a logical answer to it [which is doubtful]: Just how are all these Holocaust revisionists, (i.e. Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, Fred Leuchter, John Ball, Keith Stimely, Germar Rudolf, Norman Finkelstein, etc., etc., etc., etc.) all these people who have never ever heard of VPW before, nor have they ever been affiliated with TWI - have now magically become enthusiasts of VPW and are somehow defending his image?

After quoting both, I then said-which WTH quoted now and was unable to understand...

So,

apparently, Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, etc, are all posters on the GSC,

since WTH replied to my comments-which were specifically flagged to refer ONLY to the GSC in case someone

was skimming or lacked the wit to contextualize properly- by saying they applied to these people.

Somehow, they have how magically become posters on the GSC as I specified.

=========

The connection between the two was right in the post WTH made.

I spoke of Holocaust denier who post here,

and WTH replied by invoking those names.

HE drew the connection, which any adolescent or adult English reader should have no trouble understanding.

WTH continues.

"I don't even know where you got that idea. But then again, it appears that you are making "a connection" where none exists -"

WTH seems rather good at denying connections between things that OBVIOUSLY exist-

like errors in his posts, and the content of the errors

(like saying "in the GSC" applies to all sorts of Holocaust deniers then denying he ever

connected them).

He continues

"But then again, it appears that you are making "a connection" where none exists - which apparently you are very good at, especially when you drop little comments like: "but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender."

This claim, BTW, is pretty self-evident to everyone else here.

I said not every person on the GSC who is a vpw defender/apologist is a Holocaust denier (AFAIK),

but those posters at the GSC who ARE Holocaust deniers are also all vpw defenders/apologists.

There being only a tiny handful of Holocaust deniers at the GSC, it's easy to see what

they seem to all have in common.

Off the top of my head, the few of them are all male, and they all come out to defend

vpw's memory and engage in apologetics to excuse his felonies and misdemeanors and other bad things.

To say otherwise is like denying giraffes have long necks.

You won't convince anyone, and you just sound silly.

But that doesn't stop SOME people...

WTH:

"(Apparently you consider me to be one of those "VPW defender's" though - which only goes to prove how little you know because there are many things VPW did I don't care to or want to defend.) "

WTH, apparently, is in denial over the content of many of his posts, in which he has gone

to great lengths to attempt to excuse vpw of crimes, or draw attention away from them.

Is he convincing anyone other than himself that his posting history has no connection

with defending vpw?

WTH still can't let drop the connection that HE drew by responding to "on the GSC" with

the names of Holocaust deniers he's quoted.

" will simply go on record by saying: "There is no connection between them and VPW and TWI, anymore than there is a connection between them and the GSC." That is the point I was making and am still making. Remarkable though how you chose to respond to everything I said, except for this comment I also made: And I keep wondering ... exactly what makes you think there ever WAS a connection there to begin with? Well WW, do you care to respond to that comment or not? Probably not. And why is that?"

A) I KNOW there is no connection between them-your own post notwithstanding. That's the one

where you invoked their names in response to me specifying "on the GSC."

It's really sad that I can say this REPEATEDLY in such clear terms and you can still miss it.

Perhaps there's a biological problem that's preventing this-I'm aware some victims of

Traumatic Brain Injuries can be physically unable to draw connections. If so, I'm very sorry

and you should have mentioned that. If you're trying your best, I can try to make allowances.

If not, your insistence on highlighting your OWN mistake repeatedly is baffling,

and your attempt to pass it off on someone else rather than just say

"whoops-I posted before I read" and moving on is rather transparent, to everyone except

possibly your own self. I can't see a reasonable motive for doing it.

B) I not only have no problem responding to why any connection was drawn,

but I ALREADY did, since I ALREADY had explained it, and all I did now was REPOST

the previous explanation. It was clear to everyone else the FIRST time I posted it.

WTH again:

"Because none of us really knows exactly what your basis is/was for drawing any connection beween Holocaust deniers and VPW defenders, regardless if they happen to post on GSC or not. Of course I realize you "conveniently" choose not to respond to that particular comment I also made, simply because you wanted to make it appear as though I were the one drawing that connection instead of you."

Actually, I responded specifically to every comment so far.

I didn't see the need to explain that the Holocaust deniers at the GSC are all vpw defenders

(but not necessarily vice versa), because everyone except those few have no difficulty

seeing that they are both. However, I've spelled it out now.

And not every light-skinned person has red hair, but most naturally red-headed people

have light skin. And I don't need to explain that one, since it's obvious to anyone not

deliberately trying to miss it.

As to what connected those authors to the GSC, YOU did, and I quoted you doing so-

TWICE now, and explained the quotes, TWICE now. Everyone except you can see it

without difficulty, TWICE now. It would surprise few if you STILL miss what you YOURSELF

connected.

Of course, we're supposed to respect your interpretation of the Holocaust's evidence even

though you can't see the direct connections in your own replies.

Forgive us if WE can see the disconnect in one, and conclude the other has little hope of

making sense.

WTH:

"WELL - HAVE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR NOW? Or are you still deaf? But then, with all the "noise" you make, it's a wonder anyone can hear at all.:

You made yourself clear before.

You were so eager to try to discredit me, that you didnt even read my post, and when I specified

Holocaust deniers [u[on the GSC[/u], you skipped over it completely-and connected my post

with Holocaust deniers worldwide-

unaware you now connected all of them with posting on the GSC.

Then you displayed an intentional denial you made that mistake, and even when it was explained,

you remained adamant you never said it.

You've been coming in loud and clear.

Error-ridden, but loud and clear.

I have had no difficulty understanding you-although you've been deficient in understanding me.

I've never been "deaf", but your own "blindness" is on display-

and not just because I'm recognizing it in a post- everyone else can see it whether I

mention it or not. But since you're speaking on "deaf", it seems apt to mention it in passing.

Finally, I post, and you post.

You seem under some illusion that refuting all the flaws in your post is identical to

shouting you down. Sorry, I'm unable to correct that illusion.

Also, you're under a separate illusion-or deliberately lying- that my posts lack content.

Do you think you're convincing anyone?

(snip)

From those I've read here, it does seem that the closer the person comes to adopting vic's ideologies and doctrine, the more outspoken they are about the "lies" or '"exagerations" of the holocaust.

I guess Koolaid by any other flavor is still Koolaid.

(snip)

But since WTH is either unable or unwilling to notice the connection,

apparently, there's ANOTHER thing to deny for WTH while he's busy denying...

I have the ROA 72 tape... and I have a Beta machine!! Can I copy this to DVD or VHS?

Janet

If you have the right adapters,

and a VHS machine and a DVR (DVD recording device),

you can copy to DVD from VHS.

Presumably, the same thing applies here. The catch is probably finding the adapters.

Then again, for all I know, they may be easy to find.

For those playing along, I posted this

(I'm adding emphasis to point out what WTH seems unable to read):

I'm still curious why there are people who keep saying that vpw was neither anti-Semetic, nor pro-Nazi in any way,

and never taught along those lines,

and yet the only times we EVER see ANYONE denying the millions of Jews and non-Jews imprisoned and killed for the

"crimes" of being different by Nazi Germany during World War II,

these are people who are enthusiasts of vpw,

and feel the need to defend both the public image of vpw and the public image of Holocaust denial.

Is this connection supposed to be accidental?

I'm not saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier,

but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender.

(I expect there may be some vpw defenders who are NOT Holocaust deniers,

but there don't seem to be any GSC Holocaust deniers who are NOT vpw defenders.)

WTH, demonstrating the consistency with which he's approached the evidence of the Holocaust,

replied-quoting that in its entirety, as follows:

Here's a logical question for you WW - that is, if you can provide a logical answer to it [which is doubtful]: Just how are all these Holocaust revisionists, (i.e. Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, Fred Leuchter, John Ball, Keith Stimely, Germar Rudolf, Norman Finkelstein, etc., etc., etc., etc.) all these people who have never ever heard of VPW before, nor have they ever been affiliated with TWI - have now magically become enthusiasts of VPW and are somehow defending his image?

So,

apparently, Arthur Butz, Bradley Smith, etc, are all posters on the GSC,

since WTH replied to my comments-which were specifically flagged to refer ONLY to the GSC in case someone

was skimming or lacked the wit to contextualize properly- by saying they applied to these people.

Somehow, they have how magically become posters on the GSC as I specified.

==

Again,

he responded to my

I'm not saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier, but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender. (I expect there may be some vpw defenders who are NOT Holocaust deniers, but there don't seem to be any GSC Holocaust deniers who are NOT vpw defenders.)

I fully realize what you are saying. What you are saying is: Every holocaust denier = a VPW defender.

But that too, is a preposterous claim, as the handful of the few people I listed above have likewise never heard of GSC, nor are they affiliated with the GSC community either.

Apparently, when I specified this wasn't an equation ("I'm NOT saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier"),

WTH "fully realized" I was saying it WAS an equation ("Every Holocaust denier = a VPW defender.")

Since I never made it, that's little problem of mine. It's the problem of the imaginary poster whom WTH supposedly

"fully realizes".

Somehow, he's reading a post that specifies each Holocaust denier around the world defends vpw,

despite the posts actually specifying otherwise-

A) the connection is only between posters on the GSC]

B) the connection does not equal an equation, since there's no equivalence (it doesn't apply in both directions)

If he's looking at the evidence the Holocaust happened the same way he can read

"this only applies to posters at the GSC"

and translate that as

"this applies to everyone around the world"

and read "I'm not saying this"

and translate that as

"I'm saying this",

then there's small wonder that he can view piles of evidence for something,

and still miss that there was any strong evidence in it.

This is the kind of "logic" in play when one is denying the Holocaust happened,

as we can all see. (Scroll up and see it for yourselves, those posts are from a few hours ago.)

======

Oh, and the irony of the mentally-blind calling the mentally-sighted people "deaf" is just too funny.....

Don't know what to tell you other than I have mixed emotions at present.

Does that mean you're currently undecided, and cannot honestly say your convictions point distinctly at either direction at this moment?

(That's what it sounds like, so I'd like to clarify.)

Wordwolf, I did sign up for photobucket this morning, after I tried it the first time. It has been in the unloading process for about 15 minutes. Is that normal for a 5 x 7 picture? This is the 2nd time I tried to unload it from photobucket as the first time it seemed to be stuck on uploading.

Let's see....

if you're not on dialup, then something's wrong.

If you're on dialup, that's STILL way too slow.

I'd see about editing the picture down a little, and seeing if that helps.

IIRC, about 1/2 an hour is the timeframe for about SIX GIANT DIGITAL pictures to load up to most online

photo galleries on DIALUP speeds. So, a GIANT DIGITAL picture should be less than 15 minutes.

I doubt your image there is QUITE that "big" (both in size and in density of image, which both affect the

size of the file, and it's the overall filesize that affects the upload speed.)

Maybe you should try Imageshack.

========

Then again,

maybe you can email it to someone on staff here or something,

since this website HAS A PHOTO GALLERY.

I don't know how it works, but this site hosts the images.

Oldies,

for now I'm leaving alone that you skipped HALF my statement- that a link is demonstrated-

to deny the existence of a link without refuting the demonstration-

because I'd like to give you a chance to set the record straight on your current thinking.

So, Oldiesman,

do you believe that over 100,000 or millions of people, some of them Jews, were imprisoned during World War II

by the Nazis and under the order of their command (Hitler and the boys),

and thousands or more of them were killed BY the Nazis at that time?

Or, do you believe that the branded numbers in the skin of people, the recovered video, photos, the confessions,

the eyewitness accounts from all sides, and the sites recovered, do you believe they were all invented in some

sort of grand conspiracy to frame the Nazis for attempted genocide and mass-murder of prisoners?

Or, do you refuse to say either way what you think?

I just found my picture of us from 1977, 30 years ago last month we were in Emporia, KS.

I will try to post it but it may be too big. Ok I think it is too big.

Ah, you can host it on an external website (like Photobucket or Imageshack),

and post a link to it here.

Or you can shrink the image using Photoshop or the GIMP or something,

but I think we'd be better served with the full-size image.

(Or you can use them to trim out the borders, or both.)

I appreciate those of you who have taken the time to debate this issue with WTH. It is quite obvious by reading his posts that he has a serious issue with Jewish people. I'm half expecting him to tell us next that slavery was all a big lie promoted by African Americans as well.

You will never change his mind - he is a racist and damned proud of it. But it is good of all of you to take the time to show those who are simply uncertain what the truth is, that WTH is promoting hate, not truth.

I'm still curious why there are people who keep saying that vpw was neither anti-Semetic, nor pro-Nazi in any way,

and never taught along those lines,

and yet the only times we EVER see ANYONE denying the millions of Jews and non-Jews imprisoned and killed for the

"crimes" of being different by Nazi Germany during World War II,

these are people who are enthusiasts of vpw,

and feel the need to defend both the public image of vpw and the public image of Holocaust denial.

Is this connection supposed to be accidental?

I'm not saying every vpw defender is a Holocaust denier,

but it seems that every Holocaust denier (on the GSC) is a vpw defender.

(I expect there may be some vpw defenders who are NOT Holocaust deniers,

but there don't seem to be any GSC Holocaust deniers who are NOT vpw defenders.)

Yeah buddy - this is all fake, doctored and, otherwise "Hollywood" footage - none of these atrocities really happened.

It's a real simple question, WTH.

Is this fake or do you just really not care about what happened to all these people?

WTH then QUOTED Belle's question, and went on for several paragraphs, coming nowhere close to her question

in actually addressing it.

I am not gonna read all your bombastic b.s.

Why can't you just give a "yes" or "no" answer? :unsure:

Is that footage fake?

All the bombastic BS was to draw attention away from his refusal to answer the question,

and pretend he actually addressed it.

Just in case you were wondering.

I can read his bombastic bs lightning-quick.

Catchphrases ARE among Figures of Speech, so long as they're addressed to the community that

uses them. At least, Bullinger listed them as so,

and twi did as well-there were even 3 different books on it from Pillai-

"Light Through an Eastern Window"

"Orientalisms of the Bible" volumes 1 and 2.

As a figure, one wanted to analyze it, this specific phrase is "synecdoche",

where the parts are placed for the whole.

That is, to name all of humanity, you name 2 extremes and imply everything between them is included.

So long as it's not overthought and considered for what it is, it's not a problem.

Remember when vpw was explaining about the potential for life? He went into a short digression on

Humpty Dumpty. During that explanation, he explained that Humpty Dumpty was an egg,

an egg that a chicken laid "WITHOUT ANY STRESS OR STRAIN".

It was an expression, meant to sound clever, not a literal post-analysis of the laying of the egg.

I imagine a number of eggs are laid WITH stress, or at least STRAIN.

So, when considering what vpw said about "sinner and saint alike", one should consider that the

Orange Book, at least some of the time, rendered it as "Christian and non-Christian", and consider

THAT the technically-accurate phrase.

Of course, there WILL be people out there who will probably come up with a doctrine for why it

says ONE thing in ONE place, and the deep, spiritual significance of saying the OTHER thing in ANOTHER

place. I can't do anything about those people, but they're not taking part in this discussion, so it's not]

exactly any stress or strain on me.

From VP's perspective, and the scriptures also I believe) is the understanding that God is faithful to His Word and to honor the promises in the scripture. If a saint (Christian) believes those promises he would get the result as per scripture) If a sinner ( non - Christian ) believed those promises he would as well get the results as per scripture. Given that God is faithful to His Word one could reap the benefits of believing what He said without being Christian in profession. This still falls short of a law and would not work in every situation as in the case of an atheist or agnostic.

I think I can agree with this,

pending any possible permutations taking a hard left into the wilderness.

(I'm just being cautious. On the face of it, this sounds like I can agree.)

I never said anybody here ever made that claim. The fact remains however: that is indeed a claim people have made regarding the holocaust as to what Nazi Germany did to the Jews. I was simply pointing out a fact I believe many people here (and also people out in the world) are probably not aware of. I am not claiming anybody here ever made this claim, regardless of what "you claim" I said. Gee, for the "intellectual type of person" you want to portray yourself to others, I certainly thought you were able to read better than that.

You made no exception whatsoever. We addressed WHAT YOU BROUGHT UP and did not pretend you hold

positions you don't. You just tossed that in and PRETENDED there's no connection with you saying that-

in MORE THAN ONE POST- and any posts you're responding to.

I'm well-read enough to know when someone's trying to INSINUATE a connection between two things.

HOWEVER ... if I were going to insisit upon anyone here making any kind of absurd claim about the holocaust, then that would be the same claim many people out in the world (those who are not GSC members) have already made and are still making. What claim is that? It is the claim that 6 million Jews were exterminated by Nazi Germany in the manner that "people claim" they were. The "Holocaust deniers" have already respond to that particular claim with:

"It has been proven both scientfically and physically impossible to exterminate 6 million Jews in the manner that "people claim" Nazi Germany did."

I'm aware they make that Holocaust deniers make that claim of their own.

I'm also aware the evidence doesn't support their claim.

Furthermore,

one of the major issues, I've noticed, you've been ducking.

That is,

do you believe SOME Jews were exterminated by Hitler and his Nazis during World War II,

whether that was 100,000 or 1 million or some other number,

or are you claiming there was no concerted effort to round up and kill Jews and other minorities

in Germany during World War II by Nazis as directed by Hitler?

Personally,

I think your persistent refusal to address this from ANY angle is quite telling.

If you DID believe that SOME were killed but the numbers were inflated,

you'd sound less nonsensical to the average poster, and stand to gain by posting it.

If you believe that there was NO such effort, then you only stand to look silly in the face of

all the photographic evidence, eyewitness accounts, and confessions from people who were

there in one form or another, so you stand to lose by posting THAT.

Therefore, ignoring this perfectly reasonable question, and changing the subject,

is quite telling on its own. After all, we didn't presume you held EITHER position, but you

must hold ONE of them- since you've rejected

"the accounts everyone ELSE hold as accurate ARE accurate".

I realize I have repeated myself, but differently - unlike the "pro-Holocaust" people regarding "their claims". AS YOU YOURSELF SO APTLY PUT IT FOR THEM: when discussing the millions of people the Nazis imprisoned, many of them for the "crime" of being Jewish, and the subsequent execution BY the Nazis for that "crime" ... etc., etc., etc.

Yes sir. People everywhere (not just here at GSC) are holding onto that "Holocaust" claim as if it were the truth - just as if it were their daily bread. The Holocaust is not true. The Holocaust is more like this "song" some people started a very long, long time ago. What kind of song is it?

Ok, so are you saying that there WAS no roundup of Jews and other minorities in Nazi Germany

AT ALL, let alone executions of them for being minorities of their particular sort?

Or are you just intending to prevaricate and pretend you said "yes" or "no" whenever it suits your whims?

That's not intellectually honest.......

.......which hardly comes as news....

The problem with that is,

this "when he said 'sinner and saint alike' he meant Christians both times"

thing completely ignores what he said other times-

in the Orange Book, this phrase is written, at least part of the time-

as "Christian and nonChristian alike".

Therefore, he CLEARLY meant sinner as non-Christian,

and saint as Christian,

and claiming he meant otherwise is demonstrably incorrect.

I never could recall dr.wierwilles power hungry ways????

Hello, zarko.

I'll try to fill in a few blanks for you.

(I shall also sum up, so this isn't comprehensive, just the main points.)

Back when vpw was a minister with a congregation, he was always looking

for something bigger-he had ambition. What he DIDN'T have was something bigger-

talent to match his ambition.

That changed the first time in the early 1950s when-in the space of one year-

he got Stiles' book on the holy spirit, and Leonard's class on "Gifts of the Spirit."

By reteaching Leonard's class and claiming it was entirely his own,

and retyping Stiles' book and claiming it was entirely his own,

he began having success more along the lines of what he wanted.

It changed at second time in the late 60s when he travelled to the House of Acts-

a bunch of hippie Christians operating in the Haight-Ashbury area of San Francisco.

He succeeded in convincing a few of them that he had something special to offer

(true) that was unique to him (false-it was the work of others.)

It was once he had these Christians working for him that twi took off. vpw had been

trying for something since the early 50s, but he now had the right people under him

who could expand the organization. He sent them out to both coasts to grow the

ministry as much as possible, as Way East and Way West.

Once these were grown to a "self-propagating" point, vpw announced he was taking

over what were effectively THEIR ministries- the East and West- and all leadership

was to come directly from him, and all moneys collected were to go directly to

his hq in Ohio, with none of it staying locally.

Somewhere in there (early 70s), Peter Wade cut ties with vpw.

That was the time it was EASIEST to see vpw evidencing power-hunger.

We could get into an analysis of the way corps for further discussion along those

lines if you want.

I wish he was stopping closer to me-I'd seriously consider a little travelling to see him in person.