Posted on 09/15/2009 3:51:35 PM PDT by Winged Hussar
We previously described how Barack Obama appointed Van Jones, the equivalent of a Holocaust denier, to the position of "Green Jobs Czar." Holocaust denial and its equivalent, 9/11 denial, are in fact characteristic of Mr. Obama's political allies.
Classical Holocaust denial, of course, consists of denying that Hitler murdered Jews (and others) because of their religion or ethnicity. Holocaust deniers say that there were no gas chambers, and that the "Holohoax" is a means for Jews to extort money from Germany and the rest of the world. Other equally repugnant forms of historical revisionism, however, include saying that the victims did "something" to deserve it, blaming somebody other than the known perpetrator, or saying that the victims were themselves the perpetrators. George Orwell's "1984" underscored the dangers of historical revisionism because whoever controls the past (i.e. what people believe is the past) controls the future.
(Excerpt) Read more at israpundit.com ...
He was never more than present, how dare you proclaim him more?
“Obama’s Secret Meeting With Historians: The president held a dinner at the White House for leading presidential scholars”
By Kenneth T. Walsh
Posted July 10, 2009
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/obama/2009/07/10/obamas-secret-meeting-with-historians.html
That sounds like the stupidest thing I’ve heard in a while. As much as I hate Obama, Van Jones and 9/11 conspiracy nuts I don’t see how it can be equivalent to Holocaust denial. Are the people who don’t belive anyone has ever been on the moon also the equivalent of Holocaust deniers? How about people who think Kennedy was killed by the CIA?
“Barack Obama Sponsored Equivalent of Holocaust Denial”
This headline is a bit of a stretch.
“As much as I hate Obama, Van Jones and 9/11 conspiracy nuts I don’t see how it can be equivalent to Holocaust denial.”
Holocaust deniers who don’t say the Holocaust never happened often excuse it by saying the Jews did “something” to deserve it, or that Zionists helped perpetrate it to force Jews to move to Israel.
9/11 deniers have trouble claiming that it never happened, but they similarly contend that the U.S. did “something” to deserve it, or that the U.S. even perpetrated it.
What part of this is so hard to understand?
Oceania is allied with Eurasia against Eastasia. Ociania has always been allied with Eurasia against Eastasia.
Because trying to tie one event to the other is like saying that everyone who disagrees with Obama does so because they are racist. It's disingenuous and insulting, even to a dirtbag like Van Jones.
Anti-Semites contend that “the Zionists” helped to perpetrate the Holocaust to advance their own agenda.
Van Jones contends that the United States helped to perpetrate 9/11 to advance an agenda of some kind.
I do not see any difference.
Liberals, democrats and progressives equivocate to demonize their opponents. Conservatives don’t. There is a difference and its a defining one. Using an enemie’s wrong-headed and morally corrupt tactics is wrong. Do you advocate teaching our children to be suicide bombers because our enemies do? Using equivocation as a tactic to advance an agenda lowers you to their level. Van Jones is pond scum and needs no arcane comparisons to demonize his evil agenda. My 2¢.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.