[Cachelot]

Don't you think that this tactic gets old?

You know, that's not really relevant. What is important here is to get you on record, straight up, about what you find positive about holocoust-denial sites. It's a bit like nailing jello to a tree, but hey, as long as you don't like it I must be doing something right :)).

[Demidog]

What is important here is to get you on record, straight up, about what you find positive about holocoust-denial sites.

Since I have never indicated that I find anything positive about them and have specifically stated I think Hoffman is a whackjob, what is it that you don't you understand?

[TheLurkerX]

It's seems to me that it's a matter of being tainted. If you had even one mainstream credible source for the same info, why would you choose to source something from a known hate site? Even if you didn't believe in anything else on the site, you've still rendered you're data questionable and buried the point you're trying to make just by the association involved. This is magnified when you don't post a disclaimer about where it came from.