Tuesday, March 22, 2005

davi wrote, " it makes you wonder why irving resists people labeling his hatred of Jews as anti-Semitism."

It doesn't make sense. The "Holocaust Denial" label is a manipulative propaganda tactic Lipstadt uses, an honest look at the facts shows this to be the case. But some people don't want the facts aired.

davi wrote, "since Irving has been convicted of libel"

No, he wasn't convicted, he lost his libel suit against Lipstadt. Irving wasn't on trial for libel, he was suing for libel. A Judge unwilling to take an honest look at the facts sided against Irving in Irving's suit against Lipstadt that she libeled him.

You really don't have a grasp on the basic issues yet you are so sure you know the facts. You don't know the facts and it is a disgrace that such ignorant people take swipes at C-SPAN.

It is a disgrace that Media Matters participates in a vicious campaign against C-SPAN and of libeling David Irving. It is grotesque, manipulative and dishonest to use a propaganda term like "Holocaust Denier" to describe Irving. Media Matters is now attacking the best thing on TV.

You and Media Matters should support C-SPAN's efforts at fairness, they happen to be correct because most people are not getting all the facts. It would come as a surprise to many, I am sure, to learn that Mr. Irving has documented evidence of the massive shooting of Jews and has written and talked about gassings taking place at Auschwitz so the term "denier" is simply slander.

Has everyone forgotten the OJ trial? Just because OJ was not convicted does not mean he was not guilty. Just because Libstadt was not convicted of libel does not mean that she was not guilty.

The woman simply twists things into untruths in order to serve her agenda and she doesn't want people heard that expose her dishonesty. Case in point, she has just removed all the comments from her blog because she claims, "most of them filled with drivel trying to prove all sorts of absurd things, e.g. Irving is not a denier and he did not lose the lawsuit."
This is a perfect example of how she deceives readers. The fact is no one argued that Irving "did not lose the lawsuit", what was argued was that Irving should not have lost the lawsuit! This is yet another example of Lipstadt dishonestly portraying a situation so that she can win her ideological battle. What as shame people don't look into the facts before they trash the best thing on TV. Read the links at my blog, they go into more detail.

No comments: