-47 votes

We Need to Stop the Anti-Jew Posts

Anyone who knows two of Ron Paul's economic influences would be stupid, ignorant, and disgusting to take up the Daily Paul's webspace with any anti-Jewish rhetoric or holocaust denial. I stand fervently against intolerance on this board which represents a community of peaceful, liberty loving, advocates of a free society.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It is anti-libertarian. And I

It is anti-libertarian. And I think you know that. Don't you?

"The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print money to do that." — Alan Greenspan

We must know two different

We must know two different libertarianisms.

The one I know is a philosophy that argues against the use of force.

The one you know seems to be a world where people shouldn't exercise any restraint.

"The one I know is a

"The one I know is a philosophy that argues against the use of force."

Force? Like preventing people from discussing certain issues because you find them objectionable?

"The one you know seems to be a world where people shouldn't exercise any restraint."

...restraint on speech. Right. Nobody is forcing you to listen or read. Nobody is keeping you from responding in kind.

That being said, this is Michael's website. We are guests here.
The rules are posted here: http://www.dailypaul.com/guide

It is up to Michael and the moderators to determine what is suitable on this site, not you or I.

"The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print money to do that." — Alan Greenspan

I’m puzzled. I always thought

I’m puzzled. I always thought force implied physical force, not just prevention. Force could be used to make someone do something rather than stop one from doing something. But I’m equally puzzled by your latter statement when you state, “Nobody is forcing you to listen or read. Nobody is keeping you from responding in kind.” But no one is forcing—by which I mean physical force—you by suggesting we stop saying certain things. You seem to be conflating prevention with force. But prevention does not necessarily imply physical force. I could prevent you from coming in my house by building a concrete wall. Further, it’s simply impossible to physically force someone to do anything through the channels of the internet. All one could do is urge someone to stop doing something, or one can ban someone and thereby prevent one from doing something—but no physical force is required. Of course, I’m not saying force just means physical force—in common parlance force means many things to many people, for instance, a leftist may say one is forced to accept the wage offered by the employer—but libertarians tend to stress the physicality of force.

Nonetheless, I agree with you when you state, “It is up to Michael and the moderators to determine what is suitable on this site, not you or I.”

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

I am an aristocrat. I love liberty; I hate equality. - John Randolph of Roanoke

Pure equivocation. You're

Pure equivocation.
You're correct however, that a suggestion is not force.

"The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print money to do that." — Alan Greenspan

Choosing not to make silly

Choosing not to make silly exaggerations and generalizations about Jews has nothing to do with the first amendment.



When Fascism goes to sleep, it checks under the bed for Ron Paul!

Yes. The first amendment is

Yes. The first amendment is a prohibition on the government's ability to stifle freedom of speech.

Was the OP asking the government to restrict people from speaking? No, he was asking people to stop making silly generalizations about Jewish people on the Daily Paul. Heck, he wasn't even asking for such people to be banned by the moderators of this site.

bullcrap this whole thread is a desperation psyop

The Op was trying to equate Holocau$t denial with anti-semitism in the hopes of imposing a Soviet style PC censorship of holocau$t denier information from reaching the ears or otherwise penetrating the veil of lies the Holocau$t Apologists have been living off of all these decades.

It is a sign of total FEAR and DESPERATION that obvious AIPAC Zionist shills like P Hazlitt, the fbi whatever, and the rest of the Quislings here are attempting to silence debate on such an important topic.

Thank you.

Thank you.

More Holocau$t facts

Auschwitz was a WORK camp, not an extermination camp.

Auschwitz had it's own currency, it's own public swimming pool, theater, a hospital where 3000 babies were born all of them live and it also had it's own brothel where workers could spend the money they made if they so chose.

Over the decades the Holocau$t lobby has spent a lot of it's ill gotten loot promoting a narrative that 6,000,000 Jews were systematically exterminated in a series of extermination camps run by the Nazi's in WWII.

Many developments have taken place that cast doubt on the narrative over the decades as well.

Yes I have many Doubts like the fact that ALL of the camps were located BEHIND the former Iron Curtain, and the claims were made by the ZYDO-Communists who ran our enemy the USSR.

And the fact that the sign on Auschwitz now says 1.1 million not the former 4 million that it read when Poland was part of the USSR.

And the fact that although the number on the sign has dropped by 3,000,000 but the Holocau$t lobby narrative, still claims 6,000,000 without providing any explanation ANY explanation where the other 3M disappeared to.

These doubts are just the tip of the iceberg. I will add the 'beef' over the next few posts...

There were THREE Auschwitz camps

You really are an ignoramus.

One was the base camp, one was a labor camp, and one was an extermination camp. People were carted from camp to camp regularly.

There were (a few) survivors and eyewitness who saw all 3. Their testimony concurs with NAZI records, SS guards and locals that that's exactly what those camps were and exactly what went on there.

NAZIs said it. NAZI records said it. SS guards there said it. Survivors and eyewitnesses said it. Locals said it.

The only discrepant piece of information here comes from you and the other neonazi revisionists on this site.

what does

what does extermination camp even mean ?


"the documented camps include not only “killing centers” but also thousands of forced labor camps, where prisoners manufactured war supplies; prisoner-of-war camps; sites euphemistically named “care” centers, where pregnant women were forced to have abortions or their babies were killed after birth; and brothels, where women were coerced into having sex with German military personnel."




I choose duff over the toilet paper of record any day , but please do your own research and come to your own conclusions.

"He's this eccentric Ghandi-Like figure that you cant touch with the normal bribes that people respond to."
the man Doug Wead on DR. RON PAUL

You lie

Auschwitz was not an extermination camp.

There is not one shred of evidence to prove your stupid claim.

There is no physical evidence to support the claims of the witnesses


According to the model that 'Bibi' was waving around, the closest building to the 'gas chamber' was the hospital where Jew and Nazi alike received equally excellent medical treatment. The next closest building to the 'gas chamber' was the Nazi commandants living quarters...

How gullible does someone have to be to buy the ridiculous claim that the Nazi's put a 24/7 slaughter and incineration program right in the middle of the city where the smoke and constantly escaping poisonous gas would fill the air over a huge area.

Aerial surveillance of Auschwitz DURING the so-called extermination time frame showed ZERO evidence of the 300' flames required to burn the bodies of 300 people per 1/2 hour in the pits behind the single story 'shower' facility.

Imagine the 6000 people standing in line every day, waiting patiently for their turn to take a shower, with 300' flames and the smell of barbeque coming up from behind the shower, and then imagine what would happen if any of the 'victims' were to ever doubt that the shower wasn't really a shower...why that would have been the end of the line for the Auschwitz gas chamber line, because not even one person would have walked willingly into the 'shower' after that.

All of the 'survivors' have been living off of reparations from the German people so their testimony isn't worth a crap, and all of the nazi's were tortured into their confessions, so their testimony doesn't count either, which leaves NOTHING that can be trusted as evidence that the Holocau$t was a real event and the MOUNTAIN of actual forensic evidence that disproves the entire story.

If that is the best you can come up with as evidence you had better quit now, punk, before you fall too far behind.

I am not a neonazi I am a 5th generation US Military Veteran and more American than anyone you ever met.

too true





"The research could have legal implications as well by helping a small number of survivors document their continuing claims over unpaid insurance policies, looted property, seized land and other financial matters. "




"He's this eccentric Ghandi-Like figure that you cant touch with the normal bribes that people respond to."
the man Doug Wead on DR. RON PAUL


So, just for context, I personally know the son of this man:

Despite the fact that the tens of thousands of prisoners who survived Auschwitz were witnesses to the crimes committed there; despite the fact that they left behind thousands of depositions, accounts, and memoirs; despite the fact that considerable quantities of documents, photographs, and material objects remain from the camp—despite all of this, there are people and organizations who deny that hundreds of thousands of people were murdered in this camp, that gas chambers operated there, or that the crematoria could burn several thousand corpses per day. In other words, they deny that Auschwitz was the scene of genocide.

The denial of the Holocaust and genocide take many forms, from simply ignoring obvious facts by manipulating the sources, through minimizing the dimensions of genocide, to trivializing and rationalizing genocide by analogy and claiming that it is an acceptable example of the kinds of things that happen in wartime.

The deniers of the Holocaust and genocide attack three facts in particular:

the existence of the gas chambers
the capacity of the crematoria in the camps, which far exceeded the natural death rate
the enormous scale of the crime.

The aim of denying the existence of the gas chambers is, first, to negate the mass scale of the crime of genocide. The second aim is to make it easier to contend that people have always been killed on a greater or lesser scale throughout history, and that the things that the Nazis did during the Second World War were hardly exceptional, but rather examples of the kind of repression that always occurs during war.

Nobody knows you

Therefore your input is not in 'context'.

Despite the fact there are no dead bodies, no mass grave sites, no where near the crematoria ovens and no proof that merely pouring cyclone b pellets through a hole in the roof will kill the people inside the gas chamber, and just plain NO EVIDENCE except the testimony of highly paid communist Jews, and highly tortured Nazi officials, and no chance of getting back in front of the dissemination of information relating to this topic, AIPAC shills continue their Quixotic quest to put the genie back in the bottle.

Yep fact 1 the entire phony Jew, phony holocau$t depends on the Auschwitz gas chamber story. This fact is true because there is no evidence of other extermination camps, or even work camps, where the Holocaust lobby claims they were located.

The holocau$t story is dead.


That's funny because I visited them and spoke to people who were interred and/or escaped from the very places I visited. They disagree with you.

Let's see places I saw with my own eyes + eyewitnesses who were at those places vs. you. Hmm....

Holocau$t deniers = 9/11 truthers Phil Hazlitt is a demagogue

I am reposting my challenge, especially to the author of this topic.

Where are you hiding A**HOLE?

What challenge?

I don't get the 9/11 Truther Holocaust denier reference?

Ummm, the official stories are both bs?

Both of these events were false flag events. Not REAL in the way they have been fed to us by government.

As in EXACTLY the same kind of BS?

Not being able to see these events as the Zionist false flag events they are, shouldn't attempt to take the challenge, lol...

I think

I saw him hiding next to your empty bottle of anger management pills.

Eric Hoffer

What about you then?

Since you decide you want to fight his battle will YOU take the holocau$t debate challenge?

Do you agree with the author that Holocau$t(tm) denial is disgusting and all of that other crap?

Were Jews really tricked by the thousands every day for over a year into walking into a shower that was really a gas chamber?

Did every 'survivor' Jew who was able to walk REALLY leave with the Nazi's WILLINGLY to avoid being LIBERATED by the soviets?

Do the red cross records show that only 200,000 people died in Auschwitz not the 4 million previously recorded, or the 1.1 million still being used?

Was the Polish president who died along with his entire cabinet in a mysterious plane crash REALLY a Holocau$t(tm) denier too?

Time to put up or shut up LOL!

I'm giving 100 to 1 odds Eric Hoffer just lost his tongue...

Lets agree to debate terms

I'll agree to debate you on this subject when you agree that writing holocaust as "Holocau$t(tm)" is stupid and absurd.

I'm not certain what you're trying to achieve with it. Is the term trademarked officially and you're scared of being sued? If so, you need to reference who the trademark is attributed to at the bottom of the document. If you're trying to imply trademark on the term, on a public forum, you're a complete idiot.

Or maybe the tm is an abbreviation? I'm trying to think of what it stands for, and the only phrase coming to mind is "Total Moron" which would make sense at least.

Eric Hoffer

Sounds like...

a Glenn Beck dogmatic thread. With freedom, people will do things you will not like. Suck it up or become a republican/authoritarian, philhazlitt.

I'm not a fan of Glenn

I'm not a fan of Glenn Beck--at all. I understand your point about freedom, Galt is good. I'm not calling for censorship of their opinion.

I'm definitely not an authoritarian. I've always been a libertarian Republican.

My point is simple. If this site is comprised of libertarians, why does it sound like the message board of National Vanguard?

Now that I have some perspective....

I just read the post titled "We should stop posting," and I had to smile. It brought this whole debate into perspective.

I hate racism. By anyone. I hate collectivist talk. So I have tried writing a response that supported the OP, but the more I wrote, the more complicated the issue got for me. I tried to parse the times when it is ok to use group identity and times when it is not. Conclusion: waaaay too complicated to be a practical guide.

So, instead, I support writing anit-Jew, anti-honky, anti-woman,anti-man, anti-gay, anti-bible thumper, anti-EVERYTHING posts. I also support, equally and without prejudice, reading those posts and responding with my rapier wit to discredit and denounce illogical, stupid, small minded, and prejudiced ideas.

So post away, you fools. I'll call you out, and we'll tango!

there is a difference between discrimination and racism

some tribes work with different principles and distinguishing such brings clarity to individuals about the dangers of collectivism, so let us not throw the baby out with the bath water.

A true flower can not blossom without sunlight and a true man can not live without love.

I want all races to die.

That means we all need to start fkng each other A LOT. I am going on tour starting right now and I want a hot chick from every race waiting at every stop... ready everyone.... GO!

Let's melt in this pot baby!

Already done.

The old 1800s concept of race that the neonazis on this board continue to attest to was put to bed once and for all in the year 2000 when Y-DNA (patrilineal) DNA testing was proven as a science.

There's no such thing as "race" anymore, only haplogroups:


Anyone who keeps attesting to the old 1800s concept of "race" is a demonstrated anti-scientific ignoramus.