Wikipedia's wikiling writers slowly vindicate Professor Rex Curry's new discoveries
rexcurrydotnet
http://rexcurry.net/wikipedialies.html The article had many visits
from Dr. Rex Curry in the past - see its talk page- as Dr. Curry
attempted to correct the many errors.
http://rexcurry.net/wikipedia-lies.html
1. Dr. Rex Curry showed that the USA's first Pledge used a straight-arm
salute and it was the origin of the salute of the monstrous National
Socialist German Workers' Party (Nazis). It was not an ancient Roman
salute. Professor Curry helped to establish that it was not an ancient
Roman salute, and that the "ancient Roman salute" is a myth.
http://rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html
2. The Pledge began with a military salute that then stretched out
toward the flag. Historic photographs are at
http://rexcurry.net/pledge2.html and at
http://rexcurry.net/pledge_military.html Due to the way that both
gestures were used, the military salute led to the Nazi salute. The
Nazi salute is an extended military salute.
http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-pledge.html
3. Francis Bellamy (author of the "Pledge of Allegiance") and Edward
Bellamy (author of the novel "Looking Backward") and Charles Bellamy
(author of "A Moment of Madness") were socialists. Edward and Charles
were brothers, and Francis was their cousin. Francis and Edward were
both self-proclaimed National Socialists and they supported the
"Nationalism" movement in the USA, the "Nationalist" magazine, the
"Nationalist Educational Association," and their dogma of "military
socialism," and Edward inspired the "Nationalist Party" (in the USA)
and their dogma influenced socialists in Germany, and the Pledge was
the origin of the Nazi salute. "Nazi" means "National Socialist German
Workers' Party." A mnemonic device is the swastika. Although the
swastika was an ancient symbol, Professor Curry discovered that it was
also used sometimes by German National Socialists to represent "S"
letters for their "socialism." Hitler altered his own signature to use
the same stylized "S" letter for "socialist" and similar alphabetic
symbolism still shows on Volkswagens.
http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-swastika.html
Dr. Curry showed that many modern myths about swastikas rely on a false
belief that Nazis called their symbol a "swastika." German National
Socialists did not use the word "swastika," but called their symbol a
"Hakenkreuz." Professor Curry showed that many modern myths rely on a
false belief that Nazis called themselves "Nazis" or used some other
term (Party members referred to themselves as "National Socialists" and
did not use the term "Nazis").
The wikipedia article on the "Roman Salute" becomes more dishonest each
week. An earlier version referenced the work of Professor Rex Curry and
started thusly: "The Roman salute is a gesture in which the arm is held
out forward straight, with palms down. Sometimes the arm is raised
upward at an angle, sometimes it is held out parallel to the ground.
The salute was supposed to have been used in the Roman republic, but
there is no clear evidence of this. Indeed it is not known whether
salutes in the military sense existed at all in Roman culture" (by Paul
Barlow). A more recent version of the same article is written as if a
wikiling writer is a neo-Nazi covering-up again.
A big initial problem is that no wiki writer will even attempt to
discover the first use of the phrase "Roman salute" and thus the
writers remain stuck in intellectually dishonest confusion about dates
and origins.
Eventually, the wiki article reverts back to its earlier opening
concessions to the work of Dr. Curry, and the article concedes that
there is no clear evidence of the salute in the Roman Republic and it
concedes that there is no evidence of salutes in the military sense at
all in Roman culture. http://rexcurry.net/book1a1contents-pledge.html
The wikiling writer then engages in speculation that people today
misunderstood some images from ancient Rome. There is no support for
the idea that the "Roman Salute" concept arose long ago from
misinterpretations of Roman images. There is as much evidence that,
after Dr. Curry's shocking discoveries about the salute's origin with
the Pledge of Allegiance, modern writers (including wiki writers)
deliberately looked for other explanations and then those writers
misinterpreted Roman images in order to cover-up Professor Curry's
discoveries.
The wikiling writer then engages in speculation that neoclassical
artists misunderstood some images from ancient Rome. There is no
support for the idea that the "Roman Salute" concept arose among
neoclassical artists from misinterpretations of Roman images. There is
as much evidence that, after Dr. Curry's shocking discoveries about the
salute's origin with the Pledge of Allegiance, modern writers
(including wiki writers) deliberately looked for other explanations and
then those writers seized upon neoclassical artists in order to
cover-up Professor Curry's discoveries.
For example, there is no evidence that Jacques-Louis David actually
thought that his painting "The Oath of the Horatii" represented an
actual historical Roman salute. All of the evidence indicates that
David created the scene out of whole cloth for drama. All of the
speculating otherwise is actually the machinations of wiki writers and
people of their ilk. The intellectual dishonesty is all the more
evident in that the wiki writers deliberately fail to address those
very points already made by Dr. Curry
http://rexcurry.net/pledgehoratii.html Further, the Horatii painting
depicts three people reaching for weapons.
The Tennis Court Oath was painted by David later, and repeats David's
use of the dramatic gesture that David concocted, but in a more modern
setting. There is no evidence that it accurately depicts the event
protrayed. David was not there. Further, the oath was written on paper
(the paper being read by the central figure?) and the "oath was taken"
by signing the document. There is no evidence that anyone is taking an
oath in the painting (the central figure might be swearing, or he might
be reading his document) while those people about him waive hats, talk,
holler, point, etc. Three figures on the left seem to be an inside
reference to the Horatii painting.
The Distribution of the Eagle Standards was painted by David even
later, and repeats David's use of the dramatic gesture that David
concocted, but in another modern setting. There is no evidence that it
accurately depicts the event protrayed and there is no evidence that
anyone is taking an oath in the painting at all. The wiki writer
claims that this is the most important of these paintings. That
painting shows no use of the salute in pledging or oath-taking at all
and simply shows various people, with various gestures, grabbing for,
and shouting for, the "Eagle Standards." Some gestures are toward the
front, some gestures are toward the crowd.
The wiki writer misrepresents the paintings and reads into them. The
wiki writer shows that he does not understand the historical events
that actually occurred before the paintings.
The wiki writer then claims that other painters during the nineteenth
century regularly depicted the straight-arm gesture in scenes of Roman
imperial history. The writer cites no support because there is no
support.
There is no support for the idea that the "Roman Salute" concept arose
among neoclassical artists from misinterpretations of Roman images.
There is as much evidence that, after Dr. Curry's shocking discoveries
about the salute's origin with the Pledge of Allegiance, modern writers
(including wikilings) deliberately looked for other explanations and
then those writers misrepresented neoclassical art to cover-up
Professor Curry's discoveries.
The cover-up is also supported by the fact that wiki writers know (or
should know) that Francis Bellamy explained the origin of his salute
and that it had nothing to do with imitating any painting, nor
imitating any "Roman" salute myth.
At this paragraph the intellectual dishonesty doubles. The writer is
attempting to imply that there is a relationship between the original
Pledge salute and the myth of the "Roman salute." No support is cited
because there is no support. The writer is not honest enough to clearly
state that the supposed Roman myth was not an influence upon Francis
Bellamy or Bellamy's cohorts. The writer will not reference Dr. Curry's
clear explanation of how the Pledge salute was selected by Bellamy and
Bellamy's cohorts, which is known because Bellamy explained its
creation. The writer knows that it does not support the myth that the
writer is trying to perpetuate.
The writer will not mention Professor Curry's voluminous dissection of
Bellamy's love of the military, national socialism, and the Bellamy
term "military socialism." The writer is still covering-up for
socialism. The writer is also completely evading the fact that the use
of the military salute in the Pledge evolved into the classic hard
stylized salute of the National Socialist German Workers' Party
(Nazis). The writer is evading the point that the Nazi salute is an
extended military salute, via the Pledge of Allegiance. All of those
are discoveries by Professor Curry.
The writer is unclear because the writer has knowingly refused to
acknowledge Dr. Curry's discovery that the use of the military salute
by Bellamy, caused the extended arm salute to change in use. Wikipedia
articles are so intellectually dishonest that they are comical. It had
nothing to do with the "Roman salute" myth, but the writer cannot bear
to give up his distortions.
The Wikipedia writer implies that the Olympic salute came from a
classical painting, but the wiki writer knows that he has no support to
cite. The wiki writer is aware of Dr. Curry's voluminous and
ground-breaking work exposing the Olympic salute, but the writer is too
intellectually dishonest to even mention it.
http://rexcurry.net/bookchapter1a1c.html The writer evades Professor
Curry's explanation that the Olympic salute also derived ultimately
from the Pledge of Allegiance.
The wiki writer references how Dr. Curry exposed the work of Martin
Winkler regarding the use of the Roman salute in films.
http://rexcurry.net/pledgesalute.html Professor Curry pointed out that
Martin Winkler did not realize at the time of Winkler's article that
the films were all pre-dated by the use of the salute in the U.S.
Pledge of Allegiance. Martin Winkler, while discussing the old films,
was unaware that the salute had been the original salute of the Pledge
of Allegiance. Dr. Curry long ago challenged Martin Winkler to debate
these issues in public and Dr. Curry has maintained that standing
debate challenge, which has been met with complete silence.
http://rexcurry.net/pledge-professor-martin-winkler.html
The wiki writer adopts Martin Winkler's intellectually dishonest use of
the term "fascist" to further aid the wiki writer in covering-up for
the National Socialist German Workers' Party and for the National
Socialism of the Bellamys.
The wiki writer also mentions a chest variation of the salute but the
writer is too intellectually dishonest to mention Dr. Curry's
photographs and explanation that the same variation was used earlier in
the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt did not institute the hand-over-the-heart,
and the writer acknowledges the error in the next sentence when
referencing the act by Congress. The writer fails to mention that
through most of Roosevelt's time in office the straight arm salute was
used and Professor Curry possesses photographic examples of Roosevelt
himself being saluted with the notorious salute. It is interesting to
note that Congress did not inject itself into the mess until after the
U.S. entered World War II, December 7, 1941.
The article uses four (or more) forms of the word "Nazi" and never
gives the actual correct name of the horrid party: the National
Socialist German Workers' Party. It is a classic example of the usual
cover-up for socialism, and the cover-up of the philosophical
relationship between the German National Socialists and U.S. National
Socialists (e.g. the Bellamys). The wiki writer's behavior is
comparable to that of neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers (and Wholecaust
deniers). It reinforces the hackneyed use of the shorthand "Nazi" and
the myth that members of the National Socialist German Workers' Party
referred to themselves as "Nazis" (they did not refer to themselves as
"Nazis"). There are many people who use the word "Nazi" to avoid ever
stating the actual name of the party. Technically speaking, there was
no "Nazi Party" as that is simply shorthand slang that has been spread
by people like the wiki writer. The writer makes constant use of the
shorthand "Nazi" even when discussing the very topic at hand.
Wiki writers evade the topic that Professor Curry has raised, which is
that Francis Bellamy and Edward Bellamy were self-proclaimed National
Socialists in the USA three decades before the National Socialist
German Workers' Party, and Edward's book was an international
bestseller, translated into every major language (including German,
which Edward spoke and wrote, and where Edward had studied as a young
man) and that Edward's dogma inspired "Nationalism" clubs worldwide,
including in Germany.
The Bellamy salute was not originally the same as the salute of the
National Socialist German Workers' Party, as noted by Professor Curry.
However, as anyone who looks at Dr. Curry's historic photographs of the
salute can see, it developed into the same salute as that of the
National Socialist German Workers' Party. Even the writer above
concedes Dr. Curry's point that the flag was saluted with a normal
military-style salute and then the arm was straightened out toward the
flag during the oath. The writer above tellingly evades the point that
the use of the military salute led to the change in the salute to the
U.S. flag. It is as if the writer above is conceding the point made by
Professor Curry.
The writers are thanked for conceding that the "Roman salute" page has
contained inaccuracies, and for correcting some of those errors. The
writers have "become wiser," by incorporating some of Professor Curry's
discoveries.