Incontrovertible proof that HHW is a dishonest person
drahcir
HHW's assertion that the jewish "propaganda machine" was using 6
million rather than 5.1 million jews killed in the Holocaust not
because 6 is the correct number, but because it suits the "machine's"
evil ends:
********
Let's assume you have a point [LOL!]. Let's say this "propaganda
machine" chooses 6 million not because it is THE round number that
falls perfectly within the aggregate of mainstream estimates, but
rather, for some nefarious end. Please detail for the group precisely
what the "propaganda machine" is gaining by maintaining 6 million
rather than 5.1. BE SPECIFIC. By that, I mean you need to say, well,
by maintaining 6 million, the machine gains x, whereas if it
maintained 5.1, x would not be valid. Got it? I hope so. I'll be
waiting
********
HHW replied thus:
You literally bet your boots, sir. I've got it in spades. I love it
when you make mistakes such as this and ask serious questions,
especially ones upon which entire books (which you haven't read) have
been written. But I've not the time just now. I'll be back later.
*********
But, there was no reply for nearly three weeks. After nearly daily
goading by me and nearly daily boasts of the "crushing" reply he would
provide, he finally, on March 18, responded. I don't think H would
object if I said that the gist of his reply is this:
"The fewer the dead the
less likely that much more money can be realized through the
industry's unique efforts to leverage shame and guilt. It's really
quite simple."
but anyone wishing to can verify for himself by reading H's entire
reply here:
http://tinyurl.com/c2u8tl
*********
To this, I immediately posted a reply. In short order, HHW had
admitted that 5.1 was something he couldn't prove more valid than 6 or
7.2. This admission, of course, destroys his entire thesis. The
remainder of the discussion can be found here:
The above URL is the last post in the subthread - it is by me, and HHW
has yet to reply to it. However, that didn't stop him from playing a
braggart-fool-liar with this post to Gary Renzetti:
"Did you notice how she ran from my
deliciously delayed answer to her Holocaust post?"
HHW's first dishonest ploy to escape admitting error is to lie: of
course, I did not run. As if this wasn't bad enough, in another
thread, he decided to draw attention to this fiasco:
********
> On Mar 20, 12:36 pm, drahcir <justrichardsmu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 20, 1:41 pm, HHW <coaster132...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > <snip for focus>
> > > > You made the assertion that the "holocaust propaganda machine"
> > > > maintained that the total number killed in the Holocaust was 6 million
> > > > although the "true" number was 5.1. million. I asked you to prove it
> > > > by showing one instance where 6 produced an advantage that 5.1 didn't.
> > > > After goading you every day for nearly 3 weeks, you figured you were
> > > > not going to escape, so you proudly replied, in fact, you drew
> > > > attention to it like a small child who accomplished what he thought
> > > > was an amazing feat with a separate post titled "Hey, everyone, I've
> > > > answered Ratner's post about the Holocaust". Of course, you didn't
> > > > provide a link to that reply because you are too stupid to know how.
> > > > Anyway, in your incredible, unbelievable stupidity, said
> > > > "The fewer the dead the
> > > > less likely that much more money can be realized through the
> > > > industry's unique efforts to leverage shame and guilt. It's really
> > > > quite simple. "
> > > > Yet, you admitted that you have no proof that 5.1 is more valid than 6
> > > > or 7.2. 5.1 is just your opinion of the "real" number. You, an
> > > > ignoramus who had never even HEARD of Hilberg some months ago, now
> > > > have formed an "opinion". Isn't that nice? Problem is, H, that since
> > > > you cannot prove that 5.1 is "the" number, and since 5.1 is THE LOWER
> > > > LIMIT of reasonable estimates. your hypothesis that 6 is chosen for
> > > > any other than objective reasons falls apart. Worse, you cannot name
> > > > even one lawsuit or negotiation that relied on 6, and of course even
> > > > if you could, you still could not prove that that number was relied
> > > > upon for any reason other than it is the most reasonable number. Do I
> > > > have that right, H? Gosh, what a crushing reply....
> > <snip to focus on what HHW below claims he has answered, but in fact
> > has not. If he had, his reply would have appeared within and below the
> > paragraphs above. His below claim to have "pretty much" answered the
> > above paragraphs is nothing but a blatant lie.>
> > > I've pretty much answered this post below.
> > A pure lie.
> > I don't want to repeat the
> > > arguments.
> > LOL! You are just a silly, cowardly liar.
> It seemed similar to me.
Aw, it seemed similar to him. Isn't that precious? Similar to what, H?
Are you getting befuddled? Or just acting that way because, in your
panic, you don't know any other way to extricate yourself? H, listen
closely. You didn't address the above, and everyone here knows it,
including you. What you hope to gain with the incredibly weak
statement "it seemed similar to me", besides showing everyone what a
loser you are, is open to question.
Perhaps I'm wrong. If there is something
> especially new in it let me know.
There is nothing "especially new". These are points you have not
addressed. The reason is that you can't - you are lost, and you know
it as well as anyone. They were first presented here
Then they were presented in my previous post in this thread. Acting
confused will not help you, H. Being confused won't, either.
**********
This can ve viewed at http://tinyurl.com/dkxb5l . It summarizes the
points to which HHW has no reply.
So we can see HHW's second dishonest ploy to avoid admitting error is
to play confused. Exactly how much is playing is anyone's guess. To
the above he wrote this reply:
"I've looked at it again. It doesn't interest me. Perhaps if you could
re-write it? Haha"
HHW's third dishonest ploy to avoid admitting error is to act superior
(and, of course, to lie more). The best defense is a good offense.
This was his final post in the thread.
In summary, the above proves incontrovertibly that HHW is dishonest.
Most of us, upon having our argument proven invalid, would simply
admit error and move on. Apparently, HHW cannot do that. I think it is
not extreme to say that the reason for this is that he is
fundamentally dishonest, thus has no compunction whatever about lying,
in this context or any other. Thus, lying is much less distasteful to
him than admitting error. H, your lies have not worked in the past
with me, and will not work here. You will be facing posts such as this
regularly until you acknowledge two things: that your assertion about
6 million was wrong, and that you have been dishonest in this thread.