Friday, October 20, 2006

Up Against The Wall

I received this email today:

AgainsTTheWall has left a new comment on your post "Amnesty Still Telling Lies":

AI have point-blank refused to interest themselves in the cases of Ernst Zundel and Germar Rudolf - both kidnapped and sent from the USA to Germany where they are currently incarcerated for their works on modern history.

AI is a cowardly PC organisation of the worst stripe.

Publish this comment.

Reject this comment.

Having never heard of the two gentlemen in question – but having my suspicions - I did a quick Google search. Lo and behold, I was right. They are Holocaust Deniers and Nazi sympathisers.

I did consider rejecting the comment and forgetting it. After all, my blog is not a forum for lying, Hitler-worshipping morons. I decided in the end that it would be better to respond. It’s important for the Men’s Movement to stamp out any emerging Dworkin Tendency before it takes root. We don’t want to leave these guys unchallenged and then find ourselves twenty years later teaching their deluded bile in universities as if it’s the truth. That’s what the feminists did with Dworkin, Solanas, MacKinnon and Daly, and the other hate-spitting neo-fascist harridans, yet another reason why I will never give the feminist movement any respect or credibility whatsoever. We need to make sure we don’t make the same mistake.

It also occurred to me that 'AgainsTTheWall' might be a feminist who is trying to fool me into posting pro-Nazi propaganda on my blog, in an effort to discredit me. I don’t know. But I can safely say it’s a deeply unpleasant moron of some description.

Let’s make this clear once and for all. I harbour a deep-seated loathing of totalitarianism in every form, and I regard this as one of my best character traits. The feminist movement is the last surviving, largely unchallenged, bastion of Twentieth century totalitarian ideology. That's another reason I oppose it so vigorously. Don’t expect me to have any sympathy with your right-wing causes. I don’t. Your flavour of totalitarianism is still totalitarianism.

One of the hall-marks of totalitarianism is the refusal to tolerate free enquiry. I frequently lambaste the feminist movement for jumping to false conclusions on the basis of fabricated evidence. Why on earth this person thinks I am going to give a moment’s credence to Holocaust denial is beyond me.

Dear AgainsTTheWall,

As an organisation, Amnesty International concerns itself with the plight of political prisoners (*). Political prisoners are typically:-

(1) Incarcerated for criticising the prevailing political authorities
(2) Denied due legal process.

Neither of these criteria applies to the two gentlemen that you mention. They were not imprisoned for criticising the German authorities. They were charged with breaking German laws, for which they were given a fair trial in a German court. When you use the word ‘kidnapped’, you mean extradited, under a treaty between two democratically elected governments. In short, these gentlemen are not political prisoners; they are simply prisoners. As such, I believe that Amnesty International was correct in refusing any involvement in their cases.

If you and your little jack-booted friends came to power, I wonder how many political opponents you would be ‘kidnapping’, and how much regard you would have for their human rights. As an apparent Nazi sympathiser, your supposed concern with human rights is a hypocritical sham.



(*)Or at least it did until it was taken over by feminists. Nowadays it mainly concerns itself with the lives of women in Third-world countries. However, let us assume for the sake of argument that it is still concerned with political prisoners.


Anonymous said...

I think that you can rest assured that 'Heretic' ain't no feminist, but a well-known right-wing UK activist who believes in free speech for all.

And bearing in mind that many EU bureaucrats would like to clamp down on anti-feminist speech, or speech that 'degrades the dignity of women', it might not be long before your own blog is considered to be legally unpalatable.

Destrier said...

I think you might be being a bit overly cautious in your approach.

These guys ARE guilty of breaking german laws, you are right. They are guilty of THOUGHTCRIME.

I'm no expert on their cases but from the little I have read it seems they have done historical inquiries into events in the past and found anomolies. What they have found has called into question the magnitude of the holocaust and the methods by which people were killed in concentration camps. They may even go as far as saying that there was no German plan of extermination, merely cruel abuse and neglect leading to cholera outbreaks and death by starvation.

It seems they may have a point, I'm not sure.

What I am reasonably confident in is that they are not neo-Nazis, they are historians. They have conducted research and reached very different conclusions to the established "facts" in all the history books.

Why is any of this relevant to the Mens Rights movement?

It is relevant because these guys are rebels, they are fighting popular beliefs with facts and research. They are in gaol!

If its a fact that 1 in 4 women are victims of domestive violence and that women are paid less than men...and to say otherwise is to be try to re-instate the patriarchy...that could make us...NEO-PATRIARCHS!!!

Horror of horrors!

Let's do away with freedom of speech so that we can protect the world from dangerous heretics. Let's throw all the mens rights activists in gaol shall we?

Why not, they threaten the perpetual victimhood of the ruling master class of the Western world: women.

Women spend 80% of the money while men pay 80% of the tax. Men are disenfranchised in their own countries, robbed of equal education or protection under the law, yet women are still victims.

Zionists use their Jewishness to claim perpetual victimhood and the need for protection, even at the expense of freedom of speech, despite leeching off the U.S. and Germany, oppressing and disenfranchising genuine Semites in their native homeland and waging destructive wars on their neighbouring countries.

There are some pretty stark parallels there, don't you think?

According to the Australian Association of Women Lawyers the Australian state of New South Wales will have a majority of women lawyers in the near future. Is this trend not the case in all western societies, where boy's education is failing them in a devastating manner and young men are retreating from an abusive and uncaring society?

With a majority of female lawmakers (with their awesome powers of egalitarian logic) will we not see anti-feminist or "patriarch-deniers" thrown in gaol?

Personally, I don't think so, but it would not be for want of trying!

Whenever anyone argues from a position of logic using sound, objective reasoning and facts and as a reply they are locked up...then you have to wonder about the validity of the thing they are arguing against!!!

Why not counter facts with facts? Research with research? Logic with logic? Is it because it can't be done...successfully?

Again, sound familiar?

Replying to an academic study with gaol is like responding to a mens rights activist with "You've probably got a tiny dick!"

AgainsTTheWall said...

Dear Heretic

Disagree with the official line on the Holocaust therefore a Nazi? A non-sequitur - a common one but a non-sequitur nonetheless.

Whether Zundel and Rudolf are right or not is irrelevant to the issue which is that these men are in gaol because of what they wrote (one could mention in passing David Irving - in gaol for what he said). Well within AIs purview I would have thought.

Your hysterical reaction would not disgrace a feminist. Anyway I apologise for upsetting you - never my intention.

Best Wishes


Heretic said...

Thank you for your communications. This is an anti-feminist, men's movement blog. Your case is similar to the guy who wants to talk about the Federal Reserve being taken over by Freemasons. He may think it is relevant to my discussion, but I disagree.

I am not an expert on the history of the second world war, but as far as I am aware, respectable professional historians all agree that the Holocaust did happen, and a lot of those who publish revisionist work on the subject are neo-Nazi sympathisers who wish to rehabilitate the reputation of Hitler and/or Germany. I do not personally know why Germany, France and Austria have all made it a criminal offence to deny the orthodox understanding of the Holocaust, but I guess it is because they have a real problem with resurgent fascism, and this is a tactic intended to deal with it.

These are, in general, liberal democratic countries, and as such they have the right to enjoy their sovereignty. If you choose to go there and break the law, that's your problem. AI generally deals with situations such as extra-judicial disappearance, in which the democratic rule of law is absent.

Liberal democrats (of which I am one) do not have a duty to tolerate everything, regardless of what it is. In fact, they have a duty to oppose those who wish to end liberal democracy. Thus, making war on totalitarianism is justified under some circumstances (such as self-defence), as is imprisoning individuals for incitement.

I agree that a feminist police state is an increasingly worrying possibility in some Anglophone nations. That is why I am here. Our duty is to prevent feminists (and other dictators) from getting into power. We have already left it too late, and that process is well advanced. I believe that the mobilisation of men, pro-family groups and liberal women is the best hope. I do not particularly care what the law is in Germany. That's for the Germans to worry about. I have enough to do here.

Anonymous said...

While I do enjoy the content of your blog and generally agree wth the conclusions that are drawn, the fact that your (and most MRAs for that matter) extreme concern over being lumped (by femhags no less) into one category or other cannot be missed . Why is this so? Perhaps it is a reaction to being labeled racist, misogynist, sexist, intolerant, etc when a logical argument is presented and ad hominem attacks such as these come forth when it cannot be rebutted. Relying on a google search to form an opinion is simply foolish at best. For example, a search for Andrea Dworkin or Betty Friedan will return a whole host of sites in condemnation and praise of each. The same goes for Wikipedia as Fred X has correctly pointed out. How then does one to determine what is is truth? Doing the research for oneself and not relying one the conclusions of another or popular belief that’s how!!! I cannot speak for Zundel, but I have read a majority of the work by Germar Rudolf and I do not recall any “Hitler worshipping” or “Nazi sympathies” presented and does not advocate an end to liberal democracy. I am surprised that an MRA of all people would resort to this sort of logic as legitimate response. Simply questioning the established view of such a significant event in history should not lead to jail time. What I was shocked to read was your argument that such speech is outlawed for the protection of society. This sounds eerily similar to what fembots preach regarding MRA sites (not equating Nazi Germany with the MRA movement). Using totalitarian policies to prevent the alleged potential of another???? If open and unrestricted debate is allowed, then a false or unsubstantiated argument would fall flat as evidenced by the feminist nonsense exposed on blogs such as this. Perhaps this is why speech is restricted in the first place…… Why would a random comment discredit all of the work presented on this site? Femhags already use the ridiculously easy argument to refute that MRAs hate women. Why then would this be any different. If this Marti Abernathey character makes further wild assertions based upon reader posts, then again, it will be a relatively easy task to dispense each one. Not allowing posts for fear of lying femhags (redundant) using false allegations against you is not a strong argument. Guess what, readers of her trash are most likely not the type to determine to fact from fiction or even to judge the veracity of femhag ideology, not to mention that false allegations from the feminist crowd is standard operating procedure. This is not intended to be an attack, but merely expressing some thought on other non-PC areas. As I said earlier, great blog.