Thursday, November 27, 2014

Floggerette Displays No Use for the Truth

At XRoads, Mousy Tongue sez:
Hey guys, big surprise: she’s falsely reporting success in that SC discussion. Furman faculty has been making short shrift of her smacking sounds. Meanwhile she digresses about honoring Erwin Rommel & the German soldiers of WWII.
The "she" referred to here is Yours Truly.... See for yourself who argued from emotion (liberals, "Furman faculty," and assorted anti-flaggers who respond with cascades of emotion and without a single neuron firing) and who dispassionately presented facts, and even rational, common-sense opinion ...

http://www.thestate.com/2014/11/22/3829567_exclusive-confederate-flag-still.html?fb_comment_id=fbc_855221447841906_856083207755730_856083207755730&rh=1#f3e62d60939b34a

Also note that it wasn't I who "digressed" -- it was one of the ring-leaders of the hyper-emotional liberals, James Scott, who introduced the Nazis to the conversation with his totally irrelevant reference to the SS. (Anybody surprised Mousy Tongue  didn't mention that? I thought not.) I threw some facts about it at Ol' James and he responded soooo predictably.
Elizabeth Herring -- James Scott They are only championing honoring the war dead. This is only a debate over a flag that flies on the Civil War memorial.
=====
James Scott -- Elizabeth Herring When do you plan on honoring the SS war dead?
=====
Connie Chastain -- James Scott the SS was not the German Army. Many people DO honor the German Army of WWII and its war dead. Field Marshal Erwin Rommel was respected by both sides. I'm surprised you don't know this. But you have to be an objective and fairminded person to separate those fighting for their country from those oppressing others. You apparently haven't developed such a capacity. I have huge respect for U.S. armed services even when I scorn the unconstitutional missions their mutant government sends them on.
=====
James Scott -- Connie Chastain So Hitler's army also comprises heroes of yours. This is not necessarily a revelation to me. However, I would point out that Field Marshal Rommel was implicated in the plot to assassinate Hitler and end the war, so at least he showed some integrity, albeit not until it was almost too late anyway.
=====
Connie Chastain -- James Scott, sorry, no. I only recently learned about Rommel from a woman in a chatroom I was a member of. Sorry to burst your hate-bubble. BTW, Rommel also disobeyed orders to kill Jewish soldiers and civilians, and treated POWs humanely. He was never accused of war crimes. This info is easily available online, for people who can see past their hate enough to read it.
________________

Now, lets look at this. Reporting what a former chat-room member said about Rommel, and what Wikipedia says about him, in the super-saturated, indoctrinated mind of James Scott equates to making heroes of Hitler's army? How does a reasonably knowledgeable person  come up with such nonsense?

It appears Ol' James scurried to look up Rommel and found out about his involvement in the plot to assassinate Hitler, and conceded that he "showed some integrity." I guess Rommel's earlier humanity in refusing to kill Jewish soldiers and civilians, though ordered to, and treating POWs humanely, do not add up to "showing some integrity" in the indoctrination-steeped mentality Scott clings to.

When confronted with this kind of sheer hallucination, I have to wonder.... Do the James Scotts of the world really not know they are lying? Or do they actually believe the garbage they spew? Watching Scott in action on that thread, one almost visualizes not a flesh and blood human person, but some computer algorithm popping up programmed responses, but for the mountain of emotionalism underlying their responses..

But Mousy Tongue / LibertyLamp / Hecate Crowley / Crowley Hecate / Inglourious Basterd / AnonBorg and (who knows how many other fraudulent profiles she goes by)) has no such excuse. She may be indoctrinated, but she's not so far gone that she can't tell when she's lying.

And she is lying. Of course, telling the truth ... lying ... it's all the same to leftists. Whatever serves their agenda of destruction....


________________
Note: When I say I only recently learned about Rommel, what I mean is that for most of my life, until the last ten years or so, I had a view of him as a stereotypical Nazi, and nothing more. I was aware that he was involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler, but I knew little about it, nor did I know about his humanity as a soldier, until I learned things about him online. But you have to be devoid of integrity to equate learning a little about Rommel with making heroes of the German army.

18 comments :

  1. One other thing these "historians" might not have known about the Desert Fox....he was involved with and sympathetic to several members of the German Resistance Movement that sought to get rid of the Nazi Party and Hitler. In fact Rommel might never have died had Von Staffenburg's bomb been effective in killing that twisted psychopath on July 20, 1944.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So 60% of blacks in SC are against the Confederate flag (average of the two poll questions).

    Isn't it suppose to be 100%?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In fact its significantly less than it was a decade ago. They are losing the fight slowly.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, people say what Heritage folks are doing is pointless, but really it's wakening a lot of people up to the truth.

      Delete
    3. They know that too, that's why they are so fixated on us.

      Delete
  3. These people don't care about truth or fairness, only winning the argument. They say whatever they think will defeat their opponent. It's a basic, yet flawed, debating tactic. All you have to do is say "You're changing the subject". If I were you, I'd read up on fallacies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Their favorite why to change the subject is to demand sources, which they then reject.

      Delete
  4. For a good example of this see Robbie Barkar's comments on Cold Southern Steel concerning CSRs. He is trying to tell me that not being the original records they cannot be used.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Can't be used for what? He's always coming up with some cockamamie, out-in-left-field reasons for this, that or the other. I think that's what college students are taught these days -- how to twist and bend and stretch and distort....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The funniest is when they dismiss a book because it's a single point source. Then tell you to read a book that's the only one of its kind on a particular topic. Otherwise, they claim that your book "wasn't well sourced" or researched, in spite of a bibliography and reference list that runs into the thousands, if not more. Like that semi friendly flogged who dismissed Yankee Babylon because he heard it "wasn't well researched." More likely it's because it tells the unimpeachable truth about Northerners, their culture, and their fundamental hostility towards the rest of America.

      Delete
  6. Can't be used to verify a (Negro) soldiers records. His insistence is these are only index cards and no real historian uses index cards as a source. Also they are held in the Confederate archives-- what ever that is supposed to mean. I know there are errors but it is what we have.

    This is just another example of his bigotry.

    George

    ReplyDelete
  7. Whatever you offer up will not be accepted. Even when you meet their stated requirements of "proof" they will move the goalpost. They have too much time and effort invested in denial to concede anything.

    CSRs

    Most of the info is transcribed from original records (rolls- muster, pay, hospital, &c). Some contain original documents.

    ReplyDelete
  8. LOL LOL I posted the CSR page from the National Archives and also the "Confederate Archives" his comment --- "Don’t even get the point you’re trying to make. You just copied and pasted a micro film index from the archives website"

    BY claiming ignorance he proves my point!!!!

    I fail to understand how ignorance is supposed to substitute for a factual answer? I suppose when they have nothing else to answer with, ignorance can be a mat that softens the fall??? It would seem to me the simple thing to say is "I didn't know that!!!!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you handed him these documents in person, he'd probably shrug them off. I saw this post on CSS, btw. It boils down to either believing the records, or not. I've noticed that these people will even reject Northern records when they don't comport with their opinions. Which they don't most of the time. They can't seem to tell the difference between fact and opinion.

      Delete
  9. I know there are errors in the CSRs, but the basic records seem to be mostly correct. Also most of know the CSRs are limited to what the copyist determined was important to record and his or her reading and spelling of names, units etc. To dismiss these records as nothing more than index cards is just stupidity. What makes the situation with Baker even more stupid is he provided the pension records for "Carey" and then tried to make a play on words.

    Let me get in a shameless plug at this time. As soon as I finish the Confederate Communications at Ft. Sumter, I will be posting some very interesting information. I expect these fellows on the other side to really throw a hissy fit.

    George

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm looking forward to that. I enjoyed the info on Sumter.

      Delete
  10. Refusing to recognize sources that disagree with what they want to believe is like a blanket of asbestos insulation for flogger-types.

    ReplyDelete
  11. speaking of insulation, they like to throw out their degrees and proclaim they are real historians, yet they are biased in their views. These people give any real historian a bad name!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are welcome, but monitored.