BeatleLinks LogoNav Panel New Sites Cool Sites Top Rated Fab Forum Add A Site Link To Us Revolution Radio New Products



Go Back   BeatleLinks Fab Forum > Solo Forums > Menlove Avenue


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 26, 2003, 12:25 AM   #1
 
Posts: n/a
Default free speech

I have free speech as well. And I plan on telling single person on this planet you are linking to a Holocaust Denial site with John Lennon's name.

You have free speech. So do I- this is just the beginning, I promise you. I am not letting you DANCE ON THESE PEOPLE'S GRAVES. I am going to protest this site beginning tomorrow. So just PREPARE YOURSELF FOR THE DELUGE.
 
Old May 26, 2003, 01:19 AM   #2
Magill
Sun King
 
Magill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 02, 2002
Location: Back to where I once belonged
Posts: 13,597

Default Re: free speech

You sure do, Walrusegg. Just as we have the right to ignore nonsense.
Magill is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 01:24 AM   #3
Savoy Truffle
Paperback Writer
 
Savoy Truffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 26, 2002
Location: Northwest Territories
Posts: 2,775
Default Re: free speech

I have to agree with Magill, walrusegg!
Savoy Truffle is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 02:43 AM   #4
bearkat77
Administrator
 
bearkat77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 04, 2000
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 60,688



Default Re: free speech

Yes, you do have a right to free speech, walrusegg. I have been silent about that topic until today. I voiced my opinion on it and it basically agreed with everyone else. There no need to "beat a dead horse" here.

The more you talk about that site, the more free publicity you garner for it. The majority of those that posted did not even want to go to that site.

If you are really that adamant about it, I suggest you file a petition against it. There is a web site where you can do this. Deluging these forums is really not the best way to protest it.
bearkat77 is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 03:14 AM   #5
FPSHOT
Sun King
 
FPSHOT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 04, 2000
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 31,563



Default Re: free speech

The only one who'se 'dancing' is you, and the sad thing is you don't seem to realise.

The last thing you wrote in my direction on the closed topic also is a misunderstanding from your side. Read your 1st message there again and focus on all you highlight.

OK, enough said.

So guys what comes next? Some weirdo who starts writing about what John said in 1860 about the Beatles being more popular than...

Or an Ex politician who could not sleep for weeks at the time of John's protest marches

Or so many who were worried about 'drugs' and the bad influence to those youngsters who we were at that time 'when grass was green'.

Or the FBI, or the BBC about lyrics.
FPSHOT is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 03:14 AM   #6
FPSHOT
Sun King
 
FPSHOT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 04, 2000
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 31,563



Default Re: free speech

The only one who'se 'dancing' is you, and the sad thing is you don't seem to realise.

The last thing you wrote in my direction on the closed topic also is a misunderstanding from your side. Read your 1st message there again and focus on all you highlight.

OK, enough said.

So guys what comes next? Some weirdo who starts writing about what John said in 1860 about the Beatles being more popular than...

Or an Ex politician who could not sleep for weeks at the time of John's protest marches

Or so many who were worried about 'drugs' and the bad influence to those youngsters who we were at that time 'when grass was green'.

Or the FBI, or the BBC about lyrics.
FPSHOT is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 05:12 AM   #7
Johnna Lynn
Mr. Moonlight
 
Johnna Lynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 09, 2003
Posts: 751
Default Re: free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted By bearkat77:


The more you talk about that site, the more free publicity you garner for it.
<font size="2" face="Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif">I agree with bearkat. I went to check the site out cause of all the talk about it.
Johnna Lynn is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 06:52 AM   #8
HMVNipper
Sun King
 
HMVNipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 26, 2001
Location: New York City, USA
Posts: 11,672

Send a message via AIM to HMVNipper
Default Re: free speech

Walrusegg, PLEASE...you do not know from whence you speak. I LOST FAMILY IN THE HOLOCAUST -- and I am not distressed about this site the way you are. Sure, it's wrong...but you know what, it's one of a GAZILLION Holocaust denial sites on the internet, and by linking to it, Jerry and Beatlelinks are not "dancing" on anyone's graves...it's idiocy, and as many, MANY people have said to you here, BEATLE PEOPLE (who are the ones most likely to find the site through THIS one) will see it for what it is and forget about it.

Lest you think I am making light of Holocaust deniers, I am not, I do not, and I never will. It is WAY to personal to me. But honestly, I don't think that BEATLES people are the ones to worry about -- it's all the people who will find this site through other means, through hate searches and that ilk, that are the real problem, because THEY are the ones who will believe it.

Protesting it HERE will not do you any good -- you want to get it off the net, go report it to the Anti-Defamation League of B'nei Brith or to any number of foundations that fight against these kinds of sites -- but not HERE!!! Tell Yoko, tell anyone you want, but deluging these forums are only going cause undue problems.
HMVNipper is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 08:16 AM   #9
Lynner
Moderator
 
Lynner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 13, 2001
Location: Elmwood Park, IL USA
Posts: 12,495



Default Re: free speech

I agree with the other posts, walrusegg. You've told us the site is bad. Protest to a place that can have the site removed. Your continual posts about it here will probably make more members go to it, out or curiousity, than keep them away. You're doing a great dis-service to yourself. Complain to the proper authorities and come back here to discuss the Beatles.
Lynner is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 10:01 AM   #10
beatlegirl9977
Sgt. Pepper
 
beatlegirl9977's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 23, 2001
Posts: 4,783

Default Re: free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted By Lynner:
I agree with the other posts, walrusegg. You've told us the site is bad. Protest to a place that can have the site removed. Your continual posts about it here will probably make more members go to it, out or curiousity, than keep them away. You're doing a great dis-service to yourself. Complain to the proper authorities and come back here to discuss the Beatles.
<font size="2" face="Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif">Yes, I agree. There's absolutely nothing we can do here on BLinks to get rid of the site. As for having the link in the BLinks database, there's a legal disclaimer that says that the opinions/ideas represented on the sites listed do not reflect in any way the opinion of the BLinks administrators. The best thing we can do is ignore it--stuff like that is always going to exist as long as the Internet exists, so we just have to use our common sense and not listen to garbage like that person posted on that site.

[size="1"][ May 26, 2003, 10:03 AM: Message Edited By: beatlegirl9977 ][/size]
beatlegirl9977 is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 10:22 AM   #11
Rellevart
Moderator
 
Rellevart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 15, 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 13,764


Send a message via MSN to Rellevart
Default Re: free speech

The whole concept of "free speech" is a little blurry on the internet. NO, you DON'T have free speech on this site as it is privately run and you agreed to the rules when you signed up. I hope you will rethink your plan to try to ruin this site because everyone's not quite as up in arms about this as you are.
Rellevart is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 10:49 AM   #12
beatlemad
Taxman
 
beatlemad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 23, 2003
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 1,541
Default Re: free speech

I think what everyone is saying in a polite sort of way Walrusegg is get a bloody life!
beatlemad is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 11:02 AM   #13
Harb83
Co-Admin Geezer
 
Harb83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 06, 2000
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 9,407


Default Re: free speech

WalrusEgg. I've just read through the article that you are protesting about, and I think you're read much too deeply into it and are twisting it's contents into something it is not.

If I may, I've written a lengthy article on MY interpretation of what was being written.....

==================================================

Okay, I've personally scanned through the website and have found nothing that WalrusEgg is accusing it of. The site is nothing more than a conspiracy site which looks at the murder from a different perspective and voices opinions about possiblies that may have occured. The italised quotes are directly from the site.

The website is stating that it was the handyman (or elevator operator) who pulled the fatal trigger just as C****** had drew his gun. Since 5 shots were heard C****** assumed that he must have pulled the trigger since he was holding a gun. The website is settingo out to prove that it was not HIS gun that was firing the shots.

It also looks at Lennons so-called bisexuality, and denounces it, stating that after someone's died you can print anything you like about them and not be prosecuted for libel...

Unfortunately, people tend to believe whatever they want regarding rumors about sexual indiscretions regardless of the facts presented, or in this instance, lack thereof. Again, the power of suggestion is a dangerous but effective weapon. Once you kill someone, you can say anything about them you wish.

It's in the section 'Motives' that the talk of the Jewish religion is brought up. It talks about John not liking them....

Of the four reasons listed, the third—disrespect for Jews and the Holocaust—is probably the least known to the public but likely the most troublesome for John Lennon. Although Lennon is widely known for criticizing Christianity, he was not exactly viewed as a gift from God to most Jewish leaders either. Keep in mind that Lennon had many close German friends and spent quite a bit of time in Germany before he became an international star. Many fans remember Lennon for the lyrics in Imagine—which some claim has socialist undertones—and may find it difficult to believe that he empathized with the "German point of view."

The site then goes on to say....
They read more into the song [Imagine]than he intended. Some think it is Communist or Socialist propaganda. Hence, people like this find it difficult to believe Lennon had a degree of empathy for Germany and its actions during World War II. This is the problem with labels.

The article then goes into how John did not like people of the Jewish faith, and hints at John not letting Paul McCartneys brother-in-law (who was Jewish) John Eastman because of this. Then a quote from a 1970's Playboy interview is quoted which apparently showed John's 'hatred' for the faith.

Then it moves onto the Holocaust, and it does NOT directly claim that it never occured. It firstly states that it was not referred to as the Holocaust because that term only ame to light in 1978 for the TV-mini series 'The Holocaust'.

In fact the word Holocaust was introduced in 1978 in the TV mini-series, The Holocaust, directed by Marvin Chomsky and starred Meryl Streep and James Woods. Before 1978, the term Holocaust was not associated with Nazi Germany and Jews. In 1976, William Stevenson wrote a book, A Man Called Intrepid, which discussed the deaths of six million Jews during World War II a great deal, but Stevenson never used the term Holocaust because that term had not been introduced to the public in 1976.

Then it goes into the Holocaust and it's beginnings in more detail, and asks why historians can define the amount of Jews killed during the holocaust, but cannot determine on a figure of the other atrocities like the A-bomb dropping or the number of civilians murdered by Allied forces. It suggests that because of these inconsistancies with figures with all the other tallies, why is the Holocaust casuality list so definate?

Then the site looks at incidences that could be looked upon as how the holocaust could be looked upon as a kind of 'retaliation' due to past events...

When Kristallnacht occurred, the German people had already endured a five-year economic boycott imposed by international Jewish organizations wanting to oust Adolf Hitler because of his controversial book, Mein Kemf, which portrayed Jewish in a negative light. On August 7, 1933, Jewish mogul Samuel Untermyer boldly stated that "this economic boycott is our means of self-defense."

The Jewish boycott against Germany continued for five years, but it wasn't until November 7, 1938, when a young Jew, Herschel Grynszpan from Poland, walked into the German embassy in Paris and shot German diplomat, Ernst vom Rath, that the Germans began to revolt against Jews in Germany. Large insurrections occurred.


It then looks at the film 'How I Won The War' and hints that it could be portrayed as pro-Nazi because the British were portrayed as buffoons and the Nazis were treated with a degree of humanity mixed with humour.

Then the bed-ins are mentioned and highlights their campaign against the Vietnam War...

In 1969 Lennon used his celebrity status to protest US involvement in the Vietnam War. He was more than a peace activist, he became a lighting rod for the peace movement.

Then the site talks about Jerry Rubin & Abbie Hoffman and how John thought they were "provocateurs for the Bureau". Although the headline states that these two individuals were Jewish, it was not say that John distrusted them because of this...

By 1975 Lennon had apparently caught onto Rubin’s and Hoffman’s tricks. "I never hear from them," he told an interviewer. "They vanished into the woodwork…Jerry was been nothing but trouble and a pain in the neck since I met him. I decided, as he didn’t lead the revolution, I decided to quit answering the phone."

Then it talks about John's move to New York City and how this may not have been the best of moves because it was "one of the most heavily populated Jewish cities in the world". Then it states that Ed Koch (who was the Mayor at the time of John's killing and was also Jewish) may not have been as determined to solve the case due to John's previous comments about Jews.

Then the article talks about how C****** may have been brainwashed by the government so that he would be a scapegoat for the killing. Then, in the next chapter, the author states the following...

It’s fairly obvious that the killer was the elevator operator (aka, the handyman) and he shot Lennon from inside or near the service elevator in the entryway of the Dakota, across from the concierge area where Lennon collapsed.

There is nothing there that hints at John being killed by a follower of the Jewish faith. The article hints that his comments may have spurred the investigation due to a Jewish mayor not taking his comments kindly, but nothing about a Jewish individual pulling the trigger out of spite.

Then it goes into C******'s statement, and talks about its inconsistancies. It talks about his sanity, his 1978 trip around the world, and how the YMCA (where C******* was staying) may have been linked with the government.

Then there's a brief article about C******'s friendship with an Evangelical Christian psychologist, and how the services could have been a brainwashing situation, and somehow C****** received orders to kill.

Then the article goes into the FBI and their surveillance of John. It talks about C******'s weapons and how he may have obtained them, and why Dana Reeves, a policeman who had fies with the FBI, was so closely involved with everything. Then goes on about how the FBI brainwashed C****** so that when the slaying occured, he was the one who would have gotten the blame.

It's only here that the author starts to hint at the Jews killing John...

Knowing the FBI’s historic allegiance to Jewish forces, it is easy to understand why John Lennon’s anti-Jewish remarks and his apparent empathy for Hitler’s Nazi Germany would make him a target of the Bureau’s wrath.
It talks about how the FBI is linked to the Jewish community.

Then the author gives his verdict on what he believed happened....

[i]The person who killed John Lennon was probably the elevator operator (aka, handyman) assisted by Jose Perdomo, the anti-Castro Cuban employed as a doorman at the Dakota. C****** was groomed to take the fall by Dana Reeves, a policeman at the sheriff’s office in Henry County, Georgia. Reeves got C****** interested in firearms, even encouraged him to become a security guard. Prior to Lennon’s murder, Reeves gave C****** hollow-point bullets for the gun that he allegedly used to kill Lennon. All this was done to make C****** look guilty. C****** was sent around the world at the behest of the YMCA and was taken care of by C******’s friend and senior YMCA administrator David Moore. The purpose of the trip is unclear, but it reveals that C****** likely worked within the intelligence community in some capacity. And we know that the FBI has offices in some the cities visited by C******. To further implicate C****** in the crime, he was likely exposed to hypnotic mind control when he attended evangelical Christian prayer groups led by a psychologist.

.

Now, going back through WalrusEgg's claims...

- On this site, the author implies that John Lennon was not shot by Chapman but the responsible party was actually the JEWS!
Wrong! The author implies that although John's anti-Jewish comments may not have been good for him, it highlights that it was in fact Jose Perdomo (The handyman) who pulled the trigger.

- This stupid person takes his obvious position of there was no Holocaust and the old "Elders of Zion" libel
Wrong! The author questions the extent of the holocaust due to the inconsistancies of other death figures. He also states that the term Holocaust was not used for the atrosity until 1978. The 'Elders of Zion was never mentioned.

- tries to bring Lennon’s fans to hate the Jews along with himself by suggesting the Jews killed him because of some scattershot comments of John about Epstein , Eastman and Klein that John made but have no bearing at all on his death
Rubbish. It talked about possible Jewish involvement, but never said anything about we should hate him and the Jewish community because of an off-hand remark directed at Paul's brother-in-law. It mentioned that Epstein and Klein were Jewish, but said nothing about John hating them for this. John has even been quoted (although not on the site) as saying "Brian was a beautiful guy, Brian Epstein".

- here he is used as a propaganda tool for hatred and violence.
No he isn't. The website is merely looking at the incident at a new angle.

- You don't even have to read it to get an idea of what is it
Yes you do. When you read it it's nothing more than a plain old conspiracy site about how someone other than C****** pulled the trigger.

- This website is listed in the HATE DIRECTORY. With links to articles such as 'Jewish Influence is Destroying America,' it is no wonder.
Wrong. There is NO link whatsoever that I could find that went to an article like that. The closest thing I could find was an article regarding the FBI and it's Jewish links.

- it is ACTUALLY part of another web site that is nothing but hate propaganda
No it isn't. The site it is linked to is promoting a conspiracy book which, although mentionning the Jewish faith in them, does not spread any kind of hatred for them.

- linking to a site that uses John Lennon as a tool to HATING JEWS.
Again, the site is NOT anything like that whatsoever.

- it about INACCURATE INFORMATION
The only innacurate information is WalrusEggs damning description of the site!

- But the first page of this has a HOME link that takes you to the overall website of this man which is a JEW HATE site
No it isn't. Go there if you like! http://www.jfkmontreal.com/home.htm . "Jewish policital forces hated the Kennedys because Joe Kennedy Sr. admired Adolf Hitler." is probably the worst quote I can take. Although it could be implied as claiming that the Jewish community killed JFK, no such statement is made on the front cover.

- It's NOT about John Lennon, that's the problem. John Lennon is being USED for SPREADING HATE
Utter, utter rubbish. It's about John's assassination and how there may have been alterior motives due to past comments.

- It is NOT a SILLY WEB PAGE. It is a web page specifically designed to foster hatred towards JEWS.
Wrong. There is NO Jew hating!

- it is not a John Lennon site, it is a Holocaust Denial site
Total rubbish!

==================================================

Again, this is my interpretation of it. If anybody would like to read the article for themselves and see if there's any other way that the article can be read then please let me know [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
Harb83 is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 11:10 AM   #14
Johnna Lynn
Mr. Moonlight
 
Johnna Lynn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 09, 2003
Posts: 751
Default Re: free speech

Wow...........you are thorough. Thanks. [img]graemlins/brush.gif[/img]
Johnna Lynn is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 11:19 AM   #15
beatlemad
Taxman
 
beatlemad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 23, 2003
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 1,541
Default Re: free speech

"You don't even have to read it to get an idea of what is it"

That statement is sums up your weak argement walrusegg.How can you get an idea from something that you know nothing about?.
beatlemad is offline  
Old May 26, 2003, 11:40 AM   #16
Jerry
Webmaster Of BeatleLinks
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 20, 2000
Location: Encino, California
Posts: 6,949
Send a message via AIM to Jerry
Default Re: free speech

Quote:
Originally Posted By walrusegg:
I have free speech as well. And I plan on telling single person on this planet you are linking to a Holocaust Denial site with John Lennon's name.

You have free speech. So do I- this is just the beginning, I promise you. I am not letting you DANCE ON THESE PEOPLE'S GRAVES. I am going to protest this site beginning tomorrow. So just PREPARE YOURSELF FOR THE DELUGE.
<font size="2" face="Tahoma, Arial, sans-serif">Yeah, you have free speech. Maybe on a street corner or in your own house. But not on this forum buddy. This isn't your site, so don't plan on doing whatever you want here. Go start your own site and say whatever you want. Stop bothering all of us with this and let it go. You won't be asked again, so read this a few times and let it sink in.
Jerry is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Advertisements

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Site Features
Search Links

  Advanced Search
Category Jump



BeatleMail

FREE E-MAIL
@ BEATLEMAIL.COM


Username


Password




New User Sign-Up!
Lost Password?
Beatles History




Donate
The costs of running our database and discussion forum are steadily rising. Any help we receive is greatly appreciated. Click HERE for more information about donating to BeatleLinks.
Extras
» Chat Room
» Current News
» Monthly Contest
» Interviews Database
» Random Site
» Banner Exchange
» F.A.Q.
» Advertise
» Credits
» Legal
» Contact Us
Copyright © 2000-2018 BeatleLinks
All Rights Reserved