Sunday, February 17, 2013

Radio debate "re-match"

Not that I think it’s very important, but last Friday there was a "re-match", requested by Friedrich Paul Berg, of the debate on Deanna Spingola’s radio show on 22 June 2012 (mentioned in the blogs The usual "Revisionist" victory dancing ... and Friedrich Berg's follow-up questions).

The record of the "re-match" is available here. Not being inclined – unlike Mr. Berg is – to tell our readers what the outcome of the debate was and who presented the better arguments and evidence, I just encourage our readers to listen to the record and draw their own conclusions.

Meanwhile, I’m enjoying Friedrich Paul Berg’s frantic post hoc attempts to score points on several threads of the RODOH forum (The LiIES of Rudolf Hoess--Commandant of Auschwitz, D-E-B-A-T-E, Walter LaGrand--Gassed to Death in 1999 in 18 minutes!).

5 comments:

Franz Holtzhäuser said...

Berg clearly demolished you in this debate.
And Roerberta, next time, tell your dogs to be quiet or put them in an other room.
Furthermore you came off as a confused and nervous Leo Getz in this debate:
Leo Getz: "OK".
I wouldn't want such a lawyer to represent my case and I can't for the life of me understand why the top Jews have chosen you to represent their bullshit "Holocaust".

FRANZ

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Berg clearly demolished you in this debate.
And Roerberta, next time, tell your dogs to be quiet or put them in an other room.
Furthermore you came off as a confused and nervous Leo Getz in this debate:
Leo Getz: "OK".
I wouldn't want such a lawyer to represent my case and I can't for the life of me understand why the top Jews have chosen you to represent their bullshit "Holocaust".

FRANZ


I should have worded the second paragraph as follows:

«The record of the "re-match" is available here. Not being inclined – unlike Mr. Berg and his fellow obnoxious true believers are – to tell our readers what the outcome of the debate was and who presented the better arguments and evidence, I just encourage our readers to listen to the record and draw their own conclusions.»

I see "FRANZ" continues projecting the problems he has with his male identity, by the way. How many times do I have to tell the poor creature that I'm not interested in its personal problems?

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

«The record of the "re-match" is available here. Not being inclined – unlike Mr. Berg and his fellow obnoxious true believers are – to tell our readers what the outcome of the debate was and who presented the better arguments and evidence, I just encourage our readers to listen to the record and draw their own conclusions.»

Or maybe it would have been better like this:

«The record of the "re-match" is available here. Not being inclined – unlike Mr. Berg and his obnoxious fellow "Revisionists" are – to tell our readers what the outcome of the debate was and who presented the better arguments and evidence, I just encourage our readers to listen to the record and draw their own conclusions.»

What do you say, "Franz"?

Franz Holtzhäuser said...

Thanks for the alternative translations.

FRANZ

Arthur Crump said...

A bit late I know but I just listened to the Spingola debate ( she sounded pro denier to me) and it was an absolute no-contest. All Berk kept referring to was his obsession with 'cherry red colouring' - even after RM had educated him twice on why no-one reported seeing this discolouration.
RM listed the important items of evidence and the only comeback from Berk was 'forgery' regarding the ground photo, pathetic.
His opening 'proof' about the Israeli demographer who reported a million 'holocaust' survivors in 2003 was rightly debunked as irrelevant and then his only direct source from then on was Elie Wiesel's book !!!! Laughable!

Belated well dones from me , Roberto