On 12/3/06, Rob gamaliel8@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/2/06, Rob Smith nobs03@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/1/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
The day a kind, thoughtful, productive and intellectual person shows up to help us with the encyclopedia project while simultaneously asserting with all seriousness that the Nazi party of Germany was or is worthy of support, we'll have a hell of an interesting case on our hands. But
the
reality is, that hasn't happened and seems very unlikely to ever
happen.
--Jimbo
Yes we have the example of Dr. Christina Jeffrey whom the ADL vindicated with the words, "any characterization of you as anti-Semitic or sympathetic to Nazism is unfair and unfounded".
http://www.ngcsu.edu/bdf/bfried/cjeff.htm
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n9_v47/ai_16920435
yet it makes up almost entirely the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian_of_the_United_States_House_of_Represe...
and is probably not adaquately covered there; pity the poor editor who dares to undertake such a task.
I doubt Dr. Jeffries is an example of someone who thinks Nazi Germany "was or is worthy of support", probably just someone who advocated examining history from different perspectives but who chose her words very poorly.
Why not simply add the ADL information to the article instead of complaining about it here? I know that had I been aware of that information I certainly would have added it to the article when I wrote it, so you can't claim you would have faced resistance inserting this.
The Epopt did that already. The point being, even when a non-Nazi, non Anti-Semitic scholar of good will states, ""The Nazi point of view, however unpopular, is still a point of view" they are permantly defamed by such authoritive sources as sitting members of Congress.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-16920435.html
Nobs01