Should we trust people who use Stormfront as a source?

It appears that we have been duped. People are using a Stormfront generated picture to smear Trayvon Martin. The poll question is should we trust racists that use pictures from neo-Nazi sites to smear a dead African American teenager who cannot defend himself?

 

I voted that stormfront is not a legitimate source but at the same time I do not agree with your statement entirely, couldnt the media be smearing a potentially innocent Hispanic man? At this point no one has been convicted of a crime, this whole thing is turning into a witch hunt, guilty or innocent I dont know if this guy will get a fair trial.

 

Sure ... it just confirms what they already want to know.

The longer they stay ignorant, the better it is for everyone who actually thinks.

 

Well, I don't trust any clearly biased source. Stormfront is just one in a long list. Nothing is lazier than forming your opinion first then looking for "evidence" you are right.

 

I had to vote yes.

because it would be silly and contradictory to rule out data solely on the fact that you disagree with the philosophy of the people in the source. Not reading something because it came from "Nazis" IMO is no different than Nazi-book-burning, and you would be guilty of the book burning type censorship that you claim to be against. Just because someone has a different take on things and I disagree with that take, doesn't mean than someone else's take cannot be a legitimate source.

even if you are bigoted against bigots, you are still a bigot yourself.

 

double post

 

If the Nazi's had a reputation for posting factual, reliable information and then forming logical opinions based on solid premises, then they would make a fine source. But since they have shown themselves to be and do the exact opposite they can be dismissed out of hand because it's not worth the time to sift through the crap to find the diamond when there are clean diamonds to be found in lots of other places.

 

I can't understand why anyone would use such a blatantly biased source to "support" their claims anyway...

 

Well, because it supports their claims!

 

Hmmm...

I see what you did there...

 

are you serious?

as heinous as the experiments of Dr. Mengele were, they did provide quite alot of medical information that likely would have not been discovered because of ethical reasons.

so laziness is the cause of your bigotry? interesting.

 

Give me one example of a scientific advancement that would have not happened w/out Mengele's atrocities?

 

What bigotry are you talking about?

 

I don't find racists to be a reliable source of information so Stormfront and the current administration in Washington are both out of the running. is Stormfront more outrageous than Rev. Wright, Derrick Bell, and Barack Obama?

 

Are you saying that Stormfront & Obama are alike?

 

Now that would be pretty darn silly.

I also hope that I misunderstood him.

 

Condemning the info because it came from Stormfront is the same as shooting the messenger instead of the message.
Do they have a right to be "racists"; or do they have to conform to your way of thinking?

Truth is hate to those who hate the truth.

 

Although I do not like Stormfront I guess that CNN, CBS & Co are not fewer biased.

 

Where is the difference between Obama's mentor Wright and Stormfront?

 

...double post

 

I know science may be difficult for everyone to understand, but we don't measure the data, based on the advancements that "happened" (as you so eloquently stated).

Your question is irrelevant to that of the OP, which (i know its probably hard for you to stay on topic sue to the sensitive nature of the OP) is should we trust people who use stormfront as a source. This quickly became: can the Nazis be trusted as a source? All I was doing was defending my answer of yes, and why we should look at their data. I'm am not saying their data is correct or right, but dismissing the data immediately because you disagree with those who have it or where it was obtained is a silly way of doing things.

 

you said that its not worth your time to find the relevant data from the Nazis, so (out of laziness) you will just ignore them, and not trust any of their data (this sounds very bigoted to me).

 

I'm sorry. I thought I was being pretty clear. Stormfront is a website that caters to racists. President Obama is a racist and he caters to racists. Rev. Wright and Rev. Peters, now deceased, are two sides of the same coin. Both are racists preachers. President Obama attended a racist socialist church for 20 years and I suspect more than a few Stormfront fanatics attend Christian Identity Churches. They're the same as President Obama's church except the other side of the coin. President Obama espouses and supports racists theoris like Critical Race Theory. He makes decisions based solely on race. So, I would be as like to visit Stormfront--I did the first time I saw the name and that was enough--as I would be to take what White House flack Carney or President Obama or VP Biden say seriously. Come to think of it, MSNBC isn't any better than Stormfront either. ABC and CNN are working on being another Stormfront.

So, Stormfront and President Obama aren't the same because one is a website and one is, in my opinion, a human being. I realize Even Thomas isn't alone in believing President Obama is God but I'm not in that camp. Now, President Obama's website for African-Americans for Obama--or whatever it's called--is a website like Stormfront is a website. I suspect there will be more similarities but I wouldn't be welcome at either.

 

It is a very strange thing to do, isn't it?

 

depends on the data