Note that I stated: True objectivity is impossible and I'll grant him that, but it being 'undesirable' merely throws the ideal of the historiographer to the four winds, and only serves to cloud the record with even more subjectivity.



I doubt that 'true' historians would omit facts. Popular Revisionist historians may do this (e.g. David Irving), but they are on the fringe, and sadly, nothing prevents these individuals from publishing in the popular arena, imposing their flawed views on an unsuspecting audience.

Academic historians are always re-evaluting the evidence, but that is that is the nature of historiography. The omission of facts will be noted when the works are subject to peer revue and as such, they will be held up as examples of poor historiography.

I am loathe to resort to the fallacy of an 'appeal to authority', but historiography is one of my specialities.

How accurate do you think history is? How much history in our schools have been revised do you think?

Did Columbus really discover America?
Who went down in history as the killer of John Kennedy?

Do you think that is correct?
What about Abe Lincoln?

History is always under revision. However, facts are not.

This is a concept which appears to be beyond the grasp of
several of the people who have been writing biased anti-Israeli
comments continually here.

They always attempt to blame Israel, Zionists and Jews for a
variety of societal ills which have no basis in fact in smear
tactics very similar if not identical to those used by the
Nazis even though these antisemitic conspiracy theories were
proven false a century ago.



These same folks repeatedly ignore the long history of Arab attacks
on Jews and Israel as a major part of the factual basis of conflict
in the Middle East. They ignore or minimize antisemitism which has
been shown historically to be the root cause of mass killings and
torture of Jewish people during the Inquisition, Russian pogroms
and WWII as a source of the more recent ongoing attacks of Israel.

Instead, while complaining about propaganda on the one hand, they
spout a virtual river of anti-Israel propaganda and then act
surprised when this is pointed out to them!

On the Button!
And when you debunk them,they HOWL Propaganda,even though they initiated and post a virtual river of it!

blah blah blah.
These battles have been going on for centuries. Nobody knows
who started them.

If you are trying to paint one side innocent then you are spreading propaganda yourself.

Facts are facts and are always facts. The trouble is that people don't know fact from propaganda.

BTW propaganda is the topic of this thread, not Jews.

Fox News Is A ‘Well-Funded, Right-Wing Propaganda Organization

dont legalize PROPOGANDA

unless its on the almighty INTERNET

and then dont DARE censor it,,,,lol

Jews own it. That's a fact.

No kind of speech, including bald faced lies, should be written into any kind of law, for or against.


If someone lies, then sue them for libel, but don't put them in jail. That would be the end of freedom of speech.

I respect the consistency

its ok for propoganda to be legal or its not

but some who were griping about internet censorship seem to be all for censoring media of other types

But,there are no Jews!

But if the government is stupid enough to pass a law that they can spread propaganda, they will be hard pressed to get anyone to believe anything they say.

Then that law could also have the power to prevent people from speaking out against that very propaganda. It might have a provision that makes it illegal to call them on it. I might have a provision that makes it illegal to spread THE TRUTH.

This is true. And its a fact.

But there are a large number of people who claim to be Jews.

Read the book "The invention of the Jewish People."

What there are is a bunch of tribes of different ethnic groups who claim to practice Judaism, and there are some whose ancestors converted to Judaism who don't really practice it. They are more Turkish than anything.

I don't think you should be calling yourself Jewish if you don't practice the religion.

this is FALSE

this is the belief of those who think the word 'propoganda' is synonymous with lie

(its like saying fruit is synonymous with APPLE )


and it does not


propoganda:
the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person

rumors are a TYPE Of propoganda, but so are ideas and information
the bill says nothing about spreading RUMORS

I think you had better check out the latest Genome-Research!

Do you have a link to the full context of the bill?

I don't think anyone should call themselves Jewish unless they practice the religion.

Jewish is not a race.

Propaganda does not always have to be true or false. It is simply spin that can't be trusted.

If you can't trust the spin, then you can't regard it as truth.

propoganda does not require SPIN,, see above definition