User:Paul Vogel/65.125.10.66

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kangaroo court for Thoughtcrime or for Paul Vogel's NPOV edits being pov and falsely called "vandalism" or for lacking Political correctness or for posting Hate speech in the Social Marxist-Jewish pov of the actual "Haters", "Trolls", and their POV political "Censorship": of this article[1] on Cosmotheism[2] below: and many others:






Cosmotheism is a form of classical pantheism that identifies God with the cosmos, that is, with the universe as a unified whole.

Overview[edit]

Cosmotheism asserts that "all is within God and God is within all". It considers the nature of reality and of existence to be mutable and destined to co-evolve towards a complete universal consciousness, or godhood.

Etymologically, cosmotheism differs from 'pan-theism' in that "pan" is Classical Greek for all, while the Greek word cosmos means an orderly and harmonious universe. Cosmotheists take this as meaning the divine is immanent to reality and consciousness, an inseparable part of an orderly, harmonious, and whole universal system.

In its broadest sense, the word cosmotheism may be considered simply as being synonymous with pantheism, although not all modern pantheists would accept Cosmotheism as a synonym for their own worldview due to the historical association of Cosmotheism with a political movement, white separatism, which some within the pantheist community may find objectionable.

According to a Cosmotheist Web site dedicated to the late Dr.William L. Pierce:

"Cosmotheism is a religion which positively asserts that there is an internal purpose in life and in cosmos, and there is an essential unity, or consciousness that binds all living beings and all of the inorganic cosmos, as one."
"What is our true human identity is we are the cosmos made self-aware and self-conscious by evolution. "
"Our true human purpose is to know and to complete ourselves as conscious individuals and also as a self-aware species and thereby to co-evolve with the cosmos towards total and universal awareness, and towards the ever higher perfection of consciousness and being."[3]

Some claim Albert Einstein was a Cosmotheist, [4], along with Carl Sagan, Benedict Spinoza and other historical figures—although there is no quoted evidence of any of these three claiming to be "cosmotheist" as such, and all could also be said to be Pantheist.

Mordekhay Nesiyahu's cosmotheism[edit]

In Israel, Cosmotheism was also described by Mordekhay Nesiyahu, one of the foremost ideologists of the Israeli Labor Movement and a lecturer in its college Beit Berl in Israel.

In Cosmotheism — Israel, Zionism, Judaism and Humanity towards the 21st Century, Nesiyahu proposed not to just assume the existence of God, being "prior to all that was created," but to consider God as only being a result of the development of the universe and the consciousness of all of humankind.

Divinity in this particular view is inherently a human invention.

The development of the divine (or what the believer would qualify as being "the revelation of the Divine") was, in Nesiyahu's opinion, both the condition for a more exalted human functioning and all that bears the fruit that comes out of it.

In Nesiyahu's universalist re-imagining of a secular divinity, the universal celebration of Cosmotheism is the basis for rebuilding the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, and is also a secular ethnically Jewish and a Zionist contribution to all of humankind.

Dr. William L. Pierce's Cosmotheism[edit]

Origins[edit]

In the United States, cosmotheism sometimes refers to a religion adopted in 1978 by National Alliance founder and white separatist the late Dr. William L. Pierce. Pierce affirmed his cosmotheist belief in a speech that he once gave entitled "Our Cause":

"All we require is that you share with us a commitment to the simple, but great, truth which I have explained to you here, that you understand that you are a part of the whole, which is the creator, that you understand that your purpose, the purpose of mankind and the purpose of every other part of creation, is the creator's purpose, that this purpose is the never-ending ascent of the path of creation, the path of life symbolized by our life rune, that you understand that this path leads ever upward toward the creator's self-realization, and that the destiny of those who follow this path is godhood."

Pierce's interpretation of cosmotheism ([5]) was greatly influenced by several disparate factors: interpretations of George Bernard Shaw's play Man and Superman; strains of German Romanticism; Darwinian concepts of natural selection and of survival of the fittest, mixed with the related early 20th century eugenic ideals; and Ernst Haeckel's version of monism.

Religion, society, and race[edit]

The foundation of Pierce's Cosmotheism was essentially similar to classical monistic pantheism — he recognized no physical difference or separation between human and divine, between creator and created — but with a few differences.

Pierce described his form of Cosmotheism as being based on "[t]he idea of an evolutionary universe ... with an evolution toward ever higher and higher states of self-consciousness," and his political ideas were centered on racial purity and eugenics as the means of advancing the white race first towards a superhuman state, and then towards godhood. In his view, the white race represented the pinnacle of human evolution thus far and therefore should be kept genetically separate from all other races in order to achieve its destined perfection in Godhood.

Dr. Pierce believed in a hierarchical society governed by what he saw as the essential principles of nature, including the survival of the fittest. In his social schema, the best-adapted genetic stock, which he believed to be the white race, should remain separated from other races; and within an all-white society, the most fit individuals should lead the rest. He thought that extensive programs of "racial cleansing" and of eugenics, both in Europe and in the U.S., would be necessary to achieve this socio-political program.

His National Alliance was to be the political vanguard and the spiritual priesthood of this program, which was designed ultimately to bring about a "White racial redemption". His Cosmotheist Community Church, which was to be the next step of this plan, was set up in the mid-1970s, alongside Pierce's other political projects — the National Alliance, National Vanguard Books, and the weekly broadcast American Dissident Voices — all from his mountain retreat headquarters in West Virginia.

Critical assessments[edit]

Pierce's views have been characterized as a version of early twentieth century racial anthropology, but driven by spiritual, as well as scientific, beliefs. This area of his belief was likely influenced by his early association with George Lincoln Rockwell's American Nazi Party. Others have noted the German Romantic roots that Pierce's ideas shared with Nazism and have observed similarities between the two ideologies: Pierce's plan for white divinity was similar to Adolf Hitler's vision for the Herrenvolk; also, his attacks against Jews as "parasites" on white society, who would prevent the white race from reaching its destined godhood by replacing the white elite with their own kind, echoed previous Nazi descriptions of Jewish traits and character. [6]

Other criticisms have been harsher if not as factually-accurate; for example, the Southern Poverty Law Center has characterized Pierce's Cosmotheism as "an unsuccessful tax dodge". Followers of Pierce's cosmotheism do call many of these characterizations erroneous, as can be seen from this part of the Dr. Griffin interview with Dr. Pierce below from "The Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds":

Dr Pierce-"And then there was a big fight with the IRS which I lost. They said that we weren't a church. They were obviously under pressure to take away the tax exemption we had. The IRS sent some agents out here to check us out. I still have the report they wrote. It had things like the road out here was very rough and not conducive to people getting to the services, and that we didn't have enough chairs and where were people going to sit, and there was no central heating system and so there couldn't be services in the winter— a bunch of baloney."

Dr. Griffin-(The IRS revoked Pierce's church status and the revocation was upheld in court. Pierce thinks the IRS was responding to pressure applied on it by the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith. While the vast majority of people view the ADL in a positive light, as an opponent of bigotry and intolerance, Pierce sees it as a Jewish instrument of thought control and the abridgment of freedoms. He contends that the ADL seeks to harm or even destroy anyone or anything that gets in the way of the Jewish agenda for this country, which includes him and his organization.)

Dr. Griffin-"You think your racial views were the real reason the IRS got on your case?"

Dr. Pierce-"If I had been preaching a doctrine that didn't irritate the Jews they would have left us alone. There are all kinds of snake-handling cults and everything else up here in these hills, and the IRS lets them call themselves a church and doesn't bother them. It is no big drain on the federal budget, and the IRS stays in good graces generally by not bothering people more than it has to. But in our case they were determined to get us, and it was strictly because of what I was teaching on racial and Jewish matters."


Related articles[edit]

Uncritical Reference for Nesinyahu's Cosmotheism[edit]

  • Cosmotheism, Israel, Zionism, Judaism and Humanity - towards the 21st Century by Mordecai Nesinyahu (Poetica - Tuvi Sopher Publishing, Tel Aviv.)

Jewish or Marxist Critical References for Dr. Pierce's Cosmotheism[edit]

  • Gods of the Blood: The Pagan Revival and White Separatism, by Mattias Gardell (ISBN 0822330717)
  • The Turner Diaries and Cosmotheism: William Pierce's Theology of Revolution, by Brad Whitsel; published in Nova Religio Vol.1, No.2, April 1998.

External links[edit]

Mordekhay Nesiyahu's cosmotheism[edit]

Dr. William L. Pierce's Cosmotheism[edit]

Jewish, Marxist, Pan-atheist, and Fundamentalist Christianity Criticisms[edit]

Cosmotheist Advocacy[edit]







Kangaroo court for Thoughtcrime or for Paul Vogel's NPOV edits being pov and falsely called "vandalism" or for lacking Political correctness or for posting Hate speech in the Social Marxist-Jewish pov of the actual "Haters", "Trolls", and their POV political "Censorship": of this article[7] on Cosmotheism[8] below: and many others:






Evidence[edit]

Please enter evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Paul Vogel/Evidence[9]

==Request for arbitration==[10] Paul Vogel is an anonymous user who has had temporary bans implemented him on several occasions for trolling, breaking the revert rule and making abusive comments. 24.45.99.191is his most common IP address but according to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Paul Vogel he also uses:

  • 24.45.99.191 (optonline.net — broadband provider)
  • 65.125.10.66 (tcius.com — marketing company)
  • 66.2.156.* (10, 27, 36, 38, 48, 69, 100, 106**, 123, 160** 205**) (algx.net NY dialups)
  • 216.99.245.* (139, 146**, 153, 154, 170, 171, 184, 188) (algx.net NY dialups)

(**) new


He has been especially prevalent (and abusive) on Holocaust, Anti-Semitism, Cosmotheism, White Separatism, Judaism, Genocide and associated talk pages.

I wish to request a permanent block against Vogel and his various IP addresses. AndyL 04:26, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It is clear that a cabal of censorous pov bigots have falsely accused me of being a "troll", "vandal", or of making "abusive comments" on some TalkPages, or of "breaking the 3-revert rule". This is psychological projection by a pov mob or ilk of lying hypocrites. I do request Sam Spade, to be my "advocate", and I also can provide evidence to demonstrate the fact that those here attempting to have me banned and to have me censored, are themselves "trolls", "vandals", and have themselves broken the 3-revert rule and have hurled "personal insults" and have abused and used slanderous and false personal insults and "abusive comments" as their own stock in trade and in their own pov bigoted and biased campaign of "character assassination".[11]-PV

  • I agree to being his advocate, in this circumstance and others, until I such time as I might find cause to recuse myself. Sam Spade 22:30, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Seconded. User has an unbroken five-month record of personal attacks, revert wars, vandalisms, and so forth. —No-One Jones 04:30, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Another typical case of Psychological projection by Mirv, ad nauseum.-PV

And did I mention that he constantly tries to diagnose psychological problems based on what people write on Wikipedia? Not sure if that behavior is within the purview of the arbitrators, but. . . —No-One Jones 15:40, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC):-)

In your case, it is quite obvious and clear, as "lying hypocrisy" is a key indicator of psychological projection.

"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?" - Matthew 7:3 King James Version of the Bible

It is not "rocket science", Mirv.-PV


  • I believe Vogel is currently under a 24 hour ban. He has apparently circumvented this by posting under 216.99.245.146 He's been on Wikipedia for months but has refused to register, it would seem, so he can circumvent discipline more easily. AndyL 02:15, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

No. I don't register so I can't be falsely and pov censored with double-standards, as AndyL and Hadal have done often and abusively.-PV


Vogel was expressly banned by Hadal for 48 hours and has now returned (as 216.99.245.146) to continue to engage in an edit war.GrazingshipIV 02:19, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

An "edit war" when you all refused to discuss the reverts first in the TalkPages.-PV


  • I personally don't see a reason to go through such contortions in order to deal with this user. He has made ad hominem attacks a central tactic in his "debates" with others and will see no compromise. The community has put up with him for months; much time and energy has been wasted in vain pursuit of accord with Vogel.

On the contrary, Hadal, it has been you and your censorious mob that has been falsely and slanderously doing so to me in your banning, blocking, and pov censoring of my various NPOV edits.-PV

As I do not see quickpolls as an appropriate method of resolving what should be a simple matter of an IP blatantly violating policy, I also do not see arbitration as necessary in this case. It's another waste of time and energy which would be much better spent building Wikipedia or dealing with problem users who bother to log in (and, for that matter, have done more than disrupt). I have re-blocked Vogel's primary (static) IP for 96 hours, as I promised I would do if he tried to evade the original 48 hour block. If he attempts to evade this block as well, I will make the block indefinite. I'll do the same if he does not moderate himself in the future.

You are just cynically abusing your power to block users, Hadal, for your own biased pov, and no more and no less.-PV

If others want to pledge themselves to what will surely be wasted effort, that's their choice. In the meantime, I'll do what I believe is best for the community. Wikipedia is not the Stormfront forums; Paul Vogel knows this as well as anyone else. -- Hadal 04:05, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Stormfront forums"? LOL! :D Indeed, this is just a typical example of this lying hypocrites own ad hominem "tactics" and false attempts to ban and censor me.-PV

Comments by outside users[edit]

Re: last comment from "More expressions of anti-Semitism"

  • " It is clear that a cabal of censorous pov bigots have falsely accused me..."
    • While I have no doubt that PV has engaged in personal attacks and anti-Semitic flaming, I fail to see how this specific comment [last comment in the section more anti-Semitic comments] is an expression of anti-Semitism. JRR Trollkien (see warning) 21:00, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Actually, I have done neither, and it isn't "anti-semitic" and I do consider any such false allegations to be both personally insulting and slanderous.-PV

I fail to see why personal attacks against individuals are not accepted but attacks against groups of people are open to discussion. I would like to see a permanent ban. Danny 00:15, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Indeed, like the "personal attacks" against Paul Vogel, verses the truthful attack against any "ilk" or "groups" that are falsely pov slandering, lying hypocritically, reverting, censoring, and falsely attempting to permanently ban, block, and otherwise personally insult and harrass me.-PV

Relief requested[edit]

Known participants have been given headers, others may join this matter by creating a header and requesting relief.

User:AndyL[edit]

Paul Vogel has had 24 or 48 hour bans imposed on him on several occasions yet has not improved his behaviour. He circumvented the most recent ban by Hadal (see above) causing his suspension to be extended to 96 hours. This shows his lack of respect for Wikipedia and for attempts to discipline him.

No, I ONLY do have a lack of respect for any of those that do unfairly and that do selfishly abuse and misuse the powers that Wikipedia and that Jimbo Wales and others have granted them.-PV

Despite being on wikipedia for several months he refuses to get a userid, despite several requests that he do so, making it more difficult to track his activity (and more difficult to impose discipline). See [12] also see his talk page in general User talk:24.45.99.191 for attempts by the community to deal with him patiently and his responses. See also User_talk:65.125.10.66

Actually, anyone that has been "reasonable" with me and that has been able to "compromise" and to avoid flame and edit wars with me, has had no real or long-term problems with me.-PV

He has made the pages on which he has participated into hostile environments for those who disagree with his views, particlarly Jews, particularly on Talk:Holocaust where he has used blood curses against Jews as a whole.

That is just a bald-faced lie. The "hostile environment" has been actually only your own "ilks" creation and not mine. The so-called "blood curse" was very specific against only "lying and censorious hypocrites" and was NOT against "Jews as a whole", whatsoever.-PV

"You are such an narrow-minded bigot that you do not see what the future holds for all Jews, everywhere, with your own selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth. A blood curse be upon all of your ilk that always censors the Truth for any such selfish and foolish and bigoted narrow-mindedness!"-PV" (emphasis mine: AndyL)

Of course, this quote was taken out of context by AndyL. The reference to the Jews was only a warning that any such selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth will reflect badly upon all Jews, everywhere, and no more and no less, and most especially, regarding the current Holocaust or Genocide of the Palestinian People by the Jewish-Zionist-Israeli's for the last 50-60 or so years of constant occupation and displacement and murderous abuse of their natural Human Rights.-PV

followed by

"Such "blood curses" always do come true, eventually, as did the one when the Jesus was murdered by the same ilk that chose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth. I was only warning you that the "Jewish Holocaust" of 50-60 years ago would not be the last, if the real lessons to be learned from it, were not learned, and were not actually taken to heart. Obviously, the same ilk then, 50-60 years ago, even 2000 years ago, is the very same ilk, now. Time is running out. Kalki or Jesus will return, them being only the "symbolic representations" of the sword of TRUTH, which is ETERNAL. Good luck!"

The Vogel RFC page shows just how much animosity he has whipped up.

Again, this is factually true and accurate, and whenever any such pov and selfish bigotry is chosen over the Truth, there actually are quite harsh consequences that are unforeseen at the time that do happen sometimes until perhaps much later down the line in history. Ignore that fact of the Cosmos and at your own peril was my actual intention, and I still wished this ignorant "ilk" some "Good luck!" in avoiding it.-PV

Paul is an open and unreconstructed anti-Semite (though he prefers the term "anti-Jewish") and tries to edit anti-Jewish (anti-Semitic) material into wikipedia such as adding a link to David Duke's material [13] on to the Judaism page and on 19th of April he reverted edits more that three times despite others efforts to stop him. See also [14] and [15]

I am neither any "open" nor "unreconstructed" anti-Semite, whatsoever. The term "anti-Semite" itself is really just a complete misnomer. I am not even "anti-Jewish", but, I am anti-FALSEHOOD, anti-LYING HYPOCRISY, and anti-POV-CENSORSHIP and anti-Jewish SUPREMACISM and anti-Zionist/Israel FIRST and if that fact makes me "anti-Jewish", or falsely "anti-Semitic", then so be it!-PV

The Holocaust page is protected due to his constant vandalism [16] again, on the 19 of April he reverted this page more than three times.

Those edits were NOT VANDALISM, but, were added to maintain a Wiki NPOV.-PV

He has harassed individuals who complain about him by pasting entire pages of material on their talk page - Eloquence complains about that here I request a permanent ban on Vogal and his various ips since he has demonstrated no ability to correct or modify his behavior despite numerous requests and past disciplinary action. If anything he's gotten worse. If a lesser ban is imposed he should be required to obtain and use a userid so that he can be more easily monitored. He should be permanently banned (at least) from editing Judaism, Jews, anti-Semitism, Holocaust, Holocaust denial, Homophobic hate speech, pantheism, genocide, cosmotheism, white supremacy, white separatism (which has been moved to racial segregation), racism and related sites. More later if I have time. AndyL 04:33, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It looks to me more like AndyL is the one that just wants to ban and censor me for having and editing for a NPOV or for a alternative pov that he and his own pov biased ilk just doesn't like?-PV

On April 27, Vogel logged on as 66.2.156.205 and vandalised the Jew and Judaism pages. See [17] and User talk:66.2.156.205 AndyL 02:58, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Again, it looks to me more like AndyL is the one that just wants to ban and censor me for having and editing for a NPOV or for a alternative pov that he and his own pov biased ilk just doesn't like?-PV


User:Mirv[edit]

His behavior here is not new, and he has been banned from numerous other sites for very similar reasons. For the past five months he has kept up a constant flow of personal attacks and reversion wars, and he either fails to comprehend or refuses to abide by basic Wikipedia guidelines, including the all-important NPOV policy. Nobody has been able to convince him to do otherwise, despite numerous efforts by any number of Wikipedians. Therefore I wish to see Vogel banned from editing Wikipedia until such time as he agrees to cease the aforementioned behavior. —No-One Jones 16:17, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

This is just psychological projection on the part of David Gerard, who once reverted over 10 times in one day, to maintain only his own biased pov within an article and refused to discuss it on the TalkPages.-PV

User:GrazingshipIV[edit]

I request that Paul Vogel be subject to a ban of 5 months. He seems to have allot of passion about issues but does not have the social skills or temperament to express it constructively.

This is amusing psychological projection here too, as Sam Spade can attest and from personal experience! LOL! :D-PV

His views about ethnicity and race, particularly the way he expresses them, are offensive to the community. His continued rants about Jewish plots to undermine him are completely inappropriate and unfounded.

On the contrary, almost all of those making false allegations against me "just happen" to be "Jews or Jewish", although perhaps not all, so any of my allegations of "Jewish plots" are actually both appropriate and are well founded in fact, although, for even greater and NPOV factual accuracy, I do call this small cabal an "ilk" of pov bigots "lying and slanderous and censorious hypocrites", which they most certainly and actually all are in fact.-PV


The way these views are expressed is my concern, he is entitled to believe anything he wants but the seeming connotations of his statements seem to smack of hatred. Throwing such wild accusations at other wikipedians is detrimental to achieving any sort of resolution to a conflict.

More psychological projection as anyone can clearly see that has ever attempted to discuss anything "objectively" with GrazingshipIV will quickly find.-PV

His actions both on wikipedia and the mailing list clearly display a lack of self-control in my opinion. He continually calls any who oppose him "biggots" and part of a "cabal". I doubt he will improve but suggest that there is at least a possibility for growth in 5 months. The ban is in the interest of wikipedia most of all, but it also gives him time to grow up a bit and reflect before returning (should he chose too).

Actually, "pov bigots", and that is only when they are not being rational nor reasonable in discussing on TalkPages before reverting and editing articles.-PV

I honestly think this may be a mutt point considering he will probably (as is his custom) circumvent any ban implemented, but considering his actions I think it is warranted.

It certainly and likely is a "mutt point", LOL! :D-PV

For the record-I can only speak to his behavior on the page white seperatism, his request for comments page, and the mailing list. I do not know of the value of his other contributions positive or negative. GrazingshipIV 02:31, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

We won't discuss GrazingshipIV's own pov "behavior" on these pages though, or otherwise the lying hypocrisy might become just too clear to any others making any judgements here?-PV

User:Slrubenstein[edit]

Paul Vogel has been adding an anti-Semitic link to the Judaism page. This is not a charge that I throw around lightly. I am not claiming that Vogel has called for the destruction of the Jewish people, but he has gone out of his way to offend Jews as a group. In my opinion this is not a free speech issue -- Vogel has a right to express his opinions, but Wikipedia does not exist to serve as a means by which such hateful views can be promoted.

The link was to and for a "criticism" of Judaism and it had no more or less "hateful views" nor was it any less "offensive" to Jews as a group than was the Jewish pov "criticisms" links to cosmotheism were to Cosmotheists as a group???? Only such Jewish hateful views against cosmotheism can be promoted in Wikipedia???? Some lying and hypocritical pov DOUBLE-STANDARD!-PV

I explained in detail on the talk page why I think this is inappropriate, and I deleted the link. Although some other users believe that such a link is acceptable as long as it is clearly identified, I think if Wikipedia is going to have any links to anti-Semitic material it should be on the anti-Semitism page. To put t on the Judaism page in no way serves the development of the article, and serves only to endorse anti-Semitism as a valid view of Jews and their culture.

On the contrary, Judaism is not above ANY "criticism" and even by so-called "anti-Semites", if you do not FAIRLY APPLY the SAME rule to cosmotheism and without DOUBLE-STANDARDS as well.-PV

I was content to argue this issue on the Talk page, and raised the issue of some sort of intervention as arbitration only after he responded to my points through more anti-Semitism.

Liar! I gave you a possible compromise solution to edit and delete for NPOV for both articles, but, you REFUSED and slandered me with "Anti-Semitism"!-PV

Specifically, after I explained why I deleted the link, Vogel responded, "Any hue and cry of "anti-semitism" or "nazism" etc. ad nauseum for such a link is not relevant, if one is being hypocritical in actually allowing similar pov and slanderous links on cosmotheism, or any other religion, within Wiki articles.-PV " --

Exactly. NO DOUBLE-STANDARDS!-PV

a response that ignored my explanation for my deletion of the link entirely.

Because it just wasn't relevant, whatsoever.-PV


Rather than engage in a discussion of what is appropriate for the article and why, his statement in effect explained his act as a form of revenge (he has since made it clear that he blames changes to the cosmotheism page on "Jews" --a logic which is almost by definition anti-Semitic, as Jean-Paul Sartre explored in his book Anti-Semite and Jew.

BS! The actual changes to the article on the cosmotheism page was done by "David Gerard", and his ilk of pov bigots and ALL of the "criticisms" linked to were authored by "Jews", or "Marxists", or both, so go figure?-PV

I did not reply by accusing him of anti-Semitism. Instead I tried to be constructive. I replied, "I am not "allowing" slanderous links on the cosmotheism page. Two rights do not make a wrong. If you have a problem on another site, seek mediation -- don't take out your frustrations here."

So he admits it is WRONG but REFUSES to right it. That is a DOUBLE-STANDARD!-PV

And then Vogel made clear the anti-Semitic logic by which problems on the cosmotheism page are really "Jewish" problems: "Aren't you? Each one of those 4 slanderous POV articles and each one linked as "criticisms" on the cosmotheism page have been written by "Jews", and you have not ever protested and ever insisted upon their actual "removal" have you?

And of course, he didn't. Instead he just started falsely screaming and slandering me with the false label of "anti-Semitism" and then complained to Fred Bauer on the mailing list.-PV

The problem is on THIS SITE, WIKIPEDIA. The lying hypocrisy of your own "ilk" is responsible for this nonsense, and so it actually is YOUR OWN PROBLEM. Unfortunately, there is no effective medication for psychological projection on your and your own ilk's part, but, hope springs eternal!.-"

So he admits it is WRONG but REFUSES to right it. That is a DOUBLE-STANDARD!-PV


Do I need to explain my outrage? Vogel doesn't identify the people working on the cosmotheism as wikipedians but as "Jews." He doesn't identify me as a wikipedian but solely as a "Jew." And because I am a Jew, he holds me responsible for what other "Jews" have done on another site.

Again, that is just false. Many if not most of those that linked to the four "criticisms" of cosmotheism were "Jews" and those that wrote the slanderous "criticisms" of cosmotheism were "Jews" or "Marxists" or both and were not Wikipedians. I held you only responsible for NOT being outraged at the DOUBLE-STANDARD. Instead, you only railed and were only "outraged" and falsely about my own so-called "anti-Semitism"!!!-PV

This use of "Jew" as a slur; the identification of my "ilk" as hypocrites, reeks of anti-Semitism. If this itself does not merit banning, I certainly think some strong action should be taken.

It was not any "slur". If you do identify yourself with an "ilk" of lying hypocrites that enforces DOUBLE-STANDARDS, that is really only just your own "anti-Semitism", isn't it?-PV

I want to be clear that I believe even anti-Semites have a right to free speech. But I simply do not believe Wikipedia therefore has an obligation to allow anti-Semites to use Wikipedia to spread their views (my objection to the link) -- especially when they do so in a way that makes no contribution at all to writing an article, and when they treat contributors to article pages with contempt becuse they are Jewish.

Nonsense. I am not "anti-Semitic". You obviously do not believe in Freedom of Speech. You slander others with false labels and personal insults and lie and hypocritically enforce or uphold DOUBLE-STANDARDS. I treat any "ilk" of lying and hypocritical pov bigots and pov censors with CONTEMPT for their DOUBLE-STANDARDS. Them being "Jewish", alone, is not relevant.-PV

I also want to be clear that I do not consider anti-Semitism to be an "extreme view" of the sort that Wikipedia must make room for. Extreme views, as I understand the idea, are views on specific events or phenomena that are controvercial. For example, some people believe that the Holocaust was a hoax, and that Jews were responsible for the 9/11 attack. I firmly believe relevant articles must make room for such extreme views -- as long as they are presented in an NPOV way, contextualized, and presented as minority opinions.

In other words, just as long as they are "presented" in a form that only you can pov "discount and dismiss", right? That is NOT any NPOV, whatsoever.-PV


I do not believe anyone should ever be sanctioned for holding these views and others like them (to my knowledge, Vogel has not presented these views -- I am offering them as hypotheticals); my understanding of our NPOV policy is that such views must be represented.

Ok, so far.-PV


But anti-Semitism itself is not a "view" in the same way as these other views, as beliefs that must be represented in articles on the Holocaust or 9/11. Anti-Semitism is not a view, it is a form of hatred. Sure we must have an article on it -- but to consider it legitimate view that must be represented to guarantee NPOV is a mockery of the notion of NPOV.

On the contrary, you can falsely label anything or anyone "critical" of Judaism or Jews or whatever as being "anti-Semitic", and to censor it, and that being and whether it is actually for a NPOV or is factually accurate or not, right?-PV

I believe that Vogel should be banned permanently from Wikipedia. If he is not, I know there is little I can do -- I certainly will not quit the project.

Why not ban yourself, since you can not uphold any alternative povs or even the NPOV?-PV


However, given his behavior and avowed views, I cannot see how he and I could ever work together. If he puts anti-Semitic material in any article on Jews or Judaism, I will delete it. I will do this even if it means I will have to revert more than three times in one day. I realize tht this on its face seems like a violation of our rules. I am not saying this in order to threaten the community -- I am only trying to be honest.


Why not ban yourself, now, since you can not uphold any alternative povs or even the NPOV?-PV


If the Arbitration Committee feels that it is I who has acted inappropriately or have broken a rule on the Judaism page, or its talk page -- broken not the letter of any rule but the spirit -- let me know and discipline me as you feel necessary. But I cannot bear to see anti-Semetic materil on the Judaism page.

Why not ban yourself, now, since you can not uphold any alternative povs or even the NPOV? You have just stated your intention to break the rules and only for your own pov? right? Double-standards? You tell me?-PV



Paul Vogel[edit]

The above statements by Sl are distressing to me. I can see numerous mistakes Paul has made, and I expect that he will be receiving a sanction from the committee, lets just get that out of the way. I am here to plead for lenience, and to minimize injustice. Hard banning Paul, particularly for being anti-Jewish or racist would be unjust. He has not made any overtly racist comments that I am aware of, and quite unlike Sl, I expect people of a variety of offensive types (paraphiliacs, communists, Muslim extremists, atheists etc...) to be allowed here. I don’t see a need to single out particular types of conventionally unpopular people, unless we are going to create an official wiki-POV. He has made quality contributions to the wikipedia, he has been willing to compromise, and his behaviour has improved over time, until just recently. The evidence against him is simple, and his only defense is the reason why he is here. A strict obedience of policy would have him banned/reverted early and often, as a contentious anon. But Paul is more than a vandal. He is Paul Vogel. He is a person with knowledge on a subject. The subject of white separatism might be unpleasant to you (much as finger fucking and atheism and heteronormativity are offensive to me) but that subject needs to be available to our fearless readers. They need to be able to learn about the distinction between separatism and supremacism, and just what exactly these fellows are thinking, and what it is about Jews they don’t like. You want him removed from the Judaism page, even from the anti-Semitism page, the chosen race page where I sent him. I speak to you from my heart: He is not going to love Jews so long as they exclude him, and he is not going to learn anything good about them when his only sources are jewwatch and stormfront. His presence on these pages serves to educate him, if nothing else. Paul is a person, and he has things to say. He is careful, if you have not noticed, not to use slurs or be otherwise overly offensive. The wording of his blood curse so as only to apply to hypocrites and liars and such, his affinity for Carl Sagan, Christ, Palestinians and other Semites shows me that he is not an irredeemable bigot, but rather is an individual who has found a broad label (“ilk”) for those he views as his opposition, rather than a racial or political one as some do (heteronormative, communist, fascist, racist, factual relativist/postmodernist are a few other such labels). Sam Spade 20:26, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Evidence for the Defense of Paul Vogel by Sam Spade:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Spade/Clients#Paul_Vogel

I propose he be required to form an account if he is to stay, and that said account be throttled, for number of edits or reverts, or both, until such time as his case is re-evaluated (for good or ill). Sam Spade 20:38, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sam, please explain what throttling an account means? Thanks. AndyL 04:38, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
It means that within a given period of time, there would be a set limit on the number of edits or reverts that he could perform. Andrewlevine 05:12, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Why not keep it at three for everyone and I do mean equally enforced on EVERYONE, period.-PV

Texture[edit]

(Attention: As the author of the following statements I do not wish to have my text parsed. Please add any responses after it is complete. This can be determined by where my signature is provided at the end. I do not feel my meaning can be properly conveyed if fragmented. I will restore my text to its original form if altered. Feel free to quote me in any response.)

The reason being that any truthful "cross-examination" by the accused will clearly show that "Texture's meaning" or "true intent" was only to bear false witness against me.-PV


"I have encountered Paul Vogel a number of times in the last few months. Putting aside instances where I only observed an altercation and did not become involved my experiences have been discouraging. My first encounters were on articles that I had not contributed but noticed a large amount of agressive activity by an anon user. Looking at these I found that the single anon user was trying to push racist POV into articles where little or no support."

In no instance was I ever trying "to push racist POV into articles", whatsoever. This is purely false slander and pov bias.-PV

"This is my own opinion and the opinions of those discussion the issue before I was involved."

In others, a pov "opinion" that was slanderous and that was based upon hearsay rather than the objective or NPOV facts.-PV


"I assisted in reverting these unwanted changes supported by the overwhelming discussion on the talk pages against them."

Again, this is just a patent falsehood, as often there wasn't very much or sometimes even any discussion on the talk pages before my edits were being falsely and pov reverted.-PV

"Some, including myself, tried to create compromises that included both points of view. The majority reluctantly accepted compromises but none (that I observed) were acceptable to Mr. Vogel and the edit and revert wars were continued on any compromise."

Again, that statement is just a bald-faced lie, as "double-standards" were still being enforced and only one pov was being implemented, which is hardly any "compromise".-PV

"I tried to discuss the issues and reasons to Mr. Vogel and in the course of discussions I was grouped with some vague collection of users that wanted to specifically silence, aggravate, or oppose him as a person."

You had falsely and slanderously accused me of "vandalism" and therefore also urged and advised the others to have me banned, blocked, or censored. If you were so "grouped" with that censorious "ilk", you had yourself made that very choice and by your own words and actions.-PV

"I do believe that there are users who would oppose Mr. Vogel in anything he does in Wikipedia but I am not one of them."

Your actions do speak louder than your words, Texture, in this regard.-PV

"Mr. Vogel railed against the oppression of his views and sought to prove that those rules are only applied to oppose his opinions and not to other articles."

The pov and abusive and slanderous actions and double-standards of Hadal and of several other admins. had proven that fact, and over and over again.-PV

"He decided that if Cosmotheism must have critical opinions linked in the article then Judaism should as well."

Obviously, no "double-standards", and to maintain a NPOV within all religious articles.-PV

"He added links to Judaism in a new "criticism" section. I made one modification to his original links to keep them from being analysis in themselves (and as short as those descriptions in Cosmotheism."

No, you only changed them to suit only your own pov, verses the Wiki NPOV, and as far as them "being analysis in themselves", that is really and it should be only for the reader to actually decide.-PV

"[18] These were immediately removed. [19] I restored both these links that were added by Mr. Vogel [20] and started a topic in the talk page [21] asking what about the links or the criticisms section was wrong for this page."

And Steven R. then completely refused and he in his pov would not allow them as any "criticisms" of Judaism, whatsoever. No double-standards, remember? -PV


"Mr. Vogel restored his original links and text which referred to Judaism's "typical lying hypocrisy and psychological projection". [22]"

Again, this is just another slanderous and bald-faced lie. The text actually referred to the "typical lying hypocrisy and psychological projection of "Malignant Narcissism", and not to "Judaism", and which can clearly be seen in the link.-PV

"Understandably, this was removed and replaced with one opinion of Jewwatch as anti-jewish. [23]"

On the contrary, it was only removed to enforce pov "double-standards".-PV

"To help satisfy both parties I attempted a compromise description (encouraged that the description was only modified and not removed outright by Mkmcconn). [24] I thought the compromise would be acceptable since it did not attack either side's opinion just gave it factually."

Again, this is just another pov opinion, and this did not actually give it "factually" nor with any NPOV, whatsoever, but only revealed a double-standard of not allowing the actual "critic" to define the "criticisms", and as was the case with cosmotheism.-PV

"One user removed the jewwatch web site as neo-nazi and not an analytical criticism (which I later came to agree with) and another user trying to compromise with Mr. Vogel helpfully added another critical link against Judaism titled "Piety and Power: The World of Jewish Fundamentalism"."

Again, nothing on that [25] web site linked indicated that it was "Neo-Nazi", whatsoever, but it was highly critical of Judaism and of "Jewish supremacists", and therefore was a valid link to "criticisms". Also, the pov "criticism" link that was added called "Piety and Power" was really only a minor and certified kosher and mild "criticism" in contrast to the completely slanderous and biased and bigoted and false pov "criticisms" to cosmotheism. No double-standards!-PV

"ALL of these compromises were unacceptable to Mr. Vogel and his original links and text were fully restored. [26] And jewwatch restored again in its original text. [27]"

Of course, because they were still only enforcing a double-standard regarding religious "criticisms" that was and is completely unacceptable and unfair.-PV

"I again tried to keep the link but reduce the text to a flat tone. Good news was that one of the links Mr. Vogel wanted added was being kept each time and the additional book reference as well. The community was trying to compromise with Mr. Vogel by retaining two entries (one of them his) in the new criticism section. [28] To Mr. Vogel's credit he made this attempt to change his own text to something more acceptable [29] and I fixed his formatting but kept his link. [30]"

Ok, but, then you all still missed the original point of mine, entirely, of not enforcing double-standards!-PV

"After this there was no attempt at compromise by Mr. Vogel but much was compromised by the community."

That is just another bald-faced lie. It was clear what I was very willing to compromise on, but, you would only enforce these "double-standards", most especially, in regard to any slanderous and false "criticisms" of cosmotheism verses of Judaism.-PV

"Wikilinks were added [31] (that were mostly kept by the compromising community) but then a torrent of anti-jewish commentary was added that was clearly not appropriate for a links section of any kind. [32]"

That is just another bald-faced lie. It was clear what I was very willing to compromise on, but, you would only enforce these "double-standards", most especially, in regard to any slanderous and false "criticisms" of cosmotheism verses of Judaism.-PV

"Mr. Vogel made several attempts to get anti-jewish links with non-link commentary added to the criticism links section with such authors as David Duke and some commentary that went for paragraphs and talked about Jewish supremacy. [33] [34] [35] [36] [[37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43]"

Exactly. But it was clear what I was very willing to compromise on, but, you would only enforce these "double-standards", most especially, in regard to any slanderous and false "criticisms" of cosmotheism verses of Judaism.-PV


"Most users left the critical analysis links (including those about moral and ethical problems in Judaism by infidels.org) as part of the article."

Only likely because I wasn't the one that had added it in the first place.-PV


"Mr. Vogel made the addition of the infidels.org link and the Jewish ethnocentrism and Anti-Semitism links that remain in the article today."

No, I didn't actually add them, whatsoever.-PV

"The community compromised and accepted these links in bending to Mr. Vogel to be as fair as possible."

No, I didn't actually add them, whatsoever. This is just another bald-faced lie. There was no real "compromise" or "bending" or "fairness", whatsoever. I was very willing to compromise, but, you would only enforce these "double-standards", and most especially, in regard to any slanderous and false "criticisms" of cosmotheism verses of Judaism. -PV

"Attempts to communicate with Mr. Vogel and stop the links viewed as racist or neo-nazi were not successful and temporary blocks were needed to stop the constant effort to include them. I attempted to discuss with Mr. Vogel about limiting the descriptions to factual terms and not include inflamatory links. [44]"

There was no real "compromise" or "bending" or "fairness", whatsoever. I was very willing to compromise, but, you would only enforce these "double-standards", and most especially, in regard to any slanderous and false "criticisms" of cosmotheism verses of Judaism. -PV

"I attempted to negotiate terms with the community so that Mr. Vogels links could remain as criticism. [45] [46] [47] [48]"

It failed. There was no real "compromise" or "bending" or "fairness", whatsoever. I was very willing to compromise, but, you would only enforce these "double-standards", and most especially, in regard to any slanderous and false "criticisms" of cosmotheism verses of Judaism. -PV


"After in-depth discussion on the topic only one of the original links was dropped, the jewwatch site. It was explained why this was not a criticism but rather an attack on anything jewish."

Which of course was just completely false, and as any actual reading of the sites own content can factually attest here: http://www.jewwatch.com It is just as valid a "criticisms" link to Judaism, as were the deliberately false and slanderous "criticisms" links to cosmotheism, and by any objective and NPOV criteria and without any such pov double-standards! -PV

"[49] [50] [51]

For my efforts to get as much as possible of Mr. Vogel's views into the Judaism article I was met with derision on the Judaism talk: [52]"

Indeed, which only reflected the intolerance and double-standards that were being enforced regarding "criticisms" links of Judaism verses that of cosmotheism. -PV

"On the Talk:Cosmotheism my efforts were utterly dismissed."

Of course, and because they completely failed to enforce ANY NPOV. There was no real "compromise" or "bending" or "fairness", whatsoever. I was very willing to compromise, but, you would only enforce these POV "double-standards", and most especially, in regard to any slanderous and false "criticisms" of cosmotheism verses of Judaism. -PV


"It is hard to find correct links to show the discussion since Mr. Vogel would cut large sections of discussion and attribute them all to me even though other signatures were included in what he claimed what all by me and attacking him. I made one effort to correct his misattribution: [53] It might have explained why he continued to attack me even as I tried to support including some (if not all) of his links in criticism of Judaism. [54] This is what I thought [55] but not apparantly what he meant since he then claimed that I banned him and was of the lying hypocrits ilk that opposed him. [56] [57]"

It is clear from the user TalkPages and QuikPolls Texture, that you actually were a part of this same ilk or cabal of censorious bigots and that was and is trying to ban, block, or censor me.-PV

"After my astonishment at this attack from someone I was trying to help wore off I wrote, then deleted an angry reply. Instead I wrote this: [58] and [59]. The response was this: [60] and other cut-and-paste that mixed up others comments mixed in badly with a statement by me that did not say the same thing."

It is clear from the user TalkPages and QuikPolls Texture, that you actually were a part of this same ilk or cabal of censorious bigots and that was and is trying to ban, block, or censor me.-PV

"He was at this point posting the same large sections that combined others comments with mine into one paragraph both in Judaism and Cosmotheism simultaneously without any change between them. I tried to answer and at the same time inidicate that this discussion should not be cross-posted to both talk pages. [61]"

It is clear from the user TalkPages and QuikPolls Texture, that you actually were a part of this same ilk or cabal of censorious bigots and that was and is trying to ban, block, or censor me.-PV


"Mr. Vogel often will past huge segments of other articles into a talk page. [62] along with his additional text."

When they show what kind of pov "ilk" are censoring me, yes.-PV


"I can only call these rants. I wanted to make it clear to Mr. Vogel that I am not "out to get him" and that I don't have to agree with him 100% to avoid being labelled hypocritical ilk that ban and censor him. [63]"

It is clear from the others user TalkPages and QuikPolls Texture, that you actually were a part of this same ilk or cabal of censorious bigots and that was and is trying to ban, block, or censor me. Playing "innocent" is not going to fool anyone here. -PV

"Someone suggested mediation but Mr. Vogel considered the "cabal" incapable of mediation. I gave my view of how he can compromise and contribute to Wikipedia: [64] but this was ripped apart along with the idea of mediation (reply to me below mediation discussion): [65]"

It is clear from the others user TalkPages and QuikPolls Texture, that you actually were a part of this same censorious ilk or cabal of slanderous bigots and that was and is trying to ban, block, or censor me. Playing "innocent" is not going to fool anyone here. -PV


"In my opinion, Mr. Vogel is not currently willing to work with others in a cooperative effort."

On the contrary, I am always willing to work with those that are "reasonable" and that can "fairly compromise" and that can uphold a NPOV, verses only their own pov and double-standards.-PV


"I agree with those above that he is causing much more disruption than contribution to Wikipedia. I think he needs extended time away both to make it clear that his actions are unacceptable and to let him reflect on how to work with the community instead of flatly against it."

It is clear from the others user TalkPages and QuikPolls Texture, that you actually were a part of this same censorious ilk or cabal of slanderous bigots and that was and is trying to ban, block, or censor me. Playing "innocent" is not going to fool anyone here. This "ilk" does NOT represent the Wiki community as a Whole, but, only their own censorious pov. -PV

"I agree with the suggestion above to give Mr. Vogel up to 5 months ban from editing in Wikipedia and hope that he can return as a contributor who works with others."

I am always willing to work with those that are "reasonable" and that can "fairly compromise" and that can uphold a NPOV, verses only their own "ilks" pov and double-standards.-PV

"I apologize for the length but this is the best way I could present the information. I left out earlier efforts to compromise with Mr. Vogel that also failed. I can include these if necessary."

You actually should "apologize" for "bearing false witness against me" and for slandering me and for personally insulting me and for always pov reverting me. The length of it is not relevant, but, your quite deliberately false representations of the TRUTH are and should actually be taken into consideration. I propose the same "punishment" for this "ilk" of bigoted and lying and hypocritical and censorious slanderers as they wish to have imposed upon me. Otherwise, again, only such pov double-standards and mob injustice will be enforced.-PV

"This completes my statement. - Tεxτurε 23:00, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)"

Is "bearing false witnesss" against other users any punishable offensive within Wikipedia? If so, then I would like to "counter-charge" my own "false accusers" with doing such and have them "punished" also according to their own quite bigoted spirit of "injustice" that they here have only wished to falsely have imposed upon me.-PV

Arbitrator's opinions on hearing this matter[edit]

  1. We should hear this. I believe it is Wikipedia policy that pushing an extreme point of view is not in itself grounds for banning. However there are a number of Wikipedia policies which by necessity must be violated in an effort to aggressively push a point of view. I think, based on a preliminary review of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Paul Vogel there are sufficient grounds for consideration of his actions. Fred Bauder 13:24, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Agree with Fred; support. James F. (talk) 13:26, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  3. Both sides seem to want us to arbitrate, so by all means let us do so. Martin 21:52, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  4. Let's roll! Nohat 22:03, 2004 Apr 23 (UTC)
  5. IIRC, I've temp blocked this guy twice so I should recuse myself. --mav 08:55, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  6. We certainly need to arbitrate this. --the Epopt 20:46, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Discussion by arbitrators[edit]

  • I think invocation of a blood curse upon another user (probably, but not necessarily Jewish) in Talk:Holocaust pretty much takes the cake. Following this up with "Does it require any "blood curse" for you and your own ilk to take the hint? Or will it take another Holocaust, before you finally learn the lesson? " pretty much defines the situation as far as I'm concerned. Fred Bauder 02:37, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

If you are that pov biased that you have taken the quote out of context, then you should really just step down as an arbitrator, Fred. You can not be fair nor impartial.-PV

Proposed principles[edit]

No personal attacks[edit]

  • In extreme cases, users have been banned for repeatedly engaging in personal attacks. Specific types of slur covered by this include but are not limited to the following: Racial, sexual, religious or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor. See Wikipedia:No personal attacks

No DOUBLE-STANDARDS. There have not been any such "personal attacks" from me nor that were not actually based upon solely the facts. The "ilk" knows just who and whom they are don't they?-PV

Disruptive users may be blocked[edit]

Not without truthful and valid reasons, which some here didn't do before blocking, banning, and censoring me.-PV

Hmm, except that's a recently proposed policy, and I'm not sure that it's sufficiently supported by the community. The three strikes proposal was less dramatic than Blocking policy#Disruption, and that still had significant opposition... Martin 23:58, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Proposed finding of fact[edit]

Systematic point of view editing[edit]

  • In addition to his editing of the article Judaism below Paul Vogel has generally contributed to articles associated with White supremacy, or as he puts it, White separatism, and Neo-Nazism. It is his assertion, strongly expressed, that since Wikipedia does not honor its own policy of Neutral Point of View, NPOV, that he is justified in this aggressive point of view approach,

see Post to Talk:White supremacy. See also Contributions 24.45.99.191 , User contributions 65.125.10.66 and User contributions 216.99.245.146

Exactly, NPOV and NO DOUBLE-STANDARDS!-PV


Links to anti-Semitic sites[edit]

  • At 14:37, Apr 12, 2004 Paul Vogel, logged in anonymously as 24.45.99.191 posted a link to the anti-Semitic site Jew Watch in the section "Critics" at the foot of the article Judaism. This was reverted shortly thereafter by User:Slrubenstein. Paul Vogel then reinserted the link a number of times as well as other links to anti-semitic sites all of which were reverted by one user or another. See page history See discussion at Talk:Judaism.

The pov link is a valid one to "criticisms" of Judaism, and whether considered to be "anti-Semitic" or not. The cosmotheism has links to far more false and slanderous "criticisms" links, yet, have not been deleted? Double-Standards, and no NPOV, yet again!-PV


Expressions of anti-Semitism[edit]

  • In the discussion discussion at Talk:Judaism Paul Vogel made the following statements:
    • "You and your ilk falsely labeling any "criticism" of Judaism as ONLY being "anti-semitic" is what is actually a "red-herring" and is deliberately and falsely and hypocritically being used only to "cloud the issues" and to limit any productive debate and to avoid anyone actually getting to the real root of any such issues and solving these problems and relations. Those that suffer from such psychological projections should "GO AWAY!" and for the sake of World Peace.-PV"

Again, this quote was just taken out of context and it was after Steve had insultingly told me to "GO AWAY!" when he just didn't like the valid pov additions of a "criticisms" link to the Judaism page, which he had quite falsely called "anti-Semitic" and then he falsely personally insulted by ALSO falsely calling me as being such.-PV


    • ""Anti-semitism" is the natural result of "Semitism" or "Jewishness" as a FALSE Identity, and which places ONLY JEWS as being the only TRUE HUMANS and as being the only "GOD's CHOSEN PEOPLE" and of being the only TRUE RELIGION and as being and having the only TRUE PERSONAL and TRIBAL "GOD":YHWH."
    • ""Anti-semitism" is the natural result of "Semitism" or "Jewishness" as a FALSE Identity, and which places ONLY JEWS as being the only TRUE HUMANS and as being the only "GOD's CHOSEN PEOPLE" and of being the only TRUE RELIGION and as being and having the only TRUE PERSONAL and TRIBAL "GOD":YHWH.-PV PS--And your obvious attempts to have me banned and censored is proof of your own lying hypocrisy and intolerance of any valid "criticisms" of Judaism as a "false identity" that is the root and source of "Anti-semitism", actually and more accurately, "anti-JEWISHNESS" as being a FALSE IDENTITY, and that is the real cause of "Hate" of any Non-Jews:"

Again, this quote is also just taken completely out of context, and refers to an article by Jan Assman, who wrote Moses the Egyptian, which factually outlines the real roots of "anti-Semitism" as being ancient and which started with the Mosaic Distinction, which had divided the world of the true and from GOD from the false and World. It is a well-researched and valid criticism.-PV


    • '"Each one of those 4 slanderous POV articles and each one linked as "criticisms" on the cosmotheism page have been written by Marxist "Jews", and you have not ever protested and ever insisted upon their actual "removal" have you?"'

Again, another quote taken out of context. Everything written was based upon the actual facts, and only revealed the DOUBLE-STANDARD and lying hypocrisy of allowing Jewish pov criticism links to cosmotheism but not any of the same to Judaism. -PV


Again, another quote taken out of context. Everything written was based upon the actual facts, and only revealed the DOUBLE-STANDARD and lying hypocrisy of allowing Jewish or Marxist or both pov "criticism" links to cosmotheism but not any of the same kind to Judaism. -PV


More expressions of anti-Semitism[edit]

  • Examples from Talk:Holocaust:
    • " I guess it is only a "relevant" one to you "Snowjob" when "JEWS" are dying at the hands of "Non-Jews" and not ever the other way around? YOU are the actual one that is being a pov "vandal" and pov "troll" by deleting relevant sections of the article. Your "lying hypocrisy" and "Malignant Narcissism" is so typical for your ilk."

This is taken out of context, and refers to not allowing the section on the Palestinian Holocaust be included within the article. BTW, Palestinians are SEMITES, too!-PV



    • " The article section is "quite appropriate" for the reasons I have just given, what information, specifically, was "not suitable" and "why" for the position in the article? HOW DARE you personally insult me with falsely and personally insulting me and calling me any "anti-Semitic" or "troll nature" because you do not understand just how relevant and important that section within the article actually is? You are such an narrow-minded bigot that you do not see what the future holds for all Jews, everywhere, with your own selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth. A blood curse be upon all of your ilk that always censors the Truth for any such selfish and foolish and bigoted narrow-mindedness! "

This is taken out of context, and refers to pov bigoted ilk not allowing the section on the Palestinian Holocaust be included within the article. BTW, Palestinians are SEMITES, too!-PV


    • "You shouldn't really be "flattered" at all. Such "blood curses" always do come true, eventually, as did the one when the Jesus was murdered by the same ilk that chose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth. I was only warning you that the "Jewish Holocaust" of 50-60 years ago would not be the last, if the real lessons to be learned from it, were not learned, and were not actually taken to heart. Obviously, the same ilk then, 50-60 years ago, even 2000 years ago, is the very same ilk, now. Time is running out. Kalki or Jesus will return, them being only the "symbolic representations" of the sword of TRUTH, which is ETERNAL. Good luck! "

This is taken out of context, and refers to pov bigoted ilk not allowing the section on the Palestinian Holocaust be included within the article. BTW, Palestinians are SEMITES, too! The "blood curse" is quite specific as to who or whom is actually condemned by it: the "ilk" that choose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth.-PV


    • "As is usual, such Wiki "no personal attacks" and such "no more than 3 revert" policies only apply to "others" and never to yourself and your own "ilk". The usual "Double-Standard". Obviously, the only ones being "blood cursed" are only those that actually are "lying hypocrites" and that are always censoring the TRUTH. "HOW DARE you personally insult me with falsely and personally insulting me and calling me any "anti-Semitic" or "troll nature" because you do not understand just how relevant and important that section within the article actually is? You are such an narrow-minded bigot that you do not see what the future holds for all Jews, everywhere, with your own selfish and biased bigotry and ignorant pov editing of the truth. A blood curse be upon all of your ilk that always censors the Truth for any such selfish and foolish and bigoted narrow-mindedness!" I stand by EVERY WORD I SAID, and if the shoe fits, you do wear it well! :D "

Again, the "blood curse" is quite specific as to who or whom is actually condemned by it: the same "ilk" that choose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth.-PV




    • " You know, when you are being a "lying hypocrite" and are always censoring the TRUTH, you should NOT ban others for what you and your own ilk are actually doing. Does it require any "blood curse" for you and your own ilk to take the hint? Or will it take another Holocaust, before you finally learn the lesson? "

Again, the "blood curse" is quite specific as to who or whom is actually condemned by it: the same "ilk" that choose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth.-PV



    • " It is clear that a cabal of censorous pov bigots have falsely accused me of being a "troll", "vandal", or of making "abusive comments" on some TalkPages, or of "breaking the 3-revert rule". This is psychological projection by a pov mob or ilk of lying hypocrites. I do request Sam Spade, to be my "advocate", and I also can provide evidence to demonstrate the fact that those here attempting to have me banned and to have me censored, are themselves "trolls", "vandals", and have themselves broken the 3-revert rule and have hurled "personal insults" and have abused and used slanderous and false personal insults and "abusive comments" as their own stock in trade and in their own pov bigoted and biased campaign of "character assassination".-PV"


Again, the "blood curse" is quite specific as to who or whom is actually condemned by it: the same "ilk" that choose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth, and that enforce pov DOUBLE-STANDARDS!.-PV


Paul Vogel blocked by Hadal[edit]

  • 21:30, Apr 22, 2004, Hadal blocked 24.45.99.191 (expires 21:30, Apr 26, 2004) (contribs) (unblock) (Personal attacks and trolling. To Vogel: If you try to evade this block once more, I will make it permanent.)
  • 21:25, Apr 22, 2004, Hadal blocked 216.99.245.146 (expires 21:25, Apr 23, 2004) (contribs) (unblock) (ban evasion)

See Special:Ipblocklist, wikipedia:block log

Again, the "blood curse" is quite specific as to who or whom is actually condemned by it: the same "ilk" that choose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth, and that enforce pov DOUBLE-STANDARDS!.-PV


Logging in while banned[edit]

  • In a post Fri Apr 23 18:48:11 UTC 2004 to the wikien mailing list Paul Vogel admitts logging in while banned. "I DID circumvent any bans based upon any such false pov allegations and upon any such biased treatment and harrassment" [66]

Again, the "blood curse" is quite specific as to who or whom is actually condemned by it: the same "ilk" that choose pov and selfish bigotry over the Truth, and that enforce pov DOUBLE-STANDARDS!.-PV

Kangaroo court for Thoughtcrime or for Paul Vogel's NPOV edits being pov and falsely called "vandalism" or for lacking Political correctness or for posting Hate speech in the Social Marxist-Jewish pov of the actual "Haters", "Trolls", and their POV political "Censorship": of this article[67] on Cosmotheism[68] below: and many others:


Proposed relief[edit]

Kangaroo court for Thoughtcrime or for Paul Vogel's NPOV edits being pov and falsely called "vandalism" or for lacking Political correctness or for posting Hate speech in the Social Marxist-Jewish pov of the actual "Haters", "Trolls", and their POV political "Censorship": of this article[69] on Cosmotheism[70] below: and many others:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Paul_Vogel/65.125.10.66&oldid=1142131821"