Mar

31

Dawg and the Liar Kinsella…Pwnd

March 31, 2008 |

Dr. Dawg and the Liar Kinsella posted a pic they stated was Marc Lemire standing behind Ernst Zundel. Lemire is calling bullshit.

That picture is not me at all. In August 1992, I had never met Ernst Zundel.

In August 1992 I was only 17 years old.
I searched around, and haven’t yet found a picture of me in 1992, but did find one a year later in the summer of 1993. Sadly the red-eye reduction wasn’t working that day :) freedomsite

Comments gents? Did you properly source the photo?

I have noticed that Marc Lemire tends to be right about stuff like this.

Update: While I think the pictures speak for themselves I have sent an email to Nizkor asking for more information on the Zundel photograph. I’ll report any response.

Update IIKen McVay from nizkor has replied to my query as follows:

Lemire may be right, and I no longer identify the image as his because
of his insistance that it isn’t him.

I haven’t seen Marc for 11 years, so cannot contest his assertion that
it isn’t him.

Not proof either way but nizkor is certainly not standing behind the attribution.

Update III: Dawg graciously withdraws his assertion that Lemire is in the frame with Zundel:

**UPDATE: (March 31) As noted here, Nizkor cannot vouch for the authenticity of the photograph. Obviously, in that case, neither can I. I withdraw, therefore, the assertion that Marc Lemire is pictured in the photograph above. dr. dawg

A gentleman. Now we can, of course, anticipate the liar Kinsella’s retraction….Yeah, right.


Comments

14 Comments so far

  1. Dr.Dawg on March 31, 2008 4:44 pm

    The source of the photo is Nizkor, which I have found in the past to be an impeccable site:

    http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/l/lemire-marc/
    http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst/

  2. Blazingcatfur on March 31, 2008 5:11 pm

    I am sure Dawg will have the good grace to admit his error and apologize. Kinsella? No. A lie is as good as the truth if not better in his world.

  3. Peter on March 31, 2008 5:29 pm

    Interesting, but why did Lemire let that picture stand without comment for almost a month–a very active and controversial month where everybody in this game was tracking everyone else’s sites long into the night?

    Could be, but I’d hold on to my wallet on this one, Jay.

  4. WL Mackenzie Redux on March 31, 2008 7:29 pm

    “Comments gents? Did you properly source the photo?”

    (sound of chirping crickets) ;-)

  5. Good Grief on March 31, 2008 7:47 pm

    Yep, de-legitimizing themselves every time they open their mouths. May sunlight shine upon them.

  6. Rose on March 31, 2008 8:33 pm

    He’s legally correct when he quotes Kinsella here: To quote Kinsella: The damages have went from general to PUNITIVE!

    Posting fake pictures to smear this man is just one of many falsehoods the media have allowed to stet, it’s time for a libel suit.

  7. jay on March 31, 2008 10:33 pm

    Well Dawg either Nizkor got it wrong or that is the toughest, narlyist looking 17 year old on the planet.

    Peter, I think that is a good question but I suspect a) Lemire was busy prepping for his hearing, b) he probably doesn’t go to Dawg or the liar Kinsella’s site on a daily basis.

  8. sheila on March 31, 2008 10:40 pm

    So Dawg, it’s not possible someone supplied Nizkor with “fauxtography”? - It’s slipped by Reuters before.

  9. Kathy Shaidle on March 31, 2008 11:30 pm

    Exactly. I think Lemire is a little too busy right now to spend his time, like Kinsella does, googling himself or wasting his time at Dawg’s largely unread blog.

  10. Dr.Dawg on April 1, 2008 12:31 am

    As noted at my place, that picture has been up at Nizkor for at least nine years with nary a peep from Lemire. I sourced it from there. (Several of your succeeding commenters appear unable to read what I wrote above.)

    If the photo was taken in 1992 (we have only Lemire’s word for that, which is pure gold for a certain type of conservative); and if that is really a photo of him as a teenager at his site (see parenthesis above), and if he didn’t know Zundel in 1992 (see that previous parenthesis again), then you might have a point. But y’all seem willing to take a great deal on faith in the meantime.

  11. Rose on April 1, 2008 4:46 am

    Quote: Several of your succeeding commenters appear unable to read what I wrote above.)

    Good grief why would I read what yet another liberal leftarded fool writes? Woof woof go back to licking your balls like a good dawg.

  12. Dr.Dawg on April 1, 2008 6:53 am

    Rose:

    Then why the hell would you ask me (later post, above) for quotes from the Bible that I already provided? Good grief, some conservatives are rock-solid stupid.

  13. Blazingcatfur on April 1, 2008 7:14 am

    Jay get ready, Dawg will now accuse both yourself and McVay of being revisionist historians.

  14. J.M. Heinrichs on April 1, 2008 2:04 pm

    Dawg
    12.5% is somewhat short of certainty.

    Cheers

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind