Originally posted by Christian Soldier
[B
"Evidence for an international conspiracy, from an American perspective, <I>Fourth Reich of the Rich</I> documents centuries of ties between world revolutionaries and international financiers. Demonstrates how Rockefeller-Rothschild interests manipulate Communists and anti-Communists alike in the interests of one-world domination."
Your second link takes us to another brief blurb, this one about the book Fourth Reich of the Rich. Just because they sell this particular book, does not prove that the book itself is anti-Semitic. Please cite some passages from the book for further evidence.
Your fourth link says absolutely nothing about Hovind or Fourth Reich of the Rich.
You're the one making the claim, so you need to do the web check yourself, then give us a link. Please make sure any link you provide has actual in-context excerpts from the book.
Please provide us with evidence that Hovind has worked with Chick on tracts that were specifically anti-Catholic. The assertion that Hovind worked with him on some of his tracts, does not necessarily mean that Hovind shares his views on Catholics. Again, please provide evidence to back your statements
The writer at your fifth link is correct in her overall thesis that the Protocols were not written by Jews. However, a significant amount of her background information is bunk...
Your source lists the book, but then says nothing else about it, and provides no excerpts whatsoever. So your case against the book is still circumstantial. Please provide a source that has in-context quotes from the book.
"Here is a first hand report on Hovind and Protocols."
The woman at your sixth link provides no hard evidence whatsoever. She has no witnesses to back her story. She exhibits a strong, emotional dislike for Hovind and his views, and she's a Bible skeptic. She admits to asking him a question about the Bible in order to "trap" him. She is a definite hostile witness, and her testimony alone means nothing.
"Kent Hovind was asked via email about the matter. The question and the Hovind's response can be found here. Hovind failed to deny it. I can't image why he would not deny the allegation if it were false."
The guy at your seventh and final link is also a hostile witness, judging not only by his rant, but by his screen-name as well. The alleged e-mail images on the screen prove absolutely nothing. There's no way of telling whether Hovind sent that e-mail or not.
