Hitler's Genocide and revisionism

[☭proletarian☭]

THIS THREAD IS NOT FOR DEBATING EITHER THE EXISTENCE OR THE EXTENT OF ATROCITIES COMMITTED BY THE NAZIS OR ANY OTHER PARTY. THIS IS FOR DISCUSSING THE VALIDITY OF HISTORICAL ACCURACY AND REACTIONS TO REVISIONISM.




What this thread is about is this question: why is it that while it's acceptable to revise our understanding of history in the name of truth and accuracy when adding Troy to the map, studying human migration, or discussing almost anything else, WW2 and the associated atrocities are taboo? Why is any questioning of the means of slaughter used in any given location, the time-line, or the total number of persons massacred met with with such anger? Is it not important to remember the atrocities of the past accurately? If the numbers on record are not accurate, isn't it right to correct them? Inflated numbers seem to devalue the persons massacred, implying that their deaths are less of a tragedy is there are less of them, while if the numbers are too low, it minimalizes the crimes committed and seems to treat some of the people murdered as not worthy of counting.

Why is there such a strong knee-jerk emotional reaction to anyone who questions the details?

 

[Xenophon]

Its not 'taboo.'

There is nothing to revise, those that currently attempt are trying to erase the greatest crime in history.

No matter how many times its gone through, from the nazis own records or the fact that 6 million people vanished that were not in military service between 1933 and 1945 a number of people still try to insist it didn't happen.

Some morons on this site are into that, and even encourage people to rep them for it, astounding as that is Buekema.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

There is nothing to revise, those that currently attempt are trying to erase the greatest crime in history.

I find that statement dishonest. There are deniers, yes, but there are alos people who know that atrocities occurred ans imply want to ensure the record is accurate.

a number of people still try to insist it didn't happen.

Again, I find it dishonest to equate revisionism with denial.

 

[Sunni Man]

The Jews have a vested monetary interest in keeping the so called Holocaust unexamined and unquestioned.

They continually reinforce the holocaust story with Holocaust Museums in almost every city in the world.

The Holohoax myth has become a huge cash cow for the Zionist who control the Holocaust Industry.

They make sure the official story is considered sacred in acedemia and among government officials.

The Jews have their own zionist gestapo to vilify and slander anyone who dares ask questions.

As people have found out;

To question any aspect of the holocaust is political and academic suicide.

 

[Xenophon]

^ There is your dishonesty Beukema.

 

[The Rabbi]

Bingo.
No one is denying legitimate scholarly work on the subject. And no one has been denied access to records.
But the topic regularly becomes a lightning rod for anti-semites, like SunniMan and his disturbed fellow travelers. Somehow they feel that minimizing the number of people killed, or their treatment will erase any moral high ground Jews have. It will not, of course, except in their own twisted minds.
The Holocaust remains probably the best-attested event in history, with records, photos, movies, eye witness accounts etc that fill libraries and all tell remarkably similar and consistent stories. Thus attempts to re-write that story are prima facie evidence of anti semitism and Jew hatred.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Bingo.
No one is denying legitimate scholarly work on the subject...

attempts to re-write that story are prima facie evidence of anti semitism and Jew hatred.

 

[Sunni Man]

Thus attempts to re-write that story are prima facie evidence of anti semitism and Jew hatred.

This is the reason scholars and historians are afraid to examine details of the holocaust.

If they did find a flaw to any aspect of the official holocaust story and published it.

Their careers would be ruined and they would be labeled as an anti-semite and a nazi sympathizer.

 

[The Rabbi]

Thus attempts to re-write that story are prima facie evidence of anti semitism and Jew hatred.

This is the reason scholars and historians are afraid to examine details of the holocaust.

If they did find a flaw to any aspect of the official holocaust story and published it.

Their careers would be ruined and they would be labeled as an anti-semite and a nazi sympathizer.

Not unless they were actually anti-semites and nazi sympathizers. But please find me a scholar who found a flaw with the official story and publishjed it. And I dont mean the nudnicks you people regularly mention.

 

[JW Frogen]

Oh for fuck sake!

Hitler did it!

He did it!

He caused it, cheered it on, and wanted it. His minions worked for him. They were not freelancing.

He did it.

So did Charles Manson.

He did it.

OJ too.

 

[Ravi]

Shouldn't this be in the conspiracy theory forum?

 

[JW Frogen]

No, because it is too dumb to even be a conspiracy.

It should be in the nightmare forum.

Do we have a nightmare forum?

If not we need one.

I have sex with Oprah last night.

 

[B L Zeebub]

No, because it is too dumb to even be a conspiracy.

It should be in the nightmare forum.

Do we have a nightmare forum?

If not we need one.

I have sex with Oprah last night.

Mate I know you are taking the Mikado

 

[JW Frogen]

iron
in my dreams of power
you won my tons
the tons what won.

 

[CharlieH]

There is nothing to revise, those that currently attempt are trying to erase the greatest crime in history.

Hardly. What about the 20 million killed in the Soviet Union under the Gulag system of control...what about the 12 million Native Americans slaughtered by ex-Europeans in America...what about the 60 million killed by Mao in China??

The greatest crime in history was not the killing of Jews, by a long way.

 

[CharlieH]

The Jews have a vested monetary interest in keeping the so called Holocaust unexamined and unquestioned.

They continually reinforce the holocaust story with Holocaust Museums in almost every city in the world.

The Holohoax myth has become a huge cash cow for the Zionist who control the Holocaust Industry.

They make sure the official story is considered sacred in acedemia and among government officials.

The Jews have their own zionist gestapo to vilify and slander anyone who dares ask questions.

As people have found out;

To question any aspect of the holocaust is political and academic suicide.

 

[Charles Stucker]

why is it that while it's acceptable to revise our understanding of history in the name of truth and accuracy when adding Troy to the map, studying human migration, or discussing almost anything else, WW2 and the associated atrocities are taboo?

There is a huge difference in the amount of information available regarding Troy or early human migration and the Nazi Holocaust. There is also a huge difference in the goals pf the people involved in the studies.
Schliemann wanted to find Troy and spent much of his life at the task. Not to belittle Greeks or Trojans, but just to know the truth.
Modern anthropologists do much the same, searching for new clues to diet, or behavior of early hominid populations.
Those who research the Holocaust can be searching for the truth, but some have a predetermined ideology they wish to put forth as if it were truth. those latter use a variety of dishonest tactics, particularly prevalent in the internet, to produce "data" based, not on fact, but on their own desire to change the perceptions of people away from the truth.

Looking for the truth is a good thing, but looking to obscure the truth, which is the goal of the Holocaust revisionists, is not.

 

[AllieBaba]

Oh for fuck sake!

Hitler did it!

He did it!

He caused it, cheered it on, and wanted it. His minions worked for him. They were not freelancing.

He did it.

So did Charles Manson.

He did it.

OJ too.

Charles Manson DIDN'T do it. He got other people to do it.

 

[CharlieH]

Looking for the truth is a good thing, but looking to obscure the truth, which is the goal of the Holocaust revisionists, is not.

"I've checked out Churchill's Second World War, not a single mention of Nazi 'gas chambers,' a 'genocide' of the Jews, or of 'six million' Jewish victims of the war. This is astonishing. How can it be explained? Eisenhower's Crusade in Europe is a book of 559 pages; the six volumes of Churchill's Second World War total 4,448 pages; and de Gaulle's three-volume Mémoires de guerre is 2,054 pages. In this mass of writing, which altogether totals 7,061 pages (not including the introductory parts), published from 1948 to 1959, one will find no mention either of Nazi 'gas chambers,' a 'genocide' of the Jews, or of 'six million' Jewish victims of the war."

Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus,
University of Ulster, December 5, 2005

 

[☭proletarian☭]

why is it that while it's acceptable to revise our understanding of history in the name of truth and accuracy when adding Troy to the map, studying human migration, or discussing almost anything else, WW2 and the associated atrocities are taboo?

There is a huge difference in the amount of information available regarding Troy or early human migration and the Nazi Holocaust. There is also a huge difference in the goals pf the people involved in the studies.

Not all persons who ask questions have the same objective. To imply otherwise dishonest and reeks of evasion and an attempt to avoid honest discussion and research.

Those who research the Holocaust can be searching for the truth, but some have a predetermined ideology they wish to put forth as if it were truth. those latter use a variety of dishonest tactics, particularly prevalent in the internet, to produce "data" based, not on fact, but on their own desire to change the perceptions of people away from the truth.

Exactly- some, not all. Refute then ignore those parties. Don't shutdown all discussion and all attempts to ensure an accurate record of past events based on someone else's ideology. That's like saying you can't correct information regarding the date of an RTLM broadcast because some people have no problem with blacks killing each other. Ideology and personal desires should never be allowed to get in the way of honest research and factual information.

Looking for the truth is a good thing, but looking to obscure the truth, which is the goal of the Holocaust revisionists, is not.

Again, you come back to stating (in contradiction to the last paragraph) that all persons who question the details are necessarily 'deniers'. Do you not see how dishonest and counterproductiove to truth that is?