Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
- Joined
- May 9, 2006
- Messages
- 29,691
And once again, it turns out I can't make up a CT so stupid, that they haven't beat me to it yet.
Sigh.
Holocaust Denial Videos
- Thread starter Budly
- Start date
-
- Tags
- holocaust denial
- Status
And once again, it turns out I can't make up a CT so stupid, that they haven't beat me to it yet.
Sigh.
"Denierbud" has refused to debate the HC bloggers who demolished his propaganda video point-by-point, for more than two years now.
He posts over at the CODOH forum as Carto's Cutlass Supreme, where non-deniers are lucky to get 1 in 2 posts up that are not deleted by the moderator there, and few can persist unbanned for very long. There is no debate at all on that forum. This is apparently the only place where he chooses to ply his crankery, unless he also happens to be posting over at white supremacist websites like Stormfront and VNN.
He has repeatedly been asked to join the RODOH forum, where both sides are permitted to express their views, and has predictably failed to do so.
Recently, we over at RODOH were preparing for a lengthy, formal debate about the AR camps with a denier team (all but two of whose members were unknown to us). We are now told that so many members of the denial team have dropped that the remaining members cannot proceed. The point of a formal debate was to avoid the negationist method of taking individual pieces of evidence out of context so that they can sidestep the convergent and interlocking nature of the entire body of evidence. The deniers obviously cannot win , or even avoid total humiliation, in a format where proper historical methodology is employed, and they clearly know this.
Denierbud, being the resident internet crank with the most knowledge of AR, was undoubtedly asked to join that team. Either he refused to participate or joined the team and then was one of those who bailed out, for reasons undisclosed to us. We believe that the appearance of "budly" on this board right at this time is not a coincidence. It seems that "denierbud" may be feeling insecure at the moment, like he needs to prove to himself that he is actually capable of debating an opposing view after years of spewing his garbage on the internet unanswered. So he chooses a forum where he (mistakenly) believes that the level of historical knowledge is low enough that he can prevail in a debate.
Cowardice is a common thread running from the Nazis themselves, who murdered unarmed, defenseless civilians (Jews and non-Jews), to their present day proponents and apologists, who cannot muster the backbone to face up to real opposition.
So Denierbud, remember what your mommy undoubtedly told you: the only way to deal with your fears is to face them. And when you're done cleaning out your underwear over the prospect of real debate, please come over to RODOH and engage us on the issues that you have been spouting off about for years, and preferrably, please offer your assistance to the now failing denier formal debate team, that has been forced into humiliating withdrawal.
Unless or until you prove yourself willing and able to debate professional historians and knowledgeable amateurs, you deserve nothing but mocking scorn anywhere you choose to post outside the the warm and comforting confines of your chosen censorious venue. So man up, and prove that anything you say on this subject is worth even a passing glance, by demonstrating your conviction that it can withstand the critical scrutiny of those not of a like mind.
- Woolfe
He posts over at the CODOH forum as Carto's Cutlass Supreme, where non-deniers are lucky to get 1 in 2 posts up that are not deleted by the moderator there, and few can persist unbanned for very long. There is no debate at all on that forum. This is apparently the only place where he chooses to ply his crankery, unless he also happens to be posting over at white supremacist websites like Stormfront and VNN.
He has repeatedly been asked to join the RODOH forum, where both sides are permitted to express their views, and has predictably failed to do so.
Recently, we over at RODOH were preparing for a lengthy, formal debate about the AR camps with a denier team (all but two of whose members were unknown to us). We are now told that so many members of the denial team have dropped that the remaining members cannot proceed. The point of a formal debate was to avoid the negationist method of taking individual pieces of evidence out of context so that they can sidestep the convergent and interlocking nature of the entire body of evidence. The deniers obviously cannot win , or even avoid total humiliation, in a format where proper historical methodology is employed, and they clearly know this.
Denierbud, being the resident internet crank with the most knowledge of AR, was undoubtedly asked to join that team. Either he refused to participate or joined the team and then was one of those who bailed out, for reasons undisclosed to us. We believe that the appearance of "budly" on this board right at this time is not a coincidence. It seems that "denierbud" may be feeling insecure at the moment, like he needs to prove to himself that he is actually capable of debating an opposing view after years of spewing his garbage on the internet unanswered. So he chooses a forum where he (mistakenly) believes that the level of historical knowledge is low enough that he can prevail in a debate.
Cowardice is a common thread running from the Nazis themselves, who murdered unarmed, defenseless civilians (Jews and non-Jews), to their present day proponents and apologists, who cannot muster the backbone to face up to real opposition.
So Denierbud, remember what your mommy undoubtedly told you: the only way to deal with your fears is to face them. And when you're done cleaning out your underwear over the prospect of real debate, please come over to RODOH and engage us on the issues that you have been spouting off about for years, and preferrably, please offer your assistance to the now failing denier formal debate team, that has been forced into humiliating withdrawal.
Unless or until you prove yourself willing and able to debate professional historians and knowledgeable amateurs, you deserve nothing but mocking scorn anywhere you choose to post outside the the warm and comforting confines of your chosen censorious venue. So man up, and prove that anything you say on this subject is worth even a passing glance, by demonstrating your conviction that it can withstand the critical scrutiny of those not of a like mind.
- Woolfe
Last edited:
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
One post in 17 months? Something about the arrival of denialist miscreants that brings good lurkers out of lurkerdom.
Welcome(?), Woolfe!
Welcome(?), Woolfe!
It's true. I had almost forgotten that I joined here quite awhile back with the intention of getting into discussion of several topics. But alas I have been on a two year RODOH tangent, and have not focused on other discussion fora.
Besides, I figured that you guys had the "truthers" pretty well pegged, so my services would be more useful elsewhere.
Thanks for the welcome.
- woolfe
JoeyDonuts
Frequencies Not Known To Normals
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,536
An Ode To This Bud Character.
So...he only wants to discuss certain elements of the Holocaust story, and won't entertain discussion of them in context of the event at large. Ok.
He wants us to push traffic TO his website, and seems unable to even offer up a meaningful summary that would give us a legitimate reason for watching his videos and investigating his claims.
The proof is not in your videos. You can't debate it here and now, without preconditions, you are approaching this dishonestly, reeking of fraud and spam.
Can you summarize for us, what your claims of contention are with the Holocaust record? I'm with Horatius here - I don't want to give you a single hit's worth of internet traffic unless I can be convinced of the possibility of you being "onto something."
But then again, you appear to be from the Ashida Kim school of Internet debate, so I don't expect anything out of you but more of the same. I'd bet a double sawbuck that within the diseased, rotten, sad core of your arguments lies a festering, putrid center of thinly veiled white nationalism masquerading as legitimate scholarly research. I think guys like you are just angry you were born about fifty years too late and on the wrong continent.
Guess what? You're fringe for a reason, and it ain't because the PTB have chosen to oppress the righteous little white-pride "researchers." It's because you have no basis whatsoever but hate. Call it what you want, but that's where it comes from no matter how you want to 'spin it.' I pity you more than anything else - you're a dying species. History and evolution do not favor racial purity and the ideas that come along with it. You're obsolete.
So...he only wants to discuss certain elements of the Holocaust story, and won't entertain discussion of them in context of the event at large. Ok.
He wants us to push traffic TO his website, and seems unable to even offer up a meaningful summary that would give us a legitimate reason for watching his videos and investigating his claims.
The proof is not in your videos. You can't debate it here and now, without preconditions, you are approaching this dishonestly, reeking of fraud and spam.
Can you summarize for us, what your claims of contention are with the Holocaust record? I'm with Horatius here - I don't want to give you a single hit's worth of internet traffic unless I can be convinced of the possibility of you being "onto something."
But then again, you appear to be from the Ashida Kim school of Internet debate, so I don't expect anything out of you but more of the same. I'd bet a double sawbuck that within the diseased, rotten, sad core of your arguments lies a festering, putrid center of thinly veiled white nationalism masquerading as legitimate scholarly research. I think guys like you are just angry you were born about fifty years too late and on the wrong continent.
Guess what? You're fringe for a reason, and it ain't because the PTB have chosen to oppress the righteous little white-pride "researchers." It's because you have no basis whatsoever but hate. Call it what you want, but that's where it comes from no matter how you want to 'spin it.' I pity you more than anything else - you're a dying species. History and evolution do not favor racial purity and the ideas that come along with it. You're obsolete.
Last edited:
Hi Foolmewunz:
You wrote,
O.K: Yankel Weirnik is a fraudulent Treblinka eyewitness, as is described in episode 1 of the video "One Third of the Holocaust." You'd have to watch that episode to respond. I'd suggest looking at holocaustcontroversies afterward, for a contrary opinion. Then offer your opinion here.
Also you wrote
Deniers aren't the only people who mention lampshades and shrunken heads. The Academy Award winning movie Judgement At Nuremberg mentioned (and showed) lampshades and shrunken heads, and that movie came out 17 years after the war.
Foolmewunz wrote regarding the lampshades and shrunken heads:
An "overactive imagination" is inadequate to explain those objects. A Psyche Warfare operation is a better explanation, and were you to watch the video Buchenwald, you'd know about that Psyche Warfare operation.
You wrote,
O.K: Yankel Weirnik is a fraudulent Treblinka eyewitness, as is described in episode 1 of the video "One Third of the Holocaust." You'd have to watch that episode to respond. I'd suggest looking at holocaustcontroversies afterward, for a contrary opinion. Then offer your opinion here.
Also you wrote
Deniers aren't the only people who mention lampshades and shrunken heads. The Academy Award winning movie Judgement At Nuremberg mentioned (and showed) lampshades and shrunken heads, and that movie came out 17 years after the war.
Foolmewunz wrote regarding the lampshades and shrunken heads:
An "overactive imagination" is inadequate to explain those objects. A Psyche Warfare operation is a better explanation, and were you to watch the video Buchenwald, you'd know about that Psyche Warfare operation.
Last edited:
That or he is perhaps a member of dozens of forums and is perhaps paid to do this, which is why he has all the good smack down comments like "man up" etc. And shows up within a day or so of a holocaust denial post.
Last edited:
People don't want you to look at these videos
I'm not going to respond to put downs, identity speculators, or people who repeatedly post (on a thread about videos) why they will not watch the videos.
I will respond to people who take a look at some of the videos at Holocaust Denial Videos and have some thoughts to share regarding the spefic videos that they saw.
Obviously a lot of people here don't want you to look at those videos.
I'm not going to respond to put downs, identity speculators, or people who repeatedly post (on a thread about videos) why they will not watch the videos.
I will respond to people who take a look at some of the videos at Holocaust Denial Videos and have some thoughts to share regarding the spefic videos that they saw.
Obviously a lot of people here don't want you to look at those videos.
Last edited:
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
- Joined
- May 9, 2006
- Messages
- 29,691
Wow. Paranoid much?
So, you explicitly refuse to give me a reason to watch your videos, rather than do some other thing. Well then, I'm off to
Have fun living your life with no impact on anything important, at all.
Last edited:
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Help, I'm being repressed!
Budly, I can't watch your videos from my office (see below), and I don't have the time to do so at home as I'm busy raising that little half-breed you see in my avatar.
Ergo, if you can't - like a real scholar or historian - put your claims into words, then you're not going to get much in the way of discussion.
When, however, you do put something into words, we'll respond.
Specifically - the point about the film Judgment at Nuremberg... Yep! You sure caught me, there. Oh, wait... but I already said that it was the product of imaginative interpretation. And it wasn't original to the script of the movie, and you know it. The film did come out, however, before much research had been done into those particular claims - and that you also know.
History is funny like that. People write things up from contemporary reports and unless those reports are challenged by evidence, they tend to hang around and become part of the public mythos. When properly challenged, however, serious scholars and historians readily admit that the initial information was wrong. You'll note that Nick had no problem dismissing them as false claims. Nor do I.
So what's your point in belaboring the issue? Psych(e)ological warfare? Yep. After the war was over? Or do you think you're still fighting that war?
Budly, I can't watch your videos from my office (see below), and I don't have the time to do so at home as I'm busy raising that little half-breed you see in my avatar.
Ergo, if you can't - like a real scholar or historian - put your claims into words, then you're not going to get much in the way of discussion.
When, however, you do put something into words, we'll respond.
Specifically - the point about the film Judgment at Nuremberg... Yep! You sure caught me, there. Oh, wait... but I already said that it was the product of imaginative interpretation. And it wasn't original to the script of the movie, and you know it. The film did come out, however, before much research had been done into those particular claims - and that you also know.
History is funny like that. People write things up from contemporary reports and unless those reports are challenged by evidence, they tend to hang around and become part of the public mythos. When properly challenged, however, serious scholars and historians readily admit that the initial information was wrong. You'll note that Nick had no problem dismissing them as false claims. Nor do I.
So what's your point in belaboring the issue? Psych(e)ological warfare? Yep. After the war was over? Or do you think you're still fighting that war?
Another classic internet denier meme: that those who oppose their views are paid by ZoG or some other such shadowy entity, because they consider themselves important enough to warrant being the focus of a world conspiracy.
What a scream.
- woolfe
What business do you have controlling the precise terms of a discussion about a historical topic?
But if you want to discuss the videos, fine. Why don't you reply to the now 2 year old refutations of those videos that are already online? I fail to see the point of raising the topic anew until those points have been addressed.
- woolfe
Hi Foolmewunz,
Well at least you tried to take a look at your office. I applaud you for that, but censorship under the rubric of "hate" is a major strength of the myth, and it kept you from watching. But that's not your fault.
You wrote:
Hi Woolfe99
Here's something I prefer: why don't you watch an episode of a video at holocaust denial videos, which has never been rebutted over at the HolocaustControversies blogspot and then offer your view here. How about the video Buchenwald and the assertion that the lamphade and shrunken heads are there as part of a Psyche Warfare operation to denazify the German population, but the info "blew back" into American media. Foolmewunz is also maybe going to watch it. There is no information about it at holocaustcontroversies, and Nick Terry claims he's never watched it nor will he. So maybe you can watch it and offer your independent opinion here.
Well at least you tried to take a look at your office. I applaud you for that, but censorship under the rubric of "hate" is a major strength of the myth, and it kept you from watching. But that's not your fault.
You wrote:
You don't know what you're talking about. A shrunken head was shown in the movie Judgement at Nuremberg because a shrunken head was shown in the actual Nuremberg courtroom.
Hi Woolfe99
Here's something I prefer: why don't you watch an episode of a video at holocaust denial videos, which has never been rebutted over at the HolocaustControversies blogspot and then offer your view here. How about the video Buchenwald and the assertion that the lamphade and shrunken heads are there as part of a Psyche Warfare operation to denazify the German population, but the info "blew back" into American media. Foolmewunz is also maybe going to watch it. There is no information about it at holocaustcontroversies, and Nick Terry claims he's never watched it nor will he. So maybe you can watch it and offer your independent opinion here.
Last edited:
Arus808
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,204
can we not link to your site, because its obvious you're spamming. And as woolfe has stated, your VIdeos are not new. We've already pointed to sites that already debunk the claims in yoru videos. So why dont you ADDRESS those critiques.
As it is, you're trying make us beat a dead horse
As it is, you're trying make us beat a dead horse
Hi Arus808,
You're right: if a video has been debunked by a blogspot website, there's no need for you to watch it.
And you're right: I should write a rebuttal to a rebuttal of a video you're never going to watch. And post it here so that you can read it and totally understand it.
You're right: if a video has been debunked by a blogspot website, there's no need for you to watch it.
And you're right: I should write a rebuttal to a rebuttal of a video you're never going to watch. And post it here so that you can read it and totally understand it.
Arus808
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,204
having read the rebuttals, i do not need to watch your videos to know that they are nothing more than your attempt a trying to pass of horrible lies about the Holocaust.
You chastise a blog for making a rebuttal against your tripe and lies, yet you want to get the opinions of members of a FORUM?
And dont act like this is anything new on your part, denierbud, since its obvious that you've been spamming this tripe to many forums (and expect ONLY forum members to rebut) but when a Website, a blog decides to handle your 3 year old arguments, you ignore them simply on the basis because its a "blog".
Yet, you want FORUM members offer rebuttals
If you can't see anything wrong with that thinking, then you are seriously mentally ill.
You chastise a blog for making a rebuttal against your tripe and lies, yet you want to get the opinions of members of a FORUM?
And dont act like this is anything new on your part, denierbud, since its obvious that you've been spamming this tripe to many forums (and expect ONLY forum members to rebut) but when a Website, a blog decides to handle your 3 year old arguments, you ignore them simply on the basis because its a "blog".
Yet, you want FORUM members offer rebuttals
If you can't see anything wrong with that thinking, then you are seriously mentally ill.
Last edited:
Crazytimes
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 348
Do they make straight jackets in any color other than white ? This is one of the most insane things I have ever heard.
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Yeah, silly Germans I work for. They seem to think this kind of stuff is repulsive. Go figure.
Do you have trouble reading? (We know you don't want to put things into words, so maybe that's not a facetious question.)
Did you miss where I said, "And it wasn't original to the script of the movie, and you know it."
My question, perhaps too subtle, was why you brought up the film when the film was merely aping what had happened in the trials where the shrunken head diversion had taken place.
So just what in the hell are you arguing with?
Did you also miss where Nick went into considerable detail about that portion of the trial? Are you so accustomed to preaching to the choir that you think you're dealing with people who can't read or write, either? I suggest you read whole sentences and paragraphs, as you'll find that quite often they are linked and contain a whole thought.
And you might stop trying to win points when people are agreeing with some element of what you're saying.
Nick and I both said that the issues were false. I even went farther to use them as an example of how bad information, like water, generally finds its level and is weeded out if actual historians and scholars go at it.
Hi Arus808 and Foolmewunz,
Maybe it's just me but I tend to understand rebuttals better if I've seen/read the work that the rebuttal is referring to.
But posting liberally to a thread about videos which you haven't watched is maybe indicative of how someone gets to 4,000+ or 8,000+ postings here.
Maybe it's just me but I tend to understand rebuttals better if I've seen/read the work that the rebuttal is referring to.
But posting liberally to a thread about videos which you haven't watched is maybe indicative of how someone gets to 4,000+ or 8,000+ postings here.
- Status