Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Clayton Moore]

Gee, I wonder if I have read up on the Nuremberg Trials. No, I couldn't possibly have read anything about Nuremberg and must never have read the transcript.



Already is one. It's called 'The Hoax'. The book in question is about denial, in case you have forgotten. Deniers drone on about Nuremberg, whaddya think I'd include?

Did you create a computer model of how all the millions of people were managed, fed and staged?

 

[Nick Terry]

OK, time for a new topic.

Could some denier please explain by what methods they are ever going to 'win'? And what would 'winning' consist of?

Could some denier even identify what strategies are being used by 'revisionism' and evaluate which might be effective and which not?

It'd really, really help if you guys could think this thing through a bit more, and offer something more than 'complain about persecution' as a supposed magic wand. Guys, you've been waving that wand for years now, and it doesn't seem to be getting you very far.

I'll spell out a few issues which I think need to be taken into consideration here.

1. Academia
Right now, the Holocaust is not simply a fully accepted fact but widely taught at universities in a variety of subjects, extensively researched, and the fruits of that research are accumulating at the rate of several thousand books per year, across all possible topics. This situation is fully international with major work being done in Germany, Poland, the US, etc. There are literally 10s of 1000s of books on the Third Reich and all related issues which come into play in this.

There are hundreds of thousands of faculty at those universities, and the number who have come out in favour of revisionism can be counted more or less on one or two hands. None of the pro-denier academics - and there will always be a few nutty professors - work in relevant fields. The thumbs down in the relevant fields is essentially total, in academia as a whole you'd have problems working out where to place the next digit after 99.9%.

I know, OK, you guys don't like academia and think that huffing and puffing will change all of this - somehow. But really? How is that going to happen and what would be the best way to change things?

Please, think it through and try to put yourself in the shoes of a university professor. What would convince such a person to change his or her mind?

2. Public Opinion... Er...Internet...Er...
OK, you're probably thinking, do an end-run around the eggheads and appeal directly to the public. Use the internet! Sounds great doesn't it. Except here are the current Alexa rankings showing where revisionist websites place - it is US-biased, sure, but I get the impression that most of the deniers on here are from the US. And if you cannot convince American public opinion, then the game is over, 'cos that's just how the world is, right? Not that there is any real sign of growth or progress in Europe.

vho.org - 455,612
codoh.com - 1,024,157
holocaustdenialvideos.com - 2,269,138
cwporter.com - 2,258,285
barnesreview.org - 3,633,865
holocaustdenier.com - 3,684,065
patriot.dk - 4,829,049
revisionistworkshop.con - 5,343,705
robertfaurisson.blogspot.com - 5,457,505
inconvenienthistory.com - 5,787,913
historiography-project.com - 6,383,465
germarrudolf.com - 7,359,061
air-photo.com - 7,594,448
nazigassings.com - 7,909,443
adelaideinstitute.org - 9,655,111
holohoax101.com - 10,221,087
holocausthandbooks.com - 11,495,560

I have only listed outright, hardcore denier sites. The IHR scores a bit higher (385,454) but it has stopped producing anything new and the director Mark Weber has basically given up on revisionism. Ditto for Irving's website (254,051) since Irving accepts Treblinka as a death camp. And coming in below 250,000 is still pretty appalling.

From other site survey tools, I know that these rankings translate into a few thousand readers in the US, per month, with a very high bounce rate, which means a lot of people who look at your stuff and say 'no thanks'. And that's for CODOH, the others barely register on site survey tools like Quantcast.

All of the sites above, including IHR and Irving, are outperformed by Nizkor. But you can also figure that those pesky universities are way, way, waaay above your sites. harvard.edu is at #1,610, the JSTOR journals database is at #4215. There probably aren't that many porn sites that outperform JSTOR for traffic.

I haven't even mentioned the hated MSM yet - BBC (#42 in Alexa, number 5 in UK), NYT (#86), Guardian (#176), and so on. How would you convince journalists that there was a story in what you have to say, other than the current 'Holocaust deniers are vile antisemites and neo-Nazis' story? Journalists are usually well educated and might want something more than a YouTube video, right?

3. Forums, Facebook, Blog Comments etc
And lastly, we come to what you're doing here or elsewhere. Guys, do you honestly think your shtick here is convincing anyone? Pretty much wherever a denier goes, other than CODOH forum or Stormfront, they are met with a hail of abuse and counter-arguments, and probably even more often - the ignore button.

I'm sorry, Sags, but that abuse isn't because everyone is a Zionist. It's because deniers are widely loathed. If they weren't, then your website would score higher than ranking in the 10 millions.


So: how about it, deniers? Have you ever stopped to think about what you're doing and what might work and what doesn't?

 

[Nick Terry]

I can't link to the source because it's behind the New Yorker paywall. The relevant passage is from a story about a visit a reporter "made to Durley, in Hamsphire, a camp for Jewish children brought to England from Nazi concentration camps." It appeared in The New Yorker on March 2, 1946, page 56-57:

To be fair, the article does say that the 'Treblinka Song' was well known throughout the camps and the ghettos so the fact that these two boys knew the words to the song does not necessarily mean that they were both in Treblinka. The article does not specifically say these two boys were in Treblinka, only that the director knows of many boys who transited through several camps and that Treblinka was the worst.

The snippet suggests that the boys who had been in four or five camps had heard about Treblinka. Knowledge of Treblinka was universal in the Warsaw ghetto after summer 1942 and widespread in many other late-surviving ghettos like Bialystok.

 

[Wroclaw]

It should hardly be surprising that the genitals are used for torture in more than one geographic location. They're loaded with nerve endings (in both sexes) and, culturally speaking, they're a "hot button" for inducing shame.

 

[Wroclaw]

For sh*ts and giggles, I watched a video today of Ernst Zundel interview David McCalden. McCalden has been dead twenty years, so I figure this was '85 or so — it seemed the trial was going on.

Twenty-five years old (at least) and McCalden and Zundel are going on about how —*ANY DAY NOW! — the hoax is going to fall to pieces.

Right.

So were they just not up to the challenge, or what?

 

[Nick Terry]

For sh*ts and giggles, I watched a video today of Ernst Zundel interview David McCalden. McCalden has been dead twenty years, so I figure this was '85 or so — it seemed the trial was going on.

Twenty-five years old (at least) and McCalden and Zundel are going on about how —*ANY DAY NOW! — the hoax is going to fall to pieces.

Right.

So were they just not up to the challenge, or what?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Prophecy_Fails

 

[Saggy]

So: how about it, deniers? Have you ever stopped to think about what you're doing and what might work and what doesn't?

Can't disagree with any part of your post, but, as to answering the question above ...... the answer is yes, the hoax is totally vulnerable, you just have to push in the right place, outside the hoax 'museums'. Leaflets will do it.

Better yet, one person leafleting at the entrance to Auschwitz could destroy the hoax.

 

[Gene Alley]

Again, look at the CHRC stuff. You're only getting the top layer of crap that Zundel was into.

citation please

 

[Clayton Moore]

OK, time for a new topic.

Could some denier please explain by what methods they are ever going to 'win'? And what would 'winning' consist of?

Could some denier even identify what strategies are being used by 'revisionism' and evaluate which might be effective and which not?

It'd really, really help if you guys could think this thing through a bit more, and offer something more than 'complain about persecution' as a supposed magic wand. Guys, you've been waving that wand for years now, and it doesn't seem to be getting you very far.

I'll spell out a few issues which I think need to be taken into consideration here.

1. Academia
Right now, the Holocaust is not simply a fully accepted fact but widely taught at universities in a variety of subjects, extensively researched, and the fruits of that research are accumulating at the rate of several thousand books per year, across all possible topics. This situation is fully international with major work being done in Germany, Poland, the US, etc. There are literally 10s of 1000s of books on the Third Reich and all related issues which come into play in this.

There are hundreds of thousands of faculty at those universities, and the number who have come out in favour of revisionism can be counted more or less on one or two hands. None of the pro-denier academics - and there will always be a few nutty professors - work in relevant fields. The thumbs down in the relevant fields is essentially total, in academia as a whole you'd have problems working out where to place the next digit after 99.9%.

I know, OK, you guys don't like academia and think that huffing and puffing will change all of this - somehow. But really? How is that going to happen and what would be the best way to change things?

Please, think it through and try to put yourself in the shoes of a university professor. What would convince such a person to change his or her mind?

2. Public Opinion... Er...Internet...Er...
OK, you're probably thinking, do an end-run around the eggheads and appeal directly to the public. Use the internet! Sounds great doesn't it. Except here are the current Alexa rankings showing where revisionist websites place - it is US-biased, sure, but I get the impression that most of the deniers on here are from the US. And if you cannot convince American public opinion, then the game is over, 'cos that's just how the world is, right? Not that there is any real sign of growth or progress in Europe.

vho.org - 455,612
codoh.com - 1,024,157
holocaustdenialvideos.com - 2,269,138
cwporter.com - 2,258,285
barnesreview.org - 3,633,865
holocaustdenier.com - 3,684,065
patriot.dk - 4,829,049
revisionistworkshop.con - 5,343,705
robertfaurisson.blogspot.com - 5,457,505
inconvenienthistory.com - 5,787,913
historiography-project.com - 6,383,465
germarrudolf.com - 7,359,061
air-photo.com - 7,594,448
nazigassings.com - 7,909,443
adelaideinstitute.org - 9,655,111
holohoax101.com - 10,221,087
holocausthandbooks.com - 11,495,560

I have only listed outright, hardcore denier sites. The IHR scores a bit higher (385,454) but it has stopped producing anything new and the director Mark Weber has basically given up on revisionism. Ditto for Irving's website (254,051) since Irving accepts Treblinka as a death camp. And coming in below 250,000 is still pretty appalling.

From other site survey tools, I know that these rankings translate into a few thousand readers in the US, per month, with a very high bounce rate, which means a lot of people who look at your stuff and say 'no thanks'. And that's for CODOH, the others barely register on site survey tools like Quantcast.

All of the sites above, including IHR and Irving, are outperformed by Nizkor. But you can also figure that those pesky universities are way, way, waaay above your sites. harvard.edu is at #1,610, the JSTOR journals database is at #4215. There probably aren't that many porn sites that outperform JSTOR for traffic.

I haven't even mentioned the hated MSM yet - BBC (#42 in Alexa, number 5 in UK), NYT (#86), Guardian (#176), and so on. How would you convince journalists that there was a story in what you have to say, other than the current 'Holocaust deniers are vile antisemites and neo-Nazis' story? Journalists are usually well educated and might want something more than a YouTube video, right?

3. Forums, Facebook, Blog Comments etc
And lastly, we come to what you're doing here or elsewhere. Guys, do you honestly think your shtick here is convincing anyone? Pretty much wherever a denier goes, other than CODOH forum or Stormfront, they are met with a hail of abuse and counter-arguments, and probably even more often - the ignore button.

I'm sorry, Sags, but that abuse isn't because everyone is a Zionist. It's because deniers are widely loathed. If they weren't, then your website would score higher than ranking in the 10 millions.


So: how about it, deniers? Have you ever stopped to think about what you're doing and what might work and what doesn't?

Did you ever view one of those computer models of the great battles of history? Battlements, transportation, support, weaponry. As soon a model of the Holocaust is programmed the Holohoax will crumble like a house of cards.

 

[Gene Alley]

Originally Posted by Gene Alley
Nowhere in your laughable evidence are any writings or quotations attributed to Zundel that are hateful, nor any that encourage using violence against anyone.

Perhaps you need to learn what "purveyor of hate" means? Methinks you've got it wrong.

You are using the same weasel word, double speak tactics that those who attacked Zundel used in order to destroy his life, falsely discredit him and in fact, cause and incite others to commit violent acts against him. (which they did repeatedly) Methinks you got the whole thing backwards.

You have clearly and repeatedly asserted that Zundel:

1)Engaged in hate speech against Jewish people.

2)Incited others to commit violent acts against Jews.

3)Espoused the position that white non Jewish people are superior to all others.

Can you cite any of Mr Zundel's published writings that back these assertions? If so, produce the links to these quotations. I'm not aware of any such material. Link please.

 

[MG1962]

Did you ever view one of those computer models of the great battles of history? Battlements, transportation, support, weaponry. As soon a model of the Holocaust is programmed the Holohoax will crumble like a house of cards.

Would it be worth pointing out the Holocaust wasn't a battle

 

[Wroclaw]

Say what you want about Terrible Tom Metzger; he always tells the truth (as he sees it):

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/peopl...tzger.tom//audio/war-960331-zundel-transcript

 

[MG1962]

Can you cite any of Mr Zundel's published writings that back these assertions? If so, produce the links to these quotations. I'm not aware of any such material. Link please.

http://www.zundelsite.org/

There ya go - anything else I can help with?

 

[LemmyCaution]

the Holohoax will crumble like a house of cards

one person leafleting at the entrance to Auschwitz could destroy the hoax.

And yet, so many years, so many YouTube videos . . . and nada. (I take it neither of you was being facetious?)

Really, neither of you answered Nick's questions . . . How are you going to get through to historians, journalists, the literate public, and the unwashed masses? All of whom turn their noses up, with varying degrees of disgust, at what you are purveying.

 

[uke2se]

You have clearly and repeatedly asserted that Zundel:

1)Engaged in hate speech against Jewish people.

Yes, and I am in agreement with courts on that one.

2)Incited others to commit violent acts against Jews.

Nope. Where did I say that?

3)Espoused the position that white non Jewish people are superior to all others.

Really? I have to see your evidence for this. This'll be a riot.

Can you cite any of Mr Zundel's published writings that back these assertions?

I have cited evidence from two sources supporting the assertion I did make. Would you care to look at them? Otherwise you're just denying stuff again, and there's no way to rationally continue this discussion.

If so, produce the links to these quotations. I'm not aware of any such material. Link please.

I'm not aware of any material supporting your straw man either. What material does exist (as I have shown) points to Zundel being engaged in neo-nazi activities, purveying hatred and generally being unpleasant.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Did you ever view one of those computer models of the great battles of history? Battlements, transportation, support, weaponry. As soon a model of the Holocaust is programmed the Holohoax will crumble like a house of cards.

This is probably one of the stupidest defenses of Holocaust denial that I've seen, but I'll bite.

1.) Do you refuse to believe anything written in any history book unless there is a computer simulation of it? Or is it just the Holocaust you apply this absurd standard to?

2.) Do you believe that any genocides have occurred in history (eg. Stalin's genocides, Mao's genocides, the Armenian genocide, Rwandan genocide, Darfur/Sudanese genocide, Khmer Rouge genocide, etc...)? If you believe in at least one, was there a computer simulation of it?

 

[Corsair 115]

Did you create a computer model of how all the millions of people were managed, fed and staged?

You on about this again? I can only assume you think the food on your local grocery store's shelves get there by magic, since it seems you are hopelessly unaware of the amount of logistical effort that goes into getting it there. If you did understand you'd realize why your argument is beyond silly. See below for more.

Did you ever view one of those computer models of the great battles of history? Battlements, transportation, support, weaponry. As soon a model of the Holocaust is programmed the Holohoax will crumble like a house of cards.

Why? You keep making this claim but have yet provided not a shred of evidence to substantiate beyond your insistence it is so.

Rounding up people, transporting them to prison camps, and keeping them there is no more a logistically complicated issue than is mounting a military operation. In some ways it's much easier, since there are no military vehicles to co-ordinate, no fuel and ammunition to stockpile, no operational orders and plans to prepare, print, and disseminate, and no briefings or training to organize for the participating units. It gets even easier if you don't mind lots of those prisoners dying on the way to the camps—pack them into cattle cars, and don't bother providing any food or water on the journey.

All that is required are trains to transport the prisoners and camps to house them. Germany had both. (Has your Nazi-addled mind forgotten the figures I gave to you earlier in this thread documenting the sheer number of railway cars that were being used just to transport coal?)

 

[Gene Alley]

Originally Posted by Gene Alley
Can you cite any of Mr Zundel's published writings that back these assertions? If so, produce the links to these quotations. I'm not aware of any such material. Link please.

http://www.zundelsite.org/

There ya go - anything else I can help with?

FAIL

Your post is nonresponsive. Expressing opinions regarding history, and political beliefs is not illegal by the terms of the law. Nor is defending the actions of his countrymen, denying guilt of mass extermination, and pointing out the misdeeds commited against Germans tantamount to hate speech, inciting violence or claims of racial supremacy. You are using the same sleazy dishonest tactics as your little cohort.

 

[uke2se]

FAIL

Your post is nonresponsive. Expressing opinions regarding history, and political beliefs is not illegal by the terms of the law. Nor is defending the actions of his countrymen, denying guilt of mass extermination, and pointing out the misdeeds commited against Germans tantamount to hate speech, inciting violence or claims of racial supremacy. You are using the same sleazy dishonest tactics as your little cohort.

Except none of us are using any tactics. We're simply presenting the facts (with evidence). That you're in deep denial thereof is none of our problem.

Also, when you say "Expressing opinions regarding history, and political beliefs is not illegal by the terms of the law", which law in particular are you talking about? Laws against hate-speech that encompass holocaust denial do exist after all, and Zundel was tried according to those laws. Are you saying that those laws don't exist?

I'd also like you to back up the stuff you made up about me, like I said in my previous post. Seems my predictions about your road towards honesty was somewhat optimistic.

 

[MG1962]

FAIL

Your post is nonresponsive. Expressing opinions regarding history, and political beliefs is not illegal by the terms of the law. Nor is defending the actions of his countrymen, denying guilt of mass extermination, and pointing out the misdeeds commited against Germans tantamount to hate speech, inciting violence or claims of racial supremacy. You are using the same sleazy dishonest tactics as your little cohort.

lol - that site is maintained by supporters of your champion. It is they that added the video titles

Such as "I dont hate Jews. I dislike intensely their parasitic nature"

Maybe he should have stuck with his Nazi UFO at the south pole routine.