General Holocaust denial discussion Part III

[Matthew Ellard]

This is a continuation from here due to the length of the previous thread. As always, all Holocaust-related discussion should be confined to this thread. Thank you.

Posted By: LashL

The Smithsonian claim that they found "gas chamber" tiles is false - http://newobserveronline.com/smiths...of-david-tiles-shown-to-be-not-jewish-at-all/

Mondail? This article is about the misidentification of the tiles, on screen, in the documentary by one person, Ivar Schute. You are already very aware the tiles were correctly identified prior to this on the Staffordshire University's "preliminary report". Why did you say this proves the old gas chamber isn't the old gas chamber?

The above compliments the Eric Hunt documentary on Treblinka - www.gaschamberhoax.com

Modail? Can you walk us through and specify exactly where in Eric Hunt's propaganda film he calculates 10,000 people transited through Treblinka II. You have been reading Eric's interesting posts on CODOH? No?

"(My) documentary shows proof that approximately 10,000 Jews were transited"

"One of the reasons I didn't just add up the numbers on screen which add up to approximately 10,000...".

Where do you think Eric got his "10,000" figure from? Why can't he explain this to the other holocaust deniers who are now questioning his "adding up"?

 

[Rincewind]

I'd like to add a question..

Even if the transit of 10,000 people is accurate, how does it alter the accepted Treblinka II facts?

After all, it's well documented (see this thread....) that more than 750,000 people arrived at the camp....

 

[Mondial]

Michael Shermer has tried to have David Cole's new book on his experiences as a holocaust revisionist banned because it shows him in an unflattering light - www.countercontempt.com/archives/5232
The documentary that David Cole made back in 1992 - http://codoh.com/library/document/1001/

 

[Matthew Ellard]

Michael Shermer has tried to have David Cole's new book on his experiences as a holocaust revisionist banned because it shows him in an unflattering light - www.countercontempt.com/archives/5232

No Mondail. Please read the previous posts in this thread before posting. We have already dealt with David Cole's lies. David Cole lies and misquotes Michael Shermer. Here is just one clear example already mentioned.

In 1993 Michael Shermer's recorded quote said " I think the gas chamber story, in terms of physical evidence is the weakest link." David Cole lied and claimed "Michael Shermer thinks the gas chambers are the weakest link in the whole story" in 2014.

Do you agree David Cole is misquoting Dr Shermer? Yes or No?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

The documentary that David Cole made back in 1992 - http://codoh.com/library/document/1001/

Mondail? You are posting links to David Cole as evidence that the holocaust didn't happen. Are you aware that David Cole has just released a book called "Republican Party Animal"? In his current book David Cole states:

Treblinka Gas Chambers
"They were simple creations---rooms with the exhaust of a car or truck piped in...The gas chambers were simply rooms with no windows, a locked door, and car exhaust piped in. Big outdoor pits, not crematoriums, were used for burning bodies"

AR Camps
"From 1942 through 1943, Polish Jewry was subjected to one of the most brutal campaigns of mass murder in human history. Because of the secrecy surrounding those four extermination camps, and the fact that they were ploughed under and erased from existence in 1943, it's difficult to be precise about certain details. ............. more than enough circumstantial evidence exists to show that for most Jews, the train ride to those camps was one-way, and final."

As a holocaust denier, do you agree with David Cole? If not, why do you keep linking to him if you think he is wrong?


Just for the record, have you actually watched Eric Hunt's propaganda film? I'm becoming suspicious that no holocaust denier has actually watched Eric Hunt's film, read David Cole's books or worked out where Poland is.. It appears to me that holocaust deniers are simply posting links here because they "know the links", not the content. Would that be a correct assumption?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

The revisionist hits just keep on coming. Here is David Cole & Bradley Smith's 2007 film on the Great Taboo -

EtienneSC? You say the "hits keep coming" in 2014 by linking us to a video from six years ago by David Cole. Did you actually watch this video yourself before linking it here? David Cole states he believes in the holocaust in this video.

Can you explain in detail why you linked this video? What was your point?

 

[MaxMurx]

The point of the video is very easy to recognize: as long as one side of a discussion is undergoing massive persecution, is it ethical to discuss the topic at all?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

The point of the video is very easy to recognize: as long as one side of a discussion is undergoing massive persecution, is it ethical to discuss the topic at all?

Which video?

The David Stein video where David Stein misquotes Dr Shermer, or the American propaganda video in English, by Hunt & Berg, for Americans where no anti-holocaust denial laws exist?

Have you actually watched any of these videos and noted down the "facts" presented and then checked them? Let's do one together!

 

[uke2se]

The point of the video is very easy to recognize: as long as one side of a discussion is undergoing massive persecution, is it ethical to discuss the topic at all?

You're right. It's not ethical. Let's just leave it as it is. The holocaust happened, end of story.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

You're right. It's not ethical. Let's just leave it as it is. The holocaust happened, end of story.

The Holocaust is a historical event. It's not ethical to research it, write about it, publish books, give lectures, etc? What is unethical about studying the Holocaust?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

The Holocaust is a historical event. It's not ethical to research it, write about it, publish books, give lectures, etc? What is unethical about studying the Holocaust?

You are 100% correct. There is nothing wrong in studying the holocaust and questioning accepted facts about the holocaust using the historical method, peer review and public debate. The same applies to any part of history. That's why we have historians.


However, it would be hard to argue that Holocaust deniers are doing any of the above. No one is stopping Bradley Smith, Eric Hunt or Berg from enrolling in a USA university, forming their views based on facts and writing a fully cited thesis for peer review. Instead we get fake testimonies, outright lies and stolen edited video footage with entire sections removed.

The biggest argument now from holocaust deniers appears to be that poor Dr Colls from Staffordshire university "looks Jewish" and therefore is part of the "Jewish conspiracy". Not one of them will explain how this secret Jewish conspiracy works in any detail.

Eric Hunt & Fred Berg's new webpage
"According to Caroline Sturdy Colls’ actions, only well-funded (by Zionists) historical dictators like herself, who make propaganda presentations regurgitating Soviet Union derived psychological warfare on television stations owned by Jewish Zionist billionaire Murray Rothstein are allowed to have a say in determining real history."

John DeNugent / His webpage
"As for Caroline Sturdy Colls, I am chagrined how many people have missed the obvious Jewish physical characteristics of this incredibly partial “scientist.” I will endeavor below to lay out the indicators suggesting strongly, though not proving, that she is Jewish, and should so state rather than pretend to be impartial. She has every neanderthalic and thus Eastern Mediteranean feature: –dark hair (reddened by coloring), –curved nose, –protruding mouth, –thrust-forward head. Here is a semi-frontal shot of her (and note the IMO stereotypically ARROGANT Jewish look."

The holocaust denier cult was one of the strangest cults ever. It is pure entertainment reading the last blogs of the last few remaining members.

 

[MaxMurx]

The point is that the video shows Ernst Zündel and other deniers being rigorously persecuted. Pro Holocausters do not speak up against that unusual practice, which means: they support it. In this case a discussion is not a discussion, science is not science. Thesis without anti thesis cannot lead to sythesis, is unscientific, if not unethical. Everybody being involved in such a pseudo discussion behaves this unethical way - deniers as well as all others. First persecution has to be removed everywhere. Then discussions can be called discussions.

 

[MaxMurx]

"Ethics" does not mean "something being convenient for you" (although that is not excluded).

 

[Dcdrac]

what a weird idea pro-holocausters..........

The deniers from what I have seen over the years have had their "beliefs" for that is what they are thoroughly shown to be wanting, due to lack of any academic rigour or real hard evidence to back any of their "beliefs", as opposed to the mountain of hard evidence and academic rigour deployed by actual real historians.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

The point is that the video shows Ernst Zündel and other deniers being rigorously persecuted.

Which video Max?

Bradley Smith and Fred Berg happily print their home addresses on their webpages, so other deniers can send them donations. ( Not sure what for). Graf fled a Swiss assault charge and worked happily for Iran spreading anti USA propaganda. Jerzy Rek is in gaol for 815 illegal weapons charges. Eric Hunt spend two years in psychiatric care to avoid gaol on a kidnapping charge. Irving got his day in court and lost. David Stein is using holocaust deniers to promote his book where he confirms there was a holocaust. Richard Toben was bankrupted for slander under civil law.

Ernst Zundel is simply a "bit nutty" and publishes books claiming there are secret Nazi Arctic bases, Nazi UFOs and no holocaust. Nutty people do stupid things and get arrested.

"Secret Nazi Polar Expeditions" [1978] Ernst Zundel
"Hitler at the South Pole" [1979] Ernst Zundel
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/z/zundel-ernst/flying-saucers/whats-new.html

Pro Holocausters do not speak up against that unusual practice, which means: they support it.

You mean conventional historians vote for parties that reflect their opinion and thus most countries don't have specific holocaust denial laws. Has it occurred to you that Germans may not want to have German neo Nazis promoting holocaust denial for historical reasons?

In this case a discussion is not a discussion

That's right, the holocaust deniers now rely on YouTube video propaganda that doesn't allow for any discussion at all. Have you watched Eric Hunt's propaganda videos? Are you aware of the errors and direct lies in those propaganda videos? Tell me, as you are a "revisionist" what mechanism exists to peer review and remove those errors from Eric's propaganda videos? What? No such mechanism exists?

Are you telling me that "revisionists" don't actually revise historical errors made by other "revisionists"? (Don't you think "revisionists" are rather hilarious and a huge joke?)

 

[Matthew Ellard]

what a weird idea pro-holocausters..........

The names holocaust deniers give to conventional historians get weirder and weirder. My favourite is "Exterminationists" which implies that conventional historians somehow knocked off the victims themselves.

My favourite entertaining holocaust denier at the moment is John Denugent. He doesn't attempt to justify his beliefs and basically regurgitates anti-Jewish propaganda from the 30's The Sturmer propaganda magazine. He's got some ongoing gripe with the clowns at CODOH, that would take a team of psychiatrists to explain.

 

[Corsair 115]

The point is that the video shows Ernst Zündel and other deniers being rigorously persecuted.

That in itself means nothing. What matters is what specifically they are being prosecuted for.

 

[MaxMurx]

How can you expect any "academic discussion" if one side at every sentence, every word which is written or said, has to evalute if that is threatened with severe legal or social consequences. That can never lead to any discussion. Even academics with sincere background like here must abstain from asking any questions in order not to provoke their contra parts into illegal activities. Therefore ANY discussion, even any commemoration is unethical as long as it is a legal offense in 20 countries of the Western World to say ones true opinion.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

How can you expect any "academic discussion" if one side at every sentence, every word which is written or said, has to evalute if that is threatened with severe legal or social consequences.

But that's not true is it? Before an academic "goes public", a paper goes through the peer review process in private. Do you have any examples of someone being charged under Sec130 "Public incitement" whilst undergoing peer review at a normal university in Germany?

List all those people for us.

 

[MaxMurx]

The video I was talking about is the one which was linked in the quotation of a reply by Matthew Ellard in posting #6 by clicking on "Here".