Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm tired of having to dumb down by explaining things like squeaky wheels.
Uh, that is fine, but you seem to have missed my point: what is your argument, I was asking, about the Holocaust in public education? What is required? What's the curriculum like? What is wrong with the curriculum?
 
Last edited:
And we can take it as read that you won't be sharing a proper history of hoaxing with members of this forum.
 
Dog, there are plenty of people who deny the holohoax. But that's just half of it, that saying that the official history of the Jews in WW II is false. That's all it takes to deny the holohoax.
But if you deny the "holooax" aren't you supporting the "official story"?

Didn't you mean "deny the Holocaust"?
 
'The Hoax of the Twentiety Century' by Arthur Butz, Northwestern Prof.
If only Arthur was as credible as his brother Seymour...

btw, Arthur Butz is a professor of electrical engineering. He's a joke of a historian. The Butz of the joke, if you will... :p
 
Last edited:
Ah yes a Revisionist bible. Not a proper History of the Hoax because Butz doesn't explain it either. Or does he? If he did explain it Saggy then Lemmy Caution would not be asking you. Your opinion. I know its difficult but there is life after Hannover. Have you ever read anything critical perhaps, anything that might suggest that Butz was wrong. And why not instead of being lazy and dumping link after link, none of which are interesting - paste a few extracts for the flavour of where you think that Butz has nailed it.

Would you be willing to read such things, such criticisms, if you have not already, taken note of other critiques and debunkings of Butz say in the thread earlier on? Or do you suffer from short-term memory loss? Or is it all just a big fat lying Zionist plot?
 
Well, science lesson time: Gasoline has a higher heating value of 47.3 MJ/kg, and kerosene's is similar (~46 MJ/kg). Kerosene is, relative speaking, safer to burn things with because of its much higher flash point than gasoline (~100ºF vs. -45ºF, respectively).

Why don't you come back and tell us all the HHV of charcoal lighter fluid on charcoal. And no, don't ask me why I'm discussing these issues.
 
'The Hoax of the Twentiety Century' by Arthur Butz, Northwestern Prof. Available online and at Amazon.com

The hoax got big coverage in the Jews' newspaper of choice, the New York Times, in 1906 ..... see....

http://exposing-the-holocaust-hoax-archive.blogspot.com/2010/01/ny-times-reports-in-1906-that-russias.html
A dreadful book, deconstructed many times, fairly recently as Rodoh's first book club selection. The material on the ghettos, for example, is not just wrong: it is risible. Butz confuses the course of the liquidation of Warsaw ghetto in order to tout Treblinka as a way station, as well as scoring a big fail in trying to prettify the ghettos as salutary for their inmates, whose ill discipline undermined Nazi attempts to keep things healthy and decent. The confused author confuses the nature of institutions like the Jewish Councils and order police, in order to confuse readers about how ghettos were established, managed, and run. Maybe we should do a reprise of the Rodoh idea here and discuss this thing?

That said, I didn't ask for a link to a book that does not construct an alternative history. I asked for Saggy to summarize how the hoax was constructed--naming names, dates, etc.--and supporting the narrative with evidence. According to Saggy. In his own words. He has flopped as badly as Clayton. I cannot even tell if Saggy understands what is meant by writing a proper history.
 
Last edited:
'The Hoax of the Twentiety Century' by Arthur Butz, Northwestern Prof. Available online and at Amazon.com

The hoax got big coverage in the Jews' newspaper of choice, the New York Times, in 1906 ..... see....

http://exposing-the-holocaust-hoax-archive.blogspot.com/2010/01/ny-times-reports-in-1906-that-russias.html

Funny you leave out what he is a Prof - Electrical Engineering. Makes him as qualified as me to write expert books on history

Now as Wildcat pointed out Seymour. Now there was a sharp operator
 
Funny you leave out what he is a Prof - Electrical Engineering. Makes him as qualified as me to write expert books on history

Now as Wildcat pointed out Seymour. Now there was a sharp operator
Serious question: Why do these guys bother? For whom are they doing this? Does Saggy truly believe I am unfamiliar with Butz's book--which doesn't, by the way, speak to my request of him? Does he think I am unaware of who Butz is? When the book was written? Criticism of the book? Defenses of it? Who does Saggy imagine he is appealing to and convincing by recycling this stuff? At least in the Rodoh book club, members gave their opinions, not off topic links as though linking proved a point.
 
Careful, it's a Traditional Revisionist bible, Thou shalt not criticize Butz or remind his faithful readers that he's a Prof of Electrical Engineering and nothing to do with History,

It's something when your opponents consistently under estimate you as these guys seem to have. Its kind of funny in a way and telling too that these people are so very bad at this. Perhaps Saggy genuinely believes you've never heard of Butz? Perhaps he thinks he's doing you a sort of favour.

Still waiting for Saggy's own account of how the hoax was won.
 
I think the theory is - expert in one field - expert in all fields. Sadly it is rare talent. History is full brilliant minds making fools of themselves
 
The hoax part was the lies of a few to punish Germans for taking Jewish people out Germany's social and financial equation. The hoax lies became the new truth of the Holocaust. The purveyors of the Holocaust realized the Holocaust could become a cloak of invulnerability to criticism. Hence the required SCREAMING WHEEL heard in every school in the USA.

Why did they do that?
 
No, this is just another argument from personal incredulity.

I refuse to believe that something that is impossible is possible. I guess you could call that an argument from personal incredulity. Tell me, if somebody told you something that you knew was impossible, would you believe it anyway?
 
No, he lied about other stuff in the Van Pelt post.

To Dogzilla, I see that Saggy has contested your assertion that nobody denies the holocaust. Want to revise your statement?

No. He said people deny the holohoax. I'm not sure how that differs from the holocaust.
 
Last edited:
Well, science lesson time: Gasoline has a higher heating value of 47.3 MJ/kg, and kerosene's is similar (~46 MJ/kg). Kerosene is, relative speaking, safer to burn things with because of its much higher flash point than gasoline (~100ºF vs. -45ºF, respectively).

Why don't you come back and tell us all the HHV of charcoal lighter fluid on charcoal. And no, don't ask me why I'm discussing these issues.

I don't see the relevance of discussing various heating values. How are they related to the ease with which naked bodies burn?
 
A dreadful book, deconstructed many times, fairly recently as Rodoh's first book club selection. The material on the ghettos, for example, is not just wrong: it is risible. Butz confuses the course of the liquidation of Warsaw ghetto in order to tout Treblinka as a way station, as well as scoring a big fail in trying to prettify the ghettos as salutary for their inmates, whose ill discipline undermined Nazi attempts to keep things healthy and decent. The confused author confuses the nature of institutions like the Jewish Councils and order police, in order to confuse readers about how ghettos were established, managed, and run. Maybe we should do a reprise of the Rodoh idea here and discuss this thing?

That said, I didn't ask for a link to a book that does not construct an alternative history. I asked for Saggy to summarize how the hoax was constructed--naming names, dates, etc.--and supporting the narrative with evidence. According to Saggy. In his own words. He has flopped as badly as Clayton. I cannot even tell if Saggy understands what is meant by writing a proper history.

as for naming names, I think Mr Caution is too enamoured of the Great Man view of history. The emplotment most revisionists view the hoax consists of not so much a plan being carried out, but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus -- mind reading by a far-flung bureaucracy.

Dunno where I dragged that up from, I think it just came to me.
 
Why would it matter if Van Pelt is Jewish or not? (He is Jewish as far as I know.)

Raising the issue just highlight that our deniers have trouble tacking his scholarship. It highlights other things too...

I think he took the oath on the Talmud or Torah in the Trial of Deborah Lipstadt. Rather appropriate really as I believe the Talmud says it is OK to deceive the Goyim.

So what was van Pelt's mother's maiden name - and did she go through any transit camps?
 
The hoax part was the lies of a few to punish Germans for taking Jewish people out Germany's social and financial equation.


Please explain what form this alleged punishment took. And don't say war reparations, because as instigator of the war by invading Poland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Netherlands, France, Norway, Russia, etc., it was unquestionably going to have to pay reparations once defeated.
 
I refuse to believe that something that is impossible is possible. I guess you could call that an argument from personal incredulity. Tell me, if somebody told you something that you knew was impossible, would you believe it anyway?

But you haven't shown that it's impossible, hence it's only an argument from personal incredulity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom