Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

This is the place for your questions, propositions, formal debate topics, etc. but they do have to be approved by the Moderator before they will be published visibly, and must not address opponents disrespectfully, if at all. The subjects have to be simple or straightforward and kept on topic.

Moderators: Budu Svanidze, been-there

Post Reply
User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8957
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

I think the following discussion from the so-called SKEPTICS FORUM is worthy of preserving.

I started posting there to attempt a genuine dialogue with others in order to see if I could learn something useful from those who have a diametrically opposite understanding to my own.
I chose the user name REALLY SKEPTICAL.

This particular topic of discussion attempted to look at an aspect of 'holocaust' belief that was not appreciated and so was quite quickly locked. (And this at a discussion forum ostensibly for SKEPTICAL and CRITICAL thinking. 🤔)

Interestingly, only once a genuine dialogue (without the usual insult) had begun to occur was it locked. Presumably that was considered too dangerous. I was then banned for contesting the closing down of the discussion, which I did with a post and a private appeal for impartiality to the administrator of the whole site.

Why would a forum that claims to promote skepticism and genuine, impartial skeptical analysis, feel a need to do that?

------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------

The topic was informed by the predominance of quite unhinged, hateful personal attacks from most of the participants. For an example of that look at this one responded to here.
But mainly it had been inspired by a failed attempt at logical, informed discussion with an academically qualified 'holocaust' university lecturer, Dr. Nick Terry.
One that ended with the following observation:
Really_skeptical wrote:The simple point is that you (and others) approach this historical subject with an ahistorical mind-set.
You approach it instead as a sacrosanct belief that may not be questioned, critically analysed, skeptically doubted or revised.
It started here and here.


It ended there with this observation:
Really_skeptical wrote:Dr. Terry constantly changes the topic and reframes the discussion. Now after numerous posts from him avoiding the obvious, now he wants to change the ground rules.
I suggest that it's yet more proof of his delusional denial.
Denial over and over and over. Topic after topic.
He most defintely has a much vaster and broader knowledge of subjects related to this imprecise thing called 'THE Holocaust' than anyone I have come across before. Yet that is offset by the fact that he often skews discussion by showing-off knowledge of things that are not contested, plus he often obfuscates and reframes any discussion that shines a too penetrating light on the obvious areas of inconsistency or error.
Just as PrudentRegret has shone a light here on Krema1 and Majdanek.
Just as I have done on the unreliability of Vrba/Rosenberg and the so-called Vrba-Wetzler report.

So obviously a person in denial can neither admit that nor even see that.
That is why I said some posts back in one reply to him, that just posting the facts will never be enough for people like him. They need therapy. They need cult exit counselling.

They genuinely can not see the reasonableness of PrudentRegret's argument and his intelligent, logical parsing of the known facts.

They are members of a cult that forbids critical analysis, that punishes dissent, that demonises skeptics of its core beliefs.

How is a high priest of the cultish-belief going to be able to see that? And even if they get a glimpse, how are they easily going to publically admit any of that after a life-time's professional career of preaching the faith?

The topic discussing the signs of cultish thinking that was locked and then caused the BANNING for appealing starts here: https://skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... bf8fdc4324
Really_skeptical wrote: ↑
How do you get a fervent 'true-believer' of a mass-delusion to become aware of their cultish thinking when everyone 'OUTSIDE' of the group is regarded by those 'WITHIN' the group as a wicked, force of evil by the Cult and its leaders?
This is a perrenial problem for all victims of cultish thinking that demonises non-believers.

Most 'cults' are minority groups that exist on the fringes of society.
So how do you help a person come out of a cultish way of thinking that is based on decades of a MAJORITY societal conditioning, manipulation and subtle misinformation?
This is the situation that reformers faced in 18th and19th centuries when compulsory cultish Christian beliefs were incorporated into ALL facets of society in Europe and America.

Awakening from cultish-conditioning is naturally much more difficult when the cultish thinking, beliefs, and attitudes are 'hard-wired' into the victim by their society through numerous methods:
— compulsory childhood education programmes,
— mass-media reinforcement through adult 'entertainment' viewing and reading material,
— constant references to the cultish-think 'beliefs' in news items.
— societal 'ceremonies' and special 'memorial' days.

How do you help a person who for all of their lives has been subjected to an indoctrination into cultish beliefs that demonises non-believers through constant emotional manipulation through news, entertainment, education, reconstructed 'sacred' memorial sites, museums, 'special' memorial days, etc.?

Are just the actual facts sufficient against decades of such mind control?
1.) For people who are capable of independent thought and critical thinking, the actual facts can be sufficient.
2.) For the majority this will not be enough. The psychological effects of them leaving the emotional security of the 'herd' and the 'group think' is for them a formidable barrier to overcome.

What happens when just the actual facts WERE sufficient, but relentless persecution and ostracisation forces a recantation?
For those who are capable of independent thought and critical thinking the realisation of the cult-think can still be a 'step too far' and the persecution and pressure from the majority mind-set can force them to rejoin the cult for an easy life. This can manifest in two ways:
— 1.) their true understanding will be concealed from others and they will feign acceptance of the cult's creed by publically disowning their realisation of reality.
— 2.) they will practice a self-delusion upon themselves in order to fit in with the majority cult mind-set.

In the 1970's there was a policy popular in America that was expensive and involved kidnapping a person and submitting them against their will to a process called 'deprogramming'.
Deprogramming ...mostly involves hours and hours of intense "debriefing," during which a team of deprogrammers... use ethical psychological techniques to try to counter the unethical psychological techniques used by the cult. The goal is to get the cult member to think for themself and re-evaluate their situation.

Debriefing methods can include:
• educating the cult member on thought-reform techniques and helping them to recognize those methods in their own cult experience.
• asking questions that encourage the cult member to think in a critical, independent way, helping them to recognize that type of thinking and praising them for it.
Thankfully kidnapping and forced deprogramming by those believers in a 'majority' view is no longer considered legal.
Now the favoured approach is called Cult exit counselling.

Here is an excerpt of an article by an exit-counsellor who used to belong to the Moonie cult:
Combating Cult mind control — exit-counseling.
While people can be programmed or indoctrinated through repetition and use of the BITE model [Behavior, Information, Thought, and Emotional contro] set of techniques and behaviours, it is my understanding that the only respectful, non-traumatising way for someone to reassert their own analytical thinking is for them to make the connections themselves.
Working with respect and compassion, as well as, asking good questions and giving very long silences works far better than using content to persuade the person that their beliefs are wrong. Frontal assaults, like this, backfire. The person feels attacked and becomes very defensive; trusting less and withdrawing into cult thought-stopping rituals even more.
This exit-counsellor has some gound rules which are fascinating in regard to the type of conversations that go on here with cult believers and anyone who dares question the cult's core beliefs. They perhaps explain why appeal to reason, critical thinking and empirical facts are almost always met with abuse, hateful rhetoric and ridicule...
• Do not try to argue the facts and make them agree with you.
• Do not try to win the argument.
• Respectful discussions with an exchange of points of view is what you want to pursue.
• Enjoy each other’s company.
• After rapport and trust are rebuilt, I suggest picking topics like [political] brainwashing programs or Traffickers and how they recruit and abuse people to become their slaves.
• discuss the BITE model and phobias and Information Control.

The best technique is to ask questions with a sincere, curious tone, giving the person a long time to think about the answer. Step-by-step. Of course, there is much more, too.
That was the opening argument.
Look at the replies that followed.

The irony was that almost ALL the replies confirmed the proposition. Yet those replying didn't know they were doing that.
Although the suggested victims of cult-thinking reacted exactly as a cult-victim would, they were quite unaware of that. They reacted with complete denial of the proposition plus resorted to cultish illogical, ad hominem abuse towards the messenger.

Near the end of the permitted discussion, some actual intelligent dialogue was beginning to occur.
My guess is that is precisely why the discussion was closed down with a completely bogus reason.

And closed down by a moderator — or pool of moderators — who use an avatar of a fictional character who erases memories of anyone who sees the reality of what is going on.
How appropriate! 8-)


Closed with what I call a bogus reason because as long there was only abuse from the cult-victims towards the messenger, the topic was permitted. Many discussion topics at the SKEPTICS–Genocide/Holocaust sub-forum consist of almost nothing but abuse and insult. E.g. this one: https://skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... 65#p502648

Such almost totally ad hominem topics are permitted and the moderator/moderators even participate. But as soon as dialogue occurs that isn't showing the cultish true-believers in a good light and is possible influencing and awakening a believer to the situation they are in, THEN the discussion is locked down.
Cultish 101.

Denying-History wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:35 am
I only see hot air.
Really_skeptical wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:47 am
Do you realise what this means?

It means you have to deny the following:
– that cults exist.
– that cultish beliefs and mind controlling cult-group-think exists.
– that psychological issues are involved in exiting cultish mind-sets.
– that exit counselling techniques have been developed.
etc., etc.

I suggest you ask yourself this: why would anyone feel a need to deny the existence of such cult-related topics?
Really_skeptical replied » Thu Jan 09, 2020 3:26 pm

Even without seeing the hater posters who are on ignore after months of no-content ad hominem replies, I still see a great deal of hateful, personal abuse as replies here to this topic.

Sad that those people resorting to that can not see that they are thereby proving the premise of this topic. I mean they are proving that they are unable to respond with any reasonable, logical reply. And I mean that they are displaying all the signs of people who belong to a mind-controlling cult.

I will attempt to help such victims with more information, and logical analysis. I see from the exit-counsellors experience that that rarely helps. But maybe one or two might start to think it through reasonably and logically. :)

Take a look at the following and see if you can see any similarities
in the following B.I.T.E control methods — that a cult-think exit counsellor has categorised —
which fits the methods used for promoting cultish 'holocaust' belief and attitude.


Behaviour control
- Promote dependence and obedience.
- Modify behaviour with rewards and punishments.

Information control
– Deliberately withhold and distort information.
– Forbid you from speaking with ex-members and critics.
– Discourage access to non-cult sources of information.
– Divide information into Insider vs. Outsider doctrine.
– Generate and use propaganda extensively.
– Encourage you to spy and report on “misconduct” of others.

Thought control
– Instill 'black and white, 'us vs. them' and 'good vs. evil' thinking.
– Change your identity, possibly even your name*.
– Use loaded language and cliches to stop complex thought.
– Teach thought-stopping techniques to prevent critical thoughts.
– Allow only positive thoughts.
– Reject rational analysis, critical thinking and doubt.
* [most online H defenders invent anonymous user-names and many even have multiple sock-puppet identities despite them not being in any danger of prosecution or persecution/ostracisation].

Emotional control
– Instill irrational fears (phobias) of questioning or leaving the group.
– Label some emotions [natural thoughts] as evil, sinful, or wrong.
– Shower you with praise and attention [if you go along with the group belief].
– Shun you if you disobey or disbelieve.
– Teach that there is no happiness or peace outside the group.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH, kindly contact Scott Smith. All contributions are welcome!

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8957
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

Here is a continuing examination of the similarities between cultish-thinking and defence/protection of what is called 'the holocaust'.

This was posted on Friday Jan 10th 2020 here
Keep in mind that what later came to be called 'the Holocaust' began with a great many fake accusations and faked evidence, fed to a gullible, traumatised public through authoritative 'news' articles in newspapers and in 'news reel' films, etc.

One example of that is the fake 'news' at the end of the war, falsely suggesting to the world population that all the concentration camps and labour camps then being liberated in Germany were 'extermination camps' where the inmates were supposedly deliberately "starved to death", "clubbed to death", "burnt to death", "tortured to death", or "gassed". E.g. Dachau, Buchenwald, Ohrdruf, Bergen-Belsen.

This news film below claims inmates at Ohrdruf camp were "starved, clubbed and burnt to death" .
This is the newsreel that Eisenhower personally authorised, saying that with this film as proof, no-one in the future would be able to deny these atrocities happened. An accusation it has long been acknowledged by academics was manipulative misinformation. Sadly — as replies here demonstrate — many cultishly still believe this propaganda.

Holocaust promoters appear to have now removed from the internet many of these Youtube films with their original, emotionally manipulative, false narration. I just searched and could mostly find footage now made available without the contemporary, embarrassingly false, narratives.
Here is one with narrative remaining, falsely claiming the inmates were "starved, clubbed and burnt to death" at Ohrsdruf camp.

Here is a newspaper article repeating the atrocity propaganda lie, calling Ohrdruf an "extermination centre":

Here is a report claiming falsely that Dachau was a "murder factory" camp of mass killings:

In the following 1945 news film, Buchenwald is described by the narrator as an "extermination centre". Dachau is described as a "factory of horror".
At 9:30 the lie of prisoners routinely being killed in gas chambers at Dachau is told to the film's gullible, primed audiences.

The film also shows German citizens being brain-washed into believing the now acknowledged false atrocity deceptions of human-skin lampshades made from inmates, and shrunken heads supposedly of camp inmates.

Such lies and deceptions are still believed by victims of this cult-think.
At least two cult-believers participating here, recently defended these lies passionately here at SKEPTICS(?) with insults against those not showing 'faith' in the cult-belief.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :


As we are witnessing here, in this topic discussion on cult-think, there are no reasonable, intelligent, logical replies coming from the cult-like believers of this narrative.

Instead, in reply to the suggestion that there are similarities between A.) 'holocaust' indoctrination with B.) expert-recognised examples of cult-thinking, the vast majority of replies consist of demonisation for not 'believing' together with immature abuse and insult.

Which, ironically, is one of the signs of cult-think.
Remember, destructive cults rely on deception, confusion, loaded language, disinformation, ad hominem attacks to keep their cults going and their true believers, believing.


On the diagram above it will be seen that the cult of 'holocaust' fits the definition of cult as it forbids critical thinking.

It encourages and promotes irrational hate and demonisation of anyone 'outside' or expressing 'doubt'. These are to be shunned as non-believers. Are to be hated as non-believers.

The cult of 'holocaust' demands complete obedience.

The cultish thinking has an emotionally loaded 'trigger word' that is a pejorative terminology applied to any person seen as threatening to the cult. The term is "denier", or in full "holocaust denier".
This is hatefully and scornfully applied to any person who questions, doubts or damages the cult's credibility in any way at all. People as diverse as Prof. Norman Finkelstein, Ken Livingstone, Paul Eisen, Gilad Atzmon, David Irving, David Cole, Joel Hayward to Wilhelm Stäglich have been smeared with this catch-all loaded trigger word.

Its votaries claim absolute authority only for themselves and fellow-believers.

Finally it allows no legitimate reason to leave the cult-think.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8957
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

Does the following post look to you like it is "obviously intended to attack other users"?
Really_skeptical wrote:
Nobody who is in a cult is aware that they are. Obviously.
That will apply to me, you, everybody.

Nor is anyone going to be aware that they are exhibiting the signs of cultish thinking. Again, that is to be expected.
That also applies equally to all of us.

But I hope people will acknowledge that negative, ridiculing, abusive types of replies to any reasonable, referenced discussion of cultish-thinking is to be expected from people who actually fit the profile. Can you get that?

So if you are one of those people who felt the need to respond here with superior put-downs and abuse, guess what? You maybe fit the profile.
And if you are one of those, maybe you might benefit from at least considering that?

Those of you who will reject such an idea immediately and with disdain, are sadly and ironically exactly the ones who most need to consider that. Its called the Dunning-Kruger effect.

https://miro.medium.com/max/1800/1*Wa0C ... 5LypMQ.gif

This isn't suggesting that the vast majority of the people on the planet who currently believe the consensus history of WW2 are members of a cult. No, no, no.
Most people naively accept the consensus position and get on with their lives. And that's quite normal.
Ignorant maybe? And gullible, maybe? ...but normal.
But it IS suggesting that the small minority who refuse to allow normal revision of that history are displaying cult-like behaviour patterns.

It IS suggesting that the small minority who spend a great deal of their time looking into and confirming that consensus belief and then add more energy online slagging off, abusing, attacking and generally feeling superior to any skeptics, doubters and non-believers of their chosen aspect of WW2 history, are displaying cultish behaviour, thinking and attitudes.

Seriously, if you are one of those people who deny I answer questions, after I have been doing that for months;
or maintain that I don't "take part in discussions" even as I am doing that;
or deny that I add anything of value even when I supply verifiable references to support my understanding;
or insist that I never have "anything concrete to say" immediately after I just supplied 'concrete' examples of Allied false, manipulative, deceitful 'atrocity' propaganda;
or who feel the need to attack me personally rather than respond reasonably to my point of view,
etc., etc., etc., — then ironically you are showing that you are the ones who are in denial.

And when you feel a need to ridicule expert opinion on cults, cult thinking and the psychological traits of cult manipulation techniques as "hot air" that also should give you cause for concern about yourself and your approach to this tyrannically controlled and protected aspect of WW2 history.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

The two top indicators of cultish thinking are:
1. forbids critical thinking — regards any criticism of the cult beliefs as evil/bad.
2. inculcates an "us versus them" attitude in the believers.

I suggest to any of you that haven't got me on ignore and are reading this, that literally EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU who has ever replied to me here has those two traits in plenteous supply.

Traits of people who are susceptible to cultish thinking:
1. those who at some time needed to feel validated.
2. those who at some time were seeking a group identity.
3. those who often blame others.
4. those who often feel angry.
5. those who have low self-worth.
6. those who at some time felt a need to belong.
7. those who at some time couldn't think things through for themselves so looked to others or a group to do that for them.
8. those who at some time needed a scapegoat or an enemy to look down on to make them feel good about themselves.

And the good news is, that we change. We grow. We mature.
That means everyone is capable of recognising and coming out of any cultish-thinking patterns we may have unconsciously developed.

This post above from the SKEPTICS 'holocaust' discussion forum website, conveniently demonstrates that the moderator at Skeptic who closed it with the above reason is ironically displaying exactly the sort of authoritarian, mind-control tactics that the topic was intending to highlight.
So that worked out really well, then. :D
Confirmation that 'holocaust history' defenders display oppressive, intolerant, cultish behaviour. :)

Also further evidence that the avatar of a fictionalised character in the process of erasing the memory of people who have seen too much 'reality' is extremely appropriate. :ugeek:
Cultish thought control methods
1. Require members to internalise the group’s doctrine as truth.
a. Adopting the group's ‘map of reality’ as reality.
b. Instill black and white thinking.
c. Make believers decide between good vs. evil.
d. Categorise people into us versus them (insiders vs. outsiders).

3. Use of loaded language and clichés which constrict knowledge, stop critical thoughts and reduce complexities into platitudinous buzz words.
4. Encourage only ‘good and proper’ thoughts.
5. ...techniques are used to ...undermine critical thinking...
6. Memories are manipulated and false memories are created.

8. Rejection of rational analysis, critical thinking, constructive criticism.
9. Forbid critical questions about... doctrine or policy.
10. Labeling alternative belief systems as illegitimate, evil, [denial] or not useful.
-- Steve Allan Hassan
[https://www.forum.exscn.net/threads/obs ... 790//quote]
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8957
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

I thought it useful to preserve some of this conversation from another forum about holocaust history.
Mainly because the discussion that it generated became such a clear example of the actual self-delusive, abusive, cultish thinking it was attempting to analyse.

I also wanted to preserve it as I feared a moderator there may delete the thread if they learn it is being copied here.

-- -- -- -- -- -- --

As examples of closed-minded, cultish-thinking compare the following post with the replies it received and which followed it.
Really_skeptical wrote:Just for the record, this particular topic of discussion is not about "denying" anything.

It is ONLY about analysing a suggestion that there has developed a tendency towards a cultish mindset when it results in members of that mind-set spewing hatred, condemnation and abuse over anyone who approaches a particular episode of WW2 history with skepticism.

That's it. That's all.

I understand if people who themselves are stuck in a cultish mindsight, will have difficulty understanding this, and will instead see it as an attack. But that is the catch 22: if YOU yourself ARE stuck in any form of cultish-thinking, you will be the last person to be able to see that.
Any mindset that refuses to allow ANY form of criticism or analysis of its beliefs can be described as cultish and self-deluding.

Any group that promotes abuse, persecution and demonisation of others for engaging in ANY criticism or analysis of its beliefs, is cultish and delusional.

Any society or nation that legalises abuse, persecution and demonisation of others for engaging in ANY criticism or analysis of its beliefs, has become cultish and tyrannical.


I hope we can at least have some agreement that it is hard for egocentric, opinionated, arrogant people with superiority complexes to ever admit flaws, errors or mistakes.

Similarly it is difficult for someone who is in a cult or part of a collective that exists by cultish-thinking, to be able to admit that to themselves.

In the same way that it is extremely difficult to explain to an arrogant stupid person that their thinking is illogical and stupid.

As has been pointed out before, this is an accepted fact of nature, that has been demonstrated convincingly by Dunning and Kruger.

Here is an example of that: it is a fact is that I have never, ever come across a single defender of the enforced, pseudo-historical narrative called 'THE Holocaust' who correctly understands the empirical paradigm.
Not one person.
Yet everyone of these people firmly asserts that they DO know what empiricism means, despite the other fact that when asked they cannot provide any empirical evidence on specific points in support of their beliefs.
That fact alone speaks volumes.

Another great irony is that any intelligent, analytical, critical evaluation of the details of this ahistorical, compulsory, quasi-religious belief-system is regarded as 'hate speech'.
When the reality demonstrated with regular clarity here is that any skepticism of this belief-system is often met with quite deranged, visceral hatred by the cultish 'true-believers' here.

It is the believers with a cultish mind-set here at SKEPTICS who regularly resort to hateful language and who show they feel hatred of other people who aren't as confident as them of the historical veracity of the mass-gassing claim.
Statistical Mechanic wrote:: ↑ Mon Jan 13, 2020
...people in this forum have different ideas and beliefs;
don't necessarily agree on details of the history under discussion or what it all means;
have long and difficult debates about differences;
and may change their conclusions through debate, or remain unconvinced.
Really_skeptical wrote:Again, this reply I think shows the same narrow, delusional, self-referential and therefore cultish mind-set.

Disagreement within mutually accepted and confined parameters — ones that accord with and do not question the basic, mutually-accepted 'cult' beliefs — is not a refutation of what is being suggested here.

You really can't see that?

That is like arguing that because there were "different ideas and beliefs" with "long and difficult debates" within the Mormon church, or the The Peoples' Temple of Jim Jones, or Church of Scientology, therefore that proves there was no evidence of cultish attitudes within those cult memberships.
Which I myself think is an extremely obvious non sequitur.

That it isn't obvious to you, and that you need this explaining to you, further supports my analysis of what has been and still is occurring here.
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient
is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion,
but allow very lively debate within that spectrum...”

― Noam Chomsky, The common good
Sergey_Romanov wrote:So you still have to provide evidence of a "cultish mind-set" and you still have provide evidence that we are believers and not you.
Really_skeptical wrote:I do not have to provide anything. It's a suggestion that you can investigate or ignore.
Only the cult-victim can choose whether to recognise their condition and come out of it... or not.
And they usually need therapy from trained therapists. I am not that.
I am suggesting ALL of you replying here are displaying cultish thinking. I have explained why. It's up to you to see if my suggestion has any value or not.

And what I see as ironic is that you yourself are displaying what I am suggesting is cultish thinking in almost every reply. Yet in almost every reply here you keep asking for evidence of it.
Do you see the problem?


The abuse I get varies from mild ridicule to full on hatred and outraged insults.
In almost every post you abuse me as a liar.
To know that I am lying you would have to know my inner thoughts. I could just be wrong or mistaken.

So I again suggest to you that it is a self-delusional person with a cultish mind-set who would think he could read the minds of people he regards as demonic outsiders/non-believers.

Can you consider that and try it on?
PREMISE 4. It is the characteristic of a cultish mind-set to think they can read minds of people they have never met who live hundreds of miles away from them and can distinguish when someone is lying and when they are simply wrong about something, just from a post on a chat forum.
And I just asked you for evidence of what exactly I am supposed to be 'denying'. You avoided that.
You also couldn't provide examples or quotes of my alleged hateful abuse.

Here is a recent example of a reply showing that against me: https://skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... 10#p746391

To give you an extreme example as a test, can you see how the following is lacking in self-awareness: "Where am I being abusive you crazy, lying, racist denier? Show me one example, you disgusting, antisemitic, neo-Nazi, Hitler-loving scum."


"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8957
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

I'm watching the Netflix documentary on the show-trial in Israel of John Demjanjuk.
Look at the title!!! :o :?

What a deception!

What a circus!!

It is even called a 'show-trial' by some of the participants being interviewed.

I'm on the second episode.
It explains how hard it was to hire an Israeli lawyer who would take on Demjanjuk as a client.
No-one wanted to get involved. Finally they found one lawyer who admitted when he had read about the extradition case from America he was convinced Demjanjuk was guilty and WAS 'Ivan the terrible'. He says he was 100% convinced.
But then he says that after being asked to take on the case as a defence lawyer and AFTER he looked at the evidence he explains very quickly he realised the evidence against him was fraudulent. He says it was so obvious!

During the trial when all these 'survivors' were getting into the witness box and getting angry and then giving emotional exaggerated testimony through tears, telling ludicrous tales of wicked cruelty, this lawyer interrupts and appeals to the Judge to explain what is the purpose of this 'undisputed' testimony. The trial is one of identification, not of listening to endless emotional stories.
The Judge is outraged and admonishes him.
The Jewish lawyer bravely persists and says it is obvious the testimony is not for the purpose of a fair trial but for the benefit of the twelve cameras — waves his arm, pointing to them — that are beaming the trial to the TV sets around Israel and the world. The Judge gets more annoyed and admonishes him more strongly, plus threatens to use the law against him if he says something similar again.
This is Israeli 'holocaust' justice.

These people are traumatised victims of a cult, where they themselves want to be centre-stage as victims.

Watching this documentary is disturbing.
These people are clearly way beyond reason.

We are shown old men claiming to have been at Treblinka and witnessing Ivan the terrible forcing people into the gas chambers with a sword and with a bayonet and a spear and torturing people so that their flesh is hanging off them BEFORE they were gassed.
Then one of them slips up. He narrated giving testimony in a holocaust trial in Florida. The American defence attorney asks him nonchalantly how he travelled there. The man replies "By train". Apparently it was a turning point in the trial.
The old man genuinely believed he had travelled from Israel to Florida by train!!?

The Jewish Israeli defence lawyer was later attacked prior to the appeal with acid in the face. He nearly lost the sight of one eye. His attacker was one of the so-called 'holocaust survivors' who had been at the trial. The attack happened at the funeral of a murdered retired Israeli Jewish Judge who was murdered by other Israeli Jews because he had agreed to appear as a witness for the defence at John Demjanjuk's appeal.
This is what these people are like. Murderous, self-deceiving, lying, traumatised seniles who are beyond reason.

This courageous Jewish Israeli defence lawyer spells it out in the documentary.
At 23:20 the Jewish Israeli lawyer for the defence makes the following statement concerning these 'holocaust' 'survivor' witnesses:
Some of the witnesses were liars.
Some of the witnesses were seniles.
And some of the witnesses were seniles and liars.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8957
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: Holocaust 'history' – an example of cultish thinking?

Post by been-there »

Here is further evidence of the cult-like, manipulative tactics employed to perpetuate 'faith' in this 'holocaust' belief-system.
In this case it concerns cult-like tactics being used upon impressionable Jewish Israeli teenagers to indoctrinate them and to emotionally manipulate them into [i 'holocaust belief'[/i] through encouraging strong feelings and tears.
When the number of sites that participants see is of supreme value, a frequent reaction is boredom. At the Warsaw Ghetto cemetery, after a long night without sleep, Dr. Yaron witnessed a familiar situation: one student said “I’m so bored here – I don’t know what I’m doing here!”
Her friend added “It’s not interesting. I don’t know what to do with myself”.

In response to these complaints, the guide reminded them, half seriously, half in jest: “The agreement was that we’ll bore you to death, and you’ll stand and listen as if you are enjoying it.”

“Do we have to travel all the way to here to love the Land of Israel?” one student asked.

One way to help diffuse the boredom while still sticking to the tight schedule is to include lots of personal stories and quotes from survivors, typically taken from information handed down from one generation of guides to the next.
But after three or four days, even this tactic loses its potency, and the students’ resistance grows.

During a trip organised by the high school in central Israel, Dr. Yaron writes, teachers resorted to shouting. “We’re talking about the Holocaust – this is an embarrassment!” the principal yelled.

The ceremonies held at the camps are the main tool for creating an “experience.”
They need to be “short, send a clear message and be moving,” one guide said. But that requires order and discipline.

At Auschwitz, during the “every person has a name” ceremony traditionally held in a darkened hall in one of the barracks, a few students clapped after a fellow student spoke movingly about some of his relatives who were killed in the Holocaust. The guide was furious, Dr. Yaron writes in his book.
“We don’t clap” he roared.
“This isn’t a theater and it’s not stand-up comedy. How many times have I told you that? Let me explain the rules once again: Everyone ends by saying, ‘May their souls be a link in the chain of life.’ And then everyone answers 'amen'.”

The emotional experience is heightened by singing Israel's anthem at the end of every ceremony, and sometimes after other activities during the trip as well. Students are told they have to sing “Hatikva” with special pride.

But the clearest expression of that “pride” is apparently reserved for the waving of the Israeli flag.
“Poland, for me, is waving the Israeli flag and proving that the people of Israel live” one principal said, summing up the trip.

“The flag is waved with great pride, and sometimes even defiantly,” said one guide.

It seems that the question of who or what exactly is being defied – Poles, Germans, Arabs, the entire world or all of history – is less important.
“I hold the Israeli flag up and wave it really high. I actually stretch my arm as high as possible, so people will see,” a religious student said, during a visit to Treblinka.
“It’s true dedication. My arm is already aching. Like me, there’s another five or six with Israeli flags. Everyone insists on holding it up until the end. So people will see!”


But the acid test of the trip, it emerges, is how much you cried.
The students have learned to expect tears, and when they don’t come, some of them lose patience.
Others blame themselves for not feeling what was expected of them.
“I was disappointed with myself that I didn’t manage to digest the magnitude of the event,” one student admitted. “I was expecting this shock, this hammer blow to the head, so the trip would have meaning.”

On another trip, after visiting “the holy grail of the death camps,” as one teacher defined Auschwitz-Birkenau, many of the participants complained of “disappointment” and “frustration.” Said one: “I wanted [to feel] death, something powerful that would rend my heart.”

“I thought maybe something was wrong with me,”
his friend added. “I didn’t know if it was because of me or because of the general atmosphere. I was pretty disappointed with myself and the others. Maybe it’s because I’m doing something wrong.”

During the first days of these excursions, some leaders threaten that any severe disciplinary infraction will result in the student being flown back to Israel at his parents’ expense. But on the last night or two, after several intense days and a roller-coaster of emotions, these threats lose their sting.
“The end is the most dangerous,” one teacher admitted. “We have to be on the [hotel] floors. The students let themselves fall apart.”

Another teacher said she learned something important about herself during the trip: “I can also get by without sleep.”

Some of the guides put the students through what Yaron calls “scenes of horror”: in the cattle car of a train on display at a camp, or alongside the death pits. The 2016 documentary “#Uploading_Holocaust” (Mahaneh Meshutaf), a compilation of short clips filmed by students on their trips to Poland, demonstrates this quite well.
In a cattle car packed with teenagers, the guide is seen speaking with a trembling voice and his eyes shut: “At this moment I want to be Moisheleh. Where did they take them? Mommy, why me? Why me and not my big brother?”

“I want you to begin to feel!” the guide exhorts the group.

At another site, the students are asked to talk about “their children” who were murdered. They break down and cry.
“I can make them break down easily” said a guide named Liron, quoted in Yaron's book.
“I allow myself to reach the limit, but I don’t cross it: I will never push a child into the corner of the railcar or into a gas chamber, and tell him: ‘Imagine that you, yourself were here.’ I play a recording of the rattling of the train, but not sounds of shooting. It’s too scary.”

Liron added that even though “it is possible to use emotional manipulation on the trip” he never looks to stir up the teens.
“Naturally a trip with such a high level of emotion also involves problems and risks among a small minority of participants. Over the years, I have seen two cases of teens who went crazy, and it was necessary to fly them home. A lot of less serious situations arise as well: Sleeplessness, anxiety, trembling and a lack of desire to continue on the trip.”

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.pr ... -1.8478098
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests