An example of how true-believers and defenders-of-the-faith here at RODOH reacted with exaggerated shock, horror, disgust and hateful abuse to a report of simple, genuinely open and respectful questioning of a so-called 'holocaust survivor' can be read here:been-there wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:48 amYes, I agree. Its constantly put before a mind-manipulated/brain-washed public in two emotionally manipulative ways:Turnagain wrote: ↑Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:19 pmI have noticed that the attempts to indoctrinate (or re-indoctrinate) people with the hoax tale
rely almost exclusively on "tugging on heart strings" tales, so-called eyewitness accounts and the orthodox interpretation of various euphemisms supposedly used as a subterfuge to hide the genocidal intentions of the eeeevul Narzis. I can't recall any of the hoaxers ever asking the simple question of, "Was that possible?". They may have done but it's a rarity.
I've taken a more "nuts 'n bolts" approach to the orthodox tale and have not received any satisfactory answers. Of course, in public education/indoctrination, the students are subjected solely to the hoaxers sad tales of suffering and woe with no thought given to any discussion of the practical aspects of the holyhoax. I'm sure that's by design rather than happenstance. How can the little kiddies be properly indoctrinated when somebody points out that the magic Jew barbeque of the AR camps were a physical impossibility?
Before the internet such questions were limited to a few books and "cranks" and could be safely ignored. Today, not so much.
1.) by repeatedly finding and presenting individual 'personal' tales of an alegedly 'unique' and 'special' suffering to inspire sympathy for a relatively small percentage of the victims of war as poor, persecuted, innocent, people whose only 'crime' was to be of the 'wrong' ethnicity.
2.) with racist generalisations portraying all German soldiers in uniform as shockingly sadistic psychopaths.
Both are clearly exagerations removed from the context of a world war where people of different races and nationalies targeted the civilian, non-combatant populations of their enemies.
The prophylactic to this constant mental barrage of emotional manipulation and deception is to be aware that the way to find the truth of any subject is not through belief, but by doubt. What is true and accurate is not arrived at through faith in traditions and authorities, but by honest inquiry.
And this is the distinction that people are becoming more aware of: that 'the holocaust' as reliable history relies on faith and unquestioning belief and it even outlaws doubt and inquiry. So the whole basis of our modern secular society based on empiricism and scientific investigation is contradicted in this one area of enforced 'belief'.
We are constantly reindoctrinated with the mindset that we must never, ever doubt or question or enquire into ANY of the sacred articles of faith that compromise this narrative. We must certainly never doubt or dare to question a so-called 'holocaust survivor'. Anyone who does that is smeared, persecuted and ostracised.
Increasing numbers of people are waking up to the logical inconsistency integral to the pepetuation of this eight-decades old victor war-propaganda.
If its true let it be questioned, investigated and proved. If that is not permitted, and we must merely 'believe', then why? Why can't it be proved empirically? Why does it rely on 1.) emotionally manipulative, unsubstantiated personal anecdote? and 2.) threat of punishment and ostracisation if you apply reason and science to the claims?
SUMMARY: the way to truth is not belief but doubt; not faith but inquiry.