Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
Jeffk1970
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Jeffk1970 »

been-there wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 3:51 am
Jeffk1970 wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:26 am
...feel free to join me at Skeptics.
That forum bans anyone who has any genuine skepticism of the 'holocaust narrative'. It's a forum that relies primarily on logically fallacious ad hominem arguments and permits ONLY 'believers' to discuss there.
I figured you would still be upset about that.
The reality is that your post on the Holocaust Cult was locked, Kleon’s response post was locked and my earlier post were all locked. Pyrrho considered them all attempts to attack other members and warned us to stop doing it. Instead you made a post attacking the moderator.!!!!

Here are the posts:

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic ... 26#p746626

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic ... 39&t=32075

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic ... 39&t=32078

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic ... 39&t=32004

As for deniers not allowed to post denial on Skeptics, there are two deniers that are currently somewhat active, PrudentRegret and chocolate. We’ve had long term deniers like David, Mary Q and Monstrous that were a lot more active at one point but not now.

It wasn’t your denial that got you in trouble.

I realize you may have me on ignore. That’s fine. I also understand that most everyone here will take your side. That’s also fine. But don’t bother with the martyr routine.


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


User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 6359
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Huntinger »

Jeffk1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:24 am
It wasn’t your denial that got you in trouble.
This thread is not about what happens over at Klowns, no one cares. It seems that on every thread you come onto you deliberately derail the thread. Unless you have something to say on the topic stay at Barnums circus.


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑
Alle Trolljuden werden ignoriert Hüntinger

Jeffk1970
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Jeffk1970 »

Huntinger wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:13 pm
Jeffk1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 11:24 am
It wasn’t your denial that got you in trouble.
This thread is not about what happens over at Klowns, no one cares. It seems that on every thread you come onto you deliberately derail the thread. Unless you have something to say on the topic stay at Barnums circus.
Been-there brought it up. Please chastise him as well.

Jeffk1970
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Jeffk1970 »

I don’t see Huntinger chastising been-there over his initial comment. I wonder why.....

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 6359
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Huntinger »

Jeffk1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:54 pm
I don’t see Huntinger chastising been-there over his initial comment. I wonder why.....
Just stick to the thread topic, if you want to talk your normal crap, stay at Klowns or go down to the gulag.


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑
Alle Trolljuden werden ignoriert Hüntinger

Jeffk1970
Posts: 1595
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Jeffk1970 »

Huntinger wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 3:11 pm
Jeffk1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:54 pm
I don’t see Huntinger chastising been-there over his initial comment. I wonder why.....
Just stick to the thread topic, if you want to talk your normal crap, stay at Klowns or go down to the gulag.
Still nothing on been-there’s initial comment.

Well, Huntinger is consistent in his hypocrisy.

But, to stay on topic, yes, many deniers are antisemitic.
Saying the Holocaust didn’t happen is not essentially antisemitic, ie, there were no gas chambers is not antisemitic. But linking that to elaborate Jewish conspiracy theories, etc., is.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 6359
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Huntinger »

Jeffk1970 wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 3:19 pm

But, to stay on topic, yes, many deniers are antisemitic.
Saying the Holocaust didn’t happen is not essentially antisemitic, ie, there were no gas chambers is not antisemitic. But linking that to elaborate Jewish conspiracy theories, etc., is.
The poster has not defined Semitic and how this applies to Js today. Semitic means relating to the peoples who speak Semitic languages, especially Hebrew and Arabic, this also includes the Phoenician and Akkadian, constituting the main subgroup of the African Asiatic family. The term antisemitic did not come into use until the 19th century, where it was coined to describe hatred of or discrimination against individual Js to organized pogroms by mobs, state police, or even military attacks on entire jüdisch communities.

In this context the definition is fair enough as people should not be pulled from their houses and hacked to death or be victims of state violence.

However, this definition has changed by the actions of the Js themselves so that any criticism of them is called antisemitic. This is a deliberate ploy to prevent criticism. One can criticize the Palestinians, Syrians or other African Semitic speaking people to death but one must never criticize der Juden.

To be frank, if these people who call themselves Js, even though they are Khazars were involved in the conspiracy which is termed the Holocaust, then so be it; the screaming of antisemitism wont stop the investigations. Of course the Soviets were involved but sadly for Js a huge proportion of Soviet leadership were Khazarian stock as well; Bolshevik Juden.

These people should realize that they are not Gods Chosen, basically because there is no god, and they are not Israelites even if there was a god. The original Israelites were the Habiru (morphed into Hebrew). At the moment the holocaust mummy is unraveling faster than they can add more strips of cloth.
Image


𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑
Alle Trolljuden werden ignoriert Hüntinger

User avatar
Scott
Site Admin
Posts: 2301
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 2:43 am
Location: USA, West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Scott »

StephenP wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:24 am

I don't get a chance to drop by as often but I did find this interesting.

I don't consider saying that the Holocaust didn't happen is antisemitic. But definitely many of its practitioners are.

I think that is a pretty good take, although I don't think that Prof. Lipstadt would agree.

I found one of Nick Terry's takes over at Skeptics Forum on Friedrich Paul Berg shortly after his death, and I wanted to comment on it but have been insanely busy at my bugman vocation and never got around to it.

However, in browsing over there the other day, I found that Sergey Romanov posted a link to a History honors paper from 2010 about RODOH by Elise Nickerson at the University of Connecticut.

https://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=746316#p746316

Elise Nickerson, "From Books to the Web: A Comparative Analysis
of Holocaust Denial in the Internet Age."
(UConn: 2010).
LINKpdf

The Nickerson paper is interesting and it is worth commenting on it in detail, probably in another thread, so I won't say too much about it here, but this brought back some memories.

Ten years ago was before the EZBoard/Yuku platform "Shoah'ed" our RODOH Forum account, which I started back in 2003 when I broke from and was banned from the Axis History Forum. (Btw, I understand that the venerable Marcus Wendel retired from AHF at the beginning of this year, and after over two decades has turned over the reins to someone else. Congratulations!)

The Axis History Forum years later did reinstate my membership, but I don't really have the time to participate too much on other forums for the most part lest it neglects from RODOH upkeep. In any case, at AHF other Revisionists always had to circumscribe any "Denial," and they had to worry unreasonably that it was somehow offensive speech, or "obscenity" to put it into Lipstadtian terms. I alone was allowed to say almost whatever I wanted as the sole representative at the Axis History Forum for Holocaust Revisionism. I considered that unacceptable.

Only with an open environment of intellectual integrity can the Scientific Method work, let alone any kind of real study of History. You cannot circumscribe what you are allowed to examine because it might be impolitic, heretical, or even obscene. Real Science or Real History does not work that way, nor can it.

Sometime near the turn of the century, the CODOH bulletin board system where I was their top poster went into hiatus and Hannover, a lead CODOH moderator, was now running a newer Revisionist discussion forum of his own at the John Ball - Air Photo Evidence website.

My only real quarrel with Hannover was that he was a bit heavy-handed with the moderation, censoring even major Revisionists like Fritz Berg if he didn't like the way an argument was crafted. So that is when RODOH was started.

Hans coined the name "REAL open-debate on the Holocaust," borrowing from "Committee" for -ODOH, and since CODOH had no discussion forum going at the time, like I said, I stole the name RODOH from Hans and opened my own discussion board along with poster Dan (the friendly beekeeper) in 2003 just before getting perma-banned at AHF.

My views are that there is no monolithic "Revisionist" slam-dunk argument, and why should there be anyway? The Holocaust is not a monolith carved into stone.


Diesel Engine Exhaust Gas Composition Under Different LoadsImage


Historians do not agree; that is what the Art and Science of Historiography is all about. The Scientific Method is itself by definition a process of Revision.


Joachim Neander, The German Corpse Factory :
the master hoax of British propaganda in the First World War
[Electronic Resource] (2013)



My approach for an Online free-speech forum was idealistic--and probably stupidly naïve, but I did not know any better. I felt that even dissident speech that "goes beyond the pale" and might only be somewhat trolling, is still a perspective, a legitimate though subjective viewpoint from someone. Not all thoughts are equal, for sure, but contrary to Deborah Lipstadt, a Jewish Studies professor, this alone does not make opposed perspectives historically invalid nor "obscene." The question "Is It Good For The Jews?" is not a universally-valid criteria of History.

Who gets to decide what is "obscenity" anyway? That is a crucially important call. Not the Anti-Defamation League, surely.

Not long afterward Bradley Smith unexpectedly added his CODOH name to Hannover's Revisionist Discussion Forum, which put RODOH a bit on the sidelines since I never would have bothered with a new forum if the CODOH bbs had never shut down in the first place.

So RODOH was and is: "A Free-Speech Forum" and I have tried hard to keep it real, and to keep it fair to both sides--this certainly until the Holocaust Controversies bloggers left en masse at some point, and then Yuku Shoah'ed our platform and we lost a lot of historical content. :roll:

My policy was maximum transparency for better or for worse. Dr. Nick Terry was lead moderator, and Dr. Andrew Mathis even had his own subforum about answering questions about Jews and Judaism that was getting very interesting. He started to review the books by Dr. Kevin MacDonald, the now-retired Professor of Psychology at California State University - Long Beach, who tries to frame Zionism, Communism, and the Jewish Diaspora into the context of "group evolutionary psychology," between Jews and Gentiles. The Anti-Defamation League calls MacDonald "the primary voice of anti-Semitism from far-Right intellectuals."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_MacDonald_(evolutionary_psychologist)

A few days ago onJanuary 27, 2020 was the 75th anniversary of the Soviet Liberation of Auschwitz, which is today a sort of atrocity Disneyland for anti-Racists, and a place of pilgrimage for flag-draped Zionist Jews.

We still don't have an authoritative definition of the Holocaust. But whatever the consensus Groupthink is, you can't Revise or Deny it.

So, if I point out that certain aspects of the Holocaust have the characteristics of obscenity--not just blanket Holocaust Denial--does that get me banned on discussion forums or social media? I think we know the answer to that. In a Theocracy you never quite know what is "beyond the pale," so to speak?

Since the 1980s many countries have had laws against Holocaust Revisionists or "publishing false news." The TRUTH does not seem to be a defense at all, because in some countries they will prosecute the defending attorney of someone who has been accused of the Holocaust Denial heresy.

Other fabulistic aspects of the Holocaust Narrative do have distinctly prurient characteristics of pornography, or "HoloPorn" as I call it. And if I point this out too noticeably, even from a country having strong traditions of free-speech, I am deplatformed from the Internet.

Amazon recently banned scores of Holocaust Revisionist books, including the one written by Fritz Berg.

What about some of the other bizarre Holocaust tales, such as from the ex-Sonderkommando artist David Olere, that has strong elements of fetish porn? Here David Olere shows the SS throwing babies alive into bonfires, and he also claimed that they actually made sausage from the flesh of Jews heading to the crematorium, what he called "Kremawurst."


Image


Are we supposed to cherrypick the Holocaust narrative and keep only the least outlandish tropes? Who gets to make that call?


Sen. Thomas Dodd: Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him ...Image


Well, that is not how any kind of real historical method works.

At some time in the early aughts I pulled the National Archives microfilm for the original Nuremberg Trial affidavits on the Human Soap claim, when the so-called Holocaust Industry was trying to deny that anyone had ever made any such claims like that the Nazis had ever turned Jews into soap and fertilizer and made lampshades out of their skin.

I posted the documents at CODOH and Dr. Joachim Neander, a Danzig-born Pole and retired History Professor from Krakow published his landmark paper on the matter in the academic journal German Studies Review (FEB 2006). Using Polish language sources it is clear that the Human Soap canard was indeed taught in postwar Poland.

Score one against the Hoaxsters.

I don't read Polish but I already knew in grade school in the 1960s that the Nazis gassed the Jews and turned them into soap and lampshades. My Dad was an Aerospace/Nuclear Engineer and we moved around a lot so I can't tell you specifically where I first heard the story, but I started elementary school in Las Vegas, Nevada in 1966 in the building that is now the UNLV Law Library. Today you can see the Luxor pyramid and the Mandalay casino (where the 2017 mass shooting was) in the skyline behind the old school building from the Google street view on Tropicana Avenue where my mother took me for my first day of school.

In any case, by the time I was in Junior High School we had studied the Diary of Anne Frank in English class and seen all of the U.S. Army Signal Corps and the Alfred Hitchcock concentration camp liberation newsreels, and many blatant Zionist propaganda shorts, the stuff featuring the gas chambers and piles of diseased bodies being pushed into mass-graves with bulldozers. Billy Wilder's War Department documentary short "Death Mills" was in the cinema long before the word Holocaust had come into the popular lexicon in the current-day context.


Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


If anti-Semitism is defined as the fear and hatred of Jews, I have never considered myself anti-Semitic. As a person with strong secular inclinations, I have often preferred liberal/broad and often "non-Christian" takes on freedom-of-speech.

The Jewish Denver radio talk-show host Alan Berg, who was murdered by White Supremist crackpots in 1984, was an obnoxious @ßhole, but he was still a human being and he did not deserve to be gunned down in his driveway in cold blood. I remember hearing some of his radio programs in the day and it was infuriating, but the best way to silence him would have been to just change the channel. :idea:


Image


Having said that, the Holocaust--whatever that was--does not give Jews, nor any other brand of atrocity-entrepreneurs, the moral right to lecture us Gentiles on "Racism" and to silence us.


Image


Whatever the Holocaust was, it had to have been brutal simply because it cannot be separated from the context of a brutal world war that killed tens of millions of people. But there is absolutely no reason why we should treat History as though it were Theology.

These days, however, the Mainstream Media is cracking down on "Hate." You see, with the election of Trump--maybe the most Jewish President ever according to the "dissident Right," Trump was elected by appealing to White populism, those voters whom Nixon called the Silent Majority. "The Donald" was not supposed to get the Republican nomination, let alone win the Presidency, BUT HE DID. And the Media Gatekeepers are worried to the point of panic.

They overplayed their hand, maybe a decade or two early demographically-speaking, and the United States is not yet the Third World utopia that it was planned to be after the "United Nations" won the Second World War and put Nazis on trial. Trump campaigned on closing the borders to immigrants and having a less adventurous "America First" foreign policy. Liberal Jews were not happy.

Journalist Andrew Marantz has a new book out about this dilemma of Kosher Gatekeeping and the Internet ...


Image


I have not read the Marantz book yet--the author sounds smarmy AF based on the Amazon audio sample--but it seems like some want the Jewish Media Elite to get back to their traditional pre-Internet role of being what David Irving calls "the traditional enemies of Free Speech."

Btw, I would agree with those that think David Irving is anti-Semitic, but not that he is a Holocaust Denier (again, whatever that means). At best Irving is a Holocaust Revisionist - Lite.

I'm old enough to remember the Internet before-time, as well as the Wild West days of the early Internet--and the increased level of censorship or "Shoah'ing" of non-Kosher content that we see today is VERY troubling.

I like Amazon and the convenience an Online bookselling platform brings, but Mr. Bezos--may his non-Jewish billionaire nape one day swing from a long string for his many sins--has gone out of his way banning political and ideological speech, including Holocaust Revisionist works like Fritz Berg's "angry sledgehammer" book.

Yet Amazon publishes and promotes all kinds of deviant weird transgender fetish shït, and they will deliver it within a couple of days right to your door. FWIW, I was never in favor of Gay marriage, but I never had a problem with legal domestic partnerships regardless of sex. Why do I have to get the marriage sacrament if I want to put my live-in girlfriend onto my health insurance, or vice versa? I wouldn't even be alive today if I had not had a good health insurance plan when I got hit by the car on my bike near the ASU campus back in 2005. In spite of this Gay marriage thing never winning a referendum vote, in fact losing them, the U.S. Supreme Court made it the law-of-the-land, and now I get ads for perverted filth in my In Box.

These are degenerate times. You can get lice and bedbugs from taking the public transportation. Where has all the Zyklon-B gone? They actually have Muslim feet-washing stations and Drag Queen Story Hour at the Public Libraries now. WTF?

When I was hired by the Scottsdale Public Library some time in the 20th century I had to have a college degree and I had to be fingerprinted by the police because kiddies read books there.

In other words, I had to pass a background check. Now they WANT your kiddies to learn from the perverts in the schools and hang out with the Queers at the Library. Doing a background check would be discriminatory.

Now, "Whiteness is the original sin," to borrow a title from the gadfly journalist Mr. Jim Goad, author of the Redneck Manifesto, and contributor at the Online Taki's magazine, along with the Jewish Holocaust Revisionist - Lite author Mr. David Cole, who wrote Republican Party Animal when he came out of exile.

These days your friendly Librarian is probably "gender non-binary" and thinks that "its" mission in life is to educate the local Rednecks about "Hate."

I don't have all of the answers but this is my take:

DIVERSITY +
INCLUSION +
EQUALITY =
D.I.E. Whitey


Thanks Jews. You can keep your NAACP, ADL, SPLC, and your HolocaustTM.

Am I really being fair here? Some anti-Semites might be Holocaust Deniers, but not all Holocaust Deniers are anti-Semites.

Myself, I don't think I'm an anti-Semite, but I don't see how anyone can honestly advocate for White interests and not be Racist. That is pretty obvious if scrutinizing the O.J. Simpson or George Zimmerman trials, or whatever other race-involved crime. You are not guilty if you ever used the term Nïgger in the last ten years like detective Mark Fuhrman did; no, it's because you were BORN guilty since White men are now the Devil.

The Holocaust is the ultimate Blood Libel. Thanks for the projection, Jews.

The problem as I see it is not that "Jews are the real racists," as Mr. Berg used to say, but that White people are the only group NOT allowed to do this. It is Hate when Whites advocate for their own racial interests.

Both Germar Rudolf and myself gave the Amazon print-on-demand book by Fritz Berg a bad review. Mr. Berg brooked very little disagreement and he was never afraid to take issue with even iconic Holocaust Revisionists, but I never paid this any mind. I have always "called it like I sees it."

My objection to Berg's last book "Nazi Gassings: thoughts on life and death" was that the Amazon version had numerous typographical mistakes, and that none of the hyperlinks worked. Germar Rudolf's review was a little more negative, calling it "angry sledge-hammer Revisionism." And the cover art was meant to be almost as shocking as David Olere's drawings of SS men tossing naked babies ALIVE into bonfires.

https://codoh.com/library/document/3439/

When my silly niece attended the Pussy Hat March in the District of Columbia in 2017 to protest President Trump's inauguration, I pointed out that the majority of White men (overwhelmingly) and the majority of White women (as well) voted for Trump, and that should tell you something. If Trump was not elected by minorities that is not my problem. I had high hopes about him.

We had a similar discussion later that year when I went to Idaho to see the total eclipse of the sun and there was a "Unite the Right" rally held by permit in Charlottesville, Virginia to protest the Commie government there trying to remove an old statue honoring the venerable Confederate General Robert E. Lee.

We don't quite have European-style laws making Holocaust Revisionism illegal in the United States because of the First Amendment, but we literally have Zionist and Commie front groups like the ADL and the SPLC dictating what is obscenity in this country now. And Antifa and other groups can literally attack people on the streets and this is rarely prosecuted unless some Jew or Darkie or obese harpy gets hurt.

Dr. Nick Terry gloats that all of the Holocaust Revisionists are getting old and dying off, and he is keeping lists. Nick does not seem to understand the reality of the Orwellian nature of speech on American Universities these days.

Long gone are the days when a UCLA Library Assistant who got fired for saying something negative about Israel after the 9/11 terror attacks could have his labor union go to bat and get an old White dude his job back after a wrongful termination that violated not only the employment agreement but the First Amendment and the principle of academic intellectual diversity.

Even less would be the job security prospects of somebody who lives in a Right to Work state. I used to be a shop steward of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers - Union local, and I successfully handled some wrongful termination cases like this. That was back in my youthful days when I still called myself Progressive and still cared.

Is is really possible for academics today to harbor Holocaust Revisionist views? Even Dr. Arthur Butz, who was a tenured Electrical Engineering Professor at Northwestern, and who wrote a landmark Revisionist book in the 1970s, had to keep a very low profile and never mention his historical views within earshot of his students.

So what is Hate?

I have had this conversation with a lot of relatives who have done some things in politics. My niece thinks that the First Amendment does not apply to "Nazis," as in the Charlottesville case. Like most Millennials she is into "SAFE SPACES" for weirdos but not Nazis, though she could not define what is meant by "Nazi" after I pointed out that nearly all of the American Founding Fathers were what would today be called White Nationalists --

Generals Lee and Washington, and even Mr. Jefferson, the patron saint of the University of Virginia at Charlottesville---all those monuments would be coming down if Globohomo gets their way.

But Holocaust memorials are literally EVERYWHERE in the United States and Europe.

Great leaders of the past were never demigods, but they were a different caliber entirely than the political creatures that we see nowadays. Forget Columbus, today our patron saint is Doctah King, the serial rapist and White-pussy-grabber extraordinaire. These are degenerate times, but I've already said that.

I predicted many years ago that honoring Confederate dead--of which I have a non-slave-holding ancestor who died of smallpox and starvation in a Union PoW camp in Illinois a few weeks before Mr. Lincoln was shot--all of it would be seen as Hate Speech today.

And indeed, now the Confederate flag is de facto banned like the Swastika; at one time you used to see them both on Arizona highway markers. Now it is Drag Queens at the OK Corral (and no, I am not posting the picture).

This is the "intersectionality" of Globalization and what the vigilant Army ground-pounder played by Keenan Wynn in the memorable 1964 Stanley Kubrick film Doctor Strangelove called "Pre-version" (sic). In those days of the Cold War the halls of power were filled with Per-verts and Communist subversives, and least according to whistleblowers who were evil McCarthyites.

When the Berlin Wall came down a generation later, President George H.W. Bush (the Elder) called it the "New World Order," and historian Francis Fukuyama called the collapse of the Soviet bloc "the End of History."

Today the dissident-Right just calls it "Globohomo."

And the Holocaust has become the new secular faith. All roads of Western Civilization must pass through the eye of the needle. The Holocaust badlands are "no country for old men."

Lots of cool metaphors here, but is this History the way it REALLY was?

Again, WHO gets to write the History?

And WHO certifies it as Halal or Kosher?

When I started this forum back in 2003 I said that I had lots of opinions, but I have always said that I did NOT have all the answers.

I think the Elise Nickerson paper from a decade ago is worth discussing in detail somewhere. Those were different times--when we could still optimistically believe that the Internet was a bastion of free-speech. I am a bit more cynical now.

One last thought that I would like to submit is that our modern corporate media today is owned and managed by Jews or the Israel Lobby.

Nobody seriously disputes that fact, but to mention it critically is almost the definition of anti-Semitism. A certain politician in the 20th century famously posed something about this Jewish Question, and supposedly had a Final Solution.

Most Jews vote Democrat and I would venture that the majority of them did not vote for Mr. Trump in 2016, even though he has done little more than pander to Israel. Rightwing Zionist Jews like Mr. Dershowitz and Mr. Netanyahu are on his side but they are in the minority.

Since Trump's electoral victory, the corporate media have gone completely bonkers with "Trump Derangement Syndrome" and I have already discussed that. I think it is fair to say that the plutocracy that runs the American theme park ride--and its globohomo empire--would infinitely prefer a Michael Bloomberg over a Donald Trump in 2020, although I doubt that will happen.

Now, WHAT IF I TOLD YOU that a religious minority (or ethnicity if you prefer) colloquially called THE MORMONS--about as numerous as the Jews--were the ones that owned all the mass media and Hollywood entertainment, and that THEY were the overwhelming number of its apparatchiks?

Would it be impolitic then to NOTICE who effectively ran the Deep State, the very industrial heart of postwar Globaloney and Democracy-Capitalism?

Of course all of this is Cuckoo, ain't it? Don't be stupid, buddy. Speaking Truth to Power would be the very essence of Thoughtcrime.

;)

“Now we have forced Hitler to war so he no longer can peacefully annihilate one piece of the Treaty of Versailles after the other.”
~ Major General J.F.C. Fuller,
historian – England

User avatar
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 8962
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by been-there »

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
Only with an open environment of intellectual integrity can the Scientific Method work, let alone any kind of real study of History. You cannot circumscribe what you are allowed to examine because it might be impolitic, heretical, or even obscene. Real Science or Real History does not work that way, nor can it.
Exactly! Seems so obvious, yet regretably is not the case.
I have been greatly influenced by you on this point.

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
...Hans coined the name "REAL open-debate on the Holocaust," borrowing from "Committee" for -ODOH, and since CODOH had no discussion forum going at the time, like I said, I stole the name RODOH from Hans and opened my own discussion board along with poster Dan (the friendly beekeeper) in 2003 just before getting perma-banned at AHF.

My views are that there is no monolithic "Revisionist" slam-dunk argument, and why should there be anyway? The Holocaust is not a monolith carved into stone.

Historians do not agree; that is what the Art and Science of Historiography is all about. The Scientific Method is itself by definition a process of Revision.
Yes! :)

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
My approach for an Online free-speech forum was idealistic--and probably stupidly naïve, but I did not know any better. I felt that even dissident speech that "goes beyond the pale" and might only be somewhat trolling, is still a perspective, a legitimate though subjective viewpoint of someone. Not all thoughts are equal, for sure, but contrary to Deborah Lipstadt, a Jewish Studies professor, that does not make opposed perspectives historically invalid nor obscene. The question "Is It Good For The Jews?" is not a universally-valid criteria of History.

Who gets to decide what is "obscenity" anyway? That is a crucially important call. Not the Anti-Defamation League, surely.

...So RODOH was and is: "A Free-Speech Forum" and I have tried hard to keep it real, and to keep it fair to both sides -- this certainly until the Holocaust Controversies bloggers left en masse at some point, and then Yuku Shoah'ed our platform and we lost a lot of historical content. :roll:
My policy was maximum transparency for better or for worse...
Which you have achieved admirably. Good work. :)

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
We still don't have an authoritative definition of the Holocaust. But whatever the consensus Groupthink is, you can't Revise or Deny it.

So, if I point out that certain aspects of the Holocaust have the characteristics of obscenity -- not just blanket Holocaust Denial -- does that get me banned on discussion forums or social media? I think we know the answer to that. In a Theocracy you never quite know what is "beyond the pale," so to speak?

Since the 1980s many countries have had laws against Holocaust Revisionists or "publishing false news." The TRUTH does not seem to be a defense at all, because in some countries they will prosecute the defending attorney of someone who has been accused of the Holocaust Denial heresy.
Which proves that 'holocaust' is a pseudo-history that ironically uses hate speech to protect the narrative from genuine analysis.

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
Other fabulistic aspects of the Holocaust Narrative do have distinctly prurient characteristics of pornography, or "HoloPorn" as I call it. And if I point this out too noticeably, even from a country having strong traditions of free-speech, I am deplatformed from the Internet.

Are we supposed to cherrypick the Holocaust narrative and keep only the least outlandish tropes? Who gets to make that call?

Well, that is not how any kind of real historical method works.

...If anti-Semitism is defined as the fear and hatred of Jews, I have never considered myself anti-Semitic. As a person with strong secular inclinations, I have often preferred liberal/broad and often "non-Christian" takes on freedom-of-speech.

...there is absolutely no reason why we should treat History as though it were Theology.
There would be no reason if it were a history interested in establishing historical truth and consequently open to revision.
So... ;) there is a 'reason' when a historical narrative is known to be based on out-dated atrocity propaganda, and therefore needs protecting from analysis and critical scrutiny.
There is 'reason' when it is known that revealing that and acknowledging that will have far-reaching negative consequences for Jews and Jewish organisations that have used that deception for personal gain.
There is a reason, when the more accurate understanding will affect Israeli excuses for their own genocidal lebensraum activities.
Correcting this history will also have far-reaching consequences on perceptions of European and American recent history and foreign policy. The above are what I conclude are the 'reasons'.

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
...I'm old enough to remember the Internet before-time, as well as the Wild West days of the early Internet--and the increased level of censorship or "Shoah'ing" of non-Kosher content that we see today is VERY troubling.
This can also be seen as a part of a policy of hypocritical, Jewish-organised, 'hate' campaigning against truth-tellers/whistleblowers.

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
...Some anti-Semites might be Holocaust Deniers, but not all Holocaust Deniers are anti-Semites.
Yes!
This seems so obvious that the fact anyone needs to express it, I think demonstrates the current sickness of society.

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
Myself, I don't think I'm an anti-Semite, but I don't see how anyone can honestly advocate for White interests and not be Racist.
How about by advocating for equal human rights regardless of ethnicity?

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
The Holocaust is the ultimate Blood Libel. Thanks for the projection, Jews.

The problem as I see it is not that "Jews are the real racists," as Mr. Berg used to say, but that White people are the only group NOT allowed to do this. It is Hate when Whites advocate for their own racial interests.
I would argue that it's racist when it raises the rights of one ethnicity over the rights of another's.

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm
We don't quite have European-style laws making Holocaust Revisionism illegal in the United States because of the First Amendment, but we literally have Zionist and Commie front groups like the ADL and the SPLC dictating what is obscenity in this country now.

...Long gone are the days when a UCLA Library Assistant who got fired for saying something negative about Israel after the 9/11 terror attacks could have his labor union go to bat and get an old White dude his job back for wrongful termination that violated not only the employment agreement but the First Amendment and the principle of academic intellectual diversity.

It is really possible for academics today to harbor Holocaust Revisionist views? Even Arthur Butz, who was a tenured Electrical Engineering Professor at Northwestern, and who wrote a landmark Revisionist book in the 1970s, had to keep a very low profile and never mention his historical views within the earshot of students.

So what is Hate?
I have had this conversation with a lot of relatives who have done some things in politics. My niece thinks that the First Amendment does not apply to "Nazis," as in the Charlottesville case. Like most Millennials she is into "SAFE SPACES" for weirdos but not Nazis, though she could not define what is meant by "Nazi" after I pointed out that nearly all of the American Founding Fathers were what would today be called White Nationalists --


But Holocaust memorials are literally EVERYWHERE in the United States and Europe.

Great leaders of the past were never demigods, but they were a different caliber entirely than the political creatures that we see nowadays. Forget Columbus, today our patron saint is Doctah King, the serial rapist and White-pussy-grabber extraordinaire. These are degenerate times, but I've already said that.
I think you mean serial 'adulterer'. There is no allegation of him raping anyone. Not even once, let alone repeatedly. And even in the unreleased and therefore unverifiable FBI wiretap-recordings, he isn't accused of being a 'white-pussy-grabber'. White women threw themselves at him. I think you're prejudice is distorting your perception here

Scott wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:54 pm


And the Holocaust has become the new secular faith. All roads of Western Civilization must pass through the eye of the needle. ...but is this History the way it REALLY was?
Again, WHO gets to write the History?
And WHO certifies it as Halal or Kosher?

When I started this forum back in 2003 I said that I had lots of opinions, but I have always said that I did NOT have all the answers.

I think the Elise Nickerson paper from a decade ago is worth discussing in detail somewhere. Those were different times--when we could still optimistically believe that the Internet was a bastion of free-speech. I am a bit more cynical now.

One last thought that I would like to submit is that our modern corporate media today is owned and managed by Jews or the Israel Lobby.

Nobody seriously disputes that fact, but to mention it critically is almost the definition of anti-Semitism. A certain politician in the 20th century famously posed something about this Jewish Question, and supposedly had a Final Solution.


...Now, WHAT IF I TOLD YOU that a religious minority (or ethnicity if you prefer) colloquially called THE MORMONS--about as numerous as the Jews--were the ones that owned all the mass media and Hollywood entertainment, and that THEY were the overwhelming number of its apparatchiks?

Would it be impolitic then to NOTICE who effectively ran the Deep State, the very industrial heart of postwar Globaloney and Democracy-Capitalism?

Of course all of this is Cuckoo, ain't it? Don't be stupid, buddy. Speaking Truth to Power would be the very essence of Thoughtcrime.

;)
Fascinating history of RODOH.
I have been deeply influenced by your take on hisorical revisionism.
Thanks for this. :)
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Turnagain
Posts: 7291
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Holocaust revisionism antisemitic?

Post by Turnagain »

been-there wrote:
It's racist when it raises the rights of one ethnicity over the rights of another's.
So, I have no right of association. Just curious, been-there, but are you an advocate of open borders?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 11 guests