Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

This board is open for all subject matters. Post information and discussion materials about open-debate and censorship on other boards (including this one) here. Memory Hole 2 is a RODOH subforum for alternate perspectives.
User avatar
Blogbuster
Posts: 2957
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:36 pm
Contact:

Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by Blogbuster »

Despite all the verified hateful actions of the Holocaust Controversies blog and its membership, do people feel the content of that blog, the data itself, is of any value? Many have been disappointed with the proven cut and paste nature of their Manifesto, and clearly most of the blog articles are more of the same. How does HC have the nerve to proclaim itself as a debunker of revisionism when the blog itself has been debunked over and over?

Thoughts?
Blogbuster

Get the facts about the strange phenomenon of Holocaust hate blogging!
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=667

http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


User avatar
Cerdic
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:39 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by Cerdic »

There's a lot of useful information there, even if it is originally from other sources. IMO.
„(...) Wenn wir irgendetwas beim Nationalsozialismus anerkennen, dann ist es die Anerkennung, daß ihm zum ersten Mal in der deutschen Politik die restlose Mobilisierung der menschlichen Dummheit gelungen ist.“ Kurt Schumacher 23. Februar 1932

User avatar
Blogbuster
Posts: 2957
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by Blogbuster »

Cerdic, I actually agree, when one cuts and pastes useful information from some good sources that's usually the case. Should they then bill themselves as a repository of information from multiple sources instead of debunker blog? The way they use the useful information they cut & paste is really what's in question.
Blogbuster

Get the facts about the strange phenomenon of Holocaust hate blogging!
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=667

http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum

User avatar
HD2014
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 2:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by HD2014 »

Dearest Blogbuster and Cerdic,

My observation is that the Holocaust Controversies blog suffers from an underlying tone of antagonism towards the few readers that have ever bothered to go there. This is quite similar to the negative tone portrayed by Dearest Mr. Hannover on the CODOH forum, but perhaps slightly more arrogant.

This misconceived arrogance by the HC members and founders, appears unbalanced, and very strange considering little, if any of the research work is done of their own labour either in archives or on location at Holocaust sites.

The infamous Sergey Romanov is notoriously known for sending emails to people to point him to a specific answer or trying to manipulate others into doing the research work on his behalf. Dr. Nicholas Terry's work is substandard for someone of his acclaimed status as an academic, and most certainly the acts of Andrew E. Mathis are so dubious in nature that they warrant only disdain.

This must be the reason that blog has diminished in readership from ten visitors a week to one or only two.

Quite sad actually.
-HD2014

User avatar
mcurtis3
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 12:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by mcurtis3 »

HD2014 wrote:Dearest Blogbuster and Cerdic,

My observation is that the Holocaust Controversies blog suffers from an underlying tone of antagonism towards the few readers that have ever bothered to go there. This is quite similar to the negative tone portrayed by Dearest Mr. Hannover on the CODOH forum, but perhaps slightly more arrogant.

This misconceived arrogance by the HC members and founders, appears unbalanced, and very strange considering little, if any of the research work is done of their own labour either in archives or on location at Holocaust sites.

The infamous Sergey Romanov is notoriously known for sending emails to people to point him to a specific answer or trying to manipulate others into doing the research work on his behalf. Dr. Nicholas Terry's work is substandard for someone of his acclaimed status as an academic, and most certainly the acts of Andrew E. Mathis are so dubious in nature that they warrant only disdain.

This must be the reason that blog has diminished in readership from ten visitors a week to one or only two.

Quite sad actually.
Quite sad when all you're left with is an ad hominem attack. Pretty much all you have said above is false. That won't phase you in the least will it?

User avatar
Blogbuster
Posts: 2957
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by Blogbuster »

This is a discussion on views Mcurtis, this isn't a debate thread. Thank you for your input, but for the record everything HD has stated above has been well documented and proven 100%
Blogbuster

Get the facts about the strange phenomenon of Holocaust hate blogging!
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=667

http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum

User avatar
Blogbuster
Posts: 2957
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by Blogbuster »

mcurtis3 wrote:
HD2014 wrote:Dearest Blogbuster and Cerdic,

My observation is that the Holocaust Controversies blog suffers from an underlying tone of antagonism towards the few readers that have ever bothered to go there. This is quite similar to the negative tone portrayed by Dearest Mr. Hannover on the CODOH forum, but perhaps slightly more arrogant.

This misconceived arrogance by the HC members and founders, appears unbalanced, and very strange considering little, if any of the research work is done of their own labour either in archives or on location at Holocaust sites.

The infamous Sergey Romanov is notoriously known for sending emails to people to point him to a specific answer or trying to manipulate others into doing the research work on his behalf. Dr. Nicholas Terry's work is substandard for someone of his acclaimed status as an academic, and most certainly the acts of Andrew E. Mathis are so dubious in nature that they warrant only disdain.

This must be the reason that blog has diminished in readership from ten visitors a week to one or only two.

Quite sad actually.
Quite sad when all you're left with is an ad hominem attack. Pretty much all you have said above is false. That won't phase you in the least will it?

Oh and regarding ad hominem, there was/is an ARC challenge that covers the majority of these topics and that would have put your ad hominem concerns to rest, but of course the HC clan has never dared to accept that challenge.
Blogbuster

Get the facts about the strange phenomenon of Holocaust hate blogging!
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=667

http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum

User avatar
HD2014
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 2:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by HD2014 »

mcurtis3 wrote:
HD2014 wrote:Dearest Blogbuster and Cerdic,

My observation is that the Holocaust Controversies blog suffers from an underlying tone of antagonism towards the few readers that have ever bothered to go there. This is quite similar to the negative tone portrayed by Dearest Mr. Hannover on the CODOH forum, but perhaps slightly more arrogant.

This misconceived arrogance by the HC members and founders, appears unbalanced, and very strange considering little, if any of the research work is done of their own labour either in archives or on location at Holocaust sites.

The infamous Sergey Romanov is notoriously known for sending emails to people to point him to a specific answer or trying to manipulate others into doing the research work on his behalf. Dr. Nicholas Terry's work is substandard for someone of his acclaimed status as an academic, and most certainly the acts of Andrew E. Mathis are so dubious in nature that they warrant only disdain.

This must be the reason that blog has diminished in readership from ten visitors a week to one or only two.

Quite sad actually.
Quite sad when all you're left with is an ad hominem attack. Pretty much all you have said above is false. That won't phase you in the least will it?

It saddens me to see the disillusionment in your words, however everything I have stated about the Holocaust Controversies blog as a debunking mechanism is factual and correct.
-HD2014

User avatar
Blogbuster
Posts: 2957
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by Blogbuster »

Hey Been-There, what's your view on HC?

In full disclosure Mcurtis is a member of the Holocaust Controversies forum so his reaction is to be expected.
Blogbuster

Get the facts about the strange phenomenon of Holocaust hate blogging!
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=667

http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum

User avatar
Blogbuster
Posts: 2957
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Views on the Holocaust Controversies blog

Post by Blogbuster »

Mcurtis is also a good friend of Sergey Romanov so its even doubly expected
Blogbuster

Get the facts about the strange phenomenon of Holocaust hate blogging!
http://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=667

http://hateblogwatch.nazihunter.net/forum

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests