Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

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.
Post Reply
Werd
Posts: 10317
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Werd »

I gave you fair warning not to dodge with red herrings and shift the goal posts. You refused to play nice. Allow me to illustrate:

Your first post at Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:06 pm was to basically ask if we have an answer to your question, which was the topic title "Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?" I had a response to you here, lower down on page one at Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:34 pm whereby I mentioned holocaust denial laws and pointed out that one could argue that it is therefore THE OTHER SIDE that needs protection. You then replied a little lower on page one here at Wed Mar 18, 2020 9:49 am, the next day, and you said that "Denial has been made illegal is [sic] "some countries, because of...lack of evidence." Then on page 2 here at Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:31 pm I stated that the actual motive was to prevent the spread of any view that is coupled with a whitewashing of Hitler and National Socialism as a form of government and Jews as world controllers for practical reasons. To prevent another holocaust.

Now here is where the trouble comes in. In your same post of Wed Mar 18, 2020 9:49 am, you also stated that "The "big dogs" of "revisionism" have accessed archives and original sources and they have found no evidence as to what did happen." Now while I NEVER DENIED THAT EXPLICITLY AND WHILE I NEVER CLAIMED THAT NO REVISIONIST HAS EVER GOTTEN INTO ANY ARCHIVE AT ALL, what I DID want to remind you of is that it has NOT BEEN ALL ROSES for revisionists. On page two here at Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:31 pm I had to remind you of a topic I made where Rudolf made a video explaining how many revisionists have been denied access to archives. I also had to remind you of where I mentioned a Mattogno article once posted on the now defunct (and illegal now in Italy) olodogma blogspot website whereby holocaust mongers were outright lying about the location of certain papers in order to flummox revisionists and frustrate their activities. I also had to remind you of a Jurgen Graf video whereby at 24 minutes 56 seconds he talks about how many papers that revisionists learn about, but want to come back to see later at a subsequent trip to the archive end up being moved or "disappearing."

My point was NOT to say that no revisionist has gotten into any archive anywhere at any time. Just that AT KEY POINTS, their efforts have been FRUSTRATED. In other words, the powers that be are trying to protect something FROM the revisionists. This piece of evidence proves that it is NOT revisionism or revisionists that need protecting. You can't claim someone needs protection and is creating roadblocks, when THEY are the ones that unfortunately have others standing right in their way blocking them. This was my simple point in the long Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:31 pm post that you felt totally free in INTENTIONALLY IGNORING by only responding to one irrelevant tiny little bit of my 1:31pm post at the bottom of page two at Wed Mar 18, 2020 1:57 pm.

On page 3 here at Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:10 pm, you felt free in ONCE AGAIN ignoring my point about the frustrations and roadblocks that revisionists DID have to deal with FROM TIME TO TIME, and simply repeat your question as if nothing happened and as if I didn't fully give you proof that revisionists have been meddled with by their enemies at times. "Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?"

Then a little lower here on page 3 at Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:21 pm, I took notice that you were simply repeating yourself and ignoring the evidence I posted about the Rudolf video, the Mattogno article and the Graf video of revisionists being meddled with and the other side clearly doing it because THEY are trying to protect something; meaning it's NOT the revisionists sneakily trying to protect something like you falsely insinuate. You accuse the revisionists of doing something and then hypocritically ignore THE OTHER SIDE WHEN THEY DO IT. Hence why when I re-presented you with the evidence you dodged the first time on page 1, I used some enlarged text to draw your attention to those three things:
The "big dogs" of "revisionism" have accessed archives and original sources and they have found no evidence as to what did happen.
Actually many of them have not only been refused access (as shown here), but they have found that others have been lying about the locations of certain documents in an effort to frustrate revisionists (as shown here). In an old Jurgen Graf video at 24 minutes 56 seconds, we find that documents that revisionists want to come back to later when they later return to an archive suddenly end up disappearing. So you're wrong again, jackass.
Now while I apologize for the bad link to the Mattogno article, here it actually is.
viewtopic.php?p=53982#p53982

But the fact that you didn't complain the link I gave was bad, tells me you didn't even click on those links at all. So no surprise you are a dodging, lying troll.

At this point we are on to page four. Now I would figure that after me showing you TWO TIMES where evidence is of SOME EXAMPLES OF SOME TIMES where revisionists have been meddled with on purpose by the other side, that you would acknowledge that I was right that some difficulty had been encountered by revisionists. I figured you would be honest and admit those things happened. On page four here at Wed Mar 18, 2020 2:30 pm, I told been-there I would give you one last chance to explain your dodging of the evidence I presented of revisionists being given a rough time on certain occasions. You then decided to ONCE AGAIN, ignore my evidence of THE OTHER SIDE trying to protect something and NOT the revisionists. You ignored my evidence showing that if anything, YOU HAD IT BACKWARDS. All you had to say in response to me at Wed Mar 18, 2020 3:20 pm was this:
Your post ignores my question. Why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?
The first statement was a dirty lie because the examples I accumulated showed that YOU HAD IT BACKWARDS AND THAT THE OPPOSITE WAS IN FACT TRUE! You didn't even have the decency to say, "Oh my, that is a good point. You are correct, the other side is in fact playing games with revisionists as if THEY are the real ones trying to protect something." That is something you wanted to deny, ignore and dodge. That you couldn't acknowledge something so simple shows what a dishonest troll, and a dirty liar that you are who ignores reality on a whim.

Then here, a little lower on page four at Wed Mar 18, 2020 3:35 pm, you made a logically fallacious pivot to either construct a red herring or strawman and claim that revisionists have been to archives before and never been blocked or meddled with.
In your link to a claim about access to an archive, I responded to say;

"Nice admission that a lot of time was spent in the archives by deniers. No mention they found nothing to evidence denier beliefs.
All that has happened is that uncredited people cannot go to the archives any more. But there are others prepared to assist who are accredited."

Fact is, deniers have had access and can arrange access and they have not found anything. BRoI is a classic example. He has kept anonymous and has accessed archives.
The reason this is a fallacious argument is that it IGNORES MY ARGUMENT THAT REVISIONISTS HAVE BEEN FRUSTRATED AT TIMES! In other words, you want to use the good times as a red herring fallacy to distract from the bad times they have. Your attempt to point at the good times IN ORDER TO PRETEND NO BAD TIMES HAPPENED TO REVISIONISTS makes a dishonest lying troll.

You ignore what is in front of you again and again. You lie and dodge all the time. Your misbehaviour is why you get kicked to the rodoh basement and your topic locked. Your refusal to apologize for ignoring what is in front of you and admitting that yes, revisionists have been meddled with at times, is why you get punished. You do this to yourself. You are not a victim. You are not innocent.

If you admit that you dodged the Rudolf video, the mattogno article and the Graf video and you apologize for it, maybe we'll take you a tiny bit more seriously. But if you continue to use good times revisionists had as red herrings to distract from the bad times revisionists had - WHICH IS THE MAIN ISSUE SINCE IT TURNS YOUR ACCUSATION ABOUT THEM NEEDING PROTECTION ON ITS HEAD - then you can expect to continue to be punished and have your topics locked. When you intentionally make bad faith mistakes, you convict yourself.

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
Huntinger
Posts: 8143
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Huntinger »

Image

Die soziale Heimatpartei
π•΄π–ˆπ– π–‡π–Šπ–—π–Šπ–šπ–Š π–“π–Žπ–ˆπ–π–™π–˜...π•Ύπ–”π–Ÿπ–Žπ–†π–‘ π–Œπ–Šπ–π–™ π–“π–šπ–— π•Ήπ–†π–™π–Žπ–”π–“π–†π–‘

Amt IV

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29884
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Nessie »

Werd, your point that some deniers have run into some problems at some archives, does not deal with my question as to why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims? It is a red herring that deflects from the real issue. You repeatedly dodge debating with me why denial has no evidence and why anyone should believe what denial claims.

My question was related to here and another forum run by deniers, where posting is heavily restricted when I ask for evidence. When I was spending hours providing deniers with evidence, my posting here and elsewhere was unrestricted.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Werd
Posts: 10317
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:00 pm
Werd, your point that some deniers have run into some problems at some archives,
So you FINALLY admit it? Good man.
does not deal with my question as to why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?
I don't see how you can think this is the case when REVISIONISTS have had more trouble given to them than the OTHER SIDE. Isn't the admitted meddling in archives just one more piece of evidence that you have it backwards? That it's the OTHER SIDE that is running a protection racket?
My question was related to here and another forum run by deniers
So why all the trouble to deny/ignore the problems revisionists have had with free speech but also uninhibited access to archival material all across the board 100% of the time with no games or interference?
a forum...where posting is heavily restricted when I ask for evidence. When I was spending hours providing deniers with evidence
Your "evidence" consists of:

1. eyewitness testimony which is the weakest.
2. Documentary evidence which has clearly been shown by Mattogno to have been taken out of context by Pressac
3. The Inability to trace all the Jews - which AGAIN, is not evidence of confirmation that Mattogno must have screwed up somewhere, somehow in his Pressac critique, or that Rudolf must have screwed up somewhere, somehow in his chemistry arguments against Green and Markiewicz, or that the Birkenau ovens were somehow the most amazing muffles on the planet.

Your repeated attempts to argue as such is just the same old non sequitor fallacies.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29884
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Nessie »

Werd wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:25 pm
Nessie wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:00 pm
Werd, your point that some deniers have run into some problems at some archives,
So you FINALLY admit it? Good man.
Link to and quote me denying it. You will not be able to.
does not deal with my question as to why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims?
I don't see how you can think this is the case when REVISIONISTS have had more trouble given to them than the OTHER SIDE. Isn't the admitted meddling in archives just one more piece of evidence that you have it backwards? That it's the OTHER SIDE that is running a protection racket?
You are being disingenuous. I was specifically referring to the denier run forums, not denial in general.
My question was related to here and another forum run by deniers
So why all the trouble to deny/ignore the problems revisionists have had with free speech but also uninhibited access to archival material all across the board 100% of the time with no games or interference?
That some deniers have had some problems at some archives, is not relevant to my point about my point about how posting her and elsewhere restricts debate when deniers are asked to evidence their claims.

You were trying to deflect the topic I want to discuss, off topic because you cannot deal with my actual point.
a forum...where posting is heavily restricted when I ask for evidence. When I was spending hours providing deniers with evidence
Your "evidence" consists of:

1. eyewitness testimony which is the weakest.
2. Documentary evidence which has clearly been shown by Mattogno to have been taken out of context by Pressac
3. The Inability to trace all the Jews - which AGAIN, is not evidence of confirmation that Mattogno must have screwed up somewhere, somehow in his Pressac critique, or that Rudolf must have screwed up somewhere, somehow in his chemistry arguments against Green and Markiewicz, or that the Birkenau ovens were somehow the most amazing muffles on the planet.

Your repeated attempts to argue as such is just the same old non sequitor fallacies.
Your "evidence" consists of

1. no eye witnesses
2. no documents
3. pretending that it does not matter that the physically impossible transportation, feeding, clothing and accommodating of 1.274 million Jews by the end of 1942, plus other mass transports such as the Dutch Jews to Sobibor in 1943 and Hungarian Jews to Birkenau in 1944, without leaving any evidence at all, contradicts the claims made by Mattogo et al.

You admit that you cannot provide a rational or logical explanation for believing in what you cannot evidence. That is such a compelling point that most posts where I raise the issue, gets locked and sent to Siberian Exile, where it is hidden except from registered users who are logged in.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8143
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:00 pm
Werd, your point that some deniers have run into some problems at some archives, does not deal with my question as to why does denial need protecting from evidencing its claims? It is a red herring that deflects from the real issue. You repeatedly dodge debating with me why denial has no evidence and why anyone should believe what denial claims.

My question was related to here and another forum run by deniers, where posting is heavily restricted when I ask for evidence. When I was spending hours providing deniers with evidence, my posting here and elsewhere was unrestricted.
In the context of this forum the words denier, denial, evidencing can only have one connotation and that is only in reference to the alleged Holocaust. In discussing this, the poster is attempting to by pass the request that the Holocaust not be discussed outside of the official forum, from which the poster has been excluded. It has only been a few hours since the last group of posts from a thread was blocked for precisely this reason.
While Nessie is not responsible for starting this new thread any one with a quarter of a brain would realize that following down the same path is not the road to martyrdom but to tomatyrdom. This one deserves the stocks.
Nessie wrote:pretending that it does not matter that the physically impossible transportation, feeding, clothing and accommodating of 1.274 million Jews by the end of 1942, plus other mass transports such as the Dutch Jews to Sobibor in 1943 and Hungarian Jews to Birkenau in 1944, without leaving any evidence at all, contradicts the claims made by Mattogo et al.
This is simply disobeying the instructions by the global moderator; frankly Nessie this is not good enough and do not be surprised if all posting privileges are removed if not a total ban.

Image

Die soziale Heimatpartei
π•΄π–ˆπ– π–‡π–Šπ–—π–Šπ–šπ–Š π–“π–Žπ–ˆπ–π–™π–˜...π•Ύπ–”π–Ÿπ–Žπ–†π–‘ π–Œπ–Šπ–π–™ π–“π–šπ–— π•Ήπ–†π–™π–Žπ–”π–“π–†π–‘

Amt IV

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29884
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Nessie »

The forum members want to debate. Those who run the forum want to shut the debate down.

Scott appears to be accepting of an open debate, but clearly he no longer has any influence over what happens.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Werd
Posts: 10317
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Werd »

Nessie wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:44 pm
Link to and quote me denying it. You will not be able to.
All I had to do was show you evading it. And I succeeded.
You are being disingenuous. I was specifically referring to the denier run forums, not denial in general.
I asked what about X? You ignored it. Of course I'm going to be on your case to NOT ignore it.
That some deniers have had some problems at some archives, is not relevant to my point about my point about how posting here and elsewhere restricts debate when deniers are asked to evidence their claims.
Okay.
You were trying to deflect the topic I want to discuss, off topic because you cannot deal with my actual point.
I'm pretty sure I showed in the now closed topic within the first page, a series of links to old debates where YOU were discussing nothing but simply evading, equivocating, context shifting, and non sequitor making. None of your points for example about gas tight doors or shower heads in one of the leichenkellers were original. They were all originally argued by Pressac and then demolished by Mattogno. My only point in putting up all those pages from Mattogno books was to show that you were late to the party.

Your "evidence" consists of

1. no eye witnesses
2. no documents
My evidence that skepticism about the gas chamber story is justified is all of the holes in the official story found by Mattogno, Rudolf and Graf that you pretend don't exist.
3. pretending that it does not matter that the physically impossible transportation, feeding, clothing and accommodating of 1.274 million Jews by the end of 1942, plus other mass transports such as the Dutch Jews to Sobibor in 1943 and Hungarian Jews to Birkenau in 1944, without leaving any evidence at all, contradicts the claims made by Mattogo et al.
I'm not sure what's impossible about putting Jews on trains and sending them East just out of the sphere of German control where they will have to then fend for themselves.
You admit that you cannot provide a rational or logical explanation for believing in what you cannot evidence.
Mattogno and Rudolf and Graf and even Berg have shown enough holes in the holocaust story to make me take a second look and go, "Something's not right here. It couldn't have happened as has been claimed."

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8143
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 18, 2020 8:50 pm
The forum members want to debate. Those who run the forum want to shut the debate down.

Scott appears to be accepting of an open debate, but clearly he no longer has any influence over what happens.
They can do that elsewhere; it is only one forum member. It is clear you cannot discuss the H here.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
π•΄π–ˆπ– π–‡π–Šπ–—π–Šπ–šπ–Š π–“π–Žπ–ˆπ–π–™π–˜...π•Ύπ–”π–Ÿπ–Žπ–†π–‘ π–Œπ–Šπ–π–™ π–“π–šπ–— π•Ήπ–†π–™π–Žπ–”π–“π–†π–‘

Amt IV

Werd
Posts: 10317
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: Nessie, this is why your last topic got locked...

Post by Werd »

Back when he was still allowed in the holocaust forum, I would often answer his new topic by posting links to old debates about the same issue. They were debates he lost of course. As you can see many examples in my posts here on page one to old debates he lost and tried to keep alive as long as he could with his multiple fallacies and roundabout arguments where he just repeats the same mistakes over and over ignoring where I corrected him the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and often sixth and seventh times. Just look at us here making sure to keep these rodoh topics relatively short, thus ruining his day.

How can transporting & accommodating 1.274 million leave no evidence?
19 pages

Challenge to been-there, empirical evidence.
6 pages

The revisionist transit camp thesis.
2 pages

The denier transit camp hypothesis.
9 pages.

Me posting links to older debates in new topic, was a way of telling him to keep it where it belonged. But also because since I knew he would just repeat his old stupid arguments, I could provide links to where I defeated him. He could then dodge, I would then write a long diatribe like the OP in this current topic documenting why his repetition of same old stupid questions only yielded the same fallacies. And then we would just leave the topic and it would be no more than a few pages long instead of running into the 100's; which I know he didn't want because he wanted to create MORE PAGES as a way to flood the board out of spite.
Last edited by Werd on Wed Mar 18, 2020 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests