So, how does this "hoax" work, anyway?

The mass-deception regarding the narrative of a Jew-genocide during WW2 — by the alleged mass-gassing of approx 3 million Jews — has been achieved and continues to be maintained in numerous ways.
As I just pointed out, one of the key methods is making sure genuine debate never gets wide-spread public attention. Anyone attempting to open up debate is attacked, smeared, silenced, discredited and ostracised.
E.g. That is precisely what happened to the academic and tenured Professor Anthony Hall merely for calling for more open debate about the holyhoax.

But that smear tactic is just one part of the over-arching methodology which is by group manipulation.
I.e. that which Edward Bernays wrote about in his influential book called ‘Propaganda’. Though that word in the title has since become regarded as an extremely negative thing, ironically due to the propaganda demonisation in the group mind of the Minister of Propaganda for NSDAP led Germany, Herr Joe Goebbels. So now this same psychological manipulation is called Public Relations (PR) instead.

The idea everyone is constantly manipulated into accepting without any evidence, is that only bad people question or disbelieve this compulsory fable. And the corrolorary of that is that such unevidenced ‘bad’ people and their ideas should be immediately rejected and shunned by ‘good’ people.
The vast majority of people who want to succeed in society have a largely unadmitted desire to ‘virtue signal’ and be regarded as a ‘good’ person. 
And by playing on such psychological desires,  the racist, anti-German, WW2 mass-gassing hate-trope is maintained.

The Jewish author Bernays celebrated and taught how to harness the mechanism of such shared group psychology.
Another Jewish academic wrote a more noble and critical evaluation of how that has been misused in his book ‘Manufacturing consent’.
In an interview with top British TV political journalist Andrew Marr, Noam Chomsky tried unsuccessfully to explain how this works. But as an example of a victim of group psychological manipulation, Marr couldn’t understand how it applied to he himself.
Which ironically demonstrates how it works. 🙂


The great potential of using insights from group psychology to control the masses is partly a function of the fact that an individual can be influenced by a group or crowd even when physically isolated. As Bernays pointed out in another book Crystallizing Public Opinion, a crowd “does not mean merely a physical aggregation of a number of persons…the crowd is rather a state of mind.”
So long as someone engages in group-identification, their mind and behaviour will be changed by the enduring influence of group psychology, even with no other members of the group physically present.

To understand how the tendency of human beings to engage in group-identification renders the masses manipulable, we must turn to one of Freud’s ideas which heavily influenced the manipulation techniques developed by Bernays. In his book Propaganda, published in 1928, Bernays explained:
“It is chiefly the psychologists of the school of Freud who have pointed out that many of man’s thoughts and actions are compensatory substitutes for desires which he has been obliged to suppress. A thing may be desired not for its intrinsic worth or usefulness, but because he has unconsciously come to see in it a symbol of something else...”

What Freud suggested is that often there is a divorce between one’s conscious thoughts, and feelings and desires which do not fit with one’s self-image and which are therefore suppressed. This fact, Bernays recognised, renders human beings manipulable. For if one can design propaganda or psychological operations that bypass the conscious and rational faculties of the individual, targeting instead suppressed emotions and hidden desires, it is possible to move people to adopt beliefs and behaviours without them being aware of the underlying motivations leading them on.
As Bernays explained:
“…men are very largely actuated by motives which they conceal from themselves… It is evident that the successful propagandist must understand the true motives and not be content to accept the reasons which men give for what they do.”

It is possible, although often difficult, for an individual to become aware of the underlying motives driving their beliefs and actions through honest and critical introspection. However, once one succumbs to the effects of group identification, such critical introspection becomes nearly impossible. “A group is extraordinarily credulous and open to influence”, wrote Freud, “[as] it has no critical faculty.”
~  Group Psychology and The Analysis of the Ego, by Sigmund Freud. 

In identifying with a group, the individual subordinates self-analysis and a discerning search for the truth in favour of maintaining group interests and cohesion. And with their critical capacities weakened by the influence of group psychology, they become highly susceptible to psychological operations designed to target suppressed or unconscious desires and emotions.

In the modern day there [are] forces operating through the mainstream media and popular culture, which are attempting to increase the individual’s proclivity to engage in certain types of group identification – namely identifications that divide the population into conflicting groups.

academyofideas.com/2017/07/edward-bernays-group-psychology-manipulating-the-masses/

[Oh boy 🙄] The way to understand for oneself HOW to guage exactly that has just been explained. 🤦‍♂️

Here’s what I expect any HONEST person with questions — or anyone who is having difficulty understanding — to do:
1.) Re-read the previous replies again until they understand them.
2.) Read Noam Chomsky’s book ‘Manufacturing consent’ that I previously referred to.
3. Watch again the extremely short Youtube clip of Chomsky discussing how consent is manufactured, that I made available for any idiots with short attention-spans, or who are in denial and experiencing cognitive dissonance
4.) Seek out and watch the whole Marr interview with Chomsky, IF they can’t be bothered to educate themselves and actually read Chomsky’s book.
5.) Read up on the smear campaign of lies, character assassination and career destruction that Prof Hall was targeted with.

Dishonest obfuscators I of course do not expect to do any of that. 🙂

The reality is that the vast majority of well-informed revisionists or their sympathisers have not been credibly shown to be motivated in their historical research by anti-semitism or any form of racial prejudice or hatred.
Instead they have been motivated by a preference for TRUTH over self-interested LIES!

Alan B Kennady is a good example.
He wasn't interested at all in the Jewish aspect of the H-narrative, but only the technical and psychological aspects of the mass-gassing narrative. Yet still he wisely realised it was absolutely necessary to protect himself and his family from attack by Jews and Jewish organisations, so published his academic research using a pseudonym to maintain anonymity.

So, why? A holyhoax true-believer needs to explain that! 

Professor Anthony Hall is yet another recent example of the dangers of an academic NOT protecting themself with anonymity.
He never mentioned ‘the holocaust’ in any of his classes.
He only made a public call for open debate about the H-belief-system. He did that as a private person, not at the University. Canadian Jewish organisations then inaugurated a hate campaign of smears, lies and defamation against him. He has been called an anti-semite and a holocaust denier without ANY evidence supporting those libellous smears. His University caved in under the pressure and he was suspended, then reinstated, then forced into early retirement.
THIS is a recent example of how Jews and Jewish organisations suppress any critical reassessment of the H-narrative.
Not only was Prof Hall punished for daring to ask for genuine, fair debate, but everyone else in academia was warned of the consequences if THEY dare do ANYTHING seen as undermining this protected pseudo-history. 

Only genuine ‘deniers’ and liars would refuse to acknowledge the truth of this.
Which demonstrates what Nessie is doing here. 🙂

I have explained how I believe the mass-gassing ‘hoax’ works. Which is the topic under discussion here.

I have given numerous quotes from authoritative, qualified sources to support my viewpoint.

You by contrast give NO evidence to support your idiotic, knee-jerk contradictions of it. You just give ignorant opinion, but presented as if fact. When you get exposed lying and bluffing you deceitfully try to change the subject. As we have all just witnessed.

I have explained in numerous posts with numerous examples how consent is created, maintained and enforced.
I can explain it again, but I can’t understand it for you. You have to do that by yourself.

But you aren’t here to understand an honest, rival viewpoint, are you?

You are not even here to have genuine discussion.
Otherwise you would answer and explain why a non-racist, highly qualified, multi-lingual history academic chose to publish using the pseudonym ‘Crowell’.
You dodged that question because YOU are a liar and here only to destroy meaningful discussion.

Otherwise you would answer and explain why a non-racist, highly qualified, tenured Professor (Anthony Hall) was smeared, defamed, lied about and driven into early retirement for merely calling for open debate about the holocaust narrative.

You dodge all this evidence already provided — and endlessly ask for more — BECAUSE you yourself are an example of “how this hoax works”. It works by lies, obfuscation, defamation and prohibiting GENUINE, FAIR, HONEST, INFORMED DEBATE!!!

YOU ironically are proving and demonstrating that! 😁
You are doing that by engaging in dishonest, ill-informed, closed-minded, unfair, insincere argument and repeated denial.
Denial of basic human biology, simple laws of physics and basic principles of logic.

It is ironic that my responses in this debate are being censored. The treatment that been-there complains about is how I am being treated.

Ho is asking specific questions about historians, universities and how the hoax works a "disruption"?

Your answers may be clear to you, they are not to me. To sum up what you have said;



There you state that historians who do not follow the accepted narrative are attacked in various ways. What I would like to know is, where the attacks come from other historians, are they in on the hoax, or have they been fooled by it? You go to say;



Do you mean that Luckert was already deceived as a child and when he became a historian and studied the Holocaust, he continued to be fooled by the deception? Is that just him, or does that argument apply to all historians?



In this case, you have a university department who has been attacked and forced to toe the line. Does that mean you think they were stepped on as they failed in their jobs as promoters of the hoax, or they had shown signs of questioning the deception and so had to warned back into compliance?