Why do Believers resort to dirty tricks?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Why do Believers resort to dirty tricks?

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Wed Jul 07, 2004 12:05 pm)

I have observed that the last resort of Believers in the standard 'holocaust' story is to make personal attacks, make false charges, and make threats (often physical, always financial) against Revisionists who openly voice their views about research which debunks the claims of the standard story. The classic 'shoot the messenger' approach.

Questions for everyone:

Is this desperate tactic effective in the long term?
Does it ultimately lend support to Revisionist viewpoints?
Can Revisionist research be obliterated and forever kept from the masses?

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
holographic
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 12:19 am

Postby holographic » 1 decade 5 years ago (Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:44 pm)

Greetings Hannover,

"No profound and popular movement in all history has taken place without its share of filth, without adventurers and rogues, without boastful and noisy elements."
- V. I. Lenin to the Communist Party's X'th Congress - Mar. 1921
Boris Souvaine, Stalin, London 1949 p. 316

As it stands right now, the "boastful and noisy elements" make the most clatter and receive the most attention.

A cursory answer to your questions would be;

1. Yes, it IS effective. But, "the bigger they are..."
Zundel's plight is really nothing more than a charge of "pre-crime". These scumbags have no scruples!

2. Yes

3. Ultimately, truth will prevail! but YES again. The effects of a complete Internet censorship campaign should not be underestimated.

I thank our humble moderators for providing this forum

FW
Member
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 10:08 am

Postby FW » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Jul 11, 2004 10:48 am)

Hannover said:
"I have observed that the last resort of Believers in the standard 'holocaust' story is to make personal attacks, make false charges, and make threats (often physical, always financial) against Revisionists who openly voice their views about research which debunks the claims of the standard story. The classic 'shoot the messenger' approach.

Questions for everyone:

Is this desperate tactic effective in the long term?
Does it ultimately lend support to Revisionist viewpoints?
Can Revisionist research be obliterated and forever kept from the masses?"


Last resort? Hannover, you are being much too charitable here, it is usually their first resort, as anyone familiar with the effluent pipe known as AR will testify! The standard and immediate response, even to scepticism, is unrestrained personal abuse mixed in with the worst kind of sophistry imaginable, with outright lies thrown in here and there.

As to your questions;

"Is this desperate tactic effective in the long term?"

No, not even in the short term, except perhaps with the confused and the propagandised (sadly, a majority). The only advantage they have here is that the holocaust story enjoys broad acceptance. What they really don't seem to realise is how bad their behaviour looks. Its like a blind spot and it will be their eventual undoing. The best thing ever would be for them to be debated in public fora. In that way a wider audience could see their atrocious behaviour and draw the obvious conclusions.

"Does it ultimately lend support to Revisionist viewpoints?"

Most definitely. All you need do is ask any reasonable person what kind of truth is it that needs legal protection? What kind of truth is it that needs everything ranging from personal abuse right throught to JDL style terror tactics?

"Can Revisionist research be obliterated and forever kept from the masses?"

Obliterated, never. Not as long as there is even just one Robert Faurisson or Ernst Zundel alive on the planet. Kept from the masses? That's their only strength, through a mixture of legal sanction, political influence, and media control, they can put off and delay, but I am firmly convinced that this story (like all other big lies) cannot be sustained in the long run. All lies melt under the light of fearless and disinterested inquiry and, of course, changing circumstances at the wider level.


As to the official story and how shaky it is, I would like to relate an experience of mine. The point I want to make is this; that the more someone is familiar with the details of the official story, the quicker they can be shown its bogus nature.

I introduced two friends to the revisionist case one night about five months ago. One of them I subsequently learned had read quite a few orthodox books about the H, the other knew little or nothing beyond what the man in the street knows. The well-read friend, to my complete surprise, became a revisionist in less than 5 minutes!! She saw it immediately; once sceptical questions were raised she immediately saw how ludicrous it all was precisely because she knew the story in detail. The other friend brought up all the usual objections (pictures of bodies after the war etc) and to this day will not acknowledge the situation and refuses even to speak about it!

I know people say that the best arguments against the official story are within the official story itself, but from the above example I can say it really is true. Its not the story itself but how you read it. How many ordinary decent people have seen 'Shoah' and heard Bomba but did not for one moment reflect and say 'hang on, that can't be right'? How to explain that, I think, is the topic of another post.

User avatar
Sailor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 810
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 6:54 pm
Location: California

Postby Sailor » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:12 pm)

Hannover wrote: I have observed that the last resort of Believers in the standard 'holocaust' story is to make personal attacks, make false charges, and make threats (often physical, always financial) against Revisionists who openly voice their views about research which debunks the claims of the standard story. The classic 'shoot the messenger' approach.

Questions for everyone:

Is this desperate tactic effective in the long term?

I don't think that the method of some of the Holocaust Believers in discussions with Revisionists will in the long term be effective.

However I think that many Holocaust Believers deep down in their heart honestly believe in the orthodox Holocaust story as is promoted by the media, in the books and in school. Many Believers may also be of the honest opinion, that a Revisionist is anti-semitic and wants to white-wash the Nazis and is basically dishonest. This should be realized by Revisionists.

Does it ultimately lend support to Revisionist viewpoints?
I don’t think that the present approach of some Holocaust Believers towards Revisionists will lend support to the Revisionist viewpoint.
At this time the Revisionist is in my opinion clearly the underdog. If his viewpoints prove to be correct he will have the upper hand in the long run.

Can Revisionist research be obliterated and forever kept from the masses?

The way I see it: Holocaust revisionism consists basically of these three points:
- No homocidal gas chambers
- No government planned genocide of Jewish people
- The six million number is grossly exaggerated.

As long as the media is substantially under the control of Holocaust promoters, Revisionist research results will probably be kept from the general population. Of course "forever" is a very long time.

fge

Fugazi
Member
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 6:12 am

Postby Fugazi » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:45 pm)

1. Is this desperate tactic effective in the long term?

In the long term no, but in the short term hell yes. I approached signing up to this forum with the utmost paranoia - hotmail address under false name, ISP which I contact only using prepay cards etc. That publicly declaring yourself a revisionist will bring all kinds of grief down on your head is a fact and a hell of a disincentive to wanting to bring up the subject with your liberal friends.

But the question refers to the long term. Absolutely not, it can't work. Just look at Soviet attempts to stamp out "inappropriate" viewpoints - it all just spread around through private photocopying. So it didn't work back then and that was before the internet. Also, fortunately for the world, there are plenty of revisionists a hell of a lot braver than me who don't let themselves be intimidated.

2. Does it ultimately lend support to revisionist viewpoints?

I don't believe so, for the simple reason that the general public never gets to hear about it. Some bozo paints a swastika on a gravestone and it's in the papers worldwide, with holocaust deniers held to be promoting this kind of thing (how exactly is never explained - my discovery that there weren't any gas chambers at Auschwitz never filled me with the desire to paint swastikas on things). But how many newspapers have ever published a story about a revisionist getting beaten up or threatened with deportation under bizarre anti-terrorist laws? Not many that I've seen. I don't think anti-revisionist violence is detrimental to the exterminationists because basically no-one ever gets to hear about it.

3. Can revisionist research be obliterated and forever kept from the masses?

Only if the "hate crime" types convince the USA to overturn the first amendment to its constitution. As long as the web exists and the US govt allows US-hosted web sites freedom of speech, the research can be published. It pains me deeply to have to admit the Americans might do something better than my own people, but I have to admit my government can ban any opinion it damn well pleases, should it choose to.

Fugazi

FW
Member
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 10:08 am

Postby FW » 1 decade 5 years ago (Mon Jul 12, 2004 9:57 am)

Sailor makes a very important point here:

However I think that many Holocaust Believers deep down in their heart honestly believe in the orthodox Holocaust story as is promoted by the media, in the books and in school. Many Believers may also be of the honest opinion, that a Revisionist is anti-semitic and wants to white-wash the Nazis and is basically dishonest. This should be realized by Revisionists


One must assume that the defenders of the holocaust story are true believers - I leave out the 'man in the street' who just believes the story without ever looking into it.

However they are - the true believers - for the most part, fanatics insofar as they believe that the end (combatting the "evil nazis/antisemites") justifies the means - legal sanction against revisionism, personal vilification through to terror tactics. It should be emphasised that there are believers who state that they do not suport legal sanctions or dishonourable tactics. But all, or almost all, work from the presupposition that revisionism is motivated by antisemitism/neonazism and so they do not enter into discussion in good faith; they assume their interlocutor is a "denier" with an "agenda". They believe that they are combatting those twin evils - nazism/antisemitism - and so in their minds extraordinary measures become justified when fighting against "evil".

Of course, this makes them fanatics and therefore dangerous. The fanatic is one who accords his beliefs the status of a certainty that only mathematics can justifiably command.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 12 guests