Need help with an outline for project

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
Ajax
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:27 pm
Location: The Real World

Postby Ajax » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 12:56 pm)

Richard - I agree completely; presentation is crucial, and I can honestly say that not one of the revisonist sites I have seen can match the likes of the USHMM for its presentational value. Some of them still look as though they were built in 1995; I think the IHR is one of the exceptions to this rule.

I am a professional web designer/developer and have been a revisonist since my mid-teens (I finally made the realisation having read Gilbert's opus The Holocaust). This would make me a perfect candidate on paper. However like many others in this position I guess, there always is the balance between real paid work and a project that by its very nature is always going to be a full-time job. I would build a site for the love of it, but would end up being a pauper as I would not be able to devote the time necessary to the work that would bring the money in to keep the bills paid and the dinner on the table.

I have for a long time wanted to present a scholarly, thorough revisionist site, a complete reference source to rival Nizkor in the contant stakes, and completely flatten it with sparkling design and navigation. Time and money, however, will always be the major issue. Naturally, if someone is willing to fund such an operation, I'd have no hesitation in cutting back the regular work.
Last edited by Ajax on Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Scour the surface throughly until it is glistening...

Petschau
Member
Member
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 7:48 am

Postby Petschau » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:04 pm)

I think it is a very good idea as well.
In order to get around the us vs. them mentality that pervades holocaust discussion, answer the six questions every journalist asks when creating a story.

Who, what, where, when, why, and how.

Here is how I would utilize them in this context.

Who
(Who created the Holocaust myth)

What
(What did they do to further it.)

Where
(Where did the Myth begin)

When
(When did the Myth begin)

Why
(Why was it done, what was the motivation)

How
(How was the fraud accomplished)

By using these questions as probes, you'll look at your subject more closely, and as you do, you'll find pertinent things to say.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9996
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:21 pm)

AND ....WHO BENEFITS?

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

User avatar
Ajax
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:27 pm
Location: The Real World

Postby Ajax » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:36 pm)

Hannover wrote:AND ....WHO BENEFITS?

- Hannover


My aim is that if there were a professional, clear and concise revisonist site that answered all the questions, the answer to this most crucial question would be answered automatically.
Scour the surface throughly until it is glistening...

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9996
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:37 pm)

Ajax said:
I have for a long time wanted to present a scholarly, thorough revisionist site, a complete reference source to rival Nizkor in the contant stakes, and completely flatten it with sparkling design and navigation. Time and money, however, will always be the major issue. Naturally, if someone is willing to fund such an operation, I'd have no hesitation in cutting back the regular work.

So, someone else has to do the work, others just cheerlead. Excuses, excuses.

I guess those who who maintain existing Revisionist websites are raking in the cash. :roll:

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

User avatar
Ajax
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:27 pm
Location: The Real World

Postby Ajax » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 3:23 pm)

Hannover wrote:So, someone else has to do the work, others just cheerlead. Excuses, excuses.


Yeah, I guess it does sound like that. I do admit it's rather weak, but this is probably the reason why up until now we haven't seen a revisionist site to rival the swanky sites rolled out by the likes of the USHMM. These things do take time, effort and money - and the unfortunate thing is that most of us on this side of the fence don't have rich moneybags to help fund prospective projects like this we are discussing, no matter how important it might be.

The truth is that if I had the cash today - either through funding from fellow revisionists or even as a result of making a killing on another web project or winning the lottery - I would most happily give up the day job and pursue this sort of project as a full-time thing. The only thing that prevents me doing so is that there are only 24 hours in a day, and most of these are spent on doing a job that gets the bills paid.

I guess those who who maintain existing Revisionist websites are raking in the cash.


I don't suppose there are many revisionist sites that are raking in the cash; funding is going to be from friends and associates (fine if you are David Irving or the IHR), but most of this is going to be splurged on keeping the site alive and paying for extra bandwidth as soon as the site becomes popular.

It's a horrible truth that to build, run and maintain a professional site to rive everything the other side has to throw at us, a stable source of funding is essential.
Scour the surface throughly until it is glistening...

User avatar
Haldan
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1371
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 9:56 pm
Location: <secret>
Contact:

Postby Haldan » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 3:43 pm)

Ajax wrote:Richard - I agree completely; presentation is crucial, and I can honestly say that not one of the revisonist sites I have seen can match the likes of the USHMM for its presentational value. Some of them still look as though they were built in 1995; I think the IHR is one of the exceptions to this rule.


Jamie McKosher would probably call this a logical fallacy, but I think it's a legitimate comparison; If you buy a car, do you only do so because it 'looks' good? Would you buy it even if it's rusty down below? What matters are what's under the hood, that's my opinion of the matter. It's just the same with these dumb 'Make-Believe' sites, they've got a pretty outer but down below it's all rusty.

-haldan
<?php if ($Holocaust == false ) {deny_repeatedly(); } else { investigate(); } ?>
Homage to Catalin Haldan

User avatar
Ajax
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:27 pm
Location: The Real World

Postby Ajax » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:56 pm)

I hear you Haldan, but it is not folks like us who need to be convinced. Like yourself and most of the others on here, what's under the hood is the most important factor - this must always be the case. But in creating a revisionist 'super site' we are not trying to draw in those who are already convinced that the hoax is a hoax, but those who are unaware of the wider implications of the 'Holocau$t' lie, those who might have reservations about revisionism and revisionists, lurkers and newbies.

To these people, a shiny cover serves a crucial function in that it is welcoming and friendly. I have trawled through revisonist websites because I know what I am after; decent navigation (or lack thereof) has never been a problem for me. Likewise, I guess it wouldn't be a problem for yourself, Hannover and the rest of the experts on here. If I were a newbie however, there would be nothing there to attract me, and poor navigation would drive me away.

The venus fly trap catches and consumes the fly because it is an effective weapon of nature, but it attracts the fly because it catches its eye. You can't have one without the other.
Scour the surface throughly until it is glistening...

Richard Perle
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 647
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 9:45 am

Postby Richard Perle » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:46 pm)

Haldan, forgive me but you're completely missing the point. You and I know that it is the content which matters, nobody disputes that. We are just pointing out the persuasive impact that a professional looking site can have on people. We have the facts all wrapped up but unfortunately the cards are stacked heavily against us on account of our terrible image problem. We need every advantage we can find, and that includes polishing up our methods of delivery so that their surface appearance matches that of the best orthodox holocaust websites.
It might be logically sound to stand by the notion that it is the content that matters, but we aren't talking about a logical subject here, at least not when it comes to the mindset of the 'other side' and how they have forced that mindset onto most innocent members of the public. A lot of people even assume that the facts presented by revisonists are made up. When it is the choice between a glossy site combined with everything they have been fed by authority figures and a ropey looking website often riddled with typos, it is clear with which side they will generally place their faith. Perhaps I am being unfair with my low opinion of Joe Public, but this is my experience.


----------
As I've said, I am new to revisionism and am not suited to do this myself, although I'm willing to put in time and effort where I can. I want to be much more than a cheerleader but I know my limtations.
IMO funded organizations such as the IHR should have done this long ago, as the need for a well presented teaching aid for 'hostile learners' unwilling to delve into files is obvious.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9996
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:08 pm)

I chided Ajax for 'cheerleading' while others do the work (we all need to do our bit), but he is right in that presentation is important. It's part of the 'medium is the message' concept as Carto's Cutlass mentioned before.

The average person, who has been dumbed down to the point of being numb, responds to stimuli just as Pavlov would predict. Note the lurid, voyeuristic, sexually perverted nature of much of the 'holocau$t' story itself and the sites that promote the tales....their phoney misleading graphics, their bizarre lying 'eyewitness' accounts. People eat it up for that reason alone. People enjoy believing it, it excites them.

The cure for lack of bells & whistles and resources is simplicity and focus. The Revisionist Forum handles that well. The guidelines here guarantee relatively easy access to the points that Revisionist make, they cannot be obscured by subject changing, dodging, and chatiness. Visually we are simple and free of pulsating, spinning icons and gimmicks. It's a good start. I also believe Germar Rudolf's more complex site www.vho.org ... does a good job with their limited resources, and he certainly has the goods to blow away the stupid storyline.

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

User avatar
Ajax
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 6:27 pm
Location: The Real World

Postby Ajax » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Mar 03, 2005 7:09 pm)

Chiding forgiven, Hannover. I get your point - it's just that it is difficult for us ordinary people to produce something worthy of the name without funding. Most of us have full-time jobs, and we all know that to do this sort of thing properly it needs time, resources, and a good old cash injection. If I had the resources, I could do this 24/7.

I agree we all have to do our bit; you are right on the mark there. But disparate as we are, how can we collaborate effectively? I'd love to have a site that trounces Nizkor and the like for both content and presentation, but you've got to remember that they have all sorts of moneyed folk propping them up. The hoax is like a house on stilts; all we need is a sharpened axe to chop it down in one decisive sweep.

Richard Perle - we are singing from the identical hymnsheet. Excellent comments there!
Scour the surface throughly until it is glistening...

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2363
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:57 am)

The hoax is like a house on stilts; all we need is a sharpened axe to chop it down in one decisive sweep.

What if you could make a website or internet movie, that just went for one of the stilts, one piece of the holocaust story, but did a good job debunking that one piece? Instead of an all-encompassing blow to the whole thing at once?

Then if another person did the same thing, you could link or combine them together to have two stilts knocked out.

Like what if one person went just after the idea of what would you do with the bodies at Auschwitz after they had been gassed? Where do you store them until you can cremate them? Here is the problem presented by Robert Faurisson
People were supposed to have arrived in groups of 2,000 and been taken into an underground place called Leichenkeller 2, where they undressed. Then they were supposed to have been gassed in the adjoining Leichenkeller 1 using Zyklon B. After the gassing, the 2,000 bodies had to be taken up to the crematories on the ground floor. There were fifteen ovens to cremate the 2,000 gassed people, and it was impossible, said Faurisson, to cremate more than fifteen people in an hour and a half: "...it means that one hour and a half after, you have still 1,985 people to burn." One would need another place to put the bodies as there were more people waiting to be gassed: "How could you do it...
http://www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/FaurisArch/RF880413.html


"Text" kind of works, but what if you were to use a series of 3-D stills to show this? Making a 3-D architecturally correct image of the holding area and show that it was a real problem. Similar to those 3-d graphics Haldan somehow got. See below to see one. Looking at it does more than text can do, it gives you a real feel of the impossibility of 2000 bodies in there.

That one aspect of storing the bodies brings up an important topic: different mediums for different topics.

Like building a really good navigable website section to present the "storing the bodies at Auschwitz" wouldn't work well that I can see. What I could see working would be a some 3-D stills combined with audio and an animated pointer, or text boxes superimposed on the images. These images would then be presented in sequence. Video might work of actual footage of the the room, to be presented after the 3-D still graphics.

Also, if you built something really solid, it would be around for as long as the myth is around. Throwing a wrench into the works.

Image

Barrington James
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:26 pm

Postby Barrington James » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:24 am)

Carlo's Cutlass Supreme and others...

The book "Treblinka" that I read was written by a "George Steiner" and it still can be purchased on the web. Maybe you could get it from a library. You would be much better off buying Jurgen Graf’s book “Raul Hilberg- The Giant with feet of clay” or Butz’s book” The Hoax of the 20’th century or Germar Rudolf’s book “ Dissecting the Holocaust and so on though. They are priceless. Steiner’s book was actually written by some professional ghost-writer, as were most of the other "eye witness” books. I forget his real name. In that book, if memory serves me well, he describes gassing 2, 000 Jews at a time, the huge piles of bodies afterwards, always, without exception," the strongest at the top"- it made a great visual. Then I learned, at least 30 years latter, that carbon dioxide, the by-product of diesel engines, is generally harmless and totally impractical, well impossible, to use for killing anything, let alone mass kiling. The 2000 people, if they had been forced into an air-tight room, would have suffocated from lack of oxygen before they died from the gas. Then there was the problem of finding no mass graves…and thus began my search for the truth. I was long convinced of it before I found out that my other favourite book, “Babi Yar” was a complete hoax too, however after having read the so obvious criticisms of Babi Yar, and how ridiculous a book it really was, I realized just how easily most of us are fooled by the dumbest of books. This should give hope to any revisionist. People do learn when given a chance to read and compare.
You can fool too many of the people most of the time.

Radar
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 505
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 2:25 pm

Postby Radar » 1 decade 5 years ago (Fri Mar 04, 2005 3:47 pm)

New-comers who don't know the usual cases could actually be a better audience for the exposure of Dr Green's lies. These people would have a cleaner mind to see the obvious logical conflicts in Dr Green's observations.

A simple case from Dr Green would be his claim that Leucter took too thick samples for scientific accuracy. The obvious logical conflict being, if Leucter took too thick samples from the morgue walls then he also took too thick samples from the delousing chamber walls. But the delousing chamber samples weren't diluted and contained very high concentrations of cyanide residue. So, if Dr Green's assertion were true, the delousing chamber samples would also have been diluted and therefore read slightly lower than expected - they didn't. Where was the dilution then with the delousing chamber samples? Dr Green then digs himself and his deception in deeper by making the absurd claim that cyanide gas only penetrates 10 microns into chamber wall materials. This furthers the absurdity because IF this were true the delousing chamber samples with their too thick dilution and penetration limit to 10 microns wouldn't have registered so high in cyanide. You simply can't have claimed lack of penetration, over-dilution, and high readings in the same sample. Of course, having drastically-opposing sets of double standards in plain view is par for the course in holocaust matters.

Dr Green has trapped himself with his own reasoning. Any layman can see the simple contradictions...

Barrington James
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:26 pm

Postby Barrington James » 1 decade 5 years ago (Sat Mar 05, 2005 3:45 pm)

Taken from the website " true Jews against Zionism".I

"It is an historical fact that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that: a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and c) $1000.00 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.

The Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti."

This doesn't sound like an extermination program to me.

p.s. The Zionists turned it down.
You can fool too many of the people most of the time.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 6 guests