Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Karl Radl
Member
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:43 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Helpful Hints on how to Deny the Holocaust

Postby Karl Radl » 9 years 4 months ago (Fri May 07, 2010 10:02 am)

Personally the obvious way to 'deny the holocaust' easily is simply not to do so. What I mean by that is fairly simple: you have a problem propagandistically speaking in that if you 'deny', if you will, that 'six million jews died' people are just going to ignore you, because what you are saying is to them, rightly or wrongly, fantastic and borderline cranky (it doesn't help that people who purport revisionism in regards to the 'caust often also purport downright cranky ideas right along with it [e.g. 9/11 'Twoof', Illuminati conspiracy etc] such as say Jeff Rense et al). After all nearly everyone in North America and Europe has been raised and taught with the holocaust as at least an ever present theme even if not taught about it directly. If you challenge someones beliefs head-on then 99.9% of the time you will simply fail (think about all the times you argue with people: how many times have they turned round and said 'I believe you' as opposed to either coping out or continuing to disagree until things get acrimonious). Thus saying 'six million jews didn't die' or 'there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz' (the kind of thing I often see revisionists say on forums, the public domain and when they get the very occasional chance to voice an opinion somewhere) is seriously self-defeating as it labels you as a crank etc.

In order to deal with so huge a falsehood as the 'holocaust' then one has to tout ones own body count which the average person doesn't know about and certainly wouldn't dare try to justify (and if they did and you were in a public/group situation it would be easy to make a swift example of them or do a reduction to absurdity on their argument). Fortunately with the 'caust this is relatively easy as you are almost spoilt for choice for large numbers of deliberately killed groups, most notably German civilians and POWs and 'Operation Keelhaul' in regards to Eastern Europeans generally, that it is easy to turn into an example to force an individual or a group to start to slowly question their perceptions [in essence you can't combat victimhood with 'denial' but you can easily combat it with victimhood your subject is simply not aware of as the logical next question is : why haven't I heard about this].

However you can't rush changing opinions or established attitudes. The simplest way to do it is to be helpful and offer to loan relatively innocuous books about these massacres to people (e.g. James Bacque's work) and then slowly introduce them to more controversial literature. Fortunately revisionism has a lot of literature, which is both relatively innocuous and informative such as Harry Elmer Barnes' work and Carlo Mattogno's well-written studies are a real asset, to bridge this gap between non-revisionist literature and revisionist literature, to introduce people to in order to get them thinking about the 'holocaust'. Most people have read no, or only very general, work on the subject so a specific study on a camp or two where it is held as gospel that a hundred thousand or million died really causes an intellectual shock to them in showing them how little evidence there is for their previously held beliefs (and we all know that Mattogno in particular is exhaustive but not too technical/jargon orientated either).

Despite the common conception among groups in a minority, especially a persecuted one, the folk (I transliterate the German term; volk, here) have a good deal of common sense, but they don't respond well to being sneered at, told they are 'dupes'/'shills' or having someone trying to force them into an opinion (all things I have again commonly seen revisionists do). In essence in order for someone to come to a firm position on a subject, especially a controversial one, they must believe, correctly or incorrectly, that they have figured it out for themselves, which is why you introduce them gradually from another major victimhood they are unaware of to innocuous literature to innocuous literature. Then you simply encourage them to do the same with their friends, because it gives them a little way to 'do something' but asks very little of them personally (which is how you have to handle the folk).

It is simple and it works like a charm, especially if you are of a kind and relatively calm disposition (and obviously know what you are talking about). It is also helpful to be willing to listen to their views, however much you may disagree, on various subjects and help them out if they need anything as you attract a great deal of bees with honey but none with a stick (and it also helps break any lingering stereotypes).

Anyway just my two cents from a propagandists perspective.

Ilikerealhistory
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 145
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:50 pm

Re: Helpful Hints on how to Deny the Holocaust

Postby Ilikerealhistory » 9 years 4 months ago (Fri May 07, 2010 8:45 pm)

vincentferrer wrote:

99.9% of americans have no clue about ANY details of the holocaust. Promoters are always vague on the details. Gee I wonder why!




not only are 99.9% of Americans have no cluse about the details of the holocaust, they have no clue about anything past the nose on their face, and they aren't even sure about their own nose.

Trude
Member
Member
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby Trude » 9 years 4 months ago (Fri May 07, 2010 11:42 pm)

Tonight I talked to my sister-in-law. She is reading a book I sent her which "denies" that Auschwitz was a death camp. She says it's interesting, but she knows already it won't change her mind. After a little back and forth, the best she comes up with is: Why would all those people have tattoos on their arms? After I give a satisfactory explanation for that, she says: Why would all those people lie about it and say these things happened if they didn't happen?! That's a big one. I said, Because they're Jews. She didn't go for that, but we talked about that a little more and she relented a bit. It finally came down to: she didn't want to be in the company of people who supported the National Socialists ... they're NAZIS, she cried.

It's a political correctness thing. She's going to give the book to her son to read. He might just be a little more curious about it.

User avatar
Jazz
Member
Member
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:12 pm

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby Jazz » 9 years 4 months ago (Sat May 08, 2010 1:59 am)

Trude wrote:she says: Why would all those people lie about it and say these things happened if they didn't happen?! That's a big one. I said, Because they're Jews. She didn't go for that, but we talked about that a little more and she relented a bit. It finally came down to: she didn't want to be in the company of people who supported the National Socialists ... they're NAZIS, she cried.


The problem for me is remembering it all off the top of my head. I've talked to my Dad about it and he took it pretty well, I e-mailed him articles and put documentaries on his USB before he went to work :) . My Mum on the other hand was completely different because she has no interest in the holocaust. And my auntie didn't even know that Americans put Japanese civilians in concentration camps! I'm still working on her :? but other than family members I don't think I could openly talk about holocaust revisionism. People are just too brainwashed.

Thesaint
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: England

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby Thesaint » 9 years 4 months ago (Sat May 08, 2010 4:46 am)

I like to bring up the fact that according to the holohoax storyline,Jews were packed sardine fashion into sealed gas chambers in which they would have suffocated very quickly-thereby making the use of poisonous gas totally redundant and illogical.

Comments invited from Muhlenkamp,Nick Terry,and the rest of the holohoax industry.
"We didn't call survivors," says Lipstadt, "because first of all we didn't want to subject them to cross-examination by this guy. He (Irving) would have destroyed them."
- Jerusalem Post 6/16/00

Karl Radl
Member
Member
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 12:43 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby Karl Radl » 9 years 4 months ago (Sat May 08, 2010 7:46 am)

Trude wrote:Tonight I talked to my sister-in-law. She is reading a book I sent her which "denies" that Auschwitz was a death camp. She says it's interesting, but she knows already it won't change her mind. After a little back and forth, the best she comes up with is: Why would all those people have tattoos on their arms? After I give a satisfactory explanation for that, she says: Why would all those people lie about it and say these things happened if they didn't happen?! That's a big one. I said, Because they're Jews. She didn't go for that, but we talked about that a little more and she relented a bit. It finally came down to: she didn't want to be in the company of people who supported the National Socialists ... they're NAZIS, she cried.

It's a political correctness thing. She's going to give the book to her son to read. He might just be a little more curious about it.


That is kind of why you can't jump in with the whole 'the holocaust never happened' argument. It causes what I term an 'ignore reflex' in that rather than believe something that is contrary to one's belief system (or system of values) then one will dismiss it out of hand. It is much the same reaction as say the average person gives marxist theory or that the average creationist will give when challenged on why the Bible and not say Greek mythology is correct.

'Nazis' doesn't mean National Socialist really in the public mind, because quite frankly it has been my experience that people rarely put the two together and those that do are usually better educated. If you want to challenge stereotypes like that then you need to offer a positive solution to things and the problem revisionism, in particular in regard to the 'holocaust', faces is that it is a generally negative ideology and doesn't tend to outline what it is positive about let alone put it to the fore.

In essence I think the thing Revisionism needs more of is work, which is, shall we say, a revisionist narrative of events (preferably written in a popular style) that completely rewrites each event in the light of revisionist and mainstream scholarship. The holocaustians have these narrative types on their side, but revisionists don't currently precisely because revisionism tends towards being detail as opposed to narrative orientated. For example compare say Mattogno's or Weckert's style with say Kershaw's or Evan's: the former are more point-on-point based targeted at specialists and a niche audience, while the latter are targeted towards a far more general audience.

Hell I'd be happy to help with publishing and getting it sold in bulk (I know quite a few people who would be interested in buying a book like that and getting it stocked in libraries, read etc), but it needs somebody (or some people) far more familiar with the details than myself to research and write it in the correct (fairly simple folksy) style.

vincentferrer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:19 pm
Location: Zionist country

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby vincentferrer » 9 years 4 months ago (Sat May 08, 2010 2:46 pm)

I prefer to begin with one point at a time.

One does not need to know all the facts about an event to prove the official version is a lie. I am a trained pilot and know full well the official line we are being told about the Pentagon crash on 911 is false, because the 7 g's exerted on a 767 jetliner in a 270 degree turn, will snap the wings off. Furthermore computer overrides prevent anything more than a 2.5 g's in a 767.

The same logic can be applied to the Auschwitz story. The story tellers or eyewitnesses, take your pick, all say that most of the 1,500,000 dead jews, were buried on the grounds. And they point out the spot! Well, if you use the space they offer, you need to dig a hole about 210 feet deep, based on my own calculations. Except the water table is less than 3 feet. In other words, the mass graves story out of Auschwitz, is bogus.

But let's say that is not enough for the believer.


I would talk about the ' so called workers ' going into gas chamber rooms with no masks and lit cigarrettes to remove bodies and explain how that would kill such workers.

You could also talk about the fact not one world leader ever mentioned this in their books written between 1949-1959. Minor oversight?

Just yesterday, I spent 3 1/2 hours at lunch with a US Federal Law Enforcement agent talking about the holocaust, and a few other things.

For some reason, I had thought this person knew it was a hoax, but when asked if the holocaust was hoax by this person, I had to begin at square one to
explain why it was a hoax. Fortunately I have been through this discussion many times so the dialogue flowed easy.

This agent was just shocked.

Some of the very points I raised were the Auschwitz ammenities like the chapel, library, hospital, wedding chapel, 12 kitchens, pool, sauna,
orchestras, script, brothel, prison, post office and classrooms. He was stunned.

I also mentioned how EW has now been exposed as a fraud, and the facts surrounding that issue.

I recounted the many phone calls I have had with so call experts who have changed the story or admittd to me on the phone they know almost knowing of the holocaust, even though their job is to promote it and they are on a payroll to do exactly that!

Lastly, I showed him some of the script I have purchased that was used in Auschwitz, and Buchenwald. He laughed!

I loaned him one of my many copies of Germar Rudolf's book, Lectures on the Holocaust.
Last edited by vincentferrer on Sat May 08, 2010 3:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The very word holocaust is a pejorative to every German citizen. There was no holocaust,
just lies from the abandoned race.

User avatar
PotPie
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:04 am
Location: Here

Re: Helpful Hints on how to Deny the Holocaust

Postby PotPie » 9 years 4 months ago (Sat May 08, 2010 2:53 pm)

Cloud wrote:But the retort you often get is "they couldn't be autopsied because they were cremated."


More often I hear that stacks of dead, emaciated bodies is proof of the holocaust because those were gassing victims. On the few occasions that I mentioned Dr. Larson's work, I get called a liar.

User avatar
Cloud
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:27 pm
Location: The Land of Political Correctness

Re: Helpful Hints on how to Deny the Holocaust

Postby Cloud » 9 years 4 months ago (Sat May 08, 2010 5:14 pm)

PotPie wrote:
Cloud wrote:But the retort you often get is "they couldn't be autopsied because they were cremated."


More often I hear that stacks of dead, emaciated bodies is proof of the holocaust because those were gassing victims. On the few occasions that I mentioned Dr. Larson's work, I get called a liar.


Yes, just like that photo of bodies Katie Couric showed to Ahmadinejad on her interview with the Iranian leader.

I just did a search on Charles Larson on Google, and I received two Nizkor links.

Trude
Member
Member
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 5:39 pm

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby Trude » 9 years 4 months ago (Sat May 08, 2010 7:11 pm)

vincentferrer wrote:I prefer to begin with one point at a time.

Just yesterday, I spent 3 1/2 hours at lunch with a US Federal Law Enforcement agent talking about the holocaust, and a few other things.

For some reason, I had thought this person knew it was a hoax, but when asked if the holocaust was hoax by this person, I had to begin at square one to
explain why it was a hoax. Fortunately I have been through this discussion many times so the dialogue flowed easy.

This agent was just shocked.

Some of the very points I raised were the Auschwitz ammenities like the chapel, library, hospital, wedding chapel, 12 kitchens, pool, sauna,
orchestras, script, brothel, prison, post office and classrooms. He was stunned.


I loaned him one of my many copies of Germar Rudolf's book, Lectures on the Holocaust.


The book I sent my sister-in-law was "Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour. What the tour guides don't tell you at Auschwitz-Birkenau." Only 48 pages, lots of pictures, easy-to-read text; only $10 from The Barnes Review. It describes the very things you mention. It's not like expecting someone to read Germar Rudolf's big book. She is not argumentative at all, but she won't get a computer; she's happy with her present state of knowledge. Doesn't want to complicate her life. Lots of people are like that. I only talk to her about it because she's a relative and she listens; not like so many people who get mad right away because they take it as some kind of religious/moral issue.

This is a good book to get people started. I bet when I call her next week and she has finished it, she'll be more affected by it. I'll ask her more questions then and expect her to defend it if she still wants to.

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

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby Barrington James » 9 years 4 months ago (Tue May 11, 2010 11:49 am)

It's an old post I know, but I just thought of some other suggestions you might try before having a debate on the holocaust. However let’s make some huge assumptions first. Let’s assume that both the debaters want to learn real history, that they actually want to learn the truth about the holocaust, and that they have the ability and honesty to think rather simply react to any information that confronts their beliefs or what they are paid to defend. ( I have no doubt that many of the defenders of the “six million-gassed” holocaust are paid to defend this myth)

So let’s also pretend that the debaters, the believers in particular, have no secret agenda, that they are not simply trying to intimidate, bully or somehow highjack the debate. Let’s also assume that the believer wants to debate the facts and is simply not going to rely on mockery, name calling, insults or try to label their opponents Nazis or anti Semitic.

Also let’s assume that the believer is honest and willing to state his beliefs (this is not always the case) ….Then if that be the case, that an honest debate is about to begin, then I suggest that each debater should give a brief one or two minute summary of his beliefs. It appears to me from my many unfortunate debates on this topic that often too many wrong assumptions about one’s opponent’s beliefs are made before the debate starts. Thus the believer often thinks the denier is a raving Nazi who claims that the holocaust "never happened" and the denier usually thinks the believer to be a simpleton, a poor brainwashed, unthinking dupe or else, of course, a paid Zionist agent.

My point is that it’s difficult to take a person from “A to B” on this debate, or maybe even further, when one does not know where that person’s “A” is or where his “B” could be. It is also difficult to have a civil debate with someone whom one believes to be in one of the above categories: a Nazi or a fool. Knowing the truth about one’s opponent might make the debate go a little bit better than fighting in the dark. I also think that your asking your opponent to state his beliefs might the your opponnet a little more honest in the debate. Your are asking him to lay his cards on the table, so to speak, rather than to hide behind some rock and take pot shots at you.

I believe my suggestions will help the debaters but, just as importantly, my suggestions will help any “listener” or “reader” to the debate to see the debate in the light and not to be listening in the dark, so to speak. For not only is it difficult to fight in the dark, it is all but impossible to “score” the fight if one can’t “see” the points being made.

Let me know how it goes.

Barrington James
You can fool too many of the people most of the time.

User avatar
Moderator3
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby Moderator3 » 9 years 4 months ago (Mon May 17, 2010 1:42 pm)

This thread has gone astray. Let's not get into discussing each element of the story, a new thread for each would be the appropriate way; or posting to an existing thread.
A few lengthy posts were deleted, they have been saved if anyone wants them. Thanks. Mod3

James Diaz
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby James Diaz » 9 years 3 months ago (Thu May 20, 2010 9:50 am)

Nice way to welcome me by deleting my post, which wasn't off topic and was my first post. You hold free speech in high esteem and say that this is a meeting ground for thought criminals, then you censor me the moment I try to speak. I guess I was wrong about joining this site. It seems that you are doing the same thing to me that is done by wikipedia to me. So much for finding kindred spirits. Thanks for rolling out the welcome wagon moderators. Have the decency to explain where my post went wrong.

astro3
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:52 am

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby astro3 » 9 years 3 months ago (Thu May 20, 2010 4:10 pm)

Helpful hints – Tip No. 3

Questioner: Well, we know that six million Jews died, don’t we?
(On no account attempt to cast doubt on this figure - I agree with Karl Radl, above: 'you have a problem propagandistically speaking in that if you 'deny', if you will, that 'six million jews died' people are just going to ignore you, because what you are saying is to them, rightly or wrongly, fantastic...)

Reply: Not by cyanide gassing, they didn’t.

Questioner: Well, in that case, how did they die?

Reply: I’d have thought that was rather your business to tell us - you are saying they died. All I’m saying is, there were no gassed bodies ever found, no … etc. Then, with a bit of luck, you will have a brief opportunity to present your evidence.
:

astro3
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 5:52 am

Re: Helpful Hints on how to 'Deny' the Holocaust

Postby astro3 » 8 years 3 months ago (Wed May 25, 2011 5:06 pm)

I feel that a basic definition of 'Holocaust denial' could here be relevant - how about this:

A Holocaust denier is one who affirms that normal hygiene technology worked in an ordinary normal manner in the German labour camps of WW2.

Thus, many tons of Zyklon were used in the German labour-camps from 1942 onwards, once the typhus epidemics had broken out, and a holocaust-denier is one who affirms that it was used as per the instructions on the can.

That is the terrible, damnable heresy.

One is making an affirmation, not a denial.

This is the converse of what was affirmed at Nuremberg, which all good, decent citizens nowadays believe, viz that a can of Zyklon was evidence of a human gassing process.

I believe one should introduce the topic in such a way that the J-word need not arise. Eg, how about: 'It's fairly clear that no-one died of cyanide poisoning in WW2.'


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Hektor and 6 guests