Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
At the time of posting, this radio program has not been broadcast yet, but after it has been, it will be available either in transcript and/or audio. However, I did a hear a preview of it and I was struck by the fact that mention was made that the Polish Jews would not return to Poland at the end of the war, or continue to live in Poland, due to the fact that they were subject to ethnic cleansing by both the Poles and the Germans at different times, which accounts for the fact that there were so few Polish Jews left after the war -- naturally the exterminationists will assert the reason for that was because most of the Jews were murdered by one means or another by the German occupiers; but that is problematic, and which is the raison d'etre of this forum. Moreover, the fact that there is a serious question raised of whether or not the Polish Jews wished to return to their homeland, implies that it is quite likely true that many of them first fled to the Soviet occupied portion of Poland relating to the Nazi-Soviet pact, and then to the Soviet Union proper once Operation Barbarossa commenced, as well as the fact that it was certainly not a foregone conclusion that nearly all of them left in Poland would have been liquidated by the Germans.
In Australia, in fact, at the annual conference of the Australian Labor Party, yesterday, there was an interview on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation with the Left-leaning ALP president, Dr. Carmen Lawrence, who is an ex-State Premier, and a leading shadow Cabinet member, concerning the question of illegal immigrants, which the Left wants virtually to be granted an open door policy. Dr. Lawrence made the point that the illegal immigrants, mostly from Iraq, Afghatistan, and the Middle East, were in the same position of the Polish Jews at the end of WWII, who, because of the persecution they suffered, did not want to return to Poland, or continue to live in Poland, and so were allowed to immigrate elsewhere. This is in relation to the link at http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1035201.htm , which, listening to the audio provided, there apparently is a deletion where Lawrence clearly compared the illegal immigrants to the Polish Jews, which I distinctly heard on the radio broadcast at dinnertime. The question is, was that section of her speech deleted for reasons of space on the ABC program, or was it because it raised sensitive issues in relation to the Australian Jewish lobby (as I have raised in the previous paragraph), and its electoral support or not for the ALP. Since the ABC is a thorourghly Left-wing dominated organisation, as are invariably all public broadcasters, there can be little doubt why that part of the broadcast Lawrence's speech was not included in the website transcript and audio.
- the total number of Polish Jews seems to have been exaggerated
- the Soviets deported vast numbers to the interior of the USSR
- many are still there
- vast numbers went elsewhere
- many died in combat
- Polish Jews are where Jews are
A good, rather energetic thread at this Forum to look at:
for more see: 'Dissecting the Holocaust' - http://codoh.com/found/fndstats.html
What was interesting is that it seemed to me that Ramona Koval's father was lying to her about his being an escapee from Treblinka, as he was unable to inform her about his supposed hiding place for two years (plus the fact that he refused to accompany her on the trip from Australia to Poland), and became very angry and refused to discuss the matter any further once she persisted. Also the father's description of how the Jewish inmates at Treblinka were supposedly exterminated is totally absurd, and has to be heard to be believed!
Also, from the radio feature by Koval and the ABC it is significant how she depicts how the Polish villagers conducted murderous pogroms against the few remaining Jews after the war, about which the Polish post-war authorities apparently did nothing -- so that Koval gave up the idea of finding "happy stories!" In view of the fact that the Germans were supposed to have done the job of ethnically cleansing the Jews, why was it that the Polish peasants and villagers were so antagonistic towards the Jews? From my knowledge of the history of anti-Semitism I have some idea why this should be the case, but it is certainly a mystery to me why the Polish peasants should have been so antagonistic to the Jews at that particular point in time when there had supposedly been a "Holocaust." If any revisionists could enlighten us on this it would certainly be appreciated.
As I say the above radio feature discussed is at best circumstantial evidence in favour of a revisionist perspective on the "Holocaust." I still remain an agnostic on the whole question, despite how plausible I generally find the revisionist perspective. When one finds that at any good library and bookshop there is no space given to the revisionist perspective (which is generally only extant on the internet) one becomes nervous to too openly publicize a revisionist perspective, and, although I can understand why that is the case in terms of what is in the interests of the status quo, there is always the understanding the the official "Holocaust" narrative could be correct, after all -- so that a revisionist perspective could, in fact, be a grave injustice to those Jews who were supposedly exterminated! There is, in fact, such ideological obfuscation around the whole question of the "Holocaust", especially concerning the Zionists (and I always suspect some of the revisionists of being neo-nazis!), I doubt if objective truth by a disinterested observer will ever be achieved.
It comes down to evidence, everything else is irrelevant; any possible political ideology or agenda included. As is commonly said:
'there's the Nazis with the '6,000,000, gas chambers and state planned genocide' and there's the Nazis without the '6,000,000, gas chambers and state planned genocide'.
Attempted distractions, obfuscations, and strawmen do not matter; the 'holocaust' as alleged cannot be substantiated in lieu of Revisionist research on the issues. An informed Revisionist will utterly rout a True Believer in any fair debate, look at this Forum...they have nothing. And that is the reason there are laws against questioning the standard mythology. It is these laws against free inquiry and free speech that are the prime indicators that the story as alleged is a lie.
Thomas Jefferson said when discussing political censorship laws:
'it is error which needs the protection of government, truth can stand on it's own'
Science and logic over propaganda and superstition.
An informed Revisionist will utterly rout a True Believer in any fair debate, look at this Forum...they have nothing.
The above is what, in fact, makes me uneasy about what exactly is posted in The Revisionist Forum. I have seen it written in other "Holocaust" forums that in this forum the strict rules laid down for supposed debate means that an anti-revisionist will not even bother to post, and it does seem to me to be the case that nearly all threads are very much one-sided. I don't know what the reason for that is (although I have read that it is entailed by a supposed political bias, although I don't necessarily subscribe to that), but, from the perspective of an agnostic like myself, I think that it is rather self-defeating.
What I am inclined to believe is that nearly all the serious exterminationists are necessarily on the Zionist payroll (at least it can be said that most revisionists are not likely to be on anyone's payroll!), as it does not seem reasonable to me why anyone would not, at least, doubt the exterminationist case, in the light of all the revisionist material on the internet. It is not likely therefore that many exterminationists would be likely to adhere to strict rules of debate, as they are primarily motivated by the necessity of being propagandists at the expense of the revisionists.
However, it is still a mistake not to do what is necessary to encourage the exterminationists to post in this forum, as surely, from a revisionist perspective, what is necessary is to raise doubts about the official "Holocaust" narrative in the minds of third parties, i.e, the disinterested observers, or "lurkers,"
(or newbies) who might see fit to visit this forum. I would think that, if they are critically intelligent, they would be somewnat uneasy about the one-sided perspective of the forum, which might cause them to think that the political criticism of this forum is correct.
Therefore, I think that the rules in this forum should be loosened up to encourage the exterminationists to participate in this debate. If they, however, don't want to engage in serious debate, then that will surely demonstrate to disinterested observers that the revisionists have a serious case after all, provided that the revisionists just ignore all provocations, and stick to what they perceive as objective facts.
There is only 1 person banned from this Forum, and he has proved to be unmanageable and nothing more than a namecaller/spammer. He serves no one's interest.
The guidelines are posted, all registrants agree to them when they register. There is nothing in the guidelines which prevents either side from posting. These guidelines are typical of what are found in most organized and civil debates.
The 'traditionalists' tend to get frustrated with Revisionist responses that they cannot refute and they resort to subject changing, namecalling, obfuscation, and dodging of pertinent questions put to them. That is not sincere debate and it shows their weaknesses. They then resort to cry baby whining that their points aren't allowed when in fact they were, but what was deleted was their off topic, frustrated trash. Some directness is tolerated when it appears measured and on topic.
Any topic that is claimed to be evidence in support of the 'holocaust' as alleged has been covered at this Forum. If you can think of one that hasn't then post it and watch the results.
Unlike the 'other forums' we do not allow personal attacks, we allow no posting of photos of people, no accusations (true or false) as to who is really the person behind a webname, none of that sleaze. We are here to debate and that is it.
You should know that on a quite regular basis Revisionist responses which violate the guidelines are deleted and the poster is warned, you apparently were not aware of that.
The hits at this Forum are way up, the readers come from all over the world, we are being read. And that is what causes our detractors so much stress. The tactics they try against us are indicative of that fact.
Now let's get back to the topic of this thread.
Some posters of the RODO*H forum seem to specialize on finding out the identity of those who post under a user name (which is customary on all forums I know of), and then publish this all over the Internet. Rather childish in my opinion.
Michael Mills of the Axis History Forum said about RODO*H something like this:
"If you want to pick a fight with someone, whoever they may be, I suggets you try your hand in the RODO*H forum, where you will find all the usual suspects who have left us - Roberto, Hans, Smith and the rest of them. There you could indulge in polemics to your heart's content. I could not be bothered myself."
Concerning the topic of the thread: I missed the radio broadcast. I wish there would be a transcript.
Will we ever find out what really happened to the Polish Jews? The time to investigate that was right after the war. The Soviets unfortunately put up an "iron curtain" between East and West, they apparentley did not permit neutral organizations like the Red Cross to enter the area and investigate the situation. And the Soviets also exaggerated and came up with some fantastic numbers of victims.
You should know that on a quite regular basis Revisionist responses which violate the guidelines are deleted and the poster is warned,
I have personally had my fair share of posts deleted. But the difference being is, I don't go storming off in a tantrum like a spoilt little brat because of it.
I think the problem lies in the fact, that the believers have become so used to having a one-sided debate, that they simply cannot cope with being answered back. The only time they seem to shine, is in the mainstream media when the pre-contrived panel consists of hand-picked participants, who all share the same view, and receive retainers from the same source.
It's got nothing to do with forum rules ! It's got everything to do with the false sense of security the media affords them. When they dare to venture into territory beyond the media's control. They suddenly realise they are lacking, and about-turn to the protective sphere and safe haven of the media's artificial paradise. That's the only place they can survive, and they know it.
If the top revisionist's were allowed into this media haven, and given a chance on an equal footing, allowed to enlighten the ignorant populace. The industry would be finished in two years. That is why drastic measures are taken, to make sure this must never happen.
Counterfeit philosophies have polluted all your thoughts. The BBC has you by the throat, and Paul Wolfowitz has you tied up into knots....When are you going to wake up ?
Concerning the topic of the thread: I missed the radio broadcast. I wish there would
be a transcript.
Well, as I said, it is only necessary to go to http://www.abc.net.au/rn/arts/sunnightrn/ , and you will see there an audio link to The Cellar, The Hinges, and The Copper Samovar, at which you will be able to listen to the program, which lasts about an hour. Possibly, Sailor, you are relying on your personal computer, which might not have the software to enable audio, but at most publicly available computers, either free, or, say, at an internet cafe, there should be an audio link available, although possibly you would have to provide your own ear-phones. As I say I think that it is helpful from a revisionist perspective, as it seems to me to imply that "Holocaust" lies have been unwittingly exposed in this episode by this Ramona Koval, who appears to be quite naive about the whole subject.
As far as what I said about the need to loosen up the rules regarding debate, in order to encourage exterminationists to post in this forum, I just feel that it is necessary to help people generally to learn about the "Holocaust" by means of a dialectical process involving both revisionists and exterminationists, otherwise critical third parties will simply draw the wrong conclusion about this forum, particularly in light of the fact that it is generally put about in the mainstream media that those who "deny" the "Holocaust" are somehow necessarily neo-fascists of some type, which would not, for instance, be true in the case of the French Leftists around Faurisson.
There have, in fact, been those exterminationists, such as Pierre Vidal-Naquet and Deborah Lipstadt, who have maintained a stance of not deigning to take the revisionists seriously; but that has been undermined in such forums as RODOH (as well as alt.revisionism, which, in spite of all the personal abuse and such, have quite long informative threads about various aspects of the "Holocaust"), which, despite the bearpit nature of such forums, perhaps (although I think that RODOH debate is of a high standard in terms of historical detail, which is really meant for the dedicated "Holocaust" buff), is really in the interest of the revisionist cause, since, in the light of the fact of State sanctions against "Holocaust denial," it is necessary to demonstrate to the general public that there is a serious matter of debate concerning the "Holocaust."
Moreover, if one was a neo-fascist I don't think that one would be particularly concerned about whether or not the official "Holocaust" narrative was substantially true or not, since surely fascist totalitarianism, especially if it was essentially racialistic (although it could be essentially classist in nature, and still be inherently genocidal), would be inherently genocidal, particularly in the light of the exigencies of the ecological imperative -- although, from my perspective, it does not necessarily rule out fascism as ultimately historically necessary. Since, in the light of mainstream opinion, "Holocaust denial" is something of a social taboo, it is surely in the interests of liberal democracy that there be no social taboos, and so, as a free-thinking social agnostic, I feel that it is particularly important that there should be this dialectic between the exterminationists and the revisionists, even if, say, the exterminationists enter such a debate in bad faith (e.g., if they are on someone's payroll to oppose revisionism at all costs), which is why that I can't help but think that it is really self-defeating on the part of those who control The Revisionist Forum to maintain such strict rules of debate, which really just forestall the necessity of dialectic in this respect.
Postscript: I am sorry if this post turns out to be double line spaced, but I had to save it to Notepad, and this double spacing always happens, since my first attempt to post this was not successful for some reason.
Fixed by Webmaster
Here's a quotation from one of the bibles of European neofascism, Francis Parker Yockey's Imperium, on the Holocaust. Considering that this book was published in 1948, this was one of the first pieces of Revisionism to see print.
'Culture Distorter' is Yockeyesque jargon for 'Jew'. 'Culture Distorting Regime' refers to the Jewish-dominated (in Yockey's view) Roosevelt administration.
Check out that hilarious line 'Thousands of the people who had been killed published accounts of their experiences in these camps'. Yes, a problem that...
On Propaganda in America
Francis Parker Yockey
Because America had never come strongly under the impression of the Spanish cabinet-politics usages which became engrafted on the European spirit, the Culture-distorting regime was able to engage in propaganda attacks of an extremely repulsive and vile kind directed against the private lives and characters of European leaders who represented the 20th century world-outlook. These leaders were represented as having been panders, homosexuals, dope-fiends, and sadists.The propaganda was entirely free from any cultural basis, and was completely cynical with regard to facts. Precisely as the cinema-factories of Hollywood ground out lying plays and "newsreels," the propagandists of the press created what "facts" they needed. When the Japanese air forces attacked the American naval base at Pearl Harbor in December, 1941, the Culture-distorters did not know that Europe would take this occasion to retaliate against the undeclared war which the Culture-distorting regime in Washington had been waging against Europe. The regime therefore at once decided to exploit the Japanese attack as a European military measure. To this end, the propaganda organs at once spread the "news" that European planes with European pilots had participated in the attack, and had even led it. Although every capital ship in the base was sunk in this attack, the regime officially announced that only slight damage had been done. These fact-creations were as nothing, however, to the massive, post-war, "concentation-camp" propaganda of the Culture-distorting regime based in Washington.
This propaganda announced that 6,000,000 members of the Jewish Culture-Nation-State-Church-People-Race had been killed in European camps, as well as an indeterminate number of other people. The propaganda was on a world-wide scale, and was of a mendacity that was perhaps adapted to a uniformized mass, but was simply ing to discriminating Europeans. The propaganda was technically quite complete. "Photographs" were supplied in millions of copies. Thousands of the people who had been killed published accounts of their experiences in these camps. Hundreds of thousands more made fortunes in post-war black-markets. "Gas-chambers" that did not exist were photographed, and a "gasmobile" was invented to titillate the mechanically-minded.
We come now to the purpose of this propaganda which the regime gave to its mentally-enslaved masses. From the analysis in the 20th Century Political Outlook, the purpose is seen to be only one: it was designed to create a total war in the spiritual sense, transcending the limits of politics, against the Western Civilization. The American masses, both military and civilian, were given this mental poison in order to inflame them to the point where they would carry out without flinching the post-war annihilation-program. In particular: it was designed to support a war after the Second World War, a war of looting, hanging, and starvation against defenseless Europe.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 9 guests