Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

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
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

Postby Lamprecht » 9 months 1 week ago (Fri Feb 01, 2019 11:42 am)

Often times, Holocast revisionism is dismissed as a mere "conspiracy theory" - a slander which intended to suggest that it is an untenable position characterized by ridiculous, misconceived, paranoid, unfounded, outlandish, or irrational arguments. Calling a claim a "conspiracy theory" is dismissive and derogatory, as it is an implication that the claim is absurd or outlandish.

Personally, when I am debating the Holocaust narrative, I sometimes try to avoid being forced on the defensive by first accusing the Holocaust believers of pushing a "racist conspiracy theory" of Nazis secretly collaborating with one another to exterminate all of the Jews, using "code-words" and then destroying all evidence of this massive crime. Indeed, Swiss historian Philippe Burrin in his 1994 book "Hitler and the Jews: the Genesis of the Holocaust" admitted (page 13) that :
"There subsists no document bearing an extermination order signed by Hitler... In all likelihood, the orders were given verbally... here the traces are not only few and far between, but difficult to interpret."

The wartime documents, especially the Wannsee protocols, define the "Final Solution" as a policy of resettlement for Jews. Holocaust believers sometimes remark that the nazis used "Code words" or "euphemisms" and secretly meant "extermination" when they said "resettlement."


Of course, there is no question that individuals and groups "Conspire" together to achieve devious aims. If you search the news "arrested for conspiracy" you will find literally millions of news articles detailing criminals being arrested on various charges of conspiracy. No serious individual can deny that individuals "conspire" with others to achieve devious aims. In fact, it is so common for governments to have engaged in conspiracies that the term "False flag" was invented to describe them. Wikipedia lists many examples, and defines it as "a covert operation designed to deceive; the deception creates the appearance of a particular party, group, or nation being responsible for some activity, disguising the actual source of responsibility."

A conspiracy theory is defined as "A hypothesis alleging that the members of a coordinated group are, and/or were, secretly working together to commit illegal or wrongful actions including attempting to hide the existence of the group and its activities. In notable cases the hypothesis contradicts the mainstream explanation for historical or current events."

Screen Shot 2019-02-01 at 11.27.07 AM.png
Google Books: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=conspiracy+theory&year_start=1800&year_end=2020&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cconspiracy%20theory%3B%2Cc0
Screen Shot 2019-02-01 at 11.27.07 AM.png (154.88 KiB) Viewed 672 times


The use of the term "Conspiracy theory" first gained popularity starting in the 1950s, although it was used in a handful of instances before that, after the philosopher Sir Karl Popper popularized the expression in his article "The Conspiracy Theory of Society" (https://archive.is/CuXwt). Usage skyrocketed in the 1960s during the Warren Commission, which investigated the JFK assassination. In April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch using the phrase "Conspiracy Theories/theorists" and offered recommendations on how to discredit these claims. The dispatch was marked "psych" (short for "psychological operations" or disinformation) and "CS" for the CIA's "Clandestine Services" unit. In 1976 this dispatch was released due to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Here are some screenshots of the memo:

CIA-conspiracy.jpg
CIA-conspiracy.jpg (188.35 KiB) Viewed 672 times
CIA-conspiracy2.jpg
CIA-conspiracy2.jpg (120.67 KiB) Viewed 672 times


And an excerpt:

Code: Select all

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.
...
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the [conspiracy] question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the [official investigation of the relevant event] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by …  propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
...
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:

a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider.

b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent–and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism)...

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc.

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other.
...
f. As to charges that the Commission’s report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

g. Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” can always be explained in some natural way ...

5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission’s Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.



The dispatch suggested the following strategies to discredit dissenting opinions:

  • Claim it is impossible for so many people to be quiet about such a big conspiracy
  • Have people attack the claims and reference official reports
  • Claim that eyewitness testimony isn't reliable
  • Claim that it's old news and nothing new has emerged since the event took place
  • Simply ignore the claims unless there is a large discussion taking place
  • Accuse the theorists of ulterior motives (political or financial motivation)

It is not difficult to see these exact methods employed against Holocaust revisionists.


Professor Lance Dehaven-Smith published a book in 2013, proving that the term "Conspiracy Theory" was employed by the CIA in attempt to refute critics of the Warren Commission's report, and the term was heavily promoted in the mass media.


It doesn't take long to notice many of these same strategies being employed when debating believers in the Holocaust. The "Conspiracy theory" smear often implies that the allegation is inherently flawed, but what happens when a conspiracy theory is proven to be true? A theory is simply a supposition, a hypothesis or guess: and can be invalidated or proven upon further analysis. When something is claimed to be a "conspiracy theory" and yet turns out later to be true, is it no longer a conspiracy?

Cass Sunstein, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs admits:
Of course some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true. The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of “mind control.” Operation Northwoods, a rumored plan by the Department of Defense to simulate acts of terrorism and to blame them on Cuba, really was proposed by high-level officials...


The standard holocaust narrative is rife with conspiracy "theories." Some examples are:

  • Hitler's 1923 Munich Beer Hall Putsch; an attempt to overthrow the German government
  • the 1933 Reichstag fire; where Nazi general Halder testified at the NMT that Goering admitted to setting fire to the building and falsely blaming the communists
  • the 1934 Night of the Long Knives; a purge in which Hitler intended to secure absolute power over Germany
  • the 1938 Crystal Night (Kristallnacht) riots against the Jews
  • The 1939 Gleiwitz incident; where allegedly Nazis faked attacks on Germans to justify an invasion of Poland
  • The Katyn forest massacre, in which the USA helped Russia cover it up and blame it on Germany (https://www.independent.co.uk/life-styl ... 22111.html)


The "Conspiracy theory" attack is sleight of hand trick, intended to obfuscate the claim by forming in the mind of the reader a distortion of what revisionists actually believe. The "Holocaust denier" denigration works in a similar manner, and for many that word choice manages to trick people into thinking that revisionists deny all suffering of Jews during WWII. The casual reader will often say something like "How can someone deny the Holocaust? Haven't they seen the piles of bodies? They can go to the camps, they're still there in Europe!" which is totally misunderstanding the position: The "Deniers" claim hundreds of thousands perished in the camps, especially at the end of the war. So the piles of bodies (due to starvation, disease, allied bombing) aren't being denied, nor are the camps themselves. This rhetorical deception is used extensively by industry promoters, as are other inaccurate arguments such as claims that revisionists believe "all of the survivors/nazis lied" despite the fact that some Nazis did deny exterminations/gassing, as did some people interned in the camps.


How do you respond to accusations that you are pushing a "conspiracy theory" by "denying the Holocaust"??
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

Postby Hannover » 9 months 1 week ago (Fri Feb 01, 2019 2:17 pm)

Conspiracies are proven everyday in courts of law all over the world.

As it relates to the bogus "holocaust" I also suggest this thread:

'conspiracy theorists’ sane, accusers crazy & hostile':
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8806
exc.:
Indeed, it's interesting to see that those who accuse Revisionists of promoting a 'conspiracy theory' often promote truly bizarre conspiracy theories themselves, such as:

'The Germans executed a secret plan to exterminate every Jew they could get their hands on, the results were such that 6M Jews and huge numbers of gypsies and homosexuals were murdered by gassing and by being shot into enormous pits.'

Yet in short, there are no orders from Hitler, no authentic German documents, no records of funding, no human remains as alleged which would necessarily be available, and a gassing method which defies science.
and:
'Is the 'holocaust' story a conspiracy ?'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8155

- Hannover

No human remains of millions in allegedly known locations, no 'holocaust'.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

Postby Lamprecht » 9 months 1 week ago (Sun Feb 03, 2019 7:38 pm)

At the Nuremberg Military Tribunals (NMT) it was alleged that the Holocaust had been perpetrated with the greatest level of secrecy, and very few know it was even happening. According to US Judge Leon Powers "not over 100 people in all were informed" about the attempted extermination. As with many other conspiracy theories, the lack of physical evidence and the scarcity of alleged eyewitness testimonies were seen as convincing proof that the Nazis had something to hide and that they had successfully managed to do it.

Holocaust-Nuremberg-trials-April-1949-Judge-Leon-W-Powers.jpg
Holocaust-Nuremberg-trials-April-1949-Judge-Leon-W-Powers.jpg (762.35 KiB) Viewed 540 times
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

Re: Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

Postby Lamprecht » 6 months 1 week ago (Fri May 03, 2019 10:44 pm)

Good article By Ron Unz. He discusses how the term "Conspiracy Theory" is a slander used by the establishment to discredit its opponents. He cites a book by Prof. Lance deHaven-Smith, former president of the Florida Political Science Association, called "Conspiracy Theory in America" which shows that the CIA was responsible for the widespread adoption of the term "Conspiracy theory" as a political tool. This happened after the JFK assassination, but the book further explains that the philosophical groundwork was laid for this during WWII when "conspiratorial" explanations of historical events declined in respectability due to political changes. The article is just a 10 minute read:

American Pravda: How the CIA Invented “Conspiracy Theories”
http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda ... -theories/


Short excerpt:
Obviously, a large fraction of everything described by our government leaders or presented in the pages of our most respectable newspapers—from the 9/11 attacks to the most insignificant local case of petty urban corruption—could objectively be categorized as a “conspiracy theory” but such words are never applied. Instead, use of that highly loaded phrase is reserved for those theories, whether plausible or fanciful, that do not possess the endorsement stamp of establishmentarian approval.

Put another way, there are good “conspiracy theories” and bad “conspiracy theories,” with the former being the ones promoted by pundits on mainstream television shows and hence never described as such. I’ve sometimes joked with people that if ownership and control of our television stations and other major media outlets suddenly changed, the new information regime would require only a few weeks of concerted effort to totally invert all of our most famous “conspiracy theories” in the minds of the gullible American public.
The notion that nineteen Arabs armed with box-cutters hijacked several jetliners, easily evaded our NORAD air defenses, and reduced several landmark buildings to rubble would soon be universally ridiculed as the most preposterous “conspiracy theory” ever to have gone straight from the comic books into the minds of the mentally ill, easily surpassing the absurd “lone gunman” theory of the JFK assassination.

Even without such changes in media control, huge shifts in American public beliefs have frequently occurred in the recent past, merely on the basis of implied association. In the initial weeks and months following the 2001 attacks, every American media organ was enlisted to denounce and vilify Osama Bin Laden, the purported Islamicist master-mind, as our greatest national enemy, with his bearded visage endlessly appearing on television and in print, soon becoming one of the most recognizable faces in the world. But as the Bush Administration and its key media allies prepared a war against Iraq, the images of the Burning Towers were instead regularly juxtaposed with mustachioed photos of dictator Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden’s arch-enemy. As a consequence, by the time we attacked Iraq in 2003, polls revealed that some 70% of the American public believed that Saddam was personally involved in the destruction of our World Trade Center. By that date I don’t doubt that many millions of patriotic but low-information Americans would have angrily denounced and vilified as a “crazy conspiracy theorist” anyone with the temerity to suggest that Saddam had not been behind 9/11, despite almost no one in authority having ever explicitly made such a fallacious claim.



Related:

Media bias, control, & censorship / quotes of note
viewtopic.php?t=605
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

Lothario
Member
Member
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 2:52 pm

Re: Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

Postby Lothario » 6 months 4 days ago (Thu May 09, 2019 12:29 pm)

A few years ago Dutch State Television had an recurring item 'Complot or Not' (Conspiracy or Not) in which they showed one conspiracy theory for which they allege is no proof and one that is supposed to be proven. This one dealt with 9/11 and the holocaust. They try to explain why there are so many unsubstantiated theories regarding 9/11 and then compare that to the holocaust which, according to them, is a proven secret conspiracy on the highest level of the German leadership.

In the video it is admitted by the head of former Camp Vught that proof for the holocaust is scarce and that historians have to rely on 'letters, diaries, and eyewitness accounts'.

They are afraid of words and thoughts; words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home — all the more powerful because forbidden — terrify them ... They make frantic efforts to bar our thoughts and words; they are afraid of the workings of the human mind

User avatar
Horhug
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:01 am

Re: Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

Postby Horhug » 6 months 4 days ago (Fri May 10, 2019 12:47 am)

Informative posts Lamprecht.

George Soros was a student of Karl Popper at the LSE.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper

Soros named his Open Society Foundation after Popper's book The Open Society and Its Enemies.

Karl Popper is also godfather to Gerorge Soros.
https://larouchepac.com/20190110/part-i ... ave-nation

"Citing the arch British agent, and godfather of George Soros, Sir Karl Popper, Sunstein advocated direct government intervention in internet chat rooms in the form of “cognitive infiltration,”

Karl "Conspiracy Theory" / "Scientific Method" Popper's birth date has also been used as one of the kabbalistic roots for the creation of one of the three birth dates reported for the entity we have come to know as "9/11 Hijacker - Hani Hanjour" ...

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3356
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Responding to the "Conspiracy theory" slander // Holocaust believers as the true "Conspiracy theorists"

Postby Hektor » 6 months 1 day ago (Sun May 12, 2019 2:36 pm)

Lothario wrote:.....This one dealt with 9/11 and the holocaust. They try to explain why there are so many unsubstantiated theories regarding 9/11 and then compare that to the holocaust which, according to them, is a proven secret conspiracy on the highest level of the German leadership.

In the video it is admitted by the head of former Camp Vught that proof for the holocaust is scarce and that historians have to rely on 'letters, diaries, and eyewitness accounts'.



Given that Dutch is similar to Afrikaans, it is understandable to me.
I really think that should get English subtitles, but here my language skills may not go far enough.

The person in question is Jeroen van den Eijnde, he makes that statement between 7:00-8:00. Later, when it's pointed out that some people "deny the Holocaust", he has to resort to the "Where did they (the six million) go, if they haven't been gassed. That's kind of remarkable, since this is what laymen out of arguments usually resort to. From a historian one would expect some response like:"Well, we did a thorough investigation identifying the following murder weapons, here is the proof, we found the following evidence for dead bodies or their disposal". Funny, they don't do that.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests