PDA

View Full Version : @ the Revisionist Forum


Keystone
02-05-2007, 11:26 PM
Don't you people, on both sides, ever tire of this?

Sulla the Dictator
02-06-2007, 12:04 AM
Don't you people, on both sides, ever tire of this?

I've taken a break.

Micaelis
02-06-2007, 12:26 AM
We must always ask, "Why is our history being revised?"

Keystone
02-06-2007, 12:33 AM
We must always ask, "Why is our history being revised?"
It's "How mant dead Jews are there?" Who cares after awhile? It's ghoulish.

Fitz
02-06-2007, 12:46 AM
I think we talk about it and argue about it while we still can. I'd rather they start digging up the (millions of?) bodies if they know where any are located, and let science take over the debate. But to the true believers of the holocaust this would be the equivalent of looking for Jesus' mortal remains...sacrilege.

Keystone
02-06-2007, 12:49 AM
I think we talk about it and argue about it while we still can. I'd rather they start digging up the (millions of?) bodies if they know where any are located. Let science take over the debate.
I'm all for that. It's a crime scene, yes? Folks have been executed over it.
The questions would be answered.
But to the true believers of the holocaust this would be the equivalent of looking for Jesus' mortal remains...sacrilege.
I agree.

Burrhus
02-06-2007, 12:53 AM
I'm all for that. It's a crime scene, yes? Folks have been executed over it.
The questions would be answered.

I agree.

Whether or not it is a crime scene is precisely what is in dispute. Those who say it is control the scene. But they wont do the forensic work needed.

Cause for scepticism at least.

Keystone
02-06-2007, 01:06 AM
Whether or not it is a crime scene is precisely what is in dispute.
No no. This is where all this foolishness gets started. The standard tale says millions of Jews are gassed and then buried or burned; buried but dug up and burned, etc...If this were true, it would be a crime...at least to most of us...right? Politics aside. At least a very big assertion. A claim or assertion to be investigated. Exhume the remains of these individuals (it hasn't been that long...thousands of tons of ash or bone is still there) and we'll have our answer. Not too hard by today's technology.
Those who say it is control the scene. But they wont do the forensic work needed.

Cause for scepticism at least.
I realize that.

Kriger
02-06-2007, 03:09 AM
According to their political leaders, everyone in the world is supposed to do, say, and think as they tell us to, or else....

Of all the histories in time, the Holocaust history is their history, and we better believe it, or else.

This has a tendency to piss me off, and so I contribute other histories that surround the official version of Holocaust history to show there is far more to history than the "Holocaust".

As for the dead bodies, they are the ones claiming this number without the bodies, yet we are supposed to tell them where all these bodies are.

Doncha love the "vaild" reasoning?

Hell, question any of their so-called facts and at the least you will be ridiculed, slandered, be threatened with a lawsuit, and recommended for some type of re-education program, which reeks of a totalitarian dictatorship to me.

This is the USA, not the "Promised Land".

Sulla the Dictator
02-06-2007, 04:22 AM
I'm all for that. It's a crime scene, yes? Folks have been executed over it.
The questions would be answered.


Its nonsensical and unnecessary. Do you need to sign a permission slip for me to dig up your dead relatives if I deny they actually died?

Or do you say, "I could care less what that crackpot thinks. I know so and so is dead."

So it is with Holocaust denial. These people aren't credible, and they lie so often as to make their demands a joke. What exactly is there to be gained by tearing up historical sites to suit lunatics?

Sulla the Dictator
02-06-2007, 04:24 AM
I think we talk about it and argue about it while we still can. I'd rather they start digging up the (millions of?) bodies if they know where any are located, and let science take over the debate. But to the true believers of the holocaust this would be the equivalent of looking for Jesus' mortal remains...sacrilege.

Let me guess. Each excavation team would need to have two deniers present to judge the excavation and make sure that the Conspiracy isn't faking it. So you, the plumber, and Burrhus, the janitor can look over the shoulder of historians and professors.

il ragno
02-06-2007, 04:35 AM
Let me guess. Each excavation team would need to have two deniers present to judge the excavation and make sure that the Conspiracy isn't faking it. So you, the plumber, and Burrhus, the janitor can look over the shoulder of historians and professors.


Well, not the historians and professors who question the official version, of course. Just the 'legitimate' scholars.

Sulla the Dictator
02-06-2007, 04:39 AM
Well, not the historians and professors who question the official version, of course. Just the 'legitimate' scholars.

Oh but of course. Maybe we should have those 'historians' and 'professors' who question the official version put in charge of entire DEPARTMENTS doing these excavations. Like the English professor who denies the Holocaust in Newark Community College. Lets have him oversee the Oxford History department.

il ragno
02-06-2007, 04:43 AM
How about the historian David Irving? He was certanly accepted as a historian, and one with better access to better source materials than most - until the fateful eve of the publication date of the Goebbels Diaries in 1996, when the decision was made to join hands and render him a non-person.

blueice2hotsea
02-06-2007, 06:03 AM
I wouldn't count on todays 'scientists' to bring clarity to the forensic investigations.

Sulla the Dictator
02-06-2007, 06:16 AM
How about the historian David Irving? He was certanly accepted as a historian, and one with better access to better source materials than most - until the fateful eve of the publication date of the Goebbels Diaries in 1996, when the decision was made to join hands and render him a non-person.

You mean David Irving, the guy who says a quarter million people died at Dresden even after he learned that his source for that figure was a fraud?

I thought you folks didn't 'believe' in Irving anymore ever since he said that around four million Jews died in the Holocaust, and acknowledged the existance of gas vans.

Keystone
02-06-2007, 09:54 PM
Its nonsensical and unnecessary. Do you need to sign a permission slip for me to dig up your dead relatives if I deny they actually died?
They weren't allegedly murdered and burnt. This is where these looooong pissing matches get started. All emotional.
My solution is sensible and necessary, if you'd like to solve this once and for all.

Sulla the Dictator
02-06-2007, 10:16 PM
They weren't allegedly murdered and burnt.


Ok. If they were, you would sign a permission slip for me to dig them up to satisfy MY 'curiosity'?


This is where these looooong pissing matches get started. All emotional.


LOL There's nothing emotional about it, its logic. What is the difference between a burial site and the Allied cemetary at Normandy? Don't you think that before Holocaust deniers have any right to call for such an outrage, they should have to present some kind of evidence to justify it?

EVIDENCE that such and such a part of the Holocaust was fabricated? Proof that so and so fabricated such and such?


My solution is sensible and necessary, if you'd like to solve this once and for all.

There's no mystery or problem to solve.

Keystone
02-06-2007, 10:37 PM
Ok. If they were, you would sign a permission slip for me to dig them up to satisfy MY 'curiosity'?
I've no idea where your going with this. My relatives don't need digging up. None of them were allegedly murdered or burned out of my sight. I went to their funerals. Christ.
LOL There's nothing emotional about it, its logic. What is the difference between a burial site and the Allied cemetary at Normandy? Don't you think that before Holocaust deniers have any right to call for such an outrage, they should have to present some kind of evidence to justify it?
Sure it's emotional. "How dare you excavate those bodies from a crime scene! They're all down there, you bastard!"
EVIDENCE that such and such a part of the Holocaust was fabricated? Proof that so and so fabricated such and such?
When did I say anything was fabricated? All the facts aren't known and can't be until there's an exhumation of the millions of pounds of bone and ash.

I'm not denying, I'm skeptical of the accepted story. (Which I guess is considered the same thing in these debates)
There's no mystery or problem to solve.
As you like it.

Sulla the Dictator
02-06-2007, 10:48 PM
I've no idea where your going with this. My relatives don't need digging up. None of them were allegedly murdered or burned out of my sight. I went to their funerals. Christ.


My point, Keystone, is that there are living people who have relatives who died in the Holocaust. There is no difference between my example and what you're asking.


Sure it's emotional. "How dare you excavate those bodies from a crime scene! They're all down there, you bastard!"


Not by historians. Historians would say, "Why should we have tractors tearing up historical grave sites? For what purpose?"


When did I say anything was fabricated? All the facts aren't known and can't be until there's an exhumation of the millions of pounds of bone and ash.


What facts aren't known?


I'm not denying, I'm skeptical of the accepted story. (Which I guess is considered the same thing in these debates)


What is there to be skeptical about, since we agree nothing was fabricated?

Keystone
02-06-2007, 11:00 PM
My point, Keystone, is that there are living people who have relatives who died in the Holocaust. There is no difference between my example and what you're asking.
There is a difference. The claims for the Holocaust are huge. The greatest human tragedy in history, for some. Millions killed but unaccounted for. Except for the above ground fatalities, there's no evidence, except conflicting testimony. Again, this is a huge claim.

Some of the stories of survivors and alleged eye-witnesses just don't ring true with me.
That's why I'd like to see proof. I'm not a monster for asking for it.

I now turn you over to the regulars, because that's my stand and I'm sticking to it. Holocaust over for me.

shanemac
02-07-2007, 11:51 PM
I quite enjoy reading about the hollowcost... it's a great work of fiction.

Sulla the Dictator
02-08-2007, 05:15 AM
There is a difference. The claims for the Holocaust are huge.


Scale has nothing to do with the principle of a thing.


The greatest human tragedy in history, for some. Millions killed but unaccounted for. Except for the above ground fatalities, there's no evidence, except conflicting testimony. Again, this is a huge claim.


There are millions of missing people, confessions of those responsible, testimonies of those victimized, documents of those in charge, and of course there are the bodies, the camps, and the photographs. Its interesting that people saw this coming. Eisenhower had Germans bury the dead because he didn't want GERMANS claiming this was Allied propaganda. I doubt he would have thought that AMERICANS would one day be fantasizing about the benevolence of Adolf Hitler.


Some of the stories of survivors and alleged eye-witnesses just don't ring true with me.


How many? Five? six? TEN? There are thousands of survivors out of MILLIONS of missing people. And you can count on your hands how many seem 'exaggerated' testimonies.


That's why I'd like to see proof. I'm not a monster for asking for it.


(Shrug) I suppose its in the eye of the beholder. One must ask what credible issue has been raised by white supremacists or Iranian theocrats in order to raise 'doubt'.