Corm
New Member
Bullshit. If people didn't preach racism then it wouldn't exist -fucked up hate doesn't come from nowhere. So, stop it at the source.
-
Welcome, guest!
Why not take a moment to register an account?
If you already have an account, remember to Log In!
Revisionism in ireland (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter faurisson
- Start date
- Replies 95
- Views 9K
- Watchers 8
Bullshit. If people didn't preach racism then it wouldn't exist -fucked up hate doesn't come from nowhere. So, stop it at the source.
Corm
New Member
Faurisson -you are an incredibly simple minded person.
Your basic argument seems to be "REVISIONISM = GOOD".
That's perhaps the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It's akin to saying GRAMMAR IS GOOD or THINKING IS GOOD.
Revisionism is looking at the general perspective on historical events, weighing up evidence which says something different to what is the general perception, taking note of prejudices and vested interests in putting forth this version of history, and simply REVISING what we think to be true.
So obviously, this could be used in positive OR negative ways. It's not simply one or the other...sheesh.
Maybe you'll understand better if I put it in your own terms:
You fucking right-wingers always see everything in black & white -wake up, the world's not that simple.
Your basic argument seems to be "REVISIONISM = GOOD".
That's perhaps the stupidest thing I've ever heard. It's akin to saying GRAMMAR IS GOOD or THINKING IS GOOD.
Revisionism is looking at the general perspective on historical events, weighing up evidence which says something different to what is the general perception, taking note of prejudices and vested interests in putting forth this version of history, and simply REVISING what we think to be true.
So obviously, this could be used in positive OR negative ways. It's not simply one or the other...sheesh.
Maybe you'll understand better if I put it in your own terms:
You fucking right-wingers always see everything in black & white -wake up, the world's not that simple.
steve albino
New Member
"At one point I was about this much away from banning him for not responding to any of the points put to him - I don't pay money so that people can come on here and spout that kind of shite. If they're prepared to engage in something approximating debate, then fine. Otherwise they can fuck off back to Stormfront and talk to themselves there."
It's your site Pete but it would have been a fucking pity not to have had the opportunity to read Silo's and other people's (like yourself) posts. Well constructed, informative and clear. I'm sure a lot of the people reading this have some more concrete information for anything they come across in the future.
On top of that, anyone who had any doubts about the evasive and chickenshit nature of intellects like Faurisson has had them cleared up by now.
I figure give the man as much rope as he wants, it's a lesson in doublespeak. Banning him just gives him credibility.
Like I say, it's your site buddy.
It's your site Pete but it would have been a fucking pity not to have had the opportunity to read Silo's and other people's (like yourself) posts. Well constructed, informative and clear. I'm sure a lot of the people reading this have some more concrete information for anything they come across in the future.
On top of that, anyone who had any doubts about the evasive and chickenshit nature of intellects like Faurisson has had them cleared up by now.
I figure give the man as much rope as he wants, it's a lesson in doublespeak. Banning him just gives him credibility.
Like I say, it's your site buddy.
It's a thin line - yeah, it means people get a chance to directly address the points he raises. On the other hand, if he just kept banging on about the same stuff over and over and over i'd have had no choice.
no_exit
New Member
i really can't agree with you there, because it seems very fascist and thought-police-like to tell people what to think. so let people say what they want to say, as long as it doesn't lead to violence.
on the same note- france, which is very strict in its anti-racism laws is probably one of the most racist countries that exist. an extreme right-wing, fascist leader was able to gain 17 fucking percent of the presidential vote last year and even made it into the second round of the elections. trying to censor a particular group only makes the movement stronger.
nlgbbbblth
Well-Known Member
Bollocks to that.
Knacker
New Member
When I come across this faurisson lad, I'm going to kick him in the fuck.
steve albino
New Member
Le pen (the national front candidate) got around 18 percent in the first round of the presidential elections, which wasn't much of an increase on his usual score. To put that in context, the left wing was more split (between different parties) than ever before which meant that no one candidate got enough votes to make it through to the second round vote (only 2 candidates can get through) but as a whole the left did really well. Add to that the huge level of abstentions and the massive media campaign which harped on endlessly about crime and "increased lawlessness" (even though there were no real facts to back this claim up) and put the blame on the fact that there was a weak socialist government and it's very uncharismatic leader.
After the first round there were huge demonstrations involving more people than ever seen before against the FN and in the second round he was beaten 80% to 20%.
The FN weren't censored in the run up to the elections, the law in France means every candidate has equal media time and it's a law which is strictly observed.
It's true that there are large racial issues in France but the elections were more complicated than it seems and putting the FN result down to racism or increasing popularity of the extreme right is misleading. It only feeds the disinformation of people like Faurisson.
As for the banning of people - they just sentenced one of the friends of the real Faurisson to 6 months in prison for violating his parole on a previous case. His crime? He published a book denying the holocaust. As much as i detest these fuckers, putting somone in prison for publishing a book frightens the shit out of me.
Ah c'mon now - it's hardly the same thing.
It's not like I was going to ban him from the interweb or anything.
although now that i think of it.....
steve albino
New Member
ah no, I wasn't making any comparisons. it's just an example of a country using tactics worthy of fascists to "stop fascism".
Shit, am I banned now?
Shit, am I banned now?
Yes. Yes you are.
And the best part of it is, in 50 years time some assclowns will try to convince people it never happened....
- Thread starter
- #72
faurisson
New Member
As for that himmler speech, people who were there say that its a forgery.
David Irving is raised up by the media as a false posterboy. The main revisionists are people like butz and weber.
Read revisionist books before ye talk out yer asses.
as for yad vashem they are liars. jews lie and cretins like ye believe them.
yad vashem sell a totally different version of the holohoax than that peddled at the nuremberg show trials.
have you ever read the transcripts www.cwporter.com
Jews have dropped the human soap allegation although for decades they were burying soap in jewish cemetaries.
read www.ety.com/tell good introduction.
every retard thinks they have a right to talk about this but you dont until you have read revisionist books. The mainstream media is controlled by the jews and lies.
allied war crimes.
Allied War Crimes
The Allies were Genocidal, the Nazis were peaceful.
The Allies were such scum that the only option they had was to slander their victims, and to our eternal shame this continues to this day. Allied war crimes should be the subject of many websites.
These things would have been researched properly if we had universities staffed with real academics and not with scum.
I barely scratch the surface here.
One of the motivations for the invention of holocaust propaganda was to distract from real allied war crimes. The British Ministry of information sent out a letter bluntly discussing this to clergy and media people.
Sir,
I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter:
It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us.
But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for.
We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia, and Bessarabia only recently.
We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country.
We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them - and ourselves - from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past quarter of the past quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject.
Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of "Corpse Factory." the Mutilated Belgian Babies," and the "Crucified Canadians."
Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry.
Your expression of belief in such may convince others.
I am, sir, Your obedient servant
(signed)
H. Hewet, Assistant Secretary
There was even a postscript, as follows:
The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to the communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons. (Rozek, Edward J., Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland, John Wiley and Sons, NY. page 209-210)
The governments of the western world are criminal. Liberal democracy, which is actually totalitarian and oligarchic, in fact, is the most evil form of government the world has seen. The crimes of the communists and the Israelis are in fact the crimes of western liberals.
It reminds one of Voltaire’s comments about the Holy Roman Empire. Well our society is Orwellian, and our arrogant ‘moderns’ just a pack of retards, more backward than even the medieval witch burners.
See www.thebirdman.org for a good discussion of liberalism.
The Wehrmacht Bureau established that Polish military personnel and civilians committed numerous atrocities against ethnic Germans living within Poland's pre-war frontiers, and against German civilians and soldiers after the war commenced. On the Western Front, the Bureau determined that the British were guilty of plundering the French and Belgian populace. The famous Belgian cyclist Julian Vervaecke was among the civilians killed by British soldiers. The French likewise executed Belgian non-combatants, Jewish refugees, and prisoners of war.
Most of the existing records deal with atrocities committed on the Eastern Front by the Red Army and Soviet secret police (the NKVD). From the outset of the war in the East, the Bureau received reports of atrocities and wholesale violations of the internationally accepted rules of warfare. And as the Axis armies advanced, Soviet subjects came forward to reveal additional acts of barbarism perpetrated by the Soviet authorities.
POWs, whether Germans or Axis allies, were often shot out of hand, or shortly after they had been questioned. At Feodosiya, on the Black Sea, wounded soldiers were drenched with water and then left on the beaches to freeze to death. Captured soldiers were not merely executed, but frequently subjected to torture and mutilation first, then left where their remains could be easily discovered.
When the Red Army invaded German territory in late 1944, civilians who had been unable to flee before their advance were condemned to undergo a regime of ferocious brutality. At such towns as Goldap, Gumbinnen, and Nemmersdorf, even children were raped before being murdered by Russian soldiers (the book includes photographs of these deeds). Alexander Solzhenitsyn is cited by de Zayas for his testimony on this topic. The famous Russian author, who fought as a captain in the Red Army, confirmed that, "all of us knew very well that if the girls were German they could be raped and then shot. This was almost a combat distinction."
The Bureau also documented Soviet crimes against non-Germans. Chapters deal with Lvov, where thousands of civilians were found murdered in the prisons of the NKVD; Katyn; and Vinnitsa, a Ukrainian town where mass graves dating from 1936 were discovered.
(from Journal of Historical Review on De Zayas "The Wehrmacht war crimes bureau 1939-45)
Operation keelhaul was another example of liberal democratic evil hypocrisy. Nikolai Tolstoy has written well on the subject.
THE TREACHERY OF THE "LEAFLET OPERATION"
Under the Psychological Warfare Division, labeled "Leaflet Operation", the Rooseveltians dropped six billion leaflets over German lines, urging the Soviet Russians in German uniforms to surrender to the West, solemnly promising them good treatment, and denouncing "as lies the Nazi propaganda that Soviet nationals fighting or not fighting with the Germans would ultimately be forcibly repatriated to the Soviets if they ever surrendered or deserted to the Americans " (Julius Epstein, Operation Keelhaul, 1973, P. 28).
To the everlasting Anglo-American shame, the so-called lying Nazi propaganda was proven right, and the legend on the six billion leaflets a lie and a treachery! When General Vlasov with his army of some 850,000 Russians in German uniforms and other Russians had fought his way out of Czechoslovakia westward and on May 7, 1945, tried to surrender to the Americans, trusting the leaflets, they were disarmed, and forcibly delivered to Stalin, who on August 2, 1946,, hanged all the generals and sent the others to Siberia to slave labor camps, from which few returned alive.
Julius Epstein declares:
"There is no need to demonstrate that the forced repatriation of non-Vlasov men in German POW camps, taken over by the Americans and the British, was illegal and utterly inhuman, contrary to every rule of war. As for the forcible repatriation of Vlasov and his men, it must be considered illegal.. . " (p. 27)
The Western Allies also even more treacherously and brutally denied asylum to the Cossack contingents in the German Army, General von Pannwitz's division. The trusting Cossacks were so stunned by the treachery that they went on a hunger strike, "We prefer to starve rather than return to the Soviet Union" (Epstein, p. 79). They refused to board the trucks for their repatriation.:
"British soldiers with pistols and clubs began using their clubs, aiming at the heads of the prisoners. They first dragged the men out of the crowd and threw them into the trucks. The men jumped out. They beat them again and threw them onto the floor of the trucks. Again, they jumped out. The British then hit them with rifle butts until they lay unconscious and threw them like sacks of potatoes in the trucks. "(See Epstein, op. cit., p. 78)
Mass Rape
The Jewish propaganda Minister Ilya Ehrenburg kept broadcasting to the troops as they approached Germany:
"Kill. In Germany, nothing is guiltless. Neither the living nor the yet unborn.... Crush forever in its den the fascist beasts. Violently break the racial pride of the German woman. Ravish them as booty. Kill, you gallant Red soldiers I,,
David Irving is raised up by the media as a false posterboy. The main revisionists are people like butz and weber.
Read revisionist books before ye talk out yer asses.
as for yad vashem they are liars. jews lie and cretins like ye believe them.
yad vashem sell a totally different version of the holohoax than that peddled at the nuremberg show trials.
have you ever read the transcripts www.cwporter.com
Jews have dropped the human soap allegation although for decades they were burying soap in jewish cemetaries.
read www.ety.com/tell good introduction.
every retard thinks they have a right to talk about this but you dont until you have read revisionist books. The mainstream media is controlled by the jews and lies.
allied war crimes.
Allied War Crimes
The Allies were Genocidal, the Nazis were peaceful.
The Allies were such scum that the only option they had was to slander their victims, and to our eternal shame this continues to this day. Allied war crimes should be the subject of many websites.
These things would have been researched properly if we had universities staffed with real academics and not with scum.
I barely scratch the surface here.
One of the motivations for the invention of holocaust propaganda was to distract from real allied war crimes. The British Ministry of information sent out a letter bluntly discussing this to clergy and media people.
Sir,
I am directed by the Ministry to send you the following circular letter:
It is often the duty of the good citizens and of the pious Christians to turn a blind eye on the peculiarities of those associated with us.
But the time comes when such peculiarities, while still denied in public, must be taken into account when action by us is called for.
We know the methods of rule employed by the Bolshevik dictator in Russia itself from, for example, the writing and speeches of the Prime Minister himself during the last twenty years. We know how the Red Army behaved in Poland in 1920 and in Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Galicia, and Bessarabia only recently.
We must, therefore, take into account how the Red Army will certainly behave when it overruns Central Europe. Unless precautions are taken, the obviously inevitable horrors which will result will throw an undue strain on public opinion in this country.
We cannot reform the Bolsheviks but we can do our best to save them - and ourselves - from the consequences of their acts. The disclosures of the past quarter of the past quarter of a century will render mere denials unconvincing. The only alternative to denial is to distract public attention from the whole subject.
Unfortunately the public is no longer so susceptible as in the days of "Corpse Factory." the Mutilated Belgian Babies," and the "Crucified Canadians."
Your cooperation is therefore earnestly sought to distract public attention from the doings of the Red Army by your wholehearted support of various charges against the Germans and Japanese which have been and will be put into circulation by the Ministry.
Your expression of belief in such may convince others.
I am, sir, Your obedient servant
(signed)
H. Hewet, Assistant Secretary
There was even a postscript, as follows:
The Ministry can enter into no correspondence of any kind with regard to the communication which should only be disclosed to responsible persons. (Rozek, Edward J., Allied Wartime Diplomacy: A Pattern in Poland, John Wiley and Sons, NY. page 209-210)
The governments of the western world are criminal. Liberal democracy, which is actually totalitarian and oligarchic, in fact, is the most evil form of government the world has seen. The crimes of the communists and the Israelis are in fact the crimes of western liberals.
It reminds one of Voltaire’s comments about the Holy Roman Empire. Well our society is Orwellian, and our arrogant ‘moderns’ just a pack of retards, more backward than even the medieval witch burners.
See www.thebirdman.org for a good discussion of liberalism.
The Wehrmacht Bureau established that Polish military personnel and civilians committed numerous atrocities against ethnic Germans living within Poland's pre-war frontiers, and against German civilians and soldiers after the war commenced. On the Western Front, the Bureau determined that the British were guilty of plundering the French and Belgian populace. The famous Belgian cyclist Julian Vervaecke was among the civilians killed by British soldiers. The French likewise executed Belgian non-combatants, Jewish refugees, and prisoners of war.
Most of the existing records deal with atrocities committed on the Eastern Front by the Red Army and Soviet secret police (the NKVD). From the outset of the war in the East, the Bureau received reports of atrocities and wholesale violations of the internationally accepted rules of warfare. And as the Axis armies advanced, Soviet subjects came forward to reveal additional acts of barbarism perpetrated by the Soviet authorities.
POWs, whether Germans or Axis allies, were often shot out of hand, or shortly after they had been questioned. At Feodosiya, on the Black Sea, wounded soldiers were drenched with water and then left on the beaches to freeze to death. Captured soldiers were not merely executed, but frequently subjected to torture and mutilation first, then left where their remains could be easily discovered.
When the Red Army invaded German territory in late 1944, civilians who had been unable to flee before their advance were condemned to undergo a regime of ferocious brutality. At such towns as Goldap, Gumbinnen, and Nemmersdorf, even children were raped before being murdered by Russian soldiers (the book includes photographs of these deeds). Alexander Solzhenitsyn is cited by de Zayas for his testimony on this topic. The famous Russian author, who fought as a captain in the Red Army, confirmed that, "all of us knew very well that if the girls were German they could be raped and then shot. This was almost a combat distinction."
The Bureau also documented Soviet crimes against non-Germans. Chapters deal with Lvov, where thousands of civilians were found murdered in the prisons of the NKVD; Katyn; and Vinnitsa, a Ukrainian town where mass graves dating from 1936 were discovered.
(from Journal of Historical Review on De Zayas "The Wehrmacht war crimes bureau 1939-45)
Operation keelhaul was another example of liberal democratic evil hypocrisy. Nikolai Tolstoy has written well on the subject.
THE TREACHERY OF THE "LEAFLET OPERATION"
Under the Psychological Warfare Division, labeled "Leaflet Operation", the Rooseveltians dropped six billion leaflets over German lines, urging the Soviet Russians in German uniforms to surrender to the West, solemnly promising them good treatment, and denouncing "as lies the Nazi propaganda that Soviet nationals fighting or not fighting with the Germans would ultimately be forcibly repatriated to the Soviets if they ever surrendered or deserted to the Americans " (Julius Epstein, Operation Keelhaul, 1973, P. 28).
To the everlasting Anglo-American shame, the so-called lying Nazi propaganda was proven right, and the legend on the six billion leaflets a lie and a treachery! When General Vlasov with his army of some 850,000 Russians in German uniforms and other Russians had fought his way out of Czechoslovakia westward and on May 7, 1945, tried to surrender to the Americans, trusting the leaflets, they were disarmed, and forcibly delivered to Stalin, who on August 2, 1946,, hanged all the generals and sent the others to Siberia to slave labor camps, from which few returned alive.
Julius Epstein declares:
"There is no need to demonstrate that the forced repatriation of non-Vlasov men in German POW camps, taken over by the Americans and the British, was illegal and utterly inhuman, contrary to every rule of war. As for the forcible repatriation of Vlasov and his men, it must be considered illegal.. . " (p. 27)
The Western Allies also even more treacherously and brutally denied asylum to the Cossack contingents in the German Army, General von Pannwitz's division. The trusting Cossacks were so stunned by the treachery that they went on a hunger strike, "We prefer to starve rather than return to the Soviet Union" (Epstein, p. 79). They refused to board the trucks for their repatriation.:
"British soldiers with pistols and clubs began using their clubs, aiming at the heads of the prisoners. They first dragged the men out of the crowd and threw them into the trucks. The men jumped out. They beat them again and threw them onto the floor of the trucks. Again, they jumped out. The British then hit them with rifle butts until they lay unconscious and threw them like sacks of potatoes in the trucks. "(See Epstein, op. cit., p. 78)
Mass Rape
The Jewish propaganda Minister Ilya Ehrenburg kept broadcasting to the troops as they approached Germany:
"Kill. In Germany, nothing is guiltless. Neither the living nor the yet unborn.... Crush forever in its den the fascist beasts. Violently break the racial pride of the German woman. Ravish them as booty. Kill, you gallant Red soldiers I,,
ElderLemon
New Member
"jews lie and cretins like ye believe them."
Funny how one small sentence can undermine the credibility of the next one hundred sentences. But anyway...
"The Allies were Genocidal, the Nazis were peaceful."
If the allies were Genocidal, why didn't they kill off the German people in 1945? That is, after all, the meaning of Genocide...
"These things would have been researched properly if we had universities staffed with real academics and not with scum."
I won't even bother...
As for that letter - so what? Wow, there was propaganda during the war - everyone knows that. Where does it say "Let's make up a story about six million jews dying"? For a start, if that's what they wanted to do, why not invent a story with 60,000 jews dying which would have the desired effect on public opinion and be much harder to disprove, rather than one with 6,000,000 jews dying. Anyway, the poor level of English used in that letter(supposedly a top-secret communique) gives me doubts about its authenticity.
"POWs, whether Germans or Axis allies, were often shot out of hand, or shortly after they had been questioned. At Feodosiya, on the Black Sea, wounded soldiers were drenched with water and then left on the beaches to freeze to death. Captured soldiers were not merely executed, but frequently subjected to torture and mutilation first, then left where their remains could be easily discovered." (and so on for the next five or six paragraphs)
These are war atrocities. There are no angels in war. Rape, mutilation, torture and mass murder are all features of any conflict, sometimes sanctioned by a higher authority as part of a campaign of terror, sometimes purely spontaneous acts. If the allies were capable of such acts, why shouldn't the Nazis, who had an over-riding ideological conviction that the world would be better off without inferior beings (ie the jews and others), be capable of the holocaust?
Funny how one small sentence can undermine the credibility of the next one hundred sentences. But anyway...
"The Allies were Genocidal, the Nazis were peaceful."
If the allies were Genocidal, why didn't they kill off the German people in 1945? That is, after all, the meaning of Genocide...
"These things would have been researched properly if we had universities staffed with real academics and not with scum."
I won't even bother...
As for that letter - so what? Wow, there was propaganda during the war - everyone knows that. Where does it say "Let's make up a story about six million jews dying"? For a start, if that's what they wanted to do, why not invent a story with 60,000 jews dying which would have the desired effect on public opinion and be much harder to disprove, rather than one with 6,000,000 jews dying. Anyway, the poor level of English used in that letter(supposedly a top-secret communique) gives me doubts about its authenticity.
"POWs, whether Germans or Axis allies, were often shot out of hand, or shortly after they had been questioned. At Feodosiya, on the Black Sea, wounded soldiers were drenched with water and then left on the beaches to freeze to death. Captured soldiers were not merely executed, but frequently subjected to torture and mutilation first, then left where their remains could be easily discovered." (and so on for the next five or six paragraphs)
These are war atrocities. There are no angels in war. Rape, mutilation, torture and mass murder are all features of any conflict, sometimes sanctioned by a higher authority as part of a campaign of terror, sometimes purely spontaneous acts. If the allies were capable of such acts, why shouldn't the Nazis, who had an over-riding ideological conviction that the world would be better off without inferior beings (ie the jews and others), be capable of the holocaust?
Proof? Evidence? Examples?
How convenient.
Interesting debating tactic you've got there, Brian. This might go some way to explain why no academics have "invited" you to debate with them.
Proof? Evidence? Examples?
And this is evidence of what, exactly? That camp survivors believed what they were told by their guards, and subsequently treated what they believed to possibly be human remains with due respect?
What would you have them do with it? Wash?
I prefer to read historical analysis written by people who at least try to disguise their personal prejudices.
This page http://www.ety.com/tell/books/jgjewstats/07.htm is particularly pathetic - he cites the reunion of five generations of one family as "proof" that 6 million jews all emigrated. Fantastic.
Amazing. I heard it was 12 foot lizards, but there you go.
You really have no idea how ridiculous you sound, do you? This isn't 1945, and nobody here is blindly swallowing Allied propaganda. I think you'll find that people are mature and intelligent enough to realise that - shock! horror! - bad things happened in the war on both sides! Nobody here will try to justify the levelling of Dresden, for example.
I fail to see how this negates a deliberate attempt at wiping out an entire race.
OK apart from that letter, i'm starting to lose track of which are your words and which bits you're quoting from other sources. Please try to keep your ramblings at least semi-coherent.
A little context might help - I have no idea who "H Hewet" is, or what department of what government in what country he worked in, or in what year. But I for one would not be in the least bit surprised to know that governments would use the acts of their former enemies as propaganda. It doesn't mean the acts they refer to never happened.
Your opinion. Irrelevant.
Dude - you're using records from the fucking Wehrmacht War Crimes Bureau as supporting evidence? Am i the only one who finds this even slightly ironic?
I'll try to explain this again - in war, innocent people get killed. This is wrong. It is indefensible. This is why we have war crimes investigations. And i'll ask this again - how does this affect the attempted massacre of an entire race?
Moral relativism. Irrelevant.
How does this disprove the holocaust?
And this disproves the Holocaust how, exactly?
Or do two wrongs make a right?
1. Minister? Where. Ehrenburg was a Russian born jewish writer, not a Minister.
2. Imagine someone from Cork popped up and started spewing semi-literate racist bullshit - would this make all Cork people semi-literate racist bullshit artists?
3. From http://mars.vnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/berlin/lectures/20CityatWar2.html
rape the drummer
New Member
hey guys according to faurisson, the western governments are....bad!!!! oh my god i never would have guessed! i thought george dubya was a saint but now....well.........
steve albino
New Member
You posted this as a reference a few days back and then today this:
"David Irving is raised up by the media as a false posterboy. The main revisionists are people like butz and weber."
So a few days back Irving was your recommendation for all poor ignorant saps and today he's an unwitting media posterboy when you don't agree with everything he says, especially if he's revising his revisions.
Hint: before you write, read back over what you said. If you're going to change your mind about your own sources so easily then at least justify it. Otherwise the list of unanswered questions is going to get very long.
What's "the left"? C'mon, at least have a go...
Bad_Penny_Model
New Member
Sometimes i've sat through history wondering about how exactly some people belive whole heartedly that the nazis were the "good guys".
I really don't think faurisson is for "revisionism" otherwise why would he be posting on a "white nationalist" website like stromfront?
I've done a project on The consevative party of britain's policy on eugenics prior to world war 2 and on Britain's involvment in the formation of israel (zionism and arab nationalism) and not once have i ever had to pay attention to Racist white nationalist propaganda. I tryed to approach the topics objectively and fair, which is quite hard seeing as the debate on israel can leave you split in two. I don't hate the jews or the arab nationalists. h have their claims and basically America decided to back the hardliner right wing parties in israel. I have met many jews who are actually afraid of, and disgusted with the ultra orthodox views of some of their people. This is much to the same way we here in Ireland do not like to be associated with some of the republican and nationalist terrorists most notably the IRA.
Two more points and i think i'll be finished.
Ok basically you belive that the nazis were the good guys. I'm sorry but there is only a few reasons why you would think this.
A) you are a white supremecist(nationalist whatever)
B) you've ignored many history books in order to make sure your troubled mind does not get clouded by theories which may disagree with you views
C) possibly like many people in germany in the thirties you are unemployed, middle class, and seek acceptencem, and power. Nazi's were all powerful and once you were caught up in it, it was hard to resist the promises and beliefs (especially for the fatherland). Most intellectuals fled the country, seeing the nazis for what they truly were. Unfortunatly people like yourself would have stayed seeing as life has improved now that the Nazis were "taking care of things".
And Finally if the Allies were genocidal and the nazis were good, why in fact did they not invade western europe and russia?
If the nazis were the good guys why did'nt the local populations of europe welcome their kind ideas and easy going politics.
The only places in europe that accepted nazi rule were places like lithuania who believed foolishly that nazi rule would provide freedom from the tyrant stalin. They were soon proved wrong.
You my friend, and not us, are a victim of propaganda(not to mention your own arrogance aswell)
Just two points i'd like to
I really don't think faurisson is for "revisionism" otherwise why would he be posting on a "white nationalist" website like stromfront?
I've done a project on The consevative party of britain's policy on eugenics prior to world war 2 and on Britain's involvment in the formation of israel (zionism and arab nationalism) and not once have i ever had to pay attention to Racist white nationalist propaganda. I tryed to approach the topics objectively and fair, which is quite hard seeing as the debate on israel can leave you split in two. I don't hate the jews or the arab nationalists. h have their claims and basically America decided to back the hardliner right wing parties in israel. I have met many jews who are actually afraid of, and disgusted with the ultra orthodox views of some of their people. This is much to the same way we here in Ireland do not like to be associated with some of the republican and nationalist terrorists most notably the IRA.
Two more points and i think i'll be finished.
Ok basically you belive that the nazis were the good guys. I'm sorry but there is only a few reasons why you would think this.
A) you are a white supremecist(nationalist whatever)
B) you've ignored many history books in order to make sure your troubled mind does not get clouded by theories which may disagree with you views
C) possibly like many people in germany in the thirties you are unemployed, middle class, and seek acceptencem, and power. Nazi's were all powerful and once you were caught up in it, it was hard to resist the promises and beliefs (especially for the fatherland). Most intellectuals fled the country, seeing the nazis for what they truly were. Unfortunatly people like yourself would have stayed seeing as life has improved now that the Nazis were "taking care of things".
And Finally if the Allies were genocidal and the nazis were good, why in fact did they not invade western europe and russia?
If the nazis were the good guys why did'nt the local populations of europe welcome their kind ideas and easy going politics.
The only places in europe that accepted nazi rule were places like lithuania who believed foolishly that nazi rule would provide freedom from the tyrant stalin. They were soon proved wrong.
You my friend, and not us, are a victim of propaganda(not to mention your own arrogance aswell)
Just two points i'd like to
LuvChild
New Member
Yes??
Do go on...
silo
Active Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2001
- Messages
- 1,890
i'm not going to write another long post, but i just wanted to bring up a sort of tangential contextualising point, along the lines of the in-a-war-nobody-is-innocent argument. i only recently found this out, but it gives an idea of the situation.
in the early days of world war 2, before america came in on the allied side, but after france had been invaded and split into occupied (north) and collaborationist (south, 'vichy'), churchill faced a decision about what to do with france; the south could easily fight with the nazis against britain if there was an invasion. so he bombed the vichy france navy while it was in port, killing an estimated 2,000 sailors. he then didn't tell de gaulle and the other northern french leaders that he was planning to evacuate british forces at dunkirk. when they found out, there were gun battles between northern french forces and british forces with the germans simply looking on; casualties unknown.
they're war crimes, by the way. so, taking these conveniently-buried facts (you won't find the daily mail going on about it, for example) and marrying them to a bit of historical invention, it's pretty easy to see how a determined person with a set of ideological blinkers on and a tenuous grasp of reality could come up with a holocaust denial theory.
the first casualty when war comes is the truth, n' all that.
in the early days of world war 2, before america came in on the allied side, but after france had been invaded and split into occupied (north) and collaborationist (south, 'vichy'), churchill faced a decision about what to do with france; the south could easily fight with the nazis against britain if there was an invasion. so he bombed the vichy france navy while it was in port, killing an estimated 2,000 sailors. he then didn't tell de gaulle and the other northern french leaders that he was planning to evacuate british forces at dunkirk. when they found out, there were gun battles between northern french forces and british forces with the germans simply looking on; casualties unknown.
they're war crimes, by the way. so, taking these conveniently-buried facts (you won't find the daily mail going on about it, for example) and marrying them to a bit of historical invention, it's pretty easy to see how a determined person with a set of ideological blinkers on and a tenuous grasp of reality could come up with a holocaust denial theory.
the first casualty when war comes is the truth, n' all that.
silo
Active Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2001
- Messages
- 1,890
sorry, actually the estimated casualties were just below 1,300, according to this site. it happened at mers-el-kebir in morocco on the 3rd of july 1940.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWmers.htm
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2WWmers.htm
Users who are viewing this thread
Activity
So far there's no one here
21 Day Calendar
Similar threads
Support thumped.com
Support thumped.com and upgrade your account
Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...
Upgrade now
