ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags holocaust denial

Closed Thread
Old 16th June 2010, 03:40 AM   #4281
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,094
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Predictably my fine anti-Anglo rant was AH-ed. From this rant this holocaust related quote:

Yes, it was the British army who put civilian boers of Dutch descent in concentration camps, a fine British invention. Here Lillie van Zuyl. Where have we seen these pictures before?
Tell me something new. Its commonly known in the UK that British invented the concentration camp. They did a lot of other bad stuff in WWII also, like the bombing of Dresden. The British did some pretty nasty stuff in the name of empire around the world.

But thats not the OP. Feel free to start a new topic on this subject.

Point is your arguments will never win because its obvious from your posts that you are completely biased on the subject due to sad and misplaced philosophies. You are not driven by an interest in the subject or by the need to understand the historical truth. You are driven purely on your sad ideology.

And so you position is completely untenable and irrelevant to the history of the Holocaust.

I've often wondered about what drives this far right point of view in an individual. Its mean and nasty and stinks. One day the human race will grow up and become civilised and this stuff will be a strange blot in our often disastrous history.

Last edited by BadBoy; 16th June 2010 at 05:20 AM.
BadBoy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2010, 07:29 AM   #4282
carlitos
"mįs divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,640
Respectfully, I don't think it's helpful to characterize an unrepentant Neo-Nazi as "far right." Just my 2 cents.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2010, 11:49 AM   #4283
TSR
Illuminator
 
TSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,783
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
TSR is asking rethorical questions he is perfectly able to answer for himself. Exactly the same pictures like in the German concentration camps.
.
Yes, were read that lie when you first told it. Show were this specific picture was attributed to the Holocaust, or be caught in yet another lie.
.
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
And again: I am not here to defend the actions of the Germans, just battling the Anglo exaggerations and lies culminating in the 'holocaust' story.
.
Exaggerations like your lie that simply disputing the number of dead is outlawed anywhere?

Or that 9 is "most of" 27?

Seems it is the deniers that are exaggerating and lying.
.
TSR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2010, 11:57 AM   #4284
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,267
Funny how bigotry and totally irrational thought go together so often.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2010, 01:55 PM   #4285
Toke
Godless Socialist
 
Toke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Denmark
Posts: 8,141
I have just read a Danish journalists account of his stay in Neuengamme, he were arrested in 1944.
There is no mass extermination in that camp, just people being brutalised and worked to death. But it does give the impression of a system where genocide would be perfectly possible.
__________________
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. -K. Marx.

Toke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th June 2010, 06:24 PM   #4286
Arisia
Graduate Poster
 
Arisia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: 26.2 from Boston
Posts: 1,002
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Inevitable? Really? It is true, they do not explicitly support Hitler, since they believe the 'evil Germans holocaust' story. But we surely both agree that multiculturalism would never have happened under Hitler (so much for your 'inevitable changes'). And when you carefully read between the lines in the Daily Mail article you have to admit that these veterans hate multiculturalism. Meaning that their position is much closer to Hitler than the current British establishment.

Have you any idea how popular Hitler was until the very end? And how deeply hated/despised modern western politicians are by their own voters?
I have a distinct feeling they 'do not explicitly support Hitler' not only because of the Holocaust, but also because he was trying to conquer the British Isles for most of WWII! I'm quite sure having a German flag flying over the UK would be a change they wouldn't like very much either, if things had turned out differently. I really think whatever changes would have happened over the last 60+ years, people in that age group would find something to complain about. Of course it's not 'the Britain they fought for' anymore, it's the Britain of their children and grandchildren, just as the Britain of the 1940s wasn't the same Britain as past generations had fought for during WWI.

No matter how much I opposed George W Bush during his two terms, he was greatly preferable to Hitler.
Arisia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2010, 01:27 AM   #4287
Tolls
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,582
Originally Posted by TSR View Post
.
Yes, were read that lie when you first told it. Show were this specific picture was attributed to the Holocaust, or be caught in yet another lie.
.
Much as I am loathe to provide support for him, I think his point is that the photo shows an emaciated person from the Boer camps...therefore photos of emaciated people from the Nazi camps is not proof of anything. Or something along those lines.

Thought, frankly, I'm not surprised he's managed to drag this thread out if that's the general level of incoherence of his arguments. I mean this would be something approaching a reasonable point if you were only arguing the pictures...and ignored all the other evidence. It's merely another one of those arguments of "this looks like that therefore this and that are the same".

For the Boer deaths this was down to sheer incompetence on the part of the British administration...it was never intended to actually kill them. For the Nazi camps, of course, we see little such concern.
Tolls is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2010, 02:59 PM   #4288
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Arisia View Post
I have a distinct feeling they 'do not explicitly support Hitler' not only because of the Holocaust, but also because he was trying to conquer the British Isles for most of WWII! I'm quite sure having a German flag flying over the UK would be a change they wouldn't like very much either, if things had turned out differently.
OMG. You really take all your clues from television and cinema, don't you.

Hitler admired Britain. He sincerely thought that the English were on the same level as the Germans (a catastrophic blunder). In his phantasy he had plans to extend and prolongue European rule. Hitler wanted colonies or Lebensraum as he called it in the East and he was perfectly willing to let Britain keep the 25% of the planet it already had acquired in their version of Livingspace. He was even prepared to deliver troops in the support of the Empire. Hitler never wanted to attack Britain. It was sheer stupidity of Chamberlain to hand out a blanque cheque to the Poles that whatever they would do the Brits would come to their aid in case of an attack by Germany. What Chamberlain should have done was put pressure on the Poles to make concessions in the Danzig case. Danzig was a 97% German city and wanted to return to the Reich. But the Poles refused to cooperate with the British garantee in their pocket. Then there was increased border tension and next the Germans decided to take back what they considered theirs after they had made an agreement with the Soviets. Because of the garantee Britain (and France) declared war on Germany. But still not everything was lost because neither Britain nor France did anything with the war declaration ('Phoney War'/'Drole the Guerre') much to the delight of the Germans who had very bad memories from a 2-front war during WW1. However it was Winston Churchill, this prototypical drunken half-Jewish/American hooligan mystery meat (bribed by Jewish financial circles from London since the mid-thirties) who really expanded a local conflict into WW2. It was him who planned the invasion of Norway in 1940 in order to cut vital iron ore supply lines from Sweden to Germany who forced the Germans to invade Norway and Benelux and France. And even during the invasion of France he let the Brits escape (the English lied this event into the 'miracle of Duinkerken') because he was interested in peace with Britain so he had his hands free to 'stamp out Jewish communism' in the East. And on the eve of the invasion of Russia it was Rudolf Hess who made this desperate flight to Britain, obviously NOT to Churchill (who was doing the bidding of the Jews anyway) but to this Duke who could expected to be more sympathetic to peace with Germany, like many others in the British establishment who feared for the survival of the Empire. It is very likely that Germany would have offered pulling back from Western Europe in exchange for peace and free hand in the East. It was Gorbatchov with his unexpected offer to release Hess from Spandau that caused alarm within Anglo circles because if Hess would leave prison alive one of the biggest WW2 lies would have been made public. That is why the Brits were forced to 'suicide' Hess. But WW2 was never over Poland. Britain never declared war on the USSR, who had done exactly the same thing as Germany, namely swallowing half of Poland. Instead they allied themselves with the biggest bunch of mass-murderers of history to defeat Germany. Germany had expelled the Jews from Germany because they did not want to be controlled, read bolshevized by them like they had done to Russia. But the Jews who already controlled London and Washington did not like that and organized resistence. The allies won and in the end they had no choice but to invent the 'holocaust' to whitewash their own crimes.

There is no end to Anglo perfidy.

In the near future the revisionist story above is going to replace to old lies that Germany wanted to conquer the world but that luckily there were a bunch of notoriously good guys around to prevent that. And in the hour of victory, as a sort of bonus, they had accidently 'discovered' that the Germans had a little extermination program going on during the war years, conveniently distracting from the Anglo destruction of German cities (the only holocaust that really happened not counting in the holomodor and other Soviet crimes). Fortunately in the end the good guys prevailed. In reality however, the not so good guys, the Jews, prevailed and in their slipstream the Americans, our 'liberators' as you will remember. The biggest losers were the Europeans. Obviously the Germans, but certainly also the Eastern Europeans who got enslaved by Bolshevism, courtesy Churchill. And of course Britain as well, which lost its empire. Only because they let an half-american traitor control their government.

Quote:
I really think whatever changes would have happened over the last 60+ years, people in that age group would find something to complain about. Of course it's not 'the Britain they fought for' anymore, it's the Britain of their children and grandchildren, just as the Britain of the 1940s wasn't the same Britain as past generations had fought for during WWI.

No matter how much I opposed George W Bush during his two terms, he was greatly preferable to Hitler.
Giving your country away to a hostile civilisation like Islam is never popular and not just to 'aging people'.

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 17th June 2010 at 03:55 PM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2010, 04:04 PM   #4289
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,267
Quote:
In the near future the revisionist story above is going to replace to old lies that Germany wanted to conquer the world but that luckily there were a bunch of notoriously good guys around to prevent that. And in the hour of victory, as a sort of bonus, they had accidently 'discovered' that the Germans had a little extermination program going on during the war years, conveniently distracting from the Anglo destruction of German cities (the only holocaust that really happened not counting in the holomodor and other Soviet crimes). Fortunately in the end the good guys prevailed. In reality however, the not so good guys, the Jews, prevailed and in their slipstream the Americans, our 'liberators' as you will remember. The biggest losers were the Europeans. Obviously the Germans, but certainly also the Eastern Europeans who got enslaved by Bolshevism, courtesy Churchill. And of course Britain as well, which lost its empire. Only because they let an half-american traitor control their government.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2010, 05:07 PM   #4290
Uzzy
Muse
 
Uzzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 965
While your off-topic drivel is amusing in a car crash sort of way, perhaps we can get back on-topic, and start by you answering my very simple question. Will you now accept that your explanation for why some prisoners at Auschwitz received medical treatment was wrong?
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth!" Captain Jean-Luc Picard, The First Duty.
Uzzy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2010, 05:36 PM   #4291
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,584
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Hitler admired Britain. He sincerely thought that the English were on the same level as the Germans (a catastrophic blunder). In his phantasy he had plans to extend and prolongue European rule. Hitler wanted colonies or Lebensraum as he called it in the East and he was perfectly willing to let Britain keep the 25% of the planet it already had acquired in their version of Livingspace.
Hitler was simply anti-colonies and did not see the benefit as it reduced racial purity.
The former German colonial policy, like everything we did, was carried out by halves. It neither increased the settlement area of the German Reich, nor did it undertake any attempt- criminal though it would have been-to strengthen the Reich by the use of black blood.
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv2ch14.html

Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
What Chamberlain should have done was put pressure on the Poles to make concessions in the Danzig case.
France and Britain put pressure on the Poles to allow the Russian army to enter Poland as a buffer to stop Hitler attacking. Poland refused as it had only concluded its war with Russia in 1924. You can read this in AJP Taylor's
The Origins of the Second World War.


Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Danzig was a 97% German city and wanted to return to the Reich.
This is a common lie from holocaust deniers. In May 1933, the Nazi Party won the local elections in the city. However, they received only 37% percent of the vote, less than the two-thirds required by the League of Nations to change the Constitution of the Free City of Danzig. Go read some history!

Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Next the Germans decided to take back what they considered theirs after they had made an agreement with the Soviets.
Correct and the Soviets moved into Poland as a buffer against Germany exactly as was offered to them by the British and French, who were sitting in the next room, because Poland refused.

Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Because of the garantee Britain (and France) declared war on Germany. But still not everything was lost because neither Britain nor France did anything with the war declaration
France and Britain ( and South Africa, Canada, Australia & New Zealand mobilised) and France attacked Germany and advanced 8 kilometres into Germany in the Saar Offensive waiting for mobilisation to supply reserves.

Yawn.....can someone please bring a holocaust denier to this forum with some experience and decent arguments? At least David Irving cracks good jokes.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 17th June 2010, 05:56 PM   #4292
Arisia
Graduate Poster
 
Arisia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: 26.2 from Boston
Posts: 1,002
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
...
Giving your country away to a hostile civilisation wannabe like Nazi Germany is never popular and not just to 'aging people'.
ftfy



If you keep going off on these baseless tirades, you're going to have an aneurysm.
Arisia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2010, 12:11 AM   #4293
BadBoy
Graduate Poster
 
BadBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,094
Originally Posted by Uzzy View Post
While your off-topic drivel is amusing in a car crash sort of way, perhaps we can get back on-topic, and start by you answering my very simple question. Will you now accept that your explanation for why some prisoners at Auschwitz received medical treatment was wrong?
BadBoy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2010, 03:31 PM   #4294
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,267
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Hitler was simply anti-colonies and did not see the benefit as it reduced racial purity.
The former German colonial policy, like everything we did, was carried out by halves. It neither increased the settlement area of the German Reich, nor did it undertake any attempt- criminal though it would have been-to strengthen the Reich by the use of black blood.
http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/mkv2ch14.html



France and Britain put pressure on the Poles to allow the Russian army to enter Poland as a buffer to stop Hitler attacking. Poland refused as it had only concluded its war with Russia in 1924. You can read this in AJP Taylor's
The Origins of the Second World War.




This is a common lie from holocaust deniers. In May 1933, the Nazi Party won the local elections in the city. However, they received only 37% percent of the vote, less than the two-thirds required by the League of Nations to change the Constitution of the Free City of Danzig. Go read some history!



Correct and the Soviets moved into Poland as a buffer against Germany exactly as was offered to them by the British and French, who were sitting in the next room, because Poland refused.



France and Britain ( and South Africa, Canada, Australia & New Zealand mobilised) and France attacked Germany and advanced 8 kilometres into Germany in the Saar Offensive waiting for mobilisation to supply reserves.

Yawn.....can someone please bring a holocaust denier to this forum with some experience and decent arguments? At least David Irving cracks good jokes.


There is no such animal because no decent arguments for denying the Holocaust exist. Irving can be entertaining, but when you examine the evidence for his arguments he does little better then the people who post their crap here. Irving is just more literate, that's all.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th June 2010, 08:57 PM   #4295
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,164
Quote:
This is a common lie from holocaust deniers. In May 1933, the Nazi Party won the local elections in the city. However, they received only 37% percent of the vote, less than the two-thirds required by the League of Nations to change the Constitution of the Free City of Danzig. Go read some history!
It is always amusing reading Mr Ellard accusing holocaust deniers of lying while his "facts" are usually nothing more than a bizarre melange of misunderstood drivel.

For the record a Plebiscite on Danzig was held shortly after the Saar plebiscite that had it returning to the Reich. The Nazis won 60% of the vote, but that was less than the 70% needed to rewrite the constitution.

The Nazis won 44 sets, the Socialists 12, Catholic Centrists 9, German Nationalists 3, Communists 2, Poles 2.
Total votes were 140 000 for the Nazis and 96 000 for their opponents (of which it was estimated 8 000 if that 96 000 were Polish).

The vast majority of the German nationalists, Catholic Centrists and probably Socialist voters would want reunion with Germany, just not Nazi Germany. As it was, a comfortable majority of the population wanted reunion even with Nazi Germany.
little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2010, 01:31 AM   #4296
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
In order not to annoy the mods let's continue our discussion about the motives concerning WW2 here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=178524

... and confine the discussion here to the H-word.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2010, 02:22 AM   #4297
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
In the thread mentioned in the previous post Matthew Ellard says:

Like all Holocaust Deniers, you are unable to explain where these missing Jews went.

Just like the True Believers are unable to prove that extermination program in the first place, I might add.
I feel like I have to prove that I do not have WMDs.

Nevertheless, in a brand new article a beginning of an attempt is made.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2010, 02:41 AM   #4298
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
I wonder if the nazi thinks that he has convinced anyone of anything besides that he is a disgusting piece of crap.
dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2010, 03:43 AM   #4299
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,519
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
In the thread mentioned in the previous post Matthew Ellard says:

Like all Holocaust Deniers, you are unable to explain where these missing Jews went.

Just like the True Believers are unable to prove that extermination program in the first place, I might add.
I feel like I have to prove that I do not have WMDs.

Nevertheless, in a brand new article a beginning of an attempt is made.
He doesn´t have to prove anything.

These Jews were alive when the Nazis apprehended them. They were not seen alive afterwards ever again. Therefore, if you or your Nazi buddies wish to claim the Nazis did not kill them, you and your Nazi buddies need to prove what else happened to them.
Chaos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2010, 06:37 AM   #4300
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Chaos View Post
He doesn´t have to prove anything.
Reasoning of people who live, judicially speaking, in a failed state. "We accuse, you have to prove it." That is the way the inhabitants of former British colony (it should have stayed a British colony) reason, hence: plea-bargains, Guantanamo, Abu-ghraib.

Quote:
These Jews were alive when the Nazis apprehended them. They were not seen alive afterwards ever again. Therefore, if you or your Nazi buddies wish to claim the Nazis did not kill them, you and your Nazi buddies need to prove what else happened to them.
Chaos tries to sell the idea that since many people disappeared, they ALL disappeared. Contradicted by observations like this one:

http://www.annefrankdiaryreference.org/people.htm
What's this about? There are some 100 people related to the life of Anne Frank. What happened to them? The result is surprising, nay revealing:

1- On those 100 people, 65 were jews. This is impressive considering there was 75,000 jews in Amsterdam at that time and thus only making less than 10% of the population.

2- On those 65 jews, no less than 33 NEVER set foot in a camp.

3- 14 have been sent to camps but were released or liberated in 1945.

4- 12 have died in camps from old age, other natural causes or typhus (Anne is one of those).

5- Only 6, out of these 100 jews are "said" to have been executed in camps. And only ONE of those 6 is said to have been "gased".


Now how is that for a starter? Anyone who followed a basic statistic course knows that these figures are at odds with the official story. The majority should have been gassed rather then only 1 'said to be gassed'.

Source

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 19th June 2010 at 06:48 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th June 2010, 09:28 AM   #4301
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,519
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Reasoning of people who live, judicially speaking, in a failed state. "We accuse, you have to prove it." That is the way the inhabitants of former British colony (it should have stayed a British colony) reason, hence: plea-bargains, Guantanamo, Abu-ghraib.



Chaos tries to sell the idea that since many people disappeared, they ALL disappeared. Contradicted by observations like this one:
Great. True to his sick nature, the Nazi worshipper resorts to lying and putting words in other peoples´ mouth. Glad to see you are keeping up the high standard of dishonesty and hatemongering we have come to expect of people like you.
Chaos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2010, 03:36 PM   #4302
Legend
Focu Meu!
 
Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 10,609
I don't know what there is to say on this whole thing, or what so drives people like "9/11-investigator" to pedal unsupported theories in rejection of evidences. But what interests me more is the disparity there is between skeptics and “conspiracists” (so to speak).

For quite some time I had a Rene Descartes quote in my signature: dubium sapientiae initium - "doubt is the origin of wisdom". Doubt is a central tenet of skeptical and critical thinking, doubting things based on what is supporting a given claim coincided with the realism of it. It's an analysis of a collection of evidences and making a judgement on the validity, quantity and relevance of those evidences.

But doubt is intrinsic in conspiracies everywhere. Doubting whether it was a plane that hit those historic towers and caused black plumes to raid New York's skies. Doubting if Hitler's nefarious Germany started World War 2. Doubting whether 6 million humans were systematically slaughtered at the hands of a maniacal Reich; while "9/11-investigator" will sit back and ask us for our evidence.

We could stand here and say that Hitler made his intentions quite clear:

Quote:
Once I really am in power, my first and foremost task will be the annihilation of the Jews. As soon as I have the power to do so, I will have gallows built in rows—at the Marienplatz in Munich, for example—as many as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink; they will hang there as long as the principles of hygiene permit. As soon as they have been untied, the next batch will be strung up, and so on down the line, until the last Jew in Munich has been exterminated.
We could stand here and say that the Nazis made their actions quite clear:

Quote:
The Führer once again expressed his determination to clean up the Jews in Europe pitilessly. There must be no squeamish sentimentalism about it. The Jews have deserved the catastrophe that has now overtaken them.
~ Joseph Goebbels
Quote:
And we say that the war will not end as the Jews imagine it will, namely with the uprooting of the Aryans, but the result of this war will be the complete annihilation of the Jews.
~ Adolf Hitler
Quote:
'The Jewish people is being exterminated,' every Party member will tell you, 'perfectly clear, it's part of our plans, we're eliminating the Jews, exterminating them.'
~ Heinrich Himmler
We could point to photos of malnourished skeletons with skin around them, laid in piles near gas chambers. We could walk them to Auschwitz and take them inside a concreted room with fingernail marks on the wall from where victims scratched in an attempt to get out. We could direct them to the contemporary documentation showing details of prisoner execution, or the fact that people who were once alive are now dead and gone. We could direct them to the multitudes of survivors and victims who were forced to live in hell on earth for days, if not weeks, if not months, if not years, who swear by statements as eye witnesses.

But conspiracists are not convinced, and will throw their noses to the side, put up a resolute palm and ask importunately for evidence.

Skeptics, who are acclaimed as the doubters, are being out-doubted.

The overwhelming problem is that the men who bear the onus of proof are asking for it. Skeptics will decline evidence for particular, objective reasons. Conspiracists will decline evidence based on an unstable hunch in order to support it. It becomes a whimsical crusade. The conspiracist behind wayward theories like Holocaust denial are fighting a cause, and use subjective interpretation to support their theory that they are already standing behind, as opposed to looking at the evidence and admitting an interpretation based on the analysis of it; saying that ‘until I am presented with sufficient proof otherwise, I will reside alongside the realistic version of events supported by evidence which balances the possibility of its veracity’.

A skeptic's modus opperandi is not to doubt everything and anything and continue blindly to do so. It is to carefully place doubt in areas where the evidence does not correlate to likelihood. Contrastigly, conspiracy theories are all too often misplaced doubt. The ability to doubt does not make you smart, nor correct.

I want to say to you, “9/11-investigator”:

There is an important difference between doubt, and excessive denial of evidence. It will come down to the discretion of your decisions on which side of the line you stand on.

Alex.
__________________
Am I the only one who thinks that Legend actually does look something like a young Leonardo DiCaprio?
~ EeneyMinnieMoe
Eat a potato, kid.
~ RoboTimbo
Legend is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2010, 08:42 PM   #4303
dtugg
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,885
Originally Posted by Legend View Post
I don't know what there is to say on this whole thing, or what so drives people like "9/11-investigator" to pedal unsupported theories in rejection of evidences. But what interests me more is the disparity there is between skeptics and “conspiracists” (so to speak).
It is simple. It idolizes the Nazis and hates the Jews. So its efforts here are to whitewash its heroes and make the object of its hatred the perpetrators of the biggest scam in history. I think it knows that the Holocaust happened and is glad it did, but its love for Hitler and its hatred for the Jews makes it lie about it in order to makes its sick ideology more acceptable to normal people.
dtugg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2010, 10:05 PM   #4304
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,584
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
In the thread mentioned in the previous post Matthew Ellard says:

Like all Holocaust Deniers, you are unable to explain where these missing Jews went.

Just like the True Believers are unable to prove that extermination program in the first place, I might add.
I feel like I have to prove that I do not have WMDs.
Why are you quoting me in this forum when I posted in another forum to which you didn't respond?

Was it because of your errors concerning the French Saar campaign? Was it your errors in not mentioning France as also declaring war? Was it your debunked claim that Churchill was jewish? Was it your debunked claim that Hitler knew about Hess flying to England before the event?
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 20th June 2010, 10:15 PM   #4305
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,584
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Irving is just more literate, that's all.
Poor David Irving. He took AUD$5,000 to allow himself be gassed by the Jewish host of a comedy TV show. David Irving simply does what brings in money.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqfvHXCaXyQ forward to 5.50

His greatest error in judgement was when he changed his mind and said the Hitler Diaries were authentic four hours before the lab results stated otherwise.
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st June 2010, 12:51 AM   #4306
Legend
Focu Meu!
 
Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 10,609
Originally Posted by dtugg View Post
It is simple. It idolizes the Nazis and hates the Jews. So its efforts here are to whitewash its heroes and make the object of its hatred the perpetrators of the biggest scam in history. I think it knows that the Holocaust happened and is glad it did, but its love for Hitler and its hatred for the Jews makes it lie about it in order to makes its sick ideology more acceptable to normal people.
Perhaps that has something to do with it in this instance, but more am I referring to what stands behind similar thoughts or what has convinced and what perpetuates the mind of a conspiracy believer to reject evidence.

Alex.
__________________
Am I the only one who thinks that Legend actually does look something like a young Leonardo DiCaprio?
~ EeneyMinnieMoe
Eat a potato, kid.
~ RoboTimbo
Legend is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st June 2010, 03:44 PM   #4307
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,267
Originally Posted by Matthew Ellard View Post
Poor David Irving. He took AUD$5,000 to allow himself be gassed by the Jewish host of a comedy TV show. David Irving simply does what brings in money.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqfvHXCaXyQ forward to 5.50

His greatest error in judgement was when he changed his mind and said the Hitler Diaries were authentic four hours before the lab results stated otherwise.
Yeah, his reversal on the Hitler diaries deserves some kind of an award for bad,bad,timing.
Irving does not come off very well in Robert Harris's (yes, that Robert Harris) excellent account of the Hitler Diaries fiasco,"Selling Hitler".
And his lawsuit against Deborah Lipstadt is right up there as proof of that old saying about what kind of client people who act as their own attorney have.

Last edited by dudalb; 21st June 2010 at 03:47 PM.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 21st June 2010, 05:26 PM   #4308
Matthew Ellard
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,584
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Yeah, his reversal on the Hitler diaries deserves some kind of an award for bad,bad,timing.
Irving does not come off very well in Robert Harris's (yes, that Robert Harris) excellent account of the Hitler Diaries fiasco,"Selling Hitler".
And his lawsuit against Deborah Lipstadt is right up there as proof of that old saying about what kind of client people who act as their own attorney have.
I have read Robert Harris's book. It is very funny. Even funnier is the BBC miniseries based on the book. I don't know if you can get your paws on it but if you do you will "wet" yourself.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0124256/

Alexie Sales plays Konrad 'Conny' Fischer
Barry Humphries ("Dame Edna") plays Rupert Murdoch
Tom Baker ( Dr Who) plays BMG's Manfred Fischer
and a cast of thousands of British comics......
Matthew Ellard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th July 2010, 09:01 AM   #4309
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Almost too good to be true, this find:

Here is Shahid Malid.

Shahid who?

This invader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1LXahun7zo

And what is his special interest?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOSQg...eature=related

He knows exactly how to steal Britain from it's original population.
With moral blackmail.

That's why H-word revisionism is not just an exercise in historical justice but in naked survival as well.
For the record: I do not mind that Britain will become a muslim state, I support it, but within Europe it should only be Britain.

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 5th July 2010 at 09:10 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th July 2010, 12:23 PM   #4310
Uzzy
Muse
 
Uzzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 965
And that has exactly what to do with the Holocaust?
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth!" Captain Jean-Luc Picard, The First Duty.
Uzzy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th July 2010, 01:12 PM   #4311
VonKleist
Muse
 
VonKleist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 685
Originally Posted by Uzzy View Post
While your off-topic drivel is amusing in a car crash sort of way, perhaps we can get back on-topic, and start by you answering my very simple question. Will you now accept that your explanation for why some prisoners at Auschwitz received medical treatment was wrong?
Originally Posted by Uzzy View Post
And that has exactly what to do with the Holocaust?

I believe The Lying Dutchman may have you on ignore, Uzzy. Therefore he can't see these posts. . . . .
__________________
"It takes a brave man not to be a hero in the Red Army"
- Josef Stalin (attrib.)
VonKleist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th July 2010, 02:06 PM   #4312
Uzzy
Muse
 
Uzzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 965
Probably, but he seems to respond sometimes.
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth!" Captain Jean-Luc Picard, The First Duty.
Uzzy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 02:43 AM   #4313
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by Legend View Post
I don't know what there is to say on this whole thing, or what so drives people like "9/11-investigator" to pedal unsupported theories in rejection of evidences. But what interests me more is the disparity there is between skeptics and “conspiracists” (so to speak).
I have expressed my motivations repeatedly in this threat and elsewhere. It is about battling the crown jewels of the left, used to destroy my society.

Quote:
For quite some time I had a Rene Descartes quote in my signature: dubium sapientiae initium - "doubt is the origin of wisdom". Doubt is a central tenet of skeptical and critical thinking, doubting things based on what is supporting a given claim coincided with the realism of it. It's an analysis of a collection of evidences and making a judgement on the validity, quantity and relevance of those evidences.
The idea that the victors of WW2 wrote history to support their perceived moral superiority is a very nice start, would you not agree, mr. doubting skeptic?

Legend says:

Quote:
But doubt is intrinsic in conspiracies everywhere. Doubting whether it was a plane that hit those historic towers and caused black plumes to raid New York's skies. Doubting if Hitler's nefarious Germany started World War 2. Doubting whether 6 million humans were systematically slaughtered at the hands of a maniacal Reich; while "9/11-investigator" will sit back and ask us for our evidence.
Nobody doubts that the towers were hit by planes. It is obvious that these planes masked the real reason for these towers to implode: controlled demolition, it's purpose being to generate enough damage ('New Pearl Harbor') and visual spectacle to justify pre-planned invasions into Middle Eastern countries (I myself bougth the official conspiracy theory for several years).

Oh the horror, 911I sitting back asking for evidence! This thread of 4000+ costs me a lot of time while 'sitting back' (and you guys are nowhere).

Legend says: "We could stand here and say that Hitler made his intentions quite clear:"

Quote:
Once I really am in power, my first and foremost task will be the annihilation of the Jews. As soon as I have the power to do so, I will have gallows built in rows—at the Marienplatz in Munich, for example—as many as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink; they will hang there as long as the principles of hygiene permit. As soon as they have been untied, the next batch will be strung up, and so on down the line, until the last Jew in Munich has been exterminated.
Are you sure you want to quote this? Hitler had all the means to follow up on this but you will be hard pressed to deliver any pictures of: gallows built in rows—at the Marienplatz in Munich, for example—as many as traffic allows. Then the Jews will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink.

http://juergen-graf.vho.org/articles...st-debate.html

Argument 2

“In a speech delivered in the Reichstag on 30 January 1939, Adolf Hitler predicted that the effect of a new war would be the annihilation of the Jewish race.”
Answer

In today’s language, “annihilation” is a synonym for “physical liquidation.” But if we analyze Hitler’s writings and speeches, we discover that he often used the word “annihilation” (“Vernichtung”), as well as the word “extermination” (“Ausrottung”), in the sense of “depriving someone of his power.” An example from Mein Kampf clearly illustrates this point. In this book, Hitler wrote that in the Hapsburg monarchy the German population had been threatened by “langsame Ausrottung” (“slow extermination”).[38] Did Hitler insinuate that Austrian emperor Franz Josef planned to gas or to shoot all 10 million Austrians of German nationality? Of course not; he simply feared that in the multi-national Hapsburg empire the Germans would gradually lose their dominating position to the Slavs.

Hitler’s speech from 30 January 1939 is often quoted in “holocaust” literature, so it is not surprising that Dr. Karsai uses it to “prove” that Hitler wanted to exterminate the Jews. Unfortunately, the “holocaust” historians always “forget” to quote the continuation of Hitler’s speech, and Dr. Karsai is no exception, so we shall quote it ourselves:[39]

“The times where the non-Jewish peoples were defenseless in the field of propaganda are gone. National Socialist Germany and Fascist Italy now have institutions which in case of necessity enable them to enlighten the world about the essence of a question of which many peoples are instinctively conscious, but lack scientific knowledge.”

So the “annihilation” of the Jews simply meant the enlightenment of the non-Jewish nations about the Jewish peril!


The peril Graf is talking about is of course Jewish initiated bolshevism, a topic a true 'skeptic' like Legend will not burn his fingers on. Or probably deep in his heart would like to install in the US today if he had the chance. The strategy of course is that Legend will attempt to portray the Jews solely as victims and not like the perpetrators they were before (to some extend) they became victims. Hitler's antisemitism did not emerge in a vacuum, like Legend and his fellow 'skeptics' would like us to believe.

The other citations are dealt with elsewhere in this thread.


Quote:
We could point to photos of malnourished skeletons with skin around them, laid in piles near gas chambers.
No you can't. These pictures only exist of Belsen. Corpses mainly of Poles and Russian. Would you want to defend the (hopeless) position that Belsen was an 'extermination camp'?

Quote:
We could walk them to Auschwitz and take them inside a concreted room with fingernail marks on the wall from where victims scratched in an attempt to get out.
Links to pictures please. This is going to be good.

Quote:
We could direct them to the contemporary documentation showing details of prisoner execution,
The German records show a few thousand of these executions. They were carried out on all sides.

Quote:
or the fact that people who were once alive are now dead and gone.
No kidding? There was a war going on with millions killed on all sides, mainly Russians and next Germans. And Legend deplores that people 'once alive are now dead'.

Quote:
We could direct them to the multitudes of survivors and victims who were forced to live in hell on earth for days, if not weeks, if not months, if not years, who swear by statements as eye witnesses.
Why don't you go in specifics? Tip: before you do that check first in thye revisionist literature what is said about your 'witness'. Saves me a lot of work. Thanks in advance.

Quote:
The overwhelming problem is that the men who bear the onus of proof are asking for it.
I am glad that you admit that you have an 'overwhelming problem'. Trying to solve that problem by demanding that I disprove your accusations does not make your case better. This kind of thinking leads straight towards the future American gulags (FEMA camps, some here even refer to them in their subscripts in an approving way). In present day America the System accuses you of something and the only way for you to escape is to admit guilt so you get a reduced penalty ('pleabargain'). That's medieval.

Quote:
A skeptic's modus opperandi is not to doubt everything and anything and continue blindly to do so. It is to carefully place doubt in areas where the evidence does not correlate to likelihood. Contrastigly, conspiracy theories are all too often misplaced doubt. The ability to doubt does not make you smart, nor correct.
Translation: 'Skepticisms' decision to 'doubt' or not to 'doubt' a particular topic will be based on the answer to the question if that particular topic serves the Jewish agenda yes/no.

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 6th July 2010 at 03:03 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 6th July 2010, 03:43 AM   #4314
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 67,319
Originally Posted by 9/11-investigator View Post
Quote:
I don't know what there is to say on this whole thing, or what so drives people like "9/11-investigator" to pedal unsupported theories in rejection of evidences.
I have expressed my motivations repeatedly in this threat and elsewhere. It is about battling the crown jewels of the left, used to destroy my society.
You peddle unsupported theories in rejection of evidence to fight an illusory battle ?
__________________
<Roar!>

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:20 AM   #4315
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
More on Germany and their gassing. Here is an add from 1939 warning against the desastrous results of lice. It is difficult to imagine for modern people used to fun showering the devastating effect of these Schaedlinge:

http://www.nazigassings.com/images/AnzeigerDEGESCH.jpg

Mark the word Begasungsanlagen.

Here an interesting article stating that Napoleons armies in Russia were basically defeated by lice, not by Russians:

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/25553/
Although Russian resistance, brutal weather, and the lack of food and water decimated the French army, new genetic evidence proves that Pediculus humanus, otherwise known as body lice, had a key role in the debacle.

This perfectly explains why the Germans were forced to build Gaskammer in all their Eastern-European labor camps.

And at some point somebody got an idea to construct a story...

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 7th July 2010 at 02:33 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 02:29 AM   #4316
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Here is an example of train delousing tunnels:

http://www.nazigassings.com/images/R...Russborder.jpg

The method [fumigation with hydrogen cyanide] has been used to a large extent, and with successful results, for the destruction of lice in clothing, in baggage and in railway carriages on the Russo-Polish border. In 1920 the local authorities in Warsaw constructed a chamber or tunnel which could be hermetically closed, large enough to contain several railroad cars (fig. 17). The cyanide for the fumigation is obtained from poison gas shells which were left in Poland in 1915. After fumigation the gas is withdrawn from the chamber by means of fans and passed through a stove where it is burnt.

At nearly all quarantine stations on the Russo-Polish frontier there is a cyanide chamber which, it is claimed, has given more satisfactory results than the other methods formerly in use. The process is not considered to be expensive, and all baggage, clothing, bedding, &c., of refugees has been treated in this way.

Cyanide chambers are also used at the Quarantine Station, New York.


Source.

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 7th July 2010 at 02:34 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 7th July 2010, 08:14 AM   #4317
TSR
Illuminator
 
TSR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,783
Originally Posted by TSR View Post
Tell us again about that law that specifically mentions 6 million and criminalizes any other number.

Or tell us who has been convicted in a case where the death toll was the only issue?

Or admit that you were lying, because you really really needed the Jooos to be that powerful, to justify your hate...
.
Still waiting, 9/11...
.
TSR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th July 2010, 05:57 AM   #4318
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Originally Posted by TSR View Post
.
Still waiting, 9/11...
.
It's not the topic of this thread.

Nevertheless this just in:

Based on this: http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/957/Belgie/...ams-Blok.dhtml

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 11th July 2010 at 05:59 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th July 2010, 02:05 AM   #4319
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
Excellent development in... Iceland!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland...dia_Initiative

The Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI) is a law intended to create a supportive and attractive jurisdiction for the publication of investigative journalism[1] and other threatened online media. It was adopted unanimously by parliament on 16 June 2010.[2] On 18 February 2010, the project entered a parliamentary resolution proposal into the Icelandic Parliament (or Alžingi),[3] proposing that Iceland "strongly position itself legally with regard to the protection of freedoms of expression and information".[4] The proposal was made by 19 MPs from all parties in the parliament.

Not difficult to understand why the probably most intelligent American Bobby Fisher (Jew?) ever, fled to Iceland.

Meanwhile in the US, the new USSR in status nascendi:

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com...e-america.html
Also at the top of the list of those who should have plans in the final stages are political bloggers. All this talk about AN internet kill switche scares me. There will be enormous pressure from very powerful commercial internet groups to prevent the broad-based kill switch from being implemented for any significant period of time.. But, the idea of the kill switch hints that the government is indeed scared of the internet. If they can't shut down the entire net, they will, when they deem it necessary, shutdown political bloggers who don't support the regime.


Remember it is the YouKnowWho Joe Lieberman who is pushing for this kind of legislation. He will fail in his attemps because the internet inevitable is going to be the backbone of the future resource starved economy. Asian companies are now developing a usb pluggable 18 inch monitor that consumes merely 6 watt. I mean, it will enough to do 15 minutes of exercises in the morning on your electricity generating home trainer for you to be able to do your work online for the rest of the day, so that the necessity of daily commuting can be thrown on the garbage heap of history. Lieberman might be able to take down sites from an ADL generated list, he will not be able to prevent (high-volume) peer-to-peer traffic. All off a sudden videos of say David Irving will become mighty interesting once forbidden in the USSA.

Last edited by 9/11-investigator; 13th July 2010 at 02:11 AM.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th July 2010, 01:56 AM   #4320
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,032
My opponents often have stressed that Hitler had on several occasions talked about the Vernichtung (annihilation/eradication) of the Jews.

Here a video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_o2u...layer_embedded

... where in 0:40 - 1:00 he speaks about how he accomplished the Vernichtung of the marxist party and other parties. It is obvious that he meant 'eradication' of these parties as a political force and not the physical destruction of the human constituting members.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:30 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.