CONTENTS:
Some questions for holocaust deniers
Crying about hate speech laws
How to become a holocaust denier in 10 easy steps

Some questions for holocaust deniers

1) How much money did Steven Spielberg personally make off his movie "Schindler's List?"

 

2) Why were Hans and Sophie Scholl, and several others of the non-violent 'White Rose' resistance group sentenced to death by the Nazi regime? Why weren't they merely incarcerated for their activity instead?

 

3) Why was refusing to swear fealty to Adolf Hitler and to enlist in the Wehrmacht, when called upon, a crime punishable by death? A famous victim, for example, was the Catholic priest Franz Reinisch, not just incarcerated, but actually executed for refusing to report to duty.

 

4) Why would a historian of Jewish origin (Gerhard L. Weinberg) take the trouble to find, translate and publish Adolf Hitler's unpublished sequel to Mein Kampf, the "Zweites Buch"? And if you consider it a propagandistic move by "the holocaust industry", why have so few people heard about this book?

 

5) If the Anne Frank story is a hoax, why did the storytellers give her a very revisionist death (transferred AWAY from Auschwitz, to die later of typhus in Bergen Belsen) rather than symbolically attributing this innocent life's demise to the gas chambers? Why needlessly complicate the story and diminish its climax? Unless of course, the story of Anne Frank is not a story at all, but reality which is told exactly the way it happened.

 

6) Why did so many Nazi officials carry cyanide pills with them?

 

7) Why did so many Nazi officials commit suicide upon capture by western Allies, often involving said cyanide pills?

 

8) Why did Hitler, Göbbels, Himmler and several other high ranking Nazis commit suicide, often even before capture, if they had nothing to hide? If it was merely because they were afraid of what might be done to them at the hands of the Allies, then was their belief in martyrdom as innocents so non-existent?

 

9) Why does the overwhelming majority of holocaust deniers today and in the past consist of civilians unaffiliated to the NSDAP rather than the once convicted Nazis themselves, or their descendants, or organizations like ODESSA?

 

10) Even if Hitler and friends were right about International Jewry all along, how does it justify the mass deportation of Polish Jews, most of whom were poor, uneducated and in no way related to any rich Wall Street capitalists? How do you justify laying blame on an entire people, for alleged actions of a tiny few? Answering this question with a question (Japanese internment camps) is evasion and not a valid answer. Using a sensationalist newspaper headline (Judea Declares War on Germany) which even National Socialists themselves did not take all too seriously, to justify the incarceration of an entire people as a logical reaction, is also not a valid answer.

 

11) Speaking of, give us proper elaboration of exactly what evils the aforementioned Wall Street capitalists of Jewish origin actually did? Or are you going to attribute something as mundane as inflation or financial depression to "the Jew"? If you want to bring up Black Tuesday, the Wall Street crash of 1929, kindly deliver proof it was all organized by International Jewry.

 

12) And why on earth do you keep bringing a proposed (perhaps even partially enacted) economic boycott in 1933 as legitimate casus belli to incarcerate an entire people most of whom didn't even take part in it? Again, pointing out to Japanese internment camps is a classic example of whataboutism, rather than answering the question.

 

13) Regarding the deportation and forced incarceration of an entire people solely due to their ethnicity, given that you like to equate what befell the Jews in Europe to what befell Japanese Americans in the United States, and given that you like to lay the blame concerning the high mortality in the concentration camps to allied saturation bombing, how will you nevertheless explain away the crucial difference of Japanese Americans essentially relaxing in their camps while Jews were put to back-breaking labor, put under meager rations, and housed like animals in the German camps long before the Allies gained air superiority in Europe?

 

14) If your hypothesis about Allied bombing destroying the infrastructure of Germany to the extent that it worsened the situation of concentration camp detainees when it came to supplies is correct, why don't you provide a SINGLE credible, independently verifiable case where a concentration camp's food supply was directly affected by allied bombing to the extent that for example the rail lines leading to it were destroyed, and therefore supplies could no longer reach the camp properly? I can wait. If you say Nordhausen, you lose, because that was firstly not a concentration camp (the Boelckekaserne was a Luftwaffe barracks/prison), and secondly that is not the subject of this question (allied bombing allegedly destroying supply lines to concentration camps resulting in lack of supplies, starvation etc.)

 

15) Why don't revisionists attack the 50-60 million total death toll of WW2 in the same way they attack the Jewish death toll? Can anyone break this number down to the sum total of all casualties sustained in all battles fought and how many civilians died in which city during which year? And if that's not possible, then why accept this number without much question while writing volume after volume of why only the Jewish death toll is a hoax and at the same time claim you aren't fueled by antisemitism?

 

16) Why are there no movements in the West to deny other genocides in history, such as the Rwandan genocide where 800,000 people were killed in around 3 months (that's 8,888 people per day!), or the Stalinist purges, the Holodomor, or Mao's Great Leap forward? How are all those death tolls historians provide accepted without question, why aren't almanac comparisons made, census data questioned, official documents alleged to be forgeries, eyewitnesses dismissed with a casual hand-wave and so on?

 

17) Given that you don't spend nearly as much time attacking the death toll of other genocides compared to the holocaust, kindly name 3 proofs, or even 1 you have that underscore the authenticity of other genocides in human history, which however remain elusive regarding the holocaust.

 

18) Since many concentration camps were equipped with delousing facilities, and since you revisionists believe clothes and bedding were regularly deloused with Zyklon-B, why does the Prussian Blue staining only appear in Auschwitz, Majdanek and Stutthof? Why dont Dachau or Mauthausen's delousing facilities show this blue coloration? Why isn't "HCN = observable PB staining" common knowledge among chemists worldwide? If every forensic scientist knows UV light is a reliable indicator for cleaned up stains of blood or semen, why does none of them claim Prussian Blue stains are a reliable indicator for hydrogen cyanide? Why isn't there any chemist on the planet, apart from denier Germar Rudolf, who can theorize how much PB should form on a concrete wall per hour of it having been exposed to HCN?

 

19) Prove to me that nowhere close to 3 million Jews lived in Poland in the years leading up to WW2, and THEN we can have a discussion about numbers.

 

20) When you repeatedly hail Fred Leuchter as "America's foremost gas chamber expert", I consider the "what came first - the chicken or the egg" question. Given that American gas chambers have been existing since at least the 1940s, how is it that there were no gas chamber experts in the United States till this Leuchter showed up? Who designed, built, operated, and maintained American gas chambers? How many gas chambers did this "foremost gas chamber expert" Leuchter even end up building for the US?

 

21) If people's careers are ruined for questioning the numbers of dead in the concentration camps, why is it no longer claimed that mass gassings took place in Dachau? Why was there even a debate about it? And why did Auschwitz and Majdanek receive drastic reductions of the death toll? None of this was the result of Faurisson and friends' meddling, it was done without their involvement. So why weren't the people who did this incarcerated? In fact, if a worldwide Jewish conspiracy needed the holocaust to legitimize the existence of Israel, why would revisions like these even be permitted? Maybe, just maybe, there is a difference between legitimate revisionism as performed by level-headed scholars, and the time wasting activity that holocaust deniers like to engage themselves with and call "research", which is just an elaborate term for flat-out denial.

 

22) If the Treblinka ground photos show no criminal activity, what is the logical explanation for there being giant excavators digging around Treblinka, located in an area in the ass end of Poland where there is no mining, no rare earths, no mineral deposits, no building projects, unless of course these cranes served a nefarious purpose, which is digging, or in this case, unearthing mass graves.

 

23) Despite the above, how can you keep claiming Richard Krege did a legitimate archaeological investigation of Treblinka and found "the soil undisturbed", while at the same time claiming Treblinka was a transit camp where structures were erected and then dismantled, claiming all of this left behind no trace at all?

 

24) Why has Richard Krege still not published the findings of his report, the Treblinka and Belzec GPR scan? We have been waiting 18 years for his report....

 

25) HOLOCAUST DENIER CHALLENGE! If the Jews were "evacuated to the East" rather than being exterminated in Poland, what happened to them? Why didn't even one of them come forward after the war and tell historians they have got it all wrong? That the Nazis merely helped their family safely relocate from Europe to Russia? Prove one Jew had his clothes deloused in Treblinka, Belzec, Chelmno or Sobibor, given a hot bath, and then "evacuated" out of Reich occupied territories (rather than somewhere else within occupied territory such as Majdanek) via one-way train ticket across the bloody Eastern Front and into Russia! And while we're at it, here's another challenge of mine: PROVE not enough Jews existed in Europe in 1939 to be genocided to a tally of around 6 million in the first place! EARN BIG BUCKS!!! http://holocaustcontroversies . blogspot . co . at/2011/07/challenge-to-supporters-of-revisionist . html

 

26) If Bolshevism, Judaism and Zionism are the same thing, why did Winston Churchill differentiate between them in his letters after WW1? Why were Soviet Bolsheviks so opposed to Zionism? Why did Israel and the Soviet Union have such a troubled relationship? Why did the Soviet Union support the Arab states during the Six Day War? And why was "globalist" Israel a friend of apartheid South Africa? Why are there many Jews today opposed to Zionism and the Israeli state? Lumping people into one basket is how you discredit yourself.

 

27) Why do you keep labeling Atheist Communists who didn't care one bit about the Talmud, Torah or even believe in Jehovah God, as Jews? If you claim Judaism is A RACE, why do you, at the same time, cling on to the theory that Ashkenazi Jews, the main target of your attacks, are in fact Khazars while Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews are not? Either all Jews are a race, or they aren't. If they aren't, are Khazars their own race now? Aren't they from the Caucasus region and therefore Caucasians? Make up your mind. And if you still believe in races, maybe it's time to pick up a 21st century biology book. Oh wait - you also doubt the legitimacy of modern science and think science is dead now and conforms to political correctness, don't you? You're a lost cause.

 

28) Describe to me how terrible it must feel like to wake up every morning knowing that you live in a world where vast amounts of academia and the establishment have conspired against humanity, and are actively working on the destruction of what you perceive as "your people" and "our values" and working towards the enslavement of the world and the creation of a World Government under the New World Order. Because this is what holocaust denial ultimately points to, isn't it? Don't deny it.

 

29) Have you seriously considered the possibility that you may, in fact, have lost your fucking marbles and you just don't know it yet? See Dunning-Kruger effect.

Crying about hate speech laws

The fact that holocaust deniers spend a great amount of time crying and wailing extensively about some of the persecution and court cases their compatriots had to undergo as a result of their voluntary activity is just proof that presenting their points to counter the historical record is apparently not enough. No, it always has to be mixed in with generic conspiracy theories as I have taken apart above, or references to George Orwell's 1984 and all sorts of appeals to emotion. Under their famous slogan "Truth does not fear investigation", holocaust deniers always make the case that if the holocaust as it has been recorded really happened, why should there be laws to incarcerate those who question it. Shouldn't that be a red flag? First of all, questioning the holocaust is not illegal in any country on the planet, else every school kid asking their teacher something they didn't quite grasp, would be in the slammer. Denying, is in some. Secondly, if you look at the countries in the world, the amount of them that have these laws is pathetic in number. Coincidentally, these countries are also those who were most affected under the Nazi dictatorship. Maybe the only political agenda here is something called "Never Again"? How about that. And in these few countries where denying or grossly downplaying the death toll of the holocaust is a punishable offense, in these very same non-islamic countries, it is also a punishable offense to e.g. slander the prophet Muhammad with allegations of bestiality or pedophilia or raise your right hand in a 45° angle in public, or display Nazi symbols for recreational or commercial purposes, or call someone a nigger or post on social media that all refugees should drown in the Mediterranean. People have gone to jail in these countries for all these offenses: It's called generic hate speech laws. You'd only have a point if saying anything and everything were perfectly legal, where true freedom of speech existed except when it came to denying the holocaust, but deniers cannot point to a single country where such laws exist. And holocaust denial IS hate speech (against Jewish people; some or all in this case doesn't really matter), ...because as my introductory post in this blog already said, even the most scholarly form of holocaust denial is ultimately saying that hand-wringing, hook-nosed kike merchants have been lying to the goyim for 70 years straight with world historians under their control-censor in order to cash in shekels for Israel. While I personally do not endorse any kind of hate speech laws (slandered individuals or organizations have the right to sue, but it shouldn't be the government's business) especially holocaust denial, as I think incarcerating holocaust deniers only turns them into martyrs after giving them a great deal of attention during their trial thanks to the media, I still harbor some level of understanding why those countries worst affected by the Nazi regime have made it an offense, e.g. because presenting deliberately fraudulent information in a deceptive pseudo-scholarly format can seriously mislead the general public (and this is a concern even scientists share when it comes to material spread by e.g. climate change skeptics), and the consequence of reading holocaust denier material and becoming convinced of its falsehoods is a rise in antisemitism with a realistic chance of culminating in renewed persecution. And guess what? A civilized society protects its vulnerable and minority populations from hateful incitement that could culminate in the very kind of genocide that these folks try to deny in the first place. A bit like yelling FIRE in a crowded theater and when they get arrested for causing the deaths of countless people getting trapped at the exits they would cry that their right to freedom of speech was violated...

As for the photo, it shows the remains of Jewish victims executed by Nazis and collaborators near the city of Zolochiv in Lviv province of western Ukraine, discovered at former Gestapo headquarters after the liberation of the city in July 1944. From the documents of the Extraordinary Soviet Commission that was researching Nazi crimes.

 

How to become a holocaust denier in 10 easy steps

 

Step 1) Arrive at a preconceived notion (the holocaust, as it is defined in terms of death toll, intent, and methods including homicidal gas chambers, never happened) based on personal beliefs (the world is run by Jews) and then proceed to cherry-pick anything that supports your conclusion while ignoring everything that doesn't.

 

Step 2) Proceed to dismiss all testimonial evidence historians rely on with a casual hand-wave (or apply the 'poisoning the well' fallacy to point some contradictions as proof of lying), or only go so far as saying if it's a victim, he is a paid shill, and if it's a perpetrator, he was tortured, or accuse either party of insanity.

 

Step 3) Proceed to dismiss all documentary evidence as forgery, without bothering to specify who forged it and when and how, or concoct an innocuous explanation ignoring other documents and testimonies that give context and what we call a convergence of evidence.

 

Step 4) Proceed to dismiss all photographic evidence in the same manner as 3) or blame it (if the corpses are from Western Europe) on typhus or (if the corpses are from Eastern Europe) the Soviets.

 

Step 5) Proceed to keep emphasizing and exaggerating allied war crimes as much as possible to shift the debate onto a more level playing field, accompanied by Hitler's 'peace offers'. And while you're at it, attribute false quotes to famous people along with it and do not provide source while doing so.

 

Step 6) Proceed to show every piece of evidence you have where someone was exposed as a fraudster who wanted to make a quick buck off the holocaust, even if 10 out of 10 people exposed this way were novelists and irrelevant to historians, or point out errors in journalism (newspapers) to attack historians. Step

 

7) Rely on the flawed and selective arguments of the few scientists on your side to dismiss the empirical knowledge of all other scientists worldwide. Also, use pen names to feign revisionist numbers.

 

Step 8) Keep changing the subject to bring forth one allegation after another allegation against Jews when you seem to be losing ground on one particular technical aspect of the holocaust you are debating an opponent on. Such as drawing attention to the modern Israeli state today, as well as the current Middle Eastern conflict, or other events like 9/11 or any Jew who has doubted the holocaust or criticized Zionism.

 

Step 9) Relating to step 8), keep in mind why you're really here: not to debate the feasibility of the holocaust with someone in the know, but rather to recruit unsuspecting laymen lacking the knowledge to debate you, to your cause. E.g. throw the Rudolf report in the face of an average youtuber to silence him.

 

Step 10) Always keep whining to your opponent about holocaust denial laws in some countries and make sure to evoke George Orwell's 1984 whenever possible to paint yourself as a victim of thought crimes. And the moment he calls you names, point out his ad hominem as proof of you having won the debate.

 

Congratulations, you are now a holocaust denier!

 

I will end this presentation dedicated to the millions of defenseless victims of Nazi genocide and post-war slander by a small band of deliberately dishonest charlatans with the wise words of Dr. Elizabeth Strakosch, who exposed the Great Father of the School of Holocaust Denial himself, Paul Rassinier, for the intellectual fraud he truly was: "Instead of basing his history on the convergence of evidence (overwhelming oral testimony, documents, etc), he based it on a convergence of doubt. Unable to cast doubt on the undeniable fact of the camps, he made isolated attacks on various aspects of the seemingly unified narrative of the Holocaust. He concluded that these various errors were linked together by a political conspiracy of the victors, rather than by the fact of the Holocaust. Thus he established the basic pattern of denial - dividing the event into its component parts and attacking smaller targets, thereby casting doubt on the whole without confronting it." - Dr. Elizabeth Strakosch, 'The Political Methodology of Genocide Denial', Dialogue, 2005, 3/3, p.9.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRmdJTiOSh8