Evangelion

The one in which you correctly identified my deliberate provocation.

Evangelion

That is not the claim to which I was referring.

I was referring to this claim by you:

If you can't even recognise your own comments, you shouldn't really be here.

-FPY-

But why? Is it his rejection of the 19th century that is so disturbing? Maybe I or someone else ought to start a Francis Parker Yockey thread; I had not expected his works to be so widely read amongst people who were probably not racists/racialists/fascists/other evil people. Perhaps a decent discussion of him could be possible?

I will agree that the IHR is less than perfect.

Thank-you.

Those documents are more historically reliable than survivors' testimonies. I never said the holocaust never happened.

Corona688

No, but you ARE trying to whitewash it by saying it wasn't as bad as nearly everyone seems to think.

I find it impossible to imagine the state of mind that would cause one to agree with this sentiment in light of the available evidence. It's like denying the existence of the ocean. The Nazis had the motivation to kill 6 million people, and stand damned out of their own mouths. They had the facilities to kill 6 million people, facilities which remain intact to this day for everyone to see. They had the transport to bring 6 million people from all over Europe to their killing facilities in timely fashion. They had the organization to kill 6 million people, indeed their bureacracy is a good source of evidence. The Nazis knew how many they killed, none better.

And finally, whether you think the Nazis killed 6 million people or not, 6 million people DID vanish during the Final Solution. How many Jewish people are left in Germany or Poland now, I wonder?

Loren Pechtel

Yes, this was also a factor. Same as with the Inquisition.

-FPY-

Why were so many "gas chambers" rebuilt? Why don't the numbers add up?

Ovazor

I think that the motivation of the holocaust deniers is somewhat different from case to case.

For most it is plain old antisemitism.

In some cases, holocaust denial is motivated by hatred of the state of Israel, which is different than hatired of Jews.

For many it is a method to make nazism more presentable.

Some, from the countries which had active part in the holocaust, e.g. Germany, Austira, Croatia, etc. are motivated by desire to see their own country in a better light.

For some it is just another form of "controversial" history. They have just read or heard about holocaust deniers' claims and swallowed the lies without having any ideological motives. There is plenty of peple who tend to be very suspicious towards anything "official", and make the holocaust denial a case of "a brave small minority against dogmatic offcial monolith which doesn't tolerate dissenteres." Most the active proponents of holocaust denial seem to be ideologically motivated,even if they use the "persecuted minority" -rethoric

Enai

Well, I'd like you to demonstrate that "the numbers don't add up". What numbers? and what should they add up to? Do you mean the old denier's claim that "you couldn't have exterminated 6 million people in auschwitz' gas chambers?" Well. That's correct. The millions of people were killed by a combination of hard physical labor and starvation. The prisoners did construction work and other simple, physically demanding and quite often dangerous tasks (for instance producing TNT, which involves handling heated strong acids, not to mention that byproducts are quite volatile). They were fed very little (I don't recall how little, but I think it was much less than 1000 calories/day). The people who were sent to the chambers were only those who weren't in shape to be exploited for their work first.

Sigh. Read a history book about that time. Preferably written by a mainstream historian.
Enai

nogods4me

Evangelion;

Correct, and I suggest you go to one of the message boards frequented by deniers and do a quick survey. Poll them and ask them their religion and what "flavor" they practice. Find out what other beliefs they hold dear. They can put apretty face on it by publishing books by folks with initials after their names, but in the end they have reached their hateful conclusions before they even get started. There is much in common here with YEC's and other hard core flavors of xtian apologists.

now then how does this statement:
B]Most christians I know are pleased with the Israeli state and do not support the totality of Jewish land claims, and obviously accept the holocaust as historical fact. Does that prove anything?[/B]

have anything to do with my statement? they are entirely unrelated. I am not talking about most xtians. I am talking about most deniers. I would guess that deniers are as small a percentage of the total population (xtian and otherwise) as the moon hoax folks.

let me be more clear if i can: most people, at least in the US and Europe belive the accounts of the holocaust to be, more or less, historically accurate. This includes most xtians, jews, buddhists, etc. However, of the group we are calling "holocaust deniers" it is my experience that the generally espouse a nasty form of xtianity. I don't just mean the folks like finklestein and other published persons, I mean of all of those I have had the displeasure of reading and meeting. those with their nasty little rallies at holocaust remebrance events, those with web pages, those with their little "white power" tracts, etc, etc.



also you claim that this statement:
The ones that claim to be scholarly (ie, the two links FPY provided), make no reference to their religion whatsoever

makes my point "unfounded". again false, I am speaking of all those who deny the holocaust, not just those who have been published. In fact, like many other "unsavory" views, when those who hold them do publish they tend to cloak their affiliations, as in the racist literature that can be found masqurading as serious research or philosophy. Think of David Duke and his attempt to put a pretty ( and surgically altered) face on race politics.

[

Evangelion

*snip*

I suggest you ask the person who wrote it. It wasn't my statement. It was joedad's.

No I don't. I didn't even make that comment. That was livius drusius, not me.