Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 25th, 2012 #41
James Hawthorne
Senior Member
 
James Hawthorne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,037
Blog Entries: 89
James Hawthorne
Default

Quote:
MacDonald, Taylor, Weber, the American Third Position guys (Merlin Miller) and Johnson meet in California every few months or so to plan strategy, socialize, etc.

MacDonald and Johnson choose to associate and form strategy with Weber and Taylor, one a pro-Semitic traitor to whites and the other a traitor to Revisionists.

Taylor's danger to our people and this movement has been covered here very well, but Weber's backstabbing and destruction of the IHR is covered on CODOH forums, or by Michael Collins Piper, or you can ask Fritz Berg about it (of nazigassings.com).

The guy who told me about these meetings is a white guy who attended at least one of these California get-togethers. He has an asian wife...

Whites with asian wives, a philo-semite, and a guy who destroyed the upward momentum of the largest American revisionist organization are all part of this California based "elite" which is telling us not to talk about the gas chamber and "gas van" lies known as "The Holocaust". This is the "New Right" strategy for success?

Mark Weber took a successful organization, castrated it, and ran it into the ground.

I think if you would ask Johnson about this, he would admit he's been to these get-togethers with Weber and Taylor. It's obvious. He quotes Mark Weber as a source to back up his point of view. "First, as Mark Weber has pointed out..."
Yes this is all true. They have meetings twice a month in Orange County. Taylor does not attend these meetings as he lives in VA. However, if he was in Orange County on business I'm sure he'd attend.

I think they are all getting themselves ready for the release of David Irving's "Himmler" book, which as I have stated, will say the German Reich gassed 3.5 Million jews.

Weber is not a plant, but a totally indolent, lazy and incompetent manager. However, the IHR has been saved on numerous occasions by bequests from newly deceased supporters. How long this will continue is open to question.
__________________
Aryan Matters

VNN Media
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #42
Torgs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
Torgs
Default

Here is another tactic used a lot at CODOH - ALWAYS post a negative comment ASAP after a thread has started that calls for REAL action. Look at what "borjastick" does to this great thread:

http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7136


A note about this borjastick. To my knowledge, he has never been given a warning, even after making personal threats to other posters. He seems to have a protected status at CODOH and is ALWAYS supporting the pukes that write for Inconvenient History. (You know, the ones who are always oh so quick to cede holohoax lies to the jews.)

There has been a change at CODOH. They have been infected with the same virus as Mark Weber, but they are just being more subtle about it.

Is there anyone here who doubts that there are numerous moles in the so-called "revisionist" movement? Is there anyone who doubts that "revisionists" have been and are being blackmailed and/or bribed?
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #43
Torgs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
Torgs
Default

James Hawthorne:

Quote:
I think they are all getting themselves ready for the release of David Irving's "Himmler" book, which as I have stated, will say the German Reich gassed 3.5 Million jews.
Here is a tread at CODOH that talks about Irving being blackmailed. (Look at the posts from "werd.")

Quote:
I never trusted Irving. Why is he walking around and given mainstream press while Zundel and Rudolf were serving their full jail sentences? Sure Zundel got in the news but he sealed his celebrity when he eventually kicked ass in Canada back in the 80's, but why not a word about Rudolf in the mainstream press? They are normal heterosexual family men and can't be blackmailed like Irving. Baron has the answers - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=536 - and sadly not even revisionists who are AGAINST Irving, and for good reason, want to hear them? Why is that? Why the disconnect? We don't have to believe everything Baron says, like when he says Isarel had no part in 9-11 or Kennedy's murder, but he's correct on Irving. Nobody's perfect. Chew up the meat and spit out the bones. Seriously, how hard is that? I have his book on Irving and it's VERY DAMNING. When Baron really wants to, he can produce some great stuff.
http://forum.codoh.info/viewtopic.ph...ving+blackmail


There are two other things to take note of on this thread. That protected poster "borjastick" steps in right away and defends Irving. And a poster named "Twila" was later banned after attacking him. Compare what Twila had to say about Irving with what borjastick said. Twila was banned and borjastick is protected. (Also notice how werd is harassed by the "moderator.") What does that tell you about what's going on at CODOH?


Here is another comment about Irving from that thread that is very interesting:

Quote:
Zundel, before he was incarcerated for questioning the absurd 'holocaust', told me face to face that he thought Irving was "mentally unstable" and specifically predicted that Irving would turn against Revisionists. Zundel and many others, like myself, saw this coming long ago. Having sat with Irving and chatted on two occasions, I can tell everyone that Irving is self centered to a degree that can only be described as comical, a 'bozo'. As well, advancing senility has had a profound effect upon on the very sad David Irving.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #44
Greg Johnson
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
Default Deaing with the Holocaust

1. I have gotten together with MacDonald and Weber here in California a number of times. On two occasions, a fellow traveler who married an Asian woman BEFORE he became racially aware was present. (I think it is a shame he married outside his race, but they have no children and are not going to have any, and he has done good work, so I was willing to work with him. The fact that he TALKED about these meetings, however, does change my willingness to talk to him.)

2. However, none of the conversations I have had with Weber since 2002 (when I first met him at an AmRen conference) have dealt with revisionism. And prior to sending MacDonald the article, I never discussed it with him. In fact, we have not discussed it at all. He just published the piece.

3. I have never discussed revisionism with Jared Taylor. And I have made perfectly clear to him, in person and in print, that I don't agree with his policy on the Jewish question. It would be one thing for him just to avoid the issue altogether, but it is another thing to claim that Jews are white just like us.

4. Alex, you are right about Holocaust education for children: it is child abuse, pure and simple, and parents should raise holy hell about it. That is true, regardless of the truth of the Holocaust, though.

5. All whites are victims of Holocaust abuse, for that matter, and it is a major problem. It is one of the chief tools Jews use to stigmatize white ethnocentrism, pride, self-assertion, and nationalism -- while simultaneously using it to support Jewish ethnocentrism, self-assertion, and nationalism. We desperately need to deal with the Holocaust.

6. But revisionism is not enough, because even if revisionists expose every lie ever told about the Holocaust, a lot of Jews STILL died in WW II at the hands of the Germans and their allies -- and honest revisionists admit that. And that fact alone is "Holocaust enough" for Jews to keep milking money and pity out of whites until we cease to exist.

7. We know that many lies were told about the Holocaust by the survivors, the Allies, and the Jewish leadership. But none of the people who died at the hands of the Germans told those lies. So revealing that OTHER PEOPLE told lies about the Holocaust for financial and political gain is not sufficient reason to stop feeling sorry for the victims, and that is "Holocaust enough" for the Jews to exploit.

8. The sort of revisionist arguments being shopped around by Hadding Scott that allow him to say "serenely" that "the Holocaust did not happen," that "zero people died in the Holocaust," etc., are premised on verbal slight of hand. He stipulates that the Holocaust was the attempt to kill every Jew on the planet, and since the Germans obviously were not trying to do that, there was no Holocaust. Or, the Holocaust means killing Jews in gas chambers, and since that did not happen, there was no Holocaust. He even claims that the world's most famous Holocaust victim, Anne Frank, was not a Holocaust victim because she did not die in a gas chamber or Hitler was not trying to kill every Jew. Sensible people look at arguments like that and ask: "But what about the big pile of Jews that revisionists admit actually died?" Aren't they "Holocaust enough" for whites to feel guilt and self-hated?

Hadding is an autistic flim-flam man, or to use Alex's phrase, a socially-awkward detail stickler. No rational person is fooled by that nonsense. The fact that this kind of sophistry is being peddled by revisionists puts the whole enterprise under a cloud of suspicion. I know there are honorable and good people involved in revisionism, and they need to police the kooks so they do not ruin their credibility.

9. So let's grant for the sake of argument that, when their work is done, revisionists establish that the Germans never intended to kill every Jew on the planet, or even every Jew in Germany; that there were no homicidal gas chambers and gas vans; that the survivors and Allies and Jewish leaders made up a lot of outlandish lies; etc. I submit -- and they admit -- that "Holocaust enough" would remain.

I'm not "conceding" that. Revisionists concede it. I am just bearing the bad news and claiming that revisionism is NOT ENOUGH to deal with the Holocaust problem. The revisionists can win every argument, and there will still be Holocaust enough for them to SELL our people on a one way guilt trip to oblivion. So we need to work on our people to prevent them from BUYING it.

Read my essay to see more: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net...the-holocaust/
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #45
DiCarlo
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Right of Stormfront
Posts: 988
Default

Quote:
The revisionists can win every argument, and there will still be Holocaust enough for them to SELL our people on a one way guilt trip to oblivion. So we need to work on our people to prevent them from BUYING it.
I don't believe that. The fact that jews are lying about what happened to them is not commonly known. Whites just don't care enough about it to question the facts. Until the facts are out there about this colossal lie for all to see, there's no way for you to make that statement. The hoax as jews have narrated it is a lie, and that lie needs to be exposed. Jews can call it a holocaust if they choose to, but if everyone understands what happened, then jews will receive nothing but the contempt they so richly deserve.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #46
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
6. But revisionism is not enough, because even if revisionists expose every lie ever told about the Holocaust, a lot of Jews STILL died in WW II at the hands of the Germans and their allies -- and honest revisionists admit that. And that fact alone is "Holocaust enough" for Jews to keep milking money and pity out of whites until we cease to exist.
This is the point I don't get. A lot of everybody died in WWII. You keep saying the jews were singled out, they got harsh treatment. That isn't the case. The jews were focused on because they were the source of communism. In Russia, where they murdered tens of millions of our kind. And in Germany, where they staged various putsches. With an eye toward doing the same thing they'd just accomplished in Russia. And harsh treatment? They emigrated. How is that harsh? Their own leaders were encouraging them to do that.

The point is not that some jews suffered, it's that there was no special jewish suffering, hence no reason to give them any of the money or apologies they demand. What kind of chutzpah is it to insist on reparations for non-existent atrocities when your side was the one committing real ones?

What revisionists discover is simply stuff we can use. The question is how to politically play WWII. The jews' plan is obvious: claim nazis, and germany, and all white culture, is responsible for the Worst Atrocity Ever. Use this to elevate their race over us for all eternity. How can we possibly not respond to this? There is no way. And even if you try, as many commenters pointed out, they will still just call you a Nazi. Which is intended to trigger Holo-horrors in the minds of the people you're trying to reach. So even there, you have no choice not to fight. You must fight. And the way you do that, to start with, is using the term Holohoax. Because that's exactly what it is.

You won't do that because you fear for your reputation among...people who don't matter. It's symptomatic of a conservative mindset that can't solve the problem we're facing. There was no Holocaust. When you and MacDonald use the term like it's A-OK, you have ceded the debate to the enemy. You're saying your communist agitprop term is perfectly legitimate and respectable, and I honor it. That's not the way to go.

Last edited by Alex Linder; July 25th, 2012 at 05:01 PM.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #47
Eric-Hunt
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13
Eric-Hunt
Default

You believe that whites, upon learning that 6 million, gas chambers, gas vans, etc., were all part of the greatest hoax in human history- a genocidal Jewish-led conspiracy which spanned decades, would still feel sorry for the Jews at the same level they do now?

-- Based upon photographs of some victims of typhus, dysentery, and allied bombing at the end of a World War which ended with the nuking of tens of thousands of innocent civilians?

The simple fact is if the Jewish community, using their Big Lie technique pointed out by Hitler, Schopenhauer, and Martin Luther manufactured "The Holocaust" Big Lie, then their internment during World War II as the most subversive entity which has ever existed was entirely justified. Yes, down to the Jew children such as Irene Zisblatt, who after deliberately being kept alive by the Germans in camps grew up to psychologically torment our children with her Spielberg produced Zionist scat torture fantasies.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #48
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Hadding is an autistic flim-flam man, or to use Alex's phrase, a socially-awkward detail stickler. No rational person is fooled by that nonsense. The fact that this kind of sophistry is being peddled by revisionists puts the whole enterprise under a cloud of suspicion. I know there are honorable and good people involved in revisionism, and they need to police the kooks so they do not ruin their credibility.
Hadding is a dweebish type, which explains his inability to understand how the world actually works in relation to our cause. That is true. But in his badger hole, he's quite formidable. On his strong points, which are the factual fine points of Nazi/Holocaust/historical/Covington/NA stuff, he's very strong, and those are the ones you're trying to beat him on. I believe most people will perceive he got the better of the exchange.

You're basically, Herr Johnson, ceding ground for no reason. As Hadding and others are pointing out, the facts are on our side. Why not use them? Why in the world would you cede the basis of the holocaust agitprop when the supposed atrocity is factually baseless? Are whites not even supposed to fight back at all when communist jews are mass-murdering them? And if they do, and they manage a few killshots, they're then somehow guilty for that? It makes no sense whatsoever. You're acting just like the enemy: whatever the white man does is wrong, and he's always guilty.

Just imagine how much stronger our cause would be if respected, brilliant men like you and MacDonald would use a term like Holohoax. Please deeply consider why you won't use it. You know darn well it's not because the term isn't appropriate. Your own arguments basically say that. Why you think it's autistic to refuse to accept the opponents' prejudiced verbal frames I do not understand. The only neologism you guys will use is $PlC, which is factually wrong and politically inept. But it comes from someone respectable, so even MacDonald will use it.

I guess I'm just disappointed. MacDonald is probably too old to change and/or understand what I'm saying, but you are young enough that you should understand the deeper implications of ceding these biggest of lies to our worst enemy.

Last edited by Alex Linder; July 25th, 2012 at 06:06 PM.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #49
Torgs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
Torgs
Default

Linder:

Quote:
So even there, you have no choice not to fight. You must fight. And the way you do that, to start with, is using the term Holohoax. Because that's exactly what it is.
Exactly. Let's see if Greg passes the litmus test:

Greg, do you deny the holocaust?

(Now let's see just how ""honorable and good" he is.)


BTW, I would like to share this little gem I found recently, as it relates to Linder’s quote above:

A reporter interviewing A.J. Muste (who during the Vietnam War stood in front of the White House night after night with a candle) one rainy night asked Mr. Muste - "Do you really think you are going to change the policies of this country by standing out here alone at night with a candle?" Muste replied - "Oh, I don't do it to change the country, I do it so the country won't change me."


And that reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:

If you feel comfortable in a country gone bad, you’ve gone bad also.

The people who throw the jews bones have been changed. They’ve gone bad. They don’t have it in them to fight the good fight. There is a word for people like them - the holocaust light crowd. Those are the kind of craven pukes I was telling you about that have infiltrated CODOH.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #50
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

A powerful slogan or word or neologism is like a verbal political party: get enough people behind it, it becomes a real force in the world. Because people think used words must refer to something real and important. Look how the jews have fared with their 'racism.' The jews try to force their fake reality on us; we must respond with better terms to force our real reality back on them. That's what politics is, short of fighting in the streets. But our smartest guys don't engage in it because 1) they think it's infra dig, and 2) they simply don't understand politics.

Our old smart guys are stodgies, and won't use anything that true radicals come up. Only new phrases and words from, say, Steve Sailer, or Vdare can be used. But not ever from someone who's actually a WN.

Maybe you and MacDonald need to face the fact that you're functional conservatives, no matter what's on your lips.

When enough people get behind a term outside the controlled lexicon they can, eventually, force it into public awareness. No one seems to understand this. To make ourselves a real force begins with a new way of seeing the world - not the way we're supposed to as dictated by the System. That must manifest in new terms and new arguments frames. But our side shows little interest in this. The top brains, even if they know that radicalism is right, refuse to use radical terminology, and stick with the jew-safe approved terms like racism, anti-semitism and Holocaust. Even though that does nothing but strengthen the enemy in his position.

You all are doing your level best to mix with the very conservatives you should be trying your hardest to distance yourselves from and fight. Is the need to raise money that bad, Greg? What is it?

Do you truly not see what this anti-White proditor Jared Taylor is doing?
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #51
Greg Johnson
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
This is the point I don't get. A lot of everybody died in WWII. You keep saying the jews were singled out, they got harsh treatment. That isn't the case. The jews were focused on because they were the source of communism. In Russia, where they murdered tens of millions of our kind. And in Germany, where they staged various putsches. With an eye toward doing the same thing they'd just accomplished in Russia. And harsh treatment? They emigrated. How is that harsh? Their own leaders were encouraging them to do that.

The point is not that some jews suffered, it's that there was no special jewish suffering, hence no reason to give them any of the money or apologies they demand. What kind of chutzpah is it to insist on reparations for non-existent atrocities when your side was the one committing real ones?
Aside from the quibbling about the use of "harsh," I can agree with all of this. And it would be true, even if the conventional Holocaust narrative were true. Putting the Holocaust in context, comparing it to other events, trying to understand why the Germans wanted a Jew-free Germany (for the same reasons that we want a Jew-free America), challenging the absurd Jewish ethnocentrism that elevates Jewish lives above all others: that's the kind of thing that I advocate. Because instead of trying to pare down death tolls or refute lies told about the events after the fact, these sorts of arguments reframe the Holocaust and set the groundwork for a different moral evaluation of it. And that is where whites are going to get immunized against the guilt tips and emotional blackmail.

Quote:
What revisionists discover is simply stuff we can use. The question is how to politically play WWII. The jews' plan is obvious: claim nazis, and germany, and all white culture, is responsible for the Worst Atrocity Ever. Use this to elevate their race over us for all eternity. How can we possibly not respond to this? There is no way. And even if you try, as many commenters pointed out, they will still just call you a Nazi. Which is intended to trigger Holo-horrors in the minds of the people you're trying to reach. So even there, you have no choice not to fight. You must fight. And the way you do that, to start with, is using the term Holohoax. Because that's exactly what it is.
Sure, revisionists give us some useful stuff for showing that the allies, the Jewish leaders, and the survivahs told lots of lies for political and monetary gain. That can't hurt. But, as I argued at length in the essay, it is not going to get the Holocaust off our back, much less challenge the Jewish power structure.

When the Holocaust is brought up, I really don't think we should respond to it. Why? Because we are allowing them to put us in a moral hole and demanding we climb out of it before we can say anything else. To use a metaphor from Chechar, revisionism is a shield. It is an essentially defensive weapon. We need to use the sword or the spear and go on the offensive. Or, to use a metaphor I employed, the Holocaust is the red cape, whereas the Jewish power structure is the matador. I say charge the matador, not the cape. Or, with Bowden, when the Holocaust is thrown down in our path, we need to "step over it," not get tripped up or stalled by it.

Revisionism has never interested me all that much, because my main concern has always been the genocide being perpetrated against our people right now. So when people have brought up the Holocaust with me in discussions, I have always "evaded" the question by saying, "If the lesson of the Holocaust is that genocide is evil and peoples need their own states to be safe from it, then that lesson applies to whites today. If we do not stop non-white immigration, separate ourselves from non-whites, and regain control of our homelands and our destinies, then we will cease to exist, and that's genocide too. Why do you advocate genocide against white people?"

That sort of argument is preferable because it sets aside the past and focuses on the present and future; it moves from a Jew-centric to a white-centric perspective; it parries their offense and goes straight to attack; it sidesteps historical issues and focuses on moral and political issues. It puts one immediately in white nationalist territory, not spluttering about hoaxes or trying to explain the Leuchter report.

As for the Nazi charge, I think the most disarming thing to do is simply to be honest. I say that as a New Rightist, I think that the basic values and political concerns of the National Socialists and Fascists are correct, namely that different peoples should have their own states, but I don't believe in totalitarianism, imperialism, and genocide. Then I go right back to pressing for white nationalism.

Quote:
You won't do that because you fear for your reputation among...people who don't matter. It's symptomatic of a conservative mindset that can't solve the problem we're facing. There was no Holocaust. When you and MacDonald use the term like it's A-OK, you have ceded the debate to the enemy. You're saying your communist agitprop term is perfectly legitimate and respectable, and I honor it. That's not the way to go.
This mantra is false, tiresome, and petty-minded. You need to give it a rest. My reputation among whom, exactly? You know, Alex, as wrongheaded and despicable as you often are, you are among the tiny handful of people in this movement whose opinion really matters to me. Kevin MacDonald is another. But I had no idea of what he would think of that essay before I sent it to him. Ultimately, there are some things more important than being liked, even by people whose opinions matter, and I think this issue is important enough -- because people who think that White Nationalism DEPENDS on revisionism are, as I have argued, pretty far from the real sources of Jewish power and white weakness, and if our aim is White Nationalism, then we can't win unless we really understand the problem.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #52
Torgs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
Torgs
Default

Greg Johnson:

Quote:
Hadding is an autistic flim-flam man, or to use Alex's phrase, a socially-awkward detail stickler. No rational person is fooled by that nonsense. The fact that this kind of sophistry is being peddled by revisionists puts the whole enterprise under a cloud of suspicion.
Notice the personal attack by Johnson on Hadding. Though I haven't read any of Hadding's work, it sounds to me like Johnson can't deal with Hadding’s reasoning - thus the ad hominems.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #53
Eric-Hunt
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 13
Eric-Hunt
Default

Greg already dodged that one on his own article, which has gotten over 600 mostly negative comments.

Greg,

1) Do you believe cyanide insecticide (Zyklon B) gas chambers killed about a million Jews?

2) Do you believe captured Soviet tank engines was used to gas about 2 million Jews?

3) Do you believe "gas vans" were used to kill a few hundred thousand Jews?

4) Do you believe, as Father Dubois and his Rothschild funders promote, that 2 million Jews were killed in a "Holocaust by Bullets" on the Eastern Front?

This is the official "Holocaust" story.

If he does believe these, fine. I even respect that. Myself, I'm only about 90% sure it's, as Fritz Berg says, a "dirty Jewish hoax". I'd like to see more evidence, such as an exhumation of the alleged million dead at Treblinka.

If he knows these are lies, yet thinks we should let the Jews have their "Holocaust" because of photographs of bodies at Bergen Belsen and Dachau - that's something else.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #54
Torgs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
Torgs
Default

Greg Johnson:

Quote:
When the Holocaust is brought up, I really don't think we should respond to it.
Bullshit.

Just look how effective Eric Hunts questions are.

Answer them Greg, so we can all sit back and watch Eric destroy you with the truth. We have the truth on our side. And we have forensic science.

Why do people like Greg Johnson want to run away from the holohoax issue when we can crush the jews with truth and science and reason?

Because he doesn't have it in him to fight the good fight. (That's why he's cravenly attacking Hadding Scott rather than the jews.)

BTW, here is a quote from Hadding Scott:

Quote:
By choosing not to dance around various taboos, one retains the ability to make sense, which is crucial for appealing to thinkers, and for bringing them to the necessary radical conclusions.

We have to speak to the deeper souls, the people driven by idealism. These are people with a conscience and a disdain for falsehood, people who have an inner voice that objects to following the crowd when the crowd is demonstrably wrong...

Truth has to be paramount. The most significant figure in the American racialist cause since World War II —William Luther Pierce — was largely, perhaps primarily, motivated by indignation at the lies all around him...

...we have to respect our audience and give them the undiluted truth that they desire...
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net...pon-the-truth/

It sounds like Greg Johnson is the kind of guy who likes to dilute the truth and dance around taboos and throw jews bones rather than speak the truth and kick jew ass. (In ohter words, a milquetoast "revisionist" and a member of the "holohoax light" crowd.)

BTW Greg, Do you deny the holocaust?
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #55
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric-Hunt View Post
Greg already dodged that one on his own article, which has gotten over 600 mostly negative comments.

Greg,

1) Do you believe cyanide insecticide (Zyklon B) gas chambers killed about a million Jews?

2) Do you believe captured Soviet tanks were used to kill about 2 million Jews?

3) Do you believe "gas vans" were used to kill a few hundred thousand Jews?

4) Do you believe, as Father Dubois and his Rothschild funders promote, that 2 million Jews were killed in a "Holocaust by Bullets" on the Eastern Front?

This is the official "Holocaust" story.

If he does believe these, fine. I even respect that. Myself, I'm only about 90% sure it's, as Fritz Berg says, a "dirty Jewish hoax". I'd like to see more evidence, such as an exhumation of the alleged million dead at Treblinka.

If he knows these are lies, yet thinks we should let the Jews have their "Holocaust" because of photographs of bodies at Bergen Belsen and Dachau - that's something else.
Are there any statistics on how many Mexicans were killed by the U.S. when the American government used Zyklon B to disinfect lousy migrant workers back in the 1930's?




Last edited by Steven L. Akins; July 25th, 2012 at 06:35 PM.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #56
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

'Holocaust' must be problematized.

'Holocaust' must be unpacked.

How's that for amateur grad-school language?

Why do MacDonald and Johnson privilege it like it's a serious term, rather than an agitprop concoction like 'racist' or 'homophobe'?
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #57
Greg Johnson
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
Default

Don't forget "deconstructed."

But better yet, don't let the satirist jack this thread and lock the thinker in the trunk. We need Alex the thinker on this one.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #58
Torgs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 43
Torgs
Default

Simple question for you Greg:

Do you deny the holocuast?
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #59
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Johnson View Post
Don't forget "deconstructed."

But better yet, don't let the satirist jack this thread and lock the thinker in the trunk. We need Alex the thinker on this one.
Yeah, deconstructed too, for sure.

But look at this off TOO comments.

This is from that jasonspeaks, who I think is a jew troll or serving the anti agenda. He makes my point:

However, there must be something about the revisionist history that isn’t quite such knock-down proof, or otherwise doesn’t quite ring true, because I don’t see too many otherwise honest scholars like MacDonald embracing it.


That shows you the power you and MacDonald have. It's really not like you disagree with the case that's been made, your essay shows that.

Using Holocaust straight up is like acceding in a crime. Against your own race.

Last edited by Alex Linder; July 25th, 2012 at 06:52 PM.
 
Old July 25th, 2012 #60
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric-Hunt View Post
You believe that whites, upon learning that 6 million, gas chambers, gas vans, etc., were all part of the greatest hoax in human history- a genocidal Jewish-led conspiracy which spanned decades, would still feel sorry for the Jews at the same level they do now?

-- Based upon photographs of some victims of typhus, dysentery, and allied bombing at the end of a World War which ended with the nuking of tens of thousands of innocent civilians?

The simple fact is if the Jewish community, using their Big Lie technique pointed out by Hitler, Schopenhauer, and Martin Luther manufactured "The Holocaust" Big Lie, then their internment during World War II as the most subversive entity which has ever existed was entirely justified. Yes, down to the Jew children such as Irene Zisblatt, who after deliberately being kept alive by the Germans in camps grew up to psychologically torment our children with her Spielberg produced Zionist scat torture fantasies.
Yes...very well said. This is pure Jared-jew-servin'-Taylor bs about whites having some kind of racial moral problem. It's flat not the case. These people feel guilty about "the" "Holocaust" because they believe it actually happened the way they're told it did. Even if it were justified, it really would be pretty bad if the Germans were gassing huge masses of jews to death, wouldn't it? Well, that's what they're teaching, and whites have the natural reaction to it.

But whites also have a natural reaction to BEING LIED OUT THE ASS TO FOR DECADES ON END. That's what we need to tap into, and there's only one way to do it.

WE need the shock and awe and outrage. Don't cede anything. Attack. Attack them as big liars, atrocity committers, and White genocidalists. What a holy trinity that could be. They lied about what happened to them. The lied about what they did to us then. And they're lying about what they're doing to us now. They are hoaxers, liars and genocidalists. Nothing they say can be believed.

That's how you use 'the' 'holocaust' politically, by taking the bat away from them and bashing their heads in. It can be done. But there has to be will.
 
Reply

Tags
#1, holocaust fairytales, holocaust mythology, jared taylor, revisionism

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:53 PM.
Page generated in 0.14776 seconds.