Holocaust truther/denier

[Ry]

Im not a holocaust truther/denier. One of my most popular videos I ever did is explaining holocausts. The opening line is I don't deny "the" holocaust. it has like 122k views
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zerJK3AhvA8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
My issue with the holocaust is the word "the" If you want skip to 12:30 to 14:50 in that video I talked about the one film I did on the holocaust and how the point was how wrong BOTH sides were to murder people by Whatever methods. To deny Jews and other un-wanteds being killed by Nazis in WWII would be pretty much impossible, how people died is a different issue but for me the difference between being gassed and being starved or shot or worked to death etc has the same end result but the manner in which someone dies is important because making Germany's methods 'special' or unique somehow excuses all the other ways the other countries killed people. Germany was hardly alone in targeting a group of people for being a different kind of group of people than themselves. America was built like that. Only thing left of the Natives in many parts are the names on some road signs.

Sure I don't believe in some of the more outrageous stuff about shrunken heads, electric floors, soap and lampshades, nor does any historian really, and I don't believe in the 6 million number because even the official story from holocaust scholars rejects that too. Even if is was six people that's six people too many (like a drone strike) But I don't "deny" a holocaust. What I do think is that a lot more of the deaths at the camps from the Nazis were probably actually because of starvation which was largely the result of the planned starvation of Germany as a whole by the allies. They did the same thing to Japan where people lived on less than 1,000 calories a day. Obviously the first to not get food in such a situation in any country are the prisoners. This is not a hard thing to prove either, that is exactly what happened. We would not have so many people bone skinny yet alive in camps if the program was to kill them, they would have died in the first year or could have been killed any hundreds of different ways in less time than it takes to give some one a tattoo and a shave.

The Nazis were using them as slaves and worked them to death. They wanted them and needed them alive and working. The cremations were to rid the dead bodies who really did die from typhus and typhoid out breaks. That also happened in WWI mostly in Russia. The ratio of crematoriums to prisoners just does not fit with a a gas and burn policy and there were no gas chambers in any of the 16 camps liberated by the Americans and open to international inspection, everything was in the remaining camps behind the iron curtain which the Soviets "reconstructed." I made long video called more than taboo showing all the mountains of dead bodies of the people who starved to death. There was no denying it. Had the Germans won most likely these people would never have left those camps they were going to die in there anyway. But they didn't win and the allies really didn't give a damn about the prisoners either, they knew they would starve when they bombed the railroads. They didn't care because the starvation method saved the lives of GIs.

They weren't all Jews either the majority of them were Russian prisoners, about two million of which were taken when Hitler surprise attacked Stalin while Stalin had his men in offensive positions rather than defensive because he was about to sneak attack Germany too. That's a historical fact. About 5 million non-Jews were said to have died in the prison camps. I don't know where that number comes from but it's plausible not that it landed on such an exact round number but that it was something in the millions or a million. But I pointed out that the allies did the same things and also killed millions of people not only in WWII but after WWII. My go to example of evil like everyone else is usually the Nazis followed by Stailn, Pol Pot, Columbus etc. But it ought to be America as our country killed millions of Asians and Arabs in modern times.

Intentional Starvation in war or peace, should be considered a war crime. Starvation as a tactic, a crime the holocaust overshadows and protects. From shooting the buffalo and salting crops to bombing rail lines to international sanctions, intentional starvation should be considered a war crime.

[adesole]

Some good points in that video, Ry.

The British Empire practiced starvation extermination againast its enemies. In WWI millions starved in Germany and Austria Hungary. By 1918 there was famine in Vienna and food blockade of Germany continued even after the war. And there was a food blockade once again in the second world war. Check out the Greek famine in WW II.

There were massive famines in British India. In Ireland about 25% of Irish Catholics died in the Irish famine. The British Empire was the biggest practitioner of genocide by starvation the world has ever seen

[Ry]

And the Americans starved the Indians too. Why isn't this considered a war crime?

[Bender]

This all will be considered a war crime when the balance of power shifts and the new lords want to cripple the old lords.

[Revolution]

http://revblog.codoh.com/2012/03/the-su ... s-in-wwii/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
crimes the allies committed to the Germans

[PlutoCharon]

Personally, I have no problem being called a holocaust denier. The term has a negative connotation and some revisionists would argue that accepting it only helps the exterminationists. I used to agree with this but I can't any longer. Exterminationists smear you as a holocaust denier by association just for questioning any aspect of it, so my new thing is to embrace the label and turn it into a positive.

I didn't realize until about a year ago that "the holocaust" only refers to Jewish victims. What I mean is that the gypsy/homosexual/POW narrative was revision in itself which added in the 70s (I think) and rejected by orthodox exterminationists who don't deny that other people suffered but want the holocaust/shoa to specifically refer only to Jewish victims. Which is a reason why the gypsy 'holocaust' is called Porajmos. The gypsy 'holocaust' has issues of it's own (the gypsy camp was more like a refugee camp and there were no exterminations) and the homosexual thing is based on zero proof other than WWII-era homosexual laws which were common to Europe (and IIRC the "nazi" ones lasted until the 90s even).

I'm more interested in historial revision as a whole. 65 million or so (or more) people died in WWII (it is claimed). 6 million Jews did not die and I do not deny that Jews died. Some died in camps for various reasons and some as a result of war just like many more others. Multiple parties were responsible, not just Germans. If you get a moral equivalency report card going, the Germans wouldn't even "score" the worst despite the fact that most of the blame falls upon them to the point where Germans today are still collectively being punished and still paying reparations for something that didn't happen and something they themselves had nothing to do with.

Not at all trying to be an apologist for NSDAP Germany or Hitler or anything like that. They definitely did their share of bad things. But they were not alone and from my research they were not even the most responsible party for all that. Churchill and co were worse. And history needs to be put in it's proper context. People can say they were all bad and that's bad enough. I'm fine with that, but that's not what history claims. It claims that FDR and Churchill were heroes.

I'm also not saying life in those camps was disneyland. Of course it was bad. In comparison, even today the US has gitmoo for Islamic political prisoners. Japanese Americans and some Germans (not a whole lot, but some) were placed in camps and had their possessions taken away. The British imprisoned German political prisoners and the Russians did the same. I would like to understand which Jews were even sent to the camps because there were still a lot of Jews in Berlin when the Russians marched in. Anne Frank's father was imprisoned for being a communist political prisoner for example. I'm well aware of the Nuremberg Laws, but there is a lot that's missing in the narrative. Was Aushwitz really for slave labor? Some of those camps looked like 1940s Kibbutz in Palestine. Is there something we aren't being told?

In addition to Allied bombing of civillian areas in Germany, they also imprisoned many Germans (including civillians) afterwards in conditions which caused thousands to die. Germans were expelled from territory outside of the new partitions. Nobody cares because "Germany was the agressor and they lost" but that's not the whole story and it doesn't justify collective punishment.

So I deny the holocaust because there was no holocaust. There was nothing unique or out of the ordinary really about the treatment of jews. That does not make it right, it just puts it in it's proper historical context. If they want to glorify the suffering of one specific niche of people over the suffering of everybody else who also suffered, I have a problem with that. If there was any sort of a holocaust, it's the 65 million or so total victims of WWII. The nukes unnecessarily dropped on Japan. The civillians fire bombed in their sleep in all nations where the war took place. And it's not just Germans or some archetypal hollywood "nazi" boogeyman responsible.

Even the famous Buchenwald photo turned out recently to be fake (the skinny guy was added). And the conditions leading to skinny people and overcrowding and dying due to typhus, etc. was largely due to Allied bombing cutting off resource and supply routes. There is just so much absurd nonsense about the holocaust that I cannot take it seriously. The survivors had my sympathies for 20 years of my life, now I sympathize with all the others who are mostly ignored just so we sympathize with one specific group and mostly over things that never happened. That's why I'm a holocaust denier and I'm okay with it. That's also just me.

The reasons why Americans were sold on WWII are also not exactly the "nazi" crimes today's kids are indoctrinated with. Back then WWI was still fresh on peoples minds, Germans were still "the Huns" for Americans and obsessed with some sort of racial-purity (also not entirely true, true to an extent but "ethnic German nationalism" would be more appropriate instead of 'race') as well as militant domination of Europe and whatever. Then Pearl Harbor happened and Germany had to declare war then the US got involved. The Jewish thing was not the reason. It was there, it was in the papers. Just like it was earlier in the century (the first holocaust, the ones the Russians were blamed for that quietly disappeared as the Bolsheviks too power). Today "Nazi" and "Hitler" are synonymous with gas chambers and killing jews. That other stuff, a lot of it propaganda, has mostly disappeared. There are WWII books with large portions devoted to the holocaust. Kids today are partially conditioned to think the US involvement in WWII was to save the Jews and that the worst crime the "nazis" committed was systematically exterminating Jews. The flipside of this is those who continue to say "America knew it was happening and said nothing" . So without the holocaust, the Germans don't look so bad compared to everybody else. Without the Nanking massacre (which I also believe was propaganda and a hoax) the Japanese didn't look as bad but they did attack Peal Harbor (and their hand was forced).

Sorry for the lengthy post. What I'm saying is I'm okay with being a holocaust denier since the meat of the holocaust never happened and a lot of bad stuff happened everywhere that people like Churchill are deified as heroes for to some people. There is no moral equivalency and people in Germany today are still being collectively punished for this. That aint right.

[atlantaiconoclast]

I have found that critical discussion of the Holocaust is THE most taboo conversation in the world. I don't think I have the courage to take on this issue.

[Ry]

dont do it it can ruin your career and no one will listen.

I no longer speak with Scott Horton because of this. He pulled Giuliani on me. If you don't support the full American version of WWII apparently you're a Nazi.

[truthmachine]

dont do it it can ruin your career and no one will listen.

I no longer speak with Scott Horton because of this. He pulled Giuliani on me. If you don't support the full American version of WWII apparently you're a Nazi.

This is exactly why people need to talk about it. If everyone lives in a cloud of fear about this topic, it will never see the disinfecting sunshine. We need to talk to as many people about this as possible. It's not like the old days when folks would be shocked by what you say and then there was no way for them to check up on what you said if it is true or not. Now people can find out the truth about this topic in a hour or so on teh internet if you push them in teh right direction. Give them the push.

[Ry]

sure but there is no reason you can't do it anonymously.