Holocaust denial

I receive emails with what are presumably suggestions for posts (except for the occasional attempt to set me up).

I usually ignore the ridiculous ones, but this one deserves some attention.

Holocaustianity – The Holocaust Lie Exposed…..#HolyHoax

If Hitler was a fascist trying to take over the World – how come we now have global corporate fascism (global corporate government)?

Exposing the Holocaust / Holy Cause/ Holy Hoax Lie – how Holocaustianity has been used to take over the Western World….

International Red Cross official death toll from the so called Holocaust is 271,000, not 6 million

There is still not one shred of evidence that even one person was gassed in the Nazi prison camps – and all of the so called ‘survivor’ testimonies have been exposed as fakes.

Wakey wakey peeps – the people who pose as victims are bleeding you and your family dry.

Read More:

http://mediawhores.co.nz/2017/01/10/holocaustianity-how-the-holocaust-lie-has-been-used-to-take-over-the-west/

That link is to a New Zealand site…

International Red Cross official death toll from the so called Holocaust is 271,000, not 6 million

There is still not one shred of evidence that even one person was gassed in the Nazi prison camps – and all of the so called ‘survivor’ testimonies have been exposed as fakes.

…which links to other sites making similar claims. Which are ridiculous attempts to perpetuate well known myths and falsities.

Red Cross and East German government figures put the total deaths at every camp as 272.000, and 282,000 respectively which includes homosexuals, communists, gypsies, murderers, paedophiles etc. The 6 Million figure is a Kabbalist number, a magickal figure which featured in news papers in the early 1900’s

The early 1900s were well before the Holocaust.

This has all been debunked long ago.

Holocaust deniers misrepresent and omit information contained in ICRC reports that contradict their claims. Critics argue that Richard Harwood in his “Did Six Million Really Die?” pamphlet could only claim that the ICRC had found no evidence of a policy to exterminate Jews by ignoring key sections of the 1948 report, where the ICRC explicitly states that the systematic extermination of Jews was Nazi policy.

Similarly, Harwood wrote that the June 4, 1946 edition of Baseler Nachrichten, another Swiss newspaper, reported that “a maximum of only one and a half million Jews could be numbered as casualties.

Harwood fails to mention that a later article in a later edition of the newspaper acknowledges that the previous article was incorrect, and 5,800,000 was an accurate number of victims.Critics cite this as an example of deniers using partial information to distort legitimate sources

  • The January 19, 1955 edition of Die Tat did give a 300,000 figure, but this was only in reference to “Germans and German Jews” and not nationals of other countries.
  • In the 1978 official bulletin, entitled “False Propaganda”, the ICRC denounced Holocaust denial and confirmed that the agency “Never published—or even compiled—statistics of this kind which are being falsely attributed to it” and stated that its mission was “to help war victims, not to count them”, and questioned how they would have even been able to obtain such statistics had they wanted to, given that they were “only able to enter only a few concentration camps…in the final days of the war”.
  • “The figures cited by the author of the booklet are based upon statistics falsely attributed to us, evidently for the purpose of giving them credibility, despite the fact that we never publish information of this kind.”
    — Françoise Perret, Comité International de la Croix-Rouge, to Jacob Gerwitz, August 22, 1975.
  • The agency states that the figures used are “the number of deaths recorded by the International Tracing Service on the basis of documents found when the camps were closed”, and accordingly bear no relation to the total death tolls, since the Nazis destroyed much documentation, and that many deaths occurred in camps where prisoners were generally not registered.
  • Because these claims regarding the ICRC were used for the defense of Ernst Zündel at his trial in 1985, critics state that despite the agency’s attempts to demonstrate the truth, Holocaust deniers have continued to rely on ICRC based disinformation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Holocaust_denial#International_Committee_of_the_Red_Cross

It’s very sad to see these false claims about the Holocaust and about International Red Cross being perpetuated in New Zealand 30-40 years after being debunked and three quarters of a century after the Holocaust.

Previous Post

97 Comments

  1. Blazer

     /  January 11, 2017

    Israel was formed not long after the end of WW2.Sympathy and guilt are milked for every advantage by the Zionists.There is a plethora of information regarding the exaggeration of the death rates of Jews.Bullets as opposed to gassing being the primary method.(and then cremating).Here is an Academy award winning example of the Holocaust industry….

    • PDB

       /  January 11, 2017

      You expect us to take this ‘documentary’ seriously?? Sounds like it was made by some teen and is so full of holes I’d have to spend all day posting on here to go through all of them.

      Mate, I thought you had some issues but this is a whole new level of Ostrich like behaviour.

      • Blazer

         /  January 11, 2017

        depends whether you take Spielbergs Academy Award winning film seriously.You see the doco relies on footage from that film.The truth is often a bitter pill to swallow,as you are well aware.

        • PDB

           /  January 11, 2017

          Regardless of the movie the fact you give any credence to Holocaust deniers suggests you need more than the bitter pill you swallow daily.

          • Blazer

             /  January 11, 2017

            an open mind is a good thing.You appear to be so sold on establishment narratives,its as if your head is a giant sponge.You have a black or white view in a world full of shades of…grey.

            • PDB

               /  January 11, 2017

              There’s a big difference in disputing how many Jews died at the top end of the spectrum to saying not many Jews died.

            • Blazer

               /  January 11, 2017

              who has said ‘not many’ Jews died?

            • PDB

               /  January 11, 2017

              I find reading you newer posts a chore let alone going back through past nonsense you have written.

            • Blazer

               /  January 11, 2017

              you always find presenting evidence to back your assertions…a chore….nothing new there.

            • PDB

               /  January 11, 2017

              I’m still awaiting your simple ‘policy announcements’ that you said Labour just need to make to ensure they are govt from a few months ago……

            • Blazer

               /  January 11, 2017

              @PDB …please do your diverting/awaiting on another thread,you are a tiresome ,lightweight.

            • PDB

               /  January 11, 2017

  2. Noel

     /  January 11, 2017

    Its sad that ethnic clensing continues to occur all those years after the Holocaust.

    • Blazer

       /  January 11, 2017

      its sad that the Zionists have to round up a bunch of shameless liars to promote their agenda.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  January 11, 2017

        One would have to assume a conspiracy on such a huge scale that involved so many people and so much fake evidence that it’s easier to believe that the Holocaust happened. It might just be possible now, with modern technology, but hardly likely then. I have read that the 6,000,000 buggered off to the USA where, of course, 6,000,000 migrants would go unnoticed-I don’t think. The photos and films were made in Hollywood-yes, it’s likely that actors would let themselves starve to make themselves look like that, And allow themselves to be piled up in vast heaps. And that the Germans would have admitted atrocities that they didn’t commit and go the gallows, in some cases, for these.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  January 11, 2017

          To me, it’s like denying that the Blitz or Gallipoli or the Somme or the Russian Revolution took place against all the evidence that they did. The idea that all the photographic and filmed evidence were made in Hollywood is absurd. If Germany was being wrongly blamed for such atrocities, they would have been justified in taking the lawsuit to end all lawsuits out.

          Why did VW finally offer compensation to the slave workers ? Too little, too late, of course, but nobody offers compensation to people who aren’t owed it.

        • Blazer

           /  January 11, 2017

          Are you a bit thick Kitty?Try reading the actual posts instead of your kneejerk reaction s.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  January 11, 2017

            Don’t be ridiculous. You have said that the Holocaust either didn’t happen or happened on a much smaller scale-you have called those who say it did liars. You are either a malicious stirrer or a lunatic if you deny the massive amount of evidence, much of it carefully recorded by the murderers.

            • Blazer

               /  January 11, 2017

              Show me where I have said any of those things…. If you can!

        • Blazer

           /  January 11, 2017

          Show your link that 6 mil went to the US…..I call… Liar.

  3. Maggy Wassilieff

     /  January 11, 2017

    Crikey! You do not want to attract EAD and Mikenmild from Kiwiblog over to this site do you?

  4. PDB

     /  January 11, 2017

  5. Blazer

     /  January 11, 2017

    the term Holocaust did not enter the western lexicon of language until the 1970’s.As the war ended in 1945,we can assume that it became a concious marketing label and was aggressively promoted from the 70’s on.Evidence attesting to this, has been presented by notable British historian ,David Irving.He became the Zionists public enemy number one and was subjected to a well organised and financed campaign to discredit his research.As Churchill said..the victors write history,and they do not take kindly to anyone trying to present anything that disputes their version.

    • PDB

       /  January 11, 2017

      Blazer: “notable British historian ,David Irving”

      Wikipedia: “Irving’s reputation as a historian was discredited[6] when, in the course of an unsuccessful libel case he filed against the American historian Deborah Lipstadt and Penguin Books, he was shown to have deliberately misrepresented historical evidence to promote Holocaust denial.[7] The English court found that Irving was an active Holocaust denier, antisemite, and racist,[8] who “for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence”.[8][9] In addition, the court found that Irving’s books had distorted the history of Adolf Hitler’s role in the Holocaust to depict Hitler in a favourable light”.

      • Blazer

         /  January 11, 2017

        he still meets the test of ‘notable’…sold millions of books and exposed the Hitler Diaries as fraud,despite another notable historian Sir Martin Gilbert confirming their authenticity.Can you provide example of the Holocaust term having widespread usage prior to 1970…if you can,please …do so.

        • PDB

           /  January 11, 2017

          “So why do we call the Nazi genocide of 6 million Jews and millions of others “The Holocaust”?

          This usage came about gradually. The lower-case “holocaust” has described the violent deaths of large groups of people probably since the 18th century, according the Oxford English Dictionary. Before World War II, the word was used by Winston Churchill and others to refer to the genocide of Armenians during World War I. In 1933, “holocaust” was first associated with the Nazis after a major book burning. And after World War II, the “Final Solution“ was often called a holocaust. By the 1960s, according to the Jewish Magazine, it became common to refer to the Nazi genocide of Jews as “The Holocaust.” The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum notes three events that led to this shift: the English translation of Israel’s Declaration of Independence in 1948, which mentions the “Nazi holocaust”; the translated publications of Yad Vashem, the “world center for Holocaust research, education, documentation and commemoration” in Jerusalem; and English newspaper coverage of the trial of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann”.

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/the-word-holocaust-history-and-meaning_n_1229043.html

          Call it what you like, doesn’t make it any better.

          • NOEL

             /  January 11, 2017

            And we haven’t learnt a bloody thing from it.
            See Ethnic Cleansing at Wikipedia.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  January 11, 2017

              Notable ? Hardly. Selling a lot of books doesn’t make one notable. The Hitler Diaries were so obviously a fraud that one doesn’t have to be a genius to debunk them.

              So, where did the 6,000,000 go ?

              The fact that it wasn’t called The Holocaust at the time is a red herring. It doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  January 11, 2017

              The Middle Ages weren’t called that at the time, but that doesn’t mean that they didn’t exist. Old English wasn’t called that at the time it was spoken, but it existed.

            • Gezza

               /  January 11, 2017

              Interesting snippet I learned watching The Crusades series on Al Jazeera. They were not called Crusades or Crusaders until long after their bottys were booted out by the camel drivers.

    • Conspiratoor

       /  January 11, 2017

      Some good reading on the use of the term ‘holocaust’ both pre and post ww2…

      http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/106031/who-coined-the-term-holocaust-to-refer-to-the-nazi-final-solution-for-the-je

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  January 11, 2017

        The word holocaust has, of course, been around for who knows how long-it’s from the Greek. It only means THE Holocaust when it’s given a capital H.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  January 11, 2017

          The middle finger to the two downtickers on the comments above.

  6. Blazer

     /  January 11, 2017

    • BLAZER, I am happy for you to test the humanity and patience of others. However, your continued denial of the deaths of millions of ethnic Jews can not be excused by labelling the as Zionists. Zionists are a very small group of extremist Israeli citizens as you know well. I consider your claims about the Holocaust as being beyond the pale. I recommend you go to New York and spend a few days at the Holocaust Museum, and inter-act with the few remaining survivors or their first born, and hear and learn from their story rather than claim that the writings of people who were never there at the time have any authenticity. You are on the wrong side of history, and your dribblings are meaningless.

      • Blazer

         /  January 11, 2017

        comprehension Col….I am certainly not denying millions of Jews died.I recommend you have a quick look at esteemed film maker Steven Spielbergs doco and then critique what useful purpose it serves, and why this Academy award winning film relied on such bare faced,incredible lying examples of humanity.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  January 11, 2017

          You don’t even need to travel abroad. Go to the Auckland Museum.

          Died sounds better than ‘were murdered’, of course.

  7. Pete – why withhold the name of the person who sent you the note?

    • PDB

       /  January 11, 2017

      Best not to name and shame them when they believe such rubbish as this…….

      “International Red Cross official death toll from the so called Holocaust is 271,000, not 6 million. There is still not one shred of evidence that even one person was gassed in the Nazi prison camps – and all of the so called ‘survivor’ testimonies have been exposed as fakes”.

      • I disagree with that the curative power of some sunshine wouldn’t go a miss on this stuff.

        • Blazer

           /  January 11, 2017

          where did the Red Cross get their figures,should be easily disproved.

    • Blazer

       /  January 11, 2017

      Dave I say ..Dave what does it matter?Instead of downticking ,why not present some plausible evidence that 100’s of 1000’s of Jews were…gassed.It seems rather hard to find…any.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  January 11, 2017

        Took about 3 seconds to find credible information on research confirming Gas Chambers existed and were used for the reported purposes:

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Holocaust_denial :

        Markiewicz and his team used microdiffusion techniques to test for cyanide in samples from the suspected gas chambers, from delousing chambers, and from control areas elsewhere within Auschwitz. The control samples tested negative, while cyanide residue was found in high concentrations in the delousing chambers, and lower concentrations in the homicidal gas chambers. This is consistent with the amounts required to kill lice and humans

        http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/american/skeptic-magazine/skeptic-12.html

        How do we know the Nazis used gas chambers to kill Jews en masse? The same way we prove the Holocaust in general–a convergence of evidence from various sources:

        1. Written documents–Orders for Zyklon-B gas, blueprints and orders for building materials for the crematoria, etc.

        2. Eyewitness testimony–Sonderkommando diaries, confessions of guards and commandants, etc.

        3. Photographs–Not only of the camps, but especially interesting are the secret photos taken of the burning of bodies that were smuggled out of Auschwitz.

        4. The camps themselves–forensic tests have now been conducted demonstrating the homicidal use of both the gas chambers and the crematoria for the express purpose of exterminating large numbers of prisoners (Pressac, 1989; Pressac and Van Pelt, 1994).

        5. Negative evidence–we have documentation of the numbers of prisoners shipped to the various camps, the numbers that were transferred, and the number liberated. The difference between the latter with the former two figures gives an approximation of the numbers who died or were killed (see Hilberg, 1961).

        But you’re right – other than the witnesses, the photo’s, the research, the documentary evidence and the residues in the chambers there is absolutely nothing to corroborate this zionist propoganda!

        • PDB

           /  January 11, 2017

          Wasting your time with Blazer – it’s like talking to a brick.

        • Blazer

           /  January 11, 2017

          none of that stands up(citations needed as per Wiki link)…Hilberg is regarded as an authority.It is accepted Jews were killed,just not en masse by gas.The Labour camps wanted healthy prisoners.,De lousing was standard practice.The pictures of emaciated bodies were largely victims of typhus.Hilberg concedes there is no evidence Hitler ordered the so called Final Solution.What did you think of Spielbergs film btw?

    • Anonymous Coward

       /  January 11, 2017

      Haven’t they made themselves known in the comments?

  8. Blazer. You have reached a predetermined conclusion, that ignores extensive historical evidence of the extent of the holocaust.

    This article provides a good overview. While it is from Jewish publication it is wide reaching and, to my mind conservative.

    Lest we forget.

    http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/.premium-1.540880

    • Can I just add that Haaretz is anything but a conservative paper, it is actually ideologically very left wing. Rather, I mean that this piece is conservative as far as it’s claims about holocaust execution numbers.

    • PDB

       /  January 11, 2017

      When you are anti-Jew facts don’t matter.

      • Blazer

         /  January 11, 2017

        I’m surprised,I had the impression you were pro Jew.

        • PDB

           /  January 11, 2017

          About time you suggested another topic for discussion isn’t it?

          • Blazer

             /  January 11, 2017

            didn’t suggest this one.PG can confirm that.A pity that everyone is not as gullible as you isn’t it?

            • PDB

               /  January 11, 2017

              Where did I say you did suggest this one loser?

            • Blazer

               /  January 11, 2017

              where did I say you did…liar…already caught you lying on this thread as you well know.

            • PDB

               /  January 11, 2017

              You are not answering my question as you can’t – you have only ‘assumed’ I was saying something I actually didn’t. You need to sharpen up a little – being proven wrong every moment of every day on here is wearing you down.

            • Blazer

               /  January 11, 2017

              go and have a lie down….you know nothing about this subject.Trying to divert from the topic because you don’t, just makes you look ….stupid,something you manage …everyday.

            • PDB

               /  January 11, 2017

              Nice collection of downticks you are amassing up above……..certainly ‘know your stuff’, or is it the more likely ‘know stuff all’?

    • Blazer

       /  January 11, 2017

      no pre-determined conclusion on my part.Open mind to some impartial evidence.Whether the figure of Jews killed is 300,000 or 5million is not the point imo.The question ,how many were killed in gas chambers and where is the evidence regarding this method was even widespread and plausible?

        • Blazer

           /  January 11, 2017

          5 bullet points,and none compelling…e.g where is the photographic evidence?’Temporary gas chambers’ is stretching credibility.What was used for de lousing inmates?

          • PDB

             /  January 11, 2017

            Blazer: “no pre-determined conclusion on my part. Open mind…”

            Yep.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  January 11, 2017

              Not the point ? It is the fucking point. The 6,000,000 who were murdered had done nothing to deserve this. It is highly relevant that the numbers were in millions. It would have been bad enough had it ‘only’ been thousands who met these horrible deaths.How dare you dismiss the suffering of these people and all the others who were murdered for the crimes of being gay, gipsy or communist ? How dare you play games with them ?

              There is little point in delousing someone who’s about to be murdered. The assumption that these people had lice is an insult, anyway.But there were cases of the Germans herding people into the shower rooms, waiting until they were in a state of terror unimaginable to most of us because they knew of the gassings,and then….turning on the showers for a laugh,

              When the gassings were done in vans, one of those whose idea it had been was accidentally locked in one of them. His last moments would have been interesting.

  9. To sum up then. It is clearly Blazer and cohorts clearly against a huge majority, most of whom relate to family who may still be alive who served in WW2 to oppose the ideas of National Socialism (NAZI) and who fought to be able to release people of many races and beliefs from the jackboot of the NAZI’s. Those who deny the clear evidence of films, expert evidence of fact, the translation of seized Nazi documents, the actual displays of the tatoo’s on the arms of the Aushwitz and other survivors and the sworn testimony of the Allied soldiers who had to deal with the remnants of the “final solution”, in my mind have no place in an intelligent discussion on man’s inhumanity to man. Blazer, please go to whatever hell awaits you, you are not worth any further time or camment from me.

    • Blazer

       /  January 11, 2017

      Perhaps you can opine on with so much evidence available why Spielberg settled on these eyewitness accounts….. Because every single one in his movie is a liar and irredeemable fatasist!

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  January 11, 2017

        How do you know ? Do you know them all ?

      • Gezza

         /  January 11, 2017

        Surely some of these irredeemable fatasists would be willing to try weight loss programmes?

  10. What baffles me is how ideas that go beyond the lunatic fringe such as this, based on fabrication, misinformation and paranoia, can maintain currency the ways it does.

    Yet its polar opposite, Islam’s hegemonic conquest of the West, happening before our eyes, factually true based on Islam’s OWN sacred writings, doctrine, its adherents’ speech and actions, verifiable evidence and current events, gains too little traction to prevent its occurrence.

    PG, you do your site and your reputation no credit by bringing this wretched canard back into the light, especially when you see what crawls out with it. Judging by the comments, however, it’s just the one with the support of no more than four thumbs, and I guess we can take comfort from that.

    • Blazer

       /  January 11, 2017

      What did you think of the academy award winning work?

    • Why shouldn’t nonsense like this being promoted in 2017 be posted on? It is something that’s happening in New Zealand now. Why should it be swept under the carpet pretending it’s not happening?

      If I didn’t post anything that someone might disapprove of it wouldn’t be worth having this forum.

      • Do you REALLY think that giving vent to hundreds of conspiracy theories, not to mention anti-vaxxers, anti-fluoride, anti-GM, anti-nuclear, anti-climate change, etc. moves intelligent debate forward one iota?

        • PDB

           /  January 11, 2017

          I don’t agree at all with what Blazer says but I defend his right to have an opinion.

        • One small blog ignoring them won’t make them go away.

          Do you REALLY want to define what should and what shouldn’t be raised here?

          Are you aware that some are likely to see you as a conspiracy theorist?

          • You’re missing my point. It’s not possible to advance the holocaust denial industry forward because there’s no new evidence or interpretation. All that can happen is for conspiracists to reinforce their own circular biases and groundless beliefs. For YourNZ to raise a topic like this with no related current event indicates not just tolerance for such extremist politics, but actual support for airing thoroughly discredited fascistic views. It’s seems pointless unless there’s a motive.

            As to “Are you aware that some are likely to see you as a conspiracy theorist?”, such people should look up the definition. Conspiracy theorists are sceptics without the critical thinking. They are believers who tend to believe in more than one conspiracy. It involves BELIEF so contrarian arguments won’t work and factual evidence won’t change minds.

            Fears – nuclear, GM, fluoride, global warming, conspiracy theories – are well debated, but civilisation’s existential threat of Islamic conquest is not.

            I rely heavily on contrarian evidence to reinforce my observations. I would unremittingly joyous to have my perspective proved wrong. I would like to debate issues of interest to me here to receive evidence falsifying my world-view. Fat chance.

            Beyond that, as Sam Harris said when interviewing Peter Singer (the Australian philosopher), “… credible ideas that we do want to be able to talk about, particularly about the problem of political Islam, but if we make a slightly lateral move in that conversation you find yourself in the company of people who see conspiracies everywhere. It’s becoming very difficult to debunk these conspiracies, or there’s no debunking that’s ever satisfying to someone who holds these views. It’s disconcerting.”

            • Blazer

               /  January 11, 2017

              So what do you think about Spielberg’s movie?

            • I don’t thinkthe world looks anywhere near “civilisation’s existential threat of Islamic conquest”.

              What about Russian conquest? Chinese conquest? US conquest? All more likely to succeed.

              What about nuclear destruction? Virus? Eating ourselves to death? Suicide? Superbugs and antibiotic resistance?

              I think all of these are greater threats to our well-being and possibly our survival.

              Religious exterminations have proven to be unsuccessful so far, I don’t see that changing. Those who you fear are too conflicted amongst themselves to threaten everyone else on a large scale.

            • Very last-century thinking. Hegemonic conquest – it’s like soft-power but carrying a very nasty and very large number of big sticks – is a new (since the 1970s) and irreversible opportunistic process which will develop over the ensuing centuries. The end result will be the same as its 14-century history – Islamic conquest – but with the connivance of a largely unwitting captive audience.

              As to ‘existential’, as I’ve said earlier, the West, (short for Judeo-Christian Greco-Roman heritage and culture), is in the process of losing this legacy to Islamic jurisprudence, culture, and sharia law. Since the two are fundamentally incompatible, the change will be epochal. It will be as fundamental to the history in the 21st century as was Princip to the 20th. I’m sure that witnesses of the time had no idea of the repercussions. Plus ça change . . .

        • PDB

           /  January 11, 2017

          I’m afraid Kit if you want a blog where everybody (that hasn’t been banned) agree on everything in unison you have to go here: http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/

          • Gezza

             /  January 11, 2017

            I tried to watch this movie about Speilberg’s movie, but it was very long – 2 1/2 hrs or something – & late at night, & I went to sleep about 20 minutes into it. I watched a few minutes at the end when there were 3 brothers visiting Auschwitz who claimed they had all been sonderkommandos & the narrator said they couldn’t have been. There did seem to be reasonable evidence in the bits that I saw that some at least of the people who claimed to be Auschwitz survivors were bullshitting.

            • Blazer

               /  January 12, 2017

              Try all of them bullshitting… Long movie… Don’t need to watch much to wonder …. Is this the best they can do.its the elephant in the thread, studiously avoided by the one eyed and irate.

            • Gezza

               /  January 12, 2017

              To be fair it’s a bit of a bore – way too long.

            • Blazer

               /  January 12, 2017

              yes it is too long,but people sat through the movie and it was widely acclaimed.Just 5 mins at the start,end and in the middle gives you a pretty good understanding of whats…going on.

            • Gezza

               /  January 12, 2017

              Quite likley. I found that with Jaws too. Duel was another disappointment at the end.

          • I find the site messy and unappealing, not to mention its politics which are as far to the Right as I am to the Left.

            Let me make this very clear, PDB, it’s not the subject matter or the commentary I was critical of. It was the gratuitous introduction of it, of a truly nasty piece of historical revisionism as attested by all bar one of the commentators here. But really, is spleen-venting all people want to do here? Fresh insights will perforce be scant on this particular subject, so why would anyone, bar one, want to pursue it?

            • Holocaust denial has been going on for decades. I think that it is still being promoted in New Zealand is noteworthy. We could pretend it’s not happening, but why?

              “the gratuitous introduction of it”

              What was gratuitous about the introduction of it?

              It seems odd that you are relentlessly anti-Islam to the extent you think it will destroy the Western world as we know it unless it is wiped out, but you object to the raising of a topic that involved the denial and downplaying of an attempt to wipe out all the peoples of another religion by a country dominated by yet another religion (not Islam). If Hitler had been a Muslim I suspect you would be publicising it and any denials of it for all you’re worth.

              Again, I don’t see why Holocaust denial in 21st century New Zealand should be a taboo topic.

            • PDB

               /  January 12, 2017

              Kit: I think holocaust denial is relevant in the modern context of continued anti-Jew sentiment primarily driven by left-wing groups with an anti-wealth, anti-USA agenda.

  11. This is a very well executed little piece of subliminal propoganda, this is –

    “If Hitler was a fascist trying to take over the World – how come we now have global corporate fascism (global corporate government)?”

    … and the only part of the topic worth discussing …