Holocaust Denial & Historic Revisionism

Again the most important point abouit the Holocaust is not about how many people died but who was behind it, who backed it, who provided the money for it and exactly who was involved. That is whats most important not the numbers.

Wars cannot be fought without suppliers and backers money and support. It is following that info trail that would provide the answer as to who really was behind it all.

as a frequent visitor to this site I would like to vote a NO against moving anything. I joined because of the content and presentation. If things start becoming filtered,obscured or hidden because someone is concerned about big-brother, I have 2 suggestions.

1 - don't visit this site
2 - build your own website and don't allow content you deem questionable to be posted.

Not trying to be harsh to anyone. Just stating my opinion

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
Exactly and which is why I consider it irrelevent and fail to understand the amount of time wasted in arguing one way or another. I think it is likely that about 6-8 million jews were murdered, but I think what has been revealed by recent research is that of that number only 3-4 million were murdered specifically because they were Jewish.

I find it quite amazing that "we" would even debate whether it was 3 or 4 or 6 or 8 MILLION Jews. Is 3 better than 8? should the Nazi regime have incurred lesser punishment if it were indeed 3? We are talking MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. Are we trying to find a number that we can all live with, a number that is just below the "significant" threshold? Does it really matter if they were Jewish? or if they were murdered for other reasons other than the Jewish one?

It is because of this very debate that this topic should remain on the public boards. IMHO.

PS: not scolding you in particular, but humanity in general.

Originally posted by DisgustedOne
I find it quite amazing that "we" would even debate whether it was 3 or 4 or 6 or 8 MILLION Jews. Is 3 better than 8? should the Nazi regime have incurred lesser punishment if it were indeed 3? We are talking MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. Are we trying to find a number that we can all live with, a number that is just below the "significant" threshold? Does it really matter if they were Jewish? or if they were murdered for other reasons other than the Jewish one?

I agree numbers are irrelevent, the simple fact of the matter is that, combined, those events set in motion the way in which all conflicts are now fought. The Nazis are labelled as evil for the crimes that they committed against civilians, yet retrospectively all they did is set the precedent.

The majority of those killed by the Nazi regime were because they were perceived as a threat, the intelligensia and political targets obviously, but when the Wehrmacht rolled into Poland, the Einsatzgruppen rounded up all civilian males, mainly ethnic Poles, over the age of 14 and shot them. They eradicated all potential dissension. The violence in the East excalated because of partisan activity, those that escaped the culls knew what awaited them, they made sure that they caused the occupiers as much trouble as they possibly could. They had nothing left to lose. The Nazis responded with even greater force and brutality. They also became concerned of what would happen if the ghettos rose up, they got a taste at Warsaw. They therefore chose to eradicate that threat and at the same time alleviate what was becoming an economic burden. Economics and military expediancy had more to do with the holocaust than race ever did.

In almost every conflict since world war 2, non-combatants have been treated as potential combatants and purposefully targeted in some instances. While the emphasis is placed on race we fail to learn the lesson that in event of war it is the little people that suffer and the warmongers who reap the profit as they step over our corpses. Not only are civilians systematically slaughtered in the execution of war, those bodies set up to prevent such things happening again fail to act to protect those innocents. Something is very fundamentally wrong with the system, part of that problem is democracy. If a country's people democratically elect a leader they automatically take responsibility for that leaders actions (no matter how unfair that electoral system may be), if another country is threatened and attacks, the people because they elected their leaders are viewed as legitimate targets. This is how murder is justified by the big guns. This is why the G8 set out to spread 'western style democracy'. So when the current incumbent won't play ball they can manufacture the necessary consent of the world wide community to attack and put in power someone who will play ball, democratically of course.

It is because of this very debate that this topic should remain on the public boards. IMHO.

I agree.




[edit on 13-1-2009 by KilgoreTrout]