It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Holocaust revisionism (as opposed to denial) a legit topic?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:24 AM
link   
IMO, it's ridiculous to think the Nazis didn't kill anyone in camps AT ALL (it's like thinking the planes were holograms on 9/11), but is it really wrong just to question the official history? Isn't calling all holocaust revisionists anti-Semitic the same as calling 9/11 truthers anti-American?

By official, I mean that: Hitler hated Jews, there was nobody behind the events other than Hitler and the Nazis, and 6 million or close to that many Jewish people were exterminated because of their ethnicity.

It's obvious Hitler did hate Jews, or at least he used the German people's hatred of Jews at the time to gain power. I do think there was an element of Zionist treason in the planning of the Holocaust to make an excuse to form Israel and keep Biblical prophecy. I find the numbers on the other hand, questionable. I'm pretty certain more than 1 million Jewish people died, but were they killed only by Nazis, or by the Russians as well? Why have the numbers been changed so many times?




posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by 19872012
 


Holocaust deniers are as ridiculous as climate change deniers - liars.

How can anyone deny something that happened? Tell that to the families of people who died in the Holocast, I say.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:31 AM
link   
I don't see the concept itself to be a problem. Historical accuracy is paramount, at least in theory, to the understanding of any event. Though I do question the reality of being able to quantify anything beyond what we already have, nearly 70 years after the fact.

The problem I see with the practicality of seeking to revise the "official" history is that, if the task were to be undertaken, then disparate groups would undoubtedly come up with staggeringly different interpretations of the available data - and then would stand vehemently by their own results - thus negating any benefit the exercise might have.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by catwhoknows
reply to post by 19872012
 


Holocaust deniers are as ridiculous as climate change deniers - liars.

How can anyone deny something that happened? Tell that to the families of people who died in the Holocast, I say.


But that wasn't my question. I agree people who deny anything happened are nuts. But what about people who don't believe it happened exactly as the history books say? Isn't it logical to think the Allies would have re-written SOME of it to make themselves look better?



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:34 AM
link   
Sorry, thats just ridiculous

There is masses and masses of arhcived footage, and documentation that proves that there were concentration camps. And, there are also a few ATS members, who had family members that actually experienced the disgraceful living conditions and treatment, that would like you to say that to their face.

You sound like another anti-semitic Hitler sympathiser....another one on the boards



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
Sorry, thats just ridiculous

There is masses and masses of arhcived footage, and documentation that proves that there were concentration camps. And, there are also a few ATS members, who had family members that actually experienced the disgraceful living conditions and treatment, that would like you to say that to their face.

You sound like another anti-semitic Hitler sympathiser....another one on the boards


I am not. I detest what Hitler and the Nazis were about. Still, I find it disturbing how discussing the motives, numbers, and possible side-stories to the Holocaust are considered taboo. It makes me think something about the original story is wrong. Yes, a lot of people died, the videos prove that, but do they prove 6 million Jews died, and do they prove the New World Order or Zionism was not behind putting the Nazis into power?



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:44 AM
link   
reply to post by 19872012
 


Does it really matter what number died?

Seriously? Do you just count these people as another statistic?

The fact is it happened, and many people died and were tortured. They had families, and friends and names, yet you decide that its a good idea to challenge the number of people that were killed, and label them each as a number

It might not be what yuo are trying to convey, but it sure seems that way



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by OzWeatherman
reply to post by 19872012
 


Does it really matter what number died?



OF COURSE IT DOES!!!!!!

The fact that six million Jewish people are believed to have died creates immense sympathy for Israel and Zionism. If it's true that only say, 2 million Jewish people died, then the Jewish nation is just one of many nations that suffered during the second world war.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by 19872012
 


Yes,

It was all re-written, because people are liars.

But it happened.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by catwhoknows
reply to post by 19872012
 


Yes,

It was all re-written, because people are liars.

But it happened.


So you agree that revisionism of the event is not necessarily a bad thing, and that the official Allied story isn't necessarily completely true?



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   
reply to post by 19872012
 


You are right.

The six millions Jews were not all murdered by the Wehrmacht or Waffen SS - Eintzgruppen . They were also murdered by their collaborators.

Ukrainians, Latvian, Lithuanian were also murdering Jews.
Croats and Chechen who formed the 'Ustaša - Croatian Revolutionary Movement ' and independently built and managed concentration camps.

And lest we forget the governments like Hungary and France, who eagerly turned their Jewish citizens to the hand of the Nazis, who sent them to be murdered in eastern Europe.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by gravitational
reply to post by 19872012
 


You are right.

The six millions Jews were not all murdered by the Wehrmacht or Waffen SS - Eintzgruppen . They were also murdered by their collaborators.

Ukrainians, Latvian, Lithuanian were also murdering Jews.
Croats and Chechen who formed the 'Ustaša - Croatian Revolutionary Movement ' and independently built and managed concentration camps.

And lest we forget the governments like Hungary and France, who eagerly turned their Jewish citizens to the hand of the Nazis, who sent them to be murdered in eastern Europe.



Have you ever considered the possibility that many of the Holocaust victims could have been killed by the Russians and just happened to be Jewish, and then it got lumped in with the Nazi stuff?

I just find it hard to believe so many countries would just hand over people like that to Hitler. It seems ludicrous to me, i'm amazed it's not questioned more than it is.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by 19872012
 


I am agreeing that a lot of people were murdered.

And yes, I am agreeing that the Allies maybe lied.

But the Allies got in there and saved a lot of people.

What can I say - people lie all the time.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by 19872012

Originally posted by gravitational
reply to post by 19872012
 


You are right.

The six millions Jews were not all murdered by the Wehrmacht or Waffen SS - Eintzgruppen . They were also murdered by their collaborators.

Ukrainians, Latvian, Lithuanian were also murdering Jews.
Croats and Chechen who formed the 'Ustaša - Croatian Revolutionary Movement ' and independently built and managed concentration camps.

And lest we forget the governments like Hungary and France, who eagerly turned their Jewish citizens to the hand of the Nazis, who sent them to be murdered in eastern Europe.



Have you ever considered the possibility that many of the Holocaust victims could have been killed by the Russians and just happened to be Jewish, and then it got lumped in with the Nazi stuff?

I just find it hard to believe so many countries would just hand over people like that to Hitler. It seems ludicrous to me, i'm amazed it's not questioned more than it is.


Sir, please take your time and read some serious history books about WW2.

For your information, the number of Jews among the ally forces, is estimated to be 1.5 million.
500,000 of them were from the Soviet Union. About 250,000 of them were KIA.

These are NOT the Jews that were handed over, tortured, experimented on, berried alive, starved, shot, hung, gassed or burned.



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 04:38 AM
link   
Also, read 'The Holocaust by Bullets '. by father Patrick Desbois .
He claims the number of Jews murdered during ww2 is even higher than 6 million.



In 2004, he traveled to Ukraine, so he could see where his grandfather had been imprisoned during the war, and to pay respects at a memorial to the lives lost. Upon his arrival, he was shocked to discover that there existed not a single marking or commemoration to 1.25 million Jewish victims in all of Ukraine and Belarus. In order to right the egregious wrong, Father Desbois helped found Yahad-In Unum in 2006. The organization collects information about the mass killing of the Jews in Ukraine and Belarus between 1941 and 1944. Ukrainian contemporary witnesses are interviewed about the mass shootings which took place next to their home and the mass graves are located. Desbois estimates that there are no less than 1 million victims buried in 1,200 graves in Ukraine. Desbois conducts many of the interviews with the witnesses himself (and with translators). Using metal detectors, Desbois and his team have unearthed German cartridges and bullets from the pits where bodies were thrown, as well as jewelry belonging to the victims.[1]


There are several documentaries about him and his research. I think you will find it to be fascinating, but also eerily chilling and horrifying.




edit on 21-9-2010 by gravitational because: edit to add



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

The problem I see with the practicality of seeking to revise the "official" history is that, if the task were to be undertaken, then disparate groups would undoubtedly come up with staggeringly different interpretations of the available data - and then would stand vehemently by their own results - thus negating any benefit the exercise might have.


.. and why I pray do you think that 'negates' the benefit? It is through encouraging a wide range of views and interpretations, and allowing open discussion of conflicting narratives (regardless of what underlying motives might be present) that we can develop an understanding of anything, whether contemporary or historical. It is called freedom of speech and thought - and it leads to divergent opinions, where intelligent observers must assess all the sources and information and make up their own minds.

Why is it, I find it more and more prevalent everywhere I look - that people simply want to be told - they want the 'right answer' - they do not want to think, they do not want a range of evidence, theories and views - they want someone in authority to tell them 'this is the truth - there you go - no more thinking required.'



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amagnon

Originally posted by Hefficide

The problem I see with the practicality of seeking to revise the "official" history is that, if the task were to be undertaken, then disparate groups would undoubtedly come up with staggeringly different interpretations of the available data - and then would stand vehemently by their own results - thus negating any benefit the exercise might have.


.. and why I pray do you think that 'negates' the benefit? It is through encouraging a wide range of views and interpretations, and allowing open discussion of conflicting narratives (regardless of what underlying motives might be present) that we can develop an understanding of anything, whether contemporary or historical. It is called freedom of speech and thought - and it leads to divergent opinions, where intelligent observers must assess all the sources and information and make up their own minds.

Why is it, I find it more and more prevalent everywhere I look - that people simply want to be told - they want the 'right answer' - they do not want to think, they do not want a range of evidence, theories and views - they want someone in authority to tell them 'this is the truth - there you go - no more thinking required.'


Though this reply totally ignores the first part of my post, which, in my estimation, negates much of the point you are trying to make...

My intent was to state that it would leave us right where we are now... With people bickering over different theories and interpretations. We currently have an open discussion of conflicting narratives.

Why would you assume first, that I have accepted anything any authority has told me, and secondly that I wish to be told anything to save myself thought?



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by catwhoknows
 


"Holocaust deniers are as ridiculous as climate change deniers - liars. "

I doubt you'd find too many people that deny the climate changes. The question is whether our input of carbon dioxide plays the doomsday role that the IPCC is pushing.

As far as the holocaust is concerned I beleive it happened. I also beleive there is a lot more to WW2 than an attempt to kill all jews. Jews were the scapegoats in WW2 and prejudices against them were used to fuel the fire of ignorant people, just like prejudices about Arabs have been building and are the reason why most simply accept the current raping of the middle east and the coming Iran conflict.

I would support a revision and a deeper digging into WW2 rather than focusing on the holocaust.



edit on 21-9-2010 by Titan Uranus because: Typo



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
I don't think there is anything wrong with questioning history, or the account that we are indoctrinated to believe.

Some of mankind's greatest discoveries were made because scientists went against the grain.

The problem is, most people who set out to prove the holocaust never happened have ulterior motives and are doing so for political reasons, not out of the desire to check hiostorical fact.

Start from a neutral starting point, conduct research, then you'll come to the same conclusion, it did happen. Maybe a few poor million souls plus or minus, there may have been more/less complicity from various people, but it did happen.

However I do believe that Zionists have taken this tragedy and used it to the best advantage, why not? they're not stupid!

Hope you find what you're looking for, kiwi



posted on Sep, 21 2010 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Holocaust revisionism...

Historical research is important, no one with any sense will deny that. How else do we at least make the attempt to learn from past errors?

But of equal, at the very least, importance is the "why" factor. Why is one doing the research? Is it to get at the truth of an issue, holocaust not the least of them; or is it to attempt to whitewash in some way an event?

Holocaust deniers are notoriously good at taking a historical discrepancy, and turning it into a "reason" the Holocaust never happened, or wasn't as "bad" as some would have us believe... ...and many of them are very, very good at it.

Agenda. What's behind the research/revisionism?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join