Post: #251

Just saw this on Twitter, wonder if there will be any response from those tagged!
Shameful that Germany sees fit to jail a harmless old woman for expressing an opinion.

Post: #252

This kind of shit is fueling antisemitism, not that Jews have the self awareness to understand that. Check out the case of Ernst zundel (who died recently). Poor bastard was dragged back and forth countless times between Europe and North America to stand trial for opinions related to the holocaust.

Post: #253

Is there anyone who will step forward to defend this? Why is an 88 year-old woman being sent to prison because she disagrees with certain wartime historical accounts? How can anyone who claims to support the values of a free and open society look at this and say, "Yes, that's a good thing to do - she certainly deserves to go to prison." It boggles my mind that people get lost in the weeds with the minutiae of Holocaust facts yet ignore the glaring, preposterous fact that THEY LITERALLY THROW 88 YEAR OLD WOMEN IN PRISON FOR DISSENTING WITH THE NARRATIVE!

How can anyone look at such a sickening and absurd situation without the question immediately entering one's mind: "What are they trying to hide?"

What is so threatening about Revisionist ideas that governments are literally imprisoning octogenarians in order to stifle them?

Of course, we know the answer: the official Holocaust narrative is so full of holes that it cannot withstand even cursory scrutiny. They do not want people to investigate it because they know that the truth is not on their side. Instead they have constructed a Holocaust mythology, which they present with religious solemnity and fervor. It is a mythology is designed to invoke maximum emotional impact, not to contain logic, truth and historical accuracy. It is not meant to be investigated, only believed without question. This is the modern religion of the West, and its critics and dissenters are treated as heretics. Could that possibly be made any more clear at this point? Who can credibly disagree?

Post: #254

What is accomplished by putting an 88-year-old woman in jail? Is she going to hurt someone? Is she going to do harm to someone?

What is it going to cost to keep her incarcerated? She certainly will require more attention than younger inmates. They generally have special prisons for older prisoners like this. What is the point?

Post: #255

And at 88 years old, chances are she has a different view of that era than most people because she lived through it.

Post: #256

(09-02-2017 04:58 PM)scorpion Wrote:  Is there anyone who will step forward to defend this? Why is an 88 year-old woman being sent to prison because she disagrees with certain wartime historical accounts?

I shall step forward ...

Rules are rules. And who likes rules more than Germans? Nobody. Also, some women don't age out of attention whoring.

I read about this situation quite a bit. This sentence is a three strikes type of thing. She's been to court over it before. She kept at it. Then when she got sentenced she was mouthy with the judge. Respect the judge. And its only an eight month sentence with she will get a bunch if not all of paroled away.

Earlier in this thread I shared my opinion on the holocost, so I'm not white knighting Anne frank here. But this old bitch should have shut up and played with her grandkids, if she has any. To spend your golden years complaining and angry about something that happened so long ago is stupid.

And my final point:_if she doesn't like what came out of the war, next time win the damn thing.

Aloha!

Post: #257

< This is not an issue to die on your principles.

I share partly the views of the otherwise partly crazy guy Henry Makow, who is born Jewish and whose close family members died during WWII and what is commonly referred to the Holocoust. And they died in one of the concentration camps. Still he questions many many points about the Holocoust and even the numbers.

But with all this we have to realize one thing - you should not start and publish those things in Germany or Austria where you have strict laws regarding the narrative. And you don't discuss the issue with Jews out of common courtesy. Even if I were Jewish I would not want to discuss it, because the topic is simply too emotionally laden and I am not going to go into any conflict about it and go into fits of whether 3.5 mio. or 6 mio. Jews died in the war.

Ursula Haverbeck either wanted to adhere to her perception of the truth even despite the consequences, but that was her choice. Others like David Cole even publicly retracted all points (even if he later made fun of the retraction). He wanted the lobby to get off his back. It was a common sense decision and I agree with it.

Common sense should dictate our decision of when and how to discuss those things. For example my family is intermarried with Israeli double-citizens and my cousin was nervous whether I would start discussing those issues (especially since her husband had actual family dying in concentration camps). I told her that of course I am not going to touch the issue. And I did not, because I am not going to breach this glut of decade-deep narrative building - one which has taken truth and myth and mixed it all into one - a narrative which does not even let you discuss slight adjustments to the official story (it is slight to me - horror is still horror, but it is big to some).

Post: #258

(09-02-2017 11:06 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(09-02-2017 04:58 PM)scorpion Wrote:  Is there anyone who will step forward to defend this? Why is an 88 year-old woman being sent to prison because she disagrees with certain wartime historical accounts?

I shall step forward ...

Rules are rules. And who likes rules more than Germans? Nobody. Also, some women don't age out of attention whoring.

I read about this situation quite a bit. This sentence is a three strikes type of thing. She's been to court over it before. She kept at it. Then when she got sentenced she was mouthy with the judge. Respect the judge. And its only an eight month sentence with she will get a bunch if not all of paroled away.

Earlier in this thread I shared my opinion on the holocost, so I'm not white knighting Anne frank here. But this old bitch should have shut up and played with her grandkids, if she has any. To spend your golden years complaining and angry about something that happened so long ago is stupid.

And my final point:_if she doesn't like what came out of the war, next time win the damn thing.

Aloha!

I think you missed the point, or else bias is clouding your judgment. Obviously she broke the law as it is written, that isn't in question. The issue is the absurdity and clear injustice of the law in the first place. Imagine if the U.S. Government suddenly passed a law mandating that Hawaiian men found driving over 50 mph will be dragged from their vehicles and executed on the spot. Good law? Just don't speed, bro! What's so hard about it, right? Justice must be served, and Hawaiian speeders must be executed. Rules are rules. And if you don't like that law, too bad: you really shouldn't have allowed your island to be colonized by the white man.

That shoe doesn't fit so well on the other foot, does it?

Post: #259

^ I'm a 100% on your side of the argument Scorpion... but take it easy with the counter arguments.. especially on this thread! Don't want to stop reading your amaizing posts over this dumb ass lie! Just Chill my man!

Post: #260

(09-03-2017 09:18 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

(09-02-2017 11:06 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(09-02-2017 04:58 PM)scorpion Wrote:  Is there anyone who will step forward to defend this? Why is an 88 year-old woman being sent to prison because she disagrees with certain wartime historical accounts?

I shall step forward ...

Rules are rules. And who likes rules more than Germans? Nobody. Also, some women don't age out of attention whoring.

I read about this situation quite a bit. This sentence is a three strikes type of thing. She's been to court over it before. She kept at it. Then when she got sentenced she was mouthy with the judge. Respect the judge. And its only an eight month sentence with she will get a bunch if not all of paroled away.

Earlier in this thread I shared my opinion on the holocost, so I'm not white knighting Anne frank here. But this old bitch should have shut up and played with her grandkids, if she has any. To spend your golden years complaining and angry about something that happened so long ago is stupid.

And my final point:_if she doesn't like what came out of the war, next time win the damn thing.

Aloha!

I think you missed the point, or else bias is clouding your judgment. Obviously she broke the law as it is written, that isn't in question. The issue is the absurdity and clear injustice of the law in the first place. Imagine if the U.S. Government suddenly passed a law mandating that Hawaiian men found driving over 50 mph will be dragged from their vehicles and executed on the spot. Good law? Just don't speed, bro! What's so hard about it, right? Justice must be served, and Hawaiian speeders must be executed. Rules are rules. And if you don't like that law, too bad: you really shouldn't have allowed your island to be colonized by the white man.

That shoe doesn't fit so well on the other foot, does it?

Your comparison is quite a stretch. She has been sentenced several times for this. She isn't being sentenced to death. Old people do go to jail for DUIs or are sent to long term rehab facilities where they can't leave for a few months.

Let's say I break a few driving laws and get caught and my license is suspended. Then I drive with my license suspended and get caught again. Its very possible for me to go to jail.

She is also a friend of a relative of Himmler according to an article, so her opinion on the holocaust might be a little bias.

Post: #261

godzilla, please read more carefully. You just quoted a post where I literally said that she obviously broke the law. That isn't the issue. The point is that the law in question is antithetical to that values of a free society. Free societies don't lock people in prison for questioning historical events. Period. These Holocaust denial laws are completely outrageous and without precedent in modern Western society. The fact that these laws exist - and that they are enforced so rigorously that they are willing to put an 88 year old woman in prison - demonstrates that the Holocaust narrative simply cannot stand up to critical inquiry. There is no other historical event that receives this sort of protection from investigation. The Holocaust is a religion with state protection, and heretics will be (figuratively) burned at the stake.

Post: #262

Just to follow up on Scorpion's point above.
I would recommend anyone who's on Twitter to follow this 'Frame Game Radio' dude.
The guy is brilliant, has some inspired threads on how the media manipulate the narrative and how to combat this.
One recent point he makes is about how the word 'Holocaust' has been effectively redefined to suit the narrative.

Post: #263

I read your post carefully (both of them by the way).

If you read my post carefully, I only argued the absurdity of your comparison to a Hawaiian man being executed for speeding. The law against questioning the holocaust, while unjust and absurd (I agree with you), at the very least, shows restraint. She has been fined several times, for the same "crime".

To take this further, do free societies think men should serve mandatory minimums for selling drugs? Should an 18 year-old who sleeps with a girl in his high school go to a jail and be labeled a sex offender?

Many people find the laws above to be quite appropriate, and they might think that these laws are actually preserving their free societies. And I believe that many Europeans feel the same about holocaust deniers, no matter how absurd it seems for someone to go to jail for questioning an historical event.

Post: #264

It really disappoints me to see holocaust/genocide denial in threads and Nazi apologism trying to attach itself to red pill writing.

Here's one place the question has already been answered:-
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-e...t-occurred

If the Nazis didn't deny it, why should anyone else. Especially those who've never been to Europe, never studied history. And hang on the word of some extremist clickbaiting basement dweller with a blog. Or even worse that cockroach David Irving and co who should be rotting in a jail cell.

Many tens of millions of Europeans AND non Europeans (incl vast numbers of Jews) were murdered and/or killed by Nazis. We really don't need garbage claims started by Islamists, Neo Nazis and clickbaiters who were born 50 years later and don't know the first thing about it. Millions of people died fighting the Nazis and their openly evil policies. America (casualties and families excluded) benefitted hugely from Europe smashing itself to pieces during WW2. But us Europeans aren't dim enough to give Nazism a "2nd chance".

For the record many places in Europe had substantial or even huge numbers of Jews before the war. Now, hardly any places have substantial numbers of Jews. And thats before you actually look at the universally accepted facts - accepted by virtually every country in the World - including states that are mortal enemies.

I've studied Nazism to degree level. It was Jews, Russians, other Slavs, gypsies, Communists, homosexuals, the disabled and numerous others all targetted for eventual extermination, when the German authorities saw no further use for them. Russia hasn't made up claims that 27m Soviets were murdered or killed. Nor have the Jews, or disabled or all the other groups. Russia infact has around HALF the popln it was expected to have by now, in pre war estimates. Slavic schoolkids were hung up by piano wire and the like. Some people should try reading some quotes by Heydrich and the like.

So why do we have genocide denialism/Nazi apologism trying to lag onto red pill thinking?
Firstly, its to discredit the red pill world. It also makes it far harder for red pill causes to work.
It makes it harder for sane, rational people to mobilise support for anti-excess migration. And it puts people off joining red pill movements. If red pill culture is going to develop successfully it must be clear in separating itself from unfounded and Nazi apologist nonsense. Look at the trash in Antifa. its got substantial numbers Islamist cranks who claim anyone red pill is a "Neo Nazi", while at the same time propagating holocaust/Nazi extermination denials - especially in England and France etc.

Finally, there's no "special exception law" for holocaust denialism or Nazi apologism. For example, malicious falsehood is a crime around the World. As are the incitement laws etc. Holocaust laws simply have statutory aspects to define certain matters precisely. The only problem is that incitement/malious falsehood laws need to be drawn wider to target Islamist extremism etc. Those who are too ignorant to accept the facts are free to present legitimate evidence. But they've never managed to find any... because there is no defence for the Nazis and the mass exterminations they commited.

If people believe the denialists, the red pill movement dies. And the Clinton gang wins. No sane, heterosexual, first world male should want that.

Post: #265

(09-03-2017 12:54 PM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  It really disappoints me to see holocaust/genocide denial threads and Nazi apologism trying to attach itself to red pill writing.

Here's one place the question has already been answered:-
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-e...t-occurred

If the Nazis didn't deny it, why should anyone else. Especially those who've never been to Europe, never studied history. And hang on the word of some extremist clickbaiting basement dweller with a blog. Or even worse that cockroach David Irving who should be rotting in a jail cell.

Many tens of millions of Europeans AND non Europeans (incl vast numbers of Jews) were murdered and/or killed by Nazis. We really don't need garbage claims started by Islamists, Neo Nazis and clickbaiters who were born 50 years later and don't know the first thing about it. Millions of people died fighting the Nazis and their openly evil policies. America benefitted from Europe smashing itself to pieces during WW2. But us Europeans aren't dim enough to give Nazism a "2nd chance".

For the record many places in Europe had substantial or even huge numbers of Jews before the war. Now, hardly any places have substantial numbers of Jews. And thats before you actually look at the universally accepted facts - accepted by virtually every country in the World - including states that are mortal enemies.

I've studied Nazism to degree level. It was Jews, Russians, other Slavs, gypsies, Communists, homosexuals, the disabled and numerous others all targetted for eventual extermination, when the German authorities saw no further use for them. Russia hasn't made up claims that 27m Soviets were murdered or killed. Nor have the Jews, or disabled or all the other groups. Russia infact has around HALF the popln it was expected to have by now, in pre war estimates. Slavic schoolkids were hung up by piano wire and the like. Some people should try reading some quotes by Heydrich and the like.

So why do we have genocide denialism/Nazi apologism trying to lag onto red pill thinking?
Firstly, its to discredit the red pill world. It also makes it far harder for red pill causes to work.
It makes it harder for sane, rational people to mobilise support for anti-excess migration. And it puts people off joining red pill movements. If red pill culture is going to develop successfully it must be clear in separating itself from unfounded and Nazi apologist nonsense. Look at the trash in Antifa. Islamist cranks who claim anyone red pill is a "Neo Nazi".

Finally, there's no "special exception law" for holocaust denialism or Nazi apologism. For example, malicious falsehood is a crime around the World. As are the incitement laws etc. Holocaust laws simply have statutory aspects to define certain matters precisely. The only problem is that incitement/malious falsehood laws need to be drawn wider to target Islamist extremism etc. Those who are too ignorant to accept the facts are free to present legitimate evidence. But they've never managed to find any... because there is no defence for the Nazis and the mass exterminations they commited.

If people believe the denialists, the red pill movement dies. And the Clinton gang wins. No sane, heterosexual, first world male should want that.

Why would you use quora as a reference? All mainstream-lamestream sites are part of the narrative, so of course they're going to use the whole dialectical population number comparison fraudulence in the very least.

To the guy who posted that he thinks that "no nazi ever denied the holocaust exists," well he is simply talking semantics. Of course they acknowledged that they planned to kick the jews out of Europe, so did a hundred other countries at various points in time. Nowhere does it say the word "kill" or "execute" or "genocide," the camps were all labor camps and just that. The jews are the most abrasive and obnoxious group of people on the planet, its in their dna. Whether they are "atheist" jews or practicing, theyre rubbish is all the same, they believe they are actually helping societies by forcing their degeneracy upon them whilst holstering real values only for their own kind.

So touche, I don't believe any part of the holocaust was planned execution, it was simply Germany's attempts to relocate a foriegn body away from a host that did not need or want it. The Nazi's treated European jews much better than modern day "Israeli's" treat the Palestinians. It all comes down to tribalism, the best thing for a tribe is spacial separation from other tribes. White European Christians do not belong intermixed with jews or africans or indians or asians. All this cultural inter-whatever thats going on nowadays is still relatively new to the world as opposed to the greater epoch of mankind living in their own lineages undisturbed for a millennia.

You should read what General Patton wrote in post-war Germany, letters to his wife, etc to see that he knew it was all a lie.

Post: #266

(09-03-2017 12:54 PM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  It really disappoints me to see holocaust/genocide denial in threads and Nazi apologism trying to attach itself to red pill writing.

It really disappoints me to see people twist the search for truth ( the truth has nothing to be afraid of by the way ) as some kind of apologism for nazis...huh?

What kind of mind does this?

"Over there, there are some men looking at several pieces of evidence."

Gets twisted into. "Look at those men over there apologizing for murderers".

Huh? Doesn't make sense man.


Norman Finkelstein wrote "The Holocaust Industry", from Wikipedia: "The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering was published in 2000. Here, Finkelstein argues that Elie Wiesel and others exploit the memory of the Holocaust as an "ideological weapon." The purpose, writes Finkelstein, is to enable the State of Israel, "one of the world's most formidable military powers, with a horrendous human rights record, [to] cast itself as a victim state;" that is, to provide Israel "immunity to criticism."[27] He alleges what he calls a "double shakedown" by "a repellent gang of plutocrats, hoodlums and hucksters" seeking enormous legal damages and financial settlements from Germany and Switzerland, moneys which then go to the lawyers and institutional actors involved in procuring them, rather than actual Holocaust survivors"

I'm sure Mr. Finkelstein wrote a book like this so he'd get a Hollywood film made, become adored, and live his life in peace, yea right.

Here he is standing up for what he believes in.

Post: #267

(09-03-2017 09:18 AM)scorpion Wrote:  

(09-02-2017 11:06 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(09-02-2017 04:58 PM)scorpion Wrote:  Is there anyone who will step forward to defend this? Why is an 88 year-old woman being sent to prison because she disagrees with certain wartime historical accounts?

I shall step forward ...

Rules are rules. And who likes rules more than Germans? Nobody. Also, some women don't age out of attention whoring.

I read about this situation quite a bit. This sentence is a three strikes type of thing. She's been to court over it before. She kept at it. Then when she got sentenced she was mouthy with the judge. Respect the judge. And its only an eight month sentence with she will get a bunch if not all of paroled away.

Earlier in this thread I shared my opinion on the holocost, so I'm not white knighting Anne frank here. But this old bitch should have shut up and played with her grandkids, if she has any. To spend your golden years complaining and angry about something that happened so long ago is stupid.

And my final point:_if she doesn't like what came out of the war, next time win the damn thing.

Aloha!

I think you missed the point, or else bias is clouding your judgment. Obviously she broke the law as it is written, that isn't in question. The issue is the absurdity and clear injustice of the law in the first place. Imagine if the U.S. Government suddenly passed a law mandating that Hawaiian men found driving over 50 mph will be dragged from their vehicles and executed on the spot. Good law? Just don't speed, bro! What's so hard about it, right? Justice must be served, and Hawaiian speeders must be executed. Rules are rules. And if you don't like that law, too bad: you really shouldn't have allowed your island to be colonized by the white man.

That shoe doesn't fit so well on the other foot, does it?

So I guess we agree? Break the law, go to jail.

Not sure why you had to bring the Hawaiian thing into it? The screwball part is that if my earlier posts had been read before your meltdown you would see that maybe our opinions aren't so far off.

I really hope you have an enjoyable Sunday.

Aloha!

Post: #268

Psst. Scorpion. Tell Kona his lawn is full of weeds and moss.

Post: #269

He didn't have a meltdown, he made a great point about the absurdity of the law in the first place.

Quote:Obviously she broke the law as it is written, that isn't in question. The issue is the absurdity and clear injustice of the law in the first place. Imagine if the U.S. Government suddenly passed a law mandating that Hawaiian men found driving over 50 mph will be dragged from their vehicles and executed on the spot. Good law? Just don't speed, bro! What's so hard about it, right?

Exactly. That shit is retarded.

Post: #270

(09-03-2017 01:50 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  Psst. Scorpion. Tell Kona his lawn is full of weeds and moss.

You want to see a real melt down don't you. I have Ortho weed b gone to wipe away any existence of moss. Im a weed denier.

Aloha!

Post: #271

(09-03-2017 12:54 PM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  It really disappoints me to see holocaust/genocide denial in threads and Nazi apologism trying to attach itself to red pill writing.

....

It really disappoints me when people don't read through this thread before posting.

Post: #272

(09-03-2017 02:00 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(09-03-2017 01:50 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  Psst. Scorpion. Tell Kona his lawn is full of weeds and moss.

You want to see a real melt down don't you. I have Ortho weed b gone to wipe away any existence of moss. Im a weed denier.

Aloha!

Kona's lawn.

Post: #273

(09-03-2017 02:09 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

(09-03-2017 12:54 PM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  It really disappoints me to see holocaust/genocide denial in threads and Nazi apologism trying to attach itself to red pill writing.

....

It really disappoints me when people don't read through this thread before posting.

I don't spend a lot of time on "The Earth is flat" internet threads either.
They have as much credibility as extermination denialism claims.

The evidence is very easy to find. And impossible to deny.
I have no problem with the facts being discussed. What I do have a problem with is the denialism
and apologism (lighter or heavier variants) for acts of Nazism and its supporters.
I'm out of this thread, so I won't be reading your reply.

Post: #274

Well there are "skilled migrants" that are well integrated and to far worse things like the planning of terror attacks, violent attacks, rapes that get away with the slap on the wrist. The law system itself is questionable.

Post: #275

(09-03-2017 02:50 PM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  

(09-03-2017 02:09 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

(09-03-2017 12:54 PM)BelyyTigr Wrote:  It really disappoints me to see holocaust/genocide denial in threads and Nazi apologism trying to attach itself to red pill writing.

....

It really disappoints me when people don't read through this thread before posting.

I don't spend a lot of time on "The Earth is flat" internet threads either.
They have as much credibility as extermination denialism claims.

The evidence is very easy to find. And impossible to deny.
I have no problem with the facts being discussed. What I do have a problem with is the denialism
and apologism (lighter or heavier variants) for acts of Nazism and its supporters.
I'm out of this thread, so I won't be reading your reply.

I can't stand guys like this; comes over and lectures everyone on their morality, makes a bunch of claims and says everyone who doesn't agree with him should be ashamed, claims to have undenaible evidence and offers none.

Then has the goddamn nerve to act like his participation in the thread will be missed.

I've been reading this thread off and on for awhile now. I am curious also why someone would believe something other than what was hammered into your head since grade school.

Big questions definetly arise when you do see the "undeniable evidence" and of course these claims should be scrutinized.

Questioning things instead of blindly accepting them is considered virtuous. It doesn't make you evil or a Nazi apologist. That's ridiculous. As if I suddenly download nazi tenets into my brain once I whisper "were the jews really gassed to death" three times.

Making it illegal to question something is tyranny. If the evidence is really there someone should be able to conclude the claim made is true or untrue or inconclusive.


Edit - The issue is not whether this woman is attention whoring, or choosing approapriate things to be upset about, or whether she's been warned, or if she "should or shouldn't" follow the law.

It's about whether it's just or not to have a law that makes it illegal to believe or say something.

It's about nothing else.