First off, its SIEG Heil.

Now, my input on this subject will be rather..different, and will probably be edited. However, it is what I believe.

I find it odd honestly how people do forget about a lot of the good things that Hitler did. Now, that in and off itself is a very controversial statement, however, it is true. Hitler did bring Germany out of the post WWI depression era, and created millions of jobs for the German people, before the war started, unemployment was very limited, and he did unify the people in a way that prior to Hitler was unthinkable. The war he waged was one of pure bloodlust, however, I personally believe that "the real horror" of what Hitler did is vastly overexagerated. I do not believe that 6 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and blacks were killed. That number doesn't even come close to being realistic.

Hitler was a conquer, a man that wanted to expand his nation, and did so. He, like hundreds of other generals, commanders and leaders before him, did what they had to do. You don't see anyone comparing GWB to Genghis Kahn do you? Of course not. People forget their very past, and what our allies in WW2 did. Stalin killed far more people than Hitler could have dreamed of. All Americans exist where we do today because of European conquers and conquistadors. Warfare is a part of human existence and history.

I think a lot of things have been changed over time, and since the US supports Israel fully, and all the bullshit they stand for and do, then and now, they obviously allow the books to be rewritten to justify the existence of Israel and their bullying of the middle east. Everything I've read on the subject shows how utterly unreasonable the entire Holocaust is, and how much of a ploy it was. Did many Jews die? Yes, however 6 million? No.

The things that Hitler did were wrong, yes, of course, however, they are blown way out of proportion and were simply done for political reasons. and now, that is lost on our generation. History after all, is written by the victors.

Stare at the Sun raises some valid points. Truth be told Genocide aside Hitler would've been a solid leader so long as you didn't rub him the wrong way.

As far as your comments on Israel are, I think that is completely offbase. And what sources would question how many jews/catholics/commie's/cripples/gypsies he killed? I mean realistically the man just about invaded the entire whole of Europe and he devastated the Eastern Bloc pretty bad before the Soviets made it a party. The Fact that Pius' saved nearly 1 million Jews should atest to the fact that those people were heavily targeted.

Okay so Hitler was not responsible for the death of 6 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and blacks. How many then was he responsible for? 5 million? 1 million? Half a million? How can you put a number on genocide and then call it a political reason? If in the interest of the safety and sanctity of people the government of the United States decided to arrest and summarily execute you and your family for being nazi sympathizers is that okay? Surely it can't be that bad. There's only a few of you, and it was for a purely political reason, right?

I understand that you are trying to invoke political discussion here, but if you try and glaze over the death and suffering invoked by Hitler's regime, you show disrespect to the victims and their families. My objection rests there.

What he did was "hijacking" a whole nation for his war. All the "good" things were just for his war. Unifying a nation with hate is not a good thing. and he brought us friom the post WW1 depression into the post WW2 depression leavinig most parts of germany destroyed and millions dead. most certanly not a good thing.
Without his hate propaganda and his lust for war and bloodshed he would have achieved nothing. so the "good" thing were just preperations for the genocide he was planning.

Since lebell asked to be civil i will not call you a :lol:
but lebell also asked to stick to facts, may I ask what facts made you think that 6 mio is not "realistic"

what he wanted was to exterminate cenrtain "races", he wanted to exterminate the russians.

So we should stop evolving in our ethic and moralic views and go back in our caves and hit each other with maces?

I think the other posters have covered the most important points.

Sure, Hitler brought Germany out of a crushing depression and runaway inflation, but the price was creating a worship cult with himself at the center and by scape-goating jews, Catholics, homosexuals, gypsies and anyone else he considered "undesirable".

That he killed many millions of people is undisputed, except by the diehard anti-semites, the only thing that has changed is the exact "millions", from 3 or 4 up to 10 million.

Much of those numbers come from documentation kept by the Nazi's themselves (they were meticulous about everything).

To me, arguing that the holocaust wasn't that bad is akin to arguing creationism: you can argue and argue, but at the end of the day, the facts just don't add up in your favor.

Actually, it's worse: because at least believing in Creationism doesn't ignore one of the worst horrors of the 20th century by turning a blind eye to it.

<b>Stare At The Sun</b>, first off, thanks. Somebody had to do this.

My personal belief is that there are some things that Hitler did well, but not much he did good. What good he did do seems to be an unintended consequence: without Hitler, the US does not become a superpower in the late 40's, and African and Asian independance movements are also set back about 10 years. We don't get Einstein, Goddard, or Von Braun.

I don't know if what you cite as his good accomplishments really are all that good, though. Yes, he took a depressed and fragmented nation in hand and made it vigorous (in the short term with massive deficit spending - there are lots of valid comparisons to be made between Hitler and contemporary leaders) , but he did it at the expense of crushing its nascent and faltering democracy. If that's good, it's only good in that it prevented the communists from doing the same.

Now, like everyone else, I'd really like to know how you figure the genocide death toll was significantly less than 6 million. Sounds like what generally gets called historical revisionism to me. On the other hand, you seem to be accusing the folks who generally level this accusation of the same, which is rich. Don't know if I buy it, though.

Son of Bush is nowhere near that successful, terrifying, effective, charismatic, or intelligent. Nor does he have any generals on par with Subotai. Now Tammerlane: there's a valid comparison to make. But I'll leave it there.

Stipulated

Those are your weakest arguments. I am glad that I have America to live in; I don't exist in a world where it isn't colonized by Europeans, but I still can't help but wonder at the genocide that went on here. I mean, between the diseases, the exploitation, and the outright slaughter, what Europeans as a people did to the Indians is like Stalin, Pol Pot, and Hitler all rolled up into one and multiplied many times. (In fact, what Europeans did to the Indians is very much like what the Paleo-Indians did to most large game species in the Americas - except that game species aren't people.) And war is part of history, but so is rampant disease, oppression of women, and human sacrifice. That something is part of history is usually a better argument for discarding it that excusing it.

A person's opinion on the factuality (is that a word?) of the depictions of the holocaust should not be met with threats or analysis of the opinion bearer. If a view is that the holocaust was used to further political agendas and the number "6 million" is questioned...leave it @ that. If people question history that is their right and when I see opposition to this kind of questioning I see either a fear of history being changed which forces people to have to question their beliefs OR some people have something to hide.

If you are interested in Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, check out the book by Alan Dershowitz, "The Case For Israel". He lays out the political, ethical, and moral reasons why Israel is a legal country and Why they have committed the actions that they have. I have always been in favor of Israel, but I wanted to see why others support Israel and to read about the legal decisions that went into the U.N. Sanctioning the formation of this country.

I am very upset that you would actually and explicitly allow people to post anything that comes so close to holocaust denial.

I'm not exactly sure why, but if you care to take it to PM's, I'll be glad to explain the reasoning we had last night and to explain TFP policy.

-Lebell

Well, I'm not exactly surprised the openly Zionist Dershowitz is so in favour of Israel. Have you ever seen him speak? I have and I truly hope you don't take him as even close to an unbiased reporter of what goes on in Israel.

As someone who studies the Middle East, and Israel/Palestince specifically, I would recommend "The Gun and the Olive Branch: The Roots of Violence in the Middle East" by David Hirst. It's considered by most scholars to be the definitive work on Palestine/Israel. If you truly are interested in this subject, you owe it to yourself to pick up this book.


SLM3

I did not say that Dershowitz is unbiased. the book is called the case for Israel. However, I think he makes some strong arguments for the country. But I would be interested in seeing the book you recommend.

I don't have a problem with it. We're all adults here. I think we should be able to have a rational discussion about anything, even things that may seem as balatantly irrational as holocaust denial.
No one is yelling, everyone is being respectful.

Where else could you have a rational discussion of such a topic without "moral indignity" ruining any kind of productive discourse than on a well moderated forum?

It may be true that Hitler did many "good" things and that the more disturbing parts of his era have been overstated (I am not an expert), but I honestly fail to see the need by some people to defend him or his legacy. I believe it is generally accepted that he participated in some degree of genocide and ultimately drove his country to ruin. It seems to me that Germany would have been better off if a less militaristic, less nationalistic leader arose to help them out of the post WW1 Depression. It appears to me that post-Hitler Germany was much worse off that pre-Hitler Germany.(This is opinion, not hard, researched fact.)

Am I wrong and what is the "need" to defend Hitler?

This is not a true statement. The number of Jewish dead, murdered by Nazi Germany and her allies, realistically was between 5.6 and 6.5 million. This is a historically provable fact.

German records in the camps themselves record that 4,250,000 Jews were anhiliated in the main concentration and destruction camps themselves. On top of this, we must also include those murdered by the special commando squads, those starved or murdered by ordinary German occupation forces in the ghetto, and Jews killed by random acts of toture.

In the anhilition camps, Jews were gassed to death and burned, in the concentration camps Jews were tortured, worked, starved, killed by epidemic, or by gas chamber, and also killed for entertainment (guards would practise taking pot shots at the Jewish slaves and keep score, a guard in Auschwitz was recorded as inventing the game where he would hang a Jewish prisoner by his arms from a bar, and then try to, from a distance, shoot through his arms to make the priosoner fall... the idea of course was to do it in as few shots as possible.)

The number of 5.7 million Jews anhilated, decided upon at the Nuremburg trials, is supported by subsequent cencus information, by German records themselves, from eye witness accounts, the capacity of the furnaces and chambers and the physical corpses that have been dug up. It is supported by physical remains (such as the seven tons of human hair, 348,820 mens suits, and 836,255 women's dresses and coats found in six storerooms discovered by the liberators of Auschwitz).

If we admit that Hitler was, if he was not at the start, a terrible general, who sentenced 100,000's of his own troops to death through insanity and incompetence, if we understand that Hitler, by the end, had genuinely come to believe that he could win battles by an effort of his own will, if we acknowledge that Hitler was a paedophile, a racist, an incompetent bungler, that he lead his own nation into a complete destruction of its national identity, that his own actions led to his nations abject defeat and humiliation at the hands of the allies... when we understand all this things, and the reality of the holocaust, this makes any good Hitler achieved (for example, helping design the Volkswagen Beetle) irrelevant and meaningless.

So how do you get down to the bottom of such a debate?
Just believe what the next person tells you? Just believe what is published?

Discussing history & politics is so very futile, frustating and enlightening.

to SLM3, I just looked it up on Amazon.com, and I see that David Hirst used to write for the UK's The Guardian. The Guardian is known to carry certain political agendas, so I expect that a writer for them would carry similar politcal agendas. If you have any truly nonpartisan works to suggest, then I would like to hear them, otherwise make sure that you mention that certain authors carry biases when they write your suggested books.

As with any historical event where we have to rely on other people's witness, you look at the facts presented and the sources and make your own reasoned judgement.

In my own case, I think there is overwhelming evidence that the holocaust occured and that about 6 million people were murdered by Hitler.

But that doesn't mean that other people will not adopt an irrational conclusion.

In that case, you simply stick to the facts that convinced you in the first place and present them the next time the discussion arises and trust that reasonable people will come to the same conclusion you did.

Bookman, I don't know how you saw a threat in what I wrote. How is it right for someone to question history and to just leave it at that. If you read my post, I was not questioning Stare at The Sun's version of history, just asking if it really made a difference in the long run. I think you misinterpreted both my intent and my point....

To preempt...above you can see that I have expended most of my brain power thinking this one out...so forgive me.
I didnt really mean you threatened anyone, but the reference to Nazi sympathizers and persecuting them made me think that anyone who questions/challenges can be dealt a serious counter-attack. Sorry if I got it all wrong.

I'm saying that the United States the UN and the Jews blew them way out of proportion to gain favor for Israel post WW2.

Now, as I said before, I am NOT denying that the holocaust happened, however, I do believe that the number did not reach 6 million killed for the following reasons.

First off. If a Jewish family lived in Germany pre WWII, moved, ran, or left germany/surrounding area's, and did not come back post WWII, they were counted in the Holocaust figures. Hundreds of thousands of these cases happened. The number in Poland alone reached 700,000.

You say that the Germans had kept meticulious plans for the gassing of the Jews. I want you to show me one of those documents that was made before the war ended. David Irving a very well known historian has been qouted as saying that he has never come across any document ordering the "Final Solution".

Also, please consider the size of the concentration camps, and the size of the "Gas chambers", many figures indicate that it would have taken up to 68 years to gas 6,000,000 Jews. Also, where are the bodies? You can say they were all burned, however, surely, atleast some gassed bodies would have survived. The bodies you see were the ones that died from starvation, and those did not number anywhere near 6,000,000.

http://www.codoh.com/thoughtcrimes/PORT2LEU.HTML

This test was also done by the Polish Government, and no traces were found.

Simply put, I do not believe that there is enough evidence to support 6 million people being killed.

I am not denying that yes, some were, and I am also not denying that it wasn't a tragedy. It was. However, I believe that the Holocaust was blown out of proportion by the Jews in order to gain worldwide sympathy, and reparations(as they do, in the hundreds of billions per year) for Israel.

The gas used in the chambers was called, I think Xylon B. Eye witnesses reported that the canisters were stamped "for the destruction of parasites"

Perhaps you didn't read the Leuchter report.

Leuchter has written, "Categorically, none of the facilities examined at Auschwitz, Birkenau or Lublin could have supported, or in fact did support, multiple executions utilizing hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide or any other allegedly or factually lethal gas."

Leuchter...I knew that name would pop up....
how can someone believe in the nonsense this self proclaimed engineer and "specialits for execution devices" writes?!

He lied at court, he claimed the direcor of the Auschwitz memorial had given him some documents, the director denies that.

He is a damn Nazi, he has some very good connections to the german NPD, the Nazis party

more:
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/l/leuchter-fred/
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/l/...uchter-01.html

Oh and David Irving....
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/i/irving-david/

Leuchter is a liar, using his "report" as a "proof" is crazy

Strange Famous, I appreciate your well-considered research on this and also the effort of those who are not revisionists regarding this well-established historical series of events.
Thanks.

zyklon B.

Anyway, I've read those documents before SATS, and they've been refuted to my (fairly analytical) mind quite satisfactorily.

The "gentlemen" have also been thoroughly discredited.

edit to add: Also my thanks to Pacifier for those links. I knew they existed, but I just haven't seen them for awhile so I forgot where they were.

Hirst has spent decades IN the Middle East, reporting. He's banned by 6 Arab countries as well. He's a calls it as he sees it kinda guy, which is why he's been attacked equally by both sides in this conflict. This book is one that prides itself on its dependance upon sources to back up everything, and it shows. There's little room to preech. Again, I think you'd do well to read it.


SLM3

Sorry for the thread jack but I COULDN'T leave this one alone.

Seriously, how much of a success do you need?

1) We successfully fought and won two wars in completely different geographic and political areas at once and completely obliterated the opposition... at the same time.

2) In Iraq we conquered more territory in the shortest amount of time than any army in the history of history. Yes, no person or army has ever advanced as quickly as the US military did in the 2nd Gulf War.

Now you can say what you will about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is not over, but at the same time we're not killing entire cities, we're not raping the women and killing the men/children. Actions like that are what kill the moral and integrity of a conquored people. They were too scared to fight because they knew that not only they, but everyone they've ever known would be put to the sword.

How can you honestly say that the fastest advances, most one sided victories, and most effective army in the history of history is not at absolute least on par with any of the Khans?

SLM do you think you are unbiased?

Wow, this has to be the most dangerous post on TFProject I've ever seen.. I'll try to be carefull

- I can't, sorry. I wrote out alot, but I already feel like I'm beating against a brick wall. This isn't politics, this is someone defending an evil the likes of which we haven't seen in a long time, and hopefully we won't ever again. This is someone defending the machinations that almost destroyed several cultures, Jewish, and Gypsy to name two, and brought the world to the first brink of nuclear war.

I would like to state however that I'm surprised that this thread wasn't killed days ago. TFproject has always been about bringing people together, and learning from each other.. This fails both horribly

Ust do you think anyone is unbiased?



SLM3

I suppose 9/11 was a plot by Jews to gain support against Arab country's too right?

This simply devastates me that people actually dont believe what is so true and documented by the Nazis themselves. Take a visit to Washington D.C. and go to the Holocaust Museum, it'd do you good.

I simply dont know what to say to this but I could show you pictures of my relatives that were killed there, if that would help you believe this wasnt exaggerated.

Ted Bundy was a nice guy doesnt anybody remember all the good in his life and I bet the amount of woman he killed was way overrated. (note sarcasm)

Please watch the sarcasm.

So far, this has stayed on track and is an adult conversation.

(Which honestly I'm very proud of the members of TFP for doing, given the volatile nature of the topic.)

here are my thoughts, and this one's long:

Hitler's primary goal was power. If planting flowers and kissing butterflies were the fastest way for him to get complete power, he'd have done it. So let's look at what Hitler saw for his opportunity for power:

Germany was in a depression. Not just a financial depression, but a country-wide emotional depression. They got their asses thoroughly kicked in WWI. They had crap for a military, crap for money, people were carting wheelbarrows full of cash around just to buy a loaf of bread. In short, life in Germany sucked. Bigtime.

Enter Hitler. What's the best way for him to get power? Find someone to blame the country's troubles on. (remember that statement, it's very important later). Hitler picked the Jews primarilly. The reason we're in this mess is that the Jews put us there. It's not YOUR fault that your life sucks, and it's not your NEIGHBOR's fault. It's the fault of the Jew.

The German people, downtrodden and miserable, quickly snapped to this idea of having a scapegoat. Here's someone to blame! It enabled them to feel better about themselves - to have a more positive outlook on their lives. It served as a drug for the country. And now that they had someone to blame, here was a man who was leading the fight against these terrible Jews who had caused all this trouble.

People began following him because he seemed to be a way out of the terrible situation they were in. And remember, he didn't start off right away throwing Jews into the gas chambers. He built up to it nice and slow, letting the people get used to each additional sanction/atrocity against the Jews, all the time reminding them that it was the Jew that put them in a terrible mess and it was Hitler who, by taking care of this Jew problem, was leading them out of it.

See, I think that too much time has been spent saying that Hitler was evil. I mean, yeah, we KNOW that. The real question isn't why Hitler wanted to kill Jews. That's explainable by both his psychopathology and his lust for power. The REAL question is why the HELL did millions of Germans allow it to happen!

Let's shed a little light on it by looking at events in our own country's history. Back in the early days of the cold war we had a huge red scare in this country. Anti-communist sentiment was running high thanks to the fearless fight against the communists lead by a Wisconsin senator named Joe McCarthy. He told us the communists were everywhere and were responsible for trying to destroy us. We had to watch out for them, and we had to report anyone who might be a communist. Even Edward R. Murrow was accused of being a communist. And people started following him. They flocked behind him very much like the Germans flocked behind Hitler. Why? Because here was someone blaming a specific group for all the problems they faced. It's much easier to blame others than to fix the problem. McCarthy and Hitler were cut from the same cloth -they both had an insatiable hunger for power, and they both used essentially the same tactics to get it. I and many others are firmly convinced that it was only our system of government, with its checks and balances, that prevented McCarthy from gaining more power and eventually becoming a United States Hitler. Germany didn't have that advantage, however, which allowed Hitler's meteoric rise to power.

By the way it's interesting to look at what's happening today. Our leaders today are asking us to flock to them so they can fight the terrorists, a group of people who share common traits with the Communists and Jews of old - those traits being that there is a nearly universal fear throughout the country of them, and that it is very easy for the government to make them out to be a much larger threat than they actually are.

Hitler used the Jews as a vehicle to gain power by making his people terrified of them. Note that Hitler was careful to paint the Jews as a threat even when his oppression had rendered them incapable of being a threat even had they wanted to be.

McCarthy used the Communists to gain power by making his people terrified of them. Note that McCarthy was also careful to paint the communists as a threat even though that threat was nebulous and impossible to quantify.

George Bush Jr. is using the Terrorists to gain power by making his people terrified of them. Note how Bush is making the terrorists out to be a threat, and is using that threat as the main platform of his reelection campaign. That frankly represents a conflict of interest - after all, if he's depending on the people being afraid of terrorsts to guarantee his reelection, he does not have very much incentive to actually eradicate the terrorists does he? The far smarter thing to do would be to attack irrelevant people who are widely known as evil people, call them terrorists, and therefore try to make it LOOK like he is fighting the terrorists when in fact he cannot defeat the terrorists if he wants to use them as leverage to get reelected. That, by the way, is one of the reasons why he went after Iraq.

So what's the point of all this? It's that Hitler manipulated his people in order to accomplish his goal - gaining absolute power. I find it difficult to fully blame the Germans for falling for it, as the citizens of the United States have fallen for it as well, under McCarthy and today under Bush.



Man, that was long.

But the fact is there are Terrorists out there. Fact is that their actions (remember the terrorists, that do exist) have shaped our policy. Fact is they are still a threat, unlike the Jews who never were, and hey historically the commie's were threats, I don't know so much domestically. Fact is they are still plotting against us and our interests actively. I'm not scared under Dubya, he has shown me that he can be/is proactive in protecting me and my interests, big difference then McCarthy or Adolf.

history forgets that McCarthy was right more often than he was wrong.

i digress...

it appears that a lot of confusion on this thread is created by the bludgeoning of the word "good." When Stare at the sun cites examples of Hitler's "good" accomplishments... i think it can be argued that the word is unfit for the discussion.

i believe the more effective word is "powerful." hitler did accomplish many economic wonders, but it was all done w/the purpose of building Germany's war machine. In turn, the war machine was used to make unprovoked attacks and create an atmosphere of persecution for minorities. The ends corrupted the means in this case. Good is being used in lieu of powerful, which leads to people interpreting that as "good=the opposite of evil."

I agree with most of what you have written, but this statement above sound like Hitler never really hated the Jews, it sound a bit like they just were "useful"

But If you look at his book "mein kampf" you will see that Hitler personally hated the Jews, he didn't just used them, he wanted to exterminate them. And for this goal he "hijacked" germany just with the methods you described above.

Oh and a small quote from Göring:
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

I think, when looking to the current situations, the last part is quite funny....

I would like to add to this thread that at the time, a large percentage of the economy was involved with jewish affairs. I'm not saying they exerted any control over the economy as a group, but even before Hitler rose to power, the Jews were seen as a "rich people".
When Jewish people became persecuted by the Nazi Regime, much of that material wealth came into the hands of the Government and some to the people. This obviously will make for a strong economy when the money that used to belong to 12 million people now belong to 8 million. This was Hitler's Blood Money where he bought his war machine.

edit: i agree with tophat below- The Khans were truley impressive empire builders.

Do it with horses and sabers, everywhere from Hungary to China and Siberia to India, and then I'll be impressed. I'll PM you with the rest. This really isn't what this thread is about.

The business of labeling who is a terrorist and who is defending themselves against terrorists has been run by people who use the lables to an advantage.
It is absurd to call an occupation legal (the US is guilty of this as well) and people striking back terrorism. Its like barbarians with educations and huge lexicons telling the story to gain advantage.

I suggest everyone read Jack Bernstein's "An American Jew In Racist Marxist Isreal". Not only does it discuss how Isreal is run today, but it touches on how the Zionist Jews helped Hitler. It mentions how Hitler could not have gained the power he did without that help.

interesting arguments the author makes. Jack Bernstein by the way challenged to debate anyone from Isreal about his writings, NO ONE accepted. Rumor has it, he was killed shortly after writing this paper by the MOSSAD.

link http://www.dutchpal.com/pal/history-13.html or try this one
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/israel.htm

No, not at all. I've read Mein Kampf too, and there's no doubt that Hitler really did hate the Jews. However, he wasn't (until the end anyway) stupid about his hatred. He didn't come out on his first day as Chancellor and tell everyone that he wanted to throw every Jew he could find into the gas chamber. He slowly built the German citizens up to his level of hatred. My point there was that people tend to think of Hitler as a psycho who stole control of Germany and became a horrible tyrant. I'm more interested in looking at the German people and how they allowed him to gain control.

The communists were not a domestic threat first off. The threat was from the commie-haters who wanted to persecute anyone they thought might have anything to do with the communists.

As for the terrorists, I never said they don't exist. I said the government doesn't want that threat to go away. 9/11 was wholly preventable with some common sense airline security measures. Really, who's brilliant idea was it to allow knives of ANY length on airplanes? Furthermore, if we are saying the terrorists are a threat, why are people STILL getting weapons onto airplanes? If they're a threat, surely the logical course of acting is to eradicate the threat.

That means staying in Afghanistan and finding bin Laden rather than going after Saddam, who had NOTHING to do with 9/11 and who has become a living martyr for all the radical factions in that part of the world who are just looking for excuses to hate us. The government has made our situation more perilous, not less. Why? Because if we're out of danger we start looking at the royal mess Bush has made of the economy and vote him out of office. This is his only chance to stay in the whtie house - if he has a terrorist threat that he has to "lead" us through. My point in all this is not that Bush = Hitler, but that many of the American people are blindly following their leader even when signs indicate that it's not such a good idea, and there's a definite possibility for comparison between the Americans and the Germans who blindly followed Hitler.

The lesson we should have learned from the Nazis is that blindly following the government can lead to very bad things. Unfortunately, we haven't learned it, so history will at some point repeat itself.

And by the way, McCarthy was NOT right more often than he was wrong. Murrow would not have come out against him if that were the case.

Honestly, I have to question your intentions for this post. Not only are you posting material that is very conrtravercial, but you are not posing any type of question, or call of the opinions of others. You are merely stating that no matter how many people died at the hands of the Nazi party, it wasn't THAT bad. ( The capture/torture/death of a human being for one's personal satisfaction is wrong on any level; this is true even for a single, needless death. One death is bad, millions of deaths, an unfathomable travesty.)
Your viewpoints on Israel are baseless and opinion based. I really have to ask how Israel's status as a nation effects you?

I also have to ask why the mods thought this was a good idea. Obviously, allowing someone to post such a topic, and at the same time allowing them to state such defimation as "...US supports Israel fully, and all the bullshit they stand for and do..."
That is your personal opinion, as unfounded as it is, it has no place in this arguement.

-SF

I'm quite relieved to see that this thread has gone so well. This is truly a test of the integrity of the TFP members as a whole, and the ability to keep a discussion free of flames, yelling, name-calling, and other such nonsense.

I ask you, what other board could successfully pull off such a thread?

Let us also please stay focused on the topic, and try not to digress into thoughts over GW and his terrorists. I'm sure there are 12 other threads for that already. :)

Thank you all for your honest and thoughtful participation, and keep up the good work.

If anyone has any questions as to why this thread is being allowed, or was approved to begin with, please feel free to PM Lebell, me- analog, or any other Mod/Admin- we will be happy to explain. Thank you. -analog.

First off, my post was originally in response to another thread. Hence why this is a Spin off thread. However, I am not saying that what the Nazi's did was right, what I am saying is that the number of victims of the holocaust was vastly overexagerated, and was used to get sympathy for Israel, and to this day, the Jews are trying to increase the number to as high as 9 million, to gain more sympathy :rolleyes:

Why this bothers me is that the United States, and many other countries, send billions(35 billion from the US alone) to Israel every year, not to mention arming them to the teeth with the latest and greatest of military tech. This money could be much better spent on domestic issues.

Perhaps if i show some of the things that Israel is doing, like the construction of their new "fence", in territory they have no claim to, shooting people w/ m-16's when they are having rocks thrown at them, running those same people over in tanks, bullying the entire middle east, and constantly threatening the stability of the region. Just one example of how the US turns a blind eye to whatever Israel does:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1061765.htm

And you you presented as a "proof" for that are calculations of liars, false "specialists" and known neonazis....

source?

Nice posts Shakran. Very intelligent and well thought out.

I have often wondered why an amoured car with a couple million bucks in it and 3 guys is protected to the hilt, but a passenger plane worth 100 million with 300 people on board has a bifolding MDF board separating the cockpit from the cabin.

WTF?

Oh, and Hitler was a dispicable human being with no good points whatsoever and I am sure that if there is a hell he is roasting away right now.

Much has been said about the German economy and Hitler pulling them out of their depression, blah blah blah. I would use the arguement that so many Clinton bashers use then, that the plans were put in place for an economic recovery by the government prior to Hitler's acension to power (Bismark I believe.)

That is exactly was I was going to say, except that you said it with far more tact and consise-ness than I would have and more likely could have.

First off Federal Aid for Israel is nowhere near 35 billion annually, from what I remember we give them about 5 billion in foreign/military aid along with Turkey and Egypt. Secondly what aid we do give them is well deserved 1) they were a very solid and strategic Ally in the cold war 2) they deserve it for the peace they made (or attempted too) with their war mongering Arab neighbors. You tell me how you feel about a fence after hundreds of terrorist attacks almost daily, especially when the people perpetrating it are fucking goon losers who picked the fight and lost. Everytime Israel eases restrictions another Palestinian slips through strapped with a bomb and blows up a bus. They have every right to defend their soverigns anyway they need too, that is the governments responsibility.

You tell me how you would feel after being invaded by enemy countries 3 times (48', 56', 73') and being dragged into a preemptive war in 73', and being forced to take action several times more because other countries knowingly and willing harbor and aid terrorists trying to destroy your country. The Palestinians are in a rough spot. But Ass clown terrorists like Islamic Jihad and Hamas whose sole purpose is to kill Israel's and destroy the State are not helping their cause, that is why I give Israel my full support.

I'd probably be able to if my family wasn't forced from their home at gun point in '48.



SLM3

We need an extinguisher...this post is FLAMIN'!!!
Your hate and blindness are sooooo evident right now.

shakran, I do appreciate your account of the historical phenomena of Nazism and Hitler. I don't see it as relevant or necessary (merely rhetorical) to include the comparisons to present-day US politics, however.

Perhaps if the Arab's had not invaded in 48, then that would not have happened.

Saying 2 wrongs make a right?

I'm not sure it was wrong. You invade and lose, shit happens. But even if it was, don't play the victim card if you are partially responsible.

Invade and loose...then have someone come to your spot and take your home. That sounds like defend invasion...then go invade.

I don't understand. My family had a house there for generations, and was kicked out before any sort of Arab invasion occured. I think you're forgetting who took what from whom.

Does Deir Yassin mean anything to you? I'll wait while you google it.

Just out of curiousity, Ustwo, what makes you an authority on the history of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict?

Interesting word, invade. You take land, then the people and their allies fight back, and they're the aggressors?


SLM3

So your family was kicked out during the civil war? Jews can claim the same thing, many had been living there for generations... Next thing you know 5 Arab regular armies come marching in to annihilate you.

I don't know how that was a flame in anyway. All I did was call out the assholes in the world like Islamic Jihad and Hamas.

Well, the one thing I CAN'T believe, is that I haven't seen this quote brough out yet:

"Naturally the common people do not want war: neither in Russia, nor England, nor, for that matter, in Germany. That is understood. But, after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."

Reichmarshal Hermann Goering at the Nuremberg Trails

I'm still curious as to what Hitler's good points were. There was a comment made about the industrial revival Hiitler took credit for after WWI.

Even if he was directly responsible, we have to remind ourselves that the economy could be doing great, but the people aren't.

Before WWII, Hitler was a darling of the business world in the 1930s because of his facism. Now remember that fascism doesn't mean gas chambers, it is a special kind of an economic arrangement, where the government and the corporations mix. Mussolini preferred the term "corporatization" over fascism.

What happens with fascism? The government and the corporations come together and decide how much investment, research, and consumption goes on every year (something that goes on right now in Japan every 2 years), unions are destroyed, and national assets are auctioned off.

In essence, the market was doing great in Germany, but that doesn't mean the people were. I don't believe that being forced to work two jobs to support a family is "progress".

Incidentally, FDR called Mussolini "an admirable Italian gentlemen." Fun in a can.

I find historical points illustrated by modern examples make more sense to me. I also find posters having points to posts adds to the discussion. Whether I agree or not.

If one disagrees, say so and back up it with fact/opinion. Or take it to another thread, as SatS did originally.

I don't find it odd that you don't appreciate his point. I do find it odd that it's worth your comment. Isn't the point of threads (particularly in Politics) to discuss/ask/share?

I hope this thread is recovering from the flames a few posts back.

Jizz-Fritter you make an excellent point. The people were working very hard for the economy to be so great. But the fact is that they were working. He provided many jobs for these people that really had no chance at all for work before. Because these people had once more a chance to support themselves and their families, they were willing to work hard for their money.

I can think of more stimulating activities than working.

You have a very good point and I agree. It was a horrible thing that happened, but everything happens for a reason. My grandmother lived through that war in Hungary, and she told us stories all the time of the German soldiers being the "civilized" ones. It was the Americans she had to dress up like an old woman and run from to keep from getting raped. The stories go into much more detail than that, but then I would be innapropriate. I think you bring very valid points, and I just hope we learn from our mistakes.

All occupying forces have tended to take part in rape and pillage, it is not a uniquely German or American trait - the crime for which Hitler is damned by his "eternal court of justic" is attempted genocide, not prosecuting an aggressive war.

Hi,

lets hope 'Stare at the Sun' is just being provocative in order to get the discussion going. Whenever I hear someone start a sentence with 'I know the Nazis were bad, but...' I get the creeps.

Actually I think its rather useless to argue wether there were 500 000 jewish victims of the NSDAP or a million or 6 million and I dont quite see the point in it. I just wanted to state that until 1937 about 50 jewish Austrians lived in the town where I was born. 15 of them were murdered the rest emmigrated, only one family returned after the war. So even in a small town of about 10000 people there have been victims. And im not counting the 'arians' that have been killed because they were social democrats, communists or even catholics who wouldnt cooperate with the new regime.

So even as a non-historian I can say that all over Austria the bodycount must have been enormous (especially in Vienna with its jewish community of almost 250000 up to the incorporation of Austria into the 'Reich', at least 40000 of whom didnt survive the holocaust). If you take into consideration that Hitler ruled almost all over Europe for a couple of years 6 Million does not sound like much of an exaggeration to me.

Anyway what I actually wanted to say, is that even for what they have done to my hometown, my country and its people Hitler and all Nazis and Nazi-Sympathizers derserve to rot in hell for all eternity - no matter how many highways they built or how great a protege of the arms industry Adolf Hitler was .

I certainly hope this is not considered a flame.

The internet has become one of the largest and most invaluable tools of the various racist groups around the world.

The ability to communicate to mass numbers with minimal effort - via websites - has assisted these groups in ways that were unthinkable in years past.

One of the most widely used methods for these groups is to infiltrate newsgroups and other internet forums to recruit new members. The members of these groups post their drivel on these sites knowing that they will be denounced by the large majority of the members of these sites. They also know, however, that among the large number of people shouting them down will be a small number of possible recruits. Every seed of doubt they can sow is a victory for them.

Holocaust denial is one of their most successful campaigns.

It goes something like this: Oh, yeah, I'm sure some people were killed, but 6,000,000? Come on.... It couldn't possibly have been that many... or... There is no evidence that a "Final Solution" existed. Sound familiar?

But don't just take my word for it; read about it yourself
here and here. These are just two links from the Anti-Defamation League. There are countless other sites out there, if you do a little searching.

It is widely known that the stereotype of your typical white supremicist is that of a toothless trailerpark denizen with little more than a basic knowledge of grammar and vocabulary. To combat this image, many groups have enlisted the help of educated bigots to help promote a more "civilized" image and project a more "intelligent" facade.

With all due respect and acknowledgement that neither do I know what transpired with the moderators prior to the posting of this thread nor the person who posted it, it is my belief that we have been the victims of one of these group's campaigns - disguised as "intelligent" debate. This is the exact intent of the Committee for Open Debate of the Holocaust, a group that engages in interent holocaust denial.

I am not unaware of this phenonomon and believe me, if I thought this were the case, I wouldn't have allowed the discussion to occur.

Yeah, I'm pretty pissed right now. I do NOT appreciate being called a peon for some racist group. This was a civil and open discussion that I felt was in order. If you read my original posts, you will very clearly see that I am not trying to incite anything, nor am I trying to totally deny the Holocaust. It was an awful and tragic event. The inhumanity of it is beyond words. That is a fact.

My views on the Holocaust, however controvertial, are my own. They were posted in a civil manner that was approved by the mod's. I was not trying to recruit anyone for any racist oganization. :rolleyes:

SATS,

While I did not think you were a recruiter, it is a legitimate concern, as there are people doing exactly what JumpinJesus said, that is, spreading lies and half truths about the holocaust.

The fact that you have questions regarding the numbers tells me that they are at least partly successful and one reason I put my own stamp of approval on the thread along with analog.

Really, the question to me is not what the intentions of SATS are, without wishing to sound harsh, when I see someone making comments about "the myth of the 6 million" and "well, we know something happened, but the figure of 6 million is hugely inflated..." I just dont really feel myself wanting to know them.

The question to me, and I think this is the defence of the moderators, is what is the best way to deal with holocaust denial? When someone comes to this site and wants to post something along the lines of "well, you know, their were Jewish casualties in WWII, but the scale and the scope of the holocaust were invented by zionist controlled governments and used as a justification for the creation of Israel" - I mean, most of us do not believe that these statements to be factually true, most of us can find a huge wealth of evidence that the holocaust did happen, that those people did die, most of us understand that what SATS says is simply not true, that whether it is "his opinion" or "someone else's" at best it is a very poor misunderstanding of history, at worst an extremely distasteful falsehood.

So when you have a post like this, you have two options - 1 you censor it because you and the majority of people find it offensive, 2 - you allow it to stand, and you allow the members of this community to demolish all of the claims made within in it, to show that holocaust denial has no historical or factual basis whatsoever, that the holocaust clearly can be proved beyond any doubt to have occured.

When I first saw this post, I was upset that option 1 was not taken, but after I have thought about it, I do appreciate that option 2 was probably better all along. If we just censor holocaust denial or holocaust revisionalism, we allow their claims to be unchallenged - it is better to knock down the claims, to always and at all times fight them and prove they are untrue, so that if there are people who are doubtful, who have not studied this - when they come to this thread, they do not see the revisionist comment only and then it disappears, so in fact the only education the thread gives them is "the myth of 6 million", they see the revisionist comment and then see many people offer proof of the holocaust, and they understand that the revisionist claims are very base lies.

Sometimes, free speech can be valuable, we cannot fight these ideas by just banning them, we should never be afraid to engage them. I think this is what lebell and analog have done here, and although I initially did not agree, I now think that their actons to allow this thread were correct.

Stare at the Sun,

First, I ask that you keep in perspective that I do not know you. Without the knowledge of your intent, I have to base my reaction on my own prior knowledge of the statements you have made.

Did you follow the links I posted? If you did, then can you not understand from where my comments come? If you did not, then I ask that you do follow those links; it may give you some idea as to why I posted what I did.

I have my reasons for feeling the way that I do about this topic as I'm sure everyone here with an opinion has a reason for theirs. If you take offense at my comments, then I've made my point. I cannot believe that you did not consider this a possible response to your post.

You link to the CODOH website, a white supremicist group masquerading as a think tank, as a basis for your opinion- and yet you take offense when I question your motives.

Your linking to one of the most damaging groups advocating the denial of the holocaust - the Committee for Open Debate of the Holocaust - is what caused me to post what I did. Your linking to their website, if not done intentionally, shows a woeful ignorance on your part as to where you gain your information.

Do you honestly not see how using this group as a source for information, then calling it a desire for "civil and open discussion" can be viewed with some suspicion when the sole purpose of this organization is to cast doubt on the holocaust in the hopes of winning converts to supremicist organizations? Are you truly unaware of this group's intent?

You do realize the ADL is a Jewish website, and therefore, just as biased as any "white supremist" website.

Well, seeing as this has now boiled down to debating hate group affiliations and whether or not Stare At the Sun is one of them, I can safely assume we've all had it out on this topic.

Thank you all for participating. To all of you who understood why we allowed this thread to take place at all- you are truly thanked and appreciated. :)

Most notably:

EDIT:

After careful consideration and a PM from a contributor to this post, I am compelled to add further explaination to the end of this thread.

1. Whether or not Stare At The Sun is or is not- and he says he is not, and i must respect his assertion- a racist, white-power hate-group-pusher is not the issue here, not the point of the thread, and not the topic we're discussing. This thread derailed several posts ago, and I have now decided to end it.

2. The continued use of opinion, regardless of the opinion itself, is part of what got this thread closed. Also, invoking the name of the CODOH, a WELL-KNOWN white power group- no matter how honest the intentions- is not something that will be done here.

If you all want to discuss who and what the CODOH are, and if they really are racists and revisionists- fine, go make another thread. I said I would show this topic nothing but the utmost respect, and I have done that. Allowing the discussion to derail into whether or not people are racists, or what a particular organization's aim is, and to continue to deal only in opinion and the "facts" of so-called "experts" in said organization would be irresponsible and disrespectful to those lost and to those left behind.

It is for those people whom we (I) work so carefully to protect.

Please feel free to PM me if you have any questions, comments, etc., I welcome them.

Thank you all again. :)

-analog.