Tommo, Borjastick, and Lothario #racist forum.codoh.com

(Tommo): Yes of course the chemical argument is just part of the puzzle, in my view it is a very important part.

It seems now the angle is not exactly confronting Rudolf's findings anymore, but trying to make the chemical argument "irrelevant" altogether as evidence. Of course, were the shoe to be on the other foot, the chemical evidence for extermination would be given the utmost highest calibre of importance.

Yes, they even try to rubbish Rudolf's coverging of evidence from other sources, such as photo evidence etc, as him relying on other sources because his own contribution is nonsense, and hence alleging basically he is a conspiracy theorist.

I've never read so much tripe.

I am of the opinion that it is impossible to even BE a holocaust historian of any calibre without first learning that it is a lie.

I hold Van Pelt, Green, Rees etc as the holocaust industry's/Jewry's most outstanding liars.

(borjastick): Indeed Tommo, they are very happy to make wild claims that 2000 jews were herded into a 'gas chamber' and a tin or two of zyklon B pellets were tossed through a hole in the roof, which killed them all in a but a few minutes. However when someone applies some logic and science to check and question these claims they scream blue bloody murder, accusing that person of not being qualified, using incorrect methods. In fact accusing him of anything that they can to rock the boat and draw attention anywhere else but the very issue he has exposed.

These holocaust managers hate the truth and will do anything to cover it up. The gaze of exposure burns bright among those who dare to question the ludicrous lies of the holocaust.

Why does Lipstadt shout about never debating the holocaust? Because it doesn't stand up in the cold light of day.

(Lothario): This is true. In David Cole's book Republican Party Animal he tells about a conversation he had with a professor from Boston University and quotes him regarding Dachau: "You know, there are times I wish we could just tell the world that the 'gas chamber' at that camp was built by our troops after the war. But we can't encourage denial." (p. 108).

I'm not sure what the official status of the Dachau 'gas chamber' is at the moment (or how they explain it's existence as nobody is alleged to have ever been gassed there), but it shows how little regard the orthodox historians have for good scientific practises. Being wrong is part of science, not willing to admit you're wrong is malefic, especially when people are in jail or physically attacked because of your lies. The question now is: is his desire to tell the world because of a bad conscience or because he is tired of all the hard questions? I hope it's the former, I fear it's the latter.

1 comments

Confused?

So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!

To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register. Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.