Was it destined to fail?

>holocaust denial
THIs is where you reveal yourself to be either dishonest or just plain stupid. "DENIAL." I'm somewhat familiar with his work ("Hitler's War" is quietly accepted as probably the best, biography of AH, certainly the one that had the best research and far more interviews with people who actually knew the man).

When you say Holocaust DENIAL, you fall into "their" trap" (or that is your goal) by trying to draw people into the language of the Inquisition.

"Do you DENY the sublime nature of Christ, 3 persons in one God?" That's when you reveal yourself as the goon you actually are. To suggest someone DENIES something would mean "he is saying nothing happened to Jews at all during WW 2," whih is not at all what Irving claims.
It's crooked, and so are you if you are deliberately using that language. They are now doing it with Global Warming. You can't be a skeptic. you can't have questions. You are et=either an ORTHODOX believer or you are a DENIER and should be burned at the stake. That's the implication.

People like you are very, very dangerous indeed. The question for me is whether you are just a useful idiot going along with the trends and don't actually know a thing about the Spanish Inquisition, or whether you yourself are actually evil.

You aren't allowed to say "well, more or less, but I clearly think the numbers are exaggerated and some of the stories are obviously made up, I'd just like to check the details." you either DENY or accept the entire view (which is now Europe's new de facto religion) in it's entirety. Very, very dangerous indeed.

>"Hitler's War" is quietly accepted as probably the best, biography of AH

Funny

>you fall into "their" trap"

Very funny

t. stormfag

literally NO ONE other than stormfags consider irving an expert on anything

Sounds like this, except replace evolution with the holocaust.

>waaa Im such a victim because people call me retarded when I try to shill retarded ideas

Poor you, such a victim.

...

>using a creationist comic to say you're not the crazy one

What was this argument supposed to support?

Flat Earth theory? New Chronology? Creationism? Alien sightings? Believe in ghosts?

the source doesn't matter

What it's supporting doesn't matter, its a phenomenon in lots of areas of study.

It's really not. Dissent in academia occurs quite regularly, and is an expected part of the academic process. People sometimes make their careers by shaking shit up.

If you are not repulsed by the Holocaust, or you're even in support of it, I don't honestly care. The thing is, if you're actually going to deny it, give some proper evidence, instead of "muh independent thought!!1!".

What? Special fucking snowflakes on the fringe that feel threatened by ebul mainstream?

If your argument has merits it will make its way forward, just like quantum mechanics or general relativity did. If it has not you'll stay a clown.

> Dissent in academia occurs quite regularly

It happens, but it's often heavily resisted or ignored. Some research publications(nature for example) generally won't publish repeats of experiments that might falsify previous experiments conclusions or produce null results. Really, the only heavily dissected and thoroughly vetted research is that of grad students. The social and health "sciences" are particularly bad in this regard.

robotics.cs.tamu.edu/RSS2015NegativeResults/pmed.0020124.pdf

>If your argument has merits it will make its way forward

There's no reason to believe this

Just because you disagree with many people doesn't mean you're right. Just like how agreeing with many people doesn't make you right.

>b-but my speciul snowflake theory must true, because my feefees say so

Theories with merit will eventually push through. That's the best measure of merit we have.

4 in a row, and not a single coherent answer or defense because you have none. As soon as you insist on couching your beliefs and accusations in the language of the Inquisition/30 years war, you reveal that your fanaticism has taken on religious terms.

I'd be willing to make a bet no one here other than I speaks Latin or has an advanced degree in history. This is why you don't know how to think as historians or apply any sort of independent analysis to such things, which makes you such an easy target for "the master corrupters."
If you were actually well-versed in history, as soon as you saw the term DENIAL the first thing to come to your mind would be the Spanish Inquisition, the violence in the Anglican Reformation, the suppression of the Huguenots, the Hapsburg wars in the low countires, etc.. "Do you DENY 3 persons in one God?" If one could take your sort back a few hundred years, you'd be gleefully manning torture tools or trying to break a man on the rack until he accepted your way of thinking about your ideas.

This is all religious, whether you know it or accept it: the language of religion and the the sudden attack of piety and lashing out when anyone questions your de facto religion.

People such as you 4 are very dangerous. And whatever community /state college taught you is all the more dangerous since they are employing people to spread this sort of thinking.

Yes it does, it shows that the creator of the comic, people who affiliate themselves with him, and youself have a very twisted view of reality.

>boo, boo, I am a victim, pity me :'((
You obviosly have zero arguments for that flat earth of yours.

If you want to post articles about how much of a martyr you are, do it on other board.

no it doesn't

>4 in a row, and not a single coherent answer or defense because you have none.

because all you did is whine about some imaginary persecution complex while also proving everyone right about the fact that holocaust denial is just the face of neo-nazi propagandist.

the reason you are laughed at is because theres literally nothing backing up your insane claims that the holocaust never happened.

archive.org/details/BelzecSobiborTreblinka.HolocaustDenialAndOperationReinhard.ACritique

You can actually see the term written by historians publishing academic works.

>I'd be willing to make a bet no one here other than I speaks Latin or has an advanced degree in history.

I'm willing to bet you don't.

>If you were actually well-versed in history, as soon as you saw the term DENIAL the first thing to come to your mind would be the Spanish Inquisition, the violence in the Anglican Reformation, the suppression of the Huguenots, the Hapsburg wars in the low countires, etc.

No, you'd think of its colloquial, normal everyday usage.

By the way, what exactly is "religious" about claiming that Irving is a shit historian, Hitler's war contains numerous factual errors, that there are very few people who use it as an authority or the premier biography of Hitler, or that Irving's bullshit extends beyond this work, and is included in his publications from first to last?

...

If you haven't read Churchhill's War you aren't educated on WW2. Irving, in his research digs up a lot of never before seen stuff. His conclusions might range from far-fetched to batshit, but even so I can reject the conclusions and still take in the information that he does provide.

He's never been any sort of blatant falsifier

There he goes! shitposting his jpegs in impotent rage

>He's never been any sort of blatant falsifier

Never heard of Max Funfack, have you?

>According to Richard J. Evans, an expert witness for the defence at the 2000 libel trial of Deborah Lipstadt,[9] Irving based his estimates of the dead at Dresden on the word of one individual, Hans Voigt, who provided no supporting documentation,[10] used forged documents,[11] and described one witness named Max Funfack as Dresden's Deputy Chief Medical Officer.[12] Funfack had made it clear by letter to Irving on 19 January 1965 that he had not been either the Chief or Deputy Chief Medical Officer in Dresden, that he had no knowledge of any documentation about the number of people who were killed in the bombing, and during the war he had only heard rumours, which varied greatly, over the number of people who were killed in the raids.[12][13]

>Some research publications(nature for example) generally won't publish repeats of experiments that might falsify previous experiments conclusions or produce null results.

Plenty of them will publish anything you pay them to publish.

(((reviewers)))

>I'm willing to bet you don't.
You'd lose your bet.

>what exactly is "religious"

When you question people about whether....their favorite baseball team is really that good, you'll get one sort of reaction. You won't get a sudden attack of piety and a litany of ridicule and abuse. If you had a true understanding of European history, you'd understand this. You're telling me DENIAL has colloquial uses? Please, point a few out.

They've been training useful idiots in this for years, and always that same word: DENY, DENY, DENY. Not "skeptical." Not "questioning." He DENIES.
Anyone who knows Irving's work would agree he is not some sort of crackpot. In fact, after his Dresden book (which was serialized in a major UK paper), he was considered one of the most prominent young historians in the world.

He became an outcast and persona non grata after his book "Hitler's War" didn't include enough dirt/slander/speculation about Hitler having..syphilis, one testicle, being homosexual, etc.. Forget the fact that Irving uncovered the diary of Hitler's personal physician and published it in full.

If Western culture/academia/media ever return to sanity, the treatment of David Irving for simply being a writer who committed his life to researching the details of the Second World War and getting them into print will be remembered as one of the great smear campaigns by international Jewry to silence a man who has different conclusions and the evidence to back up his conclusions that support at least the possibility of an alternative interpretation.

DENIAL and DENIER have been used exclusively in a religious context for over 500 years. If you read Latin, especially look for it in Papal Bulls. It's a religious word with religious connotations, being abrogated to shut down the right of someone to express ideas you find disagreeable.

>You're telling me DENIAL has colloquial uses? Please, point a few out.

en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/denial

So, for instance, if you're accused of a crime and you say you didn't do it, that's a denial. You have terms like the denial of service, you have phrases like "self-denial", or an addict "in denial". These are pretty ordinary terms. Are you not a native English speaker?

>You'd lose your bet.

I have enormous amounts of trouble believing that someone who is actually a historian from an elite university would, in all seriousness, use phrases like "International Jewry", as if there was some council of Jewish elders plotting.

>He became an outcast and persona non grata after his book "Hitler's War" didn't include enough dirt/slander/speculation about Hitler having..syphilis, one testicle, being homosexual, etc

No, it's mostly criticized for its blatant nonsense. I'm not sure what edition you're working from, but do you remember the part where Irving claims that Hitler was against the Jewish genocide because he gave orders, through Himler, on November 30th, 1941, about how the Jews arriving in Latvia were not to be executed on arrival? As if that were the ordinary course of events? And how this wasn't a general order, but just this specific train load?

Hitler's War gets criticized because it's crap history.

By the way, you didn't defend your point that "Denial" is not used in an academic context when you have that Aktion Reinhardt paper I linked you to, or how it is "religious" in nature to level actual criticism to Irving's methodology and blatant lying?

I should add, even the average person is starting to catch on, and those behind all of it are getting more and more nervous that their game is up. I may personally find Ann Coulter distasteful, but she has a very large audience and even she now openly mocks the SPLC and ADL. People have grown very, very tired of language policing and having a small group who purport to represent the Jewish community telling the rest of the nation what we can and cannot say for fear of offending group x, y, or z, while at the same time remaining completely silent as Israel exists as an Apartheid State and one of the worst human rights abusers in the world and then US politicians have the temerity to stand up at confirmation hearings and tell the world they are a "democracy." The "Jewish State" is a "democracy." Thus my wife--who was raised Catholic and knows nothing about Judaism, but whose mother was born Jewish in theory has the right to displace an Arab family who has been living in Hebron for 1,500 years?

And no, the argument may seem to be meandering but it isn't, since it all comes back to the same, very hubristic group at day's end. In France, you can go to jail for even questioning or wanting to investigate how many Jews died in concentration camps. If this is law, then the muslims do indeed have a point, they should also have the "right not to be offended" and drawings of Muhammed should be outlawed. And, as a Catholic, I find the awful TV series "the Young Pope" offensive, and that should be outlawed as well. You cannot have one law for a protected elite and one for everyone else.

>No, it's mostly criticized for its blatant nonsense. I'm not sure what edition you're working from, but do you remember the part where Irving claims that Hitler was against the Jewish genocide because he gave orders, through Himler, on November 30th, 1941, about how the Jews arriving in Latvia were not to be executed on arrival? As if that were the ordinary course of events? And how this wasn't a general order, but just this specific train load?

theres also the fact that the end of the movie The Eternal Jew is LITERALLY Hitler saying he will destroy the jewish race in europe if another world war happens.

>And no, the argument may seem to be meandering but it isn't, since it all comes back to the same, very hubristic group at day's end. In France, you can go to jail for even questioning or wanting to investigate how many Jews died in concentration camps.

Tell me user, why Christopher Browning isn't in prison then, and is in fact a well respected historian, unlike say, Irving?

ITT: Anal pained Arabs and Iranians.

I don't like zionists either but you're delusional

>forced to give a holocaust victim 50k
>got jailed for a year
>now his only audience is Bubba and his NeoNazi pals
KEK

>en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/denial
giving me an OED entry does not count as a "colloquial" use of a word. Perhaps you ought start over and look up what the word "colloquial" means, since clearly you don't know.

>International Jewry
How would you describe the World Jewish Council, The Jewish Agency, the ADL, the list goes on? Give me a better term to describe them and I will use it. They are Jewish pressure groups international in scope (see film "Defamation." It's available at no charge on YT).

>Hitler's War gets criticized because it's crap history.
Again, no. I can pull..50 random quotes from Raul Hilberg's "Destruction of the European Jewry," that taken without proper context ( sometimes even in proper context) make no sense.

If you have access to a good University library, go pull the press coverage on Irving prior to and after "Hitler's War." The problem the media had was not with his writing.

I have no idea of your age, I'm probably old for this site being in my 30s, but my real wakeup call was interacting with a now banished historian named "Daniel Goldhagen." Goldhagen's ideas, btw, were central to the thinking behind bombing Serbia. I recall reading his first book, and then being at a restaurant as he "held court" during the extended celebrations of the book's brisk sales. I could tell then, the man was a deranged ideologue who had taken "perceived victimhood as currency" to an entirely new level.

As of a few years ago, he was made to resign his professorship at Harvard for his vicious attacks on the Catholic Church. Which is quite an accomplishment, given that such attacks are essentially Harvard's raison d'etat.

So Goldhagen is now alone somewhere, spitting out more talmudic hatred and accusing everyone and anyone of anti-Semitism. We're now getting close to the point where all the Goldhagens of the world will be losing their professorships. And not a moment too soon.

I think you think you have some profound insight and therefore have "got me," but in reality you have no idea what you're talking about. Browning is a "court historian." He knows damn well his job depends on him not saying anything controversial and he plays his role.

Irving has no professorship. Also, Irving is not currently in jail, but he has had MI 5 confiscate a bunch of his research and then give it back to him destroyed by a flood, just truly vindictive, vicious things clearly done at the behest of Jewish interests.

For Christ's sake, as of a few weeks ago, the UK now has a LAW against criticizing Israel, Jews, suggesting Jews might have dual loyalty, the list is amazing. And it is enforced!

these are the very same people who let over 1,2000 underage White British girls be raped over and over by Pakistani rape gangs for over 12 years, and then refused to make an arrest in all that time for fear of how the optics would look to see a bunch of Pakistanis being arrested and the victims all White British girls. So it was allowed to carry on. For more than a decade. This isn't a fantasy or a conspiracy, this actually happened.

so, the same police who will now come and ARREST YOU for saying mean think about Jews refused to arrest Pakistanis for pimping out/raping British girls as young as 11. This is the state of the West.

As for what point you were trying to make via the guy at Ohio state or whoever he teaches, he is allowed to teach simply because he sticks to the party line.

>giving me an OED entry does not count as a "colloquial" use of a word. Perhaps you ought start over and look up what the word "colloquial" means, since clearly you don't know.

OED does in fact use colloquial English. It does not include specialized terms of art, or jargon. That's why, for instance, when you look up say, the word "metal" you do NOT get definitions like what is used in the fields of astronomy or chemistry. It certainly has far stronger non-religious usage than a term like "International Jewry".

>How would you describe the World Jewish Council, The Jewish Agency, the ADL, the list goes on?

A variety of NGOs, several of which don't actually get along and none of whom claim to represent all Jews.

>Give me a better term to describe them and I will use it.

How about you just talk about the organizations you're attributing various actions to, instead of lumping it all together into some sort of bizarre hivemind implication?

>If you have access to a good University library, go pull the press coverage on Irving prior to and after "Hitler's War." The problem the media had was not with his writing.

Why are you talking about popular press coverage in regards to academic appraisal of his work? Negative treatment of Hitler's War comes out starting in 1977, and doesn't really let up, because some of the central premises, like "Hitler was unaware or impotent to stop the mass killings in the Eastern Front" are absurd.

>Irrelevant tangent.

>I think you think you have some profound insight and therefore have "got me," but in reality you have no idea what you're talking about. Browning is a "court historian." He knows damn well his job depends on him not saying anything controversial and he plays his role.

>"h-he really believes everything I preach but doesnt come forward with it!"

go fuck yourself you clown

Browning is not a court historian, and he was hugely controversial when he started taking potshots at Intentionalism. You were wrong about the only point you made addressing what I wrote.

Why do you add so much irrelevant crap whenever you make your posts? What university taught you to argue in that fashion?

>I don't like zionists either but you're delusional
Typical of the person who has absolutely no idea what any of this is about, but wants to do the internet version of a "drive-by shooting" to make sure his virtue signal flag display is seen.

Which doesn't make sense since the board is anonymous, but that idea has apparently not yet sunk in...

Also love the idea that, if somehow your rea name were revealed and a news microphone was put in front of your face, you'd deny being a "racist" to high heaven. And yet you believe everyone who has any sort of issue with the falsification of history/pressure placed on anyone who disagrees must be a muslim. Though you aren't even brave enough to use that word. God I tire of people of like you.

I refuse to sign up for anything where I have to give my name and allow FB or anyone else to make their money from data-mining me, but the level of discourse heroes just terrible these days...

user, you are reaching and now you are boring me. You got in over your head because you're used to the usual idiot on here. I suspect you didn't count on finding someone who actually knows such things. Unless you are stupider than I think, you know what COLLOQUIAL means- something you'd hear in everyday expression, a word you'd overhear getting coffee in the morning. "DENY" is not one of them. We both know not. Unless it's "your CC was denied," but even then it would be "turned down." There ARE NO colloquial uses for DENY.

>A variety of NGOs,
I don't know how to get it through your head that you aren't dealing with the average moron you are apparently used to dealing with. The question is, do you actually not know any better or you do and just hoping I do not know better?

giving you the benefit the doubt, let's give you some recommendations: BBC Panorama: "the neocons and the War Party." BBC: "Louis Theroux and the ultra-zionists." And the movie "Defamation," the film by an Israeli Jew documentary maker that finally unseated Abe Foxman from the ADL. Highly suggest you watch these, then maybe I could have more to say to you.

>go fuck yourself you clown
Thus my point, you're making it for me. If this discussion were simply about...a favorite footballl team or whether Messi is better than Ronaldo, people don't have sudden attacks of piety and respond with profanity. This is how you know you are literally insulting someone's defect religion of "multi-cultralism."

Thanks for making the point better than I ever could have made it.

>Not denying holocaust means you worship multiculturalism

Not even the user you replied to, but Go fuck yourself you clown.

>Browning is not a court historian
If he has written about the so-called Holocaust, I can guarantee he has not said anything remotely controversial lest he'd have received the "Rick Sanchez" treatment or maybe the "Dr. Scheuer" treatment and be banned from network TV despite being right about quite literally everything to do with the Arab Spring?

If he has given interviews or he has written a book or paper that genuinely stirs the pot, I'd love to see it. For Christ's sake, did you see the protests at UC Davis yesterday for the Milo person? He has no real beliefs, he's simply walking about doing all he can for attention.

you are making shit up based on LITERALLY nothing you stupid faggot. You just implied that everyone actually secretly agrees with you, but doesnt say so because the illuminati will ruin them. The fact that your little bird brain thinks theres only neo-nazi faggots and es jay double yous also showcases what a child you are.
go fuck yourself you clown

>Go fuck yourself you clown.
Sir, you seem very learned. That insult, "go fuck yourself you clown..." such elegance, yet at th same time so stinging. Can you tell us a bit about your process and how you settled on that phrasing in particular? I mean, I'm still smarting from the insult, you showed such range and mastery of language. How did you settle upon word "clown?"

tell me why the total death toll is always greater than the sum of its parts. The Holocaust is the only thing Jews ever invented.

>YOU DONT UNDERSTAND HE SECRETLY AGREES WITH ME!

Wow! I guess the holocaust never happened!

>you are making shit up
tell me what I've made up
>The illuminati
Never used that word
>your little bird brain thinks theres only neo-nazi faggots and es jay double yous

Sir, your writing talent is truly extraordinary. Can you share with us a bit the thoughts behind it? I think everyone realizes, creativity and mastery of the English language like that can only come with process. Can you tell us a bit about your process?

>B-but he agrees with me, b-but there is a conspiracy, because my feefees tell me so
>listing 3 unrelated Americans, instead of making a legit argument
Make an argument or go fuck yourself you clown

Jesus, Even with IQ to skew the results FAR toward the upper side, the average poster IQ here right now cannot be over 70...

>tell me what I've made up

Browning secretly agrees with you

>Never used that word

explain the difference between the Illuminati and international jewry

please stop being overly formal to try and give the idea that you are educated user. Its cringy and no one buys it. go fuck yourself clown

>Make an argument
Sir, you are clearly such a learned person with so much to share. In this instance, for anyone reading, I think allowing you to say what you re saying speaks volumes and pales in comparison to anything I might say. I'm content to just let you go on, this is great.

>holocaust denial thread
>resorts to shitposting

Yes. But they were in denial about it.

>Its cringy and no one buys it
>go fuck yourself clown

Yes, I think anyone reading trough the thread would obviously see me for a "clown" who doesn't know anything. I'm so ashamed. Is there anyway I can delete what I've written? MY G-D, people reading this most think I'm so stupid!

Reminder if anyone sane is watching before I take off to get started preparing my notes for tomm-- The Controlled Media would lie people to think that "we" ("We Wuz Kings!") are some sort sort of White Trash in trailer parks, rather than Ivy League lawyers and doctors, as at least some of us are.

I'd invite people to read the thread and make their best educated guess as to who is who...

Aw man I'm glad this phase passed pretty quickly for me. Worst that happened getting sucked into all this boogeyman shit was that I got into a facebook fight about BLM with somebody from my school and they blocked me.

It was nice thinking I'd figured everything out and the truth was really simple, that people were just deluding themselves but the reality is that most people don't give a shit, they just want to live their lives in relative peace without having to think about genocide all the time.

Realizing that in order to have a grasp of History that was worth any merit required a significant amount of time studying various perspectives on a subject was incredibly humbling.

saying sir doesnt make you seem intelligent. It just comes off as an autistic attempt to appear well mannered

>Realizing that in order to have a grasp of History that was worth any merit required a significant amount of time studying various perspectives on a subject was incredibly humbling.
So this the part of your attempted "reverse psychology" where I'm meant to start naming my degrees, awards, grades, etc.. as you try to imply I...lack of holistic understanding of world history and thus my place in it?

Sort of like Keats' poem "When I have Fears That I may Cease to Be?" 4/10 bait. that probably works with people who actually have no credentials and see a board like tis a place where they want their ego stroked. In fact I come here for just the opposite reason.

the reaction I get when it slowly dawns on another poster they aren't dealing wit the sort of typical idiot they are used to. Immediately, they go from the calm, tolerant person to calling me a a "sand nigger" or the like if they think I'm Muslim (I a not). It's an hilarious show to watch unfold.

But no good sir, I can promise you I'm both smarter and have spent far more tie=me studying various aspects of history than you will in your entire life. You can call that hubris, nut it's just plain fact.

>t just comes off as
>implying I care how I come off...

youre still an idiot user. You think browning secretly agrees with you based on nothing

>implying I care how I come off...
>Writing shitton of pointless text to appeal smart while providing nothing of substance to disscusion

Yea, you are total cool dude that doesnt gives a fuck

>You think browning secretly agrees with you based on nothing
you completely pulled "Browning" out of your ass and somehow tried to associate him with me. I did a brief search on him he apparently works at some shit uni in flyover country, I have never head anything by him, nor do I plan to.

What I CAN say about him or any other professional historian? They are not fools. none of them actually believe the bullshit (well, except for maybe John Merriman at Yale...he may be a true Shabbos Goy). Behind closed doors, when people know that there are likeminded people and no Jews around, do you really think European history professors believe in the lampshades, the soap, the number 6 million, the has chambers, and all the rest of that bullshit? No. They certainly can't say so publicly, eco. now since the UK has made naming the Jew ILLEGAL (!!!) to where you can go go to jail in the UK for criticizing Israel, for suggesting Jews have dual loyalty. the lost is about a mile long.

And while I am no Muslim and no Persian, I used to enjoy the shit out of Dr. Ahmadinejad from Iran coming to the U and trolling the West and pointing out the blatant hypocrisy. How can one argue with him that it's a clear double standard in France that one can be JAILED for even seeking to investigate the number of Jews who died in WW 2, but a cartoon of Muhammed is "muh free speech!" "Je Suis Charlie!" It's complete hypocritical bullshit, and he's right.

Why bother going through the joke of pretending Europe has free speech when they don't? Europe, at this point, has essentially acknowledged that jews area overlaps, a group of protected citizens. And the man known as the true "Father of the EU" even acknowledged this was what they wanted: a brown race of cattle on a worldwide plantation to be ruled over by Jewish overseers.

For anyone who doesn't want to read anything I write or trust what I write, that's fine. I must admit, this genuinely surprised me. No matter how much you dislike me, most people like/trust
Stefan Molyneux. Even if you don't "like"him, the few episodes I've listened to have been tame and he's not prone to Alex Jones type insane outbursts about gay frogs.
Anyway, listen to what Molyneux says about UN Agenda 2030. Much like Alexander Solzhenitsyn's book's the main book Moly.will refer to has no English translation because a...certain group knows it's in their best interest to keep an English copy away from the goyim. Thisis the only major work by a Nobwl Prize Winnner to have no English translation. Much like this book referred to here by "the father of the UN" and his aspiration to mix all the peoples of Europe into some sort of Egyptian-like mud race of potation worker and consumers:

youtube.com/watch?v=AZN7Jv-3uvk

>Yea, you are total cool dude that doesnt gives a fuck
Thanks. And thanks for reading. Have a good one,

>You got in over your head because you're used to the usual idiot on here.

So far, you haven't distinguished yourself from the usual /pol/ idiot, except you're significantly less insulting but more pretentious.

>- something you'd hear in everyday expression, a word you'd overhear getting coffee in the morning. "DENY" is not one of them. We both know not. Unless it's "your CC was denied," but even then it would be "turned down." There ARE NO colloquial uses for DENY.

Yes there are. You DENY an accusation. You DENY a service or charge on a bill. These are pretty ordinary uses of the term. They are enormously more common than a religious heresy connotation of the word, which I have quite literally never heard.

>I don't know how to get it through your head that you aren't dealing with the average moron you are apparently used to dealing with.

You could actually try responding to the arguments I make in entirety instead of by selection, and citing to academic sources. And I mean actually citing, instead of dropping names of various programs without even announcing how they supposedly help your case.

>If he has written about the so-called Holocaust, I can guarantee he has not said anything remotely controversial

What an amazing and baseless assertion you have there.

>Rick Sanchez" treatment or maybe the "Dr. Scheuer" treatment and be banned from network TV despite being right about quite literally everything to do with the Arab Spring?

This might come as a shock to you, but you do realize that in academia, TV network programs aren't really a big thing, right?

>If he has given interviews or he has written a book or paper that genuinely stirs the pot, I'd love to see it.

amazon.com/Ordinary-Men-Reserve-Battalion-Solution/dp/0060995068

>do you really think European history professors believe in the lampshades, the soap, the number 6 million, the has chambers, and all the rest of that bullshit

I dunno, they seem to write hundreds of page long documents about it.

drive.google.com/file/d/0B6Gu9NuQ7Zi4ZTFiYjFjZjUtOGNkYi00NzFiLTg5NTMtNWNlMWY2ODcxZDI2/view

Some of them even use the word "Denial" despite the fact that you claimed upthread that it is a religious term used to invoke persecution and not something serious academics do.

Was that the book in which he said that "Hitler was the best friend of the Jews in Germany"?

>in France that one can be JAILED for even seeking to investigate the number of Jews who died in WW 2
Pretty sure historians have been doing exactly this in France and in pretty much every other western country since 1945.

May I ask why you bother coming to this board? You don't know a single thing about Irving, about the controversy surrounding the so-called Holocaust,...you don't know much of anything at all but for how to make nebulous statements that reveal no real knowledge of anything while still trying to be insulting but knowing you cannot get specific enough on any issue since I actually know the details of such things. And you do not.

>You DENY a service or charge on a bill
You're lying. You don't "deny" a charge," you "reject" it. You've had almost a full day to try to discredit anything I said, and THS is the best you've come up with.

If you purport to have an interest in history, spend less time running your mouth and more time studying. This is the problem with he internet. Everyone aways running their mouth, yet so few actually know anything, You quite clearly either KNOW NOTHING on this subject or you are dishonest.

The word DENY in Western Civilization has vey specific religious implications, thus the reason they have worked it into this Holocaust Scam (See Dr. Norman Finkelstein's "The Holocaust Industry.")

Consider my position; yes, I realize this is a Cambodian fly-fishing forum and that the point is no one has any sort of recognition for name or reputation. Yet having spent my entire adult life studying these things, I have people like ...you trying to tell me I'm incorrect. Which is fine, OK, have some sort of coherent argument, you never do.
After a time, if get boring. I ran the gauntlet on this stuff at...one of the most elite unis in the world and then I come on here not expecting deference but at least hoping for some sort of well-formulated argument. I get none of it.

Before you decide to run your mouth and speak from your ass, at least try to lean something about the issue at hand.

>pakistan

>T. /pol/ won the day.

True. Dr. Faurisson probably the most prominent, Irving was charged in France for an interview he did with French TV in the UK. And the way they do it is incredibly dishonest.

If you are found guilty of contradicting the law (which still includes the finding that the Germans did Katyn, BTW) you have to A.Pay the fought court fine B. Pay the legal fees of every group of Jews that climbs out of the woodwork representing..."Jewish communist Veterans.." and right on down the line C. You have to take out NOTICES in 5 of the largest daily papers in France confessing your guilt. Now, however, you are NOT ALLWED to print in the paper what you actually said. Thus it would say: "Pierre LeClerc found guilty of violating then the hate statute for saying: "----------------CENSORED-------------------.
"

In Irving's case, this had to appear in 5 different major papers in France. It's absolutely disgraceful, and I throughly enjoyed watching Iran's Ahmadinejad troll the Western media on "freedom of speech...oh,unless it involves criticizing Jews,then you go to jail." That was great.

ban stormniggers on sight

Jesus Christ. I did not know the person, but wow...

>amazon.com/Ordinary-Men-Reserve-Battalion-Solution/dp/0060995068

>crucial source of original research used for the bestseller Hitler's Willing Executioners- (!!!!)

Where shall I begin? You know who Daniel Goldhagen was, correct? I knew him when I was a student and we was a young professor writing this book. His thoughts ended up being very influential in the decision of the horrid little Jewess troll to bomb Serbia. But moving beyond that...Goldhgagen is SUCH a rabid, Jewish Supremacist (that term 100% true here), Catholic hating, inane polemicist that even Raul Hilberg did all he possibly could to distance himself from him and Harvard made him resign. Now...for Harvard to make you resign for being TOO RABIDLY ZIONIST AND ANTI-GERMAN.....they frequently had Morgentahu there (he of the famous "Morgenthau Plan" which called for the Germans to be literally returned to a stone age culture and left to starve)

I was going to make other points, but Jesus Christ. THIS is the man you are holding up to me as soon who "stirs the pot." The FUCKING COURCE DOCUMENT FOR GOLDHAGEN (!!!), the only piece of drake ever forced to reign from Harvard for being too rabidly pro-Jewish....

Well, if any of you ever wonder what it would look like in a Harvard UG an dColumbia Mater's in History visited the forum and what they'd find, here you have it. Feel free to screen cap for posterity.

Fucking stormfags shitting up the place with their fake shit

>addendum-- I never reveal where I attended for UG or grad school, but let's think about this. I was at best lower middle-class, and a White guy. No legacy, no big money, not even an athlete, just worked my fucking ass off.

Want to understand why I was part of the 8% who was accepted or whatever the admission rate was? Look over the thread. Even in a completely, useless, bullshit thread on a forum that no one will ever see, you can check my facts and find them all perfectly true.

There were at least 6 people who acted as if they opposed me and claimed they "knew better," yet not one spent even 3 minutes to check details and return with a coherent argument of any sort.
tl,dr-- you are LAZY.

>fake shit
lol, And they continue. Everything they don't agree with is "fake," but they won't even take 5 minutes to delve into the topic. They don't like it? "fake!" Good goy. Stack up on some beers for the ball games this weekend,

What facts? Your ability to write a lot about nothing is indeed impressive.

You truly are pathetic. Just one question-- are you the ones who gave the author of one of Goldhagen's primary sources (I think he used a total of 3 for that entire book) as a reputable;e body of work?

Even the people you would think would be "on your side" would laugh at you. I was there when word of the scholarly reception to Goldhagen's piece of forgery began to take hold, and even high priest of the holocaust Raul Holberg dismissed his book as "worthless." His breakdown was quite public and quite amusing. No one deserved it more.

user, you don't know anything. Trust me on this one. Anyone with an IQ over 105 would be laughing at you. When you first posted it, I thought you had to know who he was and was bait It wasn't. You really are that dumb. And I've lot my patience.

So here we have this violent brutal regime that kills or sends to concentration camps all their enemies or even people who disagree with its ideology. They consider Jews their main enemy and in Poland for merely helping them there is death penalty. But no, they actually loved Jews and even built them a swimming pool in Auschwitz! Are stormagfs even serious or at they pretending? How stupid can they be?

That wasn't me, sorry. There are more people here amused by your incoherent rambling.

Friendly reminder that David Irving faked his Dresden figures and subsequently lowered the figures with each new edition. The first edition being in the 200 thousands and then falling all the way down to 50.

Friendly reminder that he got the figure from the account of an officer who didn't know the facts.

Friendly reminder the Dresden city council figures put it at 22-25 thousand.

Friendly reminder David Irving continually points out the lack of 'Prussian Blue' from gas chambers when he has been time and time again proven wrong on this yet continually brings it up.

Friendly reminder that according to his twin brother, Irving used to say "Heil Hitler!" In his youth.

Irving is finished. I think only Mattogno still produces some revisionist crap.

Se the book "An Eye for an Eye" on the Polish Jew Solomon Morrell, who killed 300= Germans in his care in horrific ways. When the Poles wanted him extradited, the Jews refused, citing statue of limitations, The very same Jews want to hunt 18 year old clerks who are now over 100 years old.

For more proof on how the Poles felt about the the Jews, Katyn, and the burgeoning NkVD in, a quick look at the time in-between the time the Germans left and the Soviets moved in, the Poles were lining up communist Jews to hang just as quickly as they could measure a length of rope and tie a noose.

Now, if your view of the world is correct and not mine, why do you suppose the poles were doing this? Notice, there were German pows around. There were even some soviets around. Why do you think the poles had a score to settle with the Jews?