amaralsright wrote:

That is so fucked up it's untrue.

If someone is being sent to prison because he has reasons for doubting something then he should be allowed to present his doubts.

They have never allowed any case to be debated - and that's goes back to Nuremberg where debate was not allowed either.

So what is your opinion on it?

Seems to me your OK with sending people to prison without being able to defend themselves.

This is no different to the Inquisition.

I can't believe people are OK with this.

I really can't.

Ab Origine wrote:
Haha, did you nick that pic from my post in the beachcombing thread or come across it yourself btw?

why don;t you start a thread , in a non agressive way , and share your knowledge ?

You obviously are very close to the holocaust thing so it might help if you just took a step back and approached it in a grownup manner?


If you could state what you want to say in a non confertianl way , you might might find that that people engage with you more

Germar Rudolf is a modern day Galileo.

germarrudolf.com/

He spent serious time in prison because of what he believes and what he can back up with research.

He was never at any point allowed a fair trial.

The Holocaust is a religion that will not allow doubt because as soon as people start examining it it falls apart.

That's why they won't allow it.

dawnbreak wrote:
This thread is fine thanks as a talking shop.

I'm still in shock at learning that some people here are OK with imprisonment without fair trial.

You'll be saying that FMOTL truths work in a Court of Law soon amaral

DM made a plainly obvious point that a court will not consider one arguing that the law is wrong. It's just not how it works.
He didn't say you shouldn't have the right to argue it in court now did he. More that to do so would make you a naive dick.

The Holocaust story falls apart because for instance: 800,000 were supposed to have been killed in Krema II & III at Auschwitz by Germans putting Zyklon B into tins and lowering them through holes in the roof. The roof still exists today and the holes are not there as admitted by various Holocaust experts like Professor Van Pelt.

I'm willing to debate this with anyone.

Anyone talking up the challenge would have to show us the location and size of the holes in the remains of the roof and not pretend all the answers are found on a certain link.

Because what usually happens then is I would look at the photos in the link and work out the size of the supposed holes (which are in the wrong place anyway and are just cracks actually) and demonstrate that they are actually not very big holes and certainly not as described by the single witness who said he made the mesh columns that were supposed to protrude through them.

So if some one wants to take up the challenge of the holes in the roof then please feel free.

If I was in Germany I would go to prison for this.

Crazy.

amaralsright wrote:
Well this is why I'm not going to do the big 'Holocaust debate' thing here, because I can see old ground just here and a few things to correct you on. Like there's been plenty of debate in court. At the Frankfurt Auschwitz trial Nazis were merrily arguing their innocence in court - they all agreed mass kilings had happened, but just that they personally weren't responsible, were only following orders, it was that other guy whatever. I've never understood qwhy people keep banging on about Nuremburg, because as far as the Holocaust is concerned Nuremburg is simply a component. It's important, but it's not that important. There have been literally thousands of trials in multiple countries taking place over decades. Yet all we ever hear about is Nuremburg.

i've been doing my usual thing of saying I don't want to talk about something and then doing so. We were arguing about the Holocaust in 2009! Do you really want to go through all that again???? At least I had fun, but you never seemed to be enjoying yourself anyway. Obviously you can talk about it here and other people can join in if they so choose. But lets not you and me start off playing the hits of yesteryear eh?

Incidentally, I was browsing the DIF earlier and I noticed your account now reads "inactive". I don't know if that's your doing or if you already know, but I thought if you didn't know you'd probably want to.

dubmeup wrote:
Jesus, someone else OK with prison without a fair trail.

Galileo knew all about this.

amaralsright wrote:
What is up with all of the baiting, and confrontational tactics? This is bullshit. Make your point and move on. I did it in one fricking post!. Step up or just step away. Again and again, the same thing. Get on with it! No one is arguing about holes in a roof, or about allowing people to go to jail without a fair trail. You're doing the equivalent of putting words in people's mouths so you can continue to argue.... you're allowed to debate, it's been established..... you appear to have lost the point of debate -- it takes more than one person to do it.

dogsmilk wrote:
You failed to show the holes in the roof of Krema II yesteryear.

I went to a lot of trouble to show how that website you kept pretending explained everything in fact did no such thing.

Do you remember the pictures where you could work out the hole sizes from the bricks next to them?

No holes no Holocaust.

That's before we even get to the way Zyklon B sublimates or how the gas was extracted from the Chamber.

Germar Rudolf went into all this but got sent to prison for it.

But that's OK eh?

ronisron wrote:
I'm sorry, you're obviously better at it than me.

amaralsright wrote:
That's akin to me saying "Portsmouth are the greatest football team"
and you replying " Bollox, It's bees that make honey".

I'm bowing out of this thread now because it's like it has been copied and pasted from the DIF and I for one will not keep contributing to it being near the top of general.

In 8 mile style, that must be because I am a *insert whatever words amaral chooses*

amaralsright wrote:
Again, no debate. Again, anything to keep this going. Folks, please feel free to leave amaral to his debate with himself. [imo]There is no new ground to cover, no new avenues to explore, just the same tired crap from elsewhere in the guise of a fresh start.[/imo]

(disclaimer ; all opinions and expressions contained in ron's post, are the opinions and expression of ron alone and do not reflect the overall membership or admin of this fine forum)

You know what guys... forget it.

Life's too short.

The usual suspects are here, the tag teaming is in place. The pressure and pleas to get this subject kicked out of here, moved, the avoiding, the dodging, the being OK with imprisonment without fair trial, the flaming will eventually ensue...

One day the truth will become public though, the German people are not stupid - you people can't win.

Sorry novum.

I hope you get a nice forum someday, but you'll need to watch some people.

Can you delete my account.

Cheers.

AR.

amaralsright wrote:
See we've been through this over and over. And i'd take issue with everything you say there. And then there'd be a 100 page thread that is no use or ornament, changes nothing and ends up a total headfuck. It baffles me why you'd want to go through all that again. I don't understand what you think it achives.
And - with respect - I find you very difficult to debate with because my previous experience was you just ignored everything inconvenient and simply dismissed everything you didn't like. And I felt you had a very poor understanding of many areas, e.g. how one handles eyewitness testimony - there was a lot of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus style fallacies, assuming people should have 100% correct recall and so on.
I'm struggling to get my head round where you're at. If you're preoccupied with the subject, then fine. But there's no point trying to egg people who say they're not interested on into talking about what you've decided you want to talk about.

I've been very clear I don't wish to repeat an endless and ultimately pointless argument that ran for about two years - and I stopped taking seriously long before it was over anyway.

If you're that desperate to talk about it, answer my longstanding 'history that nobody saw' question - that's the only way I'd even think about it.

Throbbing Gristle foresaw threads like this in 1979.

amaralsright wrote:
Bye then take care. Give my regards to Sean HJ G75, Pikachu etc
[/THREAD]

amaralsright wrote:
For someone that says they wish to examine evidence here are a few facts for you:

You have been repeatedly told you are welcome to post about the holocaust here

There was a discussion about the best place to house holocaust threads that was fairly done asking and taking into consideration everyones viewpoint - not to hide the subject but to give it a home

People commented that they were not interested in discussing the same stuff as had been discussed ad infinitum elsewhere - not to dodge or silence but as their freedom of choice

No one has stated that they think imprisoning people without trial is ok - you have put words into peoples mouths.

You were welcomed here and offered a clean slate - yet you have badgered people to discuss something they have no interest in - been confrontational, dismissive and made wildly inaccurate summations of what people have responded.

dubmeup wrote:


I have to admit, I haven't read your beachcombing thread. I'll get on it right now.