'Falconeyes' banned for showing proof of Holocaust

Member 'falconeyes' banned for showing proof of Holocaust in David Icke forum

I have recently been banned from David Icke forum, and their reason for banning me is this "Repeatedly abuse of forum", however, their real reason for banning me (my member name 'falconeyes' in David Icke's forum) is that they can't take i posted witness testimonies about how the Nazis murdered Jews as well as evidence of gas chambers as part of the Holocaust. I want to show what i posted in Icke's forum with the thread title "Proof of gas chambers" and Page 234, 235, 236 and 237 in "Holocaust Denial" under the headline of Political Manipulation / Cover-Ups / False Flags in David Icke forum, http://www.davidicke.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=6

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&p=1788918

http://ww2talk.com/forums/topic/47291-a-member-banned-for-showing-proof-of-holocaust-in-david-icke-forum/

The Mods in David Icke forum allow to let Neo-Nazi cowards like 'bob1', 'believenothing', 'resistance' continue their socalled "There is no evidence of Holocaust, and Holocaust never happened" propaganda, despite the numerous times i posted evidence as well as witness testimonies of Holocaust during WWII.

Now, as you can see, it's very clear the Mods in the David Icke forum don't want someone like me to continue posting facts and evidences of for example Holocaust during WWII, it seems the Mods in that David Icke forum prefer to support Neo-Nazis and Holocaust deniers like for example members called 'bob1', 'believenothing', 'georgesmiley', 'resistance', and other members in that David Icke forum who support Holocaust Denial...

David Icke forum should be shut down for promoting Holocaust Denial.

 

Let's face it. The guy is another conspiracy whackjob. Don't bother to waste your time with folks like him. You can't reason with them because they refuse to accept factual evidence that proves them wrong. They come up with crazy things and then link it all together while ignoring everything that contradicts their ideas.

 

What a horrible experience! I don't know that site but I need all I need to know to avoid it after reading your story. I do see a growing amount of conspiracy theorists who are denying the Holocaust online. Personally, I wouldn't shut them down but I don't think they should have shut you down for stating the truth, either! You are probably better off not hanging out with people who embrace evasion and fantasy over reality. Good to have you here!

 

Appalling. It's just ridiculous to insist that the Holocaust never took place. Even the people who organised and carried it out testified at Nuremberg matter-of-factly figures and method.

You're best off not getting involved trying to reason with people like that because they're not worth the oxygen of acknowledgement.

Linda Hardy would also argue they are not worth the oxygen of oxygen.

 

Everyone has a right to say what they think, but to dinie the camps where not there, ( I have seen them), or to dinie the ovens did not burn people, ( I have seen and smelled them), or to say six milllion jews did not die, sorry I have seen the paper work, no report can prove it did not happen, look it has happened before, it happened than, and it will happen again, why is it so hard to belive it took place?

 

I, too, have had my share of "debate" on-line with Deniers and Disciples of David (Irving). I put debate in quotes for I find the exercise similar with the controversy over evolution v. creationism ("Intelligence Design"). I find it astounding how many people are evolution deniers, and so I can also understand the self-delusion of the DDD.

I recently bought my first book by Irving, the controversial historian. I must admit that in the first few pages I have read I am impressed with some of his research and writing. But I have listened to several hours of his lectures; which I have found less than convincing. And I have read a book written by one of the defendants in a liable action brought by Irving in an English court (where he had an advantage). But the outcome of the case was that the judge concluded in favor of the defendants, that there was a Nazi programme of "Racial Hygiene" and that on at least several occasions Irving was a Holocaust Denier who both errs in facts and sometimes creates his own "facts".

So Mr. David Irving now must plan his travel carefully so as to avoid being called to account to pay his court costs.

 

You have to be careful with what is passed as "factual" information. Sometimes the "facts" are out of context which is probably the number one method of truth distortion, completely made up, or actually edited so that they mean something else. I've seen some blogs where authors have remarked on people who have quoted them, but done so in ways that the quotes were edited and as such completely changed what the authors were saying.

 

I astonish when I think that at least a couple of billion of words been spent in discussing, debating, researching etc....etc on Holocaust .. but relatively less , precisely saying very little been discussed/published for Gulags, M 56 etc..etc...

A guard of a Gulag camp paid 3 times than any usual standard wages paid in those days. Not only this, a very good reward been provided there for every kill.

Seeing the inhuman and guided, forced mechanism on this, I never feel good.

 

You have to be careful with what is passed as "factual" information. Sometimes the "facts" are out of context which is probably the number one method of truth distortion, completely made up, or actually edited so that they mean something else. I've seen some blogs where authors have remarked on people who have quoted them, but done so in ways that the quotes were edited and as such completely changed what the authors were saying.

I understand the Art of Propaganda -- I was in PSYOP for the US Army. And, may I add, with some humility, that I was considered a phenom at that near-mystical institution. As for "creative" use of fact: at least 70% of Psyops training equates to ADVERTISING, where you don't sell the "steak" but rather the "sizzle".

Just today I read a newspaper article regarding the US House Rep. Michele Bachmann (R, Minn) who has recently announced her decision not to run for re-election. She is well known for having a skin condition on her legs since her pants are so often aflame.

 

As part of the craft of studying evidence and writing history, Historians are trained to search out distortions, lies and propaganda. Even though they bring their own cultural values and prejudices to bear errors will soon be spotted by other Historians and pointed out. not all written history is of equal value. The best is that which has been tested by exposure to criticism and has stood up. The Holocaust is such an event which nearly ALL respected Historians agree happened. Having read widely the bulk of the reputable experts on this subject the overwhelming evidence is clear. The Holocaust was probably WORSE than we concluded several years ago. That is the number were probably more than 6 million Jews slaughtered.

 

I would say ALL respected historians agree that the Holocaust took place. As a matter of fact, I would ignore any historian who claimed it did not. Actually, I do reject any historian that claims it did not take place. The factual evidence is overwhelming. Credibility is a big issue for historians and I just don't think any historian worth their degree would claim the Holocaust did not take place.

 

I rise to address the peculiar case of David Irving. Here is (was?) a talented "amateur historian" who despite a lack of professional, academic training was producing some interesting research and writings. Fluent in German, English by birth, he eschewed the normal path of most historians. Indeed his distain for most writings by historians was, I paraphrase, commentary upon commentary without benefit of original research or consultation of original sources. He, on the other hand, sought out participant in historical events, along with original sources, or so he alleges. With this in mind some of his output seems to has value.

Alas, somewhere amid his research and study he has lost track of "independent objectivity', a cornerstone for good historical writing, and became an advocate or apologist for a Neo-Nazi, or anti-Jewish, perspective. Rather than use the methodology of first researching, then postulation theory, refining, and publishing, Irving seems to have first postulated, then sought "facts" or sometimes creating "facts", before publishing.

And in this Irving somehow 'drank the Kool-aide' of the Holocaust Deniers.

He still claims not to be anti-Jewish despite his many announcements and pronouncements with, on casual hearing, seem to cast shadows where shadows should not be.

Still, I value Irving as a historian in that he does raise many good questions which deserve to be answered, rather that just taking main-stream History by rote.

 

Can you name me one respected historian who either agrees with Irwin or would agree with you ?? Certainly not in the UK.

 

Ah, there you have me. I can not name a single "respectable historian" who would agree with I Irving, but then I am out of touch with any and all such academicians, and have been for some years. I read the book about the libel case brought by Irving against an American writer and an English Publisher (Irving lost) in an English court. Mentioned in that account was one writer (and I have one of his books in my small collection) who while may not support Irving, refused to speak ill of him. That is the best I can do.

And before you go any further, let me correct you in what I perceive as may be an error of yours. I am not a supporter of David Irving as a whole. I think his Holocaust Denial notions are rooted in too much bile and vitriol, and the fellow has allowed this to poison his mind and his soul. But I think there are kernels of historic fact in some of his early works, which will not allow me to dismiss him out of hand.

I have found that taking a fair, balanced and open-minded perspective is dangerous. Both Irving supporters attack me for not being a dyed-in-the-wool believer, and, his detractors attack me for even trying to listen to him. But I am a seeker of historic truth, no matter how it is wrapped.

So, for the record, I do believe the policy of the NSDAP was to achieve "Racial Hygiene" through the eugenic purification of the Volk, i.e. the Holocaust. But it was not just Jews who were eliminated but a whole list of enemies of the State.

 

I agree that it was not just the Jews, but Jews were singled out by Hitler and his Nazi followers ( and sadly aided by many Germans and other Europeans ) for "Special treatment". On January 30th 1939 in a speech to the Reichstag, Hitler gave a clear indication of who he was going to eliminate.
"
If the international finance-Jewry inside and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations into a world war yet again, then the outcome will not be the victory of Jewry, but rather the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe! "

(Wenn es dem internationalen Finanzjudentum in und außerhalb Europas gelingen sollte, die Völker noch einmal in einen Weltkrieg zu stürzen, dann wird das Ergebnis nicht der Sieg des Judentums sein, sondern die Vernichtung der jüdischen Rasse in Europa! )

 

People like Irving use some facts to give their crackpot theories some credible standing. They like to use those facts as sort of a bait to get people to pay attention to them before moving to the extremes. By mixing facts with fiction they build sort of a plausible denial type of argument. If you deconstruct the argument you find that when you examine each fact for itself the real facts don't fit with the interpretation or to be more accurate, the fictional and delusional belief.

It is very important to fact check things completely. Irving and his type just try to create an aura of what if to get people to pay attention to them and buy their books and stuff. These people are not historians by any stretch of the imagination. They do not submit their information for peer review because they know it won't stand up to it. We run into the same thing with Lost Cause mythology here in US History. Often these pseudo historians are really doing nothing more than advancing their own ideologies wrapped in history to form some sort of link to reality.

 

We too suffer it in the Uk over World War One - The "Lions lead by Donkeys" myth.

 

I read a well-researched and scholarly book a while back which seemed to be half in German, which was only naturlich since it dealt with German public policies of the NSDAP era. I recall it was entitled "Racial Hygiene", which was apt as that was the subject of the governmental policy.

It dealt with the application of Eugenics (or the science of 'animal husbandry' to humans) which on the surface may sound like a sensible idea. After all, who shouldn't want to improve the human race (the Volk) by the proper scientific control of the gene-pool? Imagine, the elimination of certain inherited diseases and disorders. At least that is how the Holocaust ws sold the German people. The German citizens were told that the enemies of the state were carrying genetic defects, like a cancer, and the way to cure this was the "cutting out" from society the source of the infection: the enemies of the state.

Understanding this makes the Nazi policies understandable. But curiously enough included in their enemies list were persons like Bible scholars, Social Democrats, and Freemasons. I have yet to understand how these three categories caused genetic defects to Society.

Could someone help me out to understand why Freemasons weakened the gene-pool?

 

The Nazi were like and unlike the communists in this
Like in eliminating hostile ideologies ie. Religions
Like eliminating political opponents SDP (Social Democrats)
Like in seeing certain social organisations as competing - Freemasons
Unlike in deliberately targeting Racial Groups (though Stalin was an anti-semite and was prepare to ship off ethic groups he feared opposed his totalitarian system)

 

maybe Freemasons is a genetic defect that results in the desire to wear funny hats and go to conventions and act like idiots. LQL