“They look like fascists”
I never heard of any of them, and tbh they look like fascists, they just dont clearly say so. the fact alone that they focus on ww2 and the holocaust makes this pretty clear to me
they said themselves that there were worse crimes that happened in the history of humity, yet they keep talking about the holocaust and jews and nazi germany…
im sorry, but i think your title would upset members, and i believe this is a group of fascists stuck in the past, and i dont want to support them.
why does it make a difference how many people died and whether there was soap made of jews? we should focus on making today and tomorrow a more just place, not argue about what happened in the past…
just my two cents
I agree with some of your points, that we should focus on today and the future. I agree fully. However, I don’t agree that most of the revisionists are “fascists” (Infact, I don’t think there is one prominent “fascist” amongst the revisionists. There is Zündel and I think has said that he admires Hitler and National Socialism, that’s all — it doesn’t make him a “Nazi” or a “fascist”; strictly speaking, the only “fascists” are the followers of Benito Mussolini). Germar Rudolf is a chemist, a scientist, who published a lengthy expert report on the alleged “gas chambers” at Auschwitz;http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/ — there is nothing “fascist” about him or his scientific findings.) The best way to “refute” a uncomfortable idea, finding or research conducted by somebody, is to label your opponent a “fascist” and in many cases a “Nazi”. But it won’t work well if that person isn’t any of that.
Myself, I am definitely not a “fascist” or a “Nazi imitator”. That chapter of history is
unfortunately gone and it will never be back, only in documentaries, movie flicks, books and in the news etc., etc,. I cannot understand how you can say they look like “fascists”; have you met any of these people? How can you possibly tell if somebody is a “fascist” merely by just looking at them? It just seems awfully illogical to say that somebody or someone looks like a “fascist”. If I saw a photograph of you and I told you that you looked like a “commie”, and you weren’t a Communist, or even a sympathizer, just a regular guy, would that not be irrational of me? Maybe you also said that your favourite colour is red, well my oh my, “that fact alone that your favourite colour is red and that you look like a “commie” makes this pretty clear to me”, see? That wouldn’t have been a nice thing to say, and it wouldn’t have been accurate either; unless I knew you personally, knew your beliefs etc., etc,. Actually the thought of this reasoning is idiotic, to put it bluntly.
It is against the law in many contries to question D E T A I L S of WWII history. Some of these D E T A I L S of history are also lies; like the human skin, human lampshades and the human soap you mentioned. Those were lies, rumours and propaganda; and it is acknowledged as such by most historians and of course the revisionists.
When you discover that something is wrong with a detail of history, you begin to investigate and find out the truth. That is what revisionists do. Should we follow your reasoning, we would still believe the earth was flat, that women are witches and that we should burn them on the stake, that the Germans “gassed” millions Jews, and many more events (and non-events) which has been revised and disproved of as either myths, lies or propaganda.
Yes, worse crimes have been committed in WWII [mostly against the German peoples, Japanese, cossacks and the Poles (Katyn forest massacre)], but they were not invented and it is not against the law to question those crimes, infact; it is questioned with a glee in the face — but all the focus in the media, books, documentaries, various films and movies, news articles, is on the “Holocaust” and what happened or did not happen to Jews in the year of 1942 and onwards.