Wednesday, March 08, 2017

Amazon stops selling more than 70 Holocaust denial books

Author: Nicholas Terry
In the past month, a wave of articles has been published around the world criticising Amazon for selling Holocaust denial books. To my knowledge, Amazon offered no public response, seemingly ignoring the growing chorus asking why denial literature was on sale through the world's largest online bookseller. So imagine my surprise when last night I tried searching for Kindle updates to the 'Holocaust Handbooks' series on amazon.co.uk and found... nothing.

Not only were the Kindle editions of every book by Carlo Mattogno, Germar Rudolf and every other 'Revisionist' author published in the 'Holocaust Handbooks' series gone, it also became apparent that Amazon no longer offered the print editions, either. Moreover, amazon.com had yanked the same clutch of titles as well. Nor was the cull restricted to titles published by Germar Rudolf's firm Castle Hill: independently-published 'Revisionist' books by Peter Winter, Richard Harwood, and others had also been pulled from sale. By my count, at least 45 English-language and 27 German-language 'Revisionist' books and Kindle ebooks have been removed, tallying only those titles I was reasonably sure had been on offer, from seeing them in Amazon's 'Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought' recommendations

The purge hasn't removed all antisemitica from Amazon's catalogue, nor have all Castle Hill titles been pulled. A good way of illustrating the inconsistency is clicking on the titles recommended alongside Benton Bradberry's The Myth of German Villainy, one of the titles that remains on sale. Henry Ford's The International Jew as well as Carlos Porter's Not Guilty at Nuremberg can still be bought on Kindle (as can David Duke's Jewish Supremacism), while Thomas Dalton, Nicholas Kollerstrom, Arthur Butz, Peter Winter, Carlo Mattogno's The Myth of the Extermination of the Jews, Gerard Menuhin and others have been 404'ed.

Exactly why Amazon decided to do this, and what criteria they used to withdraw these titles from sale, remains unclear, as the company made no announcement about its decision.  This isn't the first time Amazon has withdrawn controversial or offensive books from sale. In November 2015, Amazon pulled 'Nobody Died At Sandy Hook', by veteran conspiracy theorist James Fetzer, evidently after complaints from customers, to Fetzer's great annoyance. Back then, too, it pulled the offensive title without fanfare, and simply notified Fetzer that he would no longer be able to sell copies of his book through Amazon. The first 'Revisionist' author to cry foul, M.S. King, likewise received a short email notifying him that "during our review process, we found that this content is in violation of our content guidelines. As a result, we cannot offer this book for sale."

Other than King's post on his website and my tweets last night, nobody else seemed to even notice the denial books had gone until late on Wednesday afternoon, when the Jewish Chronicle ran a story reporting that three books had been removed, not realising the number was more than twenty times greater; the Times of Israel then ran a shortened summary version of the same story. Kevin Barrett at Veterans Today weighed in to complain that his friends' books had been "banned", as has the blogger Kev Boyle. Germar Rudolf broke CODOH's silence around 9pm GMT this evening, revealing that another publisher had no fewer than 727 titles removed from Kindle, while Castle Hill had seen 68 print and 72 Kindle editions removed.

The Jewish Chronicle failed to elicit a comment from Amazon for their article, and at least one news website I alerted regarding this story had also not received a reply from Amazon as of late Wednesday afternoon. As today was budget day in Britain, most journalists have been busy covering that, so it will be interesting to see how long it takes for the Daily Mail, which ran no less than three stories in a month castigating Amazon for selling Holocaust denial literature, to cover this surprise move. 

It will also be interesting to see whether the media can get Amazon to go on record explaining their decision, and why they removed the 70-plus titles but left many dozens of virulently antisemitic books on sale. There's no doubt that Amazon customers were leaving more and more negative comments on the review pages for a number of Holocaust denial books, and one can imagine that Amazon were receiving at least some direct complaints as well. Feedback options include 'Would you like to report this content as inappropriate?', although the choices offered are simply to note that a work is pornographic, violates terms of service, or that there are 'other' reasons for a complaint. Jeff Bezos had received a number of letters personally, including from Robert Rozett of Yad Vashem, while other Jewish organisations had chimed in publicly with criticisms of Amazon for continuing to sell Holocaust denial titles. 

However much deniers may complain about being 'banned', Amazon's ban isn't censorship - they have the commercial freedom to decide not to sell products if they so choose. As we've seen recently with the cancellation of Milo Yiannopoulos's book with Simon and Schuster after he was found to have praised underage sex, businesses might eventually decide that whatever money they might make selling controversial or offensive material won't compensate for the loss of other business as customers vote with their wallets, and other content producers distance themselves from the publisher or retail outlet. The First Amendment simply doesn't apply here, as no government interference has taken place, and these books continue to be available for sale or for free perusal through other outlets. 

Holocaust Controversies opposes government legislation against Holocaust denial as contrary to freedom of speech, and I would personally endorse the arguments made by Nick Cohen in his polemic You Can't Read This Book: Censorship in an Age of Freedom regarding the increasing censoriousness of governments around the world. But Amazon's ban is a commercial decision. It may well inconvenience me personally, as I have bought 'Holocaust Handbooks' not available for free download from Amazon for research purposes, and Amazon delivers faster than Castle Hill does - indeed, in a matter of seconds when using Kindle One-Click. But many other commercial decisions to discontinue stocking far nicer and tastier things than the 'Holocaust Handbooks' have also inconvenienced me in my lifetime.

What impact will this have? Most readers of this blog will know that nearly all of the titles are widely available as free downloads on many different websites, including the 'flagship' Holocaust Handbooks site, so this will hardly take denier literature out of circulation altogether. It's an entirely open question how many sales of the 'Holocaust Handbooks' and other denier books were being racked up via Amazon. From memory, many bumped along in the top 1 to 2 million, with only a few surging up the rankings from time to time. A number of the more popular titles, including the introductions to 'Revisionism' written by Thomas Dalton and Nicholas Kollerstrom, have not been offered as free downloads, so would have to be purchased either from Amazon or direct from the publisher. 

By banning more than 70 titles, almost all of which are published by Germar Rudolf via his imprint Castle Hill, Amazon may well have put a significant squeeze on the 'Revisionist' movement's cash flow. M.S. King estimated that he will lose 80% of the sales of his book thanks to Amazon's decision. Castle Hill's pattern of sales through different outlets must surely be very similar. Germar Rudolf wrote rather candidly of the economics of selling 'Revisionist' books back in 2004, in an era when Borders and other bricks-and-mortar booksellers were still in business. Since then, he has embraced print-on-demand, and despite essentially giving away most of his merchandise as free downloads, the income stream from so many different titles must have been critical to the continued operation of the publishing company and presumably also to Rudolf's own livelihood, even if the dividends amounted to mere pin money. 

Following hot on the heels of video-maker Eric Hunt's apostasy from the 'Revisionist' cause in February, Amazon's surprise move officially makes the first part of 2017 a total disaster for Holocaust denial. Sad!

47 comments:

J Kelly said...

Really, losing "The Bad War" is no one's loss. I read it (courtesy of Jim Rizoli, I've never forgiven him for that) and it surpasses any "Holocaust Handbook" I ever read in sheer stupidity.

Aaron Richards said...

If YouTube (also a privately owned company) follows suit, it'll be the final nail in the coffin for holocaust revisionism. I mean, the material is still there, but what good will it do our brave truth seekers if joe public is no longer as easily made aware of it in order to seek it, and read it and get fooled by it? ;)

Geoff said...

I've complained to youtube about some of the worst deniers comments.'we'll kill all of you next time' and so on.One grub lately says the einsatzgruppen'kill and shovel' was a good thing.These comments are rarely actioned by youtube.Where do you draw the line,freedom to hate meets encouragement to violence?

The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...

>>>>>"....we've seen recently with the cancellation of Milo Yiannopoulos's book with Simon and Schuster after he was found to have praised underage sex,"

In a 1997 letter to The Guardian, Peter Thatchell said virtually the same thing as Yiannopoulos. The Guardian regularly publishes opinion pieces by Thatchell, and it's a paper you're happy to give interviews to. Without wanting to get into a discussion on their shared view on this matter, could you confirm whether you would summarise Thatchell's view on it with the same three words you did for Yiannopoulos?

Nicholas Terry said...

Since you don't want to get into a discussion on the issue, your question is moot. I used only three circumlocutory words because the views expressed are not as important as the fact that a *commercial business decided to cut its ties with someone* for their views. Tatchell wasn't signed up to a mainstream business that could have cut ties with him, Yiannopoulos was.

The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...

You described what Yiannopoulos said succinctly, not circumlocutory. It's the complete opposite of circumlocutory.

Would you use the same phrasing to describe Tatchell's [almost identical] views expressed in his letter?

Nicholas Terry said...

No, because Tatchell didn't praise a priest for allowing him to perfect his blowjob skills. That's why I was circumlocuting. Thus Yiannopoulos 'praised' underage sex. Both men argued or claimed that it isn't always harmful, which is at least six words to one. Therefore I wouldn't use the same *phrasing*.

Had Tatchell lost a business opportunity because of stirring up a controversy in 2017 then I could have made a similar comparison in the post above involving Tatchell. But he didn't. He caused controversy twenty years ago, and has argued similarly since, in a more activist context (OutRage! had a formal campaign about age of consent).

The controversy about Yiannopoulos is also situational, since he was being mainstreamed for an anti-PC audience while also still being marketed to a conservative audience (CPAC disinvited him after the story broke). Such things cause more controversy when the limelight is greater, as is undoubtedly the case. So now Yiannopoulos says his book will come out with another publisher, maybe that happens and maybe it doesn't. Yiannopoulos's predicament is more like a pop star being dropped by a major label for saying something boundary-crossing that wouldn't be as widely publicised if said by an impecunious activist on another occasion. Or indeed if said twenty years ago before social media and a truly 24 hour rolling news cycle, along with reader-generated reviews and comments to whip up the outrage (yes, there's an irony there).

I don't agree with either Tatchell or Yiannopoulos, but I wouldn't boycott the Guardian if they published an article by Yiannopoulos any more than I boycott them for publishing Tatchell or any of the other writers I might disagree with or think are saying things that cross lines. But I also wouldn't boycott Simon and Schuster for publishing Yiannopoulos, and I wasn't boycotting Amazon for selling Holocaust denial books. Others *were* boycotting Simon and Schuster for publishing Yiannopoulos even before the blowjob story broke, and clearly Amazon was coming under some pressure from consumers as well as Jewish organisations and the media for selling Holocaust denial, and not for the first time, either. The level of outrage was clearly higher for Yiannopoulos than about Amazon selling HD, but both cases saw commercial enterprises decide to end business relationships following media coverage.

Nathan said...

-The level of outrage was clearly higher for Yiannopoulos than about Amazon selling HD-

I'd say this is very noteworthy. The deniers love to whine about how "The Jews" frequently "shove the Holocaust down people's throat". Yet, a scandal involving and started by a Jewish person (Yiannopoulos) was viewed more prominently by the media than Amazon's initial selling of HD propaganda, and the similarly minor issue of how Holocaust denial used to show up as the top results in google searches.

The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...

>>> No, because Tatchell didn't praise a priest for allowing him to perfect his blowjob skills. That's why I was circumlocuting. Thus Yiannopoulos 'praised' underage sex.

"You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means." Describing something in three words is not *circumlocuting*.

The part you cite was clearly gallows humour about his personal experience of being sexually abused as a child. Such a "joke" may be of interest to psychologists who study the coping mechanisms of CSA victims, but it's pretty nasty to claim it as "proof" that he "praised underage sex" without detailing for your readership that it was said in reference to his own experience as a victim of CSA.

"And you know what, I’m grateful for Father Michael. I wouldn’t give nearly such good head if it wasn’t for him."
- Yiannopoulos

"I often joke when I say if it hadn't been for Hitler I wouldn't have met my wife"
- Ray Firmani, retired USAF bomber pilot


Up next on the HC blog: *Ray Firmani praises Hitler*

M said...

A sad day for freedom of speech and a win for those who want to police what information is available to the public. The irony is that the Nazis were also book burners.

papasha408 said...

I cannot believe the posts from the tweedle dum and tweedle dee supporters of the suppression of free speech. Then again, most are posts by fanboys of the holocaust drivel and other exterminationist nonsense. It truly is unfortunate that the higher -ups at Amazon have caved in so easily to the kosher commands of the chosen. And the lesson learned today is, 'you shouldn't question the chosen or any of their pet dogmas.

Nicholas Terry said...

BRoI: "Describing something in three words is not *circumlocuting*."

Fine, you're correct that I wasn't *circumlocuting*, but I used more anodyne words than I could have done, and was trying to circle around a delicate subject. Not the same thing, you're right.

"The part you cite was clearly gallows humour about his personal experience of being sexually abused as a child. Such a "joke" may be of interest to psychologists who study the coping mechanisms of CSA victims, but it's pretty nasty to claim it as "proof" that he "praised underage sex" without detailing for your readership that it was said in reference to his own experience as a victim of CSA."

Nasty? I don't think so. I also don't think that a comparative aside needs to be explored by me in further detail when I gave a link to a story that fills in the details in greater depth.

A number of commentators have interpreted all this as you say, as a coping mechanism for dealing with childhood sexual abuse. But the literal surface meaning of Yiannopoulos's remarks was to express gratitude to a priest for helping him perfect his blowjob skills. The end result was that Yiannopoulos went from arguing that underage sex might not be harmful to extolling its virtues. Joke or not, that is what comes across in the media reporting. The joke followed Yiannopoulos clearly arguing that age of consent was too high and that he thinks some people *including himself* are capable of giving consent at a younger age.
http://heavy.com/news/2017/02/milo-yiannopolous-pedophilia-transcript-pederasty-video-full-sex-boys-men-catholic-priest-cpac-quotes/

The concluding part, *after* the joke, is clearly praising underage sex:

"Some of the most important, enriching and incredibly life affirming, important shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys. They can even save those young boys, from desolation, from suicide (people talk over each other)… providing they’re consensual"

Yiannopoulos talked for c. 500 words of transcript, with one joke sandwiched in the middle.

I'm happy to find another word than 'praise' to edit in if that's what's bugging you - but it's a matter of fact that Yiannopoulos lost commercial opportunities, speaking gigs and a job after a video of him talking in favour of underage sex came to light. The cause and effect is crystal clear.

Nicholas Terry said...

M:

"A sad day for freedom of speech and a win for those who want to police what information is available to the public. The irony is that the Nazis were also book burners."

No books have been burned, they're just not being sold through Amazon any more. The publishers can sell them directly to the public - which most were already doing. Most of the books dropped from Amazon are available for free download in many different places on the internet.

How many 'Revisionist' books have you actually bought, and how many did you download for free from the internet? If you bought 'Revisionist' books, did you actually buy them from Amazon?

I'm genuinely curious about the answers to these questions.

In return, I'll tell you how many 'Revisionist' books I've paid money for - the number is higher than you might think.

Unknown said...

The REAL question is, "Why now?" Toppled tombstones? Crank calls to Jewish Community Centers? Jeff Bezos is Jewish? - No, wait! He's always been Jewish. Don't be fooled. Tombstones and phone calls are all theater, all (except for Juan Thompson) by Jews (or possibly so, anyway).

Maybe it's to conceal the massive advances of Jews and sayanim in general in the federal government with Trump and his Kushner, et al. Bezos made a business decision. And Israel made the decision he took well worth taking.

wilfredo said...

If you don't take this amazon people to courts you will not gain nothing speaking here. Take Them to courts. The us Constitution is clear. Free speech cannot be denied

Nicholas Terry said...

wilfredo

"If you don't take this amazon people to courts you will not gain nothing speaking here. Take Them to courts. The us Constitution is clear. Free speech cannot be denied"

I suggest you actually read the First Amendment before sounding off about it, especially the bit about "government". Freedom of speech means the freedom to say what you want without government interference. That is all. Businesses are not bound by the First Amendment because they are not the government. The case law is extensive so good luck trying to persuade the courts to overturn existing precedent.

papasha408 said...

It is unfortunate, Amazon isn't standing up to this type of bullying. But, this action by everyone's favorite spoiled and pampered special interest group isn't really surprising. They know they cannot debate the revisionists about their holy cause and win. So, they put pressure on booksellers. They have done it before and they will do it again. These groups are the true enemies of free speech in the Western World.

Sergey Romanov said...

> M said...
> A sad day for freedom of speech

This case is irrelevant to freedom of speech. Amazon is exercising its own freedom.

> papasha408 said...
> I cannot believe the posts from the tweedle dum and tweedle dee supporters of the suppression of free speech.

No free speech has been suppressed by Amazon.

> wilfredo said...
> If you don't take this amazon people to courts you will not gain nothing speaking here. Take Them to courts. The us Constitution is clear. Free speech cannot be denied

A typical denier idiot who doesn't understand the concept of free speech.

Sergey Romanov said...

> It is unfortunate, Amazon isn't standing up to this type of bullying.

It is unfortunate you want to suppress Amazon's freedom not to carry denier junk.

> They know they cannot debate the revisionists about their holy cause

Deniers have been debated and debunked. HC has already debunked the denial. So have others.

> and win.

Winning is indeed impossible against YECs, flat-earthers, Holocaust deniers and other nutsos. Because you can't "win" against a religious dogma. Holocaust deniers have blind faith that the Holocaust didn't happen and nothing will budge most of them. Holocaust denial is a zombie lie: it has been debunked, but it will stay on for some time.

Gabi said...

From the comments, it looks like somebody shared this post on stormfront.com

Sergey Romanov said...

Deleted spam from some neo-Nazi.

papasha408 said...

Sorry Sergey, but historical revisionists are far from being flat earth lunatics. And Amazon is not exercising its freedom to not carry revisionist histories. It is actually losing money by going along with the Kosher censors.
Many people believe erroneously that the holocaust is based on incontestable evidence and those who deny it must be either deranged or driven by foul motives such as the ridiculous idea they are trying to resurrect National Socialism or some other form of fascist government. But, the exact opposite is really the case here. The preposterous claims of the holocaust are driven by a tribal campaign of systematic and wholesale lying with no evidence at all to back up their claims.
The cause of death in German concentration camps was disease, the kind of disease which wastes away the entire human body such as typhus, tuberculosis, diarrhea and dysentery. And this came about because of the bombing of the Reich infrastructure. The bombers destroyed what little food was available as well as pharmaceuticals and more importantly the entire water supply. And the Anglo-Americans knew exactly what they were doing for they had done it in the past. They used the same strategy for the period after the 1918 armistice to force Germany to sign the Versailles treaty six months later against its will after half a million Germans died from starvation and disease from the blockade. In 1944 and 45 they used airpower instead of the Navy. But after World War Two rather than admit they also inadvertently killed thousands of Jews, the embarrassed Americans and Brits blamed the Germans instead. The victors, as you may know, can get away with anything.
No revisionist has ever said Jews did not suffer during the Second World War. Many were murdered on the Eastern front. But, not all Jews were sent to concentration camps. Approximately 150,000 Germans of Jewish blood fought for the Reich. Some of them even reaching the status of General and Field Marshal. Both field Marshals Erhard Milch and Eric Von Manstein were Jews.
Revisionists do not believe there was a Hitler order to exterminate Europe's Jewry. They also contest the homicidal gas chamber stories. There is no forensic evidence for homicidal gas chambers in any of the German camps. And lastly, revisionists do not believe the preposterous six million number which has more to do with Talmudic and Kabbalistic mythology than statistics.
And again, I say sorry Sergey but most if not all revisionist claims have not been debunked as you claim. But, much holocaust nonsense has been debunked.

Sergey Romanov said...

> Sorry Sergey, but historical revisionists are far from being flat earth lunatics.

They are exactly like flat earth lunatics and in fact more and more I delve into the twitter denialsphere the more I see actual flatearthers among the deniers (and vice versa).

> And Amazon is not exercising its freedom to not carry revisionist histories.

It doesn't because there are no "Revisionist histories". Deniers are not in the business of history writing, they're in the business of apologia and propaganda. Even the most "academic" denier of all, Mattogno, isn't even close to writing actual history, i.e. presenting a connected, logical, documented narrative of what really happened to those Jews. All he can do is deny.

So no, Amazon is exercising its freedom not to carry pro-Nazi apologia.

> It is actually losing money by going along with the Kosher censors.

Sometimes ethics means more than money, but I don't expect you to get it.

> Many people believe erroneously that the holocaust is based on incontestable evidence and those who deny it must be either deranged or driven by foul motives such as the ridiculous idea they are trying to resurrect National Socialism or some other form of fascist government.

These people are correct.

> But, the exact opposite is really the case here. The preposterous claims of the holocaust are driven by a tribal campaign of systematic and wholesale lying with no evidence at all to back up their claims.

The evidence is voluminous and incontestable.

> The cause of death in German concentration camps was disease, the kind of disease which wastes away the entire human body such as typhus, tuberculosis, diarrhea and dysentery.

It was one of the causes, not the main one. The main cause was murder.

> And this came about because of the bombing of the Reich infrastructure.

What bombing causes the typhus outbreak in Auschwitz in the summer of 1942? Right, you don't know what you are talking about.

> Many were murdered on the Eastern front.

Example: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-jager-report-8_30.html

"Jäger’s reply dated 9 February 1942 to Order Nr. 1331. Jäger reports execution of A) 136,421 Jews, B) 1,064 communists, C) 56 partisans, D) 653 mental patients, E) 44 Poles, 28 Russian prisoners of war, 5 Gypsies, 1 Armenian. Total 138,272, thereof 55,556 women, 34,464 children. Facsimile in Wette, Jäger, page 147."

> But, not all Jews were sent to concentration camps.

Yes, on the occupied Soviet territories Jews were usually shot as Jews (not partisans etc.).

Those who did get sent to the camps, mostly European Jews, were in most cases sorted into those able to work and those unable to work.

The deniers are unable to account for those unable to work sent, e.g., to Auschwitz (according to documentary evidence they were murdered there - holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2017/02/separate-accommodation-in-auschwitz.html ). They are also unable to account for the Jews sent to Treblinka, Belzec, Sobibor, Chelmno and never seen again. I should note that none of those were concentration camps.

Sergey Romanov said...

> Approximately 150,000 Germans of Jewish blood fought for the Reich.

They were Germans with some Jewish ancestry, not Jews. Not sure how this point helps you in any case. The Nazi genocidal policy towards Jews is well-documented.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2015/08/more-than-100-nazi-extermination.html

> Revisionists do not believe there was a Hitler order to exterminate Europe's Jewry.

It doesn't matter what they religiously believe, only the facts matter. And the fact of the matter is that Hitler did take a decision to exterminate the European Jews. On Dec. 12, 1941, Hitler said privately, referring to his 1939 prophecy (as written down by Goebbels):

"Regarding the Jewish question, the Führer is determined to clear the table. He warned the Jews that if they were to cause another world war, it would lead to their own destruction.
Those were not empty words. Now the world war has come. The destruction of the Jews must be its necessary consequence. We cannot be sentimental about it. It is not for us to feel sympathy for the Jews. We should have sympathy rather with our own German people. If the German people have to sacrifice 160,000 victims in yet another campaign in the east, then those responsible for this bloody conflict will have to pay for it with their lives."

> They also contest the homicidal gas chamber stories.

They can contest whatever they like, like the flat-earthers contest the shape of the Earth, but once again this doesn't change the fact that there were gas chambers. The deniers' arguments are extremely weak and inept in any case. http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2014/10/rebuttal-of-mattogno-on-auschwitz-part.html

> There is no forensic evidence for homicidal gas chambers in any of the German camps.

Not true, but in any case forensic evidence is not the only evidence that counts. E.g. we don't have any forensic evidence for Julius Caesar but we have documentary and eyewitness evidence. This cherrypicking of the types of evidence is typical for the denial dogma followers.

> And lastly, revisionists do not believe the preposterous six million number which has more to do with Talmudic and Kabbalistic mythology than statistics.

There is no connection whatsoever between the estimate of between 5 and 6 million Jews dead due to the well-documented genocidal Nazi policies, the estimate which is grounded in sound demographic and historical research, and any religious concepts.

https://www.degruyter.com/viewbooktoc/product/220100

> And again, I say sorry Sergey but most if not all revisionist claims have not been debunked as you claim.

Yes, the significant ones have been, and moreover, the main core claims - that millions did not die, that gas chambers did not exist and that there was no genocidal policy - have been amply debunked.

Meanwhile the deniers are unable to account for the missing Jews - the fact that made a noted denier Eric Hunt leave the fold.

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2017/02/eric-hunt-is-no-longer-holocaust-denier.html

Gabi said...

"And lastly, revisionists do not believe the preposterous six million number which has more to do with Talmudic and Kabbalistic mythology than statistics."

Oh god... mate, don't talk about stuff you don't know anything about.
7 is an important number in Judaism. So are 4, 40, 18 and 13. But not 6, not 6 million (there isn't even a word for Million in Hebrew). It those were prominent numbers in Jewish culture, I think that I, as a kike, would know about it.

Sergey Romanov said...

He'll probably dig up some obscure source from some denier/neo-Nazi book and will still be unable to show any causal relationship.

Unknown said...

Of course the source will be obscure. It's not even on Amazon.

How obscure can you get? Stick to stuff that's on Amazon - you can't go wrong that way.

Sergey Romanov said...

Poor deniers, so unable to construct any semblance of a coherent argument.

The Black Rabbit of Inlé said...

I agree that he does praise sexual relationships between men and boys [the age of 13 is mentioned], although you previously insisted it was with the "joke" that he "praised under-age sex". Perhaps it was the fact that his comments are so similar to Tatchell's [who mentioned the age of 9] which prompted your initial choice; the double-standard of refusing to describe Tatchell's views in the same way, even in a blogger comment, was just too glaring.

The Guardian has its own double-standard on this matter. It features an article which calls Yiannopoulos' statement a "justification of child abuse", but elsewhere hosts a 2014 video of their regular feature writer—well known for holding similar views—arguing for lowering the age of consent to 14!

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/21/milo-yiannopoulos-rise-and-fall-shallow-actor-bad-guy-hate-speech
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2014/jan/14/should-legal-age-of-consent-be-lowered-video-debate

Geoff said...

Well papasha408....a number of deniers also do believe the earth is flat.Read Eric Hunt's statement again.(Not that he does).

Nicholas Terry said...

BRoI: "the double-standard of refusing to describe Tatchell's views in the same way"

There's no double standard, since I've said quite clearly that both argued that underage sex isn't always harmful. We can also agree that both spoke positively about it. But Yiannopoulos went further and was *seen* publicly to be extolling its virtues, and praising a priest for helping him perfect his blowjob skills.

This was recorded on video, dug up, flashed around first social media then multiple media outlets and finally the story ended up on Fox News and other TV channels (minus the blowjob references, of course)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5331605442001/?#sp=show-clips

The scandal was bigger, firstly because our media environment amplifies the effects, secondly because Yiannopoulos was becoming a much more mainstream figure. So while both argued for the same thing, only one saw his wings melt as he flew towards the sun, because only one was flying towards the sun with a rising mainstream profile.

There are also differences in their overall profile. Tatchell is known as a direct action activist but is generally thought of as a serious commentator, whereas Yiannopoulos is known as a provocateur and troll, and so it's evidently harder for him to discuss serious issues without embellishing them with provocative remarks.

If Yiannopoulos was a gay rights activist and was discussing this issue in another forum, much of what he said would have been absolutely identical to Tatchell's views, but Yiannopoulos is who he is, so he threw in explicit sex talk. I think even the Guardian would have baulked at publishing a letter from the progressive activist Tatchell had he started talking about blowjobs.

Jonathan Harrison said...

Rudolf: "And here are the Jews gloating over their victory"

http://codoh.com/library/document/4266/?lang=en

But don't call him an antisemite.

Sergey Romanov said...

Rudolf is of course an antisemitic loony. From his afterword to The First Holocaust:

http://i.imgur.com/I7EwB9X.png

Ignoring the typical Nazi view of the early Soviet Union, he even invented - or regurgitated from some even nuttier source - the claim that the Jewish star was a Soviet state symbol.


Germar Rudolf needs psychiatric help ASAP.

BrendanT said...


Amazon.com action, which is just a first step of a betrayal of trust
to the American people; it was easier. The order came from Israel which is an open display of jewish power. However, no one should ever forget this nor allow it to be forgotten. I, for one will never buy anything from amazon.com again. It has declared war on truth albeit in a passive mode of hyper-ethnocentric cohesion.
It is also an assertion of jewish-supremacist power over the American people.
They probably ran their jewish game theory machine and figured White people --who are the ones interested in truthful accurate history and the corrections of the falsified 'narratives' of judaic-created false history that includes much of the
of WW II; and the game machine said White people in America today are too non-cohesive to defend their interests in the face of jewish supremacist dictates.
So amazon.com abused the trust and patronage it has enjoyed as an American business to become a political jewish-supremacist actor in a war being waged against freedom of speech,and against the ability to access accurate information. This is the beginning not the culmination of jewish supremacist power abuse within America.
Definitely, remember this before buying anything from amazon, unless you are a hyper-ethnocentric-jew, you do not want to support an enemy of truth and of all non-jews whether they know it or not. Jewish power vs. the host peoples' power.
Freedom vs alien dominion of America. not a pretty picture; thanks a lot nasty-amazon.com for selling us-all Americans who value freedom and truth, -down the river; though probably at best it was only a matter of time ....

papasha408 said...

A very accurate summation Brendan T. And the lesson learned is, don't question the chosen or their pet dogmas. How many museums of lies are these parasites going to build? And how much more Purimshpiel must we endure?

Gabi said...

It seems to me that both a of ya are doing plenty of "questioning thr chosen" and yet nothing happened to you.

J Kelly said...

Why?
You get the crap for free. This'll save you some money.

J Kelly said...

😂

J Kelly said...

If you want to debate you are always welcome at Skeptics.

J Kelly said...

Come here:
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewforum.php?f=39
And make your case.

J Kelly said...

I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't care losing 15-20 deniers.

Come here:
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewforum.php?f=39

Make your case.

J Kelly said...

Would you like to bring up the 4 million thing at Auschwitz again and give us all a good laugh?

Sergey Romanov said...

They are bad humans and even worse historians, Brent.

Sergey Romanov said...

Papasha, debunked on every single factual point, reverts to the "crazy ranting uncle" mode.

papasha408 said...

Sergey, You haven't debunked anything I've posted. And it is you holocaust story- tellers who rant and rave and use organizations such as the ADL and B'nai B'rith to put pressure on governments to persecute citizens simply because they have a different and may I add a more realistic viewpoint about the Second World War. Shame on all of you.

Gabi said...

This is gold.

Sergey Romanov said...

> Sergey, You haven't debunked anything I've posted.

Meta-denial is cute. Too bad everyone can scroll upwards and see that this is a bald-faced lie. Typical. 😁