The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 8:35 pm**

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 7:06 pm
The gas chamber denial is a separate sub-issue that we can maybe address later.

The 'gas chamber denial'

is absolutely an integral, inseparable issue from any discussion on the 'Holocaust', as it is allegations of industrialized killing at mass scale which makes the 'Holocaust' considered so significant. Any attempt to separate it from the discussion is likely in an effort to minimize its impact on your position, since the impact is obvious.

It's well documented which countries Jews went to after the war. Rarely did siblings and family members reconnect after the war but it did happen and those survivors had many of the same terrible reports as other people.

No, it is not. Census data before and after the war and insofar as tracking Jews in and out of Europe is notoriously unreliable, even if we assume it was not generally falsified. You're also neglecting the Soviet Union, notorious for its secrecy and 'Iron Curtain'. The bottom-line is that you cannot reasonably assert that we necessarily have evidence of 'where Jews did not go' en masse. They went everywhere.

As our former forum moderator Hannover used to say, "Jews went where Jews are".

What is very well documented is that hundreds of thousands of Jews were put into Displaced Person camps in Germany, Austria, and Italy until about 1952. A lot of displaced people went to the US, Palestine, Canada, South America, South Africa, and Australia. Some Jews returned to Eastern European countries like Poland, Hungary, and Romania but then they faced more anti-semitism and even pogroms so many left.

That's a very incomplete list. The Shoah Foundation archives alone include Jews who ended up in at least 60+ different countries. You're greatly understating the amount and range of global dispersion which occurred.

We are also only considering 'survivors', here. There are undoubtedly many who died by the end of the war or in the years that immediately followed, once in Soviet captivity (freezing winters, famine and disease continued well-after the end of the war, within the former Eastern-occupied territories). And Stalin was no friend of Jews nor minorities in general, having slaughtered millions.

We also have yet to consider Israel and that any secret agreements between victorious nations after the war may very well have coordinated transports to Israel, where demographic/population counts thereafter would be easily controlled by Jews and their collective interest groups.

Whereas I leave my conclusions partly open in terms of where each and every Jew ended up, it is you who claims they were all 'gassed' or shot into pits, indiscriminately. And it is your position who has the power and responsibility to prove your claims. Instead of doing that, you censor and persecute your critics.

As long as people remain committed to truth and reason and objectivity, it doesn't matter what their pre-existing beliefs and biases are. Where I draw the line is on personal insults and clearly racist comments like maligning all Jews for doing things.

Sorry, I used to preach the "not all Jews" line as well. The problem is that Jews have extreme and disproportionate power in major institutions. This is not even debatable, Jews often celebrate this publicly. They then use that power in ways that exclusively or overwhelmingly benefit Jews, to the extent that they can still maintain plausible deniability, in order to avoid negative attention upon Jews and Jewish interests.

There is a longer history of these behaviors, here (primarily focused on the USA as of circa 2000), which I highly recommend, for anyone interested (disregard the color-coding of names, which does not come from the original author):
https://archive.org/details/WhenVictims ... 7/mode/2up

It is possible that people first come to disbelieve in the Holocaust and then become anti-semitic although that is still unacceptable in my opinion. I'm not sure why people here think the Holocaust was a "hoax" or who perpetuated it or why, but certainly not every single Jew so it's not fair to despise all Jews for the alleged actions of a few.

There are no massive protests by Jews against Jewish deception in media, none about Jewish influences in communism and other 'isms', about Jewish lobbying in Washington, about Jewish financial practices, etc. While there are a smaller number of "big Jews" at the top engaging in the most overt and problematic initiatives, the tribalism of Jews in general prevents the "little Jews" from counteracting initiatives which benefit Jews, even if unpatriotic and harmful to the host nation (e.g. USA).

So no, "not all Jews" is not a sufficient policy in addressing the Jewish question. Jews in general have prioritized Jewish interests. More discussion on this topic, here:

'Criticism of Jews as a Collective (Not Just as Individuals) is Ethical and Warranted'
https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=144

Very few Jews are in the media, finance, warmongers, heads of NGOs. You will see the same exact things in any country that has developed a network of media, banks, NGOs. Jews are not necessary for that. People are aware of roughly how many casualties there were in WW2. I don't know why you are so upset that people know about the Jews who died?

Yes, very few Jews are the heads of these organizations, simply because the number of organizational heads is naturally very few. But the proportion of organizational heads who are Jewish is extraordinary and revealing. In any case, if these organizations were doing noble, patriotic things, we might have no problem with them being run by Jews. But we consistently find that quite often the most anti-American, problematic organizations have Jews at the helm (again, despite Jews as just ~2% of the population in the USA and even less abroad). See the link I just provided.

It's historically false that Jews have been ejected from nations for hundreds of times throughout history, but even if it were true, who cares? Human nature tends to persecute people who are different from them and scapegoat those who don't deserve it when they don't understand their own problems or know how to deal with it. It's sad, but that's an actual indictment against humanity rather than Jewish civilization. Repeating that false claim, makes me question your accuracy and judgment overall.

It is absolutely not "historically false that Jews have been ejected from nations for hundreds of times throughout history". You're either ignorant or just being deceptive, full-stop.

As for "who cares?", such a pattern of ejections is necessarily concerning, given that we have multiple independent nations having serious problems with a visiting population. This strongly suggests the nations themselves are not the problem -- the visitors are.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 8:51 pm**

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 5:34 pm
I am legitimately curious how you justify and rationalize your beliefs. No need to take my word for it, you'll see that in my responses and behavior here.

No, you clearly are not “curious.”

Curiosity wouldn’t compel you to rush to ChatGPT to combat inconvenient information that you find uncomfortable to consider or to acknowledge. You’d receive the information given, or you’d browse the many existing posts on this current forum or the archived forum.

You are compelled to perform narrative control.

This is why you feel overwhelmed and brigaded in this thread. You ask questions, people here respond and similarly ask you questions—and then you get flustered and blustery trying to be a one-person Holocaust narrative representative.

None of this is a display of “curiosity.”

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 8:55 pm**

borjastick wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 8:25 pm
Ashkenazim are of the racial subset 'levantine negroids', as are the other peoples of the Levant. They have a higher European admixture, but, their DNA indeed reflects a root in the Levant.
Produced in some shady research programme in Tel Aviv University no doubt.

Unlike most people here, especially CJ and Nessie, I have read and understood The Thirteenth Tribe and to me it makes a lot of sense that the Ashkenazis might have shagged a few jew traders on their travels but they are definitely not part of the Twelve Tribes of Judah and thus not connected historically with the Holy land. If you don't want to believe that good for you.

As for CJ and his silly comment about me reading and believing every anti-semitic trope and myth that comes along please don't go there because I think you are probably better than that type of comment. You are acting like most arrogant jews who have believed hook line and sinker all the fables and stories that Schlomo and great cousin Rubin told them over dinner. You simply don't seem to have the capacity to think outside the box. I suspect because you know that if and when the holocaust truth is accepted by most, which is coming, the jews will be in a rather large puddle of poo.

PM sent

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 9:07 pm**

borjastick wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 8:25 pm
Ashkenazim are of the racial subset 'levantine negroids', as are the other peoples of the Levant. They have a higher European admixture, but, their DNA indeed reflects a root in the Levant.
Produced in some shady research programme in Tel Aviv University no doubt.

Unlike most people here, especially CJ and Nessie, I have read and understood The Thirteenth Tribe and to me it makes a lot of sense that the Ashkenazis might have shagged a few jew traders on their travels but they are definitely not part of the Twelve Tribes of Judah and thus not connected historically with the Holy land. If you don't want to believe that good for you.

As for CJ and his silly comment about me reading and believing every anti-semitic trope and myth that comes along please don't go there because I think you are probably better than that type of comment. You are acting like most arrogant jews who have believed hook line and sinker all the fables and stories that Schlomo and great cousin Rubin told them over dinner. You simply don't seem to have the capacity to think outside the box. I suspect because you know that if and when the holocaust truth is accepted by most, which is coming, the jews will be in a rather large puddle of poo.

Are there any anti-semitic tropes that you recognize as clearly false or even misleading? This will tell me about your seriousness and is an honest question.

Calling me an arrogant Jew and using epithets and ad hominems is unacceptable to me. So please refrain from doing that or I will discontinue our discussion.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 9:22 pm**

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 9:07 pm
Are there any anti-semitic tropes that you recognize as clearly false or even misleading? This will tell me about your seriousness and is an honest question.

What you need to understand (if I assume for a moment you're "just asking questions") is that Jews have historically portrayed and propagated any and all powerful criticisms against them as being baseless 'tropes'. Thus, many such 'tropes' are in fact truth.

I do think that many of the accusations now referred to as 'blood libel' in the Middle Ages were likely false, although to suggest they were all false (given how many there were, overall) strains credulity.

There will always be morons who say things like, "Jewish space lazers", etc., and you can be sure that those defending Jewish interests will portray these absurdities as being very typical 'antisemitic' views. But for the most part, I would say at least 2/3rds (possibly more) of the 'antisemitic tropes' I have investigated in-depth have turned out to be largely or entirely based in fact and sound reasoning.

Once again, however, I don't think you are truly open to considering this. I think you are playing a role to feign 'shock and awe', as if you are observing some kind of bizarre circus spectacle, here; as AreYouSirius suggests, you're attempting a 'one-man show', to engineer an impression upon readers that they are seeing anything other than credible evidence and sound reasoning. Unfortunately, for you, these traditional Jewish tactics are becoming less and less effective.

You may wish to consult your rabbi on the best approach for Pilpul 2.0. You're gonna need it.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 9:30 pm**

Callafangers wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 8:35 pm
The 'gas chamber denial' is absolutely an integral, inseparable issue from any discussion on the 'Holocaust', as it is allegations of industrialized killing at mass scale which makes the 'Holocaust' considered so significant. Any attempt to separate it from the discussion is likely in an effort to minimize its impact on your position, since the impact is obvious.

I consider that to be separate issue because I'm specifically looking at where the Jews went. If you can prove to me that none of those 6 million missing Jews were exterminated by the Germans, then there's no reason to even consider the gas chambers.

No, it is not. Census data before and after the war and insofar as tracking Jews in and out of Europe is notoriously unreliable, even if we assume it was not generally falsified. You're also neglecting the Soviet Union, notorious for its secrecy and 'Iron Curtain'. The bottom-line is that you cannot reasonably assert that we necessarily have evidence of 'where Jews did not go' en masse. They went everywhere.

As our former forum moderator Hannover used to say, "Jews went where Jews are".

Why was the census data before and after the war notoriously unreliable? What census data do you think is reliable? Jewish people keep very close track of these things so it is almost impossible for significant communities of Jews to have settled without it being documented.

That's a very incomplete list. The Shoah Foundation archives alone include Jews who ended up in at least 60+ different countries. You're greatly understating the amount and range of global dispersion which occurred.

The list I gave was where the majority of Jews went although smaller populations went to other countries of course, although that was well documented. Clearly the Shoah Foundation keeps very close tabs on that and they can't make up fore the 6 million population drop.

We are also only considering 'survivors', here. There are undoubtedly many who died by the end of the war or in the years that immediately followed, once in Soviet captivity (freezing winters, famine and disease continued well-after the end of the war, within the former Eastern-occupied territories). And Stalin was no friend of Jews nor minorities in general, having slaughtered millions.

Fine, but then why did such a large percentage of Jews get killed relative to any other group? Was that just a random coincidence?

We also have yet to consider Israel and that any secret agreements between victorious nations after the war may very well have coordinated transports to Israel, where demographic/population counts thereafter would be easily controlled by Jews and their collective interest groups.

The Jewish population in Israel is very well documented, both before and after the 1948 war.

Whereas I leave my conclusions partly open in terms of where each and every Jew ended up, it is you who claims they were all 'gassed' or shot into pits, indiscriminately. And it is your position who has the power and responsibility to prove your claims. Instead of doing that, you censor and persecute your critics.

I haven't censored or persecuted anybody who denying the Holocaust so please don't ascribe behavior to me that is untrue. If the census count for Jews drops by 6 million, which most people consider a very reasonable but imperfect estimate, the burden is really on you to prove that it was either extremely unreliable or reasonably account for how many Jews could have gone missing so easily.

Sorry, I used to preach the "not all Jews" line as well. The problem is that Jews have extreme and disproportionate power in major institutions. This is not even debatable, Jews often celebrate this publicly. They then use that power in ways that exclusively or overwhelmingly benefit Jews, to the extent that they can still maintain plausible deniability, in order to avoid negative attention upon Jews and Jewish interests.

I don't really want to have this discussion but I still won't tolerate ascribing the behavior of some Jews to all Jews. It is so much better if you criticize specific actions or policies or attitudes rather than scapegoating an entire group of people.

There is a longer history of these behaviors, here (primarily focused on the USA as of circa 2000), which I highly recommend, for anyone interested (disregard the color-coding of names, which does not come from the original author):
https://archive.org/details/WhenVictims ... 7/mode/2up

There are no massive protests by Jews against Jewish deception in media, none about Jewish influences in communism and other 'isms', about Jewish lobbying in Washington, about Jewish financial practices, etc. While there are a smaller number of "big Jews" at the top engaging in the most overt and problematic initiatives, the tribalism of Jews in general prevents the "little Jews" from counteracting initiatives which benefit Jews, even if unpatriotic and harmful to the host nation (e.g. USA).

Jews don't protest there being too much of anybody in certain positions. Like I said before, criticize specific actions and attitudes all you want, but it's unacceptable to blame "the Jews".

Just for one example, I do agree that we have massive problems with the banking system and political lobbying in the US. Are there some Jews that contribute to part of the problem? Sure, but its a tiny percent of all Jews. It's also unfortunately totally legally what goes on. It's much more constructive if you advocate for changing the law over blaming the entirety of Jews for engaging in legal but undesirable activities.

So no, "not all Jews" is not a sufficient policy in addressing the Jewish question. Jews in general have prioritized Jewish interests. More discussion on this topic, here:

'Criticism of Jews as a Collective (Not Just as Individuals) is Ethical and Warranted'
https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=144

If you want something changed, propose a policy that applies to all citizens or humans and then it can be debated whether or not it's fair.

Yes, very few Jews are the heads of these organizations, simply because the number of organizational heads is naturally very few. But the proportion of organizational heads who are Jewish is extraordinary and revealing. In any case, if these organizations were doing noble, patriotic things, we might have no problem with them being run by Jews. But we consistently find that quite often the most anti-American, problematic organizations have Jews at the helm (again, despite Jews as just ~2% of the population in the USA and even less abroad). See the link I just provided.

It's pretty weak to criticize an entire group for working hard and being successful mostly based on their merit. If you feel that there are clear violations to meritocracy then say that and propose better laws.

It is absolutely not "historically false that Jews have been ejected from nations for hundreds of times throughout history". You're either ignorant or just being deceptive, full-stop.

This is 100% false. There are anti-semitic memes floating around on Twitter that say this but the number is immensely exaggerated. A lot of data on these memes are sometimes totally made up or extremely misleading. In this case, it's just made up.

As for "who cares?", such a pattern of ejections is necessarily concerning, given that we have multiple independent nations having serious problems with a visiting population. This strongly suggests the nations themselves are not the problem -- the visitors are.

Jews are not a visiting population. There are millions of Jews who were born in the US and have naturalized citizenship just like every other American.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 9:37 pm**

Callafangers wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 9:22 pm What you need to understand (if I assume for a moment you're "just asking questions") is that Jews have historically portrayed and propagated any and all powerful criticisms against them as being baseless 'tropes'. Thus, many such 'tropes' are in fact truth.

I do think that many of the accusations now referred to as 'blood libel' in the Middle Ages were likely false, although to suggest they were all false (given how many there were, overall) strains credulity.

Well here's what I would say then. Jews are overwhelmed with so much false propaganda and hatred that it is almost impossible for them to find the 1% or 2% of truth that is embedded in these criticisms. I've seen a lot of false tropes spread on here to be honest. If you want to make a difference, it's on you to establish a reputation for being credible and making criticisms that are true. AI can help you a lot with that.

There will always be morons who say things like, "Jewish space lazers", etc., and you can be sure that those defending Jewish interests will portray these absurdities as being very typical 'antisemitic' views. But for the most part, I would say at least 2/3rds (possibly more) of the 'antisemitic tropes' I have investigated in-depth have turned out to be largely or entirely based in fact and sound reasoning.

You might not have looked hard enough because much more than 1/3 of these tropes are wildly inaccurate. If you are open-minded, and I see some hints of that, we can discuss specific tropes. But I don't want to spend so much time trying to debunk these memes unless you show me that you have sufficient respect for truth. It's a waste of my time then.

Once again, however, I don't think you are truly open to considering this. I think you are playing a role to feign 'shock and awe', as if you are observing some kind of bizarre circus spectacle, here; as AreYouSirius suggests, you're attempting a 'one-man show', to engineer an impression upon readers that they are seeing anything other than credible evidence and sound reasoning. Unfortunately, for you, these traditional Jewish tactics are becoming less and less effective.

You may wish to consult your rabbi on the best approach for Pilpul 2.0. You're gonna need it.

[/quote]

I'm honestly fascinated to see why you guys believe what you do and it seems like you have done a lot of research. I am open to changing my mind, a little or even a lot, if I am presented with credible arguments and data. What I suspect will happen is that we will reach an impasse where there's a massive gap perceived credibility of arguments and I'm curious where that is. Nobody can be 100% certain about anything. If you are eager in getting to that point in a pleasant way, then I am more than happy to go down that rabbit hole. But the discussion and debate has to be based on a truth seeking endeavor and respectful so no ad hominems against people or groups. Criticisms of specific behaviors are fine though.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 9:40 pm**

AreYouSirius wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 8:51 pm No, you clearly are not “curious.”

Curiosity wouldn’t compel you to rush to ChatGPT to combat inconvenient information that you find uncomfortable to consider or to acknowledge. You’d receive the information given, or you’d browse the many existing posts on this current forum or the archived forum.

You are compelled to perform narrative control.

This is why you feel overwhelmed and brigaded in this thread. You ask questions, people here respond and similarly ask you questions—and then you get flustered and blustery trying to be a one-person Holocaust narrative representative.

None of this is a display of “curiosity.”

I use ChatGPT to do all kinds of research all day long. I am overwhelmed because I have 20 people ganging up on me in here with different arguments on different topics and very long posts that are difficult to read and understand. This is why I am sticking to the change in demographics before and after the war.

Again, I'm not flustered, I just can't respond to 1,000 different things so I'm asking to focus on one topic like somebody suggested would be a good approach earlier in this thread.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 9:53 pm**

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 9:37 pm Well here's what I would say then. Jews are overwhelmed with so much false propaganda and hatred that it is almost impossible for them to find the 1% or 2% of truth that is embedded in these criticisms. I've seen a lot of false tropes spread on here to be honest. If you want to make a difference, it's on you to establish a reputation for being credible and making criticisms that are true. AI can help you a lot with that.

Been there, done that. I've gotten every AI I have ever worked with to eventually concede revisionist positions (without specific instructions or other manipulation to do so), even ones with extremely-biased training (although guardrails can always be a challenge). So long as they are still trained on sound reasoning, they eventually give in. The more intelligent ones are even more likely to do so, as Grok 3 plainly shows.

You might not have looked hard enough because much more than 1/3 of these tropes are wildly inaccurate. If you are open-minded, and I see some hints of that, we can discuss specific tropes. But I don't want to spend so much time trying to debunk these memes unless you show me that you have sufficient respect for truth. It's a waste of my time then.

Nonsense. If we are talking about popular tropes, you will not find 30% of them to be untrue. Please list any which you would insist are false.

I'm honestly fascinated to see why you guys believe what you do and it seems like you have done a lot of research. I am open to changing my mind, a little or even a lot, if I am presented with credible arguments and data. What I suspect will happen is that we will reach an impasse where there's a massive gap perceived credibility of arguments and I'm curious where that is. Nobody can be 100% certain about anything. If you are eager in getting to that point in a pleasant way, then I am more than happy to go down that rabbit hole. But the discussion and debate has to be based on a truth seeking endeavor and respectful so no ad hominems against people or groups. Criticisms of specific behaviors are fine though.

You don't seem "fascinated". It's utterly transparent.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 10:17 pm**

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 9:37 pm Nobody can be 100% certain about anything.

Yet another lie.

If you told me that there was an elephant in my basement and I didn't see an elephant in my basement, I would be 100% certian that there was no elephant in my basement.

It's a thing called the convergence of the lack of physical evidence method CJ. I don't think you have the mental capacity to understand.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 10:20 pm**

Callafangers wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 9:53 pm Been there, done that. I've gotten every AI I have ever worked with to eventually concede revisionist positions (without specific instructions or other manipulation to do so), even ones with extremely-biased training (although guardrails can always be a challenge). So long as they are still trained on sound reasoning, they eventually give in. The more intelligent ones are even more likely to do so, as Grok 3 plainly shows.

Can you show me an example of a thread where this happened? That would help save me a lot of time in seeing where your beliefs come from.

Nonsense. If we are talking about popular tropes, you will not find 30% of them to be untrue. Please list any which you would insist are false.

There are so many that are spreading that are false. Two massive examples are the idea that Jews have been expelled from 109 countries (which is untrue). There are also cherry picked and even false quotes from the Talmud that are either fake or very misrepresented. Thanks to Elon, these quotes are getting massive circulation. The Protocols of Zion is also a known fabrication and partially plagiarized from other sources but it let to Jews getting murdered in pogroms.

Imagine if people kept throwing tons of false and severe criticisms of you non-stop as has been done for centuries. How would you handle that?

You don't seem "fascinated". It's utterly transparent.

You're wrong. If you have a problem with my style or approach, feel free to provide specific negative feedback. What you think is transparent is completely backwards. It is counterproductive to make ad hominids like that, especially when they are false.

Thanks.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 10:24 pm**

Keen wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 8:22 pm CJ:

I can make a new thread, this thread is getting very off track.

I will do some more research on my own now and come back in a new thread to discuss the demographic collapse question.
You keep saying that. We are waiting for this new "demographic collapse question" thread to get started.

What are you waiting for? What are you so afraid of?

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 10:31 pm**

Keen wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 10:17 pm
Yet another lie.

If you told me that there was an elephant in my basement and I didn't see an elephant in my basement, I would be 100% certian that there was no elephant in my basement.

It's a thing called the convergence of the lack of physical evidence method CJ. I don't think you have the mental capacity to understand.

OK this was an interesting enough question that I will give you another chance but if you accuse me of lying again then I will remove your privilege of having me respond to you.

You are saying that if you can't see X then X doesn't exist. That is a logical fallacy.

Are you religious? Do you believe in G-d? I am not religious but according to that logic, G-d definitely doesn't exist because you can't see him.

Evidence of absence is not proof of absence.

The "convergence of the lack of physical evidence" is an informal way of saying that the absence of expected evidence, when that evidence should be present, increases confidence in the non-existence of the thing.

Let's say I tell you there's an evidence in your basement and you can't see it. That will increase your confidence that it doesn't exist, but what if the elephant is wearing an invisibility cloak? Or what if the elephant is so small that you simply can't detect it or don't have the right tools to detect it?

I don't think that you can be 100% certain of the absence of an elephant just because you don't see it.

I'm waiting until I do more research on the demographics so that I can have a more intelligent discussion on that. It might take me awhile. I'm not deflecting or dodging. I will definitely get there, I'm just not sure when.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 10:33 pm**

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 10:20 pm Can you show me an example of a thread where this happened? That would help save me a lot of time in seeing where your beliefs come from.

I did not mention a thread.

There are so many that are spreading that are false. Two massive examples are the idea that Jews have been expelled from 109 countries (which is untrue). There are also cherry picked and even false quotes from the Talmud that are either fake or very misrepresented. Thanks to Elon, these quotes are getting massive circulation. The Protocols of Zion is also a known fabrication and partially plagiarized from other sources but it let to Jews getting murdered in pogroms.

Wikipedia alone lists almost 100 (it is admittedly incomplete):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion ... es_of_Jews

Here are some more:
https://archive.org/stream/TheCompleteL ... y_djvu.txt

There being some quotes from the Talmud that are paraphrased or even falsified has nothing to do with the broader tropes (narratives) against Jews. There are many extremely-problematic quotes from the Talmud, so we would need to address those case-by-case. There is no shortage of them.

As for the Protocols, its origins remain under discussion and debate and even Hitler suggested their origin is not so important -- what is important is the fact that this document has evidently become prophetic in predicting how Jews would end up behaving, even a century later. Even if its origins are questionable, its content remains very relevant.

Imagine if people kept throwing tons of false and severe criticisms of you non-stop as has been done for centuries. How would you handle that?

Imagine if you were one of hundreds of nations just trying to self-determine and develop a great quality of life for your people but a foreign tribe keeps injecting (bribing, deceiving, promoting vices, and lending at interest) its way into your upper echelon only to collapse your economy and create conflicts benefiting only their tribe, at the expense and suffering of your nation.

How would you handle that? Would your 'hate' toward them be for no reason at all?

You're wrong. If you have a problem with my style or approach, feel free to provide specific negative feedback. What you think is transparent is completely backwards. It is counterproductive to make ad hominids like that, especially when they are false.

Ad hominids? No, it's simply saying that your approach here has not reflected anything I would consider typical of 'fascination'. I think AreYouSirius' previous assessment was nail-on-the-head. You're working an agenda. We've seen it many times before.

Posted: **Mon May 05, 2025 10:42 pm**

ConfusedJew wrote: ↑Mon May 05, 2025 10:31 pm Evidence of absence is not proof of absence.

Liar.

Lack of visual evidence of an elephant in my basement is ipso facto proof that there is no elephant in my basement.

It's a thing called the convergence of the lack of physical evidence method.

But because you are retarded, you don't have the mental capacity to understand.

ConfusedJew

What if the elephant is wearing an invisibility cloak? Or what if the elepWhant is so small that you simply can't detect it or don't have the right tools to detect it?

What a retard!

That's like saying: What if the "huge mass graves" containing the remains of over 2.1 million jews are so small you can't see them, or the Nazis put an invisibility cloak over them so they couldn't be detected?

What a retard!

The CODOH Revisionist Forum

Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?

Re: Why Do you Guys Think the Holocaust is Fake?