Why are you here?

[Alonso]

Like many people here, I believed the official narrative of the holocaust for most of my life. Around eight years ago I started to notice that some things didn't add up, started to investigate, and eventually understood the deception. This probably sounds familiar. Looks like many prominent revisionists, like Germar Rudolf, and also many participants in this and other revisionist forums have a similar background.

The amount of time I have devoted to this topic is striking. For many years I have been using a tool that reports how I spend my time. It reports that, over the last eight years, I have spent more than 400 hours on this topic. It's more time than I have spent over the same period on practical tasks like, say, doing my laundry. That's remarkable. I'm not a public figure. Unlike Germar Rudolf, I don't have the goal of revealing the truth to the world, I'm not even a member of any organizations related to this topic. Unlike doing my laundry, learning about this topic doesn't serve any obvious practical purpose for me. And yet, I've spent so much time on it that it borders on obsession.

This begs the question: why? Why do I care so much? It doesn't affect me, at least not more than it affects any other person in the Western world. I'm Spanish, my country didn't even participate in World War II. Like any other Western person, I've been bombarded all my life by propaganda on this topic. But most Western people don't ever question the holocaust narrative, let alone spend hundreds of hours researching it. What's so special about this topic, why does it captivate my interest (and apparently, also the interest of many others) in such a way?

I think the answer is related to my personal background. I have an extremely dysfunctional family, in which lying and deceiving has always been the norm. Since we were born, my sisters and I were taught to lie and deceive others without even realizing that we were doing so. My family is controlled by my mother: she has used lies, deceptions, and manipulations to control the life of my father, my siblings and myself since we were born. I'm the only person in my family who has ever seriously questioned the deceptions of my mother.

There's an interesting similarity between my personal life and the Western world in general. The Western world is ruled by an elite that uses systematic lies, deception, and manipulation to stay in control. This elite uses many deceptions, but it's probably fair to say that the most significant one by far is the holohoax (I'm aware that the holohoax also has a profound influence in the rest of the world, but here I'm focusing on the Western world for the sake of simplicity). There is a minority in the Western world, the revisionists, who question this deception, but most people believe it uncritically. Revisionists are systematically punished and ostracized for telling the truth.

This seems to map neatly with the situation of my family: the elite that rules the world (the world of my family) is my mother. She uses very complex deceptions to rule this small world, just like the Western elite uses the holohoax to rule the Western world. My siblings and I were bombarded with these deceptions since we were born (and my father since he met my mother), just like Western citizens are bombarded with the holohoax. I'm the only person in this small world who has questioned the deceptions and, just like revisionists, I'm systematically punished and ostracized for telling the truth.

This parallelism seems to explain my interest on this topic. I feel deeply identified with revisionists -specially those that tell the truth in public, like Rudolf- because we experience the same ordeal. In a way, understanding the Western elite and how they use the holohoax is understanding my mother and how she uses her deceptions, the deceptions I've been subjected to throughout my life. Understanding revisionists and their ordeal is understanding myself.

This also seems to explain how I approach the topic. I have some general knowledge about the holohoax and its deceptions, but my factual knowledge is remarkably limited given the amount of time I've spent. For example, I know that Sobibor is the location of an alleged extermination camp, but I know almost nothing about that camp: where it is, what is alleged to have happened there, what actually happened, etc. I'm not so interested in the factual details. I'm far more interested in how the deception works: what happened in the Nuremberg show trials, how the allies managed to force Rudolf Hess and so many other innocents to confess horrible crimes, etc.

What about you? Why are you here? Are there others whose motivations are similar to mine?

[HansHill]

Hi Alonso!

1 - Welcome
2 - What is the tool you used to ascertain the time spent on this topic, if you don't mind me asking? It sounds like a personal organising tool, like an Excel sheet to map out and analyse your time but that sounds quite involved.
3 - i'm sorry to hear about your private situation but just as a friendly heads up, you seem to have divulged quite a bit of personal information including your home country, it would be worth considering your own personal privacy in future and be conscious about identifiable things you are posting here, as this is all public, and of great interest to certain.... people. I will assume "Alonso" is not your real name!
4 - I agree with you that this is a topic that can become fiercely time consuming, it has become a fascination of mine and I have spent approx 6 years on this, reading everything I can get my hands on along with documentaries, interviews and podcasts
5 - I am here, primarily to ask questions to expand my knowledge. I opened my account here asking niche questions I could not find the answers to elsewhere, and I continue to ask questions to the present day. Secondly, I am here to participate in knowledge sharing with other Revisionists, and debate with Exterminationists - the former to help in whatever way i can with our body of knowledge, and the latter, to dunk on these people so any lurkers or newbies can see that Exterminationists are easily bested in open debate.

[Archie]

It can be addictive. At first, there is mere curiosity. Who are these revisionists? Why don't they believe it? But then you are surprised by the arguments which seem very reasonable. Could they actually be right? And then the more you look into it, the more certain it seems that the official history is very, very wrong. I do not think I could have stopped in the middle. I suppose I could have quit once I had looked into it enough to draw my own conclusion, but I think I was bothered by the fact that the matter this still isn't settled. I actually got interested in WWII revisionism first, but I think I moved more toward the Holocaust as it became clear that there was no way to get the history of WWII right without figuring out the Holocaust piece.

I relate to how Arthur Butz described his motivation for writing his book in the mid 70s. This from the original 1976 preface.

Although my long-lingering skepticism in regard to the legend was no longer on the defensive, my information could not, early in 1972, be considered conclusive, and my knowledge of the subject was not comprehensive, so I set out, at first in my “spare time,” to investigate the subject with the thoroughness that was required.

The reader will have surmised that my “spare time” eventually expanded considerably.

Several – for me startling – discoveries made the subject irresistible in a purely intellectual sense. I acquired the foreign language literature. Ultimately, I spent the entire summer of 1972 working on an exposé of the hoax, since by then I had penetrated and demolished the whole sorry mess. While the book you are holding differs considerably in quantity of factual content and general quality from the picture I had formed by the summer of 1972, that picture, whose essentials are transmitted here, was in such overwhelming contradiction to the lies that Western society had equipped me with, that my attention could not be drawn from the subject by any appeal to prudence or any such practical calculation. Because even early in the summer of 1972, it was evident that my research had carried the subject beyond the existing literature, I felt an inescapable obligation and an intellectual imperative to put forward for society’s evaluation what I knew about this most pernicious hoax.

[Stubble]

Because the pool was closed. Due to AIDS.



Sorry about your family problems and stuff, hope things get better.

[Alonso]

I felt an inescapable obligation and an intellectual imperative to put forward for society’s evaluation what I knew about this most pernicious hoax.

I surmise that you do it because you feel that it is your moral obligation. Did I get that right?

the former to help in whatever way i can with our body of knowledge, and the latter, to dunk on these people so any lurkers or newbies can see that Exterminationists are easily bested in open debate.

This sounds similar to what Archie said, but it's not so explicit. Do you also do this out of a sense of moral obligation?

What is the tool you used to ascertain the time spent on this topic, if you don't mind me asking? It sounds like a personal organising tool, like an Excel sheet to map out and analyse your time but that sounds quite involved.

Following your advice on privacy protection, I have sent you a private message to answer this. I think it's the first time I send a private message in this forum, so let me know if it doesn't reach you.

you seem to have divulged quite a bit of personal information including your home country, it would be worth considering your own personal privacy in future and be conscious about identifiable things you are posting here, as this is all public, and of great interest to certain.... people. I will assume "Alonso" is not your real name!

I've had mixed ideas about this for a lot of time. I have searched this forum for threads on the topic of privacy, but I didn't find anything relevant, so I've just created a new thread on the topic. You can see it here.


@Stubble: I'm sorry, I've made a reasonable effort to get the joke, but my meme culture is just too limited XDD

[borjastick]

This also seems to explain how I approach the topic. I have some general knowledge about the holohoax and its deceptions, but my factual knowledge is remarkably limited given the amount of time I've spent. For example, I know that Sobibor is the location of an alleged extermination camp, but I know almost nothing about that camp: where it is, what is alleged to have happened there, what actually happened, etc. I'm not so interested in the factual details. I'm far more interested in how the deception works: what happened in the Nuremberg show trials, how the allies managed to force Rudolf Hess and so many other innocents to confess horrible crimes, etc.

I read your post with some interest I must say. Very well articulated concerning your mother and her manipulation. Sounds a bit narcissistic if I may be so bold. Just a few points about your closing paragraph above.

For a good factual appraisal and understanding of the various camps and claims I would suggest you read Dalton - Debating the holocaust.

With regard to Nuremberg it is best to know that after all wars or nasty conflicts the allies always find a way to kill the opposite (losing) leaders, generals etc. WW2, Middle east wars, Saddam Hussein, Colonel Gadhaffi. It helps keep the lid on the truth coming out as the dead don't talk much...

I don't think the allies did manage to convince innocents to confess to so many crimes did they? By and large those of trial denied most things.

[Alonso]

Sounds a bit narcissistic if I may be so bold.

Yeah, that's probably a fair assessment.

With regard to Nuremberg it is best to know that after all wars or nasty conflicts the allies always find a way to kill the opposite (losing) leaders, generals etc. WW2, Middle east wars, Saddam Hussein, Colonel Gadhaffi. It helps keep the lid on the truth coming out as the dead don't talk much...

Yes, killing those who are willing to tell the truth is a part of the deception, but I don't think it's an essential part. In cases like WW2, Iraq, Libia, etc., there are thousands or even millions of witnesses, killing all of them is not feasible. There are many other methods that are more effective. I think the main one is brainwashing (propaganda).

I'm also very interested in how the deceivers organize the deception. I know there is no Simpson's style Mr. Burns saying "and now we are going to deceive the whole world" while he laughs hysterically, so I'd really like to know how they create such a well coordinated effort to do something so morally deplorable. Unfortunately, this seems to be the less documented and understood part of the holohoax. After all the time I've spent learning about it, I think the closest I've read to something like this is Simon Wiesenthal's infamous explanation of the five million gentile victims figure (he made it up to get gentiles interested).

I don't think the allies did manage to convince innocents to confess to so many crimes did they? By and large those of trial denied most things.

I don't think that's the case. For example, according to the Holocaust Encyclopedia, about a year and a half after the Dachau trials, "almost all defendants issued affidavits, complaining of abuse and rescinding their earlier confessions". Confessions extracted under torture were also the norm in Nuremberg.