Earlier today I was involved in some protracted discussions with ‘holocaust’ believers. Somebody (he appears to live in Poland) told me:
It’s pretty funny how someone can be so deep in their bullshit. I would argue with you but you seem to bring nothing up that goes against nazi death camps being a thing.
Whereas I responded:
Indeed, it sure is funny how somebody can be so deep in their bullshit. A real humdinger.
Most ‘holocaust’ believers are incapable of arguing; they resort to violence or other foul attacks.
But when they do try to argue, this is how it can unfold:
He responds back with this:
did that word bullshit trigger something that made you think i was being violent? Do you want me to use a different word? I just have one question to ask you do you believe in chem trails?
I end the discussion with this comment:
No, of course it didn’t trigger any such things for me. I am just stating (perhaps for you) inconvenient fact; that ‘holocaust’ believers very often engage in violent attacks against their opponents — fierce assaults, arson attacks, acid attacks (particularly one case where they threw acid in the face of an elderly man. I think he was close to eighty years or somesuch. I cannot be bothered to look it up right now). Also bomb attacks (e.g François Duprat who died due to a car bomb and his wife had to amputate both of her legs). And on & on, the list of ‘holocaust’ believer violence is a long, sordid one. I assume they use violence because they have no arguments.
It is also, as you probably know, illegal in some fourteen countries to question the extermination thesis. So you have everything on your side — even the judicial system. But in a traditional, even-handed debate the ‘holocaust’ believers will always fail because he does not have truth on his side. That is what matters.
Well…except it never really ended with my comment. The obligatory so-called “Mother Word” of the ‘holocaust’ believer was let loose along with one other word — a cocktail of buzzwords to deter:
you’re an anti-semite and probably white supremacist.
…or so they thought! I am not a person easily deterred. I reply back:
The word ‘antisemite’ is a particularly useless buzzword as it has come to mean anybody and anything, and even used in situations where it is not kosher to use it.
Now the ‘holocaust’ believers are somewhat quiet.
Somebody else jumps into the discussion and it is — to my surprise — not to attack me, but for semi-support of me:
Actually, the Palestinians are more Semitic than Israeli Jews. Supporting Israel over Palestine would be more suggestive of an anti-Semite. Of course, neither really proves anti-Semitism at all and it’s ridiculous to suggest so.
I see nowhere that k0nsl bad mouthed the Jewish people. He simply doesn’t support everything Israel does and does not accept their justifications. Anti-Semitism is a hatred of Semitic people, the polar opposite of a Semitist. Suggesting someone is an anti-Semitist because they aren’t a Semitist is like suggesting someone is anti-White because they aren’t a White supremacist.
I’m not going to make any claims on the holocaust or Israel at the moment, but I just wanted you to know that you are only making your side look worse. It would be best if you either asked questions and then came up with actual arguments, or simply moved on.
That’s it, for the moment.