Help making ground breaking revisionist video...

[Barrington James]

Thanks Carto's Cutlass Supreme-

I don't know what the average American or average European believes about the holocaust but I can safely say the average Canadian believes the total package. One of my history teaching friends just found out last year, thanks to me, that there was no lethal gassing in Germany. He was very surprised. Shocked actually.

Canadians depend almost totally for their “news” of the world from their trusted newspapers, magazines, Hollywood movies, TVs and Radios. Consequently they know little of the world.

They do not trust the Internet. They do not read about the Nazi trials. They have seen the movie “Judgment at Nuremberg” and “Swindler's List” and that is good enough for them. That's all they they think have to know. They know little and suspect nothing. Right, for example, now they are supporting the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and are completely unaware of what Canada did to Haiti a couple of years ago, but they are totally convinced that they are the good guys.

There is no active academic community in Canada. Our universities have nothing to do with the real world of history and it would be worth a prof's job to question anything about the holocaust. At the present time many of our newspapers are running a series on a Jewish family who claim to have escaped the Nazi death squads who were killing the Jews of Poland during the holocaust. Google the Ottawa Citizen.

[MJB]

Thanks for the responses. I'm slowly getting things done by adding roughly 4 or 5 minutes worth of script every day. At that rate after a year I'll have a 24 hour long video.

[Laurentz Dahl]

Thanks for the responses. I'm slowly getting things done by adding roughly 4 or 5 minutes worth of script every day. At that rate after a year I'll have a 24 hour long video.

If you want any quick feedback on the script you can send it (or bits of it) to me by pm.

My suggestion is to not "dumb it down" or resort to simplistic or outdated argumentation. I believe one should address the upper half of the intelligence spectrum, they are the ones you can possibly make start thinking about the issue.

[Hektor]

@ Barrington,
as for the mass of the people - the lemmings, if you want - I think your statement is true. People tend to form their opinions based on what their mates and some authority figures do believe. Or even worse: they align their believes on the bases of what they believe other people do believe.

I read an estimate that only 2-3% of any Western type of population do actually form independent, critical opinions. The rest goes with the flow and thinks within the given framework.

Changing these consensus of hegemonial opinion is a difficult process. You'll have to deal with lots of prejudices and fallacies. The key is to target the right people first, people that belong to the critical thinking group I mentioned and that command some respect from the rest of the community. That is were the trouble starts. Critical people are in many cases outcasts within their communities, although others may respect their courage. Those having authority may think critical, but they also realize that expressing unpopular opinion can be dangerous as well. And this is why the hawkish eyes of the Holocaust lobby are on academics and their views. If one steps out of line, a more critical look at him may be taken. Suddenly people find faults and bias in his works. Things may get difficult and with an education in the humanities jobs are mostly limited to that kind of positions in academic or civil society institutions. And they tend to be very critical when it comes to choose their staff with political correctness being an important criteria.

I must add that one of my first encounters with revisionism was a video that I watched while on High School. My little brother even wanted to "tell my dad about it" and he usually did shut up about naugthy things . So the whole thing (featuring Robert Faurrison about the Crematoria in Auschwitz Birkenau) had its effect, even while it was hopelessly amateurish. That shows random distribution of a Video/DVD can have its effects in the long run, since per coincidence it will reach the right people. It is also good to stir controversy. In toto the Holocaustians are busy losing ground piece by piece. Their behaviour and arguments get ridiculous by the day. And lets face it the policies ("be tolerant") that were based on their dogma are also busy backfiring. So I expect the fall of the big lie not too soon.

[diaz52]

In toto the Holocaustians are busy losing ground piece by piece. Their behaviour and arguments get ridiculous by the day. And lets face it the policies ("be tolerant") that were based on their dogma are also busy backfiring. So I expect the fall of the big lie not too soon.

I think this is a good point, Hektor. The whole "tolerance" thing that the Hoaxers push is betraying a double standard when they also want to imprison people who simply speak their minds about the Holohoax. However, it appears to me that many westerners have become acustomed to double standards with regard to Israel and the Jews. Orwell named this "double-think." We have Holocaust museums all over the place, but the millions murdered by the communists aren't even acknowledged. Israel can shoot million dollar missiles into crowded arab marketplaces and are covered by the "They have a right to defend themselves" argument, but when other nations or the Palestinians fight back they are "terrorists." The Jews denounce racism yet have no problem with brazenly dominating our entertainment industries. Lets face it you can't say a lot of things openly when it comes to the Jews which are nontheless true. There has come to be a double standard with regard to other races as well; any American whos been thru high school knows about the "Black Student Union" while of course there is no "White Student Union," and there is a NAACP while of course no NAAWP, etc. But with Israel and the Jews most whites have come to understand that there is a standard for them, and a standard for everyone else. So although I think you're right that this whole "we must be tolerant of those with which we disagree" thing is back-firing intellectually, I don't know that it will make that much of a difference to the average person, sadly. They're used to there being a double standard when it comes to Israel and the Jews.

[Hektor]

In toto the Holocaustians are busy losing ground piece by piece. Their behaviour and arguments get ridiculous by the day. And lets face it the policies ("be tolerant") that were based on their dogma are also busy backfiring. So I expect the fall of the big lie not too soon.

I think this is a good point, Hektor. The whole "tolerance" thing that the Hoaxers push is betraying a double standard when they also want to imprison people who simply speak their minds about the Holohoax. However, it appears to me that many westerners have become acustomed to double standards with regard to Israel and the Jews. ...and there is a NAACP while of course no NAAWP, etc. ...

There allegedly is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_A ... ite_People

As for the "tolerance teaching" of Holocaustians. It seems that the agenda is to neutralize any resistance to takeover of institutions (and subsequent seizure of social and economical power) by minorities. The Holocaust ("Auschwitz") justifies almost everything that would not be justifyable with normal arguments. The "minority" issues aside this would include mass-immigration from the third world, persecuting pro-White dissidents, eroding Western values, support for Israel and much more.

[BradleySmith]

I agree that "media" is the way to go. So far as the structure issue goes, if you don't have a knack for it, it is very important indeed to take care of that issue first. Don't worry about any filmic materials. Put together a team of two, three or four guys who have the time and the background to work out a "structure" that can make sense. At that point you might have to decide what "part" of the story you want to deal with. The H story is immense. To do the whole enchilada could, maybe would, take a lifetime.

So: we need guys who are interested in media, who have the time to work, a little money, but maybe most of all someone who can either lead a team on such a huge project, or understand how to choose one other guy who can lead a team.

Or: choose to do something rather less grandiose for starters: maybe a filmic "preface," or "introduction. And let the structure develop. But this is a huge project. It has never been done. No one has ever tried to do it. I think you need to organize a team where you can work out the sturctural issues before you get into it. Boring, but maybe professional.

[diaz52]

Here's an idea which is something I've been batting around in my head: the Holohoaxers are always using emotion and fiction in the form of books, plays or movies to promote their Holohoax myth. And revisionists usually counter intellectually with facts, essays, books and online content. One idea I've had is to write a work of fiction that deals with a respected scholar stumbling upon revisionists' work and finding himself questioning the Holohoax more and more. Indeed he eventually becomes a disbeliever in this most sacred of holy cows. And finally he begins to speak his mind openly, at first to his friends and family, but eventually word gets out, with all the ramifications that will inevitably bring. I think a tale, which includes the real arguments which disprove the myth, and which shows a man or woman grappling with this knowledge, can be quite a tale. And this story would show the struggle between keeping quiet and staying in the good graces of polite company, or speaking ones mind; that struggle can make for a decent conflict, and make for a good story, IMHO. Further, a work of fiction which shows the abuse, and "buckets of slime" as Irving puts it, which are dumped on the protagonist by the society at large once he speaks his mind, can all add up to quite a gripping story, and one that includes plenty of action, as the thought police come calling with sinister intent... Certainly the journey from comfortable believer happy in his/her bliss to one who disbelieves the Hoax, can be a very difficult journey to the truth, and can be an element which is ripe with possibilities, should one have the skill to realize it in a work of fiction. Certainly a work such as this will be met by the public at large with a lot of negativity, but so were a lot of famous books in the past which presented unpopular opinions.... Just a thought, any who are gifted writers are free to run with it, best of luck! I personally think revisionists need to start using every available means of getting the word out.

[_Mads_]

MJB,

There are a lot of good suggestions in this thread; I can only add my own opinion.

I think you should focus on people, events, drama, and not (solely) on refuting the "holocaust" factually (which more or less is what diaz52 says, too).

Secondly, maybe it would be a good idea to give an account of all the different stories that "holocaust" witnesses have told. The viewer can then draw the conclusion that they are liars himself, simply based on the apparent fact that they contradict each other.

If you want to spend a year on the project, you should in my opinion aim for making a film about the entire "holocaust", not just about a couple of issues. It´s difficult to boil everything down to one or two hours (or whatever, maybe half an hour), but it certainly is possible, and it will in the end make a much greater impression on the viewer.

Good luck!

[Hektor]

I agree that "media" is the way to go. So far as the structure issue goes, if you don't have a knack for it, it is very important indeed to take care of that issue first. Don't worry about any filmic materials. Put together a team of two, three or four guys who have the time and the background to work out a "structure" that can make sense. At that point you might have to decide what "part" of the story you want to deal with. The H story is immense. To do the whole enchilada could, maybe would, take a lifetime.

Before taking on the media one would also need to develop and exercise the skills requiring dealing with the media. "How to write a successful letter to the editor", should be on the agenda.

So: we need guys who are interested in media, who have the time to work, a little money, but maybe most of all someone who can either lead a team on such a huge project, or understand how to choose one other guy who can lead a team.

Skills and interest.

Or: choose to do something rather less grandiose for starters: maybe a filmic "preface," or "introduction. And let the structure develop. But this is a huge project. It has never been done. No one has ever tried to do it. I think you need to organize a team where you can work out the sturctural issues before you get into it. Boring, but maybe professional.

Possibly one should engage first with already existing structures and organizations. Get the issue of lies about the Holocaust into their agenda. Perhaps starting with gross distortions concerning the issue or focussing on rather ignored contradictory facts (Pool, hospital, camp-money, postcards etc.). One big barrier could be the "Holocaust-fatigue". Many people are actually sick hearing about the subject again and again.
That an amateur can do quite a good Video can be seen from this:
http://onethirdoftheholocaust.com/

[_Mads_]

Of course, I understand the challenge that I have set myself and it will be difficult. I don't expect to complete it for a year or more. I'll post bits here as I am making them in a few months and you lot can tell me if you think I'm up to it or not.

You seem to have good common sense, and since you have also taken film making classes for two years, I believe you could produce a quality film much more rapidly. Three, four or five months, maximum. Maybe even faster. Don´t let yourself be intimidated or your resolve to make a difference here and now be hampered by anything, "you can do it", as they say.

[Hektor]

...
They do not trust the Internet. They do not read about the Nazi trials. They have seen the movie “Judgment at Nuremberg” and “Swindler's List” and that is good enough for them. That's all they they think have to know. They know little and suspect nothing. Right, for example, now they are supporting the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and are completely unaware of what Canada did to Haiti a couple of years ago, but they are totally convinced that they are the good guys.
...

Debunking the movies would be a nice project I guess. At least Judgment at Nuremberg is available on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-BqHX8PDkM

[Landulf]

You can also go to the mall with a videocamera and a good mic. Ask people about the holocaust and tell them to explain where they got their knowledge about the holocaust? After you got your answers in the correct political manner you can end that interview subject with some questions connected to revisionism. Maybe they tell you to FO, but in that case you have the first material with this person. If you are lucky they may comment on revisionism to? Always go for good sound and nice microphones. You can save shitty footage with great sound but you can't save shitty sound and good footage.

[Landulf]

As I make movies myself anybody that want tips on a nice setup to start with, just let me know. There are really good alternatives today that produces great quality for little money. And there is tons of tutorial videos on youtube that teaches how to make a good interview, lighting, sound etc… This is one rig I have and that goes for about 3000 dollar today, but you can get a similar rig for half that money. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUtoPRrkqFs

[Hektor]

You can also go to the mall with a videocamera and a good mic. Ask people about the holocaust and tell them to explain where they got their knowledge about the holocaust? After you got your answers in the correct political manner you can end that interview subject with some questions connected to revisionism. Maybe they tell you to FO, but in that case you have the first material with this person. If you are lucky they may comment on revisionism to? Always go for good sound and nice microphones. You can save shitty footage with great sound but you can't save shitty sound and good footage.

That sounds like a great idea. My camera is substandard for something like that, but I plan getting a better one.
A maker should consider any legislation or repercussions against Revisionism.

But I can see how a dialogue could run.
1. Can I talk to you for a minute
I.: Yes/No
2. Do you know what the Holocaust is or means?
3. How did you find out about it?
4. Do you think you are informed correctly about it?
5. Do you know there are people questioning the historical validity of it ?


Etc. Branching from the initial narrative is possible. Especially considering that you can get all kinds of responses; negative and positive ones.