CODOH or not CODOH?

[Hebden]

The CODOH Revisionist Forum seems to have reverted back to being the plain old Revisionist Forum.

Given CODOH's present state of hibernation (their site was last updated in November), it's probably for the best.

May we suggest rebranding this site as the Neo-Revisionist Forum?

[Moderator]

Indeed, CODOH would seem to be in a state of 'hibernation', but other Revisionist sites & Revisionists are quite active.
After further thought, we have opted for complete independence. CODOH, or any site can link to us, but that does not indicate any direct, formalized relationship.

Your proposal is interesting, please state your reasons for preferring this 'neo' prefix.

Moderator

[Hebden]

It simply seems that, as defined by Messrs. Robertson and Colleti, the term 'neo-revisionist' suits this board better than the alternative.

[A] "humanistic" objective. Avoiding the political and racial "landmines" of Revisionism....appear to have little interest politically....They don't want us to deal with unkind political, social, and ethnic implications; they just want us to join in counting holes at Krema II or scrutinizing another new set of forensic examinations of concentration camps...Neos not only reject that the propaganda of Holocaust faulty information was intentional, they go as far as stating that the purpose of Revisionism is to embrace us all, Jew and Gentile, in peaceful coexistence, symbiosis, and racial fusion....The neo-revisionists, who to their credit it must be said they are the most active campaigners against the gas chambers extermination fraud, lack a sense of final purpose, as well as a clear understanding of the larger political and social implications that accompany such sort of disclosures.

The suggestion is that those of our ilk amount to nothing more than an assorted bunch of hobbyists, pedants and harmless naifs.

As we have your attention, we would like to repeat our request for the introduction of another section on this forum where a wider range of WW2 and revisionist topics could be discussed.

[Moderator]

Hebden said:

As we have your attention, we would like to repeat our request for the introduction of another section on this forum where a wider range of WW2 and revisionist topics could be discussed.

- Doesn't 'The Third Reich Forum' offer that opportunity as long as you stay clear of the sacred 'holocaust' religion?

- What other revisionist topics are you referring to?

Thanks, Moderator

[Sailor]

[the neo-revisionists] lack a sense of final purpose, as well as a clear understanding of the larger political and social implications that accompany such sort of disclosures.

Interesting comment.

What was the “final” purpose of Leuchter’s/Rudolf’s chemical analysis of some probes taken from the walls of the alleged gas chambers in Birkenau, or of Mattogno’s study of the crematoriums in Auschwitz, or Berg’s Diesel engine research?

So now we now that the walls of the alleged gas chambers did not show sufficient traces of prussian blue to indicate the alleged use as homicidal gas chambers, that the crematoriums could not have possibly cremated all the alleged victims, or that diesel-exhaust is not really that poisonous to kill in Treblinka up to 30,000 prisoners in one day.

So what do we do with this wisdom now?

Maybe those revisionists thought, that once they came out with their discoveries the orthodox Holocaust story would change accordingly. Well, it didn’t. In fact most people never heard of Rudolf, Mattogno or Berg. But they know all about 6 million Jews gassed by the Nazis. They see it on TV all the time: “Into the cattle cars, off to Auschwitz and into the ovens.”

So, what is Mr. Hebden’s suggestion?

[Hebden]

Maybe those revisionists thought, that once they came out with their discoveries the orthodox Holocaust story would change accordingly. Well, it didn’t. In fact most people never heard of Rudolf, Mattogno or Berg. But they know all about 6 million Jews gassed by the Nazis. They see it on TV all the time: “Into the cattle cars, off to Auschwitz and into the ovens.”

So, what is Mr. Hebden’s suggestion?

A combination of realism, stoicism and fortitude.

From a recent column by Mr. Joe Sobran:

But that, in a way, was what attracted me to conservatism. It was a philosophy of reflective losers, men whose principles and memories gave them resistance to the conquering fad and its propaganda. Such men hoped for victory, naturally, but they were fighting heavy odds, fierce passions, and powerful interests. They were ready for defeat, but they weren’t going to adjust their principles in order to win. They knew that if you win power by giving up your principles, you’ve already lost.