Spartacus Paraclete wrote:
Spartacus Paraclete wrote:
It's alright to believe fantasies and shape the future, but do you really need to invent a past?
What evidence do you have that Jesus ever existed?
Spartacus Paraclete wrote:
Roscoe, as usual, you are extremely confused. Your tendency to only scan posts that do not confirm or support your delusion means you are needlessly yapping madly in the background. I am not a Christian, something that I have made clear here numerous times. Therefore the historicity, or lack of historicity, of Jesus is of no real relevance to me, although I do, of course, have an opinion on the question. However, I am almost certain that the ins and outs of the argument would be completely lost on you. Your delusion already provides you with every answer you need, doesn't it?
What evidence do you have that Socrates ever existed?
E pluribus unum...
Then why are you demanding proof from me like some kind of idiot?
Well, Roscoe, this is a public forum that acts as an online discussion site. People post stuff and other people get to discuss it! In your case, you keep posting stuff you have read elsewhere on the Internet. You post it in way that makes it seem that you are desperately trying to make people listen to you. Unfortunately, you are a piss-poor researcher and most of what you post fails to stand-up to scrutiny. Considering that your posts have an on-going agenda (Holocaust Denial/anti-Jewishness disguised as anti-Zionism) I feel a particular urge to highlight your extreme short-comings as a researcher, and your deluded state of mind. I do this in case some random reader ever begins to take your continued nonsense seriously. There is way too much hate out there already. It shouldn't be ok to add to it. The bottom-line is that Holocaust Denial is an extremely dangerous cultural drift, that can and does lead credulous people toward hate-politics. As such, you Roscoe, are a hate-peddler, and your extreme short-comings as a researcher should be highlighted whenever possible IMHO.
Unfortunately it is a public forum and all of this verbal diarrhea of yours has absolutely sod all to do with Henry Lincoln's latest blog. You are a hate peddler, you hate Henry Lincoln and are hell bent in destroying any discussion on what he says.
How do you do this? You make everything up and peddle that.
For example me Holocaust denier. Nope!
I posted this
on my website several years ago. However it has big words in it so I wouldn't expect the likes of you to make it to end of the text. But I'll repost it here for the benefit of others.
What does Holocaust Revisionism claim?
First of all, because of false representations by the media, it is necessary that we first clarify what Holocaust Revisionism does not maintain:
* it does not deny that Jews were persecuted under the Third Reich;
* it does not deny that Jews were deprived of civil rights;
* it does not deny that Jews were deported;
* it does not deny the existence of Jewish ghettos;
* it does not deny the existence of concentration camps;
* it does not deny the existence of crematoriums in concentration camps;
* it does not deny that Jews died for a great number of reasons;
* it does not deny that other minorities were also persecuted such as gypsies, Jehovah's Witnesses, homosexuals, and political dissenters;
* and finally, it does not deny that all the above mentioned things were unjust.
None of these crimes of the National Socialist regime are doubted by Holocaust revisionists. In the view of the Revisionists, however, all these injustices have nothing to do with the Holocaust, which is defined as planned and organized mass murder, carried out specifically in homicidal gas chambers.
Holocaust revisionists believes the following to be correct:
1. There was no National Socialist order for the physical extermination of Jews (cf. R. Widmann);
2. Likewise, there was no National-Socialist plan for physical extermination of Jews;
3. There was no German organization and no budget for carrying out the alleged extermination plan. Consider the statement by the world-renowned Holocaust researcher R. Hilberg:
»But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures [of the Juden]. They [the measures]were taken step by step. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus mind-reading by a far-flung [German] bureaucracy.«);
4. In detailed investigations of former German concentration camps, expert researchers have established: The internment camps had no homicidal gas chambers or sophisticated methods for mass murder (see G. Rudolf, J. Graf (summarized in English by Mattogno, C. Mattogno, F. Berg). Furthermore, the reports of mass shootings were greatly exaggerated and taken out of context (see H. Tiedemann und G. Rudolf/S. Schröder);
5. There were neither adequate industrial facilities nor sufficient fuel to cremate such a huge number of corpses. In fact, the capacity of the crematories was barely sufficient to cremate the bodies of those who died from starvation and epidemics (see the investigations by C. Mattogno and A. Neumaier).
There is no documentation for the existence of homicidal gas chambers (see G. Rudolf and W. Rademacher), and no material traces of alleged mass murders (see sources given under nos. 4 & 5, R. Krege as well as J.C. Ball (also here)). All the "proofs" rely on eyewitness accounts only, whose unreliability is widely acknowledged (see F. Faurisson, M. Köhler and J. Graf).
7. Despite massive observation by spies and resistance groups in areas in the near vicinity of the German concentration camps, all of Germany's wartime enemies conducted themselves as if no exterminations of Jews were taking place. The charges of genocide were not raised until after Germany's defeat, when there was no German government to dispute them (see A. Butz).
8. Statistical investigations of living Jews worldwide show clearly that the losses of this ethnic group during the Second World War were nowhere near six million. The exact number is probably well under half a million (see the researche by W.N. Sanning and G. Rudolf)
If you want to read a brief summary of revisionist viewpoints, we recommend our leaflet which you can download, print, copy, and distribute as you like. Furthermore, our Revisionist Archive offers a broad variety of introductory articles available on this website and elsewhere
Yes you see folks this prat's technique is purely strawman argument. He makes things up and argues against that.
When asked to substantiate his claims he runs away.
I would normally start my Internet Shill identification procedure on him but unless they are running out of intelligent recruits he doesn't match up to the standard and is probably no more than a simple prat.