Thank you for the heads-up. It's a surprisingly short thread for such a big hoax - perhaps I can help remedy that some timefbenario wrote:I would suggest that kneejerk Holocaust defenders have trouble with the reality of fake terror events. You should review our thread on the HoloHoax.reichstag fireman wrote:Lawson reminds me of David Irving. Irving also has great difficulty coping with the reality of fake terror events.
David Irving is a skilled author but, unfortunately, he writes mostly garbage. Lawson seems very similar, but without any skills
Back in 2002, Irving was privately asked whether he drew an obvious parallel between the staged burning of the Reichstag building in 1933 and the contrived incidents of 9/11/2001. Irving was asked to explain why he wrote so confidently that the NAZI High Command had no involvement in, nor forewarning of the Reichstag Fire.
In his reply, Irving repeated his lame explanation that Hitler had documented in his diary his own shock at the events of that night. And therefore, according to Irving, Hitler's (very pointed) act of officially recording his horror entirely vindicated him of involvement. Hmm...
Yet all the evidence is to the contrary. Hitler and Goebbels, together with Sefton Delmer, the Berlin correspondent from the Beaverbrook camp were soon at the scene of the blaze. All a bit too soon, and all certainly well prepared for it. The front pages of rags across the globe were filled with Hitler's long speech, and his final pronouncement that "This..is A New Beginning!" (hint! hint!). The NAZIs had got their catastrophic and catalysing event.. Accompanying Delmer's copy were symbolic photos of Hitler, Goebbels et. al, standing strong against the dramatic backdrop of the blaze.
But Irving still wouldn't budge. "Hitler knew nuffink", claimed Irving. Never mind. Irving does at least write a good novel, even if he imagines it as fact.
The Cole video on Auschwitz is one of the better HoloHoax documentaries, which is a depressing indictment on the rest of them. And Cole was forced to recant, iirc.
There is so much crap in this field of research. Fairly obvious low-grade fake "anti-semitic" attacks - Swastikas daubed in Jewish cemeteries and on Jewish buildings, are rarely challenged for what they are, by the likes of Irving, Lawson and Co.
The recent fake terror attack on a Jewish school in Toulouse bore all the hallmarks of being a victimless staged event, with (thankfully) vicsims only. Yet none of the professional Jew-haters like Lawson flagged it up as that. Odd that they wouldn't challenge the propaganda itself. Since that is the most effective way of snuffing out the whole operation, and extinguishing the undeserved outpouring of sympathy. Instead, the Jew-haters wilfully fuelled the propaganda by pushing racist justifications for the (fake) attack.