HOLOCAUST........ Fact or Fiction?

If the Holocaust was a hoax that would mean the Jews are immensely powerful, able to dictate world government, and write their own History. They would put the Illuminati in the shade as no serious credible historian has ever denied the Holocaust, only those on the fringes of academia.

Only idiots like you are insecure with the truth, you hate a lot of people don't you? Christians, Jews, people who don't want their children to be killed by a lunatic with automatic weapons, the list goes on and on.

Maybe instead of telling people what to think, and looking around for someone else to blame for all that's gone wrong in your life, you should take a long hard look at yourself.

The evidence for the Holocaust is overwhelming.

Gun control, the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, was introduced to Germany in 1928 under the Weimar regime (there was no Right to Arms in the Constitution of 1919) in large part to disarm the nascent private armies, e.g. the Nazi SA (aka "the brownshirts"). The Weimar government was attempting to bring some stability to German society and politics (a classic "law and order" position). Violent extremist movements (of both the Left and Right) were actively attacking the young, and very fragile, democratic state. A government that cannot maintain some degree of public order cannot sustain its legitimacy. Nor was the German citizenry well grounded in Constitutional, republican government (as was evidenced in their choices at the ballot box). Gun control was not initiated at the behest or on behalf of the Nazis - it was in fact designed to keep them, or others of the same ilk, from executing a revolution against the lawful government. In the strictest sense, the law succeeded - the Nazis did not stage an armed coup.

The 1928 law was subsequently extended in 1938 under the Third Reich (this action being the principal point in support of the contention that the Nazis were advocates of gun control). However, the Nazis were firmly in control of Germany at the time the Weapons Law of 1938 was created. Further, this law was not passed by a legislative body, but was promulgated under the dictatorial power granted Hitler in 1933. Obviously, the Nazis did not need gun control to attain power as they already (in 1938) possessed supreme and unlimited power in Germany. The only feasible argument that gun control favored the Nazis would be that the 1928 law deprived private armies of a means to defeat them. The basic flaw with this argument is that the Nazis did not seize power by force of arms, but through their success at the ballot box (and the political cunning of Hitler himself). Secondary considerations that arise are that gun ownership was not that widespread to begin with, and, even imagining such ubiquity the German people, Jews in particular, were not predisposed to violent resistance to their government.

The Third Reich did not need gun control (in 1938 or at any time thereafter) to maintain their power. The success of Nazi programs (restoring the economy, dispelling socio-political chaos) and the misappropriation of justice by the apparatus of terror (the Gestapo) assured the compliance of the German people. Arguing otherwise assumes a resistance to Nazi rule that did not exist. Further, supposing the existance of an armed resistance also requires the acceptance that the German people would have rallied to the rebellion. This argument requires a total suspension of disbelief given everything we know about 1930s Germany. Why then did the Nazis introduce this program? As with most of their actions (including the formation of the Third Reich itself), they desired to effect a facade of legalism around the exercise of naked power. It is unreasonable to treat this as a normal part of lawful governance, as the rule of law had been entirely demolished in the Third Reich. Any direct quotations, of which there are several, that pronounce some beneficence to the Weapons Law should be considered in the same manner as all other Nazi pronouncements - absolute lies.

I'm not trying to impose anything on anyone, some things are facts, the evidence is overwhelming, and your pathetic attempts to disprove something that is accepted by all serious academics shows you're delusional.

The one fact you need to examine, is that you're quite stupid. I know it's hard to come to terms with, and you think you're quite smart, but you're not. You're very very stupid.

As for gun control in Germany, try looking at the facts for once. You want guns because you're a sad inadequate who has nothing better to do than stay up all night arguing with people on the internet.

You want guns because you're a sad inadequate who has nothing better to do than stay up all night arguing with people on the internet.

Not at all, I can tell the difference between **** and shinola that's all, and you've spouted nothing but **** since you started posting.

And not very good **** at that. At least Gunga gives us the odd chuckle with his crackpot theories. You can't even do that.

They will take one source as an authority on the subject and not consider checking other sources.

Just silly when a discussion comes down to selective bias and circumstantial evidence.

The problem is you accept secondary sources while ignoring primary ones like this report from Himmler that cites over 350,000 Jews executed in a 4 month period.

The funny thing about comparing these two things is that had germany not banned owning private firearms it would have been much harder for the germans to round up the jews. But since they banned firearms there was nothing they could use to defend themselves from this oppression and injustice. This same sort of thing could happen where ever firearms are banned.

Sure 350k could have been killed in 4 months but why should you then all of a sudden say, well yeah 6 million was the final result. It is a leap of data to make such a statement.
.

I am skeptical of the 350k in the 4 months.

I find it funny that you use guard statements as reliable evidence when there are other guards who claim just the opposite. Not only that but there are jews who were encamped who said they never saw or heard of anyone gassed to death. Why would they lie?

This is where it starts to get interesting. You are starting to contradict yourself and can't see it. If the holocaust never occurred then why would Jews have needed to defend themselves? Certainly all the Jews just returned to their homes after the war since they were not killed. Or are you now arguing that many of them were killed as a result of their not being able to defend themselves.

We ill ignore for present the idiocy that forgets that the majority of the Jews killed were never subject to German firearm laws so your argument does nothing to defend the Poles or Russians that died.

See once again I can not praise your reading comprehension skills at all. I never said there was no holocaust.

Another example dealing with firearms is Switzerland.