The CONDOM "Revisionist" Forum
Don't read this if disgusting analogies or offensive language bothers you.
Why should the codoh "revisionist'' forum change it's name to 'condom'?
Easy question.
1) The name CODOH is misleading, as it stands for 'comitte for open debate on the Holocasust'. Aswe have already seen, the CODOH forum isn't for open debate. Opponents are routinely censored there. In fact, things are so tight there that Private Messages are not even allowed! How fucked up is that?
2)The forum is really very filthy and dirty, like a used condom. "Revisionist" filth is paraded around there. And worst of all, anyone who debunks it is censored.
But wait a second. Is my saying that the stuff in codoh is filth justified? Yes it is. Once when I went there, the "revisionists" there were trying the disprove the infamous photo of cremations in Birkenau.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=1103
How did they do this? Hargis (one of the moderators there) zoomed up on the alleged photo which showed spaghetti-like corpses.
After a few seconds of looking at the photo with the spaghetti corpses, I immediately realized that the spaghetti corpses where faked. Try zooming up on the photo. I don't see anything strange when doing so. This is what I get whan I zoom up on the corpses:
it quickly becomes obvious that there are in reality no spaghetti-like corpses; this was just done by a fucked up "revisionist', apparently Udo Walendy, for his own ideological reason.
Thus once more proof that denial is based on pure faith.
So we see that, like a dirty and used condom, the CODOH ''revisionist'' forum is filthy and doesn't allow free speech. In reality, the majority of the ''revisionists'' at CODOH are morons and have no idea what free speech is.
From hereafter the author will refer to the CODOH ''revisionist'' forum as CONDOM, the truly appropiate name.
Why should the codoh "revisionist'' forum change it's name to 'condom'?
Easy question.
1) The name CODOH is misleading, as it stands for 'comitte for open debate on the Holocasust'. Aswe have already seen, the CODOH forum isn't for open debate. Opponents are routinely censored there. In fact, things are so tight there that Private Messages are not even allowed! How fucked up is that?
2)The forum is really very filthy and dirty, like a used condom. "Revisionist" filth is paraded around there. And worst of all, anyone who debunks it is censored.
But wait a second. Is my saying that the stuff in codoh is filth justified? Yes it is. Once when I went there, the "revisionists" there were trying the disprove the infamous photo of cremations in Birkenau.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=1103
How did they do this? Hargis (one of the moderators there) zoomed up on the alleged photo which showed spaghetti-like corpses.
After a few seconds of looking at the photo with the spaghetti corpses, I immediately realized that the spaghetti corpses where faked. Try zooming up on the photo. I don't see anything strange when doing so. This is what I get whan I zoom up on the corpses:
it quickly becomes obvious that there are in reality no spaghetti-like corpses; this was just done by a fucked up "revisionist', apparently Udo Walendy, for his own ideological reason.
Thus once more proof that denial is based on pure faith.
So we see that, like a dirty and used condom, the CODOH ''revisionist'' forum is filthy and doesn't allow free speech. In reality, the majority of the ''revisionists'' at CODOH are morons and have no idea what free speech is.
From hereafter the author will refer to the CODOH ''revisionist'' forum as CONDOM, the truly appropiate name.
posted by 104839sobe104839 at 11:36 PM
5 Comments:
Your commentery would carry more weight if you had zoomed in on the same area of the photo that Udo had.
I am not sure that zooming on a different area of the photo really can disprove Udo's claims.
If you search axishistory forum you will find someone has already zoomed up on that portion to compare. The claim is that Udo was not using the original and best version of the photo and that the print he was using had lost definition in the copying process hence the appearance of "spaghetti bodies".
Actually its quite easy to prove these series of photos are fakes, unfortunately there is not enough room in the margin here to do so.
Codoh ah hahahahahahaha!
They are such a bunch of backslappers, they don't debate over there, the graphic of two people sitting across each other on a table is laughable. Really they should carry a graphic of them all sitting on each others' laps. That would be more accurate.
They play follow my leader Fuhrer Hannover.
I hold them in the highest of contempt.
You need to prove that these pictures are fake rcww. Or is it just the fact that this is one more piece of evidence you'd rather did not exist?
Over 2 u
Nexgen
"Your commentery would carry more weight if you had zoomed in on the same area of the photo that Udo had."
well, you can still see part of the same part of the photo were walendy zoomed in.
"If you search axishistory forum you will find someone has already zoomed up on that portion to compare. The claim is that Udo was not using the original and best version of the photo and that the print he was using had lost definition in the copying process hence the appearance of "spaghetti bodies."
I find it hard to believe that the spaghetti-like corpses were simply a mistake on Walendy's part. Even if you look at all the versions of the photo, not one of them seems to have something even resembling spaghetti-like corpses. So Walendy's seriously expecting us to believe that something like those spaghetti-like corpses were simply made by bad print? i call bullshit.
"Actually its quite easy to prove these series of photos are fakes, unfortunately there is not enough room in the margin here to do so."
That's so cute: "Oh trust me, the photos are fake, I just can't prove it here."
"well, you can still see part of the same part of the photo were walendy zoomed in."
Exactly, which makes me wonder why you did not try to exactly replicate Udo's work?
My assumption is that when you did so the bodies looked rather spaghetti like - so you moved the field to the right.
Regarding definitively proving the photo a fake, if you look at the Dec 1944 aerial photo you will see that in the area where the background of the Sonderkommando photo is showing a row of trees, on the aerial photo is shows a clear view of fields.
Of course, for the Museum, that constructed the photo, the fact that area of the camp adjoined open fields with clear views directly contradicted with their story how the Germans hided everything behind giant fences.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Post a Comment
<< Home