NationStates Jolt Archive

How similiar are the two on a scale of one to 10? 10 being identical, 1 being absolute opposites.

Now, I'm not asking how similiar 9/11 and the Holocaust are. 9/11 was a tragedy, but the Holocaust was a horror of monumental preportion.

What I am asking is how similiar the phenomenon of the two types of conspiracy theories are.

Both the Holocaust and the standard accounts of 9/11 are established facts. In both, we have physical evidence to prove what exactly occured. Yet, we have people who deny that the Holocaust happened, or modify the established history of the Holocaust, in the same fashion that people deny that 9/11 happened as the established history presents.

In many cases, people who are seemingly educated deny these facts. We have people who hold degrees in history that deny the Holocaust in the same fashion that people who hold degrees in physics deny 9/11. This does not make either form of denial history or science, as it works outside of the scope of those fields, but it does demonstrate a similiarity between the two in respect to conspiracy theories.

And on that note, why do people deny the established history of the Holocaust and 9/11? What motivates even a few seemingly intelligent people to go so far outside the scope of established fact, and to essentially ruin their professional reputations, to do such things?

The holocaust happened. Some people are denying that, and they're idiots.

9/11 happened. Nobody is denying that - they're just disagreeing on who made it happen.


Big difference.

The holocaust happened. Some people are denying that, and they're idiots.

9/11 happened. Nobody is denying that - they're just disagreeing on who made it happen.


Big difference.

There is one major thing that makes them identical, they are both idiotic

The holocaust happened. Some people are denying that, and they're idiots.

9/11 happened. Nobody is denying that - they're just disagreeing on who made it happen.


Big difference.

Holocaust denial is a term used to refer to Holocaust revisionism, as well. Its Holocaust denial to say "oh, well a Holocaust happened, but it was only 1 million Jews." In the same respect, its a fact that 9/11 was carried out by Islamic terrorists. It is 9/11 denial to pretend that the established fact didn't occur, but that some other alternate history did.

whereever there is mainstream or leadership, people will try to find alternate view of the history/present situation, or as they called it "the truth".
most of the times their alternate history is against the known facts and the logic. than they establish conspiracy theories to clear the differences between what know to happened and what they want to believ that happened.
in this area all the conspiracies are as same (including the ones mentioned). how they really as same? I don't sure but both of them mostly used by the same people for the same reasons.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories do at least have some evidence to back them up, however flaky.

Denying that the Holocuats happened, however, is to go against both reality and the huge amounts of evidence that show that the Holocaust actualy did happen.

I'm not sure the two can be compared, as many people do the 9/11 thing. However, it's usually only Neo-Nazis who try and say the Holocaust never happened.

There are also a whole gamut of thnigs which can fall under the umbrella of 'revisionism' regardnig both events. For one, a major part of holocaust revision is that Hitler had little or no knowledge of the practicalities of the holocaust. This seems rather spurious, but there is little documented evidence of Hitler personally signing death warrents, transportation manifests etc. Hence, Fucktards like David Irving have a field day with their own interpretations. Same with 9/11. It could be argued (obliquely, to be sure) that United 93 is a form of revisionism.

On a related topic, there was a documentary here on BBC2 last night about two events in the Vietnam war. One was the rioting at Madison University, and the other was the near massacre of the "Black Lions" unit of 150 men (apologies for forgetting the correct designation) by 1200 NVA. The unit got ambushed while their commanding officer was following Westmoreland's directive to 'hunt down' the VC, suffering 50% KIA and 98% Wounded. In the media back home, the event got spun by the army into part of a larger holding action, preventing the NVA from taking Saigon (this was before the Tet offensive, obviously). Point being that revisionism happens all the time in one form or another - but the methods used, the politics in doing so and the motives involved will be different each and every time.

Edit: When I think about it, Primo Levi talks about differing memories in "the drowned and the saved" (which I recommend to all) - one example is the famous orchestra that played the prisoners out to work each morning. Some remember it, some don't. From this ambiguity springs the revisionist.

One is a bit of harmless playing about by some nutcases, the other an ideological foundation for an entire movement.

While they may be similar in theory, I consider the two very different in practice.

How can anyone deny the holocaust?Thats just insaine!!
Ive been to auswitz and Ive been to ground zero,the difference is immense.
6 million jews,up to a million gypsies ascocials and homosexuals,systematically forced inot gas chambers with their hair and skin used to make rugs and lamps,that is very diiferent compared to 3000 people blown up by 2 plane crashing into 2 buildings.Im not saying 9/11 wasnt terrible-any loss of human life is terrible,but it was on a very diferent scale.
Denial of the holocaust is denial that 6 million jews were gassed, it is different with 9/11, there is no denial that it happened--just denial about who did it.

How can anyone deny the holocaust?Thats just insaine!!
Ive been to auswitz and Ive been to ground zero,the difference is immense.
6 million jews,up to a million gypsies ascocials and homosexuals,systematically forced inot gas chambers with their hair and skin used to make rugs and lamps,that is very diiferent compared to 3000 people blown up by 2 plane crashing into 2 buildings.Im not saying 9/11 wasnt terrible-any loss of human life is terrible,but it was on a very diferent scale.
Denial of the holocaust is denial that 6 million jews were gassed, it is different with 9/11, there is no denial that it happened--just denial about who did it.
Those of us who see them as similar don't try to equate the suffering and loss of life caused by the holocaust with 9/11, but rather see the similarity in that deniers reject facts and evidence in favor of a conspiracy theory that justifies their own political agenda.

How can anyone deny the holocaust?Thats just insaine!!

Lots of reasons. I believe the Holocaust happened pretty much as it was written...maybe 12 million died, maybe 8 million or 15 million...just details, but the point is that a lot of people were systematically murdered, worked to death, or...well, that about covers it...by the Nazi regime and those who supported it. The only question I would ask is how much control Hitler had over it. He probably knew a good bit about it and wouldn't have been opposed, but I doubt he was pulling the strings behind it. After all, he had a war to fight, and the dirty work of murdering dissenters, malcontents, untermenschen, and weird folks was probably best left for some of his underlings.

That said, there are a few reasons people deny the Holocaust. Some people believe it doesn't match historical records, however skewed they are. Some just don't believe anything out of the mouth of a Jew, never mind that a handful of Holocaust survivors would have cracked by now, causing a domino effect that would unravel the Holocaust story by now. Immediately after the war, though, there was a good deal of sentiment to the effect of, "We can't POSSIBLY have done this. No one can be THIS brutal." It was less about malicious denial than it was about inability to come to terms with what the Germans had done. Granted, Germany has been at the forefront of solid, peaceful democracy since then, but many still chose to run from the Holocaust rather than learn from it.

Ive been to auswitz and Ive been to ground zero,the difference is immense.
6 million jews,up to a million gypsies ascocials and homosexuals,systematically forced inot gas chambers with their hair and skin used to make rugs and lamps,that is very diiferent compared to 3000 people blown up by 2 plane crashing into 2 buildings.Im not saying 9/11 wasnt terrible-any loss of human life is terrible,but it was on a very diferent scale.
Denial of the holocaust is denial that 6 million jews were gassed, it is different with 9/11, there is no denial that it happened--just denial about who did it.

I too have been to Ground Zero, and it was more like a construction site by the time I saw it about a year and a half after 9/11. Denying 9/11 altogether is to stick one's head in the sand and cover one's ears while shouting "LALALALALALALALALALALALA" at whoever dares speak of it. Granted, it was 3,000 people killed in about two hours, as opposed to 12 million killed over the course of 6 years. The Nazis would have had difficulty pulling off a 9/11, not that they needed to; the Nazis held the power in Germany. Similarly, could you have seen al-Qaida rounding up infidels on Manhattan island and gassing them? Most of them probably would have ended up mugged and probably dead. Each side used what it had. The results were very different, considering the means and the time involved, but both are horrific examples of how destructive enemies can be toward one another, and sadly, both are examples of how cruel the still-living can be toward the survivors' victims.

How can anyone deny the holocaust?Thats just insaine!!
Ive been to auswitz and Ive been to ground zero,the difference is immense.
6 million jews,up to a million gypsies ascocials and homosexuals,systematically forced inot gas chambers with their hair and skin used to make rugs and lamps,that is very diiferent compared to 3000 people blown up by 2 plane crashing into 2 buildings.Im not saying 9/11 wasnt terrible-any loss of human life is terrible,but it was on a very diferent scale.
Denial of the holocaust is denial that 6 million jews were gassed, it is different with 9/11, there is no denial that it happened--just denial about who did it.


David Cole, a once holocaust revisionist, now recanted, made a video on his visit to Auschwitz in 1992. That might give you an idea of what their thinking is.
here (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5730629725967885378&q=David+Cole)

The main difference is 9/11 isn't quite "history." Not when it is apparently the reason for everything the government decides to do.

The volume of evidence, also, differs. There is just far too much evidence for the holocaust, that people who deny it are either willfully ignorant or paranoid to the point of inventing vast conspiracies involving pretty much everyone in the entire world.

I don't buy into 9/11 conspiracy theories, the ones that go from melting steel temperatures to GW Bush caused it using holographic planes and CIA bombs... but I don't automatically assume that the 'official version' is 100% correct either. IMO the jury is still out on 9/11 concerning certain details.

And generally, there is a character difference, that holocaust denial folks tend to be neo-nazis or anti-semites, while 9/11 conspiracists can include fairly regular people (but also the crazies, of course).

David Cole, a once holocaust revisionist, now recanted, made a video on his visit to Auschwitz in 1992. That might give you an idea of what their thinking is.
here (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5730629725967885378&q=David+Cole)

My God, his voice is ridiculous.

I too have been to Ground Zero, and it was more like a construction site by the time I saw it about a year and a half after 9/11. Denying 9/11 altogether is to stick one's head in the sand and cover one's ears while shouting "LALALALALALALALALALALALA" at whoever dares speak of it. Granted, it was 3,000 people killed in about two hours, as opposed to 12 million killed over the course of 6 years. The Nazis would have had difficulty pulling off a 9/11, not that they needed to; the Nazis held the power in Germany. Similarly, could you have seen al-Qaida rounding up infidels on Manhattan island and gassing them? Most of them probably would have ended up mugged and probably dead. Each side used what it had. The results were very different, considering the means and the time involved, but both are horrific examples of how destructive enemies can be toward one another, and sadly, both are examples of how cruel the still-living can be toward the survivors' victims.

This is gonna sound sick, but I did the math, and it works out to about 39 people per hour, 24 hours a day, for 6 years, for the holocaust. 3000 in 2 hours is a lot more than 78 in 2 hours... (not trying to start anything, just saying). However, the holocaust was on a much greater scale than 9/11. Both were horrible, but I'm just spurting some facts.

This is gonna sound sick, but I did the math, and it works out to about 39 people per hour, 24 hours a day, for 6 years, for the holocaust. 3000 in 2 hours is a lot more than 78 in 2 hours... (not trying to start anything, just saying). However, the holocaust was on a much greater scale than 9/11. Both were horrible, but I'm just spurting some facts.

That's irrelevant. Human life, no matter how much is lost, is infinitely precious. The loss of any innocent human being is a loss to the world..

This is gonna sound sick, but I did the math, and it works out to about 39 people per hour, 24 hours a day, for 6 years, for the holocaust. 3000 in 2 hours is a lot more than 78 in 2 hours... (not trying to start anything, just saying). However, the holocaust was on a much greater scale than 9/11. Both were horrible, but I'm just spurting some facts.

That was kind of my point...9/11 was far fewer people, but it was executed far more quickly. The Nazis didn't have to worry about trying to kill as many people as they could with sneak attacks; they could afford to take their time with it. If the Nazis felt the need to kill 1,500 people every hour, they probably could have done so for some time, or at least come close.

why do the israeli cheerleaders connect everything to the holocaust? the two are nothing to do with each other in their action. one was genicide one was terrorism.

people deny the holocaust happend because they are nazi filth. simple as that.

no-one deny's 9/11 happened. no-one.

what is the point of this tiresome thread?

Lots of reasons. I believe the Holocaust happened pretty much as it was written...maybe 12 million died, maybe 8 million or 15 million...just details, but the point is that a lot of people were systematically murdered, worked to death, or...well, that about covers it...by the Nazi regime and those who supported it. The only question I would ask is how much control Hitler had over it. He probably knew a good bit about it and wouldn't have been opposed, but I doubt he was pulling the strings behind it. After all, he had a war to fight, and the dirty work of murdering dissenters, malcontents, untermenschen, and weird folks was probably best left for some of his underlings.

That said, there are a few reasons people deny the Holocaust. Some people believe it doesn't match historical records, however skewed they are. Some just don't believe anything out of the mouth of a Jew, never mind that a handful of Holocaust survivors would have cracked by now, causing a domino effect that would unravel the Holocaust story by now. Immediately after the war, though, there was a good deal of sentiment to the effect of, "We can't POSSIBLY have done this. No one can be THIS brutal." It was less about malicious denial than it was about inability to come to terms with what the Germans had done. Granted, Germany has been at the forefront of solid, peaceful democracy since then, but many still chose to run from the Holocaust rather than learn from it.



I too have been to Ground Zero, and it was more like a construction site by the time I saw it about a year and a half after 9/11. Denying 9/11 altogether is to stick one's head in the sand and cover one's ears while shouting "LALALALALALALALALALALALA" at whoever dares speak of it. Granted, it was 3,000 people killed in about two hours, as opposed to 12 million killed over the course of 6 years. The Nazis would have had difficulty pulling off a 9/11, not that they needed to; the Nazis held the power in Germany. Similarly, could you have seen al-Qaida rounding up infidels on Manhattan island and gassing them? Most of them probably would have ended up mugged and probably dead. Each side used what it had. The results were very different, considering the means and the time involved, but both are horrific examples of how destructive enemies can be toward one another, and sadly, both are examples of how cruel the still-living can be toward the survivors' victims.

Are you really comparing Nazi to al-qaida

They're not that allike. People who deny the Holocost do so because they hate Jews or gays or something like that. People who deny 9/11 do so because they think that has the leading imperial power, the U.S. must have sinister motives, and theirfore everything must be there fault.

"Are you really comparing Nazi to al-qaida"

Well, the Nazis and Al Quaida do share *some* similarities. They both oppose pluralism in society. They both hate the Jews. They use some of the same intimidation tactics. I wouldn't go so far as to say they're identical- they have different goals, the nazis existed in a different historical context, etc- but I'd say they're comparable. That said, the "war on terror" sure ain't WWII.

"Are you really comparing Nazi to al-qaida"

Well, the Nazis and Al Quaida do share *some* similarities. They both oppose pluralism in society. They both hate the Jews. They use some of the same intimidation tactics. I wouldn't go so far as to say they're identical- they have different goals, the nazis existed in a different historical context, etc- but I'd say they're comparable. That said, the "war on terror" sure ain't WWII.

GODWIN!!!

maybe alquada have a problem with Israel the state, not Jews the ethnic group?

GODWIN!!!

maybe alquada have a problem with Israel the state, not Jews the ethnic group?
no. al-qaida had problem withe israel, the jews, usa,the christians the western world, the shihis (or does it the sunies?), the moderate muslims, the moderate muslims states and any othe person in the world which is not radical sunie (or shihi. don't remember what they are) muslim.

GODWIN!!!

maybe alquada have a problem with Israel the state, not Jews the ethnic group?

Al-Quieda has a problem with everybody. Even other Muslims.

Are you really comparing Nazi to al-qaida

That wasn't really the point of my post...I wasn't the one who compared the Holocaust to 9/11, nor was I trying to compare the denial of either event. There are possible similarities between the two factions...think about it.

Both advocate, and have, on some level, attained, a totalitarian society. Both have opposed many progressive measures and require a return to what is seen as the people's roots. Granted, some of the requirements may never have actually been imposed, and some ideas are brand new, but a lot of both Nazi and Islamist demands are, in a way, throwbacks.

Both Nazism and Islamism are extremely rooted in ideology that cannot be bent and frequently is not. The Nazis had many World War I veterans in Germany who did not fit the mold of the perfect Nazi. They were perfectly good Germans who may have been war heroes, but the Nazis still tossed them into camps for not being proper Nazis. Islamists, on the other hand, are so dedicated to their rules that they put Qu'ranic law even before saving lives. If I understand correctly, the Qu'ran makes exceptions to its laws for the preservation of life; for example, if yo uare starving to death in the desert and your only hope for survival is to cook and eat a wild pig, the Qu'ran says to go for it. It also would state that, if a woman is in a burning building but happens not to be wearing a veil, the rescue workers must rescue her anyway. However, the Saudis do not follow this exception, putting Wahhabism before saving lives.

Both are extremely male-dominated in nature. The Nazis had the idea of a man's "large world" outside the home, with work, war, and politics, while the women had a "small world" with children and home duty. Islamists? Simply put, women have to weir veils and often full-body covers, often have to share husbands, and frequently are not allowed outside their homes without a male escort.

Both used new methods of warfare, often invoking new technology and frequent disregard for civilian life. The Nazis are considered responsible for 12 million or so civilian deaths in what's commonly known as the Holocaust. They invented the Blitzkrieg and used extermination camps as no other had done before...sure, others had performed mass exterminations before, but not on this scale. Islamists have blown up subways, embassies, the World Trade Center, not to mentione countless busses, restaurants, etc. in Israel. Like the Nazis, regard for international law is completely out the window with al-Qaida. The Nazis followed a few rules of humanity, such as Hitler's refusal to use mustard gas in warfare and respect for Switzerland's military neutrality, while al-Qaida and other militant groups have pretty much no respect for any laws of decency. Civilian human shields, fighting from mosques, killing children...all considered in-bounds for al-Qaida.

Both espouse ideas many would consider ridiculous and most would consider supernatural. We all know about the seven wives and 70 virgins, or whatever the hell the suicide bombers are promised. We all know about Hitler's idea of a "master race." Hell, even Mussolini and Tojo got in on this, what with ideas about the Roman Empire being reborn and Shinto being declared the official state religion of Japan. It's nothing new, and it dates back further than the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.

I could go into a lot of the differences between the two as well, such as the obvious ones, but I have neither the time nor the patience.