I've never heard anyone claim two buildings didn't get destroyed killing thousands of people. The doubt is in what caused them to get destroyed, and who the masterminds/orchestrators behind the incident really were. I've never heard anyone outright deny something happened on 9/11/2001.
And I think it's similar with the Holocaust.
Imagine something so true and so convincing that denying it is a punishable, jailable offence in some countries. That definitely isn't suspicious....
I've heard it several times in the 9/11 Conspiracy circles. Also that the planes never hit the buildings and safely landed. Also that they were hit by laser beams. Also that the planes that hit were actually remote-controlled and empty. Also, that the NYPD and NYFD directly installed laterally tens of thousands of pounds of thermite in both buildings smuggled in under the cover of construction.
You may have not operated in the same circles that I have been in, and as such you didn't see the wildly stupid shit.
And I'm sorry, the Holocaust Deniers are worse because there are plenty that I've met here that will tell me that it didn't happen at all. One literally asked me why there were no mass graves.
no mass graves
in WW2
Imagine something so true and so convincing that denying it is a punishable, jailable offence in some countries. That definitely isn't suspicious....
That's easy. They want to criminalize revisionist history by people who supported the regime that conducted it. That is always the case in many genocides. The Turks will deny the Armenian genocide. The Communists deny the Holodomor. The Hattian Black government denies they commited a White Genocide. Native Americans tend to deny when they commited genocides (or ethnic cleansings) against European settlers. So on and so forth.
Mass killings aren't palatable to most societies, so when the advocates of the killings get caught they tend to deny it.
This is especially important for National Socialists, because the only thing the Internationalist Socialists and Democratic Socialists can argue against the National Socialists is the killings. Each of them would have killed other groups in their place, but the other Socialists didn't get the chance to. And most importantly, they can't argue that the NSDAP were the bad guys on policy. They would have had identical policies.
So, the NatSocs are basically trolling the other Socs. Every Socialist knows the NatSocs did it for the Soc part, not the Nat part; and they all have to pretend they wouldn't have done the same. While the Nazis stand there and say, "Fine. If you wouldn't have done it, then I wouldn't have done iteither."
I appreciate your response. I'm still not sold though. The censorship thing still gets me. Here in the US tech platforms censored ile crazy anything anti narrative regarding COVID or the election. To the nth degree. So I'm inclined to think that if something isn't allowed to be said it's because it's true. Otherwise just let me run their mouth and look a fool.
It's stupid to deny the holocaust based on clout chasers. There are 9/11 clout chasers too, that doesn't mean 9/11 didn't happen.
I've never heard anyone claim two buildings didn't get destroyed killing thousands of people. The doubt is in what caused them to get destroyed, and who the masterminds/orchestrators behind the incident really were. I've never heard anyone outright deny something happened on 9/11/2001.
And I think it's similar with the Holocaust.
Imagine something so true and so convincing that denying it is a punishable, jailable offence in some countries. That definitely isn't suspicious....
I've heard it several times in the 9/11 Conspiracy circles. Also that the planes never hit the buildings and safely landed. Also that they were hit by laser beams. Also that the planes that hit were actually remote-controlled and empty. Also, that the NYPD and NYFD directly installed laterally tens of thousands of pounds of thermite in both buildings smuggled in under the cover of construction.
You may have not operated in the same circles that I have been in, and as such you didn't see the wildly stupid shit.
And I'm sorry, the Holocaust Deniers are worse because there are plenty that I've met here that will tell me that it didn't happen at all. One literally asked me why there were no mass graves.
no mass graves
in WW2
That's easy. They want to criminalize revisionist history by people who supported the regime that conducted it. That is always the case in many genocides. The Turks will deny the Armenian genocide. The Communists deny the Holodomor. The Hattian Black government denies they commited a White Genocide. Native Americans tend to deny when they commited genocides (or ethnic cleansings) against European settlers. So on and so forth.
Mass killings aren't palatable to most societies, so when the advocates of the killings get caught they tend to deny it.
This is especially important for National Socialists, because the only thing the Internationalist Socialists and Democratic Socialists can argue against the National Socialists is the killings. Each of them would have killed other groups in their place, but the other Socialists didn't get the chance to. And most importantly, they can't argue that the NSDAP were the bad guys on policy. They would have had identical policies.
So, the NatSocs are basically trolling the other Socs. Every Socialist knows the NatSocs did it for the Soc part, not the Nat part; and they all have to pretend they wouldn't have done the same. While the Nazis stand there and say, "Fine. If you wouldn't have done it, then I wouldn't have done it either."
I appreciate your response. I'm still not sold though. The censorship thing still gets me. Here in the US tech platforms censored ile crazy anything anti narrative regarding COVID or the election. To the nth degree. So I'm inclined to think that if something isn't allowed to be said it's because it's true. Otherwise just let me run their mouth and look a fool.