Login or register


Last status update:
Date Signed Up:3/29/2010
Last Login:8/26/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#10646
Highest Content Rank:#4157
Highest Comment Rank:#416
Content Thumbs: 2399 total,  2750 ,  351
Comment Thumbs: 8941 total,  10100 ,  1159
Content Level Progress: 96% (96/100)
Level 123 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 124 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Comment Level Progress: 89% (89/100)
Level 286 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor → Level 287 Comments: More Thumbs Than A Hiroshima Survivor
Content Views:111619
Times Content Favorited:163 times
Total Comments Made:2575
FJ Points:1075
Favorite Tags: lol (8) | troll (5) | chan (3) | Four (3) | anonymous (2) | black (2) | Christianity (2) | comic (2) | forever (2) | murder (2)

latest user's comments

#393 - You're absolutely right (I get their faces mixed up sometimes). 07/08/2015 on Ignore the hype. Remember... 0
#39 - My friend, you seem fairly educated, so I think you need to lo…  [+] (4 new replies) 07/07/2015 on Schöne blaue Augen +2
#55 - tck (07/07/2015) [-]
Oh and I forgot to add more to the point of Wikipedia's claim that the Nazis avoided specific mentions of killings in records:

I read at some point that, knowing the above to be factually true, the death toll is calculated using mentions of "departed" because one of the ruses used to lure prisoners to execution was being told that they were being transferred to another camp. What I ask is this - is it unlikely that they actually were transferring them between camps, before deportation? If that were the case, it would mean that the same person could show up as a death multiple times without necessarily even dying, depending on how many times he was transferred.
#54 - tck (07/07/2015) [-]
4. I actually had the opposite experience when looking at the official record; Wikipedia claims multiple times that the Nazis were meticulous in planning a "ghost atrocity which they hoped could never be linked to them." It says they avoided any blatant or specific mentions of killings in records or speeches; that they used "ruses" to lure groups of prisoners to execution, so as to make sure if the other prisoners lived they couldn't claim they heard of the others being executed; and that they ordered all mass graves burned and "ashes of the bodies spread in such a specifically planned way as to make a body count impossible, which is why we'll never know for sure just how many innocent lives were taken." It seems so far fetched to me that I don't know why more people aren't questioning it. As far as speeches go, it said they would talk of removing Jews from the country as a milder way of saying killing all Jews, without being incriminated for it. Furthermore, it's said that camps had such things as zoos and swimming pools, and Wikipedia claims that these were made to create plausible deniability as to the purpose of the camps. I'm not saying I know for a fact what happened, but I can't wrap my head around all these things being true at the same time. It seems to me that the holocaust itself is a conspiracy theory, while doubting it is the path of least assumptions based on the evidence provided (Occam's Razor).

On a more social note, why is it that we only hear talk of the Jews who were killed, when the holocaust killed 9 million white civilians? The answer I hear to that is often, "because they were killed specifically for being Jews," but that's different from making this an event against solely Jews, which is what it's represented as. Jewish people are legitimately the richest people in the world, and they own much of the media; this isn't hidden at all, they are proud to be Jews. So we know that money buys exposure; is it the case that money now buys truth?

Anyway, I think that covers most of my observations on the whole thing.
#53 - tck (07/07/2015) [-]
1. I agree that intuition isn't a citation-worthy source. That was mostly just a glimpse into what personally sparked my interest. However, certain personalities are inherently intuitive; I believe it's possible that the reason the officers in the study seemed to have the same results as random chance, is that only a portion of them had that personality trait. As an ENTJ personality (inb4 someone says, "oh wow an ENTJ defending Hitler? How shocking." I'm aware Hitler was ENTJ as well, heard all the jokes before.) I rely on intuition//logic/experience as measures of a situation. Though the evidence is anecdotal, I've found myself correct when hearing the confessed truth more often than not (my personality dictates that if I found myself proven incorrect I would change my thought patterns until they yielded correct results consistently; experience would show my old methods incorrect). Which is to say, since everyone is good at something, and no one is good at everything, I think that it would make sense for the average to balance out to what seems like random chance if some of them have the skill and some do not. So while I wouldn't try using my intuition to prove something right or wrong, it's enough to convince me myself, at least partially.

2. When a group of people make it apparent that they're willing to lie about something that was supposed to be so horrible, I can't help but wonder how much of it is true at all. If it were as horrible as they claim, they wouldn't lie about it. It just seems that they're angry at being imprisoned, so they had an unspoken agreement to up the carnage factor in revenge. I obviously believe that people were rounded up and imprisoned; however it seems to me that it was for the purpose of deportation and extradition. The spearhead evidence for the holocaust comes from the pictures taken of the prisons that were raided which show prisoners in terrible shape; but at that point in the war the supply lines had been bombed to hell months prior and everyone in all of Germany was starving, even the soldiers and civilians. So it makes sense that the prisoners would be too. I believe that there was a holocaust, and it killed about 200,000 people, but it was caused by starvation and disease due to the dire circumstances at the end of the war. Can you imagine what we'd be hearing about the United States if the tables were turned and the Germans and Japanese raided the internment camps containing several hundred thousand starving Japanese civilians? (Even though I highly doubt Germany would have invaded the US more than what would have been necessary to force a cease fire.)

3. I don't think it's really debated that the Soviets were cruel and hateful to the Nazis when they invaded Germany, is it? Knowing that, how could we possibly think that there would be a fair trial for them? If those who conducted the trial were willing to disclose pic related and allow it to be an official part of the record, I shudder to think what kinds of things were said/done that they didn't want on the record especially with the Soviets involved. If a Nazi did claim that they weren't mass executing, do you think it would be recorded in the trial? Or does it seem likely that the huge circle of victorious countries knew they could write whatever history they wanted, so they waited until they heard what they needed to hear, and ignored everything else (whether it was forced confession or whether the Nazi officials said something along the lines of, "we rounded up and imprisoned them in an effort to remove them from the country," which could easily be twisted into, "we rounded them up in an effort to exterminate them.")? And as well, let me ask you this: do you trust the modern US/EU governments at all? Why, then, do you trust the US and Allied European governments of 1945? Governments will always say what makes them seem the good guys, in victory. Look at the American Civil War; or even something as small as Snowden.

#49 - tck (07/07/2015) [-]
I appreciate a well-written reply that isn't emotional. I'll reply when I'm not on the way to the gym.
#59 - I think this whole notion that being high while driving is com… 07/07/2015 on alternative pay +1
#305 - What are you talking about? Jeb Bush (Republican) is …  [+] (2 new replies) 07/07/2015 on Ignore the hype. Remember... +1
User avatar
#351 - pebar (07/07/2015) [-]
lower left is Macro Rubio
User avatar
#393 - Deeticky (07/08/2015) [-]
You're absolutely right (I get their faces mixed up sometimes).
#333 - I must say, my experiences have been quite different. I am the… 07/05/2015 on Sanders vs. Clinton +1
#89 - No need to be facetious. I Googled it. I couldn't find anythin… 07/03/2015 on What an asshole 0
#117 - So yeah, I guess that professor actually exists. It's unfortun… 07/03/2015 on Politics -1
#116 - A right-wing group made that video. That's about as biased of … 07/03/2015 on Politics -1
#114 - Dude, she was referring to assault weapons in that clip, not a… 07/03/2015 on Politics +2
#113 - To be completely fair, Liberals are also trying very hard to f… 07/03/2015 on Politics +2