I am leaning toward it simply being word-play. What those pushing the holocaust narrative think "holocaust denier" means and what it actually means are not the same. I think stonetoss may be using its actual meaning, not their delusional definition. As an example, I am also not a holocaust denier. I am fairly certain that many on poal are also not holocaust deniers. The term "holocaust denier" requires that the holocaust did, in fact, occur, and the person who is 'in denial' simply cannot accept the factual reality that it did occur. However, one cannot be in denial of an event occurring if there is not only no evidence to support it as having occurred, but all evidence is to the contrary and instead supports that it did **not** occur. I suppose it depends on who is reading his remark. If one believes the holocaust happened, to them Stonetoss is stating that he agrees it did happen. To someone else who knows that it did not based on the evidence, Stonetoss is simply saying that he cannot be in denial of something happening if that something never happened in the first place.