General Holocaust denial discussion Part III

[LemmyCaution]

It is worth noting in passing some statements that go against the main thesis of the book. In particular:

How does what you cite supposedly run against the main thesis of the book? I am left perplexed.

On T4, BST states;

There is no footnote referring to a source for this, never mind a German one. For such an astronomical number of victims, you would think there would be a footnote. (Later there is a reference to de Mildt, In the Name of the People (1996) - which may have more information.)

There are a number of easily accessible secondary sources, replete with archival references, that address the "astronomical number of victims" and in fact add to it, with material on the so-called wild euthanasia. Worth a peek are

* Ulf Schmidt, Karl Brandt: The Nazi Doctor: Medicine and Power in the Third Reich (2007)
* Henry Friedlander, The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to the Final Solution (1997)
* Michael Burleigh, Death and Deliverance: 'Euthanasia' in Germany 1900–1945 (1995)
* Robert Proctor, Racial Hygiene: Medicine under the Nazis (1988)

and others which I've not read. Even Patrick Montague's book on Chelmno covers the operations of special "euthanasia" units in the Warthegau, prior to establishment of the Chelmno camp. IIRC there is a good chapter or so in Berenbaum's The Holocaust and History: The Known, the Unknown, the Disputed, and the Reexamined. These sources rely on German sources, of course.

 

[Nick Terry]

The claim of impossibility refers to rapid killing by diesel exhaust, which is the means suggested by Raul Hilberg in Destruction of the the European Jews on the basis of eye witness accounts.

Sorry, but Hilberg pointed to petrol engines at Sobibor in the 2nd edition (1985), because that was the method spelled out by SS witnesses who operated the engines.

The claim of diesel engines at Belzec and Treblinka arose because diesel engines for power generation were co-located with petrol engines in engine rooms attached to the gas chamber. The engine operators point to petrol engines being used for killing, while diesel became bandied around as a possibly ironic camp slang for the engines as a whole. Those who worked with the killing engines said petrol. Those who did not work directly with the engines reported both diesel and petrol.

Preferring sources closest to the "events", the rational conclusion is that petrol engines were used, and the diesel issue is totally freaking irrelevant.

This is something our white paper explored thoroughly in a section of Chapter 5

For gas vans the evidence is even more clear-cut; our research in the past few years has unearthed a veritable avalanche of testimonies to petrol engines and also clarified the identity of the vehicles, refuting claims that certain models were 'always' diesels.

 

[LemmyCaution]

The claim of impossibility refers to rapid killing by diesel exhaust, <snip>

Unless you deal, as Elagabalus suggests, with criticism of your claims - and this includes those in the HC White Paper, as Nick Terry has just posted, I remain utterly unconvinced.

The key kind of evidence would be human remains. The latest report on these seems to be 2013: Haimi Report 2013. However, it seems impossible to get any quantification from the statements in the report. Certainly there are human remains there. The 2014 report claimed to have found "gas chambers", but shorn of interpretation these are simply buildings.

You miss the point, perhaps intentionally: the findings from Haimi corroborate other evidence. It must also be pointed out that the project is ongoing and has yet to be fully reported, which is why I emphasized the words slowly and gradually to describe both the work and reporting about it. So far, what's been released, is corroborative of other evidence. We do not yet have a full, final report. Indeed, you link to ashort update on the project from 2013, in which we can read that the team tell us that "In the winter season, over 3,500 square meters were excavated, revealing remains of the crematoria, mass graves and remains of double fence that encircled Camp 3. Fragments of human bone and hair were uncovered in the excavation," touching on both human remains found at the site and mass graves there - rendering rather odd your earlier having asserted "There is also the absence of evidence of mass graves and human remains at Sobibor."

There seem to be no names here, but ddt has already linked to lists of names.

Well, there were a few names, but to provide names is not why I linked to the post - I meant to provide a good summary of the transports for readers who may not be familiar with them, in order to avoid gaffes like . . .

Noted. The Frank family was sent from the Netherlands via Westerbork to Auschwitz in 1944 or later and from there to Bergen Belsen.

Thank you, as you know, I knew that and alluded to that.

 

[LemmyCaution]

From Talbot about those non existent mass graves on scrapbookpages site....
Some people get it some don't like the several Skeptoids here...
They show non existent everything and think they have nailed the truth....

You are quite right, Jim – there are no mass pits or large-scale deposits of human remains at any of these sites,

Jim, please, which sites are you talking about? What other evidence is there, besides that concerning human remains, about these sites?

The post-war archaeological and forensic investigations were simply half-baked propaganda exercises done purely to paint the Germans in the worst light possible.

Which investigations are you referring to? Are you, or your correspondent, trained archaeologists? I don't know this "Talbot."

There were ongoing war crimes trials and tribunals at the time – and this was the ballast that was used to obtain the convictions.

Which trials do you refer to - and what was the role of forensic "ballast" in gaining convictions in them?

The more recent archaeological work is just as questionable, because it is all carried out by teams that either originate in Poland itself, or Israel.

Which professional standard is this that rules out archaeological work done by Israelis and Poles? Do professional and scholarly archaeological bodies agree with this judgment? How many archaeologists, using professional methodology, have been sent to prison for investigating Holocaust sites? Whatever happened to Krege and his lawn-mower - and will his report be forthcoming?

 

[Nick Terry]

It is worth noting in passing some statements that go against the main thesis of the book. In particular:

Quote:
Sobibor was encircled with a penumbra of satellite labour camps. (Kindle loc. 1465)

The main thesis of the book is that MGK are morons.

The fact of selection at Sobibor for nearby labour camps has been recognised since the 1940s. That is why in the unsourced overview on p.14 I wrote

A tiny percentage were selected after arrival for forced labour either in the three camps or, more rarely, in nearby labour camps, work which the majority did not survive.

while on pp.229-220 I noted that

In Treblinka, it suffices for Mattogno to note that there were selections at Sobibor which sent Dutch Jews to forced labour camps in the surrounding area. Blithely ignoring the fact that these selections had been discovered by the investigations of the Dutch Red Cross in 1946, and skipping over the fact that both Leon Poliakov and Gerald Reitlinger these selections just as they had noticed the selections from the Warsaw ghetto uprising transports [at Treblinka], Mattogno tries to use the account presented by Jules Schelvis, one of the 18 survivors of the selections, to discredit “official historiography”. But since all his sources are “official” by Revisionist standards and the equally “official” historians acknowledged this over sixty years ago, it is truly a puzzle to work out just what his point is. So what?

this following blasting him for erecting a strawman of 100% extermination which does not exist in the historical record (sources) or in the historiography

Instead of confronting and properly dealing with this evidence, Mattogno opts to substitute a strawman version of Nazi policy, an all-or-nothing caricature whereby either the Nazis implemented virtually instantaneous 100% extermination, or they did not do this at all. Yet this strawman is flatly contradicted by the extant paper trail, which makes it perfectly clear, as we have seen above, that the Nazis carried out their extermination policy in tandem with a policy of selecting and sparing an ever decreasing minority of Jews for use as forced labourers.(pp.181-2)

as for your query

Are there any records of admissions to these camps? Does anything confirm the arrival of Jews at these destinations?

LOL, nope, no detailed records, just the testimonies of Jewish survivors, Polish underground reports, and a few fragmentary Nazi documents. There's a June 1943 report from Globocnik specifying a labour force of 45,000 Jews in camps in the Lublin district. Since this figure includes the much better documented camps at Poniatowa, Trawniki and Budzyn, then there isn't much statistical room left over for a large number of labourers in camps in Chelm county.

The majority of camps in Chelm county were in any case liquidated in the spring of 1943, according to testimonies, leaving only Dorohucza as a major SS-run labour camp for Jews, and that was new.

At the same time, many Germans were returning to the Reich (Heimkehr), so presumably there was spare accommodation

The ethnic German population of Chelm county was never huge, so this is irrelevant.

 

[LemmyCaution]

The main thesis of the book is that MGK are morons.

Which was well demonstrated in the White Paper, along with the fact that they are not honest brokers.

As for the arguments in this thread, the notion that some small number of Jews shuffling from Sobibór to Dorohucza and other camps in the area runs against historiography of Sobibór is laughable in the light of the knowledge of this you point out and the biography of Jules Schelvis, the most prominent historian of the camp, whose surviving Sobibór involved a Dorohucza transport and is so well known. The argument here smacks of gussied-up Eric Huntism.

 

[Ivanesca]

Unless you deal, as Elagabalus suggests, with criticism of your claims - and this includes those in the HC White Paper, as Nick Terry has just posted, I remain utterly unconvinced.

The key kind of evidence would be human remains. The latest report on these seems to be 2013: Haimi Report 2013. However, it seems impossible to get any quantification from the statements in the report. Certainly there are human remains there. The 2014 report claimed to have found "gas chambers", but shorn of interpretation these are simply buildings.

You miss the point, perhaps intentionally: the findings from Haimi corroborate other evidence. It must also be pointed out that the project is ongoing and has yet to be fully reported, which is why I emphasized the words slowly and gradually to describe both the work and reporting about it. So far, what's been released, is corroborative of other evidence. We do not yet have a full, final report. Indeed, you link to ashort update on the project from 2013, in which we can read that the team tell us that "In the winter season, over 3,500 square meters were excavated, revealing remains of the crematoria, mass graves and remains of double fence that encircled Camp 3. Fragments of human bone and hair were uncovered in the excavation," touching on both human remains found at the site and mass graves there - rendering rather odd your earlier having asserted "There is also the absence of evidence of mass graves and human remains at Sobibor."


Well, there were a few names, but to provide names is not why I linked to the post - I meant to provide a good summary of the transports for readers who may not be familiar with them, in order to avoid gaffes like . . .


Thank you, as you know, I knew that and alluded to that.

If I'm not mistaken, Professor Andrzej Kola also visited the Sobibor site and indeed identified the mass graves there. It has been shown that the areas marked as mass graves are considerably greener than the surrounding areas, when checked via google satellite, no doubt precisely because of the Human remains mixed into the soil. There is also a huge mound of Ash in the middle of the place if I'm not mistaken.

The entire "Revisionist" quibbling about "Physical remains" is a classic example of the fallacy of moving goalposts. Initially, when confronted with documents proving or strongly implying mass murder, the Deniers dismiss these as forgeries and demand physical evidence. When the Physical evidence IS provided however, they insist that it is not enough or doctored and demand documents (sometimes the same documents they dismiss as forgeries). It's a complete and utter farce.

 

[Ivanesca]

That is a reasonable, but not the only way to establish the credibility of a doubt. There is also the absence of evidence of mass graves and human remains at Sobibor, the impossibility or improbability of the suggested killing methods,German laws in force prohibiting indiscriminate killings, the general prevalence of falsehood in wartime, lack of authority of sources and substantial changes over time in claimed fatalities.

The highlighted statements are ridiculous and utterly baseless assertions. One only needs to reread this and other threads and they will find examples of German Orders either explicitly ordering killings, or at the very least authorizing them. Quoted examples are the SS verdict against Max Taubner ("The accused will not be punished for the actions against the Jews as such. The Jews have to be exterminated...), the Goebbels Diary entry of May 27 1942 ("Liquidation", "not much will remain") and the Jager report and the like. Deniers insist that there are no orders or documents proving such indiscriminate killings, and yet when such documents are shown to exist, they are dismissed as forgeries. Holocaust Denial is just a baseless conspiracy theory that refuses to accept evidence that disproves its assumptions.

The second statement (Falsehood in wartime) illustrates a painful ignorance of the Allies' policies both during and after the war. The simple, blunt truth is that there is no way on this Earth that the Allies falsified the Holocaust or any of the evidence of the Holocaust, as EtienneSC insinuates. Antisemitism was rampant in the USA and Britain at the time, not to the extent of Nazi Germany, but it was still there. It's worth remembering that the US tightened its immigration quotas with regards to Jewish refugees during the war, exactly because of Antisemitism. At the same time, Britain issued a white paper in 1939 severely limiting the immigration of Jews into Mandate Palestine in order to curry favor with the Arabs, whose support they needed during the war. After the War, the USA's priority was to build a strong and stable Germany to use as a bulwark against the USSR. To this end, they loosened the requirements for Denazification and allowed even former Nazis to serve in the nascent West German government, as opposed to the Denier fantasy of them "manufacturing" evidence to "make the Germans look bad". For example, US military courts commuted the sentences of SS men accused of murdering American Soldiers at Malmedy from death and life sentences to short prison terms, as a goodwill gesture to West Germany. EtienneSC and Mondial's insinuations are not only baseless, but are completely the opposite of what actually happened. Similarly, Britain continued its policy of blocking Jewish immigration to Palestine until 1948, even to the extent of firing on ships carrying refugees. There is no way, utterly no way, the Allies would falsify the record of the Holocaust, on behalf of the Jews or otherwise. Their broader foreign policies totally and utterly rule out any such falsification.

The deniers have no business complaining about "falsehoods". The only "falsehoods" in this discussion have been from their side, and only their side.

 

[LemmyCaution]

If I'm not mistaken, Professor Andrzej Kola also visited the Sobibor site and indeed identified the mass graves there. It has been shown that the areas marked as mass graves are considerably greener than the surrounding areas, when checked via google satellite, no doubt precisely because of the Human remains mixed into the soil. There is also a huge mound of Ash in the middle of the place if I'm not mistaken.

The entire "Revisionist" quibbling about "Physical remains" is a classic example of the fallacy of moving goalposts. Initially, when confronted with documents proving or strongly implying mass murder, the Deniers dismiss these as forgeries and demand physical evidence. When the Physical evidence IS provided however, they insist that it is not enough or doctored and demand documents (sometimes the same documents they dismiss as forgeries). It's a complete and utter farce.

Well put, thanks for the additional reference to Kola. In this case, what struck me as utterly bizarre is EtienneSC's linking to a brief summary of Haimi's work-in-progress that states the exact opposite of EtienneSC's claim. You've well stated denier psychology when it comes to physical evidence.

 

[LemmyCaution]

. . . either explicitly ordering killings, or at the very least authorizing them.

Or protecting Germans who might commit atrocities, including murders, in the occupied East. Thus, to your list we can add the Barbarossa Jurisdiction Order (13 May 1941).

This Führer decree made German soldiers immune from legal consequences for mistreatment of civilians: ““Punishable offenses committed against enemy civilians do not, until further notice, come any more under the jurisdiction of the courts-martial and the summary courts-martial.”

The decree was sent on 31 May 1941 to units that would carry out the invasion of USSR. (Romer, in Kay/Rutherford/Stahel p 78)

Some key components of this order were:

Imposition of different rules for the East based on Nazi political-ideological preconceptions and a predetermined view of the enemy as deserving especially harsh measures: “The further extension of the eastern theater of operations, the battle strategy conditioned thereby, and the peculiar qualities of the enemy, confront the courts of the armed forces with problems,” which required, in the Nazis’ view, removing legal consequences for important aspects of troops’ behavior in the East.

A view of civilians that they constituted the enemy, an ironic position in that many of the nationalities in the occupied territories chafed under Soviet rule and under other circumstances might have welcomed a chance at liberation: “the troops defend themselves relentlessly against any threat from the enemy population.”

Permission for officers to take actions against civilians, including the death penalty, based on suspicion alone and without even pretense of a trial or investigation of any sort; granting of power of life and death for civilians to front-line officers: “persons suspected of an offense will be brought immediately before an officer. This officer will decide whether they are to be shot.” And: “Extreme caution is indicated in assessing the credibility of statements made by enemy civilians.”

Authorization of punitive measures against villagers for attacks with which they were not involved and because those carrying out attacks were not known: “Against localities from which troops have been attacked in or treacherous manner, collective coercive measures be applied immediately upon the order of an officer of the rank of at least battalion etc., commander, if the circumstances do not permit a quick identification of individual perpetrators.”

The actual prohibition of the use of law or courts in most cases of the apprehension of civilians: “It is expressly forbidden to detain suspects in order to transfer them to the courts after the reinstatement of jurisdiction over indigenous population.”

Exemption for troops from obeying law with regard to civilians, who were to be regarded as the enemy: “1. With regard to offenses committed against enemy civilians by members of the armed forces and its employees, prosecution is not obligatory even if the deed is simultaneously a military violation or crime.”

Justification for illegal measures in the East based on a Nazified revision of German history and the presumed need for a war of annihilation against the Soviets on the basis of ideology: “2. When judging such deeds, it must be borne in mind, whatever the circumstances, that the collapse in 1918, the subsequent suffering of the German people and the fight against national socialism which cost the blood of innumerable supporters of the movement, were caused primarily by Bolshevist influence and that no German has forgotten this.”

Allowance for troops to commit atrocities against civilians – and reservation of courts-martials only for actions that threatened German military discipline or actions that involved sexual activity or other affronts to German ideas of morality: “In the case of offenses against indigenous inhabitants, the judicial authority will order a court martial only if maintenance of discipline or security of the troops call for such a measure. This applies for instance to serious offenses based on lack of sexual restraint, or resulting from a criminal tendency, or indicating that the troops are threatening to become out of hand. As a rule offenses resulting in the senseless destruction of billets, stores or other captured material to the disadvantage of our forces will not be judged more leniently.” A supplemental order reinforced this point (Letter From Defendant Lehmann to Defendant Warlimont's Office, 4/28/1941, Transmitting Lehmann's Draft of Barbarossa Jurisdiction Order, in Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10. Vol. 10: United States of America v. Wilhelm von Leeb, et al. (Case 12: 'The High Command Case'). US Government Printing Office, District of Columbia: 1951. pp. 1121-1123.): “II: 1. Military law and its enforcement agencies serve primarily the enforcement of discipline.”

According to Felix Romer, “The most consequential innovation of the Jurisdiction Decree remained, however, the introduction of executions without legal proceedings” as we have seen above. (in Kay/Rutherford/Stahel, pp 75-76)

According to Kevin Jon Heller, the Barbarossa Jurisdiction Order was held by the court in the NMT Hostage Tribunal to be prima facie illegal because “the order categorized ‘partisans’ in such an overbroad manner. . . . For example, the order authorized the summary execution of ‘[e]very civilian who impedes or incites others to impede the German Wehrmacht,’ a criterion that ‘clearly opens the way for arbitrary and bloody implementation.’” (Heller, The Nuremberg Military Tribunal and the Origins of International Law, pp 209-210) Romer concurs: “The break with international law [regarding anti-partisan actions] consisted above all in German reprisals from the outset being directed not only against irregulars but also too often toward uninvolved villagers, civilians who had been picked up or dispersed Red Army soldiers, who were declared in arbitrary acts of substitution to be ‘partisan suspects,’ ‘partisan helpers,’ or other ‘suspicious elements’ and called to account for ‘the increasing precariousness’ of the occupied territories.” (Romer, in Kay/Rutherford/Stahel, p 84)

 

[JimRizoli]

Wow!.....All this goggligop to avoid the truth....

Six million Jews died in fake homicidal gas chambers with bug spray.....who could deny that?

JR

 

[Elagabalus]

Wow!.....All this goggligop to avoid the truth....

Six million Jews died in fake homicidal gas chambers with bug spray.....who could deny that?

JR

Internet crazies, Jim. The same people who believe in the faked moonlanding, 9/11 was done by Mossad and the Hollow Earth!

I know, I know ...incredible ...

 

[threadworm]

Can I like any race or hate any race?
Or do I have to like all the races you do?
By the way Jews aren't a race as much as they like to think they are.
But they sure act like one when it comes to people criticizing them.

I'm an equal opportunity race hater....If you do bad things representing your race then you get my hate...

JR

It's generally seen as a bad idea by normal people with consciences and ethical values to want to exterminate an entire group of people because you don't like what someone has claimed some of them do.

You and all the other disgusting nazi apologists out there denying the holocaust are just disappointed by the lack of dead Jews.

 

[Ivanesca]

Wow!.....All this goggligop to avoid the truth....

Six million Jews died in fake homicidal gas chambers with bug spray.....who could deny that?

JR

Internet crazies, Jim. The same people who believe in the faked moonlanding, 9/11 was done by Mossad and the Hollow Earth!

I know, I know ...incredible ...

You know what, Rizoli has admitted elsewhere that he can't prove any of his statements or beliefs, but he still believes them anyway. He's really not worth it.

I do find something interesting though: he keeps on clinging to a straw man about "bug spray" when even one of his colleagues in this very thread talked about gas chambers using engine exhaust. Seriously. Not only does Rizoli ignore what respected and established historians say, but he ignores his own fellow deniers in the same thread. How crazy is that?

 

[LeoMajor]

That is an important first step. General Frederick Morgan's War and peace: a Soldier's Life (1961) describes substantial numbers of people being transited through displaced persons camps at the end of the war by Jewish/zionist/proto-israeli authorities.

Nonsense, the illegal immigration of Holocaust survivors after the war was known as the "Aliyah Bet" and it had mixed success at best, with few arriving and most sent back to Cyprus. The first wave of immigration of Holocaust survivors did not take place until 1949-53 and did not occur in numbers beyond what could be expected when we consider the proven death toll.

It's a reasonable subject for investigation by revisionists. I'll pass it on. The only name I can think of offhand is the author Otto Frank: it is clear that not everyone was killed.

Otto Frank was sent to Auschwitz, not Sobibor, and was selected for labor, He lost his entire family, his wife was gassed on arrival or shortly after.

 

[LeoMajor]

Wow!.....All this goggligop to avoid the truth....

Six million Jews died in fake homicidal gas chambers with bug spray.....who could deny that?

JR

You are repeating yourself and are covering absolutely no new ground. Also, you know full well that the "six million in gas chambers" line is a strawman. The number of victims gassed was significantly lower, but we must also take intyo account mass shootings and starvation/forced labor.

 

[LeoMajor]

The claim of impossibility refers to rapid killing by diesel exhaust, which is the means suggested by Raul Hilberg in Destruction of the the European Jews on the basis of eye witness accounts. F Berg argued that diesel exhaust normally contains oxygen and non-deadly amounts of carbon monoxide: The Diesel Gas Chambers and hence would not fulfill the purpose it is supposed to serve.
[

Berg's dilettantish conclusions are irrelevant. Every direct eyewitness of the engines, including their operators, were explicit in labeling them as petrol engines. In a notable exchange at the Sobibor trial, Erich Bauer and Erich Fuchs engaged in an argument over the type of ignition the engine used, each attacking the others memory, but both agreed that the engine was petrol.

 

[LeoMajor]

German laws in force prohibiting indiscriminate killings

I dispute that such laws applied in this instance. We have access to a number of SS court verdicts that empathized that Jews and Slavs were outside the walls of legal protection. SS judge Konrad Morgen, in his investigation of impropriety in the KL's, encountered opposition form Oswald Pohl, Himmler, and Gestapo Mueller among others, of which the latter two were emphatic in stating that Morgen's efforts had no bearing on the continuance of the Final Solution. This was clearly communicated by Morgen numerous times after the war. In particular, Morgen found that extrajudicial killings were accepted and allowed, thus forcing him to focus only on financial crimes in the KL's.

This is one of the verdicts I was referring to

"The SS- and Police Judiciary in adjudicating cases of this kind has taken the approach of intervening in a legal way against such misdemeanors and crimes only when the accused manifests by his act severe character flaws that make him intolerable to the German Volksgemeineschaft. Thus, for example, if assaults degenerate into sadistic tortures, or sexual motives play a role - and here the law is to be applied ruthlessly - when the victim is German by nationality or race, or has citizenship in an allied state."

Basically massacres and genocide were accepted and encouraged so long as it was done in an efficient organized manner. This did not stop the Germans from engaging in all manner of sadistic excesses (including sexual slavery) against Russian and Belaroussian non-combatants.

 

[Dash80]

Wow!.....All this goggligop to avoid the truth....

Six million Jews died in fake homicidal gas chambers with bug spray.....who could deny that?

JR

I deny it.

Because 6 million Jews were not gassed, the number is less than half that.

Because 6 million Jews were not killed with (ahem) "bug spray" either. Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka didn't even use Zyklon B... they used petrol engine exhaust.

Then there's the 70,000+ mentally or physically disabled people gassed in the Euthanasia killing centres, using bottled carbon monoxide.

 

[LemmyCaution]

I deny it.

Because 6 million Jews were not gassed, the number is less than half that.

Because 6 million Jews were not killed with (ahem) "bug spray" either. Chelmno, Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka didn't even use Zyklon B... they used petrol engine exhaust.. . .

And nearly 2 million Jews were shot in open-air massacres and up to another 700,000 perished as a result of overwork, starvation, or disease brought on by the conditions of their captivity.

It is important IMO to stress, given denier obsession with gas chambers, that just a bit more than half the Jewish victims in the Holocaust were killed in gas chambers or by gas vans - and of these a bit more than 35% were killed using Zyklon B.

Jim knows all this because we went over it last week - "You've already been corrected on this . . . up to 2 million Jews were shot, about 2.6 million were murdered in camps (about 1.5-1.6 million of these by engine exhaust, not Zyklon B), and about 0.7 million died from starvation, overwork, disease. Why do you insist on distorting what others have claimed?"

Jim's reply to being corrected the first time he offered this inept maxim was to ask for us to show 2 million shot - then, when shown evidence, to request photos, autopsies, etc. As Ivanesca says, Jim's using a very silly strawman that must be embarrassing even to deniers, a breed that does not embarrass easily.