General Holocaust denial discussion Part III

[Saggy]

You're faring really, really badly here.

LOL. I described it before as being like Gulliver and ...... and got a warning, so I won't repeat that.

To me it feels like beating on a drum.

This idea of providing twenty links with no discussion as a response, and then defending it !, is truly pathetic. In what, 10 years, I've never once seen it before !

 

[LeoMajor]

I'm not looking for a list of twenty links

Don't be a *****

I'm looking for you to discuss evidence for the holocaust yourself, providing links as appropriate.

Which is what we have been doing. You have so far not come across as particularly knowledgeable.

What I'm afraid of? I'm afraid the insane aggression of the US/Israeli military will initiate WW III.

The Israelis are not relevant outside their stupid little sandbox. The US on the other hand is led by a man that most deniers adore. So in a way it's your own fault.

Edited by Locknar: 

Edited, breach of rule 0 & rule 10. Name calling is never civil or polite. As to curse/vulgar words, Otto Censor has one job...please let him do it and do not alter curse/vulgar words.

 

[LeoMajor]

To me it feels like beating on a drum.

You have been shown to be wrong on the method and scope of the holocaust, on the role of the Jewish community in Latvia in the inter-war years, on the NKVD, and on mass graves. For me it feels like a tennis match against a man with no hands.

 

[LeoMajor]

If Saggy is feeling particularly timid this evening I will enlighten him on a mass grave.

"Grave # 10" identified by Andreasz Kola at Belzec, was shown to be 18X24 meters in width and over 5.25 meters in depth.

Kola stated that the bottom of the grave contained "human remains in a state of wax-fat transformation". Also found was white sand mixed with rich lime and a substantial amount of cremains.

 

[LemmyCaution]

LOL. I described it before as being like Gulliver and ...... and got a warning, so I won't repeat that.

To me it feels like beating on a drum.

This idea of providing twenty links with no discussion as a response, and then defending it !, is truly pathetic. In what, 10 years, I've never once seen it before !

Of course in the first place I didn't post twenty links - I posted a list of sources which you claim don't exist. Deal with it and stop crying.

In the second place I am happy to discuss Babi Yar - after you explain how come there is so much evidence when you claim none exists. You made a claim, defend it.

And, last, this act doesn't work partly because it comes from a person who dodges question after question and who is a serial poster of random links - Holohoax 101, Zisblatt, Eric Hunt, etc.

 

[Saggy]

Kola stated that the bottom of the grave contained "human remains in a state of wax-fat transformation".

I knew that when this pic was posted earlier in the thread it would come in useful, this is the picture of an excavated body from 40,000 years ago ...

As we see, the skeleton is intact.

The mass grave you have described is less than 100 years old. How many intact skeletons were in the grave you've described?

Where are the pics of the bodies in 'wax-fat transformation'? How many were there?

That's for starters. We can continue tomorrow.

 

[Saggy]

In the second place I am happy to discuss Babi Yar - after you explain how come there is so much evidence when you claim none exists. You made a claim, defend it..

You've got to be kidding. I can't analyze evidence you have not described. I did google the first item on your list ....

1. Ereignismeldung UdSSR 97, 28.9.41 - planning of action

It came up with two hits, both in lists by Terry. There is no sense trying to refute something that cannot even be googled.

So, it is on you present the evidence, described in your own words, with links as appropriate.

 

[LeoMajor]

I knew that when this pic was posted earlier in the thread it would come in useful, this is the picture of an escavated body from 40,000 years ago ...

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/TbIgonE.jpg[/qimg]

As we see, the skeleton is intact.

The mass grave you have described is less than 100 years old. How many intact skeletons were in the grave you've described?

Where are the pics of the bodies in 'wax-fat transformation'? How many were there?

That's for starters. We can continue tomorrow.

The report did not enumerate the number of intact skeletons. However, as the bodies had been subjected to intense burning (note the presence of ashes of human origin, which corroborates with descriptions of the cremation of corpses at Belzec from local residents at the time one cannot logically make a comparison between the grave identified by Kola and the stupid little skeleton that you keep waving around like a dumb fat fruitcake.

 

[Hans]

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/TbIgonE.jpg[/qimg]

As we see, the skeleton is intact.

So you confirm by using that image that people have been cremating bodies for long before WWII....lol

Define intact - that is not considered an 'intact' skeleton it is fragmented in situ.

I guess we can add forensic physical anthropology to the long list of subjects you don't know 'binz' about.

 

[smartcooky]

You have so far not come across as particularly knowledgeable.

Methinks you give him far too much credit.

 

[LemmyCaution]

You've got to be kidding.

I'm not.

I can't analyze evidence you have not described. I did google the first item on your list ....

So I take it that you deny that the Babi Yar massacre took place. Yet you haven't read the sources for it. Interesting method you use.

1. Ereignismeldung UdSSR 97, 28.9.41 - planning of action

It came up with two hits, both in lists by Terry. There is no sense trying to refute something that cannot even be googled.

Is there a Stundie judge in the house? LOL "There is no sense trying to refute something that cannot even be googled." Sorry, Saggy, there is a lot, and I mean a lot, of evidence about history, not just the Holocaust, in documents in archives which cannot be googled. Or in books, articles, and papers that aren't online. Those are the things historians study to learn about the past. You should find out about these things. They have really interesting content.

But your immense incompetence is really getting in our way here: if you want to complain about Google not turning up hits, you need to first learn how to use the search function. Look what I found, 'cuz, yeah, some of this is online: EM 97:

Execution of at least 50,000 Jews planned. The German Army welcomes measures and demands drastic procedure. Garrison commander advocates public execution of 20 Jews.

I copied a bit of the document because at this point, I'm not sure you know how to click a link.

And so on.

Mind-blowing. Now you demand to be spoonfed . . .

So, it is on you present the evidence, described in your own words, with links as appropriate.

Get off your high horse and participate.

E.g., LeoMajor and I have linked you to the same summary of archaeological investigations at Chełmno, but you refuse to read it (or this parallel material, which I posted). If you had any interest at all in the topic, you'd be happy we posted links to the archaeological work and you'd want to read the summary of the work by those close to it. But you'd rather blether on and on about what you will and won't read. Amazing.

 

[LemmyCaution]

"There is no sense trying to refute something that cannot even be googled."

Lawd have mercy.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Saggy: "I can't analyze evidence you have not described."

We've described evidence - and you've fled, dodged, changed the subject. We've linked to evidence - and you've whined about links. We've given you references to where to find evidence - and you've whined that there's too much.

So I shall now re-write your sentence as I am hearing you: "I can't analyze evidence." Sorry, that is basically what you're telling us.

 

[Hans]

There is no sense trying to refute something that cannot even be googled.

....and there it is a prime example of 'clown research'. Yes Saggy all the information in the world is ONLY located in Google.

 

[Axxman300]

So I'm clear...

Reynhard Heydrich is sent to Czechoslovakia, and in the first week he has 92 locals executed, and another 4,000+ rounded up by the Gestapo to be sent to Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp. Only 4% of these people survived.

After Heydrich was righteously killed, the Gestapo wandered into the village of Lidice and shot all of the men over 15 years of age, and rounded up the woman and children and sent them to Chełmno extermination camp where they were gassed. A handful of children deemed racially acceptable were sent to live with S.S. families in the Fatherland (17 would return to Lidice after the war).

My question is this: If the Nazis were so casual about the mass murder of the Czechs (people they weren't even mad at), then what makes anyone thing they'd ever give the Jews under their control a pass on the violence?

The answer is: They didn't.

 

[Matthew Ellard]

Can you identify and describe one mass grave, or not?

Are you saying we can't trust Nazi officers?

I think it started the day I first saw the Totenlager in Treblinka. I remember Wirth standing there next to the pits full of blue-black corpses. It had nothing to do with humanity—it couldn’t have; it was a mass—a mass of rotting flesh. Wirth said, ‘What shall we do with this garbage?’

 

[Degeneve]

You've got to be kidding. I can't analyze evidence you have not described. I did google the first item on your list ....

1. Ereignismeldung UdSSR 97, 28.9.41 - planning of action

It came up with two hits, both in lists by Terry. There is no sense trying to refute something that cannot even be googled.

So, it is on you present the evidence, described in your own words, with links as appropriate.

I can't believe what I read. Libraries are full of books and others documents that can't be googled.

But it becomes obvious that Saggy is too lazy or too coward to even try to open a book that could refute his beliefs...

 

[Degeneve]

So I shall now re-write your sentence as I am hearing you: "I can't analyze evidence." Sorry, that is basically what you're telling us.

Sorry, but the only really way to re-write this sentence is: "I don't want to see any evidence or hear of any evidence. And certainly not analyse any evidence"

 

[Elagabalus]

Why not CO? Why nothing discussed by Muehkenkamp? Saggy is well and truly spooked by Muehlenkamp!

Not a huge fan but I do like "Hurts So Good" and "Jack & Diane" from his "American Fool" album*.






*C'mon guys, this thread need some yucks what with Saggy not answering any questions ...

 

[LemmyCaution]

I can't believe what I read. Libraries are full of books and others documents that can't be googled.

But it becomes obvious that Saggy is too lazy or too coward to even try to open a book that could refute his beliefs...

Also, one refutes an argument. One examines evidence to learn and then uses as much as evidence as can be found to build and support an argument. Saggy OTOH is all worked up to refute the evidence itself - that is, evidence he's never seen but senses to be big trouble for him.