Merged General Holocaust denial discussion Part IV

Just wondering if members of another forum this forum as well.

The denier argument that the Nazis would have used wood gas powered engines for the gas chambers because gasoline was scarce and since witnesses say gasoline engines were used, therefore the witnesses lied, is so riddle with flaws it beggars belief.
 
Nessie said:
Just wondering if members of another forum this forum as well.

The denier argument that the Nazis would have used wood gas powered engines for the gas chambers because gasoline was scarce and since witnesses say gasoline engines were used, therefore the witnesses lied, is so riddle with flaws it beggars belief.
Click to expand...

Another "if I ran the zoo" argument from incredulity.

The one I remember was the poster who maintained that the most efficient way to have carried out mass exterminations would be by marching the victims into disused mines and flooding them, and since there was no record of this, there were no mass exterminations.

:blackcat:
 
I just want to see if what I post here is also being monitored by the deniers at another forum.

The Nazis would not have done it that way is a common argument from incredulity used by deniers. It covers the unevenly spaced holes in the roof of krema I, to why not use train delousing facilities and leave the people on the trains.

Since deniers ignore the evidence (it is all lies/faked etc) I do think that attacking their arguments is the best way to deal with denial.
 
Nessie said:
The Nazis would not have done it that way is a common argument from incredulity used by deniers.
Click to expand...
Yep - usually taking the form of, 'But why didn't they just...' Well, sorry but the evidence (that's ALL the evidence taken TOGETHER and AT THE SAME TIME - see the deniers running for the hills! :D) shows that they didn't do that and that they did do something else. Then they'll go quiet for a bit then come back with, 'But I don't get it. Why didn't they just...' It's like a 'reset' button.
 
Mattogno's Einsatzgruppen book has been translated into English. There has been little discussion of the book at denier forms. Below, however, is a listing of articles on Mattogno's new book published at the Holocaust Controversies blog.

Mattogno takes on the Jäger Report (well, he tries) - Roberto Muehlenkamp

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5 (1)

Part 5 (2)

publishing history by Roberto Muehlenkamp

Germar Rudolf’s foreword to Mattogno’s Einzatzgruppen book

articles by Jon Harrison

Mattogno's Distortion of Orders in his Italian Einsatzgruppen Book

Some Initial Observations on Mattogno's Einsatzgruppen Handbook

Mattogno's Distortions on the Crimea

Mattogno on the Killing of 4,273 Children in Kaunas [Kovno]

Mattogno on Riga, Part One: Keine Liquidierung Revisited - Andy Mathis

Mattogno on Riga, Part One: Keine Liquidierung Revisited

Mattogno on Riga, Part Two: Phone Calls in Riga, Prague, and Berlin

Mattogno on Riga, Part Three: Hierarchies Are Hard

Mattogno on Riga, Part Four: Polishing a Turd

articles by Hans Metzner

SK Lange and Mattogno's Italian Book on the Einsatzgruppen

Mattogno, his Einsatzgruppen book and the Gas Vans. Part I: A Dilettante at Work

(more to come)
 
Last edited:
Good question about Gen Baugher. I'll ask around.

Donnydämmerung got moved to the Politics thread to focus the Holocaust, Genocide, and Mass Violence thread better. The Donny thread now has 27,526 replies!
 
Saw this Holocaust related item:

Hitler-owned book hints at plans for North American Holocaust

190125154849-02-nazi-book-north-america-exlarge-169.jpg


https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/25/amer...-north-america-blueprint-scli-intl/index.html

Has anyone ever read this or seen a summary of it?
 
@Hans
Sorry, unless you've got a photograph of Hitler holding the book, a sound recording of him saying he owned the book and film footage of him reading the book in his library then there's no evidence that he ever went anywhere near it /holocaustdenier :)
 
Georgio said:
@Hans
Sorry, unless you've got a photograph of Hitler holding the book, a sound recording of him saying he owned the book and film footage of him reading the book in his library then there's no evidence that he ever went anywhere near it /holocaustdenier :)
Click to expand...

If Germany had beaten the U.S. and USSR (Pretty way out assumptions) one could deduce that a Holocaust would be planned for the U.S. as well as that taking place in Europe.
 
Georgio said:
@Hans
Sorry, unless you've got a photograph of Hitler holding the book, a sound recording of him saying he owned the book and film footage of him reading the book in his library then there's no evidence that he ever went anywhere near it /holocaustdenierDavid Irving. :)
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you.....:D
 
dudalb said:
Fixed that for you.....:D
Click to expand...
I'm not sure all that would even be enough for Irving - he'd need a document signed by every member of the Nazi party showing a DIRECT ORDER from Hitler to bring him the book and his reading glasses :D
 
I have never met anyone who denied the Holocaust. When someone at work asked what the Holocaust was there was universal surprise she did not know as everyone else did.
 
Nessie said:
I have never met anyone who denied the Holocaust. When someone at work asked what the Holocaust was there was universal surprise she did not know as everyone else did.
Click to expand...

I met lots of non-western college students who had either no knowledge of the holocaust or a deeply flawed idea about what had occurred - given I was teaching mainly Muslim students in the ME that was to be expected. Most western students had some knowledge about it and I did run across a few who thought it was 'faked' or trumped up.

I once worked with an Indian (Madras University grad) economics teacher who was an extreme fundamentalist Hindu - he had absolutely no information about western history at all except a rather biased view of British history and his country. He considered any history that was not centered on India to be 'useless'.

I taught some Saudi technical college students who had only the vaguest idea of any aspect of WWI or WWII.

In that group was a young man whose family was in a clan that held to the belief that if something was not mentioned in the Qu'ran or one branch of the Hadith it didn't exist - based on that they denied the existence of the Americas......
 
Cosmic Yak said:
Saw this today. It seems much more education is needed, at least in the UK.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47015184
Click to expand...

Speaking from personal experience, I think the problem is that the 'argument' for Holocaust denial can be made to be extremely compelling for those who don't really know how historical evidence works. I saw a video by Anthony Lawson which was (I now know) the usual HD trick of repeating things like, 'There still isn't one single piece of physical evidence that shows...' etc. If you don't know about consilience (as I didn't), then that sort of rhetoric is extremely powerful.

I was never actually convinced that there was anything in the claims because I immediately did a google search on them (and as I'm sure you know this very quickly leads to them all being comprehensively debunked), but the fact is after watching that video I did think, 'Wow. Maybe there's something to this after all - maybe it is being suppressed' etc. and that kind of casual, lazy 'questioning' of the Holocaust will be what surveys like that are measuring: the results of idle office conversations with someone who saw something on twitter and says, 'Did you know that the wooden doors at Auschwitz couldn't have been used as gas chamber doors? That 'six million' number was changed from 1 million overnight. Zyklon B can't actually be used to kill humans. There weren't any holes in the roof. I know! I couldn't believe it either!' and so on.

The problem is that the deniers know their market and know that saying, 'There isn't ONE SINGLE piece of evidence that directly proves the Holocaust happened' will convince a lot more untrained people than saying, 'There are a million things that indirectly prove it happened'.
 
Georgio said:
Speaking from personal experience, I think the problem is that the 'argument' for Holocaust denial can be made to be extremely compelling for those who don't really know how historical evidence works. I saw a video by Anthony Lawson which was (I now know) the usual HD trick of repeating things like, 'There still isn't one single piece of physical evidence that shows...' etc. If you don't know about consilience (as I didn't), then that sort of rhetoric is extremely powerful.

I was never actually convinced that there was anything in the claims because I immediately did a google search on them (and as I'm sure you know this very quickly leads to them all being comprehensively debunked), but the fact is after watching that video I did think, 'Wow. Maybe there's something to this after all - maybe it is being suppressed' etc. and that kind of casual, lazy 'questioning' of the Holocaust will be what surveys like that are measuring: the results of idle office conversations with someone who saw something on twitter and says, 'Did you know that the wooden doors at Auschwitz couldn't have been used as gas chamber doors? That 'six million' number was changed from 1 million overnight. Zyklon B can't actually be used to kill humans. There weren't any holes in the roof. I know! I couldn't believe it either!' and so on.

The problem is that the deniers know their market and know that saying, 'There isn't ONE SINGLE piece of evidence that directly proves the Holocaust happened' will convince a lot more untrained people than saying, 'There are a million things that indirectly prove it happened'.
Click to expand...


Good post and well put.

Also, as time goes on, and three are less and less people around who either experienced it first hand, or who have parents and relatives who did, it will become easier for your 'casual, lazy 'questioning' suggestion to become more common.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom