Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Thunder]

There is a distinction between flat out anti-semtisim as opposed to hatred of an enemy.

ah, so the Jews were the enemy of Germany and therefore deserved "punishment"?

are you trying to tell us that the Nazis had a right to declare all 600,000 German Jews "enemies of the state", and therefore punish them for their "crimes"?

 

[truethat]

They didn't differentiate "enemies of the state" and "poor peasants" in the US either. How can you continue to be dishonest about this. It was still not right to have done forced deportations and labor of innocent people off course.

There wasn't a typhus epidemic in the US first of all and the camps would have been much larger at Auschwitz.

Was it even 1.1 million at Auschwitz? Probably not. Just imagine what's involved in gassing all those people and cleaning it up.

Ok so you admit that people were rounded up for being "JEWISH" just as Japanese were rounded up for being Japanese.

The US has admitted it was wrong to do this. The Germans have as well. So what is your beef.

If you round up people because of an ethnic heritage and they are subsequently killed, this is called genocide

gen·o·cide
   /ˈdʒɛnəˌsaɪd/ Show Spelled[jen-uh-sahyd] Show IPA
–noun
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

This is what the Nazi's did to the Jews. Why the confusion?

It is what it is.

 

[kageki]

You're not addressing the point. We know how much Zyklon-B was requisitioned because the records still exist. (We even know that it was ordered without the warning odor included — perhaps you can explain why.)

You have yet to explain why, with all that Zyklon-B on hand, people would still be dying of typhus.

Unless, of course, it was being used for something else.

http://www.codoh.com/forum/viewtopi...b&sid=523ce755720727ce54ddbcdd94fff4df#p39130

- There was no SS order to remove the odor from Zyklon-B, no order has ever been shown, nor can it be shown.

The removal of the warning scent was decided upon by DEGESCH and not by the SS. This came out during testimony given by Mr Breitweiser during the course of the Auschwitz Frankfurt trial in 1961. Breitweiser was in charge of disinfestation at Auschwitz. He was never charged with or convicted of a crime.

By 1944 Zyklon was being supplied to Auschwitz without the warning ingredient, but the reason for this exceptional practice was a supply shortage rather than any desire, as alleged by Exterminationists, to deceive potential murder victims. One cause of considerable concern to some of the German technicians at the time was that since the warning ingredient also contributed to the chemical stability of the Zyklon-B, its removal could present a serious hazard to the end-user. One result of the removal of the warning ingredient seems to have been the shortening of the shelf-life of even properly sealed cans of Zyklon-B. {footnote 7)

You can also imagine how many more would of died had they not deloused.

It's also been established that 95% was used for delousing so you know at least the primary reason was for delousing.

 

[kageki]

And if the Nazis hadn't arbitrarily declared the Jews to be enemies, then they wouldn't have become refugees.

And if my uncle had t*ts, he'd be my aunt.



Except when you start, you know, exterminating them.



No, he says that there were several prominent Jewish Bolsheviks, which was true in 1920, when he wrote that.

It wasn't arbitrary and the Jews had declared war themselves.

Which is to basically say it was a Jewish thing.

http://library.flawlesslogic.com/ish.htm

Nothing could be more significant than the fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr. Weissmann in particular. The cruel penetration of his mind leaves him in no doubt that his schemes of a world-wide communistic State under Jewish domination are directly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal, which directs the energies and the hopes of Jews in every land towards a simpler, a truer, and a far more attainable goal.

 

[kageki]

ah, so the Jews were the enemy of Germany and therefore deserved "punishment"?

are you trying to tell us that the Nazis had a right to declare all 600,000 German Jews "enemies of the state", and therefore punish them for their "crimes"?

Did the US have the right to do so?

 

[kageki]

Ok so you admit that people were rounded up for being "JEWISH" just as Japanese were rounded up for being Japanese.

The US has admitted it was wrong to do this. The Germans have as well. So what is your beef.

If you round up people because of an ethnic heritage and they are subsequently killed, this is called genocide



This is what the Nazi's did to the Jews. Why the confusion?

It is what it is.

No one is denying that people were being rounded up. Why do you keep insist on being dishonest?

Killed does not mean gas chamber.

It also wasn't just Jews either:
http://guardian.150m.com/holocaust/auschwitz-data.htm

35,228 (37,148) have their religion recorded as Christian (30,852 Catholic, 2,145 Protestant, 1,858 Greek Orthodox, 280 Czech-Moravian, 93 Eastern Orthodox). 28,511 (30,065) have their religion recorded as Judaism.

 

[truethat]

No one is denying that people were being rounded up. Why do you keep insist on being dishonest?

Killed does not mean gas chamber.

It also wasn't just Jews either:
http://guardian.150m.com/holocaust/auschwitz-data.htm

I haven't said yay or nay to gas chambers. In fact I specifically remember taking it off the table several pages ago.

Why do YOU keep on insisting on being dishonest?


I have said that it doesn't matter the method of death. I have said that to continue to send people to camps that were ill equipped to handle the people in the camp amounts to sending people to their death.

In fact I think I talked about SUGAR.

And I notice that you completely skip over the posts that I've posted that discuss your lack of critical thinking and education.

For example, to suggest that "most people" don't know about Zionism is a projection of your own lack of education.

I am cautioning you to pay attention to the way your own lack of education or strategies for learning has led you astray.

The way you come across to me is someone who lapped up what he thought he was being fed without thinking. Then you want to blame spoon for not having food on it.

If you don't THINK how can you learn?

 

[Wroclaw]

http://www.codoh.com/forum/viewtopi...b&sid=523ce755720727ce54ddbcdd94fff4df#p39130

Really? You're going to try passing Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis off as an expert? Or Fritz "The SS Were the Good Guys" Berg?

Please.

The files from the IG Farben case indicate Hargis is wrong. Not only did the SS order Zyklon-B without the warning odor, but Degesch complained about removing it because they had the patent on the odor, but not on hydrogen cyanide. Thus they would be risking competition if they produced Zyklon-B without the indicator.

Furthermore, the only way Zyklon-B could have been used more for delousing than gassing at Auschwitz would be if no one were gassed.

In short, you are begging the question.

 

[abaddon]

No one is denying that people were being rounded up. Why do you keep insist on being dishonest?

Killed does not mean gas chamber.

It also wasn't just Jews either:
http://guardian.150m.com/holocaust/auschwitz-data.htm

So now you admit they were rounded up, and were exterminated by various means, and your house of cards argument is entirely based on nit-picking, should anyone be willing to concede that your argument has enough merit to not be dismissed out of hand.

Nice.

 

[Wroclaw]

Did the US have the right to do so?

Why don't you answer the God-damned question?

 

[kageki]

Really? You're going to try passing Jonnie "Hannover" Hargis off as an expert? Or Fritz "The SS Were the Good Guys" Berg?

Please.

The files from the IG Farben case indicate Hargis is wrong. Not only did the SS order Zyklon-B without the warning odor, but Degesch complained about removing it because they had the patent on the odor, but not on hydrogen cyanide. Thus they would be risking competition if they produced Zyklon-B without the indicator.

Furthermore, the only way Zyklon-B could have been used more for delousing than gassing at Auschwitz would be if no one were gassed.

In short, you are begging the question.

Where is this order then?

What do you think about the supply shortage?

 

[TSR]

It wasn't arbitrary and the Jews had declared war themselves.

.
Really? The Jews did?

How many troops did they command, how were they equipped and supplied? Where did they train? Where did they get their tanks, artillery, air support?

You seem to be under the impression that there was some governing group which spoke on behalf of the Jews -- can you name it?

Answers: None, they weren't, they didn't, they didn't, and and you can't because there wasn't (are arguably *still* isn't.)

*One* editorial by *one* man published by *one* newspaper (in a country which was not even predominately Jewish) using hyperbolic language does not a credible threat make. Have got any proof that "the Jooos" even paid attention to this call for an economic boycott or that it had any appreciable effect?

Answer: No, because they didn't, and it didn't.

Do feel free to contradict any of the above by citing a real, you know, historian rather than one of your denier buddies...
.

 

[Wroclaw]

Where is this order then?

The evidence code for the IMT document is NI-1210. I've seen the originals, but I don't have them anymore at hand.

What do you think about the supply shortage?

I don't think there was one regarding Zyklon-B.

 

[truethat]

I agree.



I agree.



Yeah, it's still off-topic. All the manage to do is evade answering the question. Responding to their evasions merely encourages them.



Untrue. Engaging in ad hominem is not equivalent to losing the debate any more than not answering the question or changing the subject.



I don't care.

As you can see by continuing to present the example of Japanese in America we have folded the house of cards.

When you are dealing with someone who is uneducated about a topic it is important to explain it to them on the terms they understand and then take it step by step.

By throwing information that they do not know and do not understand at them you only have them dismiss it outright.

Part of the problem is that deniers will always say that the evidence has been tampered with or the witness is lying.


ex.

I have personally spoken to Eva Kor and she shared her experiences with me. One of the very important things that she has done is encourage Hans Munch, a doctor at Auschwitz, to document that he witnessed the use of gas chambers. He does so here:

I, Dr. Hans Munch hereby attest that, as an SS physician on duty in Auschwitz in 1944, I witnessed the selection process of those who were to live and those who were to die. Other SS physicians on duty in the camps made selections at the platform where the transports arrived. They also made selections in the barracks. I was exempt from performing selections because I had refused to do so.

I further attest that I saw thousands of people gassed here at Auschwitz. Children, old people, the sick and those unable to work were sent to the gas chambers. These were innocent human beings: Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, Hitler's political opponents - anyone who did not fit Hitler's idea of a pure Aryan race.

I am signing this paper of my own free will to help document the cruel intolerance of my fellow SS.

I, a former SS physician, witnessed the dropping of Zyklon B into simulated exhaust vents from outside the gas chambers. Zyklon B began to work as soon as it was released from the canisters. The effects of the gas were observed through a peephole by an assigned doctor or the SS officer on duty. After three to five minutes, death could be certified, and the doors were opened as a sign that the corpses were cleared to be burned.

This is the nightmare I continue to live with fifty years later.

I am so sorry that in some way I was part of it. Under the prevailing circumstances I did the best I could to save as many lives as possible. Joining the SS was a mistake. I was young. I was an opportunist. And once I joined, there was no way out.

(signed)
Dr. Hans Munch
January 27, 1995, Auschwitz

(6 witnesses)

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/m/muench-hans/auschwitz-declaration.html

However deniers will state that it's a fraudulent document. They say he was cooerced and senile. And that his story doesn't match the facts.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/is-dr-munch-a-confused-old-man-or-a-defiant-nazi-1183628.html


I think rather than taking the witness and documentation of "opinions" as to what happened, it is important to show the facts of what happened and ask people to draw a logical conclusion.

Ex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment

About 150,000 people were rounded up by the US government

The deaths if any were very minimal.

Kageki states because there wasn't a typhus epidemic and it was much smaller.

So the question remains. Why would Nazis continue to send people to a camp where the fatality rate was hovering around 50%. Where they had a typhus epidemic and a lice epidemic and very little resources.

For how long did the Nazis intend to keep them there in these conditions.


I'd like to see an answer to this question. For how long did the Nazis intend to keep them there in these conditions?

According to the arguments made in this thread, this was considered a "new" solution for them and where they were going to stay since they couldn't get them out of the country.

Odd how they went into other countries and insisted on rounding them up even though the other countries didn't want to give them up. That doesn't jibe with what the deniers are suggesting about no one wanting them. You'd think if Denmark was saying "No we won't surrender the Jews" they'd say "shwoo, finally someone wants to keep them. Because our camps are packed to the gills and we can't manage the ones we have!" But no.

So kageki, if this was a long term housing camp, where are the plans for that and the budgets?

Let's just look at money. How much did it cost?

 

[Thunder]

It wasn't arbitrary and the Jews had declared war themselves.

ah, so since the Jews collectively declared war upon Germany and the rest of humanity, they had to be defeated?

 

[Thunder]

Did the US have the right to do so?

Germany was and is a state, with a democratically elected leader.

The Jews were and are a religious and ethnic community.

Are you saying that since it was ok for the USA to declare war on Germany, it was therefore ok for Germany to declare war on der Juden?

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

I have personally spoken to Eva Kor and she shared her experiences with me. One of the very important things that she has done is encourage Hans Munch, a doctor at Auschwitz, to document that he witnessed the use of gas chambers.

Are you still in contact with her? In a german documentary called "Hitlers Helfer - Josef Mengele, der Todesarzt" she mentioned a document in the museum of Auschwitz, which states her and her sisters death and which has the signature of Mengele. They were supposed to be gassed, but could not since there was no Zyklon B left to do so.

I really would like to have a copy of this document and I think it would be a good piece of evidence for her story.

If you are interested in Hans Münch, this could be interesting. It's an interview in the "Spiegel", but in german. Looks to me, that the story about the "good" Hans Münch is bogus. He was a nazi scumbag like the rest of them.

If anyone is interested in simple testimonies, I recommend the documentary "Drei Deutsche Mörder" (="three german murders"). But maybe the director forced those nazis into lying about Auschwitz by showing them the Star Wars Holiday Special.

 

[kageki]

Germany was and is a state, with a democratically elected leader.

The Jews were and are a religious and ethnic community.

Are you saying that since it was ok for the USA to declare war on Germany, it was therefore ok for Germany to declare war on der Juden?

I don't think Germany had formally declared war on Judea, but essentially yes. They had the right to change citizenship laws and later grew suspicious of at least some Jews as being Communists or sympathizers. Germans were certainly concerned by Bolshevism/Communism. There had been other countries in the past that have passed formal laws to expels Jews and that's what the Germans did. When no one else would take them in then they started forced deportations and labor. While other countries expressed sympathy, they were basically agreeing with Germany.

http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/Evian_conference.htm

The Nazi newspaper Voelkischer Beobachter summed up the proceedings of the conference in a most objective and painfully accurate article: ref

... The development of the Evian Conference so far is very embarrassing for the Marxists, because according to them, it leads to an international legalization of German antisemitic policy.

In accordance with their democratic ideology and political tendencies, the official statements made by the representatives of the United States, France and – to a lesser degree – England, made noises of moral outrage over the liquidation of the Jewish problem in Germany. At the same time, however, England and France were so reserved when it came to declaring readiness to accept more emigrants, that the representatives of other states, who did not wish to speak out at all at the outset, found the courage to express one after the other their reluctance to permit new Jewish emigration.

The European countries did this, while pointing to the fact that they had reached the point of saturation; the south Americans spoke unanimously of the agricultural structure of their countries which permitted the emigration of farmers, not of merchants and city intellectuals. Some of them, as for example the representative of Brazil, let it be understood that Jews often would enter disguised as farmers, only to move to the city at the earliest opportunity.

The representative of the British Dominions made excuses based on the situation of the labor market (Canada), the wish for a uniform population (Australia), or the danger of increasing anti-Semitism.

It seems, therefore, that the United States alone can be considered a target for Jewish emigration of any significant proportion. In his opening speech, the American representative pointed out the now combined immigration quota for Germany and Austria (approximately 27,000 per annum). Beyond this, most of the delegates are convinced, and the Swedish representative said so openly today, that a real solution to the Jewish emigration problem can only be solved on a territorial basis, in which the Jews will be among themselves and where, besides the German emigrants, within time also millions of Polish and other Jews can be settled. The English representative referred to the African colony of Kenya in this respect, but all this was dependent on present developments. Other colonial powers did not mention their colonies at all (France, Belgium) or they have declared that they were not fit for white settlers (Belgium, Holland).


In his Reichstag speech of January 30, 1939, Hitler used the world's reluctance to absorb Jewish refugees to legitimize the Nazi program of expulsion:

It is a shameful spectacle to see how the whole democratic world is oozing sympathy for the poor tormented Jewish people, but remains hard-hearted and obdurate when it comes to aiding them -- which is surely, in view of its attitude, an obvious duty. The arguments that are brought up as excuses for not helping them actually speak for us Germans and Italians.

It's still not "morally" right for innocent people to get caught up in this off course, but as a sovereign nation they did have the right.

Then we come back to the entire point of the discussion. If the Nazis were really trying to kill everyone and if they used gas chambers or not.

 

[abaddon]

Then we come back to the entire point of the discussion. If the Nazis were trying to kill everyone and if they used gas chambers or not.

No, not everyone, just those they arbitrarily chose to consider "untermenschen".

And yes they did use gas chambers.

 

[kageki]

As you can see by continuing to present the example of Japanese in America we have folded the house of cards.

When you are dealing with someone who is uneducated about a topic it is important to explain it to them on the terms they understand and then take it step by step.

By throwing information that they do not know and do not understand at them you only have them dismiss it outright.

Part of the problem is that deniers will always say that the evidence has been tampered with or the witness is lying.


ex.

I have personally spoken to Eva Kor and she shared her experiences with me. One of the very important things that she has done is encourage Hans Munch, a doctor at Auschwitz, to document that he witnessed the use of gas chambers. He does so here:


http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/m/muench-hans/auschwitz-declaration.html

However deniers will state that it's a fraudulent document. They say he was cooerced and senile. And that his story doesn't match the facts.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/is-dr-munch-a-confused-old-man-or-a-defiant-nazi-1183628.html


I think rather than taking the witness and documentation of "opinions" as to what happened, it is important to show the facts of what happened and ask people to draw a logical conclusion.

Ex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment

About 150,000 people were rounded up by the US government

The deaths if any were very minimal.

Kageki states because there wasn't a typhus epidemic and it was much smaller.

So the question remains. Why would Nazis continue to send people to a camp where the fatality rate was hovering around 50%. Where they had a typhus epidemic and a lice epidemic and very little resources.

For how long did the Nazis intend to keep them there in these conditions.


I'd like to see an answer to this question. For how long did the Nazis intend to keep them there in these conditions?

According to the arguments made in this thread, this was considered a "new" solution for them and where they were going to stay since they couldn't get them out of the country.

Odd how they went into other countries and insisted on rounding them up even though the other countries didn't want to give them up. That doesn't jibe with what the deniers are suggesting about no one wanting them. You'd think if Denmark was saying "No we won't surrender the Jews" they'd say "shwoo, finally someone wants to keep them. Because our camps are packed to the gills and we can't manage the ones we have!" But no.

So kageki, if this was a long term housing camp, where are the plans for that and the budgets?

Let's just look at money. How much did it cost?

http://www.codoh.com/butz/di/intro.html

During both world wars Germany was forced to fight typhus, carried by lice in the constant traffic with the east. That is why all accounts of entry into the German concentration camps speak of shaving of hair and showering and other delousing procedures, such as treatment of quarters with the pesticide Zyklon. That was also the main reason for a high death rate in the camps, and the crematoria that existed in all.

When Germany collapsed in chaos then of course all such defenses ceased, and typhus and other diseases became rampant in the camps, which quartered mainly political prisoners, ordinary criminals, homosexuals, conscientious objectors, and Jews conscripted for labor. Hence the horrible scenes, which however had nothing to do with "extermination" or any deliberate policy. Moreover the west German camps involved were not the alleged "extermination camps", which were all in Poland (e.g. Auschwitz and Treblinka) and which were all evacuated or shut down before capture by the Soviets, who found no such scenes.

My guess for the camps would be for the duration of the war then perhaps go back to the ghetto system or more deportations. I also think there has been a lot of exaggerations of the conditions.

Some countries resisted, but others were willing like Hungary. As Eichmann explained that the attitudes toward the east were generally shared as in places like Poland, Hungary, Ukraine and Romania. Nazis were still interested in expelling them out of their political sphere so I guess that also meant Denmark. "No one wanting them" was established at the Evian conference.

You should also look into the discussion about the capacity of the crematoriums.