9/11-investigator explains the Holocaust

[Humanzee]

Ugh. How can you make such a comparison Dogzilla? Are you seriously equating Jews exterminated inside German occupied territory with Japanese-Americans interned in US borders during WWII? Surely not.

 

[Craig4]

The claim was that deporting alone and nothing else was a criminal act. All those other words you used aren't important to this particular discussion.

You are correct that the Japanese-Americans weren't deported in the sense of being removed from US borders. But the Jews weren't moved anywhere outside of territory controlled by Nazi Germany either.

So I can count you as one who thinks that deporting Jews is a criminal act but deporting other ethnic groups might not be quite as criminal?

Of course killing the Jews after deportation was a criminal act.

 

[Wroclaw]

The claim was that deporting alone and nothing else was a criminal act. All those other words you used aren't important to this particular discussion.

Hey! Dogzilla! Two yes/no questions await your reply here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6949378&postcount=435

Come on! Show the world that Holocaust deniers really can answer simple questions!

 

[Dogzilla]

Ugh. How can you make such a comparison Dogzilla? Are you seriously equating Jews exterminated inside German occupied territory with Japanese-Americans interned in US borders during WWII? Surely not.

The claim was that deporting Jews is a criminal act. Nothing else. Just deporting them would be a crime in and of itself.

 

[Dogzilla]

.
What? They weren't sent East?

What happened to them, then?

They *were* deported from the countries of which they were citizens. How many Japanese (or any other ethnic group) did the US do that to?

Jews were moved from German controlled territory to German controlled territory. You are not seriously suggesting that Germany had the ability to send Jews into territory that it didn't control?

Nothing I have said even suggests this, but I can't stop you from being dishonest if you choose to be.


As you so often, you know, choose to be.
.

Why don't you just answer the question?

 

[Dogzilla]

Of course killing the Jews after deportation was a criminal act.

Non sequitur. The issue is deportation.

 

[Dogzilla]

Hey! Dogzilla! Two yes/no questions await your reply here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6949378&postcount=435

Come on! Show the world that Holocaust deniers really can answer simple questions!

Asked and answered.

 

[H'ethetheth]

...Thank the stars that Dutchmen like you are few and far between.

Unfortunately, they weren't so few and far between in the war, as the Netherlands ended up deporting a far larger percentage of its Jews than even the Germans managed; I believe we came in second, right after Lithuania or some such.
Also, I'm not really sure they are all that few and far between now, if you count the enormous support for Wilders' xenophobia-party (though admittedly, the Jews are about the only minority not in their focus).

ETA: I see that wikipedia has different (more favourable for the Dutch) numbers than I read some time ago (I believe in "der Spiegel").

 

[TSR]

Jews were moved from German controlled territory to German controlled territory.

.
Perhaps you are using a definition of "deported" different the the entire rest of the world? Here let me help you out:

"to expel (an alien) from a country; banish."

Now, unless you are trying to argue that, to pull one example out of the air, Hungary had become Germany, or that the various United States are actually various countries, then the first were deported and and second, not.

And one noticed you entirely ducked the issue that you heroes actively sought out people to deport in every country they "controlled" (and how did they come by that "control," again?) while the US did not.

You really should stop trying to defend your comparison -- it's been shown to be so faulty in so many ways that it's like comparing bacon and eggs and saying they are the same thing since they are both tasty for breakfast.

The difference is we don't kill the chickens for their eggs.
.

You are not seriously suggesting that Germany had the ability to send Jews into territory that it didn't control?

.
Ah, so we are agreed that the whole "evacuation to the East" thing is a crock.

What *did* happen to all of those Hungarian Jews, then?
.

Why don't you just answer the question?

.
I did.

Any rational person with a working knowledge of English would have understood that "Nothing I have said even suggests that" necessarily includes the concepts of "No, you are wrong" and "Stop trying to twist my words."

Which is it: are you not rational, or do you not have a working knowledge of English?

Your turn: why don't you answer my question about what exactly I tried to dodge when I last asked you "What Happened To Henio?"
.

 

[TSR]

Asked and answered.

.
Nope.

Asked, but not even acknowledged.

Go ahead -- prove me wrong, liar: link to your answering post.

Or is this another "Don't know, don't care" scenario? More like "don't care to answer because it makes me look stoopid."

Guess what? Too late.
.

 

[Wroclaw]

Asked and answered.

Liar!

 

[Matthew Ellard]

Jews were moved from German controlled territory to German controlled territory.

I see. So in regards to the 713,555 jews sent to Treblinka prior to 30Dec42 (Hofle Telegram) please explain where exactly these jews were transported in the east, in light of Franz Stangl's (the commanding officer) confession...
it was always a huge mass… they were naked, packed together, running, being driven with whips" & "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.
and in light of Justice Łukaszkiewicz's investigation where he states
"its walls give recognizable evidence of the presence of a large quantity of ashes as well as human remains – was further excavated in order to discover the depth of the pit in this part of the camp.....Numerous human remains were found by these excavations, partially still in a state of decomposition.[208] The soil consists of ashes interspersed with sand, is of a dark gray color and granulous in form. During the excavations, the soil gave off an intense odor of burning and decay. At a depth of 7.5 meters the bottom was reached..........

I made an exact inspection of the terrain. According to the measurements, the area of the camp is approximately 13.45 hectares and had the shape of an irregular quadrilateral.......the surface is covered for about 2 hectares by a mixture of ashes and sand. In this mixture, one finds countless human bones, often still covered with tissue remains, which are in a condition of decomposition. During the inspection, which I made with the assistance of an expert in forensic medicine, it was determined that the ashes are without any doubt of human origin

 

[dafydd]

Hey! Dogzilla! Two yes/no questions await your reply here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6949378&postcount=435

Come on! Show the world that Holocaust deniers really can answer simple questions!

Maybe the questions are not simple enough for the knuckle draggers. Try couching them in two syllable words.

 

[Dogzilla]

.
Perhaps you are using a definition of "deported" different the the entire rest of the world? Here let me help you out:

"to expel (an alien) from a country; banish."

Now, unless you are trying to argue that, to pull one example out of the air, Hungary had become Germany, or that the various United States are actually various countries, then the first were deported and and second, not.

And one noticed you entirely ducked the issue that you heroes actively sought out people to deport in every country they "controlled" (and how did they come by that "control," again?) while the US did not.

You really should stop trying to defend your comparison -- it's been shown to be so faulty in so many ways that it's like comparing bacon and eggs and saying they are the same thing since they are both tasty for breakfast.

The difference is we don't kill the chickens for their eggs.
.

As I said, "deported" is not the right word. People who are "deported" are usually free to go wherever they want to go except back to the country that deported them. That's not what happened to the Jews. Plus, as your Webster's tells you, deportation is something that happens to "aliens" and the Japanese-Americans were US citizens.

However, 'deportation' was the word that dudalb used in the statement that

Not to mention that even the deportation of somebody just because they are Jews would strike anybody except for a hate filled bigot as a crime in and of itself.

'Forced relocation' would be more apropos. Or perhaps you have a better word for forcing every member of a particular group of people--because they are a member of that particular group of people--to abandon their homes, businesses, and all their personal property except for what they can carry on their backs, get on cattle cars, travel hundreds if not thousands of miles away to unfamiliar territory and live for an indefinite period of time in converted horse stables surrounded by barbed wire and guarded by soldiers who are ordered to shoot anybody who tries to leave without permission?

But whatever word you use, do you agree that only a hate filled bigot would see it as a crime when it happens to Japanese-Americans qua Japanese-Americans or is that only true when it happens to Jews qua Jews?

That's the question you keep trying to dodge with your focus on irrelevant minutia.

.
Ah, so we are agreed that the whole "evacuation to the East" thing is a crock.

Germany could relocate Jews to territory it didn't control and maintain control over the Jews in that territory that Germany didn't control or evacuation to the East is a crock???

Your desperation is showing. How is what you asked an answer to my question?

What *did* happen to all of those Hungarian Jews, then?
.

IIRC, they were evacuated to the General Government where they were holocausted. Then they were evacuated to the camps inside Germany proper where they were holocausted some more. Then they were set free to inflict an orgy of rape and pillage against the civilian population.

.
I did.

Any rational person with a working knowledge of English would have understood that "Nothing I have said even suggests that" necessarily includes the concepts of "No, you are wrong" and "Stop trying to twist my words."

Which is it: are you not rational, or do you not have a working knowledge of English?

You are a liar. You never answered my question. It appears again in this message. Why don't you stop being a girly man and just admit you're prejudice?

Your turn: why don't you answer my question about what exactly I tried to dodge when I last asked you "What Happened To Henio?"
.

I did answer your question but evidently your attention span is too short to remember. As I said, little Henrio was snatched from the comfort and safety of his family and sent to the gas chamber in either Auschwitz or Treblinka. I'm not sure which one. It's possible--although not certain--that he was thrown alive into the gas oven. After the war, he moved to Brooklyn and became a successful ear, nose, and throat specialist.

Oh, wait a minute! That was Zvi, not Henrio. What happened to Henrio? Don't know. Don't care.

 

[Wroclaw]

IIRC, they were evacuated to the General Government where they were holocausted.

Depends. Auschwitz and Chelmno were not in the General Government. The Reinhardt camps and Majdanek were.[/quote]

Then they were evacuated to the camps inside Germany proper where they were holocausted some more.

Er, no.

In the case of the camps in the General Government, only Majdanek had a significant number of Jews brought into Germany. In fact, of all six death camps in Poland, Auschwitz alone sent Jews in five figures back into Germany. The Reinhardt camps sent extremely few. If I recall correct, Belzec sent zero Jews to Germany.

So the question is: What happened to all those Jews who were sent to Belzec from Poland? Tens of thousands, you know. If you decide to view the Höfle and Korherr documents are not indicating murder, then you're talking about a couple hundred thousand Jews went to Belzec who disappeared.

And here's the thing: You can't make the claim they were sent someplace else, unless you want to rescind the claim that the Nazis sent them someplace that was not under their control. And we know that this was basically impossible.

Furthermore, we know that when the Soviets reached the site of Belzec, the camp had been bulldozed.

So why don't you tell us what you think happened at Belzec to the Jews sent there? And offer some proof while you're at it.

 

[dafydd]

So why don't you tell us what you think happened at Belzec to the Jews sent there? And offer some proof while you're at it.

He will tell you what he thinks but proof? Forget it.

 

[Wroclaw]

He will tell you what he thinks but proof? Forget it.

Why, in a hundred million years, would he think that his word was worth anything without proof to back it up?

It's all so ◊◊◊◊◊ transparent. They demand proof for everything that's been proved a thousand times, but they were allege their own version without a shred of evidence.

 

[TSR]

As I said, "deported" is not the right word.

.
No, you didn't -- at least not until right now.

G'head, prove me wrong, liar.
.

People who are "deported" are usually free to go wherever they want to go except back to the country that deported them.

.
No, usually they are sent back to where ever they entered the country in question.
.

That's not what happened to the Jews. Plus, as your Webster's tells you, deportation is something that happens to "aliens" and the Japanese-Americans were US citizens.

.
Which is why *your* calling what happened to them as deportation, when they were neither foreign nor left the country was a stupid thing to have said.

Which you then compounded by trying to defend by the whole "German controlled territory" thing.
.

However, 'deportation' was the word that dudalb used in the statement that

.
... mainly because they were. They were removed from a country where they lived, and sent to some other country. If you wanted to dispute dudalb's use of the word "deportation" to describe this process, using it yourself in an even more inappropriate manner, and then trying to defend that use wouldn't seem to be the best way to make that point.
.

'Forced relocation' would be more apropos. Or perhaps you have a better word for forcing every member of a particular group of people--because they are a member of that particular group of people--to abandon their homes, businesses, and all their personal property except for what they can carry on their backs, get on cattle cars, travel hundreds if not thousands of miles away to unfamiliar territory and live for an indefinite period of time in converted horse stables surrounded by barbed wire and guarded by soldiers who are ordered to shoot anybody who tries to leave without permission?

.
If you would *now*, having been spanked on the matter, want to use that term, I for one am good with that. Just don't try to pretend that you didn't use the other term yourself in a wildly inappropriate manner, nor that you said something you hadn't.

That just points up your dishonesty.
.

But whatever word you use, do you agree that only a hate filled bigot would see it as a crime when it happens to Japanese-Americans qua Japanese-Americans or is that only true when it happens to Jews qua Jews?

.
Who here has stated that it is only true when it happens to Jews?

Straw man much?
.

That's the question you keep trying to dodge with your focus on irrelevant minutia.

.
And given that it is based on a false premise, and a false moral equivilancy, and has no bearing on anything that anyone here has even said, and is off topic, it's a "question" that simply highlights your fundamental dishonesty. What is minute is the probability of success for your attempts to re-write history...
.

Germany could relocate Jews to territory it didn't control and maintain control over the Jews in that territory that Germany didn't control or evacuation to the East is a crock???

.
No, the idea that this was their plan is a crock.

An idea you try to champion by claiming that, for example, Treblinka was a transit camp from where the Jews went their "merry way."

Proving which is one of the questions you keep dodging with, for example, this off topic Japanese interment camps thing.
.

Your desperation is showing. How is what you asked an answer to my question?

.
Okay, I'll type it slow for you:

N o ,
d e p o r t a t i o n ,
a s
u s e d
b y
d u d a l b ,
w o u l d
n o t
o n l y
b e
a
c r i m e
w h e n
d o n e
t o
J e w s .

B u t
t h e n ,
n o
o n e
e v e r
c l a i m e d
i t
w a s
s o
y o u r
q u e s t i o n
m a k e s
n o
s e n s e ,
i s
o f f - t o p i c
a n d
a
d e s p e r a t e
a t t e m p t
t o
d i s t r a c t
f r o m
y o u r
f u n d a m e n t a l
m e n d a c i t y .
.
IIRC, they were evacuated to the General Government where they were holocausted. Then they were evacuated to the camps inside Germany proper where they were holocausted some more. Then they were set free to inflict an orgy of rape and pillage against the civilian population.
.
Define "holocausted," if you would, and show that the Hungarian Jews were "set free to inflict an orgy of rape and pillage against the civilian population."

Don't forget to document all the rapes committed by the pre-pubescent children sent to the camps.
.

You are a liar. You never answered my question. It appears again in this message. Why don't you stop being a girly man and just admit you're prejudice?

.
Again, a rational being with a working knowledge of English could read the context and see that the question that I responded to in that way was "So I can count you as one who thinks that deporting Jews is a criminal act but deporting other ethnic groups might not be quite as criminal?" I even, you know, quoted it and stuff. If you meant some other question, from some other post which I didn't quote, then you should have repeated which question you were referring to, or provided a link.

You know, like Wroclaw did?

For the two questions you lied about having answered?

And *still* have not.
.

I did answer your question but evidently your attention span is too short to remember. As I said, little Henrio was snatched from the comfort and safety of his family and sent to the gas chamber in either Auschwitz or Treblinka. I'm not sure which one. It's possible--although not certain--that he was thrown alive into the gas oven. After the war, he moved to Brooklyn and became a successful ear, nose, and throat specialist.

.
Wow -- gotta be a personal best. Four lies in one para.

You've never said any such thing; no, it's not "possible"; no, Zvi Unger moved to Israel by way of Paris; and he was bookkeeper there.

Are you making this all up, or is that what your idiot denier buddies told you happened to him which you are now mindlessly parroting?
.

Oh, wait a minute! That was Zvi, not Henrio.

What happened to Henrio? Don't know. Don't care.

.
No, why should you -- he was only a jooo, after all, and his fate demonstrates that your crap about Majdanek being a "transport camp" to be, you know, crap.
.

 

[Dogzilla]

Depends. Auschwitz and Chelmno were not in the General Government. The Reinhardt camps and Majdanek were.

I think that Auschwitz I was not in the GG but Birkinau was. I don't remember where I read that or in what context it came up. If anybody else says I'm wrong, I'll yield to them because I'm just not sure. Does anybody know where to find a map of the GG pre-Barbarossa that would be detailed enough to distinguish A from B?

Er, no.

In the case of the camps in the General Government, only Majdanek had a significant number of Jews brought into Germany. In fact, of all six death camps in Poland, Auschwitz alone sent Jews in five figures back into Germany. The Reinhardt camps sent extremely few. If I recall correct, Belzec sent zero Jews to Germany.

So the question is: What happened to all those Jews who were sent to Belzec from Poland? Tens of thousands, you know. If you decide to view the Höfle and Korherr documents are not indicating murder, then you're talking about a couple hundred thousand Jews went to Belzec who disappeared.

And here's the thing: You can't make the claim they were sent someplace else, unless you want to rescind the claim that the Nazis sent them someplace that was not under their control. And we know that this was basically impossible.

Furthermore, we know that when the Soviets reached the site of Belzec, the camp had been bulldozed.

So why don't you tell us what you think happened at Belzec to the Jews sent there? And offer some proof while you're at it.

The question was what happened to the Hungarian Jews. I thought the official story is that those four hundred thousand or so Jews were sent to Birkinau.

 

[TSR]

I think that Auschwitz I was not in the GG but Birkinau was.

.
Even if you weren't wrong, which you are -- what is the point of this distinction?

People were forcibly removed to a country other than th one of which they were a citizen, for no better reason than they were considered Jewish, and were never heard from again.

They didn't go anywhere further East, they didn't go back to their homes, they didn't even go back to Germany proper.

What happened to them?

Don't forget to include some of that, you know, evidence thingy in your answer...
.