Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Corsair 115]

Go [to] library.

Many many books -- don't be afraid, nice person behind counter will help you find.


Read, read, read.

Pffft! Libraries are passé. These days everyone knows the real source to use is YouTube!

 

[TSR]

So where is that proof?

.
I just told you: it's in those, you know, book thingys that Mr. Z references quite extensively in those, you know, footnote thingys which your source mostly uses to editorialize in instead of, you know, citing his own sources.

Am I going to have to use smaller words again?

Do you expect me to list all 400 some odd citations used by Mr. Z?

Tell you what: actually *read* the first paper, then actually *read* the link you posted, then actually *read* the response.

You've been given the proof, in a format that doesn't make you have to touch one of those nasty book thingys that apparently scare you so much.

If you feel your link raises a valid point not addressed by mine, rephrase it here and I will show that it has been, or that it is invalid.

If you feel anything in *my* link is invalid, rephrase it here and I will supply another credible source for it.

Meanwhile, have you bothered to even try to figure out what happened to Henio, or can't you find one of the more clever deniers to spoon feed you an answer?

Or the answers to *any* of the questions you've been running, you brave 'honourary' aryan warrior, you?
.

 

[Wroclaw]

Ask them and I will.

I did. Here. Bolded. Stop f-ing around or admit you won't:

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

 

[Wroclaw]

These are mostly about cremation capacity and there has been lots of debate about that. What makes me wonder is the complications of specifically disposing gassed victims. Gas chambers.

OK, two issues here: cremation capacity and gas chambers. Mattogno's and Zimmerman's cited work is on cremation capacity, so let's stay there for now.

I believe Zimmerman's figures, for the most part. Perhaps you could tell me why you don't?

 

[dafydd]

So where is that proof? Why don't you answer your own question?

It's a game of give and take. You have to answer questions too,you're not a Gestapo officer conducting an interrogation.

 

[Dogzilla]

I did. Here. Bolded. Stop f-ing around or admit you won't:

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

I answered them. But again: No. No.

 

[Wroclaw]

I answered them. But again: No. No.

Fine, so clearly you have evidence that the Reinhardt camps were delousing camps (i.e., you have evidence that Jews were ever deloused at these camps on a routine basis — something like testimony would be nice, particularly from the SS).

Well, gee: Enlighten us all. Please list a single SS man who ever said that delousing was done at the AR camps and not gassing.

I'll answer a question for you first, however, if you'd like.

 

[Walter Ego]

Denial: The Final State Of Genocide

Our genocide apologists seem to running out of steam, sputtering and running in circles chasing their own tails. As deniers they of course are carrying on the work of those Nazis they admire so much.

DENIAL is the eighth stage that always follows a genocide. It is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres. The perpetrators of genocide dig up the mass graves, burn the bodies, try to cover up the evidence and intimidate the witnesses. They deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims.

The 8 Stages of Genocide
By Gregory H. Stanton
http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutgenocide/8stagesofgenocide.html

 

[dafydd]

Our genocide apologists seem to running out of steam, sputtering and running in circles chasing their own tails. As deniers they of course are carrying on the work of those Nazis they admire so much.

Why do they keep presenting the same debunked arguments? I suppose they think that some eejit somewhere will believe and join their ranks.

 

[Wroclaw]

Why do they keep presenting the same debunked arguments? I suppose they think that some eejit somewhere will believe and join their ranks.

I think they get reeled in by simpler arguments, and the most of the ones who bother to debate the issue are at this stage. Rather than rest on very weak laurels, they ultimately either give up denial as untenable or double down and go into hard-core anti-Semitism. If they do the latter, they may show up on forums such as this with mildly more sophisticated arguments (cf., Little Grey Rabbit), but those people are the exception and not the rule.

 

[Dogzilla]

Our genocide apologists seem to running out of steam, sputtering and running in circles chasing their own tails. As deniers they of course are carrying on the work of those Nazis they admire so much.

From the eighth stage: "The perpetrators of genocide dig up the mass graves, burn the bodies, try to cover up the evidence and intimidate the witnesses. They deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims."

What genocide besides the holocaust have the perpetrators dug up the mass graves and burn the bodies?

 

[Wroclaw]

What genocide besides the holocaust have the perpetrators dug up the mass graves and burn the bodies?

Bosnia.

 

[Wroclaw]

Just posting a link to a refutation of CODOH:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6956964&postcount=59

 

[TSR]

Bosnia.

.
While not a genocide in the normative sense of that word, Los Cabitos also springs to mind as a case of state-sponsored mass murder which had an attempt at a cover up by exhuming its victims and burning them.
.

 

[Wroclaw]

.
While not a genocide in the normative sense of that word, Los Cabitos also springs to mind as a case of state-sponsored mass murder which had an attempt at a cover up by exhuming its victims and burning them.
.

Interesting. Hadn't heard of this specific incident (though I was aware of Latin America's "dirty war"), and this was the first hit I got:

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45512

Thanks for that.

 

[Dogzilla]

Bosnia.

I should have been more specific. I was wondering if in any other genocide the perpetrators have dug up bodies and burned them to try and erase the evidence of their crimes. Is that what happened in Bosnia? I see articles about bodies being burned and mutilated in Bosnia but it doesn't sound like the burning was done to erase evidence.

 

[TheRedWorm]

Right, the nazis were possibly unique in their evil. So?

P.S. So you now admit that the nazis killed a mass of people then burned their bodies to try to conceal evidence of their crimes, right? Furthermore, you admit that what happened to the Jews, Roma, Gays, and others during the nazi regime was, in fact, genocide?

 

[truethat]

I'm curious--I don't know the answer to this question--has anybody ever been jailed in Europe for "hate speech" by proclaiming that a non-holocaust genocide didn't happen?

I'm not sure I understand your point here? But people are jailed for inciting hate speech in other countries, including Canada. We don't have it in the US and there's a vast difference. If your insinuation is that it is only related to the Holocaust, I don't think this is true.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24665094/ns/world_news-europe/
http://euronews.us/?p=1284

It should be questioned no matter what. If the physical evidence doesn't support it, then that part of the testimony should be discarded.

Not discarded, but not believed.

Between the sister on stage and the one in the audience, it was claimed emphatically that Jews were turned into soap, one sister lived right next to the crematorium and said it smelled just like roast chicken. The one on stage said that the Sondercommando working in the "gas chamber" came back to the barracks every night and told her and the other prisoners what had been going on and that they were killed every few months so there would be no eyewitnesses. She said that Dr. Mengele allowed a younger sibling to join their mother because Mengele "didn't want a commotion" at the selection. And finally, she said that the Jews were given some sort of medication to keep them calm.

Problems:
1) Nobody was turned into soap.
2) Nobody lived right next door to the Krema unless they worked inside it.
3) Sondercommandos who were going to be killed after six months so there wouldn't be any eyewitnesses wouldn't be allowed to go back to the regular prisoner barracks to bear witness to their activities.
4) Mengele wouldn't care about "a commotion" at the selection.
5) Nazis didn't distribute sedatives to the prisoners in the camps.

Everybody here agrees that these two teenage girls were traumatized by their experience in Auschwitz. Does anybody think that either of these women are reliable witnesses to anything?

They would be, in my opinion not reliable witnesses. The documentation of the camps was not based on these kinds of witnesses. In fact most of the documentation came from the Germans themselves. Still curious why you ignore this fact.

What do you mean by "documented evidence?" Are you saying that there were plenty of witnesses talking but those testimonies weren't written down?

You may be correct--that there are thousands and thousands of eyewitnesses who told what they saw but if these testimonies weren't written down, they're not very helpful to either of us, are they?

Not quite. If you are using Confirmation Bias then it would not be helpful. But the Holocaust evolved based on the evidence. Not the other way around. The Holocaust did not start with the testimony of witnesses, it ended there. The documentation is huge and led to this conclusion. We are not talking about urban legends here or emotionally biased misinformation. We are not talking about outright liars or manipulators or scam artists.

Get rid of them=removing them from the sphere of German influence. Not killing them.

That's a bit of a parsed sentence. "From the sphere of German influence while Germany was trying to take over Europe. Use some common sense here. WHERE were they planning on sending them? Russia? If so why didn't the trains just take them there in the first place.

If gassing isn't important, why not drop it?

I have taken it off the table several times. I still don't understand what the method of death has to do with the reality of millions of people being killed.

Any perceived power or sympathy the Jews gain from the holocaust today is a separate discussion. Even if the holocaust occurred exactly the way Hollywood shows us that it did, the question of why the Arab population should pay for the crimes committed on another continent by a people of a different religion remains.

It doesn't. The situation is Israel and Palestine has nothing to do with the Holocaust and everything to do with the religious implication of the land. That is obvious.

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

I have taken it off the table several times. I still don't understand what the method of death has to do with the reality of millions of people being killed.

Hitler huggers are denying the gassings, because they don't make sense for their story. It doesn't make any sense, that there were gas chambers for mass exterminations, if the poor misunderstood nazis just tried to lock political enemies away from doing any damage to their fine agenda.

If gassing isn't important, why not drop it?

How about that?: Because it's a fact!

You have to be a total nut, nazi or both to still deny the existence of those facilities after ALL the evidence that was presented to you. And most of this evidence doesn't have a damn thing to do with eyewitnesses. For ****s sake, some of these gas chambers are still in existence today.

 

[truethat]

The reason I'm taking the gas chambers off the table is that I'd like to know what difference it makes to the deniers.

Ok say they didn't use the gas chambers in an aggressive and deliberate way to exterminate the Jews. Take that off the table. What does that leave us with? Is it suddenly NOT a Holocaust because they didn't use it?

That seems to be the angle many of these people are trying to take. Even without the gas chambers it is still a Holocaust. It's only worse, with the gas chambers.