Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Wroclaw]

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.

It seems to be a matter of the death by a thousand cuts. If they can convince people that there weren't any gas chambers, then they can move on to convince them there were no shootings, no central plan, nowhere near six million deaths, etc.

 

[Walter Ego]

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.

The existence or non-existence of the gas chambers is what defines Holocaust denial. It is the sine qua non of denial. To take it "off the table" would be a form of Neville Chamberlain-like appeasement to the Nazi apologists.

The deniers have no problem with Nazis killing Jews or with mass murder in general. It is with the gas chambers that they draw their line in the sand. Kamenets-Podolsk in the Ukraine (23,000 Jews killed)? Babi Yar (33,771 killed)? Odessa (35,000 killed)? No problem! These things happen in war. The death camps with their gas chambers and crematoria? Problem! Halt verboten!

There is also the issue of how "respectful" we should be to the genocide apologists (who in my view are carrying on the work of the Nazis they admire so much ). I don't think they deserve any respect whatsoever regardless of their motives. We are constrained, of course, by the forum rules regarding "civility," but within those constraints, we should give them the scorn, ridicule and, yes, disrespect they deserve.

 

[Wroclaw]

The deniers have no problem with Nazis killing Jews or with mass murder in general. It is with the gas chambers that they draw their line in the sand. Kamenets-Podolsk in the Ukraine (23,000 Jews killed)? Babi Yar (33,771 killed)? Odessa (35,000 killed)? No problem! These things happen in war. The death camps with their gas chambers and crematoria? Problem! Halt verboten!

I very strongly disagree. Deniers fundamentally also attempt to negate the plan and numbers aspect of the Holocaust.

Furthermore, I just posted a response to a Babi Yar denial thread at CODOH.

They may have limited themselves to gas chambers regarding methods twenty years ago, but now everything is game.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

The Holocaust Deniers have a new target audience:The Charlie Sheen fanboys. They are showing up in force on several SHeen fan pages and using Cheen's antisemitic outbursts to push their cause. And the Sheen fans are just stupid enough to fall for it.

wait, what?

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

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.

Nothing, because the gas chambers are just one thing they deny. Their goal is it, to make the camps of the final solution look like the camps the US prepared for the Japanese in WW2.

And all those deaths just happend because of the war and illnesses like typhus. There never were exterminations, there never were experiments with human beings or other stories about the holocaust, nothing. Poor, poor nazis were totally innocent and did nothing wrong.

The deniers have no problem with Nazis killing Jews or with mass murder in general. It is with the gas chambers that they draw their line in the sand. Kamenets-Podolsk in the Ukraine (23,000 Jews killed)? Babi Yar (33,771 killed)? Odessa (35,000 killed)? No problem! These things happen in war. The death camps with their gas chambers and crematoria? Problem! Halt verboten!

Actually holocaust deniers deny those things too. But they have no moral problems with them, many, if not most, deniers are capable of commiting such crimes again.

There is also the issue of how "respectful" we should be to the genocide apologists (who in my view are carrying on the work of the Nazis they admire so much ). I don't think they deserve any respect whatsoever regardless of their motives. We are constrained, of course, by the forum rules regarding "civility," but within those constraints, we should give them the scorn, ridicule and, yes, disrespect they deserve.

Yep, I always prefered the good old argument+"You're a moron!" routine.

 

[Walter Ego]

I very strongly disagree. Deniers fundamentally also attempt to negate the plan and numbers aspect of the Holocaust.

Furthermore, I just posted a response to a Babi Yar denial thread at CODOH.

They may have limited themselves to gas chambers regarding methods twenty years ago, but now everything is game.

I stand corrected.

Yep, I always prefered the good old argument+"You're a moron!" routine.

I didn't say we should just call them names. I said they deserve scorn and ridicule. We should of course expose their lies.

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

I didn't say we should just call them names. I said they deserve scorn and ridicule. We should of course expose their lies. Do think genocide apologists are worthy of our respect?

That's why I wrote:

argument+"You're a moron!"

Just name calling doesn't really help the case and they surely don't deserve a respectful debate. There is no debate about the existence of mass exterminations in the holocaust.

 

[truethat]

It seems to be a matter of the death by a thousand cuts. If they can convince people that there weren't any gas chambers, then they can move on to convince them there were no shootings, no central plan, nowhere near six million deaths, etc.

Ah but they can't. This is why I take it off the table. As I have said before, the Holocaust wasn't created in the gas chambers. The gas chambers IF they were used were just one of the many methods. This is why I'm willing to disregard it to get to the heart of the matter and the truth.

The existence or non-existence of the gas chambers is what defines Holocaust denial. It is the sine qua non of denial. To take it "off the table" would be a form of Neville Chamberlain-like appeasement to the Nazi apologists.

The deniers have no problem with Nazis killing Jews or with mass murder in general. It is with the gas chambers that they draw their line in the sand. Kamenets-Podolsk in the Ukraine (23,000 Jews killed)? Babi Yar (33,771 killed)? Odessa (35,000 killed)? No problem! These things happen in war. The death camps with their gas chambers and crematoria? Problem! Halt verboten!

There is also the issue of how "respectful" we should be to the genocide apologists (who in my view are carrying on the work of the Nazis they admire so much ). I don't think they deserve any respect whatsoever regardless of their motives. We are constrained, of course, by the forum rules regarding "civility," but within those constraints, we should give them the scorn, ridicule and, yes, disrespect they deserve.

I very strongly disagree. Deniers fundamentally also attempt to negate the plan and numbers aspect of the Holocaust.

Furthermore, I just posted a response to a Babi Yar denial thread at CODOH.

They may have limited themselves to gas chambers regarding methods twenty years ago, but now everything is game.

I also very strongly disagree. It is very important not to use insults and name calling when discussing this topic.

Their stance is based on the idea that people are unwilling to look at the issue logically because they are swept up in emotion. When you reply emotionally you only bolster their claim.

I am quite logical about this issue and logical investigation shows there certainly was a Holocaust. That they are unwilling to concede this point shows THEIR emotional pleading. Which usually amounts to an annoyance that Jews have been able to "play the Holocaust card" throughtout the last 50 years.

That's why I wrote:


Just name calling doesn't really help the case and they surely don't deserve a respectful debate. There is no debate about the existence of mass exterminations in the holocaust.

Again, statements like these play right into their hands.

If it is History, then it should be History like any other. There is no special pleading in situations that discuss Japanese internment or the Native American Removal Act.

It is important and essential to keep any and all emotional pleading and insults out of the debate because when you don't you only prove to other less informed individuals that the Holocaust gets a special "white glove" approach rather than straight history.

 

[Wroclaw]

There is such a thing as simultaneously proving someone wrong using logic and science and calling that person an a-hole.

I will continue to do both, thanks.

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

Again, statements like these play right into their hands.

If it is History, then it should be History like any other.

Well, the problem is, this isn't history. It's fake history, that is supposed to legitimate a political system, which killed millions, not just through war but through industrial extermination.

Respect is something that such a bunch of racists simply doesn't deserve, because they are not looking for historical truth. Just look how often they seriously tried to answer critical questions. I have yet to find such an incident. And just look how some of them treat this topic, they don't even bother to commit multiple fallacies, they are just mocking every possible aspect about the holocaust and telling you how ridiculous it is.

It is important and essential to keep any and all emotional pleading and insults out of the debate because when you don't you only prove to other less informed individuals that the Holocaust gets a special "white glove" approach rather than straight history.

Yeah I agree, but there is no debate here and deniers aren't just people who get their facts wrong. As I already said, historical truth is not their goal. If you treat them with respect, you give the impression that their view is legitimated.

And this doesn't have anything to do with the holocaust, it's not the topic which sets the tone, but the a-holes you and I are talking to.

 

[Wroclaw]

Respect is something that such a bunch of racists simply doesn't deserve, because they are not looking for historical truth.

Amen to that.

 

[Walter Ego]

Ah but they can't. This is why I take it off the table. As I have said before, the Holocaust wasn't created in the gas chambers. The gas chambers IF they were used were just one of the many methods. This is why I'm willing to disregard it to get to the heart of the matter and the truth.

You can take is off your table but, since you are not a moderator of this forum, you can't take if off the table and I doubt if the genocide apologists will take if off their table either as it is an idée fixe for most of them. This tack would allow lies about the gassings and crematoria to stand unchallenged.

As to making nice-nice with liars and Jew haters, chose your own path and I'll chose mine.

 

[Walter Ego]

There is such a thing as simultaneously proving someone wrong using logic and science and calling that person an a-hole.

I will continue to do both, thanks.

As the situation warrants of course.

 

[truethat]

There is such a thing as simultaneously proving someone wrong using logic and science and calling that person an a-hole.

I will continue to do both, thanks.

You can do as you please but I'd rather get to the point of truth without the usual suspects of diversion.

You can take is off your table but, since you are not a moderator of this forum, you can't take if off the table and I doubt if the genocide apologists will take if off their table either as it is an idée fixe for most of them. This tack would allow lies about the gassings and crematoria to stand unchallenged.

As to making nice-nice with liars and Jew haters, chose your own path and I'll chose mine.

I never said "make nice-nice" with liars and Jew haters.

My contributions on this thread have nothing to do with the people actually posting. Rather, (as I have said before) my concern is with the silent reader who may be swayed by these arguments.

The truth is, there was a Holocaust. Quibbling over the details and method of death doesn't erase the Holocaust.

But removing them from the debate the remaining information shows that still INDEED there was a Holocaust: a deliberate aim to remove Jews by any means necessary.

I have never said I was the moderator. That is the second time you've put words in my posts that were not there.

It is simply my opinion.

 

[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?

Sup dog?

 

[pooshoodog]

[QUOTE
The AR camps were delousing facilities. Don't AR camps narratives include a part about how all the Jews were "deceived" into thinking they were stopping for a delousing? Aren't there stories about Jews being told to 'raus raus' or the water will get cold"?

What else could those facilities be? Treblinka, e.g., was a very tiny camp. Over 700,000 people were sent there according to German wartime records. They sure as h**l weren't murdered there because there's no evidence of that happening.

They stopped. They got clean. They went on their merry way.
[/QUOTE]

Well, if 700,000 people went on their way it should be no problem
for this chimp to post some eyewitness testimony from the German
and Ukrainian camp staff. Stuff like the diary of Franz Suchomel:

"16/8/1942.
Had no problem getting the Jews off the train, but they took forever
getting back on board for the trans-Siberian railway. After a plate of
Kurt Franz's Latkes, they were so sleepy and contented they just
sprawled out for a nap under the trees by the zoo."

Off course, there would be litererally thousands of diaries, memoirs
and letters detailing the journeys of these happy campers, and I
have no doubt that our deniers will be posting paragraphs, pages and chapters
from Jews in the countless memoirs that have been published by those
who happened to be deloused at Treblinka.

Obviously, all eyewitness accounts are lies and should be disregarded
completely, but doesn't it seem odd that we don't have any eyewitness
accounts from Germans, Ukrainians and Jews about the AR transit camps
or about the Auschwitz showers that were oddly adjacent to crematoria.
I mean, these would all be lies, but wouldn't some of these liars have
written something down on paper?

Oh Jeezux, I forgot that until I find the autopsy reports that Nazi
medical staff wrote up on the people they gassed, it is against the
rules to even write the word "eyewitnesses." My bad.

 

[Walter Ego]

[Quote tags fixed]

The AR camps were delousing facilities. Don't AR camps narratives include a part about how all the Jews were "deceived" into thinking they were stopping for a delousing? Aren't there stories about Jews being told to 'raus raus' or the water will get cold"?

What else could those facilities be? Treblinka, e.g., was a very tiny camp. Over 700,000 people were sent there according to German wartime records. They sure as h**l weren't murdered there because there's no evidence of that happening.

They stopped. They got clean. They went on their merry way

Well, if 700,000 people went on their way it should be no problem
for this chimp to post some eyewitness testimony from the German
and Ukrainian camp staff. Stuff like the diary of Franz Suchomel:

"16/8/1942.
Had no problem getting the Jews off the train, but they took forever
getting back on board for the trans-Siberian railway. After a plate of
Kurt Franz's Latkes, they were so sleepy and contented they just
sprawled out for a nap under the trees by the zoo."

Welcome to the forum pooshoodog. I have most of our resident Holocaust deniers on ignore. Which of them were you quoting?

 

[dafydd]

Welcome to the forum pooshoodog. I have most of our resident Holocaust deniers on ignore. Which of them were you quoting?

Does it matter?

 

[pooshoodog]

Welcome to the forum pooshoodog. I have most of our resident Holocaust deniers on ignore. Which of them were you quoting?

Hey Walter. <snip> I know
that no one <snip> allege that thousands of
trainloads of Jews stopped at these facilities for a quick
delousing and a reboarding without so much as a solitary
witness confirming this mass migration.

I, personally, whether you believe me or not, stopped
off at Tucumcari, New Mexico, 30 years ago. I know that
not many people have seen Tucumcari, but there are living
witnesses and written testimony that people have seen it.
They may all be lying and Tucumcari might be just some sort
of fantasy, but at least we have something to encourage
our faith in Tucumcari.

This is in contrast to the Reinhard Transit Camps that have
never been described, to my knowledge, by a single guest
or employee. I forget why we are supposed to believe that
these transit camps existed? Perhaps, if all witnesses are
liewitnesses, the only truth is the utterly unwitnessed.

<snip>

Edited, multiple breachs of rule 0, rule 12. Please re-read your Membership Agreement; these are the rules you agreed to follow when you became a member here.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar

 

[truethat]

Don't call people names. It is against the rules. I like your arguments though.