Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[VonKleist]

Anyone who studies the holohoax will have that surprise, there is no physical or documentary evidence whatever, no bodies, no gas chambers, no photos, no movies, no records, no nothing to document the holohoax. Instead, we know that the holohoax happened because of the Nuremberg trials ! That's it. The testimony of men who were under immediate threat of execution. That, along with endless propaganda lies from the World Jewish Congress, is ALL the 'evidence' there is of the holohoax.

Wow!

 

[Walter Ego]

Wow!

Saggy's boilerplate spew quoted above is intended for the innocents, newcomers and historical illiterates who may have wandered onto this forum and who may be impressed by such bold, mendacious assertions. I doubt if he even typed it out. It probably was cut and pasted from a collection of stock denier statements and phrases on the hard drive of his PC. If he was fast asleep and you poked him with a sharp stick to wake him up, he would probably verbally ejaculate something similar. Jew haters are nothing if not predictable.

 

[Wroclaw]

Thank you gareth for quoting Saggy's post. It is breathtaking in its idiocy.

 

[Saggy]

Thank you gareth for quoting Saggy's post. It is breathtaking in its idiocy.

gareth, could you please quote this as well, I don't want Wroc to miss it ...

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110318225327AA1Uxvj

Leading Jewish Auschwitz expert, admits "99% of what we know about Auschwitz" there's no physical evidence for?

"Ninety-nine per cent of what we know (about Auschwitz) we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove"

Robert Jan Van Pelt (foremost expert on Auschwitz)
The Toronto Star
December 27, 2009

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/742965--a-case-for-letting-nature-take-back-auschwitz
____________

Question:

Why do people accept what happened at Auschwitz on faith?

70,000 people on 13th October, 1917 had the same apparition, but we don't just accept that on their say so, despite their vast numbers.
http://fatima.ie/

Why's Auschwitz special, why is it accepted on virtually no evidence, except people's say so?

 

[VonKleist]

gareth, could you please quote this as well, I don't want Wroc to miss it ...

This bit?

If people go to the link they can see that there is no "(about Auschwitz)" in the statement.

Just how much of a jackass are you? do you think no-one will actually check the link? The man is talking about all human knowledge not Auschwitz.

Lord the world is full of dumb people but Holocaust deniers may just be the dumbest

 

[Wroclaw]

Yes, I'm aware of that quote. I'm also aware that in the same freaking article — in the next freaking paragraph, RJvP says this: "I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense."

Duh.

 

[dafydd]

Saggy's boilerplate spew quoted above is intended for the innocents, newcomers and historical illiterates who may have wandered onto this forum and who may be impressed by such bold, mendacious assertions. I doubt if he even typed it out. It probably was cut and pasted from a collection of stock denier statements and phrases on the hard drive of his PC. If he was fast asleep and you poked him with a sharp stick to wake him up, he would probably verbally ejaculate something similar. Jew haters are nothing if not predictable.

Thanks for quoting it. Breathtakingly dumb. How sad that a human being could sink so low.

 

[Nick Terry]

Anyone who studies the holohoax will have that surprise, there is no physical or documentary evidence whatever, no bodies, no gas chambers, no photos, no movies, no records, no nothing to document the holohoax. Instead, we know that the holohoax happened because of the Nuremberg trials ! That's it. The testimony of men who were under immediate threat of execution. That, along with endless propaganda lies from the World Jewish Congress, is ALL the 'evidence' there is of the holohoax.

OK, let's play along for a while. Saggy, can you define the 'holohoax'? I want to know exactly what was 'hoaxed' and what is included under your definition of the 'holohoax'?

Once you've defined the 'holohoax' then we can move on to see how good your assertions are.

 

[Walter Ego]

This bit?

So that was Saggy who inserted "about Auschwitz" into the Van Pelt quote? That's the trouble with pathological liars. They lie when they don't even have to.

The article is about the future of the Auschwitz-Birkenau site. Van Pelt, among others, proposes the site be sealed and allowed to "revert to nature."

Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.

It's obvious from the context that Van Pelt meant that ninety-nine per cent of what we know about all of history we don't have physical evidence for. He didn't say we don't have psychical evidence of the Holocaust but that we don't need more physical evidence from Birkenau to placate Jew haters like Saggy.

(Actually, if you read the entire article here you will see why there might, in any case, be a dearth of material evidence at the Birkenau site.)

Saggy could have quoted Van Pelt accurately and argued that Van Pelt wants to seal up Birkenau to prevent the discovery of additional evidence disproving the Holocaust but he thought it would be more effective to lie by altering the quote. Are we at all surprised by this?

 

[TSR]

That, along with endless propaganda lies from the World Jewish Congress, is ALL the 'evidence' there is of the holohoax.

.
Whose stories during the war in the NYT you repeatedly refer to, but have yet to actually *cite*, you degenerate liar.
.

 

[Saggy]

OK, let's play along for a while. Saggy, can you define the 'holohoax'? I want to know exactly what was 'hoaxed' and what is included under your definition of the 'holohoax'?

Once you've defined the 'holohoax' then we can move on to see how good your assertions are.

You have to be careful with the defines, Nick. The holohoax is the sytematic organized campaign by Zionists and World Jewry to convince the world that the holocaust happened. So, there is, of course, plenty of evidence for the holohoax, dating back to 1900 when Rabbi Wise was writing about 6,000,000 starving Jews in Europe in danger of extermination, to 1909 when the NYT accused Russia of the onging systematic extermination of 6,000,000 Jews in Europe, to the endless stream of article sourced to the World Jewish COngress that appeared in the NYT during WW I and WW II, to the takeover of the War Refugee Board by Morganthau, to the Nuremberg show trial.

Now, the holocaust is something different, a pack of degenerate lies, pure phantasmagoria. Six million non-existent bodies, non-existent gas chambers, non-existent plans to exterminate European Jews, non-existent Jewish soap, shrunken heads, lampshades, you can fill in other parts of the phantasmagoria here.

But, don't take my word for the lack of physical evidence, take fellow holohoax scholar Van Pelt's, he's a world authority, you know.

 

[Saggy]

It's obvious from the context that Van Pelt meant that ninety-nine per cent of what we know about all of history we don't have physical evidence for.

You are exactly right. That's what makes his statement such a howler, complete idiocy .... really, completely freaking absurd ...... here's an example of some of the evidence he overlooked for WW II, for example, sorry I can't post the photo, but, just click on the link.......

http://masterkeydalereynolds.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/battleship_003.jpg


LOL - I love this one !

 

[Nick Terry]

You have to be careful with the defines, Nick. The holohoax is the sytematic organized campaign by Zionists and World Jewry to convince the world that the holocaust happened. So, there is, of course, plenty of evidence for the holohoax, dating back to 1900 when Rabbi Wise was writing about 6,000,000 starving Jews in Europe in danger of extermination, to 1909 when the NYT accused Russia of the onging systematic extermination of 6,000,000 Jews in Europe, to the endless stream of article sourced to the World Jewish COngress that appeared in the NYT during WW I and WW II, to the takeover of the War Refugee Board by Morganthau, to the Nuremberg show trial.

Shame there's no evidence for any of this, but that's by the by.

Now, the holocaust is something different, a pack of degenerate lies, pure phantasmagoria. Six million non-existent bodies, non-existent gas chambers, non-existent plans to exterminate European Jews, non-existent Jewish soap, shrunken heads, lampshades, you can fill in other parts of the phantasmagoria here.

OK, now here's the problem. What you define as the Holocaust and what everyone else defines as the Holocaust are two very different things.

So now you need to provide us with a reasonably accurate summary of what the mainstream thinks the Holocaust is. Where and how the victims are held to have died, +/- 250,000 either side of the most recent consensus figures.

Oh, and where non-Jewish suffering fits into all of this. Was all of that hoaxed as well?

 

[Wroclaw]

Saggy's point about the six million figure being created is debunked here:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/

Andrew Mathis, who used to be part of the same blog, also did some work on that some blog, I think, on this denier meme.

 

[TSR]

You have to be careful with the defines, Nick.

.
So careful that you never get around to, you know, offering one that can be *factually* supported?
.

The holohoax is the sytematic organized campaign by Zionists and World Jewry to convince the world that the holocaust happened. So, there is, of course, plenty of evidence for the holohoax, dating back to 1900 when Rabbi Wise was writing about 6,000,000 starving Jews in Europe in danger of extermination,
.
Is there a reason that, despite it having been pointed out to you every time you've trotted this out, that you forget about the 700k children Wise wrote about?

Or that you still don't seem to be able to demonstrate that the famines then rampant in Eastern Europe *didn't* put these people in danger of starving?

Or even that there *weren't* close to 7 million men, women and children so endangered?
.

to 1909 when the NYT accused Russia of the onging systematic extermination of 6,000,000 Jews in Europe,

.
Linky? Or is this another of your lies?
.

to the endless stream of article sourced to the World Jewish COngress that appeared in the NYT during WW I and WW II,

.
And yet, you cannot produce even *one* such article, despite having (again) been repeatedly called on this lie.
.

to the takeover of the War Refugee Board by Morganthau,

.
"Takeover?" What position did Morgenthau hold on this board, exactly?
.

to the Nuremberg show trial.

.
Yeah. Show trial. Which explains why several of the defendants were acquitted.

You keep forgetting that point, too.
.
Now, the holocaust is something different, a pack of degenerate lies, pure phantasmagoria. Six million non-existent bodies, non-existent gas chambers, non-existent plans to exterminate European Jews, non-existent Jewish soap, shrunken heads, lampshades, you can fill in other parts of the phantasmagoria here.

.
The Nazis kept records of transporting non-existent bodies to the camps?

The ruins in the various camps, and the fully functional chamber at Dachau don't exist?

Soap? No one but Nazis claimed differently. Shrunken heads -- got a credible source? Lampshades: check the National Archives.

The only degenerate liar here is you, Saggs. Which why you continue to run from actually sourcing your claims or defining your terms.
.

But, don't take my word for the lack of physical evidence, take fellow holohoax scholar Van Pelt's, he's a world authority, you know.

.
The one that didn't say what you lied about him saying, liar?

How are we doing on at uncovering those Dachau pics you lied about, or the NYT articles you lied about or ...


Oh, that's right: you're a degenerate liar, and so have zero credibility when you try to pretend that your beef is with Zionists by which you have admitted
you mean Jews.
.

 

[Saggy]

So now you need to provide us with a reasonably accurate summary of what the mainstream thinks the Holocaust is.

Say what? Why would I indulge in that idiocy? I'll give it a go ... just for fun .... Elie Weisel is in the mainstream, right? He says the Nazis threw adults into one burning pit, and babies into another at Auschwitz. That degenerate lie is part of the holocaust, and has the added cachet of being told by the first director of the USHMM. Same book, 'Night', he says Nazis tossed babies into the air and used them for machine gun practice. That degenerate lie is part of the holocaust. Another mainstream source, Y. Wiernik, says that the Nazis grabbed babies from their mother's arms and tore them into two parts with their bare hands. That degenerate lie is part of the holocaust. How many do you need? You know infinitely more than I do, make your own list.

Here's a question for you Nick, how can you associate yourself with the degenerate lies of Elie Weisel and Yankel Weirnik?

 

[Saggy]

Saggy's point about the six million figure being created is debunked here:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/

I was quoting articles from the NYT, one published in 1900, the other in 1909. For a whole slew of articles published in the NYT from 1915-22 with holohoax lies get Don Heddesheimer's book "The First Holohoax, Jewish Fund Raising Campaigns With Holohoax Claims During World War ONE", available on amazon.com.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Say what? Why would I indulge in that idiocy? I'll give it a go ... just for fun .... Elie Weisel is in the mainstream, right? He says the Nazis threw adults into one burning pit, and babies into another at Auschwitz. That degenerate lie is part of the holocaust, and has the added cachet of being told by the first director of the USHMM. Same book, 'Night', he says Nazis tossed babies into the air and used them for machine gun practice. That degenerate lie is part of the holocaust. Another mainstream source, Y. Wiernik, says that the Nazis grabbed babies from their mother's arms and tore them into two parts with their bare hands. That degenerate lie is part of the holocaust. How many do you need? You know infinitely more than I do, make your own list.

Here's a question for you Nick, how can you associate yourself with the degenerate lies of Elie Weisel and Yankel Weirnik?

Since Saggy appears to be unable to answer the question asked by Nick Terry about a mainstream summary of the Holocaust, perhaps he could tell us simply how one scholar he's mentioned, Robert Jan Van Pelt, summarizes the Holocaust, whether he relies on Elie Wiesel, and whether in his various works he makes use of documents or cites to other works making use of documents.

 

[Nick Terry]

Saggy, I asked a couple of what should be very simple questions, and you are apparently unable to answer them. Please try again.

1) please give a reasonably accurate summary of what the mainstream thinks the Holocaust is. This must include all methods and the major locations or regions, with figures that are +/- 250,000 of the most recent consensus among historians. I will start you off: Auschwitz - 1.1 million. Tell us the rest.

2) please tell us whether non-Jewish suffering is also part of the 'holohoax'.


One question you can answer without even looking anything up. The other will test whether you can define what the Holocaust is as it is conventionally understood.

You don't even need to get the numbers exactly right. You just need to be able to demonstrate that you know what it is you're trying to attack, 'cos right now you're failing rather miserably.

 

[LemmyCaution]

You have to be careful with the defines, Nick. The holohoax is the sytematic organized campaign by Zionists and World Jewry to convince the world that the holocaust happened. So, there is, of course, plenty of evidence for the holohoax, dating back to 1900 when Rabbi Wise was writing about 6,000,000 starving Jews in Europe in danger of extermination, to 1909 when the NYT accused Russia of the onging systematic extermination of 6,000,000 Jews in Europe, to the endless stream of article sourced to the World Jewish COngress that appeared in the NYT during WW I and WW II, to the takeover of the War Refugee Board by Morganthau, to the Nuremberg show trial.

Now, the holocaust is something different, a pack of degenerate lies, pure phantasmagoria. Six million non-existent bodies, non-existent gas chambers, non-existent plans to exterminate European Jews, non-existent Jewish soap, shrunken heads, lampshades, you can fill in other parts of the phantasmagoria here.

But, don't take my word for the lack of physical evidence, take fellow holohoax scholar Van Pelt's, he's a world authority, you know.

This is piss poor. It sounds as though Saggy is arguing that a few random and hyperbolic statements from early in the 1900s taken out of context sound kind of like, if you make yourself incredibly stupid for a while, common misunderstandings of the postwar period--and therefore all the research, scholarly works, trials, documents, bodies, photographs, photographs of bodies, diaries, witness testimony, and perpetrator recollections are part of a vast conspiracy or a wild fantasy. He has offered not one word to explain how the hoax was developed, spread, and adopted by entire generations of scholars, not a single word about the real research and scholarship on the Holocaust. Perhaps a start would be for Saggy to summarize what Robert Jan Van Pelt and Raul Hilberg have to say about human soap, human-skin lampshades, and shrunken heads.