• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Saggy said:
OK, here's one - the 'gas chamber' shown to visitors at Auscwitz every day is an obvious hoax, it has unsealed tyical wooden office style doors, one with a large plate glass window. Any fool can see that it is a complete hoax. The Russians built chutes in the ceiling after the war to make the room look like a gas chamber, but a more pitiful hoax cannot be imagined. Yet, it sells to the mindless who have been propagandized for 60 years. You can see photos at scrapbookpages.com. You can learn about the Soviet installed chutes by googling David Cole interviews Frantisek Piper.

So, there is one good reason. There are plenty more, but the Auschwitz hoax gas chamber is the whole hoax in a nutshell. If you understand it, you understand everything.
Click to expand...

So I guess this is somewhat implied since this is in the CT thread, but that is CRAZY :eye-poppi
 
Clayton Moore said:
Ah, the anti-Semitic card.
Click to expand...
Clayton Moore failed to read how the "antisemitic card" was not objected to; far from it, Saggy embraced it as the way of the world. Kind of like "hate and war," also around for 1000s of years and thus, in Saggy's view it seems, positive values.
 
Bluespaceoddity said:
Indeed existed. http://www.hdot.org/en/learning/myth-fact/gasvans1

Are we going to spent some time on this topic or is there another intersection with a quick change of direction up ahead?

Did anybody ever come back from one of the return trips? What did they say about their journey? How about the driver? Can you quote some of their comments?
Click to expand...
Confused about the rules concerning linking to sources (it seems we are permitted to link to some things but not to others), I won't take a chance but simply refer anyone who is actually interested in the topic of the role mobile killing vehicles played in the genocide to the chapters on gas vans, with details on the formation of the gas van program, in Christopher Browning's Fateful Months: Essays on the Emergence of the Final Solution.

(Although we certainly have a lot to discuss in here, we do not hold a monopoly on information, viewpoints, etc., thus links outside this admittedly Olympian forum sometimes help clarify or add richness to the matters we discuss here.)
 
BaaBaa said:
Back that statement up.
Click to expand...

How does one refute an absurdity that someone actually believes?


A work order for gassing vans? Who would write one? Who would take it seriously? It's like a cat bringing its fresh kill to the back door.
 
Clayton Moore said:
How does one refute an absurdity that someone actually believes?


A work order for gassing vans? Who would write one? Who would take it seriously? It's like a cat bringing its fresh kill to the back door.
Click to expand...

And yet it all happened. Your inability to believe it or desire that it not be true is not important.
 
This thread is certainly educational - I had no idea that so many individuals are interested in clearing the good name of Adolph Hitler and the National Socialists.
 
Something I kind of wonder about- why do these fellers get their panties bunched up in knotsies over WW II only? Do Hitlerhuggers make common cause with people who deny the deliberate starvation of the Ukrainians or the Armenian Genocide?

It can't be because they hate Jews, right?
 
LemmyCaution said:
Clayton Moore failed to read how the "antisemitic card" was not objected to; far from it, Saggy embraced it as the way of the world. Kind of like "hate and war," also around for 1000s of years and thus, in Saggy's view it seems, positive values.
Click to expand...

Given that such an unsupported claim can be a breech of the membership agreement, I wonder why Clayton has not reported the posts, and if he had why I am not seeing yellow card, suspensions or out right bans
 
BStrong said:
This thread is certainly educational - I had no idea that so many individuals are interested in clearing the good name of Adolph Hitler and the National Socialists.
Click to expand...
I count about a half dozen, eight, ten at most. It is certainly a far greater number than one would expect but in the scheme of things . . . well . . . it is a large world . . .
 
MG1962 said:
Given that such an unsupported claim can be a breech of the membership agreement, I wonder why Clayton has not reported the posts, and if he had why I am not seeing yellow card, suspensions or out right bans
Click to expand...

Hurting others isn't my way. In fact I think the MA should be revised to consider that the JREF may be important to a long time poster before banning them.
 
.
Then take it to the appropriate forum, where you can discuss what the terms "long time poster" and "important to" might actually mean in this context.

Meanwhile, where're Krege's raw data and the documentation of a single lie on THHP?
.
 
LemmyCaution said:
Confused about the rules concerning linking to sources (it seems we are permitted to link to some things but not to others), I won't take a chance but simply refer anyone who is actually interested in the topic of the role mobile killing vehicles played in the genocide to the chapters on gas vans, with details on the formation of the gas van program, in Christopher Browning's Fateful Months: Essays on the Emergence of the Final Solution.

(Although we certainly have a lot to discuss in here, we do not hold a monopoly on information, viewpoints, etc., thus links outside this admittedly Olympian forum sometimes help clarify or add richness to the matters we discuss here.)
Click to expand...
As you know, and ClaytonMoore should, HDOT contains substantial contributions from Christopher Browning. Both at HDOT and in his books Browning cites, among other things, the correspondence of Walther Rauff.

A person interested in history would be aware that in some cases he should write in the past tense. (typos and sloppy spell checking aside) Asking; "Who wrote one?" right after links to Just such historical documents have been posted would be a bit strange but it would at least indicate a willingness, if not the ability, to confront the historical record. Pretending that such correspondence could not have come into existence seems to me a rather odd way of dealing with existing records. That, to me, seems to be ClaytonMoore's approach.

"This letter, sent by Willy Just to Walter Rauff on June 5, 1942, describes in great detail the "Spezialwagen" (special vans) and their operation in the gassing murders of thousands." That's how that document is introduced before the full text in English, in German as well as images of an original document are shown here:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/19420605-rauff-spezialwagen/
With source attributions at the bottom.

In the book you referenced "Fateful Months: Essays on the Emergence of the Final Solution" Browning frequently refers to German Bundesarchiv holdings. He too excerpts the improvements Just suggests for the gassing vans as well as mentioning the firm for carrying out the procedures.

By posting the first link to the HDOT fact sheet and then asking some follow up questions -in line withe the flow of the thread on the previous page and given the general topic- I was hoping that ClaytonMoore might follow through and address parts 2 and 3 of the HDOT fact sheets. (Fact sheets on gassing vans and the untrustworthiness of Holocaust deniers when addressing such facts.) it seemed a logical progression at the time ...

There is no real way around such records but I bet we'll see some more camouflage in the near future.
 
Last edited:
LemmyCaution said:
I count about a half dozen, eight, ten at most. It is certainly a far greater number than one would expect but in the scheme of things . . . well . . . it is a large world . . .
Click to expand...
That's what I saw as well, although fortunately not all of them are posting here anymore. In spite of advertising at the sites we will not mention there are only approximately 10 Holocaust deniers / Hitler huggers out of the roughly 120 people who posted comments in this thread. Those 10 accounted for roughly 1120 of the 3560 posts when I checked. The signal to noise ratio is clearer when reading the actual output.
 
Clayton Moore said:
How does one refute an absurdity that someone actually believes?


A work order for gassing vans? Who would write one? Who would take it seriously? It's like a cat bringing its fresh kill to the back door.
Click to expand...


2951828127_2077cd93e1.jpg


Noted.
 
Nick Terry said:
No, it's not. It simply involves patiently explaining, yet again, the difference between the particular and the general, and how the two can overlap. You probably weren't very good at Venn diagrams at school, were you?

Eisenhower is quoted reacting to what he saw in a liberated concentration camp, Ohrdruf, after he had received reports from across the front about other liberated concentration camps and decided to see for himself what they were about. The liberation of the camps marked the end of the Holocaust because more than a third of the inmates in the camps in Germany in 1945 were Jews. The liberation of the camps also marked the end of many other forms of Nazi persecution, since nearly two thirds of the surviving prisoners were not Jews. Among the victims of such persecution were German and Polish political prisoners, a very few of whom were the victims of freelance Ed Gein-style haberdashery in one particular camp, Buchenwald.

To put it another way, Eisenhower was reacting to Nazi crimes against humanity, in the form of the state of the concentration camps in 1945 when they were liberated. The set of Nazi crimes against humanity includes a subset, the Holocaust, and another subset, freelance Ed Gein-style haberdashery. One subset, the Holocaust, overlapped with the 20 or so concentration camps of the WVHA, but was not restricted to those sites, while the other subset, freelance Ed Gein-style haberdashery, took place exclusively in one camp.

Thus, shrunken heads and lampshades do not have anything to do with the Nazi genocide of European Jews, whereas the fate of many European Jews interned in camps in the Reich in 1945, including Buchenwald, does.
Click to expand...

Hi everybody! Did you miss me? I decided I needed to rebuild my system with an SSD boot drive and then I went on vacation. So I had some downtime. But

I'm back now and my system is screaming fast. Anyway, where were we? Oh yeah, heads and shades....

That's a pretty good answer. But it features a dash of confusion-for which I am responsible--because I mixed up two different questions in my original post. The two questions which should be dealt with seperately are: 1) Was Eisenhower talking about the holocaust--the extermination of the Jews when he said he "saw things that beggar description" at Ohrdruf? and 2) Are the shrunken heads and lampshades atrocities part of the holocaust?

But first...you mischaracterized Eisenhower's visit to Ohrdruf. Eisenhower didn't visit Ohrdruf after receiving reports from across the front about other liberated concentration camps. With the Moscow declaration in 1943, the Allies had found the Germans guilty of crimes against humanity/war crimes and needed to find evidence to support the conviction. The conditions in the camps in the closing days of the war turned out to be a Psych Ops wet dream as far as gathering evidence of German atrocities. Eisenhower visited Ohrdruf for the simple reason that it was the first concentration camp liberated by the Americans. The British overran Belsen (their first camp) right around the same time the Americans lost their camp cherry so any "reports from across the front" regarding the concentration camps prior to Ohrdruf would have come from the Soviets. And because the Soviets didn't find conditions in the death camps that they overran in late 1944 and early 1945 horrific enough to publicize, document or photograph to any great degree, any of their "reports from across the front" would have been much ado about nothing.

Anyway, your answer about what things Eisenhower saw that "beggar description" when he did drop by Ohrdruf for a photo op a week after it had been discovered is spot on accurate: he saw what he believed was (or what he believed could be spun into) evidence of Nazi Crimes Against Humanity. Now, according to you, these Nazi Crimes Against Humanity are a "set" that includes other "subsets." One of these subsets is the holocaust--the extermination of the European Jews. Another subset is the Ed Gein style haberdashery. I agree with your categorization schema here. I'm sure you'd agree that there are many other subsets of Nazi Crimes Against Humanity and that the subset of the holocaust can be broken down even further into sub-subsets.

So Eisenhower was reacting to the horrorshow at Ohrdruf in the overall sense. But that doesn't mean that his reaction to the overall set of "Nazi Crimes Against Humanity" was a reaction to the subset of NCAH--the holocaust anymore than you can say it was reaction to the subset of NCAH--shrunken heads and lampshades, or NCAH--Russian POWs, or NCAH--Communists, or NCAH--Jehovah's Witness, etc. Because there were Jews present at most of the NCAH--the holocaust sites and there were Jews present at Ohrdruf isn't particularly relevant. It certainly doesn't automatically turn the overall set of Nazi Crimes Against Humanity at Ohrdruf into Nazi Crimes Against Humanity--the holocaust.

Because Eisenhower didn't expand upon the "things that beggar description" we can't know specifcally what he was talking about. But we can determine what he was NOT talking about by looking at what was NOT at Ohrdruf. We can be reasonably certain Eisenhower was not talking about the shrunken heads or the lampshades when he said he "saw things that beggar description."

But neither did he see anything that was evidence of the extermination of the European Jews (and this is not because there was no extermination of the Jews. Even what passes for evidence of a German policy of extermination wasn't present at Ohrdruf). There weren't any documents talking about a policy of exterminating the Jews at Ohrdruf. Nothing I've read leads me to believe Eisenhower visited Ohrdruf because he heard it was a camp where Jews had suffered.

I haven't seen any evidence that he connected anything he saw with Jewish suffering. IIRC, the emphasis was on the suffering of citizens of the United Nations, including POWs and not Jews.

Even though the Eisenhower Memorial Commission website says that Ohrdruf was a holding pen for prisoners on their way to the gas chambers at Buchenwald, we know that isn't true. Ike didn't see any gas chambers at Ohrdruf. He didn't see the bodies of anybody who had died in gas chamber. We know he didn't see a camp where comdemned prisoners, Jewish or otherwise, waited to be murdered. He didn't see any Einsatzgruppen mass graves. He saw some relatively healthy prisoners demonstrating interrogation and punishment techniques. He saw some crispy corpses on the griddle. He saw some dead people. He saw some skinny people and he saw some sick people. We know that most of the dead, skinny, and sick people he saw became that way in the few weeks prior to liberation because of the breakdown of transportation infrastructure at the end of the war. The conditions were not even evidence of Nazi Crimes Against Humanity let alone evidence of a Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews.

The presence of Jews at Ohrdruf, if it is meaningful in anyway, is evidence AGAINST a deliberate German policy to exterminate the Jews. So nothing Eisenhower saw can be said to be evidence of the Nazi Crimes Against Humanity--the extermination of the Jews. Ergo, whatever Eisenhower saw that beggared description, it wasn't the holocaust.

Now, to answer the second part of the question, are the shrunken heads and the lampshades part of the holocaust or not, I would say not. The fact is that the shrunken head is obviously not of European origin--Jewish or otherwise--and only the most gullible of people would believe it was. And if there was any tattooed skin being turned into lampshades, Jewish law makes it extremely unlikely that it came from a Jew.

The fact that these props were found at only one camp isn't particularly relevant and is only partially true anyway. The shrunken heads were found at one camp only. But the tattooed skin has connections extending beyond Buchenwald. As we all know, collecting tattooed skin was one of Frau Koch's hobbies. She was at Buchenwald until her arrest in 1943. But we have at least one eyewitness who says Ilse Koch traveled to Madjanek to look for specimens of human skin.

Because her husband had been transferred to Majdanek in 1941, it's very likely that she did indeed visit that camp for no other reason than to be with her husband and vice versa. So this means that the Ed Gein style haberdashery wasn't restricted to just one camp and has connections with what is often considered a true holocaust "death" camp.

Still, I tend to agree with you that they're not part of the holocaust because the heads and shades were never identified specifically as coming from Jewish victims.

But this is true for everything in the western camps. None of the other iconic holocaust imagery--the bulldozing bodies of Belsen or the skinny men of Buchenwald--can be considered holocaustal because these weren't identified as Jewish victims of Nazism either. There were probably some dead Jews among the heaps of corpses but they were not identified as such. So they don't count.

If you want to say that Eisenhower was reacting to Nazi Crimes Against Humanity--the holocaust, there's no rational reason for disclaiming the shrunken heads and the lampshades as part of the holocaust. They're part of a package. You need to take them together or reject them together. Unless all the evidence for the holocaust is evidence for the holocaust until it is proven to be false at which point it never was evidence for the holocaust.
 
Bluespaceoddity said:
Indeed existed. http://www.hdot.org/en/learning/myth-fact/gasvans1

Are we going to spent some time on this topic or is there another intersection with a quick change of direction up ahead?

Did anybody ever come back from one of the return trips? What did they say about their journey? How about the driver? Can you quote some of their comments?
Click to expand...
There are 2 sides to every story. See "Gas Vans A Critical Assessment of the Evidence" by Ingrid Weckert www.codoh.com/found/fndwagon.html
 
Dogzilla said:
the bulldozing bodies of Belsen or the skinny men of Buchenwald--can be considered holocaustal because these weren't identified as Jewish victims of Nazism either. There were probably some dead Jews among the heaps of corpses but they were not identified as such. So they don't count.
Click to expand...
Circumcision suggests they were Jewish. Do you have another theory?

The Nazis did not execute Muslims. Only the USA, UK and Commonwealth countries adopted circumcision for hygiene reasons
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom