Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Dogzilla]

Guy Walters' Hunting Evil, page 319


Rauff, Rademacher, Sassen all recruited by Mossad/Shin Bet.

Has anyone managed to find a photo of Eichmann's crematorium yet?

Why wouldn't they just dig a hole, throw some fresh cut wood in the hole. lay some old railroad ties over it, place Eich's body on top, toss a match in the hole and, fifteen minutes later when the body is completely incinerated, cover the whole thing with dirt let a Ukrainian farmer have the land? Unless some local peasants blew up the ground looking for gold, there wouldn't be any way to tell there was ever a cremation at the site.

 

[LemmyCaution]

I have an analysis typed up. I will post it when Nick Terry proves that he is really interested and answers my easy question, what is the line that follows this quote ....


"However 'freedom or death' was our motto. In the meantime I completed the construction of the blockhouse."

Why would it demonstrate real interest to google a line in a book? Why do you find it funny that prisoners had to figure ways to learn to cope with incarceration without charge or conviction, forced labor, deprivation, and murder of their fellows?

 

[jhunter1163]

Do not personalize your arguments, and be civil and polite.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163

 

[Clayton Moore]

The fact that there were Nazis who didn't deny their role in the holocaust doesn't mean that none of them denied their role. Kaltenbrunner didn't acknowledge a policy of extermination. He denied signing order that he was accused of signing and he demanded to see witnesses who testified against him in affidavits.

The statement was that "no Nazi denied the holocaust." I only need to find one who did to prove my point. Kaltenbrunner is one. Goering is another.

By not mentioning the gas chambers in their post war writings didn't Ike, de Gaulle, and Churchill deny the Holocaust myth?

 

[Wroclaw]

The statement was that "no Nazi denied the holocaust." I only need to find one who did to prove my point. Kaltenbrunner is one. Goering is another.

Incorrect. They denied knowledge, but not the crime itself.

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

Kaltenbrunner didn't acknowledge a policy of extermination.

Really? Quoted from here:

Der Antisemitismus in Partei- und Staatsgesetzen war im Kriege noch als Notwehrmaßnahme hinzunehmen. Der Antisemitismus Hitlers, wie wir ihn heute feststellen, war Barbarei.

An beiden Fällen war ich unbeteiligt. Ich behaupte aber, wie ich noch ausführen werde, daß die Einstellung der Judenvernichtung auf mein Einwirken auf Hitler zurückzuführen ist.

To summarize the bolded part: He thinks, that his acting on Hitler lead to the stop of destruction of the jews. That doesn't really make sense, if he didn't believe, that there was an extermination policy.

But hey, prove me wrong with a quote, but something tells me, that you won't.

The statement was that "no Nazi denied the holocaust." I only need to find one who did to prove my point.

The problem is not, that you deniers cannot present a nazi, who is denying any policy of extermination. Who cares, if some old nazi ****, that wasn't involved in the killing process, and so never could have seen the gas chambers anyway, denies the holocaust.

The last time I asked for a nazi, that was allegedly involed in the killing process AND denied the gas chambers and so on, the only useful answer I got was from Dr. Terry. And it's pretty weak, if your opponent has to do the work for you.

I think there are alot of eyewitness accounts that can be dismissed right away as 'fanciful.'

Oh, yeah. Scientist always dismiss something, if it's too fancy. Like this theory of evolution. Yeah, natural selection my butt.

I gotta say, holocaust denial is maybe the least convincing conspiracy theory (that doesn't involve super natural stuff), that there is. Who do you think, you are going to convince, if you just bring this idiotic appeals to ridicule or arguments from incredulity everytime you are confronted with evidence. I have read every page of this thread and those two forms of silly arguments are nearly everything you guys got.

And also this false analogy here:

If we evaluate the testimony of the thousands that have seen alien landings collectively, we conclude that the aliens are amongst us.

...which again totally ignores the documentation, the perpetrator testimonies, the physical evidence, the photos, the audio tapes of Himmler and the huge convergence of evidence you got from all this stuff together, is also not new and absolutly stupid. Even the most nutty conspiracy loons here in Germany don't fall for this kind of crap you guys puke in this forum. And Jesus *********** Christ, your buddy Zündel even came up with this stupid nazi UFO BS about "Neuschwabenland".

And not only is this all not convincing (even by nutjob standards), it is also totally boring. It was not even a year ago, that I started to research in the topic of holocaust denial, but now I have already seen enough.
For comparison, I had my fun with AGW and 911 deniers for 3 or 4 years, which are far more limited in their fields.

EDIT:

By not mentioning the gas chambers in their post war writings didn't Ike, de Gaulle, and Churchill deny the Holocaust myth?

And since you never wrote anything here about the moon, you are denying its existence.

 

[MG1962]

By not mentioning the gas chambers in their post war writings didn't Ike, de Gaulle, and Churchill deny the Holocaust myth?

Yes only to your selective defense. Both Ike and Churchill made expansive comment during the war. Churchill's being a matter of public record through the Hansard.

 

[MG1962]

The statement was that "no Nazi denied the holocaust." I only need to find one who did to prove my point. Kaltenbrunner is one. Goering is another.

Could you reference the particular page of the trial transcripts in which he did this? Deniers often make much of his 'pure fantasy' statement when told of the deaths at Aschwitz. He was not denying the deaths occured, just the value then placed on the numbers

 

[Clayton Moore]

Yes only to your selective defense. Both Ike and Churchill made expansive comment during the war. Churchill's being a matter of public record through the Hansard.

Unproven rumor and propaganda hype.


When it mattered, for posterity, mum was the word.


Ike, mum was the word.
de Gaulle, mum was the word.
Churchill, mum was the word.

 

[Saggy]

..which again totally ignores the documentation, the perpetrator testimonies, the physical evidence, the photos,

The photos? Uh oh Dog, I guess we have to come clean. The photographic evidence has done us in .... why, look at this ....

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/Holocaust/gc5.jpg

'The Unaware Walk to the Gas Chamber'. Proof positive !

But there is more ..... check this ....

http://www1.yadvashem.org/exhibitions/album_auschwitz/photos/268_134-137_1.jpg

'Jews no fit for work waiting to be gassed'.

Thank God someone was there with a camera to document this carnage.

I'm a little perplexed by these images though, these wily Jews must have outfoxed the Nazis .....

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/bergenbelsen/OldPhotos/BelsenChildren.jpg

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

The photos? Uh oh Dog, I guess we have to come clean. The photographic evidence has done us in .... why, look at this ....

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/Holocaust/gc5.jpg

You don't even know about which photos I was talking. But hey, that's nothing new. And no, these photos, to which you link, are not a prove for gassings or extermination and nobody says that (especially since the last picture is from Bergen-Belsen, but also this strawman tactic is nothing new).

I meant photos, that are showing the ovens, the crematories, the four little chimneys on the "Vergasungkeller" of Krema II and III, the caps on the side of the gas chambers in Krema IV and V, the burning pits at Birkenau, the bones and ashes at Treblinka, the excavaters, the old gas chamber at Treblinka, that matches nearly exactly to the testimonies and the model of Wiernik and so on.

I could go on forever even with my limited knowledge, but talking to you simply has no point. You are probably even ignorant about these photos, which again shows, that you don't even have a basic knowledge about what you deny. If you are now going with the "I don't have to, it's absurd or phanta something" response, then I don't care.

And wow, you again showed no evidence and instead just mocked my statement. Again: Boring.

 

[Saggy]

I meant photos, that are showing the ovens, the crematories, the four little chimneys on the "Vergasungkeller" of Krema II and III, the caps on the side of the gas chambers in Krema IV and V, the burning pits at Birkenau, the bones and ashes at Treblinka, the excavaters, the old gas chamber at Treblinka, that matches nearly exactly to the testimonies and the model of Wiernik and so on.

Oh, THOSE photos. Why didn't you say so? Your photos remind me of the Georgia backwoods story of the "good ole boy" hunter, who bragged to his friends: "Last week I treed me a 300-pound possum, and if you don't believe me, I'll show you the tree." *

* thanks to M. Weber

 

[Dogzilla]

Incorrect. They denied knowledge, but not the crime itself.

Denying knowledge of the small part of which they were accused is the best anybody could do. It would be impossible for any one person to issue a blanket denial. But that's OK because nobody was accused, tried, or convicted of committing the whole thing anyway.

 

[MG1962]

Unproven rumor and propaganda hype.


When it mattered, for posterity, mum was the word.


Ike, mum was the word.
de Gaulle, mum was the word.
Churchill, mum was the word.

Hansard is the official record of the British Parliament. It is not a place for unproven rumour or propaganda

 

[MG1962]

The photos? Uh oh Dog, I guess we have to come clean. The photographic evidence has done us in .... why, look at this ....

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/Holocaust/gc5.jpg

'The Unaware Walk to the Gas Chamber'. Proof positive !

But there is more ..... check this ....

http://www1.yadvashem.org/exhibitions/album_auschwitz/photos/268_134-137_1.jpg

'Jews no fit for work waiting to be gassed'.

Thank God someone was there with a camera to document this carnage.

I'm a little perplexed by these images though, these wily Jews must have outfoxed the Nazis .....

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/bergenbelsen/OldPhotos/BelsenChildren.jpg

So Saggy what was your reasoning for removing the context of each of those photos?

 

[MG1962]

Denying knowledge of the small part of which they were accused is the best anybody could do. It would be impossible for any one person to issue a blanket denial. But that's OK because nobody was accused, tried, or convicted of committing the whole thing anyway.

And why was that Dogzilla - Was it a lack of evidence....or maybe it is hard to put a corpse on trial.

 

[Saggy]

Denying knowledge of the small part of which they were accused is the best anybody could do. It would be impossible for any one person to issue a blanket denial. But that's OK because nobody was accused, tried, or convicted of committing the whole thing anyway.

It's better than that, the architect and director of the entire hoax was at Auschwitz, and he testified, as a DEFENSE witness. This is beyond Kafka, and has a Russian fantastical touch, a al Gogol, which is fitting enough I suppose, as the Russian Judge Iona T. Nikitchenko, judge of the famous Moscow show trials, presided.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Yes only to your selective defense. Both Ike and Churchill made expansive comment during the war. Churchill's being a matter of public record through the Hansard.

Unproven rumor and propaganda hype.


When it mattered, for posterity, mum was the word.


Ike, mum was the word.
de Gaulle, mum was the word.
Churchill, mum was the word.

If you don't know what "Hansard" means, just say so and someone can explain it to you.

Otherwise, your comments come out looking stupid.

 

[Wroclaw]

Denying knowledge of the small part of which they were accused is the best anybody could do. It would be impossible for any one person to issue a blanket denial. But that's OK because nobody was accused, tried, or convicted of committing the whole thing anyway.

I disagree that a blanket denial couldn't have been made. The Nazis knew they were going to hang — particularly someone like Göring. He could have issued a blanket denial and nothing would have been any different. But he didn't.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Hansard is the official record of the British Parliament. It is not a place for unproven rumour or propaganda

Talk about being pawned and gaspingly grasping at straws.