• 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.
LemmyCaution said:
What is keeping Saggy from focusing on Strawczynski or one of Nick's 200 witnesses and After he made such brave noises about lies and lack of credibility, Saggy seems to have chosen the silent treatment for his expose. Odd.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for Saggy of course, my advice would be to leave Strawczynski, like OSR 24, as a Sword of Damocles hanging over Mr Caution's head.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Your constant yammer that nothing has been presented reminds me of John Cleese's side of the MP argument skit.

That's how everything in this thread is argued.
Click to expand...
Well, since you volunteered, please tell us about Strawczynski's lies . . . with specifics, comparisons, details . . . the kind of material you usually ignore.
 
little grey rabbit said:
I can't speak for Saggy of course, my advice would be to leave Strawczynski, like OSR 24, as a Sword of Damocles hanging over Mr Caution's head.
Click to expand...
When you run out of gambits and your lies fail, this is what you have left, sad attempts at jokes and game-playing.

OSR 24, like Oscar Strawczynski, is already dealt with -- and you have nothing to say about them except your bravado and mockery. As you demonstrate over and over again.
 
Kevin.Silbstedt said:
Oh, a stupid question, what a surprise. :rolleyes: Of course I believe, that this story happend, since Mueller is a valid eyewitness and I have no evidence, that contradicts his story. On the contrary, the story of Vrba about the failure to produce an uprising, fits the story of Mueller.

What you are doing, is just denying, without a shred of evidence of course, but that's nothing new. Oh, and again just mocking the story, doesn't make it false, it just lets you look like a pathetic moron.
Click to expand...


Of course you believe it's true. That's not surprising. What would be surprising is if you had actually read the passage to which I am referring. I'm guessing that you haven't and that you're just saying you believe it is true. After all, Mueller is--as you said--a valid witness and one of the more important witnesses at that. That doesn't make his story true. It merely highlights the quality of what passes for "evidence" of the gas chambers and the unwillingness of believers to subject eyewitness statements to any sort of critical review.
 
Dogzilla said:
Of course you believe it's true. That's not surprising. What would be surprising is if you had actually read the passage to which I am referring. I'm guessing that you haven't and that you're just saying you believe it is true. After all, Mueller is--as you said--a valid witness and one of the more important witnesses at that. That doesn't make his story true. It merely highlights the quality of what passes for "evidence" of the gas chambers and the unwillingness of believers to subject eyewitness statements to any sort of critical review.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can tell us where this specific story has been cited by anyone, naming the books or articles and page references which reference Mueller's account of despairing and then being persuaded to live by Czech Jewish girls. And it'd help to then specify what discipline the authors were working in.

I can save you some time and say that it's not referenced in Van Pelt, Pressac, in the Auschwitz Museum five volume work, or in Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp. It's not in Hilberg, Friedlander or Longerich. Some of these authors cite from Mueller on other issues, but they haven't picked this particular story.

Perhaps you can also direct us to where in your imaginary handbook of Rules of Evidence there is a section on how to cite memoirs and what one must do to decide which bits of a 200 page memoir must be included or taken into consideration.

Or maybe it's just easier to realise that when you have an uncorroborated story from an eyewitness, it is entirely a matter of personal choice whether you include it, or not; and whether you believe it, or not. The catch is that an uncorroborated story can neither be refuted nor proven.

Arguing about such a story is tantamount to arguing about angels on a pinhead. It's tedious, pointless and only makes the moron using argument to incredulity look very silly indeed.

When will you clowns realise that there is more to the evidence than grazing over a published memoir and picking out something you find to be unbelievable.
 
An excellent point by Nick. Don't remember what inspired me to do so, but I did a literature search on Moshe Peer today, who, it was said, claimed to have been through six gassings at Belsen (a camp that we now know had no gas chambers).

What do you know? Not only did Peer not testify anywhere, as far as I can tell (I could be wrong on that point, but I'm pretty sure), but he isn't cited anywhere in the scholarly literature either.

Which is precisely why whatever Peer actually said really doesn't matter and doesn't prove or disprove anything at all.
 
Wroclaw said:
Which is precisely why whatever Peer actually said really doesn't matter and doesn't prove or disprove anything at all.
Click to expand...

This is a related topic. Historian, Nigel West authored a book called "Counterfeit Spies". As Britain did not talk about its enigma decoding ability for some decades, many charlatans, who did not know about enigma but guessed using other facts & tidbits and published their false memoirs. The book is extremely funny as it pulls the stories apart.....but has nothing to do with real history...it is about charlatans.


https://www.cia.gov/library/center-...s/csi-studies/studies/vol46no2/article10.html
(It's the second review)
 
Nick Terry said:
When will you clowns realise that there is more to the evidence than grazing over a published memoir and picking out something you find to be unbelievable.
Click to expand...

You don't have to graze over it, you just have to read the title.

General comment: God save us from these degenerates.
 
Saggy said:
You don't have to graze over it, you just have to read the title.
Click to expand...


Indeed. "Worldwide conspiracy in which Jews control all media everywhere." Still waiting for some evidence on that one.


Saggy said:
General comment: God save us from these degenerates.
Click to expand...


Indeed. Someone save us from these ridiculous, nonsensical conspiracy theories such as you have expressed.
 
Dogzilla said:
Of course you believe it's true. That's not surprising. What would be surprising is if you had actually read the passage to which I am referring. I'm guessing that you haven't and that you're just saying you believe it is true.
Click to expand...

As I already said: This story was also presented in Lanzmanns Shoah by Mueller himself. And you based your dismissal of his story entirly on the lack of an explanation for certain elements. THAT is *********** stupid. Even if Muellers written story lacks some of the explanations, that were given in his interview, you're doing a silly argument from ignorance/incredulity.

Dogzilla said:
After all, Mueller is--as you said--a valid witness and one of the more important witnesses at that.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about "important". What you deniers can't figure out, is, that even if one single witness is a liar, it doesn't change the facts presented by all the other witnesses and forms of evidence.

Instead of trying to find holes in the narrative of certain survivor stories, you should present your own evidence for your case. I'm still waiting for even one testimony, that describes the "Vergasungskeller" as just a delousing chamber. Hundreds of possible testimonies and not one fits you denial. YOU have to prove your crap, not the historians! They already did this decades ago.

Dogzilla said:
That doesn't make his story true.
Click to expand...

To bad, you don't know, what is true or false about this story. As I already said: It fits another story given by Wetzler and there is no reason for doubt. And your whole agenda doesn't make any sense: Even if Mueller lied about the girls or his intention to die, that doesn't disprove the possible fact of the homicidal gassings. This is just another stupid fallacy.

Dogzilla said:
It merely highlights the quality of what passes for "evidence" of the gas chambers and the unwillingness of believers to subject eyewitness statements to any sort of critical review.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between criticism and baseless denial. Eyewitnesses will and always have been a legitimate form of evidence even through such testimonies have to be used careful, especially when it comes to details. I and maybe others are still waiting for you to show any historical event with your standards of evidence to be true.
 
Last edited:
Kevin.Silbstedt said:
Instead of trying to find holes in the narrative of certain survivor stories, you should present your own evidence for your case.
Click to expand...

The lies are the hoax. Pointing them out is direct evidence of the hoax.

You are faced with ignoring the lies of Wiesel, Bomba, Rosenberg, Wiernik, Meuller, et al., because they are obvious. And, you cannot provide one credible Jewish witness, because there are none.

And, when the lies are vetted by the entire holocaust establishment, they indict the whole establishment. Zisblatts lies were vetted by Yad Vashem, the USHMM, professors Berenbaum and others I won't bother to look up, and the Motion Picture Academy when it gave Spielberg the Academy Award. Her lies, and the fact that the entire hoax establishment promulgated them, directly demonstrate that the holocaust is a complete hoax.
 
Saggy said:
The lies are the hoax. Pointing them out is direct evidence of the hoax.

[non sensical rant snipped]
Click to expand...

Well, you kinda have to proof, that something is a lie, duh. :rolleyes:

I'm no friend of the ignore feature, but I think, setting you on the ignorelist would be totally fine. You and your "Kameraden" are the least convincing conspiracy nuts I have seen in my entire life and nobody will fall for your crap. You are not even trying to make an argument, not even a fallacious argument. You just post your stupid baseless accusations over and over again.

But hey, on the other hand, seeing you fail with this pathetic hate mongering is kind of funny.
 
Saggy said:
And, you cannot provide one credible Jewish witness, because there are none.
Click to expand...

Except for all the names provided for you already. Your lies are so desperate it's really amusing to behold.
 
Nice to see Seven-up being taken apart by Kevin.

"Wiesel, Bomba, Rosenberg, Wiernik, Meuller, et al."

You got that permanently setup as a cut and paste, Seven?
 
Kevin.Silbstedt said:
I'm no friend of the ignore feature, but I think, setting you on the ignorelist would be totally fine. You and your "Kameraden" are the least convincing conspiracy nuts I have seen in my entire life and nobody will fall for your crap. You are not even trying to make an argument, not even a fallacious argument. You just post your stupid baseless accusations over and over again.
Click to expand...

Really. If enough people ignore him, maybe he'll go away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom