• 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.

General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
That's just a fabrication. Kinda like explaining to little children when they wake up that the Easter Bunny was here and left.

I asked you two months ago about the children of Drancy. They were put on a train and they got off a train. None were heard of again. Please explain where they went to and why, despite the fact that they were young enough to have a good survival rate to the present day, that none have ever come forward to tell the tale of where they have been.
Don't ask for any more details, you do the research. Then revisit your statment about people selected for immediate gassing.
 
Vested interest in the Holocaust cash cow.

Gotta admire them Jews, they got the whole Nazi regime, the British, American and Soviet armies and all the historians to lie for them so they could cash in.

Well done and a Star of David to you Hebrews.
 
Humanzee: do you have more supporting sources than an old Ynet article that says this fact has been uncovered by two historians who found something nobody had found yet?
On a side note, according to Longerich in his 2012 biography of Himmler (citing Abitol, Les Juifs d'Afrique du Nord sous Vichy, and Mallmann & Cuppers, Halbmond und Hakenkrenz. Das Dritte Reich, die Araber und Palastina, English translation referenced above), the matter was not purely theoretical or speculative: "As a counterstroke to the Allied landings in North Africa [in November 1942] German troops occupied Tunisia and brought about 85,000 Tunisian Jews under their control. A specially formed Einsatzgruppe Tunisia introduced a regime of forced labour, and around twenty Jewish men were deported to the extermination camps. The total victory of the Allies in North Africa in May 1943 prevented a catastrophe." pp 662-663
 
Last edited:
You couldn't care less if your religion is debased but you're all offended and outraged about someone's version of history.:confused:

Here's your problem in a nutshell, CM: You don't get to have your own "version of history". Well, not and have that version of history be taken seriously.

You might interpret the evidence differently -- for example, there is no doubt that Calvert and then Schliemann found archaeological evidence of several different cities built in succession at Hisarlik in the mid 1860s. There continues to be some debate over whether or not this site is the historical Troy. But there is no serious historian who takes the fact of the various ruins which, along with other data, points to the association of this site with Illium to make a case for an historical, half-God Achilles. Nor does anyone deny the evidence that was found, even though no written order for the invasion of Troy has ever been found.

Similarly, you don't get to claim that people who were documented to be on a train from point A to point B exited that train prior to arrival without some documentation. You especially do not get to ignore the fact that there is other evidence that shows that many people sent to point B were killed on arrival.

Nor do you get to hand wave away that other evidence with absurd generalities such as "they wouldn't have done it that way" especially while you're desperately also trying to make a case that those people deserved their fate, despite a total lack of any information about what those individuals had done to deserve it.

And that's not getting into your whines about "lies" when you so frequently do so yourself.

If you want to change the normative understanding of history, you must do so as Schliemann and Calvert did: by introducing new evidence, and then establishing a narrative which incorporates that new evidence ***and all of the evidence which preceded it*** into a coherent whole.

For example, were you to produce documentation or testimony of any kind from any contemporary source showing even a significant percentage of the people sent to the camps jumped the train, you would have a start on supporting that lie. Of course, then you would have to explain why, after having gone out of their way to round these people up and put them on that train to begin with, they were allowed to just jump off where ever -- and why all the evidence from point B indicates arrival and death.

But if you were able to do so, you will have actually revised history.

You cannot, because no such contemporary evidence supports this lie, making you not a revisionist but a mendacious denier. Driven by your misplaced hate, you lie and distort in the service what you believe to be the "greater good" of a group of people of which you are not a part, and who have repeatedly demonstrated that they do no need nor even want your "help".
 
Last edited:
Driven by your misplaced hate, you lie and distort in the service what you believe to be the "greater good" of a group of people of which you are not a part, and who have repeatedly demonstrated that they do no need nor even want your "help".

What is more, none of the people Clayton is combating to restore the German honour shows any hatred of Germans in general and certainly does not use current examples of racism in Germany as evidence that Germans are predisposed to rob and kill non-Germans.
Clayton uses one example of a shrewd but apparently legal business transaction that happened several decades after the war (the Time-Warner shares) to prove the fiendish nature of German Jews in the Weimar Republic.
 
What is more, none of the people Clayton is combating to restore the German honour shows any hatred of Germans in general and certainly does not use current examples of racism in Germany as evidence that Germans are predisposed to rob and kill non-Germans.
Clayton uses one example of a shrewd but apparently legal business transaction that happened several decades after the war (the Time-Warner shares) to prove the fiendish nature of German Jews in the Weimar Republic.

CM could also explain how anyone's religious beliefs would have changed the AOL buy out (which Turner supported) which was financed on the heels of the dot com bubble, whose burst led to the stock tumbling. In what way was all of that "flimflamming" by Jooos -- when most of the key players weren't even Jewish? Turner didn't *have* to resign the company, and having done so didn't *have* to sell his shares -- nor was he the only one to lose money on that deal, and I'm sure that number included CM's hated Jooos.

And what does his former marriage to Jane Fonda (which had ended by that time) have to do with any of this? I suppose it was her that brainwashed Turner into saying that Fidel Castro was "a hell of a guy"? Oops, no -- he wasn't married to her then. And where's the outrage at Turner's characterizing Christianity as "a religion for losers".

That sound you just heard was CM's head asploding...

But that would interfere with his desperate hate, so we'll just chalk it up as another doomed to fail attempt at revisionizing history to slam the Jews.
 
Last edited:
You couldn't care less if your religion is debased but you're all offended and outraged about someone's version of history.:confused:

Christianity can well survive his one-off comment. It has in the past. And his comment will not debase it any more than what it has undergone in the past 2000 years. What would debase it more, in my opinion, were if people who deny the wholesale slaughter of a people try to identify with Christ's teachings. 'Nuff said, this is a derail.
 
What is more, none of the people Clayton is combating to restore the German honour shows any hatred of Germans in general and certainly does not use current examples of racism in Germany as evidence that Germans are predisposed to rob and kill non-Germans.
Clayton uses one example of a shrewd but apparently legal business transaction that happened several decades after the war (the Time-Warner shares) to prove the fiendish nature of German Jews in the Weimar Republic.

I think I should point that CM is not "combating to restore the German honour", he is combating create the honour of a regime that never had any honour to begin with. German history is what it is, and any honor Germany does or does not have involves honestly dealing with it, not in throwing in with a bunch of dishonest scumbags who wish to repeat the things they deny.
 
I think I should point that CM is not "combating to restore the German honour", he is combating create the honour of a regime that never had any honour to begin with. German history is what it is, and any honor Germany does or does not have involves honestly dealing with it, not in throwing in with a bunch of dishonest scumbags who wish to repeat the things they deny.

Which is exactly why Holocaust denial is nothing more than what Harold Covington said it was: an attempt to whitewash the crimes of National Socialism in the eyes of the public, so its modern adherents can try to bring it back.
 
I doubt it.

I never heard it.

Besides, writing it isn't a spontaneous curse.

The guy writes it to get away with an anti Christian slur. If I were to write a Jewish version of it I'd get banned post haste.

Moses J Rabbenu topped with bacon, are you serious?
 
Last edited:
Because that is how many of them showed up in Israel, North America and/or Iran from Europe, obviously.

So, why do you still have to guess about something that just about every single one of your opponents has identified as the most convincing evidence for the possible veracity of your claims?

Obviously the borrowed objection to headers on office documents isn't working for you. Why not explore another route? One that not a single Holocaust denier has walked us through to the end. Like the one that led to Israel, North-America and/or Iran for x amount of Jews out of the total of migrants that ended in a, b and/or c - though not necessarily in that order.

I do not have the appropriate resources to perform such research.
 
I don't believe you are serious. I used to live in the Jewish quarter in Antwerp and they weren't hard to identify.

Believe it, I am.

That is interesting from your personal experience, but I am more concerned how the SS personnel of the Third Reich used to recognize the Jews when they were required to captured them.
 
In the fantasy world which SnakeTongue inhabits, first there was no legislation anywhere in Europe enacted in the 1930s and 1940s concerning who was or was not Jewish, nor were there any genealogical tests (e.g., on marriage) to determine one's "racial" status in the Reich. Members of the SS did not have to prove Aryan heritage back to great-great grandparents. There was no obligation for civil employees to show their lack of Jewish heritage by means of anything resembling an Ariernachweis. German children were not subjected to books and pamphlets warning them about Jews and their pernicious characteristics and influence - and they were encouraged to mingle and play with their Jewish schoolmates, who just happened to be shoved out of their schools, but that is only a minor detail. In this strange world, inhabited only by revisionists and SnakeTongue, who is not a revisionist, the war years happened, without any prior history, in a sort of Heideggerian thrownness, people just turning up on the scene: without histories or documents or connections. There were no Jewish congregations, for instance, and no Jewish community with membership lists. Jewish civic and charitable organizations did not exist - and if they did, they did not have members, and if they had members no lists of members were kept. It was not required of Jews to register their property - and no Jewish property was taken, and not a single hair on the head of a single Jew was ever hurt by any of the National Socialists or their chums. Neighbors in those days did not know one another, and if they did "Aryans" always protected their Jewish compatriots from denunciation or harm as shown in Jebwadne in Poland and at Lietukis garage in Kovno, Lithuania. Indeed, in SnakeTongue's world, in Eastern Europe every Jew was assimilated, and there were no Jewish neighborhoods and no Jewish culture. Eichmann's organization never existed, and if it did there was no postwar discovery of it and how it worked. At that time, there was no Jewish Question - and thus no one even thought about who might be Jewish - and Jews certainly hid their identity, always. When the Nazis decided to do something about the almost non-existent Jews, they did it suddenly, without any buildup - no anti-Semitic laws, no citizenship or marriage law, no Aryanization, no Kristallnacht, no emigration or expulsion schemes. No nothing. Just tabula rasa and complete blethering idiocy. Those are the conditions which prevailed in the time of WWII. There was no way for the National Socialists to so much as guess who might be Jewish - and certainly no way for SnakeTongue to have a clue. He doesn't, he's said, discuss secondary sources, you see, and so he is almost completely ignorant - and cannot think of a single way to remedy his condition. In fact, one might ask, who after all was Himmler?

Still, not one reference to your fairy tale.

That is not my "fantasy world world", is yours.

Provide reference to your assertions.

You typed 483 "completely ignorant" words which did not answer the simple questions I made.
 
Believe it, I am.

That is interesting from your personal experience, but I am more concerned how the SS personnel of the Third Reich used to recognize the Jews when they were required to captured them.

  1. Censuses
  2. personal identification papers or internal passports with entries for religion
  3. forcible registrations of Jews
  4. asking men to drop their trousers
  5. ignoring the protests of non-Jews with big noses
  6. denunciations by neighbours
  7. 'Jew hunters' (in Germany and the Netherlands) and szmalcowniki (in Poland), paid to identify Jews

Most European countries conducted censuses which asked for religion, and often had personal ID systems which included such information. The Soviet Union's internal passports specified nationality, and Jews were one of the many Soviet nationalities so recorded.

France, like the US, had not traditionally asked for religion on censuses, but after the German occupation, Jews were ordered to register. This was some time before anyone was deported. Despite exposing themselves immediately to a risk of denunciation or police arrest if found out by some other means. quite a large proportion did not register, which meant that they were harder to catch, but this didn't forestall many from falling into Nazi hands. Foreign-born Jews were more easily rounded up and identified. Overall, only 25% of Jews living in France were deported, the rest escaped into hiding or over the Spanish and Swiss borders. Quite a large proportion of the deportees from France came from various roundups in 1941, when foreign Jews were arrested especially in Paris, then the infamous Vel d'Hiv roundup of mid-1942, then further manhunts and roundups through the remainder of the occupation, including after November 1942 and September 1943 when Nazi control expanded into Vichy and then into formerly Italian-occupied territory.

Belgium was similar in not really pushing religion in registration systems, and had a fairly low deportation rate despite the same combination of forced registration and manhunts. There were sizable communities of very traditional-looking Orthodox Jews in Antwerp and elsewhere that could be caught like fish in a barrel once the Nazis wanted to start deporting people.

The Netherlands had a very efficient and comprehensive bureaucracy which included personal ID papers specifying religion, as well as registers of residents much as in Germany. They also conducted censuses asking for religion and the last one had come long before anyone suspected Holland would be occupied. In 1941 Jews were ordered to register and could hardly avoid this, again a year before deportations. Still, quite large numbers tried to go into hiding, but the total deported was better than 80%.

In Poland, Jews could be identified by their dress and appearance. They were quite obviously Jews because they belonged to an entirely different culture to other nationalities, and mostly spoke their own language, Yiddish. While many also spoke Polish, they often did so with an accent. This wasn't as noticeable to the Germans but it was to Poles, many of whom were willing to denounce in exchange for payments of sugar or cash, or because they were antisemites. Nonetheless, despite being highly visible and thus easily identified, 10-20% of Polish Jews were either assimilated or could become so. Large numbers fled at the start of the war, about 300,000. They went to Soviet territory where of course they had to register and be identified as Jews, so could be caught once more when the Nazis invaded in 1941. The ones who remained behind in western Poland frequently tried to go underground or flee to the forests, to the tune of 10-20% in some districts, but this did not prevent many from being caught by patrols in the countryside or denounced or winkled out of their hiding places, which almost invariably meant the death of their Polish rescuers, several thousand of whom died for aiding Jews.

There were also some gender differences which became apparent, since Jewish women didn't have the problem of being identified as circumcised, and many had been sent to Polish schools since it was traditional to send Jewish boys to yeshivas if there was any money in the family, and this meant that Jewish women spoke better Polish. Many also had a more 'Aryan' appearance, especially the younger women.

Obviously, the fact that no system of registration was perfect meant that quite a few did survive. Which is why we have films such as The Pianist, and why the director of that film also survived the war in hiding as a young child placed with a Christian family.

SOURCES - a small selection, needless to say
Jews in France during World War II / Renée Poznanski. Hanover, N.H. : University Press of New England in Association with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ; Waltham, Mass. : Brandeis University Press, 2001
Moore, Bob, Survivors. Jewish Self-Help and Rescue in Nazi-Occupied Western Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010
Paulsson, Gunnar S., Secret city : the hidden Jews of Warsaw, 1940-1945. New Haven : Yale University Press, c2002.
Krakowski, Shmuel, The War of the Doomed. Jewish Armed Resistance in Poland, 1942-1944. New York, 1984
Seltzer, William, ‘Population Statistics, the Holocaust and the Nuremberg Trials’, Population and Development Review 24/3, 1998, pp.511-552
Engelking, Barbara, Jest taki piekny sloneczny dzien... Losy Zydow szukajacych ratunku na wsi polskiej 1942-1945. Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Centrum Badan nad Zaglada Zydow, 2011
Grabowski, Judenjagd. Polowanie na Zydow 1942-1945. Studium dziejow pewnego powiatu. Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Centrum Badan nad Zaglada Zydow, 2011
 
Last edited:
That, contrary to your claims, you haven't examined anything for yourself. You've merely gone and looked at what other deniers have said,

Fallacy: The assertion of A is wrong because B already made the assertion.

No you didn't. You ran it through Google Translate.

Fallacy: A cannot translate language B if A use dictionaries and digital translators.

You are terrible wrong.

I did the translation, word by word.

I do not deny that Google Translate was a essential tool in the translation.

By detecting patterns in documents that have already been translated by human translators, Google Translate can make intelligent guesses as to what an appropriate translation should be. This process of seeking patterns in large amounts of text is called "statistical machine translation".

http://translate.google.com/about/intl/en_ALL/


The transcript of the document (specially formatted for Google Translate and without the forgery):

1.) Schreiben
An das
krim. tech. Institut
beim Reichskriminalpolizeiamt

Berlin.

In der Anlage reiche ich den Vorgang des Standortarztes (K.L. Mauthausen) zurück.

Die von uns gefertigten Sonderwagen sind z.Zt. alle gemäss Befehl des [Chefs der Sicherheitspolizei und des SD] im Einsatz. [Es sind weitere Wagen in Beschaffung], deren Lieferung aber abhängig ist von der Zurverfügungstellung der Fahrgestelle durch den [Generalbevollmächtigten für das Kraftfahrwesen]. [Zu welchem Zeitpunkt die Bereitstellung durch den GBK erfolgt], lässt [sich noch nicht] [saegen] [und es ist ferner damit zu rechnen], dass nach Bereitstellung noch eine Umbauzeit von ca. 8 - 14 Tagen für die einzelnen Wagen benötigt wird. [Nach diesem Zeitpunkt wäre ich bereit], dem (K.L. Mauthausen) für eine bestimmte Zeit einen derartigen Sonderwagen zur Verfügung zu stellen. [Zur gegebenen Zeit werde ich Sie unterrichten], sobald der Wagen einsatzfähig ist.

[Da ich annehme], dass das (K.L. Mauthausen) nicht unbestimmte Zeit bir zur Verfügungstellung warten kann, bitte ich die Beschaffung von [Stahlflaschen mit Kohlenoxyd bzw. andere Hilfsmitteln] zur Durchführung von dort aus in die Wege zu leiten.


Just copy and paste in the Google Translate page and be my guest to find the mistranslated words by yourself.

No, it's more credible because it's more detailed. His 1945 statement doesn't talk about events, places, names, dates, and duties he carried out as head of II D, which his Chile deposition does. For example, the role of his office and his subordinate in II D, Pradel, in the Barbarossa campaign in June 1941. His 1945 statement doesn't even say a single thing about what he was doing in the entire period from May to September 1941 - almost half a year!

Still, he do not contradict his statement from 1945...

Sure it does. He says he was assigned to II D as soon as he returned to the RSHA from the Navy in early 1941, and was head of II D all the way up until a few months after June 1942 (when Heydrich died), and during the period from September 1941 to May 1942, he also continued to assist with the technical department of the foreign intelligence office in Prague, dividing his time between Berlin and Prague.

Does where?

That is your misinterpretation without highlight one single phrase where Walter Rauff directly does!

You haven't shown me a single document. In fact, when I asked you most recently, you passed on the opportunity!

Though I certainly agree that your observations are "simple", SnakeTongue.

I will show then.

I am looking for the Internet links where I obtained the documents. I will show you with references.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom