General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[SnakeTongue]

(...)

You also show that, in the posts of mine you quote, I didn't claim that Jews killed Jews. You show that I was specific about the repugnant tasks which the Nazis forced some Jewish camp inmates to do. And that specifically Jews weren't forced to kill other Jews.

(...)

That are YOUR words.

Bear it!

I think that the heavy labor, including body disposal, in the crematoria at the death camps was performed by special kommandos of Jews.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7120095&postcount=1417

 

[A'isha]

He said "heavy labor", SnakeTongue. You even highlighted it.

Such labor in the camps included many things. Killing was not one of them. The Germans reserved that for themselves.

 

[SnakeTongue]

Is it a requirement that Holocaust deniers also be 9/11 Truthers, or is the fact that if they're one they're inevitably the other just sheer coincidence?

Ask Nick Terry, he is a specialist on the subject deniers. Lemmycaution can also give you good explanations. Other users would agree with you about the basics.

 

[000063]

Thank you. That was helpful. I agree on the limits of symbolic logic in this sort of discussion. It can be useful to have a common language but logic argument is only useful when the assumptions are accurate. In this instance, 000063's argument fails because the assumptions cannot be validated.

My point was that Snakey's argument failed because his assumptions do not necessarily lead to his conclusion. He said that since the prisoners were not shown in the gas chamber, they were not gassed to death. I pointed out the flaws in this, in as clear and simple a fashion as I could, multiple times, and Snakey's response was to respond in a complicated manner that cannot be understood by the proverbial man on the Clapham omnibus. He went out of his way to reduce clarity his response to my plain English argument, and yet you have not seen fit to call ''him'' out for what I can no longer pretend was a good-faith response.

I'm right here. Why are you avoiding talking to me about my argument? Do you have me on ignore? If so, isn't it intellectually dishonest to discuss what I meant by my arguments without listening to what I have to say about them? Unless, of course, what I have to say is irrelevant to your interpretation of my arguments, just like I don't read Snakey's posts anymore.

My argument was perfectly sound. Snakey's was flawed. He has provided no evidence that the prisoners were not gassed, and is, from other people's quotes of him, trying to throw up chaff for the idea of the video being faked because of the tailpipe. I have already pointed out that the vehicle is modified, and already has a non-stock tailpipe in that a pipe/hose is running out of it attached to the building.

Of course, Snakey doubtless thinks he's the first to discover this, while ignoring the logic thereof. Most prominently; if this is such a smoking gun, why didn't They simply use a period-appropriate car? It's not like it'd be hard to find. I would have difficulty finding a stock modern car with a canted tailpipe, and I would bet money that Snakey has not provided one.

EDIT: Upon a reread, I notice that you actually make no claim on the veracity of Marras' explanation which you sneered at a short time ago, backpedalling to a suddenly neutral "that was helpful" and changing the subject to gainsaying my argument again while presenting not a shred of real evidence or logic.

 

[000063]

He said "heavy labor", SnakeTongue. You even highlighted it.

Such labor in the camps included many things. Killing was not one of them. The Germans reserved that for themselves.

Of course. Can't let the filthy untermenschen have the honor.

 

[BazBear]

I just saw a new dawn.

Question for ST.

Do you think flipping the image shows the other side of the car?

Please answer.

He seems to be avoiding this question.

It looks like he found the original here.

What's up with this chicanery ST?

As found on the link above.

 

[Nick Terry]

You ignore the fact that the commissioners were not the only ones to work with the data.

Probably every project have specific professionals (including mathematicians, computer analysts and librarians) working under the instructions of the directors.

Every project? Utter rubbish. You clearly have no idea how academia works if you think there are usually 'specific professionals' working on research projects in the social sciences and humanities. Most research projects consist of precisely one researcher. A PhD is a research project. One year of research leave for a single researcher is a research project.

Coordinated research projects with large grants may consist of a principal investigator, 1-3 postdocs and maybe a couple of PhD students. They will use computer software if appropriate. Some will be interdisciplinary, but the disciplines will be the ones where there is analysis to be done, not 'mathematicians, computer analysts and librarians'.

Your three examples from the Dresden commission are all still working as historians. Neutzer like Bergander is a local historian according to the listing, not a professional, not an academic computer scientist or mathematician or statistician, qualified as an engineer with no doctorate. Overmans and Mueller were employed by the MGFA as historians. I already said Overmans did excellent statistical work on Wehrmacht casualties and was precisely the kind of guy to have on such a project.

Yet for all the effort, they still could not produce a result more precise than 'up to 25,000'.

If you think this is a required standard, you are engaged in special pleading and trying to obfuscate how history should be written by demanding standards that do not exist in the real world. Historians use the best information they can in their scholarship (and not when chatting on internet forums), and they use whatever tools they can. But those tools do not usually have to involve anything more complex than reading documents and using a calculator.

So?

That number is more precise than the numbers provided by your "courtesy".

It took a 96 page report to be so "precise", not a few paragraphs on an internet forum written from memory.

You don't really seem to understand where historical statistics usually come from - documents.

I said for example that Dutch Jews were subjected to a systematic registration in 1941 - this registered exactly 140,001 'full Jews' by Nazi definitions, defined by number of Jewish grandparents and membership of the Jewish religious community. Half- and quarter Jews were exempted from deportation as in Germany in this Germanic country. The 1941 registration is a source, a document. There is nothing much to query with the figure, it is like any census or any official report.

Other documents - transport lists, records of Westerbork, the SS and the Jewish council, overlapping with each other - indicate that exactly 103,019 Jews were deported from the Netherlands to Auschwitz, Sobibor, Theresienstadt and Belsen. Further transports lacking precise documentation took another 2000 Jews to Mauthausen, Buchenwald and other camps. The documents were identified and compiled already in the 1940s, and the number has not changed since then.

The data is repeated in multiple sources; mine is Gerhard Hirschfeld, 'Niederlande' in Wolfgang Benz (ed), Dimension des Völkermords. Die Zahl der jüdischen Opfer des Nationalsozialismus. Munich, 1991, pp.138-165, the numbers appearing in multiple locations in this chapter. Other sources give the same figures (Presser, de Jong, Moore, Croes).

Thus, when I stated from memory that 80% of Jews in the Netherlands were deported I was too high by about 5-6%, since the real percentage is 73.5% for the precisely documented transports and 74.9% including the less precisely documented transports.

My original point still stands: Jews in the Netherlands were registered systematically because of the fact that the Dutch population registration bureaucracy was efficient, and because there was a census identifying religion, the 1930 census counting 111,917 (Hirschfeld, p.138, citing E. Boekman, Demografie van de Joden in Nederland, Amsterdam, 1936, p.3), a number which significantly increased because of the influx of refugees from Germany in the 1930s (like the Frank family).

When deportations started, Jews in mixed marriages were exempted; they numbered 10,500; there were other initially exempted categories who were later added to the transports (and often sent to Theresienstadt as a concession to their previously privileged status). But many went underground. Some were caught before the autumn of 1944 and deported, like the Frank family. Some were not.

The number who went underground cannot be known with absolute precision. But it is no different to asking how many people in Dresden sheltered in cellars or sheltered in public air raid shelters. Interesting to know, but a subject for lots of research by specialists; much like it took 66 years for the Dresden Commission to do its job. The current estimates suggest 20,000 went underground over the war, or better than 1 in 7 of the target group.

Three Dutch demographers and historians, van Imhoff, van Solinge and Film, wrote a study which exploited among other sources the NIOD database of survivors which records 13,557 Jews survived in hiding. NIOD is the Netherlands Institute for War Documentation, an official government research institute. The database is of course computerised. This suggests that 6-7,000 Jews were caught while in hiding, a number which has some documentation from German police reports of the Befehlshaber der Sicherheitspolizei Niederlande as well as the Westerbork documents; and which obviously includes the Frank family. Bluespaceoddity and ddt can tell you more about this, as they already have, including how rewards as well as manhunts and threats worked to help catch Jews in hiding.

Imhoff et al published their work on Dutch Jewish demography in Population Research and Policy Review, Vol. 20, 2001, pp.457-481. The work compares very well with other demographic studies, eg France Mesle and Jacques Vallin, Jacques, Mortalite et causes de deces en Ukraine au XXe siecle. Paris, 2003; detailing the complex demography of the Ukraine in the 20th Century, with especial emphasis on the 1930s and the 1932-33 famine as well as the Great Terror. The same scholars also published a study specifically on the 1930s and 1940s (Vallin, Jacques, Mesle, France, Adamets, Serguei, Pyrozhkov, Serhii, ‘A New Estimate of Ukrainian Population Losses during the Crises of the 1930s and 1940s’, Population Studies 56/3, 2002, pp.249-264).

By contrast, while the number of Jews deported from France is precisely known and documented (see Klarsfeld, Serge, Memorial to the Jews Deported from France 1942- 1944. New York: Beate Klarsfeld Foundation, 1983; the same data can be found all over the internet with a google search for e.g juifs convoi France 1942 1944 or Jews deported France), the number of Jews living in France in 1940 or 1942 will never be known precisely, since there was no census and no systematic registration.

The estimates at the time were that 300-350,000 Jews lived in metropolitan France. The Nazis estimated more by including the colonies in French North Africa. My figure was that 25% of French Jews were deported. This took the lower end of the estimate range to produce a simple statistic, since it is well known and easily checked that 75,000 French Jews were deported, rounding off. Since the precise number of Jews in France will never be known, any further objections are irrelevant.

So in both these cases, your trolling is simply that; ignorant of the literature on the Holocaust in the Netherlands and France, ignorant of the sources, and hilariously ignorant of historical methodology, since there is no need to use computer databases to produce simple percentages out of well known figures. One only need use books and documents.

I have written the above not for you, but for other readers, since you have repeatedly proven you are wilfully ignorant of logic, methodology and simple debate courtesies. You may reply if you wish, but I am placing you on ignore since you have forfeited any remaining courtesy from me, and from several others, it seems. If I were you, I'd reflect on that.

 

[000063]

He seems to be avoiding this question.
...

What a tweest!

 

[SnakeTongue]

How about you with that forged pic of Hitler?

What, exactly, is this "Holocaust concept" and from where did you get it?

Perhaps no "lights", but there are mountains of other evidence to support that understanding of these events.

You know -- the stuff from which you've been running this entire thread?

CAre to rephrase so that this is readable in English?

Repeat *what* cycle?

Into fairly random strings of characters, for all of the meaning they convey.

Read a book of philosophy, it will answer your constant absurd endless questions.

I recommend you start with Jostein Gaarder's Sophie's World book.

http://www.mvla.net/teachers/LisaG/...hie's World/Sophie's World The Whole Book.pdf

 

[SnakeTongue]

Loser of the biggest war in history.

Hitler got more Germans killed than anyone before him so he really looked after his volks.

You got it very wrong.

Allies and Soviets were the ones which killed the Germans.

Germans soldiers died willing to defend the nation until the capital was defeated.

 

[LemmyCaution]

He said "heavy labor", SnakeTongue. You even highlighted it.

Such labor in the camps included many things. Killing was not one of them. The Germans reserved that for themselves.

Bingo. Of course. Heavy labor including body disposal. Not killing. Which, in fact, was barely light labor for the Germans. SnakeTongue's massive ignorance has him repeatedly highlighting the proof that I didn't write what he claimed! LOL I don't know whether he is lying, clueless, or just likes attention.

 

[SnakeTongue]

(...)
Questions:
Was that aspect of persecution during the 12 year Reich news to you when DDT mentioned it? Where did you look after you were confronted with it? Were the hints useful? What have you found yourself so far?

(...)

When you find that letter, do you require Google translation or will you be able to read the German language in which it was written yourself?

I am still answering old post, so I did not have the appropriate time to look deep into this matter. Since you provided the translation, I will do a short comment regarding what you provided:

My translation.
No punishment for timely reporting of hidden Jews and Jewish property.
Authorities on the German side alert to the following:
Since the promulgation of the order by the GeneralKommissar fuer das Sicherheitswesen regarding the Jews staying in the provinces, a large number of fugitive Jews and hidden Jewish assets have been recovered with the assistance of the population.
In light of the voluntary and timely nature of their cooperation those Dutchmen and their relatives, who were originally involved, who provided information have in all cases been released without punishment.
On the other hand, a number of Dutchmen had to be arrested who had attempted to prevent the police from gaining information regarding the location of hidden Jews and Jewish assets.
To avoid mistakes regarding the membership in the Jewish race of those seeking housing and to avoid the risk of criminal activities, it is urgently recommended that all people in included in your household are reported immediately with the nearest police authority in accordance with regulations

You were interested in the text after the "head line", weren't you?

I understand the news it is explaining that Jewish criminal fugitives and its assets were recovered by the official authority. Dutchmen involved in the criminal activity was arrested with the Jews. The news recommend the general public to report the presence of Jews looking for shelter, including Jews already sheltered, to avoid mistakes.

How that fits with a supposedly mass extermination plan executed by the German Third Reich?

 

[A'isha]

I understand the news it is explaining that Jewish criminal fugitives and its assets were recovered by the official authority. Dutchmen involved in the criminal activity was arrested with the Jews. The news recommend the general public to report the presence of Jews looking for shelter, including Jews already sheltered, to avoid mistakes.

This is one of the most vile (and vilely deliberate) misreadings of this order that I think I've ever seen.

I'm this close, right now, to following Dr. Terry's lead and just ignoring you completely.

 

[SnakeTongue]

Oh dear, very funny. The only skills he had were hate and malice. Now, are you a troll or a real Hitler hugger?

You seem to not understand the difference between skills and feelings.

None.

 

[SnakeTongue]

Not all papers published those so, please, share what you find amazing about the Dutch newspaper "Nieuwsblad van het Noorden", published the same day in a different region of the Netherlands.
http://resources2.kb.nl/010410000/pdf/DDD_010414078.pdf

Besides the same "Geen Straf - bij tijdige aanwijzing van verborgen joden en joodse vermogenswaarden" published in the Dordrechtsche Courant linked in the previous comment, this paper also has a "Beschikking
van den Commisaris-Generaal voor den Openbare Veiligheid betreffende het verblijf van joden in de provincies"

My translation.
"Ordinance
from the Commissaris-Generaal for Public Safety regarding the stay of Jews in the provinces"

You think there might be a connection? ... and what could the following mean? "Article 5. jood in den zin van deze beschikking is hij die ingevolge Artikel 4 van de verordening 189/40 betr. de aanmelding van ondernemingen jood is of als jood wordt aangemerkt"

From what I could understand form the previous news, this indicate the official authorities were willing to locate the fugitive criminal Jews.

 

[A'isha]

From what I could understand form the previous news, this indicate the official authorities were willing to locate the fugitive criminal Jews.

You know full well that the only "crime" these Jews had committed in the eyes of the official authorities was the crime of being a Jew.

 

[SnakeTongue]

Given that those skills included murder, backstabbing, bigotry, conquering, and racism, I certainly hope so.

Every once in a while, you let your "patient debater" mask--which was never very good--slip, and we see your true colors.

oh my god what the :

That's it. Welcome to ignore.

For who consistently insisted to me answer its posts and to answer posts of other users, you got it exactly what you asked for.

 

[Dogzilla]

My point was that Snakey's argument failed because his assumptions do not necessarily lead to his conclusion. He said that since the prisoners were not shown in the gas chamber, they were not gassed to death. I pointed out the flaws in this, in as clear and simple a fashion as I could, multiple times, and Snakey's response was to respond in a complicated manner that cannot be understood by the proverbial man on the Clapham omnibus. He went out of his way to reduce clarity his response to my plain English argument, and yet you have not seen fit to call ''him'' out for what I can no longer pretend was a good-faith response.

I'm right here. Why are you avoiding talking to me about my argument? Do you have me on ignore? If so, isn't it intellectually dishonest to discuss what I meant by my arguments without listening to what I have to say about them? Unless, of course, what I have to say is irrelevant to your interpretation of my arguments, just like I don't read Snakey's posts anymore.

My argument was perfectly sound. Snakey's was flawed. He has provided no evidence that the prisoners were not gassed, and is, from other people's quotes of him, trying to throw up chaff for the idea of the video being faked because of the tailpipe. I have already pointed out that the vehicle is modified, and already has a non-stock tailpipe in that a pipe/hose is running out of it attached to the building.

Of course, Snakey doubtless thinks he's the first to discover this, while ignoring the logic thereof. Most prominently; if this is such a smoking gun, why didn't They simply use a period-appropriate car? It's not like it'd be hard to find. I would have difficulty finding a stock modern car with a canted tailpipe, and I would bet money that Snakey has not provided one.

EDIT: Upon a reread, I notice that you actually make no claim on the veracity of Marras' explanation which you sneered at a short time ago, backpedalling to a suddenly neutral "that was helpful" and changing the subject to gainsaying my argument again while presenting not a shred of real evidence or logic.

I think you're strawmanning Snakey's argument. IIRC, this whole discussion started when Snakey asked to see a video of the gas chambers in operation back in the first HD thread. KevinSilberst linked to the Deadly Medicine clip on Youtube in response to Snakey's request. But that link doesn't show a gas chamber. You can use your imagination to fill in the blanks but the fact is that there is no gas chamber shown in that video.

The spiral into a discussion of symbolic logic and the use/misuse thereof or the various photographs showing a vehicle with the exhaust on the right or the left side aren't worth talking about because no matter what, the video doesn't show what Snakey asked to see. Even if it did, it would be about as persuasive at proving there was a German extermination program for the Jews utilizing gas chambers as this series of photographs is at proving the American extermination program of the Japanese Americans using gas chambers:

1. Terrorized Japanese citizens forced onto the death trains while armed Americans stand by

2. Innocent Japanese removed from trains and marched down the "Road to Heaven" for a "delousing"

3. The "delousing" chamber

4. The mass graves showing the remains of the three million murdered Japanese children

 

[dafydd]

For who consistently insisted to me answer its posts and to answer posts of other users, you got it exactly what you asked for.

Could we have that again in English?

 

[A'isha]

Even if it did, it would be about as persuasive at proving there was a German extermination program for the Jews utilizing gas chambers as this series of photographs is at proving the American extermination program of the Japanese Americans using gas chambers:

Which is why SnakeTongue's request for a "video" is a red herring, and why he's done his best to ignore all the documentation, testimony, and historical scholarship over the past fifty years that do actually prove the German extermination program.

This is exactly the fallacy Pressac himself wrote about - the fallacy of the "one single proof" that has been a favorite tactic of deniers ever since Faurisson tried it, thirty years ago. And that's at least partially why SnakeTongue refuses to even read Pressac's book.