• 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.
Yes, those are the tools of the denier.

Altho I'm not quite sure what you mean by "drivel"?

Could you clarify?

And have you noticed also that none of the rest of us have such consistent problems understanding or being understood by each other?

Curious, that...

I find it hard to believe that you need clarification about the use of the word drivel. I think you are talking nonsense.

I find it hard to believe you need clarification about what I mean by listening when referring to the radio.

So I find it hard to believe that you have not been able to follow what I have said. A read through this thread shows many instances of misunderstandings. clarifications and arguments over what is meant.
 
So I find it hard to believe that you have not been able to follow what I have said. A read through this thread shows many instances of misunderstandings. clarifications and arguments over what is meant.
No, from here it looks like I have followed what you said, called you on it, and you changed to something else while pretending it was still the first thing.

An *honest* approach would be to say "that wasn't what I meant to say" -- see my recent reply to ST for an example.

And what the thread shows to everyone else is that you have no problem redefining terms to mean what you want them to mean at that time.
 
I'm just looking for clarity. I mean, after all I thought "orthodox history" might mean, oh, gee -- "the branch of knowledge that records and analyzes past events in a commonly accepted, customary, or traditional manner", while your usage it means both "intuition gained by use of the five senses in a manner accepted by or prevalent among the people in general" and your own personal ignorance.

Could you clarify you usage of "really" above?

Go back to my second and third posts 2666 where I talk about orthodox history and then 2669 where I talk about the ignorance of the general public. Two posts, two topics which you have mixed up into one.

I used "really" to emphasis just how pathetic I think your responses have been.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chamber

where under Nazi Germany it states "Some stationary gas chambers could kill 2,000 people at once." and "The gas chambers were dismantled or destroyed[18] when Soviet troops got close, except at Dachau, Sachsenhausen, and Majdanek" but it is recognised the chamber at Dachau was not used and does an historian know a 2000 capacity gas chamber?

And you think it is vital to the public interest to understand that "only" 5.3 million Jews died in the holocaust as opposed to 6 million.... why exactly? Do you feel the discrepancy gives someone unduly influence over people's minds?

@ Nessie; while the general public are quite ignorant about pretty much of history, denial does not do anything to cure that ignorance. It may encourage deeper historical enquiry but so many denier arguments are superficial. It is worth considering why the holocaust considered important; why it is taught in schools. It isn't for the detail. It is for the importance to our understanding of people, society and government. It is for the fact that a relatively sophisticated culture went from being one of the most progressive constitutional democracies in Europe to a dictatorship which deliberately murdered millions of civilians, within a little more than 2 decades. (...)

And yet the story exists.

Ah, so it is popular *perception* that you decry. Why did you spell it "education", then?

*Probably* was not used, which does not change the fact that its design could only have had one purpose.
Well, since the information is out there, what more do you expect to be done about public perception?

What a strange, disorganized and incompetent Hoax that can't even train its docents decently enough that they toe the party line in their tour narratives.
And this powerful evidence has you questioning the scholarship, Nessie? Seriously? Do you understand how weak this line of thought is?

(...)

And yet recently you've seen an example of a historian, Martin Broszat, doing just what you say deniers do. Historians make an effort - giving time and effort to educational media, for example - to get accurate knowledge out. Most of them, after all, are teachers - and teaching and research is where they are skilled and most effective. But they do work outside academia and the classroom - e.g., Rees, Sturdy Colls. However, they don't control the media, and reporters, etc., are not well versed in this stuff - and the folks who do decide what the media report go in for headlines and drama. That said, one thing deniers do not do, contrary to their puffery and your naive acceptance of it, is get more accurate information into the public domain - they don't want that, they don't advocate it, and they don't do it. They try to promote lies and disinformation, to put it crudely.

Accurate confessions of religious indoctrination by the sophists.
The Holocaust was the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of approximately six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. "Holocaust" is a word of Greek origin meaning "sacrifice by fire." The Nazis, who came to power in Germany in January 1933, believed that Germans were "racially superior" and that the Jews, deemed "inferior," were an alien threat to the so-called German racial community.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005143
Overview

Students will brainstorm methods to illustrate the number six million. Using real-life math, students create a graphic presentation to represent the six million Jewish Holocaust victims.

...

Edited by LashL: 
Snipped for compliance with Rule 4. Do not copy and paste lengthy tracts of text from elsewhere. Instead, cite a short quote and a link to the source.


http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/lesson-plan/how-many-six-million
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Go back to my second and third posts 2666 where I talk about orthodox history and then 2669 where I talk about the ignorance of the general public.
... and then later switched to perception, which you blame on education, which is necessarily the domain of orthodox history.

And so the circle completes.
Two posts, two topics which you have mixed up into one.
No, using your terms against you. See above.
I used "really" to emphasis just how pathetic I think your responses have been.
While I was using it to point out that it is not *my* job to assume you aren't writing exactly what you mean to say.

If you perceive a problem with understanding, it is up to you to make it clear you are making an attempt to address that or else it looks like you're simply changing what you are saying for other reasons.
 
No, from here it looks like I have followed what you said, called you on it, and you changed to something else while pretending it was still the first thing.

An *honest* approach would be to say "that wasn't what I meant to say" -- see my recent reply to ST for an example.

And what the thread shows to everyone else is that you have no problem redefining terms to mean what you want them to mean at that time.

Sorry I disagree. I think the misunderstanding is yours. I posted on two separate topics one after the other, which you then tried to combine and I have been trying to disentangle since then.

So, again, to try and clarify this mess, which yes is partly my fault as it takes two to tango in a dispute

Topic 1 - I think orthodox historians should do better on some subjects which revisionists think they have a better answer to, such as disposal of bodies at the Action Reinhard sites.

Topic 2 - I think the public should be better informed, such as by more accurate info on the internet, when taking tours of sites and better teaching at schools.

If you really do not believe me that these are two topics then re read post 2666 and 2669 and you should see that that is the case.
 
Accurate confessions of religious indoctrination by the sophists.
No, dishonest editing by a denier, and running away from the question.

My "story" comment was about Washington and the cherry tree.

And if a "shower room" is designed with features such as shower heads that are not actually connected to water plumbing, and "trap doors" which open directly to the outside, then it is obvious not to be used for personal hygiene.

Care to address why you so mendaciously edited my post, and in what way the facts of the installation at Dachau are evidence of indoctrination?
 
Topic 1 - I think orthodox historians should do better on some subjects which revisionists think they have a better answer to, such as disposal of bodies at the Action Reinhard sites.

.

Nessie,

Ok, this is starting to - finally - go somewhere. I will shut up for now - after all, it will take me very long to try to figure out what SnakeTongue and his yellow hiliting are going on about - but it would be useful for you to spell out where you think (let's drop orthodox, ok) historians have not offered good explanations. Perhaps give us a dozen issues. Then we can discuss your view and what (I think) historians have written and why (I don't think) deniers have helped . . .

I haven't listened to the show yet - what is your take on Berg and Muehlenkamp, other than that our mutual friend's prediction was goofy?

LC
 
Topic 1 - I think orthodox historians should do better on some subjects which revisionists think they have a better answer to, such as disposal of bodies at the Action Reinhard sites.

Topic 2 - I think the public should be better informed, such as by more accurate info on the internet, when taking tours of sites and better teaching at schools.
No, there are several other topics in the queue well before these two, although those answers may address these. You know -- those posts of Lemmy and myself you were going to get back to?

I once again recommend one monster post addressing all of them, eliminating the duplicates.
 
Last edited:
You can also magic away the conenction between World War 2 and the Nazi extermiantion programme was it not Snake or one of his cohorts that tried to argue they were unrelated?

Sorry about this but I've got so much catching up to do that I'm not going to be able to address everything that you've been discussing for over a week now. Hopefully you guys have moved beyond that stupid mass grave capacity discussion that relies on Charles Provan's "experiment" as a data source. So far it's not looking good but I've just started trying to catch up.

I know that most of what I'm reading now is no longer the current topic. For that reason, I'll refrain from jumping in unless I see something that deserves a response. For the next few days or so, think of me as your crazy ex-girlfriend who randomly brings up trivial arguments you had months ago during a current argument.

Anyway.

It wasn't Snaketongue who first recognized the disconnect between World War II and the holocaust. Peter Novick and Gulie Arad touched upon the concept during interviews in the BBC Channel 4 documentary "Battle for the Holocaust." I seriously doubt they are the only two who recognized the trend of seperating the fate of the Jews and the war. But I'm the person who first brought it to the attention of everybody here that the logical extension of the believer definition of the holocaust, the characterization of all Jewish deaths during the holocaust, and the increasing importance of holocaust "memory" makes the holocaust more and more of an independant historical event. The holocaust is now talked about as a unique event--a defining moment in Western Civilization rather than what is really was: nothing more than what happened to the Jews during World War II.

I'll try to explain this for the slow people who can't see the forest for the trees. It's actually quite easy to understand if you ask the right questions and really listen to the answers from those who profess to a knowledge of the holocaust.

It starts with the believer definition of the holocaust. That definition goes something like "the state-sponsored systematic persecution and annihilation of Europeean Jewry by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945." That's the USHMM definition of the holocaust and it's pretty close to the broadest definition you guys accept.

So then we ask: How many Jews died during this so called holocaust?

The answer is: somewhere between five and six million (or something like that). Holosnobs like to quote the Hilbergian 5.1 million but because popular culture demands homage to the six million, we'll go with six million.

Q. So, six million died. How did they die?

A. They were intentionally murdered--gassed, shot, starved, etc.--by the Nazis because they were Jewish.

Q. How many of them were innocent civilians who simply got caught in the crossfire?

A. None of those six million were innocent civilians who got caught in the crossfire.

Q. How many were executed because they were involved in partisan activity?

A. None of those six million were executed because they were involved in partisan activity. They were murdered because they were Jews and for no other reason.

Q. How many of them were not involved in partisan activity but were executed in reprisals for partisan activity?

A. None of them. They were murdered because they were Jews and for no other reason.

Q. So none of these Jewish deaths were ordinary wartime casualties?

A. Nope. None.

Q. How many simply died of old age or other natural causes?

A. None of them. A 103 year old Jewess who died in Theresienstadt in 1943 is a person who perished in the Shoah. It's even a Nazi depravity bonus point--i.e., they even murdered women who were 103 years old. What did a 103 year old woman do to deserve being holocausted?

Q. How many Jews died due to disease and starvation brought on by wartime deprivations?

A. None of them. Wartime deprivations might have been the murder weapon but they were still murdered.

Q. Were there any innocent civilians anywhere who could be classified as ordinary wartime casualties?

A. Yes, of course. During World War II there was a war going on!! Millions of innocent Poles, Russians, British, etc. were killed because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Q. Was there any organized resistance to the German occupation forces by the local population during World War II?

A. Yes. Local populations sometimes resist foreign occupation. In Iraq they were called "insurgents" or simply "terrists." They were called "partisans" during World War II.

Q. Did the Germans ever fight back against the partisans?

A. Yes.

Q. Did "fighting back" involve executing suspected partisans?

A. Yes.

Q. Did the Germans execute innocent civilians who were not involved in partisan activity in retaliation for partisan activity?

A. Yes.

Q. Did Jews join the partisans and resist the German occupation?

A. Technically no. Jews only joined the partisans when it became clear that Jews were being murdered. So Jewish partisans were not resisting German occupation. They were trying to survive.

Q. When the Germans executed suspected partisans, is it possible that there were Jews among them?

A. Yes. But when that happened, they weren't executed because they were partisans. They were executed because they were Jews.

Q. When innocent civilians were rounded up and executed in retaliation for partisan activity, is it possible some of those civilians were Jewish?

A. No. The Jewish population living in the old Pale of Settlement could have been left unmolested when collecting random innocent civilians for retribution. If the Germans didn't make a concerted effort to avoid Jewish civilians when rounding up random civilians, they were targeting Jewish civilians.

Q. Did anybody in Europe die due to starvation and disease brought on by wartime deprivations?

A. Yes, of course. War is a terrible thing.

Q. Were Jews among those who died in Europe due to starvation and disease?

A. Yes. But starvation and disease that afflicted the entire population in general was specifically directed at Jews when Jews were afflicted.

Q. Were there massive voluntary and involuntary population transfers during and right after the war because of the war?

A. Yes, of course. Nazis loved moving people around to create a new world order.

Q. Were Jews among those people who changed residence during the war?

A. Yes.

Q. Were there Poles, Russians, Germans, Czechs, etc. who lost contact with family and friends during the war and who were considered missing?

A. Yes

Q. Were there any Jews who lost contact with family and friends during the war and who are considered missing?

A. No. None of them are missing. They were all murdered by the Nazis.

Q. Did Jews die of natural causes during the war years?

A. Yes

Q. Were innocent Jewish civilians among the innocent civilians who killed because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time?

A. Yes

Q. How many Jews died of natural causes or just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

A. *silence*

Q. So there weren't any Jews who died of natural causes or who could be considered ordinary wartime casualties?

A. Nobody said that.

Q. Then how many were there?

A. *silence*

So Jews weren't killed because they were innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. They weren't executed because they resisted the German occupation. They weren't executed because they were involved in black market activity. They weren't executed as part of reprisals against civilians because of partisan activity. They didn't die because disease and starvation that killed the non-Jewish population also hit the Jewish population. They didn't even die of natural causes. Jews always maintain contact with everybody they know so if a Jew doesn't know where another Jew was after the war, that Jew is dead. All the misfortune that swept over the European continent during the war miraculously passed over the Jews.

The only thing that did kill the Jews was the holocaust, which murdered six million of them.

There is only one tangential connection between the holocaust and World War II. World War II caused millions of non-Jewish civilian deaths which created a tremendous labor shortage for the Nazis. Some Nazis saw the Jews as potential slave laborers for the war effort. They felt it would be prudent to temporarily exempt some of the stronger, more able bodied Jews from extermination, make them slaves during the war, and kill them after the war. Fortunately for the Jews the war ended with the Nazi defeat so all the Jews who had been temporarily exempt from the Final Solution survived the war. So World War II did impact the holocaust

So let me rephrase the question: Besides saving millions of Jewish lives and strengthening the genetic pool by exterminating the old and the weak, what did World War II have to do with the holocaust?
 
I think we are at cross purposes here. I am talking about general public knowledge of the Holocaust, which is poor, whereas you are talking about scholarly research.

I think that one thing revisionism has been right about is getting a more accurate knowledge of the Holocaust into the public domain. But it got it very wrong as to how to do that and what is the correct information.

Did you read the links I posted?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8386199&postcount=2652
 
Last edited:
That is nothing like giant proof, it is only nibbling away at the edges.

My attitude towards the Holocaust is that revisionism/denial have raised some important issues and that orthodox history does not have good enough answers. I do not think that revisionism/denial will ever provide reliable answers to their own questions as they are biased and some of their techniques are frankly appalling. I think banning revisionism/denial is wrong as that makes the orthodox side lazy as it can hide behind the law and it has not gone with the times making it clear to the public that many claims about the Holocaust were grossly exaggerated ones from immediately after the war, now found to be wrong. Examples of that are the view that all camps had homicidal gas chambers and the numbers who dies at Auschwitz.

I think that independent, full, detailed modern forensic examinations are needed of the T4 gas chambers, Action Reinhard camps and Krema II. I also think that public education now about the Holocaust needs to be more accurate about gas chambers and numbers killed.

So you're saying that proof that there may have been 100 experimental gassings and that proof that 2,999,900 were could not have been gassed means nothing?
 
Oh look, The Holocaust denier catechism. LOL

Dogzilla must be dead proud of his latest contribution to revisionist vacuity! This is definitely going in the stupid file.
 
Q. How many of them were innocent civilians who simply got caught in the crossfire?

A. None of those six million were innocent civilians who got caught in the crossfire.

You seem incredibly ignorant to make statements like this about an estimated total.

Surely, even a denier could recognise that historians discuss specific incidents, where such questions are invalid.

How many "crossfires" were there in the Warsaw ghettos? How about Lvov or Riga? In 1942? Who would these crossfires have been between? How did they make the wounds look like the effects of typhoid or starvation?

Which forces fought at Triblenka? Which engagement would have caused the crossfire that might have killed upwards of 800,000 people while Poland was occupied by Nazis? Or the 20,000 who died carrying out slave labour.

Your post is incredibly ill concieved on any and every level and makes no logical sense.

So Jews weren't killed because they were innocent civilians caught in the crossfire? The crossfire of which battles? By which forces? How? Please do explain...
 
So you're saying that proof that there may have been 100 experimental gassings and that proof that 2,999,900 were could not have been gassed means nothing?

We're saying there is sufficient evidence to show that the Holocaust accounted for approximately 11 million victims of which about 5.1 million were Jewish.
 
My first post here resulted in some questions by TSR which I want to answer. So starting last as a point was recently made which I want to pick up on.

Nessie - I also think that public education now about the Holocaust needs to be more accurate about gas chambers and numbers killed.

TSR - Can you cite the actual textbooks involved?

I was not just talking about text books, but public education in general and here is an example



I have relatives who have been to Auschwitz and speaking to them they report similar claims of Kremas working day and night as if they functioned perfectly as a conveyor belt of death with thousands queuing for their deaths at a time. But again no historian claims 24/7 operations.

Then there is the questionable captioning of images on the internet, where so many photos are labelled '...... on their way to the gas chambers' or 'queuing for selection'

http://furtherglory.wordpress.com/tag/gas-chamber/

and here at Birkenau it is supposedly possible to decide from an ariel photo that some people are also on their way the gas chambers.

http://www1.yadvashem.org/exhibitions/album_auschwitz/air_photographs03.html

but we have no idea who they are and where they are going.

As for numbers and gas chambers specifically here is an example of a popular source which is inaccurate

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_chamber

where under Nazi Germany it states "Some stationary gas chambers could kill 2,000 people at once." and "The gas chambers were dismantled or destroyed[18] when Soviet troops got close, except at Dachau, Sachsenhausen, and Majdanek" but it is recognised the chamber at Dachau was not used and does an historian know a 2000 capacity gas chamber?

Then in terms of over all numbers the best know figure is 6 million Jews were killed.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_Jews_were_killed_in_the_Holocaust

But we know that has been the subject of study and has been revised

http://socioecohistory.wordpress.co...number-of-holocaust-dead-drop-to-2-8-million/

Certainly my relatives after their visit to Auschwitz were unaware the number of deaths there have been revised down and down again, something I think most are still unaware of.


http://socioecohistory.wordpress.co...number-of-holocaust-dead-drop-to-2-8-million/




JEWISH ESTIMATE SEES NUMBER OF HOLOCAUST DEAD DROP TO 2.8 MILLION
According to Hilberg, as quoted in an article written by himself in the 1998 Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia under the heading Holocaust, the six camps, their means of killing and their total number of victims was as follows:

“Chelmno had gas vans, and its death toll was 150,000; Belzec had carbon monoxide gas chambers in which 600,000 Jews were killed; Sobibor’s gas chambers accounted for 250,000 dead; Treblinka’s for 700,000 to 800,000; At Majdanek, some 50,000 were gassed or shot; and in Auschwitz, the Jewish dead totaled more than 1 million.”

- Raul Hilberg, “Holocaust,” Microsoft “Encarta” 98 Encyclopedia. 1993-1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.)”

This only accounts for 2.8 million dead: (as the other camps did not have gas chambers); if Hilberg’s figures are correct, then the number of six million dead drops, by Jewish estimates, by half to just over 3 million, even if the verified Einsatzgruppen victims are included.


THE SHRINKING NUMBERS OF DEAD AT AUSCHWITZ
The best example of how the figures for the number of Jews killed varies can be seen from this table: the left hand column is the number of dead as alleged in the source, stated in the right hand column. From this overview it can be seen that estimates of the number of people who died in Auschwitz has varied over the years from 9 million to 73,000.
Number of Alleged Dead in Auschwitz

...

Edited by LashL: 
Edited breach of Rule 4.


- (This table and its contents first appeared in The Barnes Review, January / February 2001)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Clayton, your maths are off, did SnakeTongue help you?

Check out pp 1301-1321 of the 2004 edition of The Destruction of the European Jews for the correction to your distortion of Hilberg's estimate:

p 1320 shows the following -
Ghettoization over 800,000
Open-air shootings 1,400,000
Camps up to 2,900,000

And that comes to more than half of whatever you are trying to pass off. Why are you distorting Hilberg's conclusions and lying about them?
 
So you're saying that proof that there may have been 100 experimental gassings and that proof that 2,999,900 were could not have been gassed means nothing?

No, but you seem to be saying that those 100 wouldn't have mattered, even if you had any evidence that this was the case.

But you don't, and it wasn't.

Are you ever going to reconcile your 94% figure with your claim that each and every Jew in the camps was a time bomb?
 
"Don't have good enough answers" is what I really said. Considering elsewhere we are in agreement about context of quotes being important I would hope that you would not then ignore that here. An example of that we have just discussed, modern forensic examination of Treblinka II.

Then I said "and it has not gone with the times making it clear to the public that many claims about the Holocaust were grossly exaggerated ones from immediately after the war, now found to be wrong." So whilst scholars have been correcting what was wrong, the public have been left behind and retain inaccurate knowledge.

I am not trying to have it both ways.

Just saw this one. Okay, you have always been honest, that is for sure, calling things as you see them. What threw me was the reference to "orthodox history," and, although it still does confuse me, I accept your explanation.

And hope you'll list out where historians fall short, in your opinion, so we can discuss that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom