General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[LemmyCaution]

What I not going to do is just ignore what they have to say just because of who they are.

Nor am I. But, based on years of experience, I have yet to see deniers being serious or contributing evidence, critical thinking, or new insights. At a certain point, after all, I do feel it is not just okay but actually almost obligatory to look at the pattern and call it what it is. What "they have to say," taken as a whole and also on specific issues, is worthless to our understanding of the history.

I find it remarkable - having seen, as you say, the way deniers operate - that you fail to see and acknowledge the pattern and learn what to expect from deniers.

On the other hand, you haven't read enough of the scholarship to understand the imbalance between denier "literature" and proper scholarship, an imbalance that is well described by nomuse's allusion to a similar imbalance in "debates" about evolution.

You know I have been approaching this subject from a different angle since the very begining.

I don't really grasp this angle, to be honest.

 

[LemmyCaution]

I would also say that due to denial laws, risk of being called anti-semitic and loss of work, respect means that it is impossible to be genuinely concerned that history is wrong and the Holocaust is not as commonly portraid.

This sentence is hard to understand, but again you seem to deny the real world connection between anti-Semitism and HD. That people draw conclusions from patterns they observe hardly seems unusual. And that popular attitudes and the state of scholarship are forms of indirect pressure on researchers and writers is not exactly news - and not remotely unique to study of the Holocaust.

 

[LemmyCaution]

No I have not read a reasonable case for denial.

This alone should give you pause.

But as requested before I am putting forward what I think are the contributions to the debate by revisionist/deniers. Condeming denial laws is one.

This is so twisted it's hard to disentangle: a group of activists runs afoul of laws intended to curtail their activism - and these activists AND people who disagree with these activists (but fear that the laws infringe civil liberties) oppose the legislation - and you present opposition to these laws as 1) coming exclusively from the most self-interested opponents (utterly neglecting civil libertarians, among them people who sharply disagree with the HD activists) and 2) contributing to understanding of the history of the Third Reich! Condemnation of HD laws is a contribution to "debate" about the Holocaust? Seriously? This is a real head scratcher, Nessie.

The reason being what happens if you reasonably do believe there was no gassing at Krema II and what does a historian do if they find evidence to show such?

The historian should show such evidence. Until and unless it is shown, and until and unless it is of such significance to outweigh the evidence we have now, it isn't possible to reasonably deny the Holocaust (I am assuming that your Krema II example is a "for instance"?).

 

[A'isha]

Do you mean losing a trial and being told by a British judge that he's an antisemite, a liar and a poor historian?

Not just losing a trial, losing a libel lawsuit he brought against someone else, in a country where libel laws meant that the only way he could possibly have lost is if the people he sued could prove in a court of law the truth of the statements they made about Irving.

Unfortunately for Irving and his lawsuit, they could.

 

[tsig]

This is not my view, but how I think no conspiracy is needed as you claim.

Those who say they witnessed gassings at Krema II are either lying or mistaken or relying on second hand information. Rather than Jews or the SS if you look at reports of British POWs at Auschwitz, they only ever had second hand information or were lied to such as one being shown an alleged gas chamber by a guard for some cigarettes. It is known what he was shown was not a gas chamber.

It was known Zyklon B was used at the camp, many died there, the Kremas were used to dispose of the dead. There is dubiety about being able to use the Leichenkeller for gassing with Zyklon B.

So a terrible rumor went about the camp, partly perpetrated by the Nazis themselves, which needs no mass conspiracy. The story, so gross then got stuck in popular imagination and is now protected by law.

It could have been also caused by a few, limited amount of gassings taking place, so there was a truth there, but nothing like the lines of hundreds of thousands or millions going to their deaths, 2000 at a time.

No conspiracy their either.


I did admit Irving has said anti-semitic remarks. Is one needed to condemn someone for life?

Unfortunately, those who witnessed the gassing personally are dead of gas.

I hear the sound of the other shoe dropping.

 

[tsig]

Lemmy believes that the prodigious output of German scholars in support of the traditional holocaust historiography is in no way a function of Germany's anti-hD laws. I explained what is obvious to everybody: the "unless it is forbidden, it is allowed" nature of how laws are written means that laws don't force people to do what they don't want to do. It prevents them from doing what they do want to do. So I'm agreeing with Lemmy. German law doesn't force scholars to research, write, and publish material in support of the holocaust. That is such a no-brainer, that the fact Lemmy even says it implies that he believes the German anti-hD laws have no influence on German scholars whatsoever. Insisting that the dearth of holocaust denial material from German scholars is not a function of the fact that such material is illegal is certifiable.

What was the original question anyway?




I really want to believe you're right about that. I know Jr. High School and High School students who are able to cite directly from wikipedia, a practice I find appalling.




But if the fact is that there were no gas chambers, then a "revision of fact" would constitute "outright denial."

This would still be illegal in Germany because protecting historical truth isn't the reason holocaust denial is illegal in Germany. It's illegal because a very important part of Jewish identity is the need to be perceived as victims. Because of the historical relationship between Germans and Jews it is incumbent upon Germans to support this self-perception. Anything that might challenge or diminish their victim-hood is an attack on their Jewish identity and self-worth. I don't know if hurting Jews feelings is at the crux of other countries anti-denial legislation. I'm sure it is but I doubt other countries are quite so open about it..

Is Germany the only country in the world where Holocaust research is done?

 

[A'isha]

I wonder what explanation CM and Dogzilla have for Berlin historian Wolf Gruner still being allowed his freedom, after publishing this book, considering that it "refutes the widespread thesis that compulsory work was organized only by the SS, and that exploitation was only an intermediate tactic on the way to mass murder or, rather, that it was only a facet in the destruction of the Jews."

I believe CM even characterized the book as an attempt to "cushion the response when the bubble bursts" and "just the beginning of an effort to cushion the reaction to the revelation for brain dead believers that there were no gas chambers".

 

[Cyrix686]

Cushioning, really? Wow! That's pretty out there Clay, another tactic?

 

[LemmyCaution]

Yup, here http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=202147&page=247 starting with post #9848 (also another time an attempt to discuss a specific topic failed to draw rev interest . . . )

 

[Cyrix686]

Their explanation will be that we of Mossad have our fingers everywhere .

Moore's post alerted one of our section leaders that Gruner must be allowed to stay free at any cost or risk bursting the bubble. LOL.

 

[Nessie]

....

Do you know of a single case of a German historian suppressing evidence out of fear of prosecution for incitement?

......

No, but for reasons such as fear of being charged under denier law, reputation, respect or being called an anti-semite how likely is it that a German historian has found something, suppressed it and then told people what he or she has done such?

 

[Nessie]

Unfortunately, those who witnessed the gassing personally are dead of gas.

I hear the sound of the other shoe dropping.

A figure of speech and to clarify those who were present when people were gassed, but not in the chamber, they were outside and part of the process.

 

[Cyrix686]

Not very likely. I would say.

 

[Nessie]

.......


The historian should show such evidence. Until and unless it is shown, and until and unless it is of such significance to outweigh the evidence we have now, it isn't possible to reasonably deny the Holocaust (I am assuming that your Krema II example is a "for instance"?).

I do not deny the Holocaust, but I do have doubts about specific aspects, such as gassings at Krema II.

I wonder how that would go down in a German court?

 

[LemmyCaution]

No, but for reasons such as fear of being charged under denier law, reputation, respect or being called an anti-semite how likely is it that a German historian has found something, suppressed it and then told people what he or she has done such?

About as likely as an American historian suppressing something he or she comes across or thinks. But conflating attitudes and laws makes you sound daft - what is your concern here? Anyway, look up Fogel & Engerman, Time on the Cross, or Gene Genovese . . . and please don't say that slavery in the US lacks emotional impact or punch . . .

But my question wasn't designed to get you to you speculate, based on nothing but your fears, about how German historians figure out their research programs. It was meant to have you tell us about actual cases where the laws have thwarted a researcher. You answered my question, saying no, you know of not a single case of a German historian bending his or her research because of anti-HD legislation. The rest of your reply is simply a repetition of your groundless speculation and your mixing of apples and oranges.

 

[LemmyCaution]

I do not deny the Holocaust, but I do have doubts about specific aspects, such as gassings at Krema II.

Then why don't you set down 1) the reasons for your doubts, summarizing the evidence pro and con and explaining why you think gassings may not have been carried out at this location, 2) the significance of your doubts and what they mean for Piper's estimate of the Jewish death toll at Auschwitz, and 3) where, for example, Pressac or van Pelt is in error about Krema II?

I wonder how that would go down in a German court?

Before speculating about something neither of us knows the answer to, let's first sort through your case against gassings in Krema II.

 

[Mondial]

Mondial, how many countries in the World don't have Holocaust denial laws?

Why should any countries that call themselves "democracies" have a law against freedom of speech on a historical subject? These governments talk out of both sides of their mouth. Out of one side they say the holocaust revisionists www.codoh.com are talking rubbish and people shouldn't take notice of what they say and out of the other they say that they are so dangerous they should be locked up. Most countries don't have a "holocaust denial" law because they are interested in laws against real crimes such as murder, rape, arson, drug dealing etc. not thought criminals. The countries that have these laws do so because of the Israeli lobby giving campaign contributions and donations in return for political favors such as this. These countries are continually condemning nazism (which hasn't even existed since 1945) yet they imprison people for their opinion. They also like to lecture China, North Korea, Iran, Zimbabwe, Venezuela etc on "human rights". When British historian David Irving www.fpp.co.uk/online/index.html was jailed for "holocaust denial" in "democratic" Austria the government of communist China issued a press release stating this is how you treat dissidents in the West and you have the nerve to lecture us. They are correct. The "holocaust denial" laws are an example of blatant hypocrisy and double standards.
Watch the documentaries at www.holocaustdenialvideos.com You might learn something.

 

[TSR]

The countries that have these laws do so because of the Israeli lobby giving campaign contributions and donations in return for political favors such as this.

And your evidence for this is ... ?

 

[Wahrheitseeker]

Before speculating about something neither of us knows the answer to, let's first sort through your case against gassings in Krema II.

I would also be interested to see more of an explanation from Nessie regarding his doubts of homicidal gassings in Krematorium II/BW 30.

 

[cwporter]

From the Black Book

PAGE 313, BELZEC: “The Belzec camp is built underground. It is an electric crematorium. There are two halls in the underground buildings. People were taken out of the railway cars into the first hall. Then they were led naked to the second hall. Here the floor resembled an enormous plate. When the crowd of men stood on it, the floor sank deep into a pool of water. The moment the men sank up to their necks, a powerful electric current of millions of volts was passed through, killing them all at once. The floor rose again, and a second electric current was passed through the bodies, burning them until nothing was left of the victims save a few ashes.”

PAGE 408, TREBLINKA: “The second Treblinka camp method, and the most widespread one, consisted of pumping all the air out from the chambers with large special pumps. By this method death ensued from approximately the same causes as from poisoning with carbon monoxide: man was deprived of oxygen.

And, finally, the third method, less widespread, was killing by steam, based also on deprivation of oxygen: the steam drove air out of the chamber.”

Edited by Locknar: 

<SNIP>, breach of rule 4.

FROM THE “BLACK BOOK”

PUBLISHED BY THE JEWISH BLACK BOOK COMMITTEE, 1946
World Jewish Congress, New York
Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee, Moscow
Vaad Leumi (Jewish National Council of Palestine, Jerusalem)
American Committee of Jewish Writers, Artists and Scientists, New York.