General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[TSR]

Was Spielberg's The Liberators eventually withdrawn from public sale because it was shown to be full of propaganda lies?

YES or NO?

I have no idea, and care even less.

But let's say it was.

What does that change about the historicity of the Holocaust.

Nothing.

Why are you so obsessed with pop culture, when you are trying to claim established history is wrong? You *do* realize those are two different things, don't you.

ETA: You're at best just wrong.

ETA2 As another 30 seconds shows.

 

[Moss]

Obviously lies make no difference in Shoah Business.

I don't expect documentaries to be historically accurate. That's why I get my knowledge from academic writing. Which for some unfathomable reason both you and Mr. Traynor seem to shy away from.

 

[Border Reiver]

Obviously lies make no difference in Shoahw Business.

Fixed that for you.

Unless of course you also are under the impression that "Captain America" is a true to life retelling of Allied Spec Ops in NW Europe.

 

[TSR]

TSR, earlier in this thread YOU were the one who wanted to discuss this film. Why are you now dodging?

Really? Where was that?

I suggest you begin doing your homework, trollboy.

You should probably read your Membership agreement again...

 

[Dcdrac]

Its weird that CM thinks academic works have no value while websites to him appear to have intrinsic value

And what is this obession the Deniers seem to have with thinking works of fiction are factual records?

 

[TSR]

Obviously lies make no difference in Shoah Business.

I note that you have ducked the court proven lies of Zundel, Irving and Rudolf, just like you duck all of the lies *you* have documentably posted here.

"Hello, Kettle? Pot here. How's it going? Uh huh. Uh huh. Well, listen -- I just phoned to say 'you're black'. Okay, take care..."

 

[Tomtomkent]

Breeze ovens in London burned around the clock since victorian era untill the fifties. Why does Clayton assume this technology would be baffling to Nazis wanting to burn bodies?

 

[Dogzilla]

And idiotic: walking = digging. As though visiting a cemetery, for example, and walking over the ground under which people are buried, would equate to digging up the bodies . . . in addition to imputing to "people" what they think and what concerns they have. And now playing the "who me?" card.

Lemmy, try reading for comprehension. Do you really think visiting a cemetary is equal to digging up the bodies? So any religious objections to exhuming a corpse would also prohibit people from visiting cemetaries, right? So you can't walk over a spot where someone is buried, you can't dig up the body but you can walk all over somebody's skeleton as long as it's in fragments and scattered over the surface? Is there some rule about a body not being a body if all that is left is the skeleton? And in fact people do generally prefer that you not walk directly over grave. Wasn't the whole point of Kola's investigation at Belzec to identify the mass graves before burying the whole camp under a pile of rubble so people could avoid walking on top of them? And what's with the quotes around 'people?' Are the "people" who lost loved ones at the AR camps not "people?"

 

[Nessie]

None of the Holocaust champions will discuss the video.

Stuffing 2000 naked people into a gas chamber? How long would that take?

15 ONE person ovens to cremate 2000 people? How long would that take?

Dragging 2000 gas contaminated bodies out of the gas chambers? How long would that take?

Cleaning out the gas chambers? How long would that take?

I agree 2000 at a time, consistently over two years seems wholly unlikely. Lower the numbers and it becomes far more realistic. And as I said before the video clearly shows how it was possible to use the Krema as a gas chamber.

I was quite taken by denier suggestions on how to make a better gas chamber! The argument that Germany makes BMWs and Mercedes, therefore Germans would not build such an inefficient gas chamber set up as at Krema II is ingenious, but very, very flawed.

 

[Nessie]

Was Spielberg’s The Liberators withdrawn from public sale because:

A. It was full of lies?
B. It had become a lightning rod for bad publicity?

As is being discussed in this thread

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238623

historical events are rarely accurately portrayed in films. You don't learn about life as it really was in POW camps by watching The Great Escape now do you.

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

Lemmy, try reading for comprehension. Do you really think visiting a cemetary is equal to digging up the bodies? So any religious objections to exhuming a corpse would also prohibit people from visiting cemetaries, right? So you can't walk over a spot where someone is buried, you can't dig up the body but you can walk all over somebody's skeleton as long as it's in fragments and scattered over the surface? Is there some rule about a body not being a body if all that is left is the skeleton? And in fact people do generally prefer that you not walk directly over grave. Wasn't the whole point of Kola's investigation at Belzec to identify the mass graves before burying the whole camp under a pile of rubble so people could avoid walking on top of them? And what's with the quotes around 'people?' Are the "people" who lost loved ones at the AR camps not "people?"

It is a concern for many of the relatives and other interested parties. Has been for years. Has been told you several times before. In Belzec that problem has now been solved although there are indications that graves extend even beyond the current memorial. The same is true in Treblinka. A redesign process for the memorial in part to protect the graves in Sobibor has had some set backs including the fatal plane crash of Polish representatives involved in the decision making but it is now being worked on again. Whenever possible remains found on the surface have been reburied on site but it doesn't in anyway imply that -all- relatives are satisfied with that state of affairs or that they have no objection to exhuming the existing mass graves.

 

[Nessie]

I don't expect documentaries to be historically accurate. That's why I get my knowledge from academic writing. Which for some unfathomable reason both you and Mr. Traynor seem to shy away from.

I do expect documentaries to be accurate. I don't expect feature films to be.

 

[Bluespaceoddity]

I agree 2000 at a time, consistently over two years seems wholly unlikely....

Going the round about way now? 2000 was just about maximum capacity and that for gas chambers which didn't operate for two years let alone consistently at that maximum capacity for two years.

 

[000063]

None of the Holocaust champions will discuss the video.

Stuffing 2000 naked people into a gas chamber? How long would that take?

15 ONE person ovens to cremate 2000 people? How long would that take?

Dragging 2000 gas contaminated bodies out of the gas chambers? How long would that take?

Cleaning out the gas chambers? How long would that take?

Incredulity, Gish Gallop. Your video has already been discussed and debunked.

Was Spielberg’s The Liberators withdrawn from public sale because:

A. It was full of lies?
B. It had become a lightning rod for bad publicity?

1. Dodge.
2. I'm not familiar with the matter, but given deniers usual tactics, I'm betting that's a false binary.

Obviously lies make no difference in Shoah Business.

1. Assuming it's a lie.
1b. Assuming Steven was aware of and knowingly perpetuated the lie.
2. Not actually answering the question.

Do you really want to start talking about who's lying here, Clay? Do you want people to dig up all the things on this subject you've been corrected on and repeat anyway?

 

[Dogzilla]

You know this how?

Churchill, for most of the time the history of WWII was being written, was in the opposition, eying a political comeback.

Reviews I've read of Churchill's work - again, I haven't read the volumes - suggest that Churchill pitched the narrative (well, his ghostwriters did) to his own need in the present more than anything - earning money, presenting his leadership during the war as a triumphant success.

I'm quite certain there was a self-serving purpose behind his books. Naturally he would want to downplay the fact that when Great Britain started the war over the issue of Polish sovereignty, she was the greatest imperial power the world had seen--commanding an empire upon which the sun never set. Under Churchill's leadership, the war ended with Great Britain becoming the bankrupt lapdog of a former colony while Poland was under the control of the world's greatest totalitarian superpower.

These reviews could be wrong, of course, so how do you know that Churchill was concerned, as Fauri says, "that there existed no satisfactory evidence to substantiate public claims that execution gas chambers did indeed exist" rather than omitted and included based on other goals? What's the evidence, aside from Fauri's argument that it must have been so because it was so?

Churchill did refer to the use of "scientific machinery" during the Hungarian action in a memo dated July 11, 1944 that was reprinted in the last volume of his work. At the time he can hardly be faulted for not being more specific because nobody was sure if the Germans were using gas chambers, steam chambers, electric floors, pedal powered brain bashing machines, or burning people alive. In 1953, when his book was published, the burning them alive story was still all the rage (hence the term "holocaust"). He wouldn't know if there was compelling evidence for gas chambers because any camps with "gas chambers" were off limits to westerners. What could he have possibly referred to as evidence that there were gas chambers in 1953?

 

[Dogzilla]

Tell that to cm.


Sorry, "aver by omission", not "acquiesce by omission". Still impossible, but I admit when I have made a mistake, unlike deniers.

Wartime propaganda like the Battle of the Bulge, for example? Not mentioned.

No, they didn't land on D Day -- they only planned or commanded it.

And Eisenhower visited Ohrdruf, which was not one of the camps with gas chambers -- but you knew that already.

How do you *know* this was the reason no one mentioned gas chambers?

You engaged here in a habit common to deniers: no gas chambers, no Holocaust. Which ignores the fact, pointed out to you many many times before, that slightly less than half of the death toll of the Holocaust was from active killing in the death camps. Even if there were no gas chambers, the forced labour, starvation, illness and actions of the EG would mean deaths in the millions.

No. Deniers don't say "no gas chambers, no holocaust." Deniers say "no gas chambers, no gas chambers." YOU people say that "no gas chambers" means "no holocaust."

 

[Dcdrac]

Of course there was a self serving side to Churchills books how on earth could you suppose otherwise....he was a politician

And no one other than you CM and the other nutters are saying anything about no gas chambers no holocaust, that is your fantasy

 

[Dogzilla]

Shhh! Don't let Dogzilla see a post where somebody suggested Churchill didn't mention gas chambers because it would be a "lie" to state they exist. Or for that matter makes a definate statement "proving" the absence of gas chambers.

Shhhh! Don't tell Tomtomkent that "not mentioning gas chambers" equals "not wanting to be branded a liar"

and

"not wanting to be branded a liar" equals "negative evidence of gas chambers"

ergo

"not mentioning gas chambers" equals "negative evidence of gas chambers"

might be logically consistent but is based upon a false premise and makes no sense anyway.

Try again, this time with an eye for a statement that says something like "they didn't say gas chambers, which is proof that there weren't any"

 

[Charles Traynor]

I don't expect documentaries to be historically accurate. That's why I get my knowledge from academic writing. Which for some unfathomable reason both you and Mr. Traynor seem to shy away from.

We are not discussing academic writing here; we are discussing Spileberg’s propaganda films, which are filled with outright lies.

Please stop trolling this thread.

 

[Nessie]

..... Naturally he would want to downplay the fact that when Great Britain started the war over the issue of Polish sovereignty

.....

Which completely ignores the fact that Germany started the War by invading Poland which resulted in Great Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand declaring war.