• 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.
Dogzilla said:
Boy, that would be really stupid to think that negative proof such as that can exist. Can you show where any denier said that proving that a handful of people have lied about their own personal experiences will prove that the entire Holocaust is a hoax?
Click to expand...

We're all mystified because you guys claim to be debunking the whole yet only ever cherrypick a few extreme cases (like Zisblatt) and then act as if that is the whole of the possible conversation.

Now, either you guys really do believe that singling out one liar proves the Holocaust is a hoax, or there's a colossal disconnect between your goal and your methods.
 
Nessie said:
It is not faulty reasoning at all. It is based on the 'no holes, no Holocaust' way of thinking by revisionist/deniers. Further evidence of that way of thinking is their criticism of Zisblatt which shows one supposed witness has been lying . . .
Click to expand...

Exactly. What is their point of harping on Zisblatt, then, if not to be in denial? Why can't a single denier summarize the totality of eyewitness testimony for even one aspect of the Holocaust, like Treblinka or Auschwitz? And then connect that to other evidence? Why the focus on outliers and anomalies?
 
nomuse said:
You are losing me here. We can all agree that many people were killed as an indirect result of the war, and as well a great many were killed as targeted civilian populations (Dresden, Tokyo, etc.)

We also seem to be in agreement that several populations were singled out for special treatment, including those of Japanese descent in America and its island holdings, and the Jewish population of Poland and other occupied nations.

Where you appear to be dragging feet is over, specifically, gas chambers (or even gas vans). Is this a numbers game, or is it a reaction to the striking difference between that and even other genocides; that it was as much as possible an automated, emotionless extermination process?
Click to expand...

If I appear to be dragging my feet over the gas chambers it's because there is a great deal of good evidence for some aspects of the holocaust like the EG while for other aspects of it, like the gas chambers, the evidence is almost as solid as the evidence that Earth has been visited by intelligent life from another planet. I don't believe in little green men so the gas chambers aren't going to cut it for me either.
 
Nick Terry said:
We're all mystified because you guys claim to be debunking the whole yet only ever cherrypick a few extreme cases (like Zisblatt) and then act as if that is the whole of the possible conversation.

Now, either you guys really do believe that singling out one liar proves the Holocaust is a hoax, or there's a colossal disconnect between your goal and your methods.
Click to expand...

There being no controversy about Zisblatt makes this approach of theirs all the more curious.
 
Dogzilla said:
I would substantiate those by referring to the EG reports and ask you to explain why reports of killing partisans means killing Jews and why killing bolsheviks means killing Jews. Also keep in mind that I don't deny Jews were shot in the East. So if you want to discuss the Jaeger report I can only assume you're going to try tying it to the plan, the six million, or the gas chambers.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could show us where anyone has interpreted reports of killing partisans as reports of killing Jews.

When historians encounter Nazi documents about anti-partisan warfare and they read reports that a Wehrmacht unit or SS brigade or police battalion has killed or executed 'partisans' or the very many synonyms, they generally do not make the assumption that the victims were Jews.

That's because the Nazis tended to report killings of Jews separately, and were very keen on identifying who was killed as a Jew and who was killed for another reason, even when the killings took place under the cover of 'antipartisan warfare'. For example, in August 1942, Friedrich Jeckeln's SS and Police forces mounted Operation 'Swamp Fever' in western Belorussia, and reported the killing of 1,713 partisans alongside the killing of 8,350 Jews (HSSPF Ostland, Abschlussbericht ‘Sumpffieber’, 6.11.42, NARB 845-1-206, pp.181-5).

The Jews in question happened to live in various ghettos into which they had been sealed in 1941. They were not roaming freely in forests, and had not joined any partisan force, but were from a military perspective entirely neutralised behind barbed wire, fences and guards. They were killed in towns like Baranovichi simply because the SS command had failed to do significant damage to the real partisan movement in western Belorussia, and so the SS commander, Jeckeln, decided to inflate his bodycount by continuing the ongoing process of annihilating the Jews of western Belorussia, a policy which had begun in 1941 and which continued through to 1943, at a slower pace than in other areas because the Jews of western Belorussia made up a significant proportion of the skilled workforce and could not be dispensed with overnight.

There are actually very few reports about antipartisan operations which also mention the killing of Jews; while on the other hand only a few reports about killing Jews mention antipartisan warfare. If you added up all the reports of antipartisan warfare in Belorussia which mention actions against Jews, you would only reach a low percentage of the total number of Jews killed in Belorussia. The Jaeger report, which has caused you so many problems over the past year, doesn't mention a Jewish partisan threat at all nor does it use partisan activity as a justification for the bodycounts enumerated on its pages.

So to suggest that the two processes of antipartisan warfare and the murder of the Jews were identical is simply nonsense, even before we look more closely at the few cases of overlap and find that the Nazis were lying to themselves about the 'Jewish partisan' link and were massacring Jews who were not actually partisans at all.
 
Dogzilla said:
If I appear to be dragging my feet over the gas chambers it's because there is a great deal of good evidence for some aspects of the holocaust like the EG while for other aspects of it, like the gas chambers, the evidence is almost as solid as the evidence that Earth has been visited by intelligent life from another planet. I don't believe in little green men so the gas chambers aren't going to cut it for me either.
Click to expand...

Here's a gloss on Hilberg's estimates of Jews murdered by the Nazis in the Final Solution:

mobile killing operations: 1,400,000
camps including Transnistria: 2,900,000
ghettos and other aggravated deaths: 800,000
total: 5,100,000

Of the camp deaths, 1,400,000 occurred in Aktion Reinhard camps; over 170,000 at Chelmno; and just under 1,000,000 at Auschwitz-Birkenau - a subtotal for these camps of a bit more than 2,500,000.

43% of the deaths occurred outside camps, according to Hilberg, and 27% of the deaths were in mobile killing actions. Not all the deaths inside camps, e.g., Transnistria, Treblinka Lazarett, etc., were from gassings - while some of the mobile killing operations included gassings (see gas vans thread).

Dogzilla's fixation on gas chambers ignores much of the genocide. And this
there is a great deal of good evidence for some aspects of the holocaust like the EG
Click to expand...
even as Dogzilla denies specific evidence whenever confronted with it - and taken along with his various excuses, justifications, and obfuscations regarding these very open-air murders - is the height of cowardice and evasion.

As Nessie asked with regard to Dogzilla's silly
definition of the holocaust [as] what happened to the Jews during World War II
Click to expand...
what did happen to Jews in the EG and mobile killing actions, and is it not best described as a genocide? Dogzilla's circumlocutions, side-stepping, and transparent dodging make intelligent readers ask themselves, why can't this guy just say what he means?
 
Last edited:
Nick Terry said:
. . . So to suggest that the two processes of antipartisan warfare and the murder of the Jews were identical is simply nonsense, even before we look more closely at the few cases of overlap and find that the Nazis were lying to themselves about the 'Jewish partisan' link and were massacring Jews who were not actually partisans at all.
Click to expand...

Indeed. But Dogzilla doesn't really know what he's talking about. He's just blowing smoke to try and divert attention from his inability to support the claims about the Jaeger report he tried passing off earlier.
 
Dogzilla said:
Only if you promise to explain to me how it's evidence for a policy your team says wasn't in place when the report was written or what the Nazi's did in response to partisan activity because the EG sure as heck wasn't involved in anything except indiscriminate Jew slaughter.
Click to expand...

Asked and answered:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7873048&postcount=8453

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7875693&postcount=8471

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7878122&postcount=8511

Pathetic. You cannot even make a gesture to defend the very propositions you tried putting over on us: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7879945&postcount=8549.
 
TSR said:
As pointed out, the answer is easy: They didn't. And since your own source offers you correction on this point, the only possible explanations are willful ignorance or mendacity.

Which do you prefer?
Click to expand...

I keep telling you folks that you are too quick to exclude "extreme bias". It's entirely possible Clay didn't really read his own link. It's happened lots before.

Dogzilla said:
I'm going to need something a little more specific. Even LC provides links to documents he thinks answers a question. When I ask to see an example of a video or photo of Jews being gassed, "that museum video" and "photos of the mass graves" and (my favorite) "stuff like that" just don't cut it.
Click to expand...

No.

I refuse.

Not that I couldn't find them, but I believe you are intellectually dishonest. Even in the very post I am responding to, you have stopped mentioning the records and testimony. Why are they not sufficient? Did something never happen just because no one was there pointing an iPhone at it, despite all the other evidence? You don't really need photos and videos to prove Jews were gassed, and you know it.

I've also noticed you do not apply such high standards to Clayton Moore and other deniers.

But let's say I was making stuff up, or mistaken. So what? It doesn't prove the Holocaust didn't happen any more than a single person lying in a documentary does, no matter what Traynor alleges. All it means is that I was wrong.
 
Nick Terry said:
Perhaps you could show us where anyone has interpreted reports of killing partisans as reports of killing Jews.

When historians encounter Nazi documents about anti-partisan warfare and they read reports that a Wehrmacht unit or SS brigade or police battalion has killed or executed 'partisans' or the very many synonyms, they generally do not make the assumption that the victims were Jews.

That's because the Nazis tended to report killings of Jews separately, and were very keen on identifying who was killed as a Jew and who was killed for another reason, even when the killings took place under the cover of 'antipartisan warfare'. For example, in August 1942, Friedrich Jeckeln's SS and Police forces mounted Operation 'Swamp Fever' in western Belorussia, and reported the killing of 1,713 partisans alongside the killing of 8,350 Jews (HSSPF Ostland, Abschlussbericht ‘Sumpffieber’, 6.11.42, NARB 845-1-206, pp.181-5).

The Jews in question happened to live in various ghettos into which they had been sealed in 1941. They were not roaming freely in forests, and had not joined any partisan force, but were from a military perspective entirely neutralised behind barbed wire, fences and guards. They were killed in towns like Baranovichi simply because the SS command had failed to do significant damage to the real partisan movement in western Belorussia, and so the SS commander, Jeckeln, decided to inflate his bodycount by continuing the ongoing process of annihilating the Jews of western Belorussia, a policy which had begun in 1941 and which continued through to 1943, at a slower pace than in other areas because the Jews of western Belorussia made up a significant proportion of the skilled workforce and could not be dispensed with overnight.

There are actually very few reports about antipartisan operations which also mention the killing of Jews; while on the other hand only a few reports about killing Jews mention antipartisan warfare. If you added up all the reports of antipartisan warfare in Belorussia which mention actions against Jews, you would only reach a low percentage of the total number of Jews killed in Belorussia. The Jaeger report, which has caused you so many problems over the past year, doesn't mention a Jewish partisan threat at all nor does it use partisan activity as a justification for the bodycounts enumerated on its pages.

So to suggest that the two processes of antipartisan warfare and the murder of the Jews were identical is simply nonsense, even before we look more closely at the few cases of overlap and find that the Nazis were lying to themselves about the 'Jewish partisan' link and were massacring Jews who were not actually partisans at all.
Click to expand...

Does the Jaeger Report specify the killing of people not classified as Jews?
 
Dogzilla said:
If I appear to be dragging my feet over the gas chambers it's because there is a great deal of good evidence for some aspects of the holocaust like the EG while for other aspects of it, like the gas chambers, the evidence is almost as solid as the evidence that Earth has been visited by intelligent life from another planet. I don't believe in little green men so the gas chambers aren't going to cut it for me either.
Click to expand...

So where are those 6 million Jews, Dogzilla ?
 
Dogzilla said:
If I appear to be dragging my feet over the gas chambers it's because there is a great deal of good evidence for some aspects of the holocaust like the EG while for other aspects of it, like the gas chambers, the evidence is almost as solid as the evidence that Earth has been visited by intelligent life from another planet. I don't believe in little green men so the gas chambers aren't going to cut it for me either.
Click to expand...

So...if Krema II had been a line of SS men with machetes would you still be posting on this thread?
 
ANTPogo said:
Why don't you read the report and see for yourself? It's only five pages long!
Click to expand...

Pfft. Reading is so quaint.

Of course, pictures could have been photoshopped or doctored, so I guess no evidence is reliable. This is why rhetoric is so powerful for these people, and why they are so easily swayed: they can trust nothing.
 
I wonder if he will be able to find an estimate of Jews in Europe at the time of the Wannsee conference according to Nazi accounting. I wonder where such an estimate is hidden.
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
Oh you see, it's easy.

Every holocaust denier we've ever seen so far has eventually revealed a deep hatred for Jews, for some reason. So the fact that one is a denier certainly points towards antisemitism.
Click to expand...

So what is antisemitic about six million Jews not being exterminated? I'm not understanding the logic behind this particular expression of hate. I understand why somebody who hated African Americans might try to keep Black folks from buying a house next door to them. Or how a bunch of drunk homophobes might get their jollies by vandalizing a known "gay" bar.

But if somebody hates Jews, what does saying six million weren't murdered get that person? Wouldn't somebody who hates Jews want more of them to have been murdered and not less? If you're Jewish, why are you offended if six million people you probably never met anyway didn't suffer a horrible fate? If I wanted to make a Jewish family feel welcome in my home, would saying that it wasn't six but it was actually ten million of them were murdered and they were all tortured first be a way to it?

If it's true that six million weren't exterminated, is it still antisemitic to say so?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom