General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[Clayton Moore]

Two things in life annoy me at the moment.

1/ That my lawn mower just broke
2/ Childish people who think the Holocaust is a hoax.

I'm sure there are childish people who know the Holocaust is a hoax.


I ain't one of them. My lawn mower's moving parts don't include no stinkin motor.

 

[Clayton Moore]

As an addition to TSR's post, suppose that these people existed. Good people nearby the camps who knew that gassing was going on.

What could they do about it? Could they contact the government? Of course not; the government was behind the camps' existence. Could they try and stage a breakout? Against heavily-armed guards, this seems unwise, unlikely to succeed, and would result in a miniscule difference anyway. Leave the country or contact other governments to let them know what was going on? Perhaps they did that. There were, after all, rumors of what was going on prior to the Allied push into Axis territories that proved the existence of the camps.

So here's what my question is to you, Clayton: what difference do you think the answer to your question makes?

So cat got their tongues in 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1955, 1960, 1965,
1970..........................?

 

[Nick Terry]

Yet the German guards remained in the camps when they were liberated?

Why would they do that?

Clayton, it seems to have escaped you that there were more than a dozen main concentration camps, and about 700 sub-camps. If you want to claim that SS guards waited to be captured at every single camp, you'd be howlingly wrong.

In 1944, there were full-scale evacuations of Vaivara, Riga, Kauen, Majdanek and Herzogenbosch, with only a small handful of guards captured at Majdanek because they couldn't get out in time.

In January 1945, Auschwitz and Stutthof were evacuated of their SS guards.

In April-May 1945, SS guards left the Buchenwald main camp before it was captured. The SS also abandoned Neuengamme, Flossenbuerg, Sachsenhausen, Ravensbrueck and Gross-Rosen before capture. SS guards also deserted Mauthausen-Gusen before liberation.

Only at Belsen and Dachau were the camp staffs properly present upon liberation, in both cases because the military situation meant that an evacuation was out of the question; the SS had nowhere to go.

 

[Nick Terry]

You want me to give you a guesstimate of what percentage of the 5-6 million Jews that died wrongly at the hands of the Nazis died at the hands of the Nazis? That would be one hundred percent, wouldn't it?

You seem pretty adamant that the 5-6 million Jews that you believe are missing died wrongly at the hands of the Nazis. Unless you hold the utterly psychotic view that not one Jew died during WWII because of WWII or for any other reason, you must accept that the total Jewish death toll exceeds 5-6 million. What is that death toll? How many Jews died in addition to the 5-6 million who died wrongly at the hands of the Nazis? Give us a number. I double dare you.

I already answered your question several weeks/months ago. You, however, have not even attempted to answer my question. You don't seem to know how many Jews died in the Holocaust according to your version of history, and you refuse to tell us whether they died because of deliberate Nazi action.

One would have thought that a document like the Jaeger report, recording 130,000 executions of Jews, would be a good starting point for you; it's hardly the only such document of course.

Did the Nazis kill 130,000 Jews in Lithuania as spelled out in the Jaeger report? Yes or no?

 

[TSR]

So cat got their tongues in 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1955, 1960, 1965,
1970..........................?

Once again (to make it even more obvious that you are running from the questions) who, specifically and by camp, are "they"; what is your proof that they were aware of mass kilings at the camps at which they were stationed; and what exactly do you expect them to have done?

 

[Charles Traynor]

Seems we've hit the nerve with asking where the hell those 6 million non-existent jews went.

Once again, where are you getting your definitive 6M total murdered figure from? Your fellow exterminationists can't even decide how many were allegedly bumped off at Auschwitz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEUY2sAyD1E

 

[TSR]

Once again, where are you getting your definitive 6M total murdered figure from? Your fellow exterminationists can't even decide how many were allegedly bumped off at Auschwitz.

Belz will correct me if I am wrong, but I doubt that Belz means it to be "definitive".

But just so you can make yourself look even more foolish:

Where did the millions of Jews who are accepted by normative historians to have been victims of the Holocaust go, if they were indeed not victims?

 

[Dogzilla]

That there are apparent contradictions and impossibilities to the Holocaust makes it no different from much of our history, particularly during wars.

Please give us an example of an apparent impossibility that exists in history outside of the holocaust. That is, an example of something that cannot happen that is accepted as having happened by all mainstream historians.

That in itself does not prove anything, though I understand that you desperately want it to so as to disprove the Holocaust.

It proves that it didn't happen the way it was described. If something can't happen as it was described, it didn't happen as it was described. There is simply no way around that.

At best it discredits some of the history.

Exactly. But Team holocaust doesn't understand the difference between "it didn't happen" and "some of it didn't happen." It's an all or nothing proposition for those people. For some reason they think that if one small part of the holocaust is proven to be wrong, the whole thing is going to fall apart. Ironically, they seem to believe the holocaust is more fragile than I do.

If it is the believer side's job to evidence the number of remains at Treblinka II to the standard you want, it must be your job to evidence all the Jews who survived the War, as there was supposedly no Holocaust and where they went.

It is your job to offer evidence that hundreds of thousands of people were buried at the AR camps if that is what you want to say happened. Even finding evidence of tens of thousands of bodies having been buried isn't enough (unless you want to say that tens of thousands of people were buried there). But nobody has even found physical evidence of that at any of the camps. It's really not unreasonable to demand solid evidence of something before accepting it. Even skeptics like to see proof.

What would you accept as evidence of all the Jews who survived the war? Jews went where Jews are. Do you know any Jews who are holocaust survivors or who are descended from holocaust survivors?

That there are hundreds of thousands of missing Jews who went into the Nazi camp system and then disappeared is strong circumstantial evidence that they were killed. We know that because of a system of proof called MAGICOP.

Motive - the Nazis were anti-semitic by word and deed. They mainly despised the Jews and were sure they were the cause of many of Germany's post WWI problems and were a danger to the Aryan race. That gave them motive to behave the way they did.

Evidence of bigotry isn't evidence of intent to murder. The Nazis didn't invent antisemitism and they weren't the only people who practiced it. Before the Nazi takeover in 1933, it was the millions of Jews in Russia and Poland who were on the verge of annihilation while the world slumbered. Nazi Germany attempted an ethnic cleansing, not an extermination.

Ability - they made the camp and ghetto system, they had the resources to move hundreds of thousands of Jews from their homes and the ability to kill them by bullet, work or gas.

They had the ability to make the camp and ghetto system although the old Pale of Settlement made it much easier to accomplish this than it would have been if Jews had been dispersed evenly throughout all of Europe. The Germans ability to kill the Jews by bullet, work, or gas was no greater than the ability of the French or British to do the same. What nobody had the ability to do was kill millions of people without leaving obvious traces.

Guilty intent - that some, primarily Mischlings were exempted means they had to be exempted from something. That something was clearly being ethnically cleansed as that is what was happening to the majority of Jews. Even if sometimes kind words were said about the Jews by senior Nazis, their actions spoke far loudly that their words.

You said it yourself: ethnic cleansing. That was what was happening.

Identity - we have a lot of documentary evidence, photos, speeches, literature and other evidence to identify those who were involved in the Holocaust.

Uh, yeah. OK. The Nazis weren't shy about their antisemitism and they didn't try to hide their desire to get rid of the Jews.

Conduct after the crime - the attempts to destroy evidence from the whole scale such as the Action Reinhard camps to blowing up Krema II. If these places were as innocent as some suggest, why try and cover up and destroy evidence.

They didn't try to hide the evidence. It's obvious beyond a shadow of a doubt that the German policy towards the Jews was an ethnic cleansing. If the policy of ethnic cleansing had been a policy of extermination, the clear unambiguous evidence that exists of that ethnic cleansing would have been clear unambiguous evidence of extermination. It would be impossible to destroy all that evidence of extermination and replace it with the evidence of ethnic cleansing.

The fallback on the "they destroyed the evidence" gambit posits a theory that the millions of pieces of evidence for an extermination policy were successfully excised from the record and replaced by bogus evidence for a policy of ethnic cleansing. Or that there was a parallel policy extermination existing alongside the policy of ethnic cleansing and the Nazis were able to destroy the evidence for the extermination while leaving the policy of ethnic cleansing intact. Either way you're positing a massive conspiracy that exceeds anything the truthers or the moon hoaxers believe in.

Promoters of the holocaust making excuses such as "Because the Nazi regime sought to destroy not only the Jews of Europe but also the documentary evidence and material evidence (i.e. the mass graves and death camps), the evidence with which scholars and judicial authorities can work is both less than complete and not symmetrical for the two killing methods (EG and gassings) should raise a red flag. What Prosecutor tells the jury that the murderer tried to cover up the murder by destroying evidence so the evidence we have may be less than complete? You can't say that you don't have evidence because the Nazis destroyed it, which is evidence that they knew they were guilty. If the Nazis really did destroy the evidence, then they got away with it. I'm sorry but that's how it works.

Opportunity - the main opportunity was at the height of Nazi success during WWII. They had control of Germany and the territories captured.

They had controlled Germany for six years prior to the war yet they hadn't murdered all their Jews. They controlled part of Poland and France for at least two years before Wannsee yet they hadn't murdered all the Jews. They had plenty of opportunity to murder all the Jews before the tide of war turned against them.

Preparation - from getting the organisation right as Wannsee to construction of a ghetto and camp system, the preparation shows this was ethnic cleansing.

Right. Ethnic cleansing.

It is not as if new towns were being constructed away from Germany and Jews were taken there to live or Jews were being deported by being sent to Palestine on ships, which full of civilians would not have been attacked by the Allies. The preparation was for destruction, not re-settlement.

A ship full of German Jews would be a ship full of Germans to the British. They would've sunk it faster than you can say "go ahead, kraut. Make my day" In fact the Germans would have been more than happy to send all the Jews to Palestine. The Nazis and Zionists even worked out the Haavara agreement to circumvent the British obstacles to Jewish settlers. The Germans did build ghettos in preparation for resettlement. Why would they bother doing that if they simply wanted them dead? It would be much easier to hide the crime if it had been spread out all over Europe.

So under such circumstances, when we have so many missing people, the evidence states they were killed.

People who are missing are missing. They're not necessarily dead. If they were dead, and they were killed in the way that all historians say is the way they were killed, there would be unambiguous physical evidence at the killing sites. If that physical evidence is there, it hasn't been found.

 

[Dogzilla]

Why was Hitler's personal authority needed to make exemptions (primarily Mischlings as opposed to full blooded Jews) from being rounded up and ethnically cleansed?

Because of the ethnic cleansing.

 

[Dogzilla]

Your analogy misses quite a few steps, such as the parents' confessions, purchase of murder weapons, residue from those weapons' use and letters written bragging of the murder.

A closer analogy to your own situation would be asking to reopen that case, because you don't want to believe the parents are guilty, and when asked what happened to the child instead telling the DA that you haven't bothered to read the file, so don't know and what's more you don't care.

You *should* feel like a doofus, advancing that sort of argument.

No steps are missing. We have evidence of parents buying bug spray and diesel fuel. We have evidence they have used them around the house. There's residue of these murder weapons. We have eyewitnesses who have seen parents frustrated with children. We have all that. That's part of the reason we have been able to exclude any other possible fate for these children if they weren't murdered.

Your "closer analogy" is a post-conviction analogy--whereby parents have already been convicted on the basis of the "what else can happen to missing children if their parents didn't murder them?" theory and there is no file or any other evidence.

 

[Nonpareil]

So cat got their tongues in 1946, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1955, 1960, 1965,
1970..........................?

They were talking about it even when it was going on.

Or do you think that there have been no reports concerning the Holocaust?

 

[Dogzilla]

I have received the following private comment from a reader of this thread:


<snip> Let's walk down memory line for just a moment, shall we?

- The parents' murdering their kids.

- This accent that is not Yiddish but might be Polish but probably comes from speakers of the Eastern European language.

- His refusal to debate that which is not in contention - i.e., Treblinka, Jaeger, etc.

- Holocaustia est omnis divisa in partes tres.

- Cadaver sniffing dogs at Treblinka.

- "Those people were never there."

- His brave supposition that Jews still live in Poland today, despite their not having lived there before WW2.

- Jews in Boca = no Holocaust.

- The multi-form "all Jews" strawman.

- The Jews of Europe never were there yet European Jews managed to go where European Jews are. Relevance.

- The repeated question how many Jews lived in Europe in '42, seemingly for no reason.

- The Haavara Agreement as the negation of the Nazis' announced and implemented policy of emigration.

- The Hoax by Accents.

- All these historians who never make use of trial testimony or documents.

- Asking, after months of avoiding discussion of the Jaeger report, if we have a document not produced for a trial!

- His unfamiliarity with defendants Ott and Braune and with the Einsatzgruppen trial of the NMT - and his ignorance, which follows from not knowing about the trial, of the prosecution's evidence against them.

- Continued purposeful conflation of comic books - well, you get my point - and Hilberg, for example.

- The bizarre decision to start clumsily aping Nick's posts, thinking this turns Nick's points back against him.

- "There is no substantial evidence that we didn't exterminate the Japanese."

- Ignorance that the Jaeger report was used in court cases long after it came to light.

- "Does the Jaeger Report document the shooting of anybody identified as a Communist? Yes or No?" - then utter silence when answered.

I could go on but I am tired <snip>

Edited by Loss Leader: 

Edited for Rules 0, 11 and 12. Speculation about a poster's mental health is almost always off-topic and an attack on the person of the arguer.

Wow! There are people who don't participate in this thread but who think that what I say is so important that they'll take the time to read my posts, lift out of context quotes and misinterpret what I say, and then PM you a summary about it? Personally, if I strongly disagreed with somebody, I'd try to counter what they say with facts in the forum or maybe PM the person directly. But talking trash about the person behind their back to somebody who posts a diagnosis of mental abnormality that violates the TOS is another way to go, I guess.

 

[Dogzilla]

The bodies were burnt. The human ash was found. The Commanding officers confessed. The photos are on the Internet. You are pretending to forget this on purpose, using the Clayton Moore "I forgot" technique.

If the bodies were burnt and the human ash was found we would have more than eyewitnesses telling us so. The Poles conducted a forensic investigation in which they said human ash was found. How much human ash? How do we know how much human ash? The CO confessing is just more eyewitnesses. You say there are photos on the internet? Where are there photos that show anything that will support the charge that 700,000+ bodies were buried, dug up, burned, and reburied?

 

[TSR]

No steps are missing. We have evidence of parents buying bug spray and diesel fuel. We have evidence they have used them around the house. There's residue of these murder weapons. We have eyewitnesses who have seen parents frustrated with children. We have all that. That's part of the reason we have been able to exclude any other possible fate for these children if they weren't murdered.

Your "closer analogy" is a post-conviction analogy--whereby parents have already been convicted on the basis of the "what else can happen to missing children if their parents didn't murder them?" theory and there is no file or any other evidence.

No, there *are* steps missing. The parents (Nazis) *have* already been convicted, and have confessed. We have bus drivers who dropped them off from school, and then more kids go to the same house, and then more and then more -- and none of them have ever been seen again.

These kids are not "missing" they have been proven to be killed. Your "theory" is that they just ran away.

In which case, the first thing the DA is going to ask is "where to, and what is your proof?"

 

[Belz...]

What definition of warmongering are you using? The ignore one?

That's not a response, Clayton. Nice dodge.

 

[Belz...]

Once again, where are you getting your definitive 6M total murdered figure from?

Who said anything about definitive ? The general consensus is about 6 million. How many did you calculate ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEUY2sAyD1E

Well that proves it, then !

 

[LemmyCaution]

Clayton, it seems to have escaped you that there were more than a dozen main concentration camps, and about 700 sub-camps. If you want to claim that SS guards waited to be captured at every single camp, you'd be howlingly wrong.

In 1944, there were full-scale evacuations of Vaivara, Riga, Kauen, Majdanek and Herzogenbosch, with only a small handful of guards captured at Majdanek because they couldn't get out in time.

In January 1945, Auschwitz and Stutthof were evacuated of their SS guards.

In April-May 1945, SS guards left the Buchenwald main camp before it was captured. The SS also abandoned Neuengamme, Flossenbuerg, Sachsenhausen, Ravensbrueck and Gross-Rosen before capture. SS guards also deserted Mauthausen-Gusen before liberation.

Only at Belsen and Dachau were the camp staffs properly present upon liberation, in both cases because the military situation meant that an evacuation was out of the question; the SS had nowhere to go.

Darn, you ruined it. I so much wanted to see Mr Moore's sources for scads of guards staying behind, on purpose, at the camps, and especially those we are discussing - that is, the proper death camps - so I wondered how many guards he placed at Chelmno, Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec at liberation - and then too at Auschwitz and Majdanek. How many stayed, how many left, why. And also I was dying to see how he explained the orders to evacuate, who gave them, and even Joachim's "local murder orders" concept. Sigh - but you didn't really spoil it, did you, because Mr Moore wasn't saying.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Once again, where are you getting your definitive 6M total murdered figure from? Your fellow exterminationists can't even decide how many were allegedly bumped off at Auschwitz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEUY2sAyD1E

Piper's estimate (see his article in the USHMM Anatomy of the Auschwitz Death Camp volume) is considered the best one. But you should feel free to misrepresent the current scholarship, by all means.

 

[LemmyCaution]

You said it yourself: ethnic cleansing. That was what was happening.

And yet you have not, and cannot, contend with the unambiguous, clear evidence of mass extermination of the Jews of Lithuania, 130,000 of them in summer and fall 1941, with a minority kept alive for labor, as we've discussed at length and as detailed in Colonel Jaeger's report to his superior. In the light of the Jaeger report, the Stahlecker reports, and other, corroborating evidence, there is no case whatsoever for ethnic cleansing of Jews in Lithuania at that time - 130,000+ were murdered, as Jaeger wrote, with "the goal of making Lithuania free of Jews."

You wonder why you get asked where the Jews who were murdered might be, if they were not murdered as Jaeger said? Because there are numerous sources - Nick's recently listed some of them - for mass extermination actions in Lithuania - and because there is no evidence for ethnic cleansing, population removals of these people, or any other of your concocted claims. In fact, Jaeger himself, listing 9,200 murdered Jews at the Ninth Fort in Kovno on 29 October 1941, explained his use, so different from your wishful thinking, of the word cleansing: Jaeger's detail for that day gives "cleansing of superfluous Jews from the ghetto" as the reason for mass murder, and these is no mention or indication of population removal. Just, as Jaeger said, a "Complete tabulation of executions carried out in the Einsatzkommando 3 zone up to December 1, 1941." Your strawman is in tatters.

We see you write that you don't like the question where the Jews of cities like Kovno and Vilna wound up. You don't like having to explain your case, against the sources, that 30,000+ Jews were not taken in 1941 from Vilna to Ponar, for example, and shot there. If they didn't go where the sources say they went, pray tell, where did they go and why are the sources in error? Were these Vilna Jews not there in the first place, or really there all along, or, as you originally claimed, removed to somewhere else? I know, I know - you don't know, you don't care, it's not relevant, etc. You cannot even understand that if you assert that actions like Jaeger's were ethnic cleansings, against the unambiguous evidence we have from a number of corroborating sources that these actions were "executions carried out in the Einsatzkommando 3 zone," you need to explain yourself and account for the evidence we do have.

In any event, absent your assuming responsibility for your own arguments, no amount of your repeating fallacies and misrepresentation of the history will make your pet theory valid - but that seems to be your favored technique at this point.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Clayton, it seems to have escaped you that there were more than a dozen main concentration camps, and about 700 sub-camps. If you want to claim that SS guards waited to be captured at every single camp, you'd be howlingly wrong. . . .

I guess we should also tell Mr Moore, Nick, what some 1000s of the 40,000 camp guards were doing during the period when camps were evacuated: in camp after camp, as the Red Army approached, the camp SS and other guards were hightailing it out of Dodge, lest they be trapped by the Soviets - and in camp after camp many of the guards were assigned duty to organize and command marches of the remaining inmates to keep them out of Soviet hands. So panicked were these guards to flee, that many of them - the ones which Mr Moore thinks remained in the camps when they were liberated - slaughtered inmates who, from weakness or disease or simply not being able to keep up, slowed the progress of the march, raising the danger of its being caught by the Soviets.

Remained in the camps indeed. Mr Moore just makes it up as he goes along.