General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[TSR]

Balderdash. People believe pathological liars all the time. Read Elie Wiesel's Night. Or about Elie Wiesel's fabricated tattoo.

Or about how all of the guards stayed in the camps with clear consciousnesses. Or about how THHP is nothing but lies. Or about how death threats and intimidation are effective most of the time -- unless we are talking about unarmed and starving Jewish civilians (but not P.O.W.s), in which case they would all become walking time bombs. Or how millions of people that the Nazis themselves documented as have been transported from point A to point B never really existed in the first place...

Or how Elie Wiesel makes any difference at all to the historicity of the Holocaust.

 

[TSR]

It seems that a glut of Holocaust huggers did indeed take him seriously.

No, a *single* historian took a direct threat to her own credibility and financial health seriously -- and a multi-national publishing company as well. Had *you* taken them to court for libel, they would have reacted the exact same way, and the only way you matter is as a source of Stundie noms and as a case study of the length to which irrational hate will drive someone, given the built-in limitation of not having the ability to actually *do* something other than whine and post lies on an obscure Internet forum.

 

[TSR]

It is not up to revisionists to prove a negative.

No one is asking you to "prove a negative". The evidence shows that these people existed -- if you claim otherwise you have to explain away that evidence.

We'll wait right here.

The world has been waiting over 65 years for exterminationists to provide a single piece of physical evidence that these so called holocaust victims do in fact exist.

*Did* exist, and the world, the courts and mainstream historical research is quite content with the evidence as it stands.

What *physical* evidence do you have that you exist?

You people made the wild accusations of genocide and therefore the burden of proof falls squarely on your shoulders to prove your case.

And it has been done, over and over, in courts and in history books.

Show us the corpses in the excavated mass graves,

Show us the excavated mass graves of the victims of Stalin's purges.

show us the human ash in the burning pits,

Go to Auschwitz and walk around the Ash Pond -- there are shards of bone all over the place.

show us the science based crime scene reports from the gas chambers.

Show us the science based crime scene reports from Katyn?

What are you waiting for?

A denier to come up with a more compelling narrative which isn't based on ignoring most of the evidence and distorting what's left

 

[Robrob]

show us the science based crime scene reports from the gas chambers.

Sounds like someone has been watching too much CSI on TV.

It was almost 67 years ago, during a World War.

 

[Dogzilla]

False dichtomy based on a strawman argument.

False dichotomy? Yes. Strawman? Not so much.

 

[Dogzilla]

So, there were no Jews among the troops that fetched up in landing craft on the beaches, then, yes?

False dichotomy is obviously false.

Jewish soldiers killed in combat are usually not counted as holocaust victims although I'm sure sometimes they are. But according to the wheredidtheygoists, if Jewish soldiers were potential holocaust victims, they would either 1) not be killed and survive the war or 2) their deaths would not be combat related but instead would have been murder, intentionally inflicted by the Nazis because the soldier was Jewish.

 

[thedopefishlives]

Jewish soldiers killed in combat are usually not counted as holocaust victims although I'm sure sometimes they are. But according to the wheredidtheygoists, if Jewish soldiers were potential holocaust victims, they would either 1) not be killed and survive the war or 2) their deaths would not be combat related but instead would have been murder, intentionally inflicted by the Nazis because the soldier was Jewish.

Where did anyone say this?

 

[TSR]

False dichotomy? Yes. Strawman? Not so much.

Ah, then you can quote someone here making this argument?





No?




The by the definition of "straw man" that everyone else uses, it is.

 

[Dogzilla]

I note Dr Terry is allowed to leave lengthy quotes here (example above). When I quoted Eric Hunt's ten short bullet points on Spielberg's The Last Days they were deleted for being too long. There is very definitely a double standard in the way this forum is being moderated.

You can be sure that this is not the last you will be hearing from me regarding this matter.

Were you told the quote was too long and that's why it was deleted? The quote from the "private message" Dr. Terry received and posted was shorter than some of the quoted material I myself and others have posted without problems. Was the material you posted from Eric Hunt copyright protected? Did Eric Hunt quote copyright protected material from Steven Spielberg that you then quoted? Eric Hunt doesn't seem to like Jews very much. Did the material you quoted reflect those views to a degree above and beyond the call of duty? Did you copy and paste material that could be pointed to with a link? Did you quote material without identifying it as such? I'm guessing there was another reason for the mods to delete the post besides just the length.

 

[Dogzilla]

Were the bullet points copied from a webpage where a link may have sufficed?

Darn you Charles Traynor! Now you've made me think like Tomtomkent.

 

[Dogzilla]

And like so many of your assumptions, this says a lot more about your agenda than about how things really work in academia.

Not to mention that it is demonstrable deniers such as David Irving who have been proven to distort sources -- didn't you get the memo? He lost in a court where he had the legal advantage, in a case he brought on himself.

Here's a challenge for you: name and support a single such distortion by a mainstream historian, or admit that you cannot.


What is your definition of "firm figures"? And we aren't discussing non-existent anything. The Nazis' own records show the victims were rounded up and sent to the camps, their confessions show what happened to them there, and there is no documentation which contradicts this.

But do try to support your thesis that they did not exist in the first place.

You're not basing your death toll on the Nazis records. You're calculating it by subtracting the number of Jews in Europe after the war from the number of Jews in Europe before the war. The six million figure was cited as early as January 1945 when it would have been impossible to know how many Jews were alive in Europe at the time.

And it's not the first time we've heard six million.

 

[TSR]

You're not basing your death toll on the Nazis records.

*I* don't have a death toll

You're calculating it by subtracting the number of Jews in Europe after the war from the number of Jews in Europe before the war.

You determined this ... how?

The six million figure was cited as early as January 1945 when it would have been impossible to know how many Jews were alive in Europe at the time.

Citation?

And it's not the first time we've heard six million.

And this is significant ... why?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Sounds like someone has been watching too much CSI on TV.

It was almost 67 years ago, during a World War.

Physical labor is physical labor. Today and 67 years ago.

Cremation was a bottleneck and the removal of the bodies from the alleged gas chambers was a bottleneck that made the gassing of 3 million Jewish children, women, and men impossible.

And if non Jewish people were also gassed to death in the alleged gas chambers
the bottlenecks would become even more of an obstacle.

 

[TSR]

Physical labor is physical labor. Today and 67 years ago.

Thank you, captain obvious.

Cremation was a bottleneck and the removal of the bodies from the alleged gas chambers was a bottleneck that made the gassing of 3 million Jewish children, women, and men impossible.

Not impossible. Problematic. Which is why they also burned bodies on open pyres.

Which you would know if you weren't so willfully ignorant of the history your hate drives you to distort.

And if non Jewish people were also gassed to death in the alleged gas chambers the bottlenecks would become even more of an obstacle.

See above.

 

[Robrob]

Physical labor is physical labor. Today and 67 years ago.

Cremation was a bottleneck and the removal of the bodies from the alleged gas chambers was a bottleneck that made the gassing of 3 million Jewish children, women, and men impossible.

And if non Jewish people were also gassed to death in the alleged gas chambers
the bottlenecks would become even more of an obstacle.

Why is it you use "argument from ignorance" almost exclusively?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Thank you, captain obvious.

Not impossible. Problematic. Which is why they also burned bodies on open pyres.

Which you would know if you weren't so willfully ignorant of the history your hate drives you to distort.

See above.

Over 3 million bodies. The labor of the Holocaust lie is always glossed over.

I wonder how the bodies of the alleged millions of non-Jewish victims were disposed of?

 

[TSR]

Over 3 million bodies. The labor of the Holocaust lie is always glossed over.

cm says, from the depths of his self-inflicted ignorance

I wonder how the bodies of the alleged millions of non-Jewish victims were disposed of?

You know, if you'd actually read a book for comprehension not quote mines, you wouldn't have to wonder. Who told you they would be disposed of in ways significantly different than the Jewish victims?

Are you ever going to stop running running away from your posted lies long enough to do so?

 

[Dogzilla]

It is remarkable how many times he has repeated this false choice, which arose out of his howler about WW2 and the Holocaust. Here, already in May, are 4 posts explicitly addressing the fallacy:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8322191&postcount=2216

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8322093&postcount=2213

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8323671&postcount=2223

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8323803&postcount=2224

(One of these posts, on a wartime diary, required that Dogzilla had a read a book he's dismissed without knowing a thing about it.)

Nick Terry also addressed this issue in his usual thorough, patient manner: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8324601&postcount=2232

As usual, your links do not say what you want us to think they say. Nick's come the closest to meaningful answer. But the first just says that historians look at pre war death rates compared to during the war death rates so....what? His last one gives his estimate but doesn't say what it's based upon. He also takes great pains in explaining how there really weren't any natural deaths of Polish Jews during the war and that Nazi policies made any Jewish deaths part and parcel of the genocide. Your answers are just Dodge City.

But if these links constitute direct answers, and everybody knows that Jews who are missing were not necessarily killed by the Nazis, why keep spamming the wheredidtheygo canard?

 

[Dogzilla]

Go to Auschwitz and walk around the Ash Pond -- there are shards of bone all over the place.

There it is again: One of my favorites. Tourists trampling all over the bodies of dead Jews but we can't dig because it's "desecration."

 

[Dogzilla]

Show us the science based crime scene reports from Katyn?

Sounds like someone has been watching too much CSI on TV.

It was almost 67 years ago, during a World War.