General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dogzilla said:
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.
Click to expand...

Your trick is not working. You are only offering your "theory" against one piece of evidence at a time.

Set out your theory again simultaneously dealing with:
1) The missing Jewish population
2) German documents such as the Hofle telegram of actual Jewish transport movements.
3) Confessions by the C.Os that they did executed the victims.
4) Jewish eyewitnesses
5) Post war forensic evidence.
 
Cyrix686 said:
By running a perfectly sensible sentence together, "where did they go" into gibberish, Doggie wishes to make the sensible, not sensible and to further diminish and distort the question. Instead of answering it, which he will never do in public, preferring to furnish the forum with ludicrous plate-spinning acts instead.
Click to expand...

Remind me; is that normally done by clowns?
 
Clayton Moore said:
Balderdash. People believe pathological liars all the time. Read Elie Wiesel's Night. Or about Elie Wiesel's fabricated tattoo.
Click to expand...

Or Holocaust Deniers Revisionists. Heck, I've seen some so good they were even able to lie to themselves, even when they provided the evidence against themselves!

Charles Traynor said:
It is not up to revisionists to prove a negative. 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. ...
Click to expand...

That is extremely unlikely, considering that the contention is that they are dead.

All the evidence you asked for already exists, and is easily findable. Revisionists have to provide and justify an alternative theory, not just "prove a negative". They shy away from doing so like the plague because, like most conspiracy theorists, any such theory is inevitably ridiculous. Which is, I assume, why you don't actually like to present any theory or evidence, preferring to take shots at people who disagree with you.
 
Last edited:
From the Stundies thread, brought back to where it is on-topic:

Dogzilla said:
He <dz, referring to itself in the third person> no doubt looks at past adjustments to holocaust death tolls and has noted that there has never been an adjustment downward that was offset by the discovery of an equal number of previously unknown survivors.
Click to expand...
dz is so desperate to distact from its idiocy that it is channelling Tom Moran, a denier from the "Golden Age" of alt.revisionism who always referred to himself in the third person.

In any case, dz *still* hasn't understood that there has never been an adjustment down -- there have been different methodologies which have (and could have been expected to have) arrived at different totals.

dz has no such methodology that it has ever articulated, any more than it has a coherent narrative of the overall scope of the events collectively known as the Holocaust.

But, true to form, even when the idiocy is pointed out, it cannot just simply admit a mistake and move on since one of the deniers dearest if unspoken tactics in their denial is "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" as if finding a small fault in the accepted history invalidates all of history. Deep down, they realize this is idiotic, but keeping up that facade requires them to never admit fault, lest they be hoist on their own petard.

A losing game, that, since there are so many other ways in which they have things bass ackwards one more isn't going to make that big a difference.

So, dz, let's go back to the thread in which it is on-topic, and you can enlighten us all as to the methodology you used to determine that millions of Jews documented by the Nazis themselves as having been shipped around behind the front lines never really existed.
 
Dogzilla said:
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.
Click to expand...

This portrays a profound ignorance of the Nazi dictatorship and in particular its Jewish policy. The Nazis didn't murder the Jews of Germany and of the countries they conquered early in the war because the policy in those years was, first, forced emigration and, then in the early war years, expulsion (Nessie has already mentioned the Madagascar plan as an example of the expulsion policy; we could go back through Nisko and other failed schemes).

To take an analogy: At the time of the Nazis' seizure of power in 1933, there was no master plan to set up a concentration camp system. Yet by the time the war began, there were 6 large main camps and maybe 20,000 prisoners.

The camps were improvised in 1933, at the outset, to terrorize and render impotent political opponents of the Nazis and the new government. The camps were an outgrowth of this policy and were accompanied by the introduction of protective custody and a punishment regime directed primarily against Communists, Social Democrats, and other political adversaries. But the nature of the camps changed throughout the 1930s, with new targets supplementing political opponents who were by and large de-fanged early on (for example, so-called work shy and asocials and, in 1938, 1000s of Jews). Changes to the concentration camps also brought the emergence of the Dachau system, an inspectorate, guidelines and norms for camp operations, a professionalized camp corps, etc. The war brought even more dramatic changes, with a multinational prisoner population, a massive influx of Jews into the camps, a shifting focus to both economic uses and extermination (not just of Jews). An explosion of the number of camps and satellites (the latter near factories and workplaces to facilitate the use of prisoner forced labor) caused changes in the camp system's organization and administration, with the creation of the WVHA in 1942. By war's end there were two dozen main camps and as many as 1000 satellite camps housing almost three-quarters of a million prisoners.

None of this was part of an advance plan or foreseeable in 1933. The camp system, like other features and policies of the Nazi dictatorship, evolved through innovation, competition, and response to exigencies. That the Jews were not murdered in 1938 is not an argument against their being murdered during 1941-1945 - any more than the humble beginnings of the camp system is an argument against its eventual size, scope, and purposes.
 
Last edited:
Heads up to ct: the thread in FMF is active, and related posts have been moved there. That part of the thread has *not* been censored in any way so far, and should you need help finding the new thread, you have received a PM for each message of yours that has been moved.

I once again renew my advice that you read the MA for comprehension.
 
Dcdrac said:
Elie Wisel why is he called a liar by the denial delusionists?

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/643360/Elie-Wiesel
Click to expand...

Clayton and other deniers feel that Mr. Weisel's written works are not 100% truthful, that there may be exaggerations or something similar in his works, and then there are a number of people that claim he doesn't have the stereotypical number tatoo on his arm.

The point that we've been trying to get through to the deniers is that, even if his works are exaggerated or even fictional, it does not diminish the reality of the events contained therein. Especially as Mr. Weisel's books are not considered to be source material for historical research.

Clayton likes to complain about Mr. Weisel. As a contrast I used another WWII author allegedly writing about his experiences as an example of how, even if it is shown that the events contained therein are 100% fictitious, that it does not disprove the historical reality behind the story.
 
Border Reiver said:
Clayton and other deniers feel that Mr. Weisel's written works are not 100% truthful, that there may be exaggerations or something similar in his works, and then there are a number of people that claim he doesn't have the stereotypical number tatoo on his arm.

The point that we've been trying to get through to the deniers is that, even if his works are exaggerated or even fictional, it does not diminish the reality of the events contained therein. Especially as Mr. Weisel's books are not considered to be source material for historical research.

Clayton likes to complain about Mr. Weisel. As a contrast I used another WWII author allegedly writing about his experiences as an example of how, even if it is shown that the events contained therein are 100% fictitious, that it does not disprove the historical reality behind the story.
Click to expand...

Thank you for elucidating that.
 
You're welcome.

My other option was that the movie Captain America does not disprove the existence of WWII multinational special forces teams.
 
Border Reiver said:
You're welcome.

My other option was that the movie Captain America does not disprove the existence of WWII multinational special forces teams.
Click to expand...

it does not??? oh well bang goes another pet theory....

So....Watchman was not true either........zoiks does the world know?
 
Nick Terry said:
Because everyone other than you gets the fact that the deportations to the death camps are documented with Nazi reports, transport lists, photos and copious witnesses. You claim that the death camps weren't death camps, so naturally people are going to ask you what happened instead, because they are aware that Jews really were deported to Auschwitz, Treblinka and the other camps, whatever you might try to pretend.
Click to expand...

When did I ever say there's no evidence of people being deported? When did I say there is not copious documentation and other evidence of people being deported to Auschwitz, etc.? What you don't have is evidence that these places were death camps. If you want to pretend they were death camps you need evidence that these people were killed there.

The question which you have repeatedly dodged isn't really about the total demographics of Jews in WWII. It's about explaining what happened to the smaller group of Jews deported to Treblinka, Auschwitz and the other death camps if those camps were not death camps, which is your basic claim.

Currently your answer is apparently 'I don't know and I don't care', a reply so transparent and so lame that it instantly destroys whatever credibility you might have on the rest of this subject.
Click to expand...

I am answering honestly. I didn't know these people . There are too many people I do know and care about for me to bother with people who lived on the other side of the world before I was born. So, no, I don't care.

I don't know what happened to these people but neither do you. You and I both know they got on trains and were transported to various camps. That is where we both lost track of them. Neither you nor I know what happened to them after that. We both know they are missing. But you believe that if they had survived, they wouldn't be missing. You also believe that if they didn't survive, they were murdered by the Nazis. So because they are missing, they didn't survive and because they didn't survive, they must've been murdered. The problem is that you don't have any evidence they were actually murdered. You just don't have clear evidence of anything else. At best, you have speculation based upon a false dichotomy.

I don't believe in this false dichotomy. I don't accept something is true just because I don't have evidence that something else is true. What I do like about your theory of what happened is that there would be clear and unambiguous evidence that it happened if it indeed happened. We don't have that clear and unambiguous evidence. We have seventy years of excuses for why we can't look for that evidence. So I look at all the facts and say that we know these people got on trains. We know they went to these various camps. We know there aren't large Jewish communities at these camps today so we can rule out them settling there. We haven't found or haven't looked for the evidence that would exist if hundreds of thousands of Jews had been buried there. So we can't just assume they were. These people are missing.

So where did they go? I imagine Israel, the United States, Australia. I don't know that is where they went but I think those would be good places to look for them. You imagine they went under the sandy soil of the death camps. You don't know that is where they went but if you cared about what happened to them, you would look. If you looked and found them, then you would know. If you found out you didn't know then you could start looking somewhere else, if you cared.
 
Robrob said:
1) As you said, just more proof he doesn't know what he's talking about.
Click to expand...

No. When I was in Auschwitz they didn't have the place roped off like I hear they do today. I walked all around inside the "gas chamber" without any restrictions. There wasn't anything stopping me from walking all around the lame "ash pond" and stepping all over the remains of dead people if there were these bone shards laying around.

2) Funny how (hyperbole or not) he doesn't see how "walking through a graveyard" might be different than "taking a backhoe to a graveyard."
Click to expand...

Funny how Robrob doesn't see how "walking through a graveyard" might be different than "walking on a corpse"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom