General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[000063]

It seems in all the excitement of last week I missed this one. As it's another Dogzilla classic, it's worth revisiting.

[six pages worth of rebuttal]

Five bucks says this gets either dismissed with a hand-wave, or only addressed in part, or just ignored.

Again, exactly backwards. The victims were murdered by the Nazis en masse. There is copious evidence for this. Therefore, they didn't survive en masse.

I pointed this out, specifically, to him several times. He never responded to that point, IIRC.

 

[TSR]

So basically in a mendacious and roundabout kind of way you are saying no pictures or video of the gas chambers were taken during the liberation of the camps?

No, he's pointing out that the gas chambers were known to have been blown up by the Nazis by that time, and that the Soviet army was concerned more with, you know, liberating the camps than with sightseeing (setting aside the fact that video wasn't even invented until years later).

Do you apply this same standard to other historical events? No video == didn't happen? I don't recall any video or pics of Jodl signing Germany's surrender -- does this mean we are still at war?

 

[TSR]

The attentive reader will have already noted your dishonesty. For those day dreaming their way through the thread the question TSR is pretending does not exist can be found here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8451604&postcount=4486

Which was answered by noting that there was absolutely nothing to suggest that BR had not, indeed, viewed all of the videos before coming to his conclusion.

That you do not like that answer, and the opportunity for either you or cm to substantively refute BR's summation of them does not change that fact.

Nor does your whining about it distract the attentive reader from noting all the questions from which *you* are running.

 

[000063]

So basically in a mendacious and roundabout kind of way you are saying no pictures or video of the gas chambers were taken during the liberation of the camps?

I am saying no such thing. I am also not lying.

I'm saying that whether pictures and photos are taken is both
a) secondary to the question of what actually occured, and
b) not what ANTPogo asserted, which was that the Russians took photos and video of the dead bodies they found at Auschwitz. Your question involved asking for evidence and photos of the gas chambers, without actually acknowledging the point ANTPogo was making.

You also choose to cut out the entire rest of my post, which kicked a gaping hole in your logic and addressed your double standards. Curious. I can only assume that you do not dispute those points, and admit that you were wrong and operate on double standards. Thank you.

The attentive reader will have already noted your dishonesty. For those day dreaming their way through the thread

Well-poisoning.

the question TSR is pretending does not exist can be found here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8451604&postcount=4486

It's not necessary to watch 9 hours when someone else has already done the legwork of debunking.

And if you want to talk about someone running from questions and evidence, why does Doggie absolutely refuse to say what his criteria for "relevance" is, or to actually read the Jager report no matter how much it's bought up or referenced? Why did you, personally, quote-mine my post to cut out the questions you didn't want to answer? That is transparent hypocrisy.

 

[Belz...]

Even more laughable are the Holocaust huggers buzz wording through the thread as if verbosity is mountains of evidence.

Which only serves to illustrates the main argument of the deniers: they don't believe it.

Well, I'm convinced !

 

[000063]

No, he's pointing out that the gas chambers were known to have been blown up by the Nazis by that time, and that the Soviet army was concerned more with, you know, liberating the camps than with sightseeing (setting aside the fact that video wasn't even invented until years later).

Actually, I wasn't, but thanks for the info.

Do you apply this same standard to other historical events? No video == didn't happen? I don't recall any video or pics of Jodl signing Germany's surrender -- does this mean we are still at war?

It's not even historical events. It's specific aspects of historical events, while he avoids other aspects that have already been proven.

 

[Belz...]

Are you unable to make a case on your own, without your video crew?

If they're as bad as Dogzilla's straw-built Soviets, it must be a pretty bad video.

 

[Belz...]

You viewed all 9 hours of the videos?

Have you ?

 

[000063]

Have you ?

I swear, I can actually hear someone's mind somewhere shifting into reverse.

Of course, neither Traynor nor Moore demand that other deniers watch the videos. Only debunkers. What they're playing at is basically a video Gish Gallop. Throw up a shedload of evidence, demand that their opponents address all of it, and say that they're dodging when they don't. This seems to have become Moore's fallback position. Ironically, even if the videos were addressed in detail, he'd dismiss it with one-liners or not respond at all.

Clay, have you watched all 9 hours yourself? I mean watched and paid attention, and checked sources and all that? Why do you refuse to address the rebuttals repeatedly linked to you? By your own standards, you have to read every single word, personally.

 

[Belz...]

On the contrary, I know that they died in the death camps. So does everyone else in this thread, other than Clayton Moore. So do all professional historians, all relevant courts, all nation-states and all international organisations.

See, this is an interesting tactic used by creationists and conspiracy theorists and a host of other nuts, and is a variation of the argument from ignorance. It's basically an argument from equivalent ignorance. By projecting THEIR ignorance onto OTHER people, it eliminates, in their own mind, the importance of their ignorance and puts them on "equal footing" with the opponent. Then, using false equivocation to imagine a 50-50 chance of being right, they can "safely" switch to rhetoric and use their incredulity as what they consider to be the tipping argument in their favour.

Phew.

 

[Belz...]

That would be a problem if it were actually true, but it's not true, since there is plentiful evidence of mass murder of Jews at the death camps by the Nazis.

Same as the above. Since the denier has NO evidence to counter the consensus that he finds so offensive (for reasons we can guess), he must imply that there is similarily NO evidence for the Holocaust. Of course, since the denier is no historian and cannot cope with the litterally overwhelming amount of evidence for the holocaust, his arguments are entirely unconvincing.

 

[LemmyCaution]

It seems in all the excitement of last week I missed this one. As it's another Dogzilla classic, it's worth revisiting.

We start with Dogzilla misconstruing the following point: < snip >

Excellent summary, Nick, of where we are, how we got here, and why Dogzilla's position is not only incomprehensible but tedious.

 

[000063]

Same as the above. Since the denier has NO evidence to counter the consensus that he finds so offensive (for reasons we can guess), he must imply that there is similarily NO evidence for the Holocaust. Of course, since the denier is no historian and cannot cope with the litterally overwhelming amount of evidence for the holocaust, his arguments are entirely unconvincing.

Especially since they consist almost entirely of hand-waving away large amounts of evidence as "buzz-words" or "BS", or trying to "simplify" them and being chagrined when people protest that he's omitting and misrepresenting vital portions of their claims. It's their fault for not presenting simple claims, of course.

 

[Border Reiver]

You viewed all 9 hours of the videos?

About 2 hours. After that length of time the sheer number of errors, exagrations, outright lies and anti- semitism made me so angry I very nearly threw the iTouch into a wall.

 

[Belz...]

Especially since they consist almost entirely of hand-waving away large amounts of evidence

Yes, that was what I meant. They have no choice but to use these tactics because they have nothing else.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Especially since they consist almost entirely of hand-waving away large amounts of evidence as "buzz-words" or "BS", or trying to "simplify" them and being chagrined when people protest that he's omitting and misrepresenting vital portions of their claims. It's their fault for not presenting simple claims, of course.

This is why I will continue to ask Dogzilla specific questions (which inevitably he will dodge):

- about Ponar, Kovno, the Jaeger report - the sources for just Ponar, as we've discussed, including the Jaeger report
, Sakowicz's diary, a number of diaries kept by Jews, several memoirs
, German documents
, census and demographic information, postwar testimony (trial and oral history), and German documents

- about extermination and/or deportation actions at Riga, Kiev, Slonim, Rovno, Lwow, Lublin, Bialystok, Minsk, Poniatowa, Pinsk, the Durchgangsstrasse IV, or other sites

- what happened to the Jews living in Warsaw, as in these posts http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7357256&postcount=3727, http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7367578&postcount=3760, and other places as asked here:

To help you understand further why asking where Jews ended up, if 5+ million of them were not killed - and why you really do need to have an answer for this if you are going to wave around ethnic cleansing, resettlement, and removed from Europe - here are some very simple questions that you should try answering for yourself:

- do you seriously doubt that the Jewish population of Warsaw <snip> was about 450,000 as of February 1940?

- do you seriously doubt that the Jewish population of Lodz ghetto was about 160,000 in June 1940?

- do you seriously doubt that the Jewish population of Greater Germany was over 300,000 in May 1939?

- do you know where these figures come from?

- do you know who controlled all these places as of 1939 and 1940 and after?

- can you add in order to see that just among Germany + Lodz + Warsaw + Vilna (from previous posts) we can account for close to 1 million Jews in 1939-1940, before Barbarossa? if you don't like this snapshot, do you want to do the same exercise for June 1941? another time?

(As a reference to give you a sense of the scale we know about from just these 4 places - consider that if every one of the Jews from these places had perished, they would make up nearly 1/5 of the Jewish victims who died in the Holocaust. Note that I haven't bothered to add in Kiev and Riga, to push us above 1 million. These simple questions, in other words, lead you to a large number of Europe's Jews, with good certainty of where they were and none of your faffing about.)

You know by now that if you say you doubt these numbers that I will ask you on what basis you doubt them, other than incredulity - or irrelevant claptrap about European demographics, which you don't really understand . . .

- what happened to the more than 160,000 Jews of Lodz, and the more than 40,000 Jews from the Reich, Austria, and the Protectorate deported to Lodz, during 1942, 1943, and 1944?

The evidence about what happened to Europe's Jews, Dogzilla's "no evidence" mantra aside, is copious, and the evidence has the benefit of being discussable, which makes it possible to determine what took place in many specific places. That is why our deniers avoid such specific discussions and favor the crap they post, which is generalized blether, false assumptions, baseless incredulity, and other vaporous musing.

 

[Clayton Moore]

There are 30 episodes of 1/3. Roberto Muehlenkamp tore into denierbud, (look up "budly" for his behaviour here) so badly that he had to close the comments option upon his youtube channel. That says it all.

If RM wishes to tread over the old ground with you or Moore, he will. Have you or Moore read the series of blogs labelled one third of the Holocaust? At Holocaust Controversies?

It is a mark of Revisionist thinking and I suppose lying too that none of the refutations are discussed and the films are still available.

An honest person would remove this amateurish pack of pretentious lies.

Not Budly, not Traynor and not Mr. Moore.

Who is Roberto Muehlenkamp?

What are you talking about?

Budly?

Denierbud?

 

[TSR]

Who is Roberto Muehlenkamp?

What are you talking about?

Budly?

Denierbud?

As if we needed the confirmation that you are ignoring information you simply don't want to acknowledge since it completely trashes your justification for your hate...

 

[LemmyCaution]

As if we needed the confirmation that you are ignoring information you simply don't want to acknowledge since it completely trashes your justification for your hate...

Well, I guess Mr Moore hasn't clicked on the provided links . . . but, to be fully accurate, the deconstruction of denierbud at Holocaust Controversies joined Roberto Muehlenkamp, contributor to this thread and recent debater with Fritz Berg on Deanna Spingola's radio program; Sergey Romanov; and Andrew Mathis.

 

[Nick Terry]

Who is Roberto Muehlenkamp?

What are you talking about?

Budly?

Denierbud?

1. You have been repeatedly given a link to refutations of the 'One Third of the Holocaust' videos, which appeared on Holocaust Controversies.

2. One of the authors of those refutations is Roberto Muehlenkamp, who has posted on this very thread as Robert Muehlenkamp (losing the 'o' because of a problem registering). So he is protected by the MA in case you are thinking of being rude about him.

3. The maker of the 'One Third of the Holocaust' videos is known as denierbud, that was his own handle on YouTube. He is also known as 'Mike Smith', a pseudonym, and has been recently interviewed by denier websites as Dean Irrebod, a clear variant on denierbud.

4. 'denierbud' turned up here as 'budly' to tout his videos, which led to one of the more classic threads in JREF history:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=151218
the thread was classic because by the end, denierbud/budly had totally destroyed his credibility.

All these facts are considered common knowledge among readers of this thread and several are also common knowledge among readers of CODOH forum, who would know perfectly well who Roberto Muehlenkamp and denierbud are.