General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

[LemmyCaution]

Gaswagen thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=235001

They "bailed" amongst other reasons because they were bored senseless by people such as Charles Traynor I imagine.

Oh and they they wished to concentrate upon this:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/belzec-sobibor-treblinka-holocaust.html

As for CODOH, well...

As the notorious coward, KentFord9, having taken a different forum name here, I can confirm that what you imagine was the case. As the revisionists at RODOH offered nothing new - Mr Traynor almost never discussed specifics of the Holocaust but instead did his old soldier act - I pretty much left months before RODOH's demise and came here and to SSF. Some RODOH deniers, like Little Grey Rabbit, were here, so we could continue tired, old debates . . . that is true. At least here the topic was generally the Holocaust and not Mr Traynor's views about what should be done to judges with whose decisions he disagrees and the 9-year-old daughters of liberal parents. And not either beer, parking lots, receptionists, etc.

 

[Tomtomkent]

A completely reasonable question.

And not one you feel sounds anti-semitic, or represents an anti semitic view?

 

[000063]

My serious research efforts are conducted whilst investigating the alleged Final Solution. I have zero interest in looking through old posts at JREF for individuals who were too lazy or ignorant to read the BPs re. Irene Zisblatt.

You are too lazy to even see if you're right before making claims about others? That explains quite a lot.

It's so cute how you just dropped the whole dozer "issue" after multiple plausible explanations were provided, and pretended you hadn't been spanked on the whole "pioneer" thing, which is why you tried to red herring the discussion back to Zisblatt.

...
Why? I'm sure there are manifold reasons. How exactly does it fit into your revisionist thinking?

When are you going to address questions asked of you from other posters?

Mr Traynor your obsession with the bulldozers used is irrlevenent to this discussion now please provide any evidence at all that the holocaust did not happen

I never asked you to prove Zisblatt is a liar, and while I asked you what you called "inane" questions, I have explained how your apparent criteria for "relevance" - like that of just about any CT - is inconsistent and illogical. When you declare questions about the factual validity of the very points you're making "irrelevant", then one is at best intellectually dishonest. You only admitted you were wrong about debunkers making claims about Zisblatt after a half-dozen (at least) posts requesting proof, and someone proving you unequivocally wrong, and phrased it in just about the most mealy-mouthed, weasel-wording way possible. You still have been unable to find evidence of me directing "a torrent of insults" at you. My insults are generally concise, you sophist liar.

Of course, since you claim that knowing whether the claims you made about debunkers were actually true are not "serious research", it logically follows that the claims themselves were not germane to the discussion. They were BS, in short. For someone who claims to be a serious researcher, most of your posts seem to be either a)insulting and making false claims about debunkers and b)asking debunkers to provide evidence for something you could find in seconds.

 

[kmortis]

Please keep this thread on topic and civil. The topic is not the other posters, nor is it Forum Moderation.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis

 

[000063]

I am not in any way engaged in a vicious or inane attack on Straw Man’s narrative. Don’t forget Straw came to us with his story and I don’t think there is anything wrong in reviewing it or asking him to expand upon parts of it.

What we have learned thus far from Straw’s account of the liberation of Belsen:

His uncle was an Infantryman.

A few bad apples from the 8th battalion the Rifle Brigade regiment have brought the name of this fine old regiment into disrepute by shooting POWS in the legs and hips for fun.

Weird. Weren't you describing it as a "war crime" earlier?

There is now a general consensus amongst JREF members that the British Royal Engineers were using the D4 model of bulldozer at Belsen.

There is? I specifically pointed out that the model may be wrong. It has also been pointed out that REs could use such models. I specifically asked you, several times, whether only REs could drive them, and you never answered. Would that be one of those "irrelevant" questions?

We are still engaged in discussion as to why Infantrymen would have been asked to operate and/or ride on the outside of the one man operated RE bulldozers.

No, we are not. It's already been established that certain infantrymen, classed as "pioneers", were permitted to act as Engies, as well as IFs with the necessary skills if needs must. That's two perfectly plausible explanations, one of which you actually acknowledged, yet are now pretending doesn't exist. I note that your phrasing doesn't specifically exclude these other possibilities, leaving you backpedal room. Cleverly done.

 

[Belz...]

A completely reasonable question.

And one which clearly answers my question to you. Assuming you're not lying and that you're not an anti-semite, do you see how such a question, from a Holocaust denier, no less, would reinforce the impression that all of them are anti-semites ?

 

[Charles Traynor]

Ok, I’ll play along with this topic for a while.

It's so cute how you just dropped the whole dozer "issue" after multiple plausible explanations were provided, and pretended you hadn't been spanked on the whole "pioneer" thing, which is why you tried to red herring the discussion back to Zisblatt.

Complete nonsense. My post http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8477399&postcount=4917 pretty much debunks Straw Man’s claims about his ficticious (?) war criminal uncle riding around on the bulldozers whilst getting more and more mentally disturbed by the minute.

I haven’t had time to scour my vast collection of WWII archive footage for British bulldozers but I have come up with this close up of the front and left hand side of one of the RE bulldozers used at Belsen.

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee226/mralbertfish/bulldozer.jpg


Anyone sitting above the motor compartment is going to obscure the driver’s vision.


What appears to be the fuel tank is mounted on the left side of the vehicle next to the driver. So there is no sitting room here.


There is no track guard fitted to the left side of the vehicle. I doubt there is a track guard on the right side either, but we will confirm that later.


It should also be noted that bulldozers don’t have nice soft suspension systems like tanks, so anyone hanging onto the outside of a D4 is very likely to be sent flying to the ground or into the tracks sooner rather than later.

Weird. Weren't you describing it as a "war crime" earlier?

When did I stop describing this as a war crime? Why do you think my earlier posts were deleted? The words war crime seem to have made certain individuals around here a little jumpy.

There is? I specifically pointed out that the model may be wrong. It has also been pointed out that REs could use such models. I specifically asked you, several times, whether only REs could drive them, and you never answered. Would that be one of those "irrelevant" questions?

I said the general consensus was the D4 was the model used by the British RE. Nowhere did I say this was definitely the model used. Obviously non RE could use them if they had been trained in their operation.

It's already been established that certain infantrymen, classed as "pioneers", were permitted to act as Engies, as well as IFs with the necessary skills if needs must. That's two perfectly plausible explanations, one of which you actually acknowledged, yet are now pretending doesn't exist. I note that your phrasing doesn't specifically exclude these other possibilities, leaving you backpedal room. Cleverly done.

Wrong again, you have established nothing, and Infantrymen are not classed as pioneers. Infantrymen can do an Assault Pioneer course under the direction of the Royal Engineers, this involves such things as: demolitions, minefield laying and clearing, laying and making safe of booby traps, watermanship, field defences etc. Pioneers dig toilets for the Brigade commander and his entourage in the rear areas.

Infantry Assault Pioneers are not trained to use heavy plant as that is the role of the Royal Engineers. During WWII the British Army did not have the time, money or resources to train every soldier in tasks not specific to their own arm, unless they were special forces, or it was required for a specific operation.


[Edit: fixed broken link to bulldozer picture.]

 

[Belz...]

My post http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8477399&postcount=4917 pretty much debunks Straw Man’s claims about his ficticious (?) war criminal uncle riding around on the bulldozers whilst getting more and more mentally disturbed by the minute.

Ok, let's say you are correct and his account is a fabrication. Motive, please. Again: who makes and maintains this hoax, for what reason, and to what end ?

 

[000063]

Ok, let's say you are correct and his account is a fabrication. Motive, please. Again: who makes and maintains this hoax, for what reason, and to what end ?

The funny thing is that it only "disproves" the account if one assumes that only REs can drive dozers. Which is manifestly not the case. Heck, in that photo, I could easily sit on that "gas tank", and I'm a big guy.

By the way, here's a modern Cat D4 with someone riding on it.



Quite comfortably, in fact.

It appears to be about the same size and shape as the WW2 models.

Charles Traynor claims there was no room. There looks like plenty of room on the bulldozer to me, in the picture I posted above.

EDIT: Here's another picture, showing a spot where someone could easily sit beside the driver

NSFW - More Nazi gruesomeness

[qimg]http://i479.photobucket.com/albums/rr157/antpogo/belsen02.jpg[/qimg]

Next time you are in this country I will take you to one so you can see for yourself. The royal engineers have their museum down the road, and there are some as monuments around Medway too.

Ever seen one Charlie?

The funny thing is that even if Traynor was right about every little thing, he's merely proved the story was wrong, not made up. It's a story we're hearing second-hand which SM heard decades after the events in question. A little "narrative drift" is actually expected.

Does this affect the overall accuracy? Yes. Does it mean that they didn't have to push bodies into a ditch with bulldozers? No, they did, and Traynor's beloved photographic evidence has already been provided on that matter, along with other evidence, regardless of whether Straw's Uncle rode in a D4, drove a D4, or was strapped to the front grille with duct tape as a cruel, cruel prank.

EDIT: Yes, I am not responding directly to Chuck's post in question. I haven't read anything more than the first line of his post. I just didn't feel like reading it. Note how I actually say what I'm doing instead of quote-mining and hoping no-one notices.

 

[Nessie]

I really don't see why pointing out the name of a vile forum troll is worthy of a forum ban. Unless of course the trolling in question was officially sanctioned?

But that is not what has happened. You have failed here because you don't post about evidence or show evidence. You are now trying to create a conspiracy out of nothing (as yet again you lack any evidence) to mask that failure.

Please concentrate on evidence and post nothing but evidence and you will do fine.

Unlike what goes on at CODOH. There evidence to the contrary gets you blocked from the forum.

 

[000063]

If I considered it serious research, I'd go back over the course of the dozer debate and quote all the unsupported claims Traynor has made that I could find. But I don't want to. So, just trust me on this, he's made a lot! I swear!

 

[Darat]

Thread now back on [Moderated] status, it is also closed until a mod or mods can make the time to do a clean-up of the most recent and egregious breaches of the Membership Agreement.

Usual drill - don't try to evade the moderated status of this thread or the closing of this thread by continuing the discussion elsewhere on the Forum.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[TSR]

Let's take this opportunity to start "fresh", shall we?

Deniers: what is your alternative explanation of the evidence supporting the normative understanding of these events? Since our resident group has show they are simply unaware of that evidence, I suggest we take it slow:

The Jäger Report is available online with both translated and original German versions. It is a relatively short document, detailing the killings of roughly 1.5 thousand people, most of them identified as Jewish, in addition to the listings for partisans, etc. Nearly a third of those were ID'd as Jewish children.

What, according to your alternative view of history, was the purpose of this document, the fates of the people killed, and the relationship between these two and the policies of the Nazis?

Don't forget to cite the evidence you use to reach your conclusions...

 

[TSR]

let's take this opportunity to start "fresh", shall we?

Deniers: What is your alternative explanation of the evidence supporting the normative understanding of these events? Since our resident group has shown they are simply unaware of that evidence, i suggest we take it slow:

the jäger report is available online with both translated and original german versions. It is a relatively short document, detailing the killings of roughly 1.5 hundred thousand people, most of them identified as jewish, in addition to the listings for partisans, etc. Nearly a third of those were id'd as jewish children.

What, according to your alternative view of history, was the purpose of this document, the fates of the people killed, and the relationship between these two and the policies of the nazis?

Don't forget to cite the evidence you use to reach your conclusions...

ftfm

 

[Belz...]

Ok, let's say you are correct and his account is a fabrication. Motive, please. Again: who makes and maintains this hoax, for what reason, and to what end ?

Charles, I am still waiting for your answer to this very important question.

 

[SanityGap]

Let's take this opportunity to start "fresh", shall we?

Deniers: what is your alternative explanation of the evidence supporting the normative understanding of these events? Since our resident group has show they are simply unaware of that evidence, I suggest we take it slow:

The Jäger Report is available online with both translated and original German versions. It is a relatively short document, detailing the killings of roughly 1.5 thousand people, most of them identified as Jewish, in addition to the listings for partisans, etc. Nearly a third of those were ID'd as Jewish children.

What, according to your alternative view of history, was the purpose of this document, the fates of the people killed, and the relationship between these two and the policies of the Nazis?

Don't forget to cite the evidence you use to reach your conclusions...

Perhaps we could add Stahlecker's "coffin map" into the pot as it also relates to EinsatzgruppenA. Explanations of the coffins and numbers alongside plus an explanation of Estonia being "Judenfrei" and how that was acheived.

 

[Border Reiver]

Charles, I am still waiting for your answer to this very important question.

As are we all. So to reiterate:

A. Who is responsible for the conspiracy;
B. What is the goal of the conspiracy;
C. How was the evidence - both the physical AND the documentary - created and put in place; and
D. Three generations post WWII why is it important that the conspiracy is maintained?

Answers must of course be supported by evidence.

 

[Natan]

I used to be a firm believer in the Holocaust. Then I started actually to be willing to read the arguments of revisionists and came to realize they actually had a good number that made sense. Now I also no longer believe the 6 millions myth or homicidal gas chambers, for which the evidence is pretty weak all in all considered. I do believe hundreds of thousands died or were killed, maybe 1.5 million or so, which is bad enough, but nowhere near 6.

I was surprised to see at JREF that there are not more revisionists. For a forum for supposedly skeptical people that think critically, it seems like 6 million dead jews is an unquestionable fact akin to a religious dogma, all those who deviate are evil and dumb. In many places in Europe, it is very much a religious dogma as questioning it can have serious legal implications (free speech about everything EXCEPT the Holocaust) and even if it doesn't, your career can be utterly destroyed. It seems that critical thinking and skepticism is promoted here for just about everything EXCEPT you know what.

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

I was surprised to see at JREF that there are not more revisionists. For a forum for supposedly skeptical people that think critically, it seems like 6 million dead jews is an unquestionable fact akin to a religious dogma, all those who deviate are evil and dumb. In many places in Europe, it is very much a religious dogma as questioning it can have serious legal implications (free speech about everything EXCEPT the Holocaust) and even if it doesn't, your career can be utterly destroyed. It seems that critical thinking and skepticism is promoted here for just about everything EXCEPT you know what.

That's the problem with "seems".

"Seems" is not "is".

 

[Humanzee]

No one says 6 million or nothing. The number isnt precisely known. Deviate all you like. Feel free to post what number seems right to you and the evidence as to why.
But nowhere in the Holocaust thread has it been said anyone who deviates is evil and dumb. Just expect to bring evidence to your claims.