(I have skimmed through TSR's, Terry's and others' replies from 10/17 onward and have yet to see much of anything but nitpicking against often irrelevant aspects to my assertions. I'll be sure to address those in the very near future, however, I've been holding onto this one [below] for a couple of days now, having to re-edit to appease the Moderators: )
Here We Go Again
Nick Terry said:
I wonder if Tommy1234 is ever coming back. No matter. His last major post is such a textbook example of shoddy argumentation it's worthy of closer dissection. It's taken a short while to get around to this, mainly because I have a life and because several others already replied without a peep in response from Tommy1234, but hey, it's the weekend...
I don't know if he is aware that the mega-reply to TSR and myself ran to more than 5,000 words. I'm actually not objecting to the length so much as to the incoherence.
Needless to say, in true conspiracist style, a fair bit of that consisted of spammed copypasta quotes offered without any commentary or explanation of why they mattered. I counted 35 of them and have numbered them in round brackets from (1) to (35).
More impressive is the way in which Tommy1234's attempted fisking produced such an extremely repetitive yet meandering rant. Rather than repeat myself as much as Tommy did, I decided to reorganise the post, quoting every single word in his reply, under common-sense headings.
To call the post a Gish Gallop would be an understatement; it might even be libellous of Duane Gish. Tommy evidently cannot make an argument without firing off a barrage of questions. I counted 41 such questions or implicit questions and have numbered them in square brackets from [1] to [41]. What virtually all the questions share in common is that they were designed to waste time by reversing burden of proof, arguing from ignorance or simply intended to clog up the discussion.
There's little reason to answer many of them on this forum since it's not like Tommy is actually that interested in the answers. And he doesn't seem to understand that whether someone does or doesn't answer them on an internet forum means [ nothing ] . They are answered elsewhere, in venues which Tommy doesn't seem to understand very well, like academia.
Readers may well have forgotten in all of this that Tommy was trying to explain away the fact that revisionism has the intellectual and social cachet of skunk secretions and is demonstrably, irrefutably marginalised in the western world. Mostly, Tommy tried to explain this away by changing the subject and going on the attack, but our latest installment does start off with some remarks on the epic fail that is revisionism, kicking off with that old classic...
What a beautiful opening argument, Mr. Terry. I'm proud to know that I can keep you on your toes and that you'd take some time out of your busy life to quantify, individually number and categorize segments of my reply into their respective fields. I'm now aware that I include a good portion of implicit questions and enjoy citing quotes that are lesser-known to the general public as my style of debate, at least at first, so as to introduce new members of this forum and other prospective readers to the historical debate they've been shut out of on account of near-worldwide institutional oppression. It is a great motivation for me to know that I've now brought you down to the level of literally numbering my cliches, rather than limiting discussion to the actual content of a given argument.
I'll follow along with your "book report" format and respond to each of your arguments, in their entirety, to the best of my ability. We'll leave it up to the readers to decide what makes sense.
1. Jews Control Everything
Nick Terry said:
Quite how Tommy1234 can think he won't be perceived as antisemitic by spamming carefully chosen and outdated quotes about supposed Jewish dominance is beyond me, and I suspect most other readers.
[...edited by LashL]
These quotes do not explain away the fact that revisionism is globally rejected by academia, the media and the public sphere as a whole, because the world consists of more than America. I made a point not long ago that acceptance of the Holocaust as a historical fact did not vary in correlation to the size of the Jewish community in a particular country or indeed to the number of Holocaust museums. Tommy1234 seems to have forgotten that his Nazi heroes drastically reduced the Jewish population of Europe, so claiming universal Jewish dominance of everything would be downright silly and won't help him sell his ideas.
The overwhelming disproportion of Jewish influence in every facet of the media industry has been fully evident. It is the impact of Jewish media and other sources of pro-Holocaust propaganda, not the "size of the Jewish community" nor the "number of Holocaust museums", that most greatly correlates to the number of Believers. I've cited an abundance of examples in my reply, above. Mr. Terry is a cheerleader for the 'Holocaust' and must continue to rely on ad hominem attacks, occasionally labeling anyone citing the observable Jewish media influence as an "antisemite", for he knows such a massive influence would be devastating to his assertions that the 'Holocaust' storyline has been sustained on rock-hard facts and stone-cold evidence, alone. Unlike the issue of 'gas chambers', which is now generally avoided by Believers, altogether, the question of mass propaganda is dismissed with accusations of antisemitic intent.
Mr. Terry seems to underestimate the full extent by which restrictions on the expression of Revisionist views have been implemented at all levels of organization in civilized societies. He does not acknowledge the impact of such restrictions. Currently, in thirteen European countries, scientists, authors and historians can be imprisoned for conducting an investigation that contradicts a 'systematic extermination' policy by the Germans. Despite the fact that many of these presentations come from distinguished intellectuals in their respective fields with no history of antisemitism, education pertaining to Holocaust revisionism is banned on university campuses worldwide.
A recent example of how Jewish interest groups are lobbying for the suppression of free speech pertaining to Jewish issues is with a resolution passed by the California State Assembly last month, HR 35: "Relative to anti-Semitism". The bill defines, in broad terms, criticism of the State of Israel as "antisemitic" and encourages universities to more aggressively crack down on such popular dissent.
The resolution was passed by state legislature without public discussion. After a passing reference to "Holocaust Denial", here is a list of some examples of what has now been marginalized as "anti-Semitic":
• “language or behavior [that] demonizes and delegitimizes Israel;”
• “speakers, films, and exhibits” that indicate that “Israel is guilty of heinous crimes against humanity such as ethnic cleansing and genocide;”
• describing Israel as a “racist” or “apartheid” state;
• “student-and faculty-sponsored boycott, divestment, and sanction campaigns against Israel;”
• “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination;”
• “applying double standards by requiring of Israel a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation;” and
• “actions of student groups that encourage support for terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah.”
This list makes clear that the accusations of anti-Semitism are a red herring, employed to attack students’ democratic rights and stifle dissent.
[...]
Moreover, it must also be said that the State of Israel is, as a matter of fact, guilty of crimes against humanity.
To cite only a more recent example, the 574-page UN Goldstone Report published in 2010 found that the State of Israel had deliberately targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure in Gaza during the 2008-2009 “Operation Cast Lead.” The invasion of Gaza saw 1,400 Palestinians killed compared with 13 Israelis killed. More than 21,000 buildings, factories, and apartments were damaged or destroyed.
Under California H.R. 35, it appears that the Goldstone report is now to be considered “anti-Semitic.”
The resolution also contains a denunciation of “suppression and disruption of free speech that presents Israel’s point of view.” This appears to be a reference to the “Irvine 11” incident last year, in which 11 students shouted down Israeli ambassador Michael Oren during his speech at the University of California at Irvine.
The 11 students shouted, “Michael Oren, you’re a war criminal,” and “You, sir, are an accomplice to genocide.” These students were later arrested, charged, and convicted of the crimes of “conspiracy” and violating Oren’s rights.
Another indication of the ongoing suppression of free speech on relevant topics is available on the ADL website. It is a featured 9,000 word publication by Hillel, the Foundation for Campus Jewish Life, entitled: "Fighting Holocaust Denial in Campus Newspaper Advertisements: A Manual for Action". The purpose of the entire manual is to coach Jewish students on methods to suppress, censor and control debate on 'the Holocaust'.
These are not isolated examples. The relentless attempts by the Jewish community to stifle dissent on relevant Jewish issues has been wholly apparent throughout recent decades.
2. Indoctrination
Nick Terry said:
Moving on, we find that Tommy repeatedly asserts that acceptance of the Holocaust as a historical fact, and the rejection of revisionism, is the product of 'indoctrination'. It's an especially bad idea for Tommy to make a lame analogy with belief in Christianity on a skeptics' forum where the overwhelming majority of members are atheists or agnostics.
Protip: if you are seeking to win converts, then berating them and abusing them because they were supposedly 'brainwashed' is downright insulting, and usually ineffective.
Mr. Terry fails to acknowledge nor refute the premise that a one-sided perspective to the 'Holocaust' is imposed upon Western society from youth until adulthood. Tall tales of 'gassings', photographs of piled bodies at Bergen-Belsen -- these are what people remember. Many people believe the 'chambers' poured gas directly out of the shower heads, as was claimed by various witnesses and depicted in propaganda films. Others remember the vast array of claims pertaining to artifacts such as bars of soap allegedly made from the fat scooped out of dead Jews. The lack of knowledge pertaining to the 'Holocaust' by the general public is astounding while their opposition to any challeges against it remains constant.
The similarities of Christianity and other theistic religions to the Holocaust are illustrated by President Barack Obama's speech to the United Nations General Assembly last month:
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied.
Muhammed = Jesus = Simon Wiesenthal
Nick Terry said:
It's also untrue, because the acceptance of the Holocaust as a historical fact rests to a very significant degree on the volume of historical research done on the subject over the past 65 years. In my country, schoolkids CHOOSE to do AS or A levels in history and then take a variety of curricula chosen by schools - interestingly there are not that many A Level syllabi offering the Nazis or Holocaust, judging by comments from my students over the past few years. In all countries, students CHOOSE to study history at university or major in that subject. They certainly CHOOSE to study specific electives or optional courses in the Holocaust. Some then CHOOSE to study the subject at graduate school, and some go on to CHOOSE to research the subject for a doctorate.
This pattern of choice continues all the way to the professors and lecturers, who have the freedom to offer what courses they like, and to change them when they want, depending on what they are currently researching, which can change over the course of a career. University tutors almost invariably become involved in teaching a wide variety of subjects - in my case, covering European and world history from c.1750 to the present, in particular the Cold War, Divided Germany 1945-1990, and the history of the Habsburg, Romanov, Wilhelmine and Ottoman Empires from the early 19th Century onwards - so have lots of opportunities to develop their interests as they wish. Which can easily mean not teaching the Nazis/Holocaust.
Yet large numbers still do. Is it because there is so much money sloshing around that field? Not really. There's probably more money in medical history and the history of science.
No, the reason why historians research and write about the history of the Holocaust is because it interests them. They can then participate in an international research discussion the same as any other. Most historians of the Holocaust are German, large numbers are continental Europeans without Jewish ancestry. In the UK, there are probably more non-Jews than Jews researching the Holocaust, and in any case, all of them have to answer to peer assessments, peer review and grant application reviews which cannot be skewed in a biased way.
Calling all of this 'indoctrination' is so wide of the mark that it's not even wrong.
The impressive extent of pro-Holocaust curricula illustrates the lasting impact of a confirmation bias coupled with an exclusively pro-Holocaust set of resources. Because of this limitation, mainstream historians have found it easy to sift through records and exploit abnormalities and ambiguities that can be presented as indirect and vague confirmation of certain testimonial claims within an immeasurable mass of highly unreliable 'eyewitness' statements.
The fact that schools exist, in other words, does not necessarily mean they are teaching the truth when opposing views are literally being banned. You mention peer reviews yet neglect the fact that all "peers" are required to sustain the 'extermination plan' hypothesis or risk their future mainstream credibility and, most likely, their career. I don't doubt most Holocaust historians truly believe in the H-tale as they, like most of us, have been persuaded by a curriculum that is utterly one-sided. I also have little doubt, however, if evidence favoring the Revisionist perspective were given an equal opportunity to be shared in academic circles, that many modern historians would change their current views or simply admit to their long-held suspicions regarding the mainstream account that they may have been unwilling to share out of fear of persecution. They don't have the incentive nor the adequate resources to do so, currently. Studies, books, lectures and all other forms of Revisionist work are simply
not allowed in the academic community.
For this reason, we may conclude that the quantity of information is irrelevant to the quantity of
evidence. We can go back to the religious example, again; there are numerous distinguished schools of theology. The amassed quantity of academic contributions these institutions possess doesn't add credibility to their claims.
3. The Inability of Revisionism to Get a Hearing
Nick Terry said:
Revisionism is shut out of all universities because it doesn't meet academic standards. Asking for a university which would have an 'open debate' on revisionism is like asking for a university which would have an 'open debate' on flat-earth theory.
No, it isn't. There are hundreds of well-established academics who want to debate the 'Holocaust' appropriately and who have staked their credentials on their support for this issue. I've heard of no one wanting to debate "flat-earth theory", Mr. Terry.
Furthermore, if someone were to organize a debate on flat-earth theory, they wouldn't risk being expelled from their academic institution, or worse, imprisoned.
Nick Terry said:
The easiest way to demonstrate why revisionism doesn't meet academic standards is to invite Tommy1234 to compare the products of revisionism with the scholarly literature on Stalinism. He ought to swiftly notice major differences between revisionist works and the historiography of Stalinist Russia. Like readablity, formatting, presentation, levels of archival research, conceptual focal points and so on. Then he can compare the literature on Stalinism with the literature on the Nazis/Holocaust. Maybe then he might learn why the mainstream study of the Holocaust is accepted and revisionism isn't.
Despite his vast knowledge of WWII, Mr. Terry has been unable to present a single authenticated document that outlines or even refers to an 'extermination plan'; not a single one, out of millions of archived documents, with hundreds of thousands pertaining directly to Germany's Jewish policy and deportation. This lack of incriminating paperwork is admitted by Mr. Terry and his Hoaxter clique who acknowledge their total lack of sustaining evidence and attempt to justify it with excuses such as:
...the extensive destruction of documents by the Nazis, the dismantling of the camps and attempted erasure of the crimes, and the small number of survivors who escaped the camps and lived to testify.
There you have it, folks: the reason why Mr. Terry cannot produce decent evidence. It really starts to get interesting once we break down his lame excuses:
(1) the "destruction of documents" pertaining to 'extermination' has never been proven.
The Nazis, like other governments that might face a post-war audit, had destroyed documents including the Luftwaffe records (which aren't relevant to the 'Final Solution') as previously mentioned by Mr. Terry. The sole piece of evidence we have pertaining to extermination, in order to make the assumption that a lack of documentation is due to all of it being vanished, is the same coerced testimony that introduced the spectrum of other now-demolished 'Holocaust' canards. If 100% of the original, authentic German documents were able to be so effortlessly obliterated, it is difficult to explain the so-called 'incriminating speeches' and mass of 'code word' documents that were so carelessly left behind.
(2) an "erasure of the crimes" is the most obvious excuse for any unfounded accusation.
(3) "a small number of survivors escaped the land and lived to testify" just isn't true.
There are lots of 'survivors' who have lived to tell their experiences from this time period. A relatively miniscule number claim to have personally witnessed mass murder. According to a written notification by the Federal German Finance Ministry of Jan 10, 1980 (VI 6-01478-P27/29), there had been 5,360,710 claims for Holocaust reparations as of July 1, 1979 -- the number that claim to have personally witnessed the 'gas chambers' as they are now depicted is somewhere in the range of far less than 1/1000th of one percent of this number. These processes weren't necessarily hidden from view, either. In Krema II and III at Auschwitz-Birkeneau, for example, the Auschwitz soccer field and several inmate barracks were within 100 yards and would have been in full view of the 'Final Solution' process.
On a side-note, there are more than 50,000 interviews with 'survivors' archived on the Shoah Foundation website. While stories with some of the more harsh depictions of camp life were once featured on the main page and available for free, online viewing (they no longer are), I was unable to find a single one of these interviews of more than two hours in length that had any mention of firsthand experience with witnessing mass murder. In fact, the testimony was exactly what we should expect: lots of assumptions that permanently lost relatives were 'gassed' and the occasional reference to individual German atrocities, sometimes appearing to have been at least partially fabricated or exaggerated. I'd encourage anyone with a basic knowledge of Revisionism to visit the Shoah Foundation archives and randomly browse, just to get an idea of how rare 'gassing' and 'extermination' claims backed with firsthand experience truly are.
Nick Terry's "smoking gun" of evidence boils down to ambiguous wording and often-fraudulent documentation from highly suspect sources presented as legitimate components to the historical record. Terry has done his part in connecting-the-dots in an elaborate web of lies that started with a Soviet and Jewish propaganda campaign nearly a century ago. Yet, more than 80 years since the beginning of the war, Revisionists are still persecuted for challenging these long-held standards in Zionist fiction.
4. CODOH
Nick Terry said:
Tommy evidently wrote a string of remarks trying to take this debate elsewhere. This begs a question which has hitherto gone unanswered by revisionists, namely why they think internet forums trump all other possible venues where facts and interpretations are discussed or determined.
People evidently post vast amounts of crap on the internet, and this applies in spades to forums dedicated to fringe beliefs. It's not up to the mainstream to come to cranks and debate them in their little control freak echo chambers. Tommy1234 may be unaware that many JREF members have been banned from 9/11 Truth forums or from David Icke forum, just as many non-deniers have been banned from CODOH, all because they offended the loonies by asking inconvenient questions.
One might add that the 650-member CODOH forum is hardly the Supreme Court or the American Academy of the Arts and Sciences. There are revisionists there who have believed in denial for 10 to 30 years yet do not seem to have read a new book on the Holocaust for roughly the same length of time. A rather large number of the user accounts are sockpuppets of a psychotic white nationalist named Greg Gerdes, who is so obnoxious that even his fellow Holocaust deniers ban him. There are exceptions (and here I think we should acknowledge EtienneSC's civilised discussion manner) but for the most part this is a bunch of uneducated, ignorant, middle-aged, politically motivated conspiraloons.
I've already challenged Mr. Terry (and others) to share which arguments they believe will have their users 'banned' on CODOH. Did he forget I asked?
Adding to the madness, Mr. Terry marginalizes internet forums of lesser popularity as 'fringe beliefs' despite the numerous forums in existence for almost every intellectual field, irrespective of popularity, with participants of all levels, often very high levels, of education. The members of this aforementioned site, CODOH, many of whom are experts in their respective fields, share vast knowledge of various complexities for an objective consideration of evidence. Furthermore, there are numerous long-standing, intelligent 'Believers' on CODOH such as 'Balsamo' and 'Hans' who are well-known at the forum.
Mass propaganda is repeatedly underestimated by Terry, who can not seem to understand how decades of indoctrination for most of the Western world might influence our willingness to accept something as controversial as Holocaust Revisionism and, hence, the popularity of CODOH. Is there anyone reading this now who hasn't been exposed to at least a dozen hours of Holocaust propaganda in their lifetime? How much of the 'Holocaust' story did each of us fully understand before we accepted it as true? Is there anything as taboo as "denying the Holocaust"?
Despite Mr. Terry's assumptions, JREF is by no means the "holy grail" of internet forums. The culture bias here tends to favor skeptics-of-skeptics; the Michael Shermer type. When I come to JREF, I expect to be grilled by disbelievers of any independent investigation that contradicts a government or media-sponsored statement on an issue. The true reason Mr. Terry makes such extravagant claims about the Revisionist forum is that he has been a member since 2007, has been repeatedly demolished on several key topics, dodges 'gas chambers' entirely and is now afraid to admit he's lost the battle.
5. Flaws of Revisionism
Nick Terry said:
Here Tommy1234 once again misses the point. The fact that none of the leading revisionist authors agree on a simple matter of interpretation, i.e. what the 'Vergasungskeller' in Krema II was, means that they contradict each other totally on this issue. They cannot all be right, some must be wrong.
Reducing revisionism to a few consensus tenets simply turns it into a catechism. If all you have are a few articles of faith, and you disagree about literally everything else, then why should anyone take the time to read a revisionist work when it is a virtual certainty that the arguments would be contradicted by other revisionists?
The issue isn't whether a 'school' like revisionism has some disagreements. Every 'school' of thought has disagreements. It's that revisionism cannot agree on the absolute basics. Like whether a document was forged or not.
The Wannsee protocol doesn't prove extermination/it was forged anyway
The Stroop Report doesn't prove extermination/it was forged anyway
The Goebbels diaries don't prove extermination/they were forged anyway
The '4756' cremation document was forged (Rudolf)/no it wasn't (Mattogno)
Crematoria do/don't smoke
Air photos from Birkenau disprove extermination/they were forged
Nyiszli is a liar (Mattogno)/but we can quote-mine him about air raid shelters all the same (Crowell)
The Hungarian Action didn't happen (Butz)/yes it did (Mattogno, Graf, Crowell)
It goes on. And on. And on. And on....
I'll deal below with your conflation of sources and historiography, so think carefully before you reply.
"...revisionism cannot agree on the absolute basics"? Nick Terry does not seem to realize that it is useless to propose a hypothesis and assume that any forthcoming evidence must be supportive of our preconceived expectation, disqualifying that which is not, even going as far as to ban opposing views that might refute our assertions. Does this sound familiar?
If we want the truth, we should gather evidence, suggest ideas and progress a search for the most plausible theory according to what we know. That is how historical revisionism and science work together.
To acknowledge Mr. Terry's first example, a letter referring to a "Vergasungskeller" within Krema II, he is correct that Revisionists have had extended debates amongst each other as to the true meaning of this reference. This has led to a very plausible explanation as outlined by Samuel Crowell:
The design characteristics, layout, and equipment of the extermination gas chambers Pressac describes match those of morgues altered to double as bomb shelters with anti-gas warfare features. According to the material evidence reviewed, extermination gas chambers have no unique features.
[...]
The design characteristics, layout, and equipment of German bomb shelters, or anti-gas shelters, are described in a large contemporary technical literature, a small part of which we have reviewed. On the other hand, there is no comparable literature pertaining to the design characteristics, layout, and equipment of extermination gas chambers.
[...]
Therefore, in a material and documentary context, we must conclude that the extermination gas chambers in the four Birkenau crematoria were designed and constructed as morgues with modifications for them to serve as anti-gas shelters, that is, they were not designed to keep gas in, but to keep gas out.
Terry's subsequent bullet-points of documents that "don't prove extermination" or "were forged" is aimed to suggest that Revisionists are so utterly confused that they can't possibly be accurate. This is an indirect ad hominem on Mr. Terry's part. Consider:
(1) To believe in the 'Holocaust', we are required to assume an implicit 'extermination' reference in documents that have an otherwise clean context.
(2) Revisionists haven't proclaimed an unchanging certainty as have Believers in 'systematic extermination'. By comparison, there are several theories to how exactly dinosaurs became extinct; Mr. Terry might conclude none of these theories are valid (or, perhaps, the dinos were 'gassed'?).
(3) some documents were, in fact, forged while others flat-out contradict an 'extermination' policy (Shlegelberger letter, Luther memo)
6. Defining the Holocaust
Nick Terry said:
Gish Gallop. Not interested.
7. “Story Keeps Changing”
Nick Terry said:
Here we find Tommy confusing sources with historiography. One might also note that since there have been 10s of 1000s of mainstream writers and historians of the Holocaust, whereas there have only ever been a few hundred revisionist authors, the overall number of mistakes will inevitably be higher in the mainstream. What is significant is the proportion of mistakes. And that 'fail rate' is infinitely higher among the Dunning-Krueger sufferers making up the revisionist massive than in the mainstream.
We also note the resort to copypasta of 'revisionist talking points', aka entries on Denier Bullflop Bingo. Moshe Peer - check! Steam chambers - check! All these things have been thrashed out repeatedly and simply make Tommy1234 look out of date.
[...]
I dealt with the 'steam chambers' tedium in Chapter 1 of the critique linked in my sig.
Mr. Terry completely ignores the fact that in a field that hasn't had the opportunity to develop there will always be a larger proportion of mistakes. Revisionists are the first to reconstruct the events during this period with consideration of
all evidence, including evidence that suggests a deliberate falsification of the historical record. The questions asked by Revisionists such as, "if not 'gas chambers', then what?", are being asked for the very first time. Mainstream institutions instantly concluded "gas chambers" and refused to consider other probabilities, while Revisionists are forced to 'make mistakes' by proposing various theories as to the true nature of these allegations.
I'd encourage everyone to read the segment on 'steam chambers' in Chapter 1 of the critique linked on Mr. Terry's sig before continuing. While highly elaborate, considering that Mr. Terry and his Believer clique are literally at the forefront of the Believer army, their arguments pale in comparison to many of the original points made in the literature they have aimed to refute. Let's take into consideration the fact that Nick Terry & Friends have severely under-played the extended sources and detail of 'steam chamber' references:
...steam is, after all, a gas, and it is not difficult to see how the anonymous source describing steam to Wasser could have deduced that the victims were being killed with steam when witnessing the opening of a gas chamber and mistaken the emanation of exhaust fumes from the chamber for a lethal sauna.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Mr. Terry. This is a blatant disregard for the number of intricate details in the report. Let's take a look at the integrity and general background of the highly-regarded Polish underground resistance group that first introduced these "steamy" claims, starting with a brief biography of the creator of the group "Onyeg Shabes", Emanuel Ringenblum:
As an adolescent, as was true of many young people of his generation, Ringelblum joined the Zionist organization in his hometown of Buczacz, before turning to left-wing Zionism at high school in Nowy Sącz, in the middle of the First World War. In Warsaw, which meanwhile had become the capital of the new Poland, he turned to history, almost by default: the numerus clausus denied him entrance to the medical school, which had hitherto been his goal. The years of his academic training were precisely those of the great renewal of Jewish historiography, with men like Balaban and Schiper, who incorporated Jewish into Polish history and called for “history for the people” – emphasizing the cultural, social, and economic life of the various Jewish social groups, with a desire to reach a wide audience. It was only natural that Ringelblum would be enthusiastic about the scholarly project known as YIVO which, in Vilnius in the 1920s, sought to treat the Yiddish language with the consideration it deserved, while also promoting the historical, sociological, and anthropological study of Jewish society. He became the pillar of the institution’s historical branch for Warsaw, creating a “Circle of Young Historians” that advocated a secular Jewish culture and history “from below,” which would bring the Jewish and Polish people closer together through greater reciprocal knowledge of one another’s past. The methods the group developed — an interest in micro-history and gathering documents with the help local amateur groups or through anonymous writing contests – would subsequently be widely used by the Oyneg Shabes group in the ghetto.
The archive Ringenblum was responsible for as a leading member of Onyeg Shabes accounts for thousands of documents in the widely-accepted 'Holocaust' record which 'Nick Terry & Friends' regard with the utmost authority. What these Super-Believers fail to adequately address is the fact that not only were 'steam chambers' a significantly more popular claim than 'gas chambers', initially, but that reports including such references were sent to London and other locations on multiple occasions. Some of these reports were later published. Our Believer friends deny such reports were used to spread misinformation about Germany, instead claiming it must just be due to a misinterpretation on the part of the Polish underground that these downright stupid claims of 'steaming' turned out to be nonsense, after all. When we consider the sheer detail of these reports, evidence of fraudulent intent becomes obvious. Perhaps this was the winner of the "anonymous writing contest" mentioned above?
Taken from what became the "Official Report Submitted to the Polish Government", originally written on November 15, 1942 and sent to the Polish government in-exile in London on January 6, 1943:
Treblinka B is situated on the sandy hills among woodland. The area of the camp is comparatively small, some 5,000 hectares (about 12,500 acres). It is entirely surrounded by a green fence interwoven with barbed wire entanglements (3). Part of the fence runs through a young forest in the north (25). At the four corners of the camp, observation points were placed for the Lagerschutz (Camp Guard). The Lagerschutz consists mostly of Ukrainians armed with machine-guns. At the observation point's strong searchlights have been placed to light the entire place at night. Observation posts are also set in the middle of the camp and on the hills in the woodlands. The western border of Treblinka B is formed by the rail embankment along which runs a side-track that connects the camp with the main railroad-line (1). The side-line (2) was constructed in recent months, in order that the trains of transports might be delivered directly to the slaughter-house. The northern border of the camp is formed in the forest; east and south the border cuts through sandy hills. In the area of the camp, bushes form a long stretch parallel to the railroad tracks starting in the north (25).
A railroad-crossing (4) is adjacent to the side-track; trains with transports halt there.
From that barrier there is an entrance to a square which holds two to three thousand persons. The square is fenced in with barbed-wire. On the square, not far from the northern border, there is a wooden barracks. In the south-western corner of the square there is a guard-house with a military post on 24-hour duty (7). South of the square, outside of the fence, there is a cloth-sorting place (Lumpensortierungsplatz), and further south, there is the execution place of the camp-commandant and the graves of the victims murdered by him (22). The arrival square (6) is connected with rest of the area by an entrance in the north-eastern corner of the fence (8). From there, a path runs through the woods for about 200 meters eastwards (9) and then turns at right angles to the south and runs along the forest, parallel to the western limit of the arrival-square. This road stops at a large building of an unusual shape; it is an unfinished one-story brick-construction, about 40 meters long and 15 meters wide. (When we received the information concerning Treblinka B in the first half of September, this building was about to be finished.) The Germans began the construction of that building after the action started, probably in the middle of August, with the help of Jewish artisans picked out from among the Jews brought to Treblinka for slaughter. It is significant that the bricks for the construction had been brought from as far as Warsaw, in trucks attached to each transport. The bricks were loaded in the Warsaw Umschlagplatz by Jewish workers. According to the report of an eyewitness, the interior of the building is as follows; a corridor 3 meters wide runs through the middle; there are five chambers on each side; the height of each chamber is about 2 meters; the area is about 35 square meters. The execution chambers are without windows, but they have doors opening on the corridor and a type of valve on the outside walls. Next to these valves there are large scoops (they remind one of large vessels). In the walls pipes were installed from which water-steam is supposed to pour into the chambers. This was to have been death-house No. 2.
A path (9) skirts the building and runs along its western wall finally ending at the next building (12) near death-house No. 1 (14). This building is at right-angles to the death-house No. 2. It is a brick construction much smaller than the other. It consists of only three chambers and a steam-room. Along the northern wall of this house runs a corridor from which there are doors to the chambers. The outside walls of the chambers have valves (until recently doors which had been changed into valves for utility reasons). Also here a scoop in the shape of a shallow vessel is placed at the height of the valves (15). The steam-room (15a) is adjacent to the building. Inside the steam-room there is a large vat which produces the steam. The hot steam comes in to the chambers through pipes installed there, each having a prescribed number of vents. While this machinery of death is in action, the doors and valves are hermetically closed. The floor in the chambers has a terra-cotta inlay which becomes very slippery when water is poured over it. There is a well next to the steam-room, the only well in the whole area of Treblinka B. Not far from the death-house, south of the barbed-wire and wooden fences, there is a grave-diggers' camp. The grave-diggers live in barracks (19) next to which are the kitchen buildings. On both sides of the camp there are two guard-houses (17-20). The remaining area of Treblinka B is destined for the murdered victims. A part of that area is already a large cemetery (22, 23, 24). At first, Poles employed in the camps dug the graves; later , as the slaughter was intensified and the need for more ditches grew, special digging-machines (bulldozers) were brought, which ran day and night at grave-digging. A Diesel-motor supplies the energy and its rattle is a characteristic sound at Treblinka B.
The supervisors and execution-staff are small in numbers. The slaughter-house is commanded by an S.S. man of the rank of major; his name is Sauer). The German staff, consisting of S.S. men, are in terror of their chief. The moment they see him from the distance they drive the Jewish workers as well as the victims on their way to death with even greater energy. Altogether, there are ten Germans and thirty Ukrainians.
[...]
When the execution chambers are filled the doors are hermetically closed and the slow suffocation of leaving people begins, brought about by the steam issuing from the numerous vents in the pipes. At the beginning, stifled cries penetrate to the outside; gradually they quiet down and 15 minutes later the execution is complete.
Nick Terry & Friends attempt to justify the total absurdity of these 'steam chamber' assertions with the fact that claims of 'gas chambers' were also circulating. If we accept either of these, we must then consider the entire spectrum of ludicrous claims that were floating around during this period. The bridge between 'steam chambers' and 'gas chambers' was (you guessed it!): "vacuum chambers". Abe Kon, former Treblinka prisoner, stated on August 17, 1944:
Each cabin measured 6 × 6 m. The height amounted to 2.5 m. In one cabin they drove 600 people each. They threw the children on their heads. The cabins had two doors, which could be sealed hermetically. In the corner between ceiling and wall two openings were connected with hoses. Behind the 'bath' stood a machine. It pumped the air out of the chambers. The people suffocated within 6 to 15 minutes.
This account is confirmed by the first official Soviet report concerning Treblinka, from August 24, 1944:
They drove 400 to 500 people into one cabin at the same time. They had two doors, which could be hermetically sealed. In the corner, between ceiling and wall, there were two openings connected with hoses. Behind the 'bath' stood a machine. It pumped the air out of the room. The people suffocated in 6 to 10 minutes.
We witness the evolving storyline develop into the modern-day carbon monoxide gassing claims with a subsequent report by a Polish-Soviet commission only a month later, September 15, 1944:
In the beginning, the method was employed of pumping the air out of the room by means of a small car engine. Then, as a result of the large number of the doomed, a chemical substance began to be used.
On September 26, Samuel Rajzman testified upon interrogation to his account of the 'chambers' used at Treblinka. Having claimed to have spent ten months at Treblinka and admittedly becoming familiar with the 'gas chambers', Rajzman is a perfect illustration of the level of inconsistency we can expect from the Holohoax:
These cabins were hermetically sealed. In the first period, the killing occurred by means of pumping out the air from the cabins; then one resorted to other methods - poisoning by chlorine gas and Cylon-gas. On the camp territory there was a special store of materials with a large amount (up to 15 tons) of so-called Chloren. Externally, Chloren was constituted of blocks white in color. Every day before my eyes, barrels of this Chloren were carried into the second division. I did not see containers with Cyclon, but rarely and periodically various crates arrived with the transports, which were taken over by the guard staff of the 2nd division without delay. The engines in the 'bath rooms' ran 24 hours without interruption. Whether poisoning by means of gas mist occurred, I have not heard.
Leading up through October of 1945, witnesses such as Szymon Goldberg still hadn't figured out which story they liked better:
The Jews were poisoned in that the air was pumped out - there was a machine for pumping out the air - and gas [i.e., exhaust fumes] of a vehicle were introduced. Ether was burned and this vapor introduced inside. Then there was also chlorine.
...neither had Henryk Reichman:
The killings were carried out either by pumping out of the air or by introduction of CO. Once, when fewer transports were arriving, the Germans conducted an experiment: They pumped out the air without introducing poison. When the doors were opened after 48 hours, we found some living people inside.
...nor Stanislaw Kon:
The killing took place by means of pumping out the air or by introduction of engine exhaust gases.
An administrative member of the Zionist-led Oyneg Shabes organization, Rachel Auerbach, describes in her published work from January, 1946:
The motor, installed in a workshop near the bathhouse, could be started now. First, a suction pump was brought into play to draw the pure air from the chamber. After that, the pipe to the reservoir of exhaust gas from the motor could be opened.
[...] At the last moment, it seems, when the pump started to suck out breathable air, all self-control broke and there was an outbreak of collective hysteria inside the gas chamber.
How utterly terrifying. It's a good thing none of it is true.
One last example from the Polish underground before moving on; this time, we have a tale of "time-delayed" gassings from the resistance group "Armia Krajowa" on September 8, 1942:
They enter it [the gas chamber] in groups of 300-500 people. Each group is immediately closed hermetically inside, and gassed. The gas does not affect them immediately, because the Jews still have to continue on to the pits that are a few dozen meters away, and whose depth is 30 meters. There they fall unconscious, and a digger covers them with a thin layer of earth. Then another group arrives.
Have a look at some bragging admissions made immediately after the war by partisan Bruno Baum, a Jewish Communist and Auschwitz inmate, who eliminates any uncertainty about the origin of 'Holocaust' assertions:
The entire propaganda which started abroad, was made by us with the help of our Polish mates.
I believe it is no exaggeration, when I say, that the largest part of the Auschwitz propaganda, which was spread at the time around the world, was written by ourselves in the camp.
Explain away, Mr. Terry.
The nutty professor continues his rebuttal by making the mistake of implying that Moshe Peere's laughable 'testimony' is one-of-a-kind. Rather than indulge myself in posting the hundreds of what is often downright hilarious claims by "eye" witnesses (I'll do a few of those later), I'll once again refer to the eye-opening documentary by Eric Hunt, "The Last Days of the Big Lie", which outlines the sheer absurdity of some highly-regarded, allegedly incriminating testimony and the manner it has been manipulated by Jewish media-moguls such as Steven Spielberg. The documentary is available for free viewing on the Holocaust Handbooks website. Go see it.
8. Historical Method
Nick Terry said:
More Gish Galloping. Lots of unproven assertions here, and a lot of major misunderstandings of how the world came to learn about the Holocaust and what evidence was accumulated on the way.
Mainstream historical method for any subject consists of relying on sources as close to the events as possible, which does not always translate into "same-day documents" no matter what the period, era or subject. There are a hell of a lot of contemporary documents for the Holocaust, though.
Gassing is discussed in diaries and letters produced by Nazis, and institutional documents generated by the Nazis. It's also discussed extensively in secret messages smuggled out of camps, contemporary local underground reports written by Poles and Jews. The supporting documents converge strongly on all of this. There are gaps, but this is not unusual. Witness testimony fills those holes, and is used on the same basis as any other historian of any other period uses witness testimony. That is to say, if you think historians don't use witness testimony on other subjects, you are completely deluded.
Most of the rest is well-poisoning rubbish about provenance which ignores the fact that relevant documents and information spread to multiple parties during the war and after 1945, and cannot be reduced to one power or the other. There was no global conspiracy of all non-German powers to invent a story which plenty of Germans admitted to freely.
The forensic babble is dealt with below.
Oh boy, Mr. Terry. Now you've really outdone yourself. The "local underground reports", including the above-mentioned Onyeg Shabos archives, produced by a fervent Zionist, is one of your first references. Prior to that, you cite "secret messages smuggled out of camps". What "secret messages", Mr. Terry?
Perhaps Mr. Terry was referring to the British Police Decodes he published a report on in 2002. Let's see what he, himself, had to say about these extensive decodes which featured detailed, candid insight for the Third Reich's greatest secrets:
It is my contention that the Police Decodes of 1941 and 1942 did not in and of themselves provide British intelligence with prima facie evidence of the "Final Solution." Indeed, the evidence was sufficiently contradictory that it actually may have contributed to a British misunderstanding of German intentions toward European Jews in the first part of 1942.
On account of the fact that these decodes, comprising what is probably the most detailed, verifiable and generally reliable account of German activity during this period, are utterly absent of any 'Final Solution' or 'gassing' references, Mr. Terry spends the rest of his report reciting 'evidence' from
other sources that the British, according to Mr. Terry, had simply 'failed to address' ("a British misunderstanding") during this period. He refuses to concede the fact that the British had no reason to accept these ludicrous and contradictory claims of 'mass gassings' based on the detailed Intel they had obtained.
This Hoaxter nightmare had already been confirmed by Professor Sir Frank Hinsley in 1942:
...the returns from Auschwitz, the largest of the camps with 20,000 prisoners, mentioned illness as the main cause of death, but included references to shootings and hangings. There were no references in the decrypts to gassings.
At least Mr. Terry admits "there are gaps" and "witness testimony fills in those holes". Yet despite these acknowledged "holes", he is firm in his stance that Revisionist writers don't deserve a voice in the academic community.
The real voice of 'Holocaust' history belongs to those who wrote it: mostly Jewish people. Jews make up the majority of Holocaust historians. A simple visit to the Wikipedia article for "Historians of the Holocaust" makes this clear (I'm still not able to post URLs).
We have predominantly Jewish 'Holocaust' historians, predominantly Jewish world media, a universal ban on opposing views and mandatory "Holocaust education" for Americans:
Forty-eight states and the District of Columbia have created social-studies standards for their classrooms. As of early 2004, the Holocaust is explicitly named in 24 state standards (Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia) and the District of Columbia's; it is implicitly identified in the remaining 23 standards when, for example, teachers are asked to address the development and consequences of the policies of National Socialist Germany. As standards play an increasingly important role in U.S. education, it can be assumed that most schools address the subject of the Holocaust.
According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, as of summer 2004 there were approximately 900 professors teaching Holocaust-related courses at the college and university level in the United States. The Holocaust is also covered in most introductory American, European, and world history courses on campuses across the United States. College- and university-level courses on the Holocaust are included in the following academic disciplines: history, English, philosophy, religion, education, Judaic studies, political science/government, psychology, sociology, communications, anthropology, literature, law, criminal justice, Hebrew language and literature, German language and literature, Eastern and Western European studies, music, art history, classics, geography, linguistics, and public administration.
Just remember: any teacher who disputes 'gas chambers' gets fired.
9. Nihilism
Nick Terry said:
This is an appeal to perfection coupled with selective nihilism. We know very well what happened in WWII based on documents and other sources including forensics. We know for example that there were 7 million foreign workers in Nazi Germany by 1944, and their presence left a mass of documentary traces, and sadly in many cases also left human remains in a wide variety of mass graves or killing sites where some of these foreign workers had been murdered by the Gestapo. Obviously, out of 7 million people a proportion then left testimony after the war, or they preserved diaries and letters of various kinds. There is enough evidence to keep a battalion of German historians busy researching the subject of foreign workers in the Third Reich for the better part of 30 years so far, and enough that they will be doing so for the next hundred or more.
We reasonably expect in the modern era that any major phenomenon affecting millions of people leaves traces. This is clearly the case for Nazi gas chambers, despite the evident efforts of the Nazis to cover up the use of gas chambers. So if you make any other claim that x happened instead then you need a greater volume of evidence to substantiate that claim, otherwise it will have less evidence than gassing, and will therefore be ignored.
And you don't have that evidence. You can babble about policy involving 'only' deportations 'after the war', but train records and other sources show there were deportations during the war to Auschwitz, Treblinka, where the trains stopped. The explanation with the largest amount of evidence is that the majority were then gassed on arrival. There is no evidence that the trains went onwards somewhere else, and no evidence that the deportees showed up anywhere else, either on an individual (name) or statistical level.
For that matter, there are no records of the trains
doing anything after arriving at these places. We have a few train schedules that curiously made it through the alleged German 'destroy-all-evidence' campaign while all outbound records, manifest lists and other train schedules which might potentially show where these prisoners went, have magically vanished. The real issue here is how something as implicit as inbound records to Treblinka have survived, which appear to favor the 'extermination' hypothesis, while the clumsy Germans managed to burn everything else of what should have been of relative insignificance to them, such as outbound records or otherwise.
Moreover, we know from numerous instances that Treblinka was not the alleged "last stop" for Jews:
After the 'extermination camp' Treblinka, Zylbersztajn also survived the 'extermination camp' Majdanek and eight 'ordinary' concentration camps; he is thus living proof of the fact that the Germans did not systematically exterminate their Jewish prisoners.
Another 356 Jews were transferred from Treblinka to Majdanek on May 13, 1943.[870] The Jewish historians Tatiana Berenstein and Adam Rutkowski write in reference to this:[871]
"Some of the transports from Warsaw reached Lublin by way of Treblinka, where the selection of the deportees took place."
This fact is confirmed by some witnesses who were interrogated within the framework of the extradition proceedings against John Demjanjuk in the USA. In the official compilations of the interrogations,[872] which we have in our possession, the names of the witnesses have been rendered unreadable, so that we refer to the respective date, on which the interrogation occurred.
Interrogation of December 12, 1979: The witness was deported in April 1943 from Warsaw to Treblinka. On the next day he was transferred to Majdanek, where he spent 6-7 days; afterward he went to Budzyn for approximately a year. From Budzyn he was sent to Wieliczka (in the vicinity of Krakow), from there to Flossenbürg in mid-1944, and finally to Leitmeritz.
Interrogation of December 17, 1979: the witness was deported from Krakow to Płaszów, and from there to Auschwitz. After that he went to Oranienburg and finally to Flossenbürg. He stated that he spent one single day in Treblinka without giving details.
Interrogation of January 3, 1980: the witness was taken prisoner in May 1943 in Warsaw and sent directly to Majdanek, from where he was later transferred to Budzyn.
Interrogation of March 7, 1980: The witness was deported in April 1943 from Warsaw to Treblinka, where he remained for only one day; afterwards he was transferred along with 180 other prisoners to Majdanek. After two days the trip continued to Budzyn, where he spent two years. He was liberated by the Soviets from an unnamed German concentration camp.
Interrogation of March 11, 1980: the witness was sent to Treblinka in April 1943, where he remained for only a day. Transfer to Majdanek, thence to Budzyn, where he was interned for about a year. Liberated on May 5, 1945, from Mauthausen.
Interrogation of July 18, 1980: the witness was deported on April 18, 1943, from Warsaw to Majdanek. After 5 weeks he went to Auschwitz and then - toward the end of 1944 - to Gusen (a subcamp of Mauthausen) where he was liberated.
The verdict of the Jury Court of Düsseldorf determined, plainly and clearly, on September 3, 1965, that
"coming from Treblinka, several thousand people are said to have arrived at other camps."[873]
Another revealing example from the same publication by Graf and Mattogno:
On August 20, 1943, a transport with 2,031 persons arrived in Majdanek from Białystok.[884] It contained men, women, and children,[885] so that no kind of selection could have taken place in Treblinka. On the same day, at least one other transport arrived in Majdanek with approximately 2,000 Jews (men, women, and children).[886] Also, the transport with 1,200 children (originally intended for Palestine[887]) between 6 and 12 years of age, which arrived in Theresienstadt on August 24,[888] traveled by way of Treblinka, which therefore served as a transit camp for these transports.
10. I Know You Are But What Am I
Nick Terry said:
I find it grimly amusing, and entirely typical of revisionists, that you asserted that the Americans had murdered a million German POWs but never even bothered to investigate the claim. No better illustration of your blatant double standards could have possibly been provided.
Indeed, I made a passing reference to Allied atrocities without fully reviewing the issue. Bacque presents some interesting circumstances and, based on what I've read, I do believe the Allied powers were capable of committing such atrocities, particularly after conducting my own investigation of the amassed Allied corruption entailed within 'the Holocaust'. Without delving into this much further, it is worth noting that there are contemporary statements from authoritative figures regarding the deliberate starvation of German POWs. One such statement comes from Senator Homer E. Capeheart of Indiana in an address before the US Senate on February 5, 1946:
At Potsdam the representatives of the United States, the United Kingdom, and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics solemnly signed the following declaration of principles and purposes:
'It is not the intention of the Allies to destroy or enslave the German people.'
Mr. President, the cynical and savage repudiation of these solemn declarations which has resulted in a major catastrophe, cannot be explained in terms of ignorance or incompetence. This repudiation, not only of the Potsdam Declaration, but also of every law of God and men, has been deliberately engineered with such a malevolent cunning, and with such diabolical skill, that the American people themselves have been caught in an international death trap.
For nine months now this administration has been carrying on a deliberate policy of mass starvation without any distinction between the innocent and the helpless and guilty alike.
The first issue has been and continues to be purely humanitarian. This vicious clique within this administration that has been responsible for the policies and practices which have made a madhouse of central Europe has not only betrayed our American principles, but they have betrayed the Gis who have suffered and died, and they continue to betray the American Gis who have to continue their dirty work for them.
The second issue that is involved is the effect this tragedy in Germany has already has already had on the other European countries. Those who have been responsible for this deliberate destruction of the German state and this criminal mass starvation of the German people have been so zealous in their hatred that all other interests and concerns have been subordinated to this one obsession of revenge.
Shall we move on?
Nick Terry said:
The Holocaust isn't a Gish Gallop. It was a complex event whose immediate roots span a period of at least 12 years, affecting people directly in about 25 present-day nation states, and indirectly in several dozen more. The victims of the Holocaust died in a multiplicity of situations and at the hands of multiple agencies, including Axis allies like Romania, Croatia and the Hungarian Arrow Cross as well as Nazi collaborator units. They were starved to death, shot, and gassed, the latter using two distinct methods.
It's fairly obvious you cannot even present a coherent summary of the chronology and geography of the Holocaust, yet this would be a sine qua non if you were going to mount a coherent argument against it. That's why you end up Gish Galloping and conflating different aspects together.
One problem is you forget that the genocide of European Jews was only one of the many Nazi crimes committed in WWII. Gassing was also used to kill psychiatric patients, Soviet POWs and political prisoners. The Nazis had multiple targets, as did their murderous Axis allies. Some people say this is all the Holocaust, but the killing of psychiatric patients clearly doesn't fit under the heading of the genocide of European Jews. Yet it was connected because the same people who gassed psychiatric patients were sent to gas Jews under Odilo Globocnik.
I can present a half-decent summary of the chronology and geography of the so-called 'Holocaust'. My issue is with the fact that every piece of 'evidence' I had heard of during my time as a True Believer has curiously turned out to be either falsified, plain nonsense or a misrepresentation of available data.
When you refer to the 'gassing' of psychiatric patients, Mr. Terry, I really hope you aren't referring to the alleged 'mass gassings' at Hartheim castle which, upon investigation, had absolutely no features that suggest the room in question would have ever been used as a 'gassing' chamber. Purely for the entertainment of our readers, I'd love for you to illustrate just how exactly this 'chamber' functioned.
Holocaustians love to focus on Germany's euthanasia program which works as a perfect prequel to concentration camp 'gassings'. Those evil Nazis just couldn't get enough! They leave out the fact that euthanasia programs via lethal injection and other methods, quite like the program that existed in Germany during this period, are still practiced in various developed countries today.
11. Did Someone Say Conspiracy?
Nick Terry said:
You were asked to provide evidence of US-Soviet collusion, and have failed to do so. Most of your remarks relate to alleged motives, but you cannot infer from a possible motive that this was actually the case. You need actual evidence to prove this. And you provided none. Try again.
We'll ignore the refrain of 'I know you are but what am I' in alleging that the Holocaust is a conspiracy theory when you cannot even provide the slightest shred of evidence to substantiate your conspiracy theory.
Per your request:
The Katyn forest massacre of around 22,000 Polish officers and other prisoners by the Soviets were kept under wraps by US government officials, according to documents released Monday, the Associated Press reported. [...] Though the evidence could have changed the course of the Soviet treatment of Poland, it was instead buried by American officials at the highest levels of government.
- GlobalPost, 'Katyn forest massacre documents kept under wraps by US: report', Talia Ralph, Sep. 10, 2012
You can't polish a turd, Mr. Terry. Put it down and wash your hands.
12. Attacks on Nuremberg
Nick Terry said:
Argument by Quotation is never particularly convincing, especially when they're the same incantations that have been muttered by revisionists for the better part of 50 years, without the slightest effect in convincing a larger number of people there is anything to the denier claim, because people who have investigated the trials and the 1940s context know there were politically partisan critics in the US who disliked the trials, and you quote almost exclusively from those critics.
The bigger problem is your Nuremberg fixation, and your apparent assumption that the International Military Tribunal was the only occasion when war crimes evidence was uncovered or used in court or became available to posterity even in the 1940s. Pretending that the evidence for the Holocaust boils down to Nuremberg is obvious nonsense. I doubt you could even spell out the full array of investigations, trials, document publications or other occasions when evidence was uncovered, even for 1945-49. And they were carried out by essentially every state affected by the war in Europe.
I challenge you to cite the evidence presented at
any of these trials that proves the alleged crimes were committed.
The allegations of Nuremberg critics being "politically partisan" haven't been sustained, whatsoever. Were these judges, lawyers, senators, congressmen and other authoritative figures secretly part of pro-Nazi organizations? Support your claims, Mr. Terry. Accusations of political partisanship are particularly ironic when used against those acknowledging injustice because, in the case of the International Military Tribunal (IMT), for example, all of the prosecutors and judges were appointed by the four Allied Powers and, in the United States, by a fervent Zionist, Colonel David Marcus.
The critics of Nuremberg had plenty of reason to express discontent. The legal framework for the IMT, defined within the London Agreement, was effectively an impediment to any semblance of real justice at the trials:
- Article 3 decreed that the Tribunal and it's members may not be challenged.
- Article 26 ruled out contestability of the verdicts.
- Article 13 gave the Court the ability to determine it's own rules of procedure.
- Article 19 dictated the Tribunal's ability to refuse admission of any evidence it deemed unnecessary or irrelevant.
- Article 21 declared "judicial notice" would be taken for "facts of common knowledge"; such 'common knowledge' was derived from prior claims made in Allied 'evidence' (documents, files, reports and protocols produced in the American, French, British and Soviet trials).
Here are some noteworthy elements of the IMT, outlined by Germar Rudolf in "Dissecting the Holocaust":
In many and sweeping respects the conduct of the IMT was shockingly similar to that of the trials described previously in <the American Trials>. Von Knieriem and many others recount threats of all kinds, of psychological torture,[101] of non-stop interrogation[102] and of confiscation of the property[103] of defendants as well as of coerced witnesses. Intimidation, imprisonment, legal prosecution and other means of coercion was applied to witnesses for the defense;[104] distorted affidavits,[105] documents[106] and synchronized translations;[107] arbitrary refusal to hear evidence,[108] confiscation of documents[109] and the refusal to grant the defense access to documents;[110] as well as to the systematic obstruction of the defense by the prosecution[111] such as, for example, making it impossible for the defense to travel abroad in order to locate defense witnesses,[112] or censoring their mail.[113] We know of professional witnesses who had been interned in concentration camps for severe crimes.[114] Last but not least, we know of verdicts flying crassly in the face of what the evidence demanded,[115] and justified with “arguments unrivalled in their crudity.“[116]
When the American attorney E. J. Caroll was prevented from acting as defense counsel in the Krupp case, he sent a letter of protest to General Clay criticizing the IMT trials for, among other things, lengthy and inhumane detention awaiting trial; the withholding of documents by the prosecution and the Court, hearsay evidence, the random nature of documentary evidence, the suppression of witnesses for the defense, and the mandatory presence of members of the prosecution at any discussions held with witnesses; the disappearance of exonerating evidence; the confiscation of property; testimony under duress; and the intimidation of witnesses.[117]
My "Nuremberg fixation" comes from it being the proverbial "birth of the Holocaust". The foremost leaders of military and political affairs in the Third Reich were tried at the IMT, with the exception of, perhaps, several of the most influential members who curiously "committed suicide" months before the trial began (including Adolf Hitler, Joseph Goebbels and Heinrich Himmler).
Injustices at other post-war trials are clearly marked. For these trials, "automatic arrest" was imposed on all Germans who held leading positions in the Nazi Party, the state or the economy. The American trials, in addition to numerous examples of maltreatment and deprivation, exhibited a variety of features that can only be described as unjust:
Up to the start of the trials the accused had no legal representation whatsoever, and even during the trials the defense attorneys rarely provided effective support, since these defense counsels (appointed by the Court) in many cases were themselves citizens of the victorious powers, usually with a poor command of the German language. They showed little interest in defending their clients and sometimes even acted blatantly as prosecutors, going so far as to threaten the defendants and to persuade them to make false confessions of guilt.[49] But even if, like American attorney W. M. Everett for example, they were willing to carry out their duties as defense counsels, the prosecution and the Court made this almost impossible for them: the defense was reluctantly given only partial access to pertinent documents, and conversations with the accused were not possible until just before and sometimes not even until after the trials had begun, and only ever under Allied supervision. Frequently it was not until just before the trial that the defense was informed of the charges, which tended to be sweeping and general in nature.[50] Motions to hear witnesses for the defense, or to contest evidence such as extorted statements, were usually refused.[51] And this was fully in accordance with the regulations of the American Occupation Power; Article 7 of Ordinance Number 7 of the Military Government for the American Zone states, with respect to the charter of certain military tribunals:
“The Tribunals shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence […] The tribunal shall afford the opposing party such opportunity to question the […] probative value of such evidence as in the opinion of the tribunal the ends of justice require.”[52]
It was left to the Court to decide what was necessary. In other words, the protocol was purely arbitrary.
[...]
Defense witnesses from the concentration camps were withheld, threatened, sometimes even arrested and abused by the prosecution.[57] Many former concentration camp inmates threatened their one-time fellow sufferers with reprisals against their families or even with incriminating statements and indictments against them if they failed to give sufficiently incriminating testimony or statements against third parties. Even threats of murder are documented to have been made against fellow prisoners.[58] The VVN (Vereinigung der Verfolgten des Naziregimes = Organization of Persons Persecuted by the Nazi Regime),[59] the organization that decided which former inmates living in the starving Germany of those days would receive food rations, housing authorization etc., used its power to pressure many former fellow prisoners into not taking the stand as defense witnesses. It even expressly forbade the former fellow prisoners to give exonerating testimony.[60]
Numerous Allied post-war trials were characterized by unjust traits including psychological and sometimes physical abuse employed against several leading Nazi figures including Oswald Pohl and Rudolf Hoess, in British prisons. Soviet trials had been ongoing since 1941, with authoritative German critics declaring them "unlawful" on a number of counts.
14. Extermination Plan
Nick Terry said:
Oh look, more out-of-date quotes. I suggest you read and digest the following more recent studies on the decision-making process
1.Christopher Browning, expert report for the Irving trial (2000)
2-3. Peter Longerich, 2 expert reports for the Irving trial (2000)
4. Chapter 2 of the Holocaust Controversies-authored critique of revisionists (2011) linked in my signature and here
and get back to us when you have an explanation which factors in and cites every single source mentioned in those studies.
I'll stick to the relevant details. Believers have had a much longer history of access to all sources, in general, and still have yet to produce evidence of Hitler's involvement (let alone his direct order) for the 'Final Solution'. Taken from the beginning of Browning's "Documentary Evidence" segment of his report:
While historians who have done extensive archival research on Nazi Jewish policy agree that such a program was implemented by the Nazi regime, they are not unanimous in their conclusions about several important aspects of historical interpretation. In particular, they do not agree as to precisely when the Nazi regime decided upon a policy of systematic and total mass murder, and they do not agree upon Hitler's precise role in this decision-making process.
Don't forget, these "historians who have done extensive archival research on Nazi Jewish policy" obtained their credentials through exhaustive indoctrination that does not permit the Revisionist perspective to be heard. If they aren't looking for certain implications, based on a pre-conceived notion of what is true, those implications may not be seen. This is known as a "confirmation bias". The viability of the 'Holocaust' story depends on this.
Let's have a look at a relevant declaration published by committee of 34 French historians in France's largest daily newspaper, "Le Monde", on February 21, 1979:
We must not ask ourselves how technically such a mass murder was possible. It was technically possible because it took place. Such is the obligatory point of departure for all historic investigation on this subject.
Indeed...
15. Ausrottung
Nick Terry said:
I'm afraid you have a lot more uses of Ausrottung and Vernichtung to deal with than just the few mentioned above. The babble about the Posen speech is ancient old rubbish, and simply not enough when there are many other examples you need to deal with. These are spelled out quite extensively here:
Peter Longerich, 2 expert reports for the Irving trial (2000)
and you can find more examples here which is far from exhaustive.
The rest in the next post.
The judge at the Irving trial openly acknowledged the fact that these words had multiple meanings that depend entirely on the context.
At the IMT trial in 1946, Alfred Rosenberg adamantly contested the meaning that was being imposed upon his own written words while being accused of 'extermination' references:
I have said already that that word does not have the sense which you attribute to it.
For the word "ausgerottet/ausrotten", some of the best examples come from a variety of German Bibles (believe it or not) published during this time period that were also translated into English. There are at least two dozen uses of "ausgerottet/ausrotten" in at least ten different versions of German Bibles during this period, all of which have been translated into the English versions (King James, New King James, International, New International and American Standard) as "cut off" or "uproot".
Some examples:
"Wohl her!" sprechen sie; "laßt uns sie ausrotten, daß sie kein Volk seien, daß des Namens Israel nicht mehr gedacht werde!" Psalm 83.5
They have said, “Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation, That the name of Israel may be remembered no more.”
Darum wird dich Gott auch ganz und gar zerstören und zerschlagen und aus deiner Hütte reißen und aus dem Lande der Lebendigen ausrotten. Psalm 52.7
God shall likewise destroy you forever; He shall take you away, and pluck you out of your dwelling place, And uproot you from the land of the living.
Denn wer seinen Leib nicht kasteit an diesem Tage, der soll aus seinem Volk ausgerottet werden. 3. Mose 23.29
For any person who is not afflicted in soul on that same day shall be cut off from his people.
Heulet, die ihr in der Mühle wohnt; denn das ganze Krämervolk ist dahin, und alle, die Geld sammeln, sind ausgerottet. Zephanja 1.11
Wail, you inhabitants of Maktesh! For all the merchant people are cut down; All those who handle money are cut off.
Remember that most Germans were, in fact, Christian.
16. Cremation
Nick Terry said:
Garbage in, Garbage Out. The garbage in this case is your blithe assertion that only 1.3 bodies/hour could be cremated. This is refuted by a dozen contemporary Nazi documents, and by the fact that multiple bodies were cremated per muffle. We've also discussed this repeatedly on this thread.
Settle down, Mr. Terry. 1.3 bodies per hour is a rather generous estimate based on countless documents for all varieties of cremation ovens, both contemporary and modern. It's difficult to know where to begin on this issue. You haven't really refuted anything, only referred to "a dozen Nazi documents" that I'm sure are not as damning as you would imply.
I suppose I'll start with a few introductory details for our readers:
- On January 5, 1927, engineer Richard Kessler performed an experiment on coke-fueled cremations that resulted in a cremation time of no less than 55 minutes per body, per muffle.
- In the Westerbork camp, it was recorded that, out of hundreds of recorded cremation times for cremations taking place between June 23, 1943 and March 31, 1944, the average cremation time for adult corpses (averaging 70 years of age) was 50 minutes.
- During this period of high infant mortality at Westerbork, many newborn babies were cremated, as well. In some instances, a baby (averaging one-year of age) was cremated with an adult corpse. This brought the average cremation time from 50 to 57 minutes -- a notable 7-minute increase.
- The hands-down most efficient of all cremation ovens ever installed in German concentration camps (including Auschwitz-Birkenau) were the Ignis-Huttenbau ovens located in Terezín; hundreds of cremations were recorded in relevant detail. The average cremation here was 36 minutes. The shortest on record was a mere 31 minutes long.
- A diagram published by Prof. P. Schlapfer in 1936, cited by Mattogno, shows that even with a fully pre-heated oven (also known as "thermal equilibrium"), coke (fuel) consumption averages no less than 37.5 kg per cremation.
- Coke consumption at the Gusen concentration camp is also in-line with these figures. 677 corpses had a total consumption of 20,700 kg of coke; 30.6 kg per corpse.
Now, consider the registered natural deaths at Auschwitz in comparison to the coke deliveries received:
- Between March 15 to October 25, 1943, 607 metric tons of coke and 96 m³ of wood were delivered to Auschwitz-Birkenau. This is equivalent, in terms of fuel, to 628.5 metric tons of coke.
- During this period, there were 16,000 registered inmate deaths.
- Coke consumption per corpse averages out to (628,500 ÷ 16,000 =) 39.3 kg.
This figure, 39.3 kg per cremation, is perfectly in range for an appropriate estimate as to what these cremation ovens may have been capable of in processing only the recorded deaths at Auschwitz, with consideration of all known circumstances. The fanatical claims made by Believers are not-so-realistic:
1) According to Roberto Muehlenkamp, a mere
3.5 kg of coke (roughly one-tenth the amount commonly used by any other cremation facility) was enough to cremate 'exterminated' Jews at Auschwitz.
2) Multiple cremations occurred in a single muffle, in order to save coke, without increasing overall cremation time.
I can only describe the "3.5 kg of coke" assertion as sheer stupidity. The notion that multiple cadavers could be inserted into a single muffle in order to increase efficiency is equally ridiculous in it's implications: allegedly, a half-burnt corpse already inside the oven was used as fuel source for the next corpse that would be inserted mid-way through the cremation of the first (this frantically rapid pace is how Believers attempt to justify the "3.5 kg" nonsense to fit the relatively small coke deliveries sent to the camp, based on available records). The claim is that, since human fat is more combustible than other human elements, all moisture would first be evaporated from Corpse #1, which would turn it into an all-out fatty fuel for Corpse #2. This ludicrous assertion flies in the face of one important fact:
fat contains water -- if fat remains, so does the water it holds. Skinny corpses run out of both fat and water rather evenly. Obese corpses will certainly burn faster and with more energy, but there is absolutely no reason to assume average-sized or even slightly overweight people would have enough fat on them to evaporate all water, burn on their own and then serve as a fuel source for other corpses with nothing but a 3.5 kg "spark" to get it all started.
Believers are compelled to disregard the cremation records at Westerbork, mentioned earlier, showing an average 7-minute cremation time increase whenever an infant or baby was included with an adult corpse (just imagine adding another full-grown adult).
17. Leuchter
Nick Terry said:
Arguments from negative evidence are only ever valid when we should reasonably expect a contrary result. The entire premise of the 'chemical disproof' peddled by Leuchter and Rudolf is completely flawed. There is no reason to expect that exposure to cyanide gas for half an hour a day, and usually half an hour every other day, followed by ventilation, washing down, and repeated whitewashing, would necessarily lead to the formation of Prussian Blue. By contrast, exposure to cyanide gas 24-7 in delousing chambers for prolonged periods does often lead to the formation of Prussian Blue. The delousing chambers at Birkenau were also in operation many months before the gas chambers in the crematoria were in operation, since killing was done in the Bunkers until spring 1943.
However you try to spin this, the fact that the gas chambers were exposed to a tiny fraction of the cyanide used in delousing chambers is enough to refute the silly chemical contention. And cyanide traces were found in the ruins of the Birkenau gas chambers, by every single person who tested for it (Leuchter, Rudolf, Markiewicz).
Similar cyanide traces to those numbers detected in alleged 'gas chambers' were found in the samples collected from inmate barracks; were prisoners 'gassed' in the comfort of their own beds? A rampant typhus epidemic swept through the camp in summer of 1942 and regular delousing of camp facilities (performed with hydrogen cyanide) was a practical measure to reduce the spread of disease. The bodies from victims killed by typhus, which was killing more than 300 inmates per day during this period, were a dangerous carrier for lice spreading the deadly disease. For this reason, morgues throughout the camp that housed the highly-infected corpses, including those later alleged to be 'gas chambers', would have been exposed to slightly greater amounts of the cyanide delousing agent due to a greater necessity for fumigation. In either case, concentrations from the delousing chambers (which explicitly used hydrogen cyanide for disinfestation of clothing and other materials) should be astronomically higher. The quantities detected by Rudolf and others are perfectly in range of this explanation (
0.1-2.7 mg/kg for inmate barracks,
0-7.0 mg/kg in morgues/'gas chambers',
1,000 to 13,000 mg/kg in delousing chambers).
The ventilation system in alleged 'gas chambers' is a relevant issue when considering overall cyanide exposure that is frequently undermined by Believers. Consider:
- The ventilation system for all delousing chambers at Auschwitz were at least 7 times more efficient than those present in any of the alleged 'gas chambers'.
- The 'gas chamber' in Krema II had a better ventilation system in the 'undressing room' than in the 'chamber'.
- The capabilities of the ventilation system in the 'chamber' were in-line with engineering standards for morgues at the time.
- These observations fit perfectly with descriptions on the original blueprint for Krema II which label the alleged 'gas chamber' as "L-keller", an abbreviation for "Leichenkeller", meaning "corpse cellar" or "morgue" in English -- not "gas chamber".
Mr. Terry claims these buildings, these 'gas chambers', were exposed to only a half-hour of cyanide gas per day. Believers are once again required to invent theories that shave off extra minutes for the 'extermination' process. They would have us believe the actual 'gassing' was complete in 10 minutes and ventilation took only 15-20 minutes. This is an unbelievable assertion.
For clarification and a considerably greater amount of available documentation, let's focus on Morgue I of Krema II:
A. Airflow
1) With optimal airflow, the ventilation system in Morgue I would have allowed a maximum 9.41 air exchanges per hour.
2) The ventilation intake is located only 2 meters away from one of the outlets on the same wall and is positioned unevenly between both outlets, one being 3.5 times as far as the other, creating a 'ventilation short circuit'.
3) Rudolf accounts for this impediment to airflow efficiency and calculates a maximum air exchange rate of approximately 5 per hour, assuming an empty chamber.
4) With immense over-crowding of tightly-packed victims during a 'gassing' process, the lower air-extraction orifices would have been highly obstructed; leading to a substantially lower air exchange rate.
5) This brings us to a generous estimate of no more than 2.5 air exchanges per hour.
B. Zyklon-B
In order to meet the requirements for a 10-minute 'gassing' process duration (which is an average of inconsistent 'eyewitness' claims ranging from "immediately" to "2 minutes" to "15 minutes"), sufficient quantities of Zyklon-B must be introduced into the 'chamber'. Since Zyklon-B pellets have released only 10% of their carrying capacity within the first 10 minutes of exposure to warm, dry air, a minimum of 20 kg of Zyklon-B would have been necessary in order to ensure the distribution of lethal quantities to all areas of the 'chamber' within the 10 minute timeframe.
Bringing it into perspective:
1) Zyklon-B deliveries to Auschwitz were consistent with the quantities shipped to other camps solely for delousing purposes.
2) J.C. Pressac attempts to justify this to favor the 'gas chamber' hypothesis with a claim that only 2-5% of the total deliveries were used for gassings.
3) This leaves roughly 0.8 to 2 kg of HCN available for each gassing which, only after the Zyklon-B pellets had fully outgassed, would have reached sufficiently lethal quantities. This process would have taken more than an hour.
4) Such a long gassing period is in stark contrast to the assertions made by principal witnesses such as Commandant Rudolf Hoess and SS Private Pery Broad, who claim gassing times of 3-15 minutes and a mere 4 minutes, respectively, in addition to the average claim of about 10 minutes for other witnesses.
5) If we conform to the times set out by these witnesses, the above-mentioned quantity of at least 20 kg of Zyklon-B would be required per gassing. This comes out to roughly 20 tons of Zyklon-B for all Auschwitz 'gassings', comprising at least 50% of the total quantities delivered between 1940-45 and a significant majority of the quantities received during crucial periods for delousing operations (1942-43).
C. HCN Exposure and Sample Data
It is completely unfounded in
any category of evidence, including testimony, that Zyklon-B pellets were removed from the alleged 'chamber' before completely outgassing. In fact, the testimony of Henryk Tauber, Miklos Nyiszli, Michal Kula and Filip Mueller state explicitly that pellets were only withdrawn after they had completely discharged. This means that not only would 20 kg of Zyklon-B be required to meet the 10-minute timeframe as alleged by 'eyewitnesses' but these pellets would continue releasing HCN for several hours, making it impossible to effectively ventilate the chamber nor diminish the formation of iron-cyanide compounds in the 'chamber' walls.
This is important for several reasons:
1) It would take at least 2 hours of ventilation for HCN concentrations to reduce to about 2 g/m³; safe enough to enter
with a gas mask.
2) There are numerous sources that claim 'chambers' were cleared
without the use of gas masks.
3) The humidity in this environment would have likely reached 100% and temperatures would have been rather high during the panicked, crowded conditions of the 'gassing' phase. After the 10-minute mark, once the victims were no longer producing body heat and ventilation was activated, the temperature would have gradually cooled. This would lead to even greater condensation and absolutely ideal conditions for the formation of Iron Blue.
4) No 'scrubbing' procedures, as outlined below, could have been performed during this period.
D. Hosing Down and Whitewashing
It doesn't get much more typical of Believer assertions than to say "they washed away the evidence". Not only would "hosing down" be an entirely futile task, as HCN is not water soluble, but this would actually aid formation of Iron Blue for any subsequent 'gassing' phases since an increase in moisture is highly beneficial to HCN ad/absorption.
Claims of "whitewashing" can be attributed to one unreliable 'eyewitness', Daniel Bennahmias, in his book that wasn't even published until 2003. He expects us to believe that after each and every 'gassing', Sonderkommandos climbed over thousands of dead Jews to quickly hose down and then paint the soaking wet walls. There is no evidence to substantiate this claim, whatsoever:
1) We should expect to find, according to the number of alleged 'gassings', at least 500-700 layers of paint on these walls.
2) There have been no reports of enormous paint orders to the camp.
3) Both Leuchter and Rudolf specifically addressed that there was no visible coating on any of the walls.
4) Rudolf's first sample is from the ceiling of Morgue 1, showing similar concentrations to the rest of the building.
5) Close-up photographs of the ceiling plainly show there is no coating present.
18. Eyewitnesses
Nick Terry said:
The above compiles various jabs at eyewitness testimony from Tommy1234, none of which add up to a coherent answer to the question of how, if all the witnesses are lying about the Holocaust, they all knew what to say and could come up with so many matching points of detail independently.
Look, it really doesn't matter how many supposedly absurd quotes you compile, until they reach a measurable percentage of the sum total of witnesses, who run into the 100s of 1000s for the whole of the Holocaust, then nobody is going to give a monkey's, because of your obviously fallacious hasty generalisations.
Why 100s of 1000s, because you deny mass shootings, and they were extra visible, so if you think they didn't happen then you're really, really screwed. If you need to deny the mass shootings, you're more or less accusing the entire population of Nazi occupied Eastern Europe of lying. Which really ought to bust most people's BS detectors - why not yours?
I don't even see a coherent analysis of the sum total of direct testimony on gassings, which amounts to well over 1,000 witnesses, of diverse backgrounds and taken down or recorded in diverse situations. It's pretty dubious to claim that they were 'mostly' Jewish when witnesses to gassing include all the staffs of the T4 institute, large numbers of SS men, Polish KZ inmates and villagers around the Reinhard camps, not to mention the political prisoners of diverse nationalities who saw gas chambers in Mauthausen or another camp in the Reich.
I see there are also various questions and attempts to shift burden of proof so let's just spam the following obvious works once more:
1. Jean-Claude Pressac, Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers (1989)
2. Robert Van Pelt, Expert Report for the Irving Trial (2000)
3. Christopher Browning, Expert Report for the Irving Trial (2000)
4. The Holocaust Controversies authored critique of revisionist arguments about the Aktion Reinhard camps of Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka (2011) linked in my sig and here including a discussion of archaeological research
and in particular, to refer Tommy1234 to Chapter 6 of the critique linked in my sig.
Mr. Terry just doesn't get it. We have evidently falsified statements of the most absurd variety. Millions of well-networked inmates were stationed together for slave labor, had shared barracks, frequently transited throughout numerous camps, participated in underground resistance movements, many were involved with Communism and other partisan affiliations. They had the means to make up lies, some of them did it, sometimes really big lies -- why is this so hard to comprehend?
Mass shootings did occur, particularly in the Russian campaign, but there is no evidence of an intent to systematically exterminate Jews around the world simply for being Jewish. Evidence of several hundred or even a few thousand members of Jewish groups with possible ties to partisan affairs is simply insubstantial in claiming a deliberate and unique 'extermination' policy.
I won't even dignify a reference to Pressac nor Van Pelt once more until you've further addressed the issue of implausible 'gas chambers' that these two Hoaxters have become so fond of dreaming up excuses for.
Chapter 6 of Mr. Terry's sig is yet another labyrinth he'd have us get lost in. Standing on the back of a "convergence of witnesses" that his case relies almost entirely upon, he can't seem to fathom any Jews having contemplated a plot for retribution against decade-long oppressors despite considerable evidence that demonstrates the means and motive for such action including a strong Jewish presence in the legal community, as well as political institutions and the propaganda industry, for one of the smallest, most tightly-woven and powerful minorities in the world. Nor can he fathom that the Soviets, possibly the biggest political liars of the last century, might have made contributions to defame the German nation.
There's really not much else I can say on this issue. Mr. Terry believes he's made his case for 'eyewitnesses' in referring to a set of long-demolished publications (with the exception of his Aktion Reinhard work released just last year that will soon endure the same fate) and expecting that somehow we'll interpret this useless spam as a cohesive argument.
What's your point, Mr. Terry? Where's your proof of 'extermination'? Is this really all you've got?
19. Torture
Nick Terry said:
More Argument by Quotation. The claims about Hoess have been shot down so many times they're not even funny anymore. Stick a fork in it, that one is well and truly done. But in the event that you want to try again, please identify all the SS men who testified to gas chambers at Auschwitz from 1945 to the 1990s, and explain case by case what evidence you have that they were tortured/coerced/bribed or whatever fanciful explanation you might have.
This is your job, no one else's, since you're the one claiming these SS men were all tortured/coerced/bribed/whatever. Be aware that people here have actually read history books and know how to locate information, so if you miss people out, we will spot this.
Cut me some slack, Mr. Terry. These men had no choice but to hope for a mitigated sentence that might save their life by conforming to the 'extermination' narrative. It certainly wasn't that they unanimously agreed with these allegations, as is often assumed by Believers. Most people don't realize there were a total of 313,213 affidavits from German military and political leaders submitted to Nuremberg, more than one-third coming from SS, declaring that they knew nothing of any 'extermination plan'.
It didn't matter.
This is what happened to Germans who didn't support the 'Holocaust' narrative:
Julius Streicher wasn't even a member of the military nor did he take part in planning the 'Holocaust'. He was hanged for statements such as these:
To this day I do not believe that 5 million were killed. I consider it technically impossible that that could have happened. I do not believe it. I have not received proof of that up until now.
Birkenau Commandant Josef Kramer was hanged, too:
I have heard of the allegations of former prisoners in Auschwitz referring to a gas chamber there, the mass executions and whippings, the cruelty of the guards employed and that all this took place either in my presence or with my knowledge. All I can say to all this is that it is untrue from beginning to end.
SS Ernst Kaltenbrunner was also hanged for his "denial":
Show me one of those men or any of those orders. It is utterly impossible.
...as was SS Hans Aumeier:
I know nothing about any gas chambers and no detainee was gassed during my tour of duty.
Alfred Rosenberg was hung, as well:
But that there was an order for the individual annihilation of the entire Jewry, I could not assume... it was not interpreted as an individual extermination, an individual annihilation of millions of Jews.
It gets even deeper:
- Auschwitz Commandant Richard Baer was the only defendant who did not appear at the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial in 1963. Though in perfect health, he died "in a highly mysterious way" while in prison before the trial had begun. This is of particular interest because a Paris newspaper had recorded his insistence that "during the whole time in which he governed Auschwitz, he never saw any gas chambers nor believed that such things existed," and from this statement nothing would dissuade him.
- Deputy Commandant Gustav Franz Wagner lived in Brazil after the war. After Simon Wiesenthal initiated a hunt for a man falsely identified as him, the real Wagner voluntarily handed himself over to the Brazil special police. Wagner reportedly told police “I never saw any gas chamber at Sobibor”. A year later Wagner allegedly committed suicide by stabbing himself to death in the bathroom of his rural home.
- There were also mysterious pre-trial "suicides" of Joseph Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler, Adolf Hitler, Odilo Globocnik and several others.
As over-cited as he may be, Rudolf Hoess probably deserved better than what he got:
Psychologically I was almost cut in pieces. They wanted to know all about everything, and this was also done by Jews. They left me in no doubt whatever as to the fate that was in store for me.
Whatever they did to him, it worked. He blamed himself for crimes he wasn't even aware of:
Since I was Commandant of the extermination camp Auschwitz I was totally responsible for everything that happened there, whether I knew about it or not. Most of the terrible and horrible things that took place there I learned only during this investigation and during the trial itself. I cannot describe how I was deceived, how my directives were twisted, and all the things they had carried out supposedly under my orders.
Oswald Pohl dealt with similar problems:
As result of the brutal physical mistreatment in Nenndorf and my treatment in Nuremberg, I was emotionally a completely broken man. I was 54 years old. For 33 years I had served by country without dishonor, and I was unconscious of any crime.
Pohl had to say about the general character of postwar trials against German leaders:
It was obvious during the Dachau trials, and it also came out unmistakably and only poorly disguised during the Nuremberg trials, that the prosecution authorities, among whom Jews predominated, were driven by blind hatred and obvious lust for revenge. Their goal was not the search for truth but rather the annihilation of as many adversaries as possible.
Both Pohl and Hoess were executed by hanging.
Once subsequently-tried German officials "got the picture", the only dependable option became acknowledging 'extermination' while denying involvement. This became the standard for SS confessions.
20. Gas Chambers and Forensic Evidence
Nick Terry said:
Tommy1234 said:
Did they find the 'gas chamber' at Sobibor yet?
With all those remains from Majdanek, there must have been an autopsy to reflect cyanide gassing. Can you refer me to one such report?
1) yes.
2) why 'must' there have been an uncremated body showing cyanide poisoning at Majdanek? The gas chambers at Majdanek used both CO as well as Zyklon, and were largely used in 1943, not inmediately prior to liberation, so there is therefore no reason to expect that any of the bodies found on-site at liberation would have been victims of cyanide poisoning. You fail, again.
1) No, they haven't, Mr. Terry. It's going to be very exciting to see what they pull out of the end of that "Road to Heaven". I have a feeling we won't be hearing about this any time soon.
2) You forgot one thing: those photographs were supposed to show mass graves of 'exterminated' Jews. Oops.
21. Mass Graves
Nick Terry said:
Quite a lot of fail here. Firstly, the Soviets produced 55,000 investigative reports including medico-legal reports in the course of their war crimes investigations. You complain about one report, whose standout characteristic is that it's about a crime which the Nazis uncovered and used against the Soviets. The same does not apply to the other 54,999 reports. You might have a tough time demonstrating that all 55,000 reports are frauds, especially as I doubt very much that you read Russian.
Secondly, your mention of Vinnitsa bumps the number of apparently satisfactorily investigated war crimes from one to... two. This leaves out every single Bolshevik atrocity in the Russian Civil War, all actions in the Great Terror other than Vinnitsa, the entire GULag system, and pretty much every other mass atrocity in the 20th Century through to the Bosnian War. If the necessary standard of evidence is that any violent death must be documented forensically by an international investigation, then no one would ever be allowed to say anything about any atrocity other than Katyn, Vinnitsa and Srebrenica. Except I gather there are also various morons who deny Katyn was a Soviet crime and other ideologically motivated idiots who delight in denying Srebrenica, so presumably we have to listen to them just like we have to listen to you, and thus we can't say anything at all about any atrocity, full stop!
This is what is known as throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
The simpler route is to note that a) the Soviets and Poles investigated all the sites, b) there was evidence in the possession of the western Allies which was independent of the Soviets and Poles about the same sites and c) the same Soviet and Polish investigations of the 1940s allow people to relocate the graves today, as has happened extensively in the past 6-7 years due to the Yahad in Unum archaeological initiative.
If Soviet evidence is so unreliable, how is it possible that historians of the Soviet Union can write history at all, since 95%+ of their evidence must come from ultimately Soviet sources? I doubt you much care that in denying the Holocaust this way, you also take out 70 years of much-studied history, but that's effectively what you're doing.
Anyone can write history, Mr. Terry. Whether or not they write it objectively or with preconceived determinations in mind is subject to the individual. While I don't doubt Soviet historians have put out a lot of very accurate records, I find your dismissal of a well-developed mini-hoax to defame Germany amidst a debate questioning the impartiality of contemporary Soviet documents to be, at the very least, worthy of ridicule.
Katyn is significant, whatever way you spin it, and it damns the Holohoax straight to hell. Get used to it.
You've simply grazed over the topic of Srebrenica and the fact that it is only the
second-worst genocide of the last century. What about #1? Srebrenica has been excavated by an international committee that has, thus far, exhumed more than 7,000 bodies for a proper burial and DNA-tested each and every one of them using nothing but bone fragments. We won't be seeing that any time soon with the 'Holocaust'. Only Believers are allowed anywhere near the alleged 'mass grave' sites. Memorials are sometimes built right on top of the sites to provide an excuse for why this deep, dark secret can never be uncovered.
The repeated "convergence" claims just don't hold water when held up to the overwhelming mass of suspicious, deceitful and downright fraudulent actions made by the Allies in cooperation with Polish resistance and Jewish inmates. It's time to show some real evidence, Mr. Terry. No more bottomless pits of useless narrative.
22. Witnesses and Mass Graves
Nick Terry said:
More missing the point. If witnesses report cremations and sites are found with evidence of cremains and large emptied pits with smaller ash pits, then the witness testimonies are corroborated. You cannot then just throw out the witness statements and make up a fanciful, unsourced coulda-woulda-shoulda explanation just because you like it. As for the rest, the usual appeals to perfection and downright laziness earn you nil points.
I can only presume that your example refers to Chelmno. If this is the case, there's a lot more to consider than claims of "corroboration". Corroboration is void if illegitimate.
What do the critics have to say about Chelmno?
- There are a number of documents and records that support Chelmno as a transit camp for deportation to Eastern territories.
- No documentary nor material trace for the use of 'gas vans' exists for this camp.
- The camp’s claimed death toll is not based on any documentation. It was set to 1,300,000 by the Commission of Inquiry into the German Crimes in Poland and has since been reduced to 152,000.
- The overall incompetency of these investigative teams is well-marked.
- The investigations, themselves, produced no evidence of mass cremation in anything close to the numbers alleged. Drill core samples were taken in dubious places; there is adequate suspicion to whether they were even collected from the alleged cremation pits. In either case, they showed only negligible proportions of human bone fragments and ash. This is evidence of cremation, not genocide.
Seemingly innumerable other discrepancies with all aspects of claims about Chelmno as a "death camp" simply do not hold up to scrutiny.
Back to my main point:
I've heard the "corroboration" argument made by theists as evidence for the legitimacy of the New Testament of the Bible, as well, observing that it had been "corroborated" with events that were addressed in the Old Testament (what a miracle!). The real question, obviously, is whether or not the authors/gospels who contributed to the New Testament had any knowledge of the Old Testament when transcribing their holy scripture. If not, they could be telling the truth. However, human beings often tell lies -- some more frequently than others. Claims of a particularly extraordinary nature must be testable; if they are not, they cannot be readily believed.
I am willing to buy into your claims of "corroboration", "convergence", "confirmation" and any other fancy "c-words" you can think of, Mr. Terry, but I'm going to need you to produce some assertions that can be tested.
Are you up for the challenge?
23. Property of Victims
Nick Terry said:
Again, more missing the point (made by TSR). The same witnesses who report gassings and selections also report property plunder. Property plunder is documented and confirmed with physical evidence. Ergo the witnesses are corroborated on one point in their testimonies. The more they are corroborated on different parts of their testimonies, the more reliable they are as a whole. You cannot actually just cherrypick the bits you really hate and ignore the rest of the testimonies.
Lies are more successful when you include as much truth as possible, Mr. Terry. To address your comment, hypothetically speaking, if a set of witnesses talks about bunny rabbits that were allegedly present in large numbers throughout Auschwitz and then also claims to have witnessed winged unicorns; a large number of bunnies actually being present doesn't make winged unicorns any more likely a reality. People lie; facts don't.
I haven't disputed property plunder, only the 'gassing' claims that have been attached to them. See my above response to TSR.
24. Gish Gallop
Nick Terry said:
I saved this to nearly last because it was such a textbook example of Gish Galloping.
Firstly, the mainstream hasn't been especially bothered by the nonsense arguments of deniers. The few that seemed more serious were refuted long ago, like Leuchter's drivel. Your belief that there is an overwhelming lack of documentation just provokes laughter among people familiar with the mainstream historiography.
Secondly, your Gish Galloping contains several bare assertions. None of your spam quotes prove 'political influence at Nuremburg (sic) shaping the narrative' in the slightest. You may of course have a slight problem in not having digested the full contents of the Nuremberg trial and not evidently having noticed the lengthy sections on
- forced labour
- concentration camps
- ill-treatment and killing of POWs
- ill-treatment and killing of civilians in all occupied territories
in addition to the treatment of the persecution of the Jews at the trial.
I don't want to fry your brain too much, but there is a consensus among recent historians of Nuremberg which is almost exactly the opposite of your apparent view. That is, the Holocaust was not given as much prominence as we might expect today, and was merged into other Nazi crimes because all the prosecutors shared universalist values, either as liberal democracies or as communists, and found Nazi antisemitism too difficult to understand.
Finally, your 'anomalies' betray a hopeless ignorance of the concentration camp system and how it created apartheid conditions between different types of prisoners. Jews weren't allowed into the brothels set up for the benefit of the non-Jewish kapos and functionaries. Jews never received camp scrip for the 'canteen' which never actually had anything worth buying anyway according to Polish survivors. I recall one memoir mentioning something about snails being on sale in one camp canteen at one point.
Jews generally wrote one postcard to deceive their relatives before being killed, a small number were allowed to write postcards to keep the deception up, except it becomes a problem when as happened, the Slovak Jewish community stopped receiving any postcards from Majdanek in the summer of 1943, not long before all surviving Slovak Jews (down to less than 900 vs 40,000 deported to the Lublin district in spring 1942) were murdered in Aktion 'Erntefest'. So that one blew up in your face entirely.
There would be no purpose for having death-sentenced inmates send a pre-execution letter to their family. Why the postponement of relatives finding out about their family member's murder? Would they not have found out, anyway? If the Germans are trying to hide their guilt for the disappearance of these persons, why establish a point of contact at the very place they were to be killed?
"Aktion 'Erntefest'" has not been substantiated by any proof. It is yet another behemoth of Holocaustianity running solely on testimony. From Jurgen Graf:
1) Not a single German war time document exists with reference to such a blood bath. The only circumstantial evidence are witness testimonies, the one which SS-Oberscharführers Erich Mussfeldt gave in great detail while in Polish imprisonment.
2) Mattogno dissects Mussfeldt’s testimony sentence by sentence and shows many contradictions and inconsistencies. He believes that Mussfeldt’s statements may have been forced through torture by the Polish while in prison.
3) The Generalgouvernement (Poland) was actually administered by Hans Frank, who was responsible directly to Hitler. He was independent from Himmler. However, the higher SS- and Police officers Krüger and Sporrenberg, who were allegedly instructed by Himmler to liquidate the Jews in the Lublin district, were also under Frank as far as police actions were concerned. Frank’s 10,000 page diary does not contain a single direct or hidden clue about such a momentous event.
4) Mussfeldt testified that he was present during the alleged mass shootings and that he supervised the cremation of the dead bodies. According to him the trenches, which served for both the shootings and cremations, were dug in zigzags. Mattogno believes, that this is nonsense. If there were any such trenches, they would have been straight.
5) As described by Mussfeldt, the butchery could never have been committed in the specified time. A willing cooperation by the doomed victims would have been necessary; they would have desperately fought back, and many would have tried to escape.
6) The massacre would have been in front of countless spectators, the execution area was easily observable from the village Dzesiata close by.
7) These witnesses would undoubtedly immediately have reported about these bloody events, and the Polish underground would have known within days about this slaughter, which they did only briefly and secondary much later.
8. The Germans would not have released on November 17 300 inmates from Majdanek They would have been witnesses for such mass crimes.
9) The cremations of 17,000 to 18,400 corpses could not have been completed, not even close, during the alleged time available.
10) There is no indication about the supply of the required quantity of wood necessary for the cremation of such number of bodies in Majdanek.
11) The horror spectacle of such a cremation would have been journalistically reported at that time, which was not the case.
12) A mass liquidation of workers, who were extremely important for the war industries at that time, is completely illogic, it makes no sense.
Furthermore at that time German Documents emphazised the necessity to keep forced laborers healthy with sufficient food and clothes.
13) After the alleged blood bath the number of the Jewish forced laborers was not suddenly reduced, but increased. This was even confirmed by Holo-Hagiographist Raul Hilberg.
14) An involuntary proof against the questionable horror reports was supplied by the Polish exile news paper “Dziennik Polski” of Nov. 20, 1943, in which they reported a ‘transfer of 25,000 Jews from Majdanek to Krakow’.
On to your next point:
A "belief", that there is an overwhelming lack of documentary 'extermination' proof, has not been refuted by anyone. If you've got reliable documentary proof, show it.
I notice you have yet again referred me to some 'required reading', Mr. Terry. I'll ask you, once again, to share evidence from these procedures or anywhere else that proves 'mass extermination'. I'm not interested in persistent library referrals.
25. What Actually Happened
Nick Terry said:
Tommy1234 said:
1) Mass deportations postponed until after the war, slave labor camps, "show trials" against the defeated.
2) Propaganda, corrupt institutions, angry people.
Simple as that.
the only appropriate response is our old friend:
Our old friend should really get a kick out of these last-minute testimonial favorites:
*****************************************************
- Yankel Wiernik claims he witnessed a naked Jewish girl jump a 3 meter (9 ft.) fence before wrenching a gun out of the hands of a guard and shooting him and two other guards to death before being overpowered.
- Dr. Charles Bendel testified in March 1946 that 1000 Jews were killed with Zyklon-B in a room measuring 10 meters long by 4 meters wide by 1.6 meters high. When asked how 10 people could possibly fit into a space of half a cubic meter, he answered: "with German technique".
- Filip Mueller describes his experience inside of a gas chamber where he was forced to undress recently gassed corpses. He claims to have found some cake and a piece of cheese in the pocket of one of the gassed victims and quickly devoured this cyanide-saturated meal.
- Stephanie Seltzer, president of the World Federation of the Jewish Child Survivors of the Holocaust, claims to have seen Jewish males in Warsaw "executed after being forced to expose themselves to German police who were looking for circumcised men."
- Auschwitz inmate Regina Bialek tells her tale of a close-call gas chamber experience: "I was made to undress and taken by lorry to a gas chamber. There were seven gas chambers at Auschwitz. This particular one was underground and the lorry was able to run down the slope and straight into the chamber. Here we were tipped unceremoniously on the floor. The room was about 12 yards square and small lights on the wall dimly illuminated it. When the room was full a hissing sound was heard coming from the centre point on the floor and gas came into the room. After what seemed about ten minutes some of the victims began to bite their hands and foam at the mouth, and blood issued from their ears, eyes and mouth, and their faces went blue. I suffered from all these symptoms, together with a tight feeling at the throat. I was half conscious when my number was called out by Dr. Mengele and I was led from the chamber. I attribute my escape to the fact that the daughter of a friend of mine who was an Aryan and a doctor at Auschwitz had seen me being transported to the chamber and had told her mother, who immediately appealed to Dr. Mengele."
- Ada Bimko (now known as Hadassah Rosensaft of the Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington DC) testified that an SS officer gave her a tour of Auschwitz and showed her huge cylinders of lethal gas in a room above the gas chamber.
- Herman and Roma Rosenblat received international acclaim for their touching story of meeting one another as children at a sub-camp of Buchenwald where Herman was imprisoned. Each day, Herman would meet Roma at the prison fence and, from outside the fence, Roma would throw Herman an apple. This continued for several months. Years later, after the war, they were unexpectedly reunited in a blind-date! Their touching story got them an appearance on Oprah on two occasions and made newspaper headlines around the world. This was later confirmed by national media to be a total fabrication. On an exclusive ABC News Special Report featuring a story on the Rosenblat hoax, Herman tried to explain himself: "Yes, it's not true. But, in my imagination, it was true."
- Morris Hubert claims to have witnessed, at Buchenwald: "In the camp there was a cage with a bear and an eagle. Every day, they would throw a Jew in there. The bear would tear him apart and the eagle would pick at his bones."
- Elie Wiesel, in his published work, tells of one account in Babi Yar, Ukraine: "Later, I learned from a witness that for months after the massacre, the ground did not stop trembling and that from time to time, geysers of blood spurted up out of the earth.".
- Former Buchenwald inmate Kurt Glass tells of Nazi wife, Ilse Koch: "She got the idea she would like lamp shades made of human skin, and one day on the Appelplatz we were all ordered to strip to the waist. The ones who had interesting tattoos were brought to her, and she picked out the ones she liked. Those people were killed and their skin was made into lampshades for her. She also used mummified human thumbs as light switches in her house."
- Eugene Kogon describes the sadistic creativity of the Nazis: "Prisoners would be forced to climb a tree and others would have to cut it down. The prisoners would fall together with the tree and be killed."
- A member of the SS, Paul Ludwig Gottlief Waldmann, testifies to an even more creative killing process at Sachsenhausen involving a pedal-driven brain bashing machine and a really loud radio: "One room was reserved for undressing and another for waiting: in one of them a radio played rather loudly. It was done purposely so that the prisoners could not guess that death awaited them. [...] The prisoner, as before, was placed against the wall: an iron plate was then slowly lowered onto his head. The prisoner was under the impression that he was being measured for height. The iron plate contained a ramrod which shot out suddenly and poleaxed the prisoner with a blow on the back of the head. He dropped dead. The iron plate was operated by a foot lever in a corner of the room."
- Former Auschwitz inmate Marie Claude Vaillant-Couturier testifies under oath about a special automatic spanking machine the Nazis used as punishment for naughty Jews: "One of the most usual punishments was 50 blows with a stick on the loins. They were administered with a machine which I saw, a swinging apparatus manipulated by an SS."
*****************************************************
Oy vey...
