General Holocaust Denial Discussion Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Border Reiver said:
In other words, even if his Standartenfurher excused him from "ramp duty" to make sandwiches everytime the trains or trucks rolled up during his tour of duty he would likely be convicted of being an accessory - unless he could convince people that with all that going on around him that he was completely unware of the offences and that his peers never discussed it in his presence - because it would not be reasonable to conclude that a person in a guard company was unaware of what his company was doing.
Click to expand...
That's just certifiably insane. My Lai was committed by a number of soldiers, only one was ever convicted and didn't see much of his "sentence". Do you think they even bothered with whoever cooked for them, even if the cook knew what had gone on that day but kept quiet?
 
Simon666 said:
Not really. Maybe 1 million out of 6 million people, essentially most by Auschwitz.


I don't know. Haven't seen anything from him on that.
Click to expand...



It's somewhat unlikely that someone who says there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz is then going to say "but the gas chambers at the Aktion Reinhard camps all existed". So, therefore, he's denying about 1/3 to 1/2 (or more) of the Holocaust.
 
Liam said:
It's somewhat unlikely that someone who says there were no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz is then going to say "but the gas chambers at the Aktion Reinhard camps all existed". So, therefore, he's denying about 1/3 to 1/2 (or more) of the Holocaust.
Click to expand...
If he wanted to remain whatever credibility he had, he would not have made any claims into what he did not investigate. I am not aware of David Cole ever investigating Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor. There is also nothing left to investigate, there are no gas chambers left intact nor damaged at those camps.
 
Simon666 said:
If he wanted to remain whatever credibility he had, he would not have made any claims into what he did not investigate. I am not aware of David Cole ever investigating Treblinka, Belzec and Sobibor. There is also nothing left to investigate, there are no gas chambers left intact nor damaged at those camps.
Click to expand...
If he wanted to retain any credibility he would have investigated these camps.
 
Simon666 said:
As mentioned, there is pretty much nothing left to investigate.
Click to expand...
On the ground, as regards physical remains of gas chambers, if you say so. But is there no archaeological evidence of mass death there? Or no written or oral sources of information worth investigating?
 
They don't allow just about anyone to do any archaeological investigations. And with regards to oral sources, very few people survived those three camps. Documentation is also virtually non existent, contrary to e.g. Auschwitz for which blueprints and other documentation exist.
 
Craig B said:
On the ground, as regards physical remains of gas chambers, if you say so. But is there no archaeological evidence of mass death there? Or no written or oral sources of information worth investigating?
Click to expand...

In Treblinka, there's plenty of fertile ground for misapplication or misinterpretation of ground-penetrating radar studies. You can find them at the usual suspect sites. :D
 
Maybe if they allowed people to actually dig, there would be no need for misapplication or misinterpretation. :rolleyes:
 
Simon666 said:
Maybe if they allowed people to actually dig, there would be no need for misapplication or misinterpretation. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Why disturb a grave?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16657363:
At Treblinka it is clear that the ash contains many bones. Bone fragments can still be seen on the surface of the ground, especially after rain.

Considerable evidence also exists to suggest that not all of the bodies were exhumed and cremated. Photographs show bodies littering the landscape as late as the early 1960s.
Click to expand...
 
Muc said:
To make it short, [..] It's quite clear that Streicher's defence strategy was that he didn't know anything about the mass killings during the war - and, so he says, wouldn't have believed it if someone would have told him back then - but only learned about them afterwards. However, he clearly stated that he would now believe that millions of jews were killed on Hitler's orders - so what's the point in trying to create the impression that Streicher denied that the Holocaust happened? He didn't. He just decided to draw a line at 4 or 4.5 million for some reason - however he came to that conclusion.

I also don't see the point in concentrating on what a person says that was apparently never involved in the inner or even the outer circle of what they called the "final solution"? [...]
Click to expand...

You have certainly shown that Streicher believed in mass killings of Jews after the war, though his reasons for so believing were spurious. So I stand corrected in my original contention that Streicher used holocaust denial in his defense (a question raised by Ranb) - he only foreshadowed one aspect of the denial arguments by doubting whether it was technically possible.
 
ddt said:
Why disturb a grave?
Click to expand...
Because jews generally speaking find being buried in Israel a bit better than being buried in a Nazi place on a heap of other people?

ddt said:
Photographs show bodies littering the landscape as late as the early 1960s.
Click to expand...
What can I say? Oh wait: pics or it doesn't exist.

And Caroline Sturdy Colls has been working there since 2010. What does she have to show for it so far? A child’s Mickey Mouse pin and some other trinkets?
 
SpitfireIX said:
Streicher was a propaganda publisher, a relatively minor Nazi official, and a rabid anti-Semite, whose newspaper, Der Stürmer, regularly called for the extermination of "the Jewish race." Further:

IQ scores of Nuremberg defendants, as determined by the IMT (source):

Hjalmar Schacht|143
Arthur Seyss-Inquart|141
Karl Dönitz|138
Hermann Göring|138
Fritz von Papen|134
Erich Raeder|134
Hans Frank|130
Hans Fritzsche|130
Baldur von Schirach|130
Wilhelm Keitel|129
Joachim von Ribbentrop|129
Albert Speer|128
Alfred Jodl|127
Alfred Rosenberg|127
Wilhelm Frick|124
Walther Funk|124
Konstantin von Neurath|123
Rudolf Hess|120
Fritz Sauckel|118
Ernst Kaltenbrunner|113
Julius Streicher | 106


So please explain why Streicher's opinion matters, especially in light of the fact that his newspaper had repeatedly called for the extermination that he later claimed he couldn't believe was possible.
Click to expand...

The original point was whether anyone had used "holocaust denial" in their defense. I concede that this was not the case with Julius Streicher, who only brought up one element of the denial case, namely technical possibility, and that in passing. I note that he had above average IQ. Incidentally, Streicher claimed only to be countering the advocacy of extermination of the Germans by an American writer.

SpitfireIX said:
Manstein demonstrably lied about his role in Nazi war crimes; why should his opinion about the feasibility of the Holocaust be considered credible?
Click to expand...

Interesting. I gather that a good deal of effort has been put into discrediting the Manstein trial. What is the evidence of his having lied?


SpitfireIX said:
Which simply goes to show how weak those arguments are; your so-called "technical arguments from physical impossibility" are nothing more than arguments from incredulity and ignorance.
Click to expand...

The deniers have put considerable evidence into removing their ignorance. Certainly they end up incredulous, but that is hardly the starting point of their arguments, which in this case draw conclusions from discrepancies between eye-witness testimony and the functioning of the equipment alleged to have been used.
 
Simon666 said:
Because jews generally speaking find being buried in Israel a bit better than being buried in a Nazi place on a heap of other people?
Click to expand...
You're saying that the remains of Jewish victims have been exhumed and reburied in Israel?
 
ddt said:
The article is only evidence for Jews wanting to be buried in Israel; not for exhumating and reburial.
Click to expand...
Is it that far fetched? Do a quick google search, for the love of Dog.

DO YOU OR YOUR LOVED ONES WANT TO BE BURIED IN ISRAEL?

Achuzat Kever, established in 2002, helps Jewish families, worldwide, bring their loved ones to their final resting place in Israel. We also arrange exhumations anywhere in the world for the purpose of transferring the mortal remains to Israel.
http://www.israelburials.com/​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom