9/11-investigator explains the Holocaust

[9/11-investigator]

By the way, it occurs to me that van Pelt has published at least one book on the Holocaust since 1999. See:

http://www.amazon.com/Holocaust-His...5245/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1294508902&sr=8-6

Just because Faurisson declares something it rarely makes it true.

How does this relate to the 99% remark made by van Pelt?

 

[Wroclaw]

In 1 minute I find 3 cases. They are not the only ones.

All of your "sources" are anti-Semites. How about Le Monde or Le Figaro? You won't find "Jewish thugs" reported in either. Know why? Because it's never been proved, beyond Faurisson's allegation. For all we know, he had himself beaten up for publicity's sake. I bet he did.

Cannot remember that Bozo the clown was forced to recant statements of global importance. Or that Galileo or Newton were 'laughed at'. Where did you read that? In that Talmud of yours?

Why is it that all you people are experts on the Talmud?

How does this relate to the 99% remark made by van Pelt?

It would be helpful if you put the quote in context. He said that most of what we know is currently (but not in the past) lacking physical evidence. Then he said this:

I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future - remembering the Holocaust - will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there - to demand that we have more material evidence - is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.

But no, you'd rather be spoon-fed your "facts" by Jew-hating simians.

 

[9/11-investigator]

Do we have a treat for you!

Faurisson's classic from 1986 about the gas chambers, now in English, for the first time in 25 years!

At 1:25 he says:

In 1960 we had the surprising news that there never had been gassings in the Old Reich. But we had 'eyewitnesses' for gassings in Oranienburg, Dachau, Ravensbrueck!

So, what does that say about the value of 'eyewitnesses' of gassings in the Polish camps?

Answer: the value of these eyewitnesses is null and void.

 

[Wroclaw]

I am completely uninterested in what Faurisson had to say 24 yrs ago. He has been definitively answered by Pressac.

 

[TSR]

Yawn. Our self-professed Talmud reader (and I believe that he did read the Talmud and owns Bibles and Quran's)

.
You misspelled "Has read *some* of one edition of the Talmud, but has read zir several copies of the Bible and the Qu'ran cover to cover, the former several times and two and three translations at a time to compare them."

HTH HAND
.

pretends that he does not know that in case of Judaism faith and ethnicity can go hand in hand.

.
Never even suggested this because ... here, let me type it slow for you:

I
d o
n o t
b e l i e v e
t h a t
J u d a i s m
i s
a n
" e t h n i c i t y "
i n
t h e
w a y
y o u
u s e
t h a t
t e r m.

Judaism is a religion, and *they* have rules (the only rules that matter) about the "inheritablility" of being Jewish. This, however, does not mean that some whom Jewish law might consider Jewish consider *themselves* not to be Jewish, which is, at the end of the day, the only consideration which matters.
.

And if a Jew is being raised 'catholic' (the so-called Marano phenomenon,
deception really)

.
First, it's "Marranos"

Second it applies exclusively (well, to anyone but but an ignorant racists that can't even spell it correctly) to Jews in Spain and Portugal who were forced to nominally convert in order to avoid expulsion or worse. I suppose they were all Bolsheviks, too?
.

one remains jewish. Fabius is jewish. Sarko is jewish. They both act jewish.

.
Do tell us: what is "acting Jewish?" Be very very careful in your answer. It's *going* to come back and bite you, but you can minimize the damage.
.

If I were to convert to Islam, TSR wants us to believe that I stop being ethnocally Dutch, what of course is rubbish.

.
Well, since there is no word like "ethnocally," I'd have to say, your statement is rubbish (but then, they mostly are.)

Assuming you meant "ethnically," I'd *still* say your statement is rubbish, since you would still share a common ancestry -- altho I dare say that your fellow Dutch would rather forget that.
.

In 1 minute I find 3 cases. They are not the only ones.

one two three

.
Once again, we see 9/11's (congenital) inability to read zir own sources.
The first two describe ***THE SAME ATTACK*** and the third describes an *attempt* not the beating you claimed.

And *none* of them offer more than bald assertion that it was "Jewish thugs" doing the attacking.

You're really getting tedious, you know?
.

The president of France? Power? Influence? Ridiculous. Not more than an average garbage man.

.
And quite a bit less than the Parliament, which it it is noted you couldn't even be bothered to look up, after being given the key phrases for which to look.
.

Cannot remember that Bozo the clown was forced to recant statements of global importance. Or that Galileo or Newton were 'laughed at'. Where did you read that? In that Talmud of yours?

.
Nor has Faurisson made any statement of "global importance." Still can't bring yourself to look up the quote I offered about him being an idiot, can you?

And since you are to the bone ignorant of history, it's not to be unexpected that you also don't understand English idiom. In this context, laughed at is being used in two ways, in order to point out the idiocy of trying to invoke Galileo or Newton in support of an idiotic premise. Doing so is a form of the "Appeal to Invalid Authority" fallacy. If for example, I said the sky was normally hot pink, and after being pointed and laughed at, and responding "Yeah, well, Galileo was persecuted, too" this does not mean my statement would be any less idiotic.

Faurisson "is not able to understand complex technical or scientific problems."
.

No kidding! I obviously meant the person who most prominently defends the h-word on a technical level. That is no doubt van Pelt. So if he says things like this 99% quote, then the holocaust industry definitely is facing bankruptcy, would you not gree?

.
No, because I disagree that this was "obvious," nor that he is "the person who most prominently defends the h-word on a technical level."

And since your quote is misleading in that it does not include the context
I do not "gree" or even agree.
.

I did post the quote a few posts ago, you must have missed it. You must have gotten tired.

.
Didn't ask for the quote, asked for the citation, which you don't have because you haven't been spoon fed it by your deniers buddies (yet) and have never even read the book.

Do I need to explain the concept of "citation" to you?


ETA: d*mmit, Wroclaw, I was keep going to leave zie dangling in the wind for a while longer before I dropped the VP bomb on zie
.

 

[Wroclaw]

Faurisson says no text on extermination exists. He lies. Here's Adolf Hitler, speaking on the floor of the Reichstag, January 30, 1939:

Wenn es dem internationalen Finanzjudentum in und außerhalb Europas gelingen sollte, die Völker noch einmal in einen Weltkrieg zu stürzen, dann wird das Ergebnis nicht der Sieg des Judentums sein, sondern die Vernichtung der jüdischen Rasse in Europa!

He referred back to this speech several times during the war, most notably three years later:

Wir sind uns im klaren, daß dieser Krieg ja nur damit enden könnte, daß entweder die germanischen Völker ausgerottet werden, oder das Judentum aus Europa verschwindet. Ich habe am 1. September 1939 [sic] im Deutschen Reichstag es schon ausgesprochen. . . daß dieser Krieg nicht so ausgehen wird, wie die Juden sich es vorstellen, nämlich daß die europäischen arischen Völker ausgerottet werden, sondern daß das Ergebnis dieses Krieges die Vernichtung des Judentums ist. Zum erstenmal werden nicht andere allein verbluten, sondern zum erstenmal wird diesesmal das echt altjüdische Gesetz angewendet: Aug' um Aug', Zahn um Zahn!

Sorry, but no texts on extermination?

 

[9/11-investigator]

Faurisson says no text on extermination exists. He lies.

No, you lie. Faurisson refers to the non-existence of any internal German document that clearly shows that Germans were busy exterminating Jews. This was already established during the Toronto trial where Hilberg was forced to admit that no extermination documentation existed. The statements you refer to are merely threats made in public, not internal orders. That would really count.

We have discussed the rest before, not going to repate this debate.

 

[9/11-investigator]

I am completely uninterested in what Faurisson had to say 24 yrs ago. He has been definitively answered by Pressac.

Of course you are not interested if you are unable to counter his arguments!

Forget Faurisson, and let me ask you directly:

Do you deny that testimonies regarding gassings in Dachau, Orienburg, Ravensbrueck exist?

 

[TSR]

Of course you are not interested if you are unable to counter his arguments!

.
You mean, kinda like your refusal to supply anything but bald assertion that the Talmud suggests a deep-rooted Jewish racism?

No, wait, it's nothing like that, because you have been offered citations to actual scholarly works which refute both, and you steadfastly refuse to consult either.

Which means you're just p*ssing in the wind, again.
.

Forget Faurisson,

.
Yeah, let's "forget" that Faurisson " is not able to understand complex technical or scientific problems" since that topic has become inconvenient.

and let me ask you directly:

.
Hypocrite much? When was the last time you answered a direct question without referring what some *other* hater has said?
.

Do you deny that testimonies regarding gassings in Dachau, Orienburg, Ravensbrueck exist?

.
Well since the last two don't exist, oh noble seeker of truth, yes, I deny those.

And since there are no *eyewitness* testimonies about gassing at Dachau, I guess I'm going to have to call that one a lie as well.

Now, let *me* ask *you a direct question: What was the purpose of the showerheads in the fifth chamber at Dachau?

Has someone told you what to say about the military value of the Annex yet?
.

 

[Wroclaw]

Do you deny that testimonies regarding gassings in Dachau, Orienburg, Ravensbrueck exist?[/B]

Only Oranienburg.

Which is fine, because there was a gas chamber at Dachau, as well as one at Ravensbrück.

No gas chamber at Oranienburg.

No testimony about one either.

Unless you can point me to some...

 

[9/11-investigator]

Only Oranienburg.

Which is fine, because there was a gas chamber at Dachau, as well as one at Ravensbrück.

No gas chamber at Oranienburg.

No testimony about one either.

Unless you can point me to some...

Excellent, let's forget Oranienburg for a moment and turn attention towards Dachau.

http://www.mailstar.net/holocaust-debate10.html

Remark: This sudden and unexplained concession is significant. At the Nuremberg trial the only homicidal gas chamber that the accusation ventured to show in a film had been that of Dachau, and the testimonies telling of alleged homicidal gassings in the three above-mentioned camps had been numerous. M. Broszat thus implicitly acknowledged that those testimonies were false.

Do you deny that there were testimonies of homicidal gassings in Dachau at the Nuremberg trial?

It would be interesting to know the names of these 'witnesses' and find out who ordered them to provide false testimony.

Would you be surprised if Nuremberg officials (70% Jewish) had set up these testimonies?

I would not be, that's for certain.

 

[9/11-investigator]

Here we have it:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/01-11-46.asp

Just google on "inurl:avalon dachau gas"

Statement by Franz Blaha (not Blabla):

and, as I learned from the people who came from Mauthausen to Dachau, they were liquidated in gas chambers...

12. Many executions by gas or shooting or injections took place right in the camp [911I: Dachau]. The gas chamber was completed in 1944, and I was called by Dr. Rascher to examine the first victims. Of the eight or nine persons in the chamber there were three still alive, and the remainder appeared to be dead. Their eyes were red, and their faces were swollen. Many prisoners were later killed in this way.

A little googling tells is that Franz Blaha was jewish.

No further questions your honor.

Nobody these days maintains that people were gassed in Dachau, despite what this lying Jew told the 'court'.

It is interesting that the interrogation was lead by Dodd. This is what he had to say:

"You know how I have despised anti-Semitism. You know how strongly I feel toward those who preach intolerance of any kind. With that knowledge -- you will understand when I tell you that this staff is about seventy-five percent Jewish. Now my point is that the Jews should stay away from this trial -- for their own sake.

"For -- mark this well -- the charge 'a war for the Jews' is still being made and in the post-war years it will be made again and again.

"The too large percentage of Jewish men and women here will be cited as proof of this charge. Sometimes it seems that the Jews will never learn about these things. They seem intent on bringing new difficulties down on their own heads. I do not like to write about this matter --it is distasteful to me -- but I am disturbed about it. They are pushing and crowding and competing with each other and with everyone else."

Thomas Dodd, here hilariously photographed with a shrunken head, already felt bad about the trial. It was a jewish show trial, a jewish lynch party.

 

[TSR]

Nobody these days maintains that people were gassed in Dachau, despite what this lying Jew told the 'court'.

.
If you could read for comprehension, you would see that Blaha was reporting what he had been *told*. Do you have any evidence other than your bigotry that this is not what he was told?




No?





Looks like the liar here is once again *you*.


And while it is likely (but not certain, you are wrong about "no one" saying there were gassings there) that the homicidal gaschamber at Dachau may not have been used for that purpose, there is no doubt that it was designed for that purpose -- you've ducked the question before, but why else would there have been fake showerheads?

And while the gassings may not have taken place on the grounds of Dachau, how do you explain the transports of perfectly healthy inmates to Hartheim Castle which then came back empty? How do you explain away Rascher having told Cpt. Best

the greatest trouble had been taken to design a gas chamber so camouflaged that its purpose would not be apparent, and to regulate the flow of the lethal gas so that the patients might fall asleep without recognizing that they would never wake.

You see what I've done there? It's called "citation," and allows you to double check that what I said is really what is on that page.

Just sayin'


And what's that? You don't recognize any of those names?


That's because of your oft-demonstrated to the bone ignorance of the history you so pathetically try to deny.
.

It is interesting that the interrogation was lead by Dodd. This is what he had to say:

Thomas Dodd, here hilariously photographed with a shrunken head,

.
"Hilariously?" Your sense of humour is only slightly less twisted than your sense of morality.
.

already felt bad about the trial.

.
No, that's not what he is saying. His concern was that the number of Jewish people involved would give racist *ssholes like Irving the opportunity to make the kind of accusations you have.


You've run from it before: name *one* verdict with which you disagree, and give your reasons, with evidence.
.

It was a jewish show trial, a jewish lynch party.

.
Which is, of course, why there were acquittals.
.

 

[9/11-investigator]

.
If you could read for comprehension, you would see that Blaha was reporting what he had been *told*. Do you have any evidence other than your bigotry that this is not what he was told? No? Looks like the liar here is once again *you*.

No it is you who cannot read for comrehension. It is only the first quote where he refers to hearsay, the 2nd quote is without qualification:

12. Many executions by gas or shooting or injections took place right in the camp

I am not going to call that 'lying' as you orefer to do, it is just mental lazyness on your side.

And while it is likely (but not certain, you are wrong about "no one" saying there were gassings there) that the homicidal gaschamber at Dachau may not have been used for that purpose, there is no doubt that it was designed for that purpose -- you've ducked the question before, but why else would there have been fake showerheads?

It was a shower.

"Hilariously?" Your sense of humour is only slightly less twisted than your sense of morality.

It is screaming hilarious! Insane hilarious. Dodd is presented shrunken heads, he is told that these heads once belonged to Poles who had the nerve to court German girls. Yet in reality these heads originated from South-America.

Here the complete story:

http://www.onethirdoftheholocaust.com/nazishrunkenheads/

Soap from 'jewish fat' or lamp shades from jewish skins, same stories.

No, that's not what he is saying. His concern was that the number of Jewish people involved would give racist *ssholes like Irving the opportunity to make the kind of accusations you have.

TSR is completely unconcerned that according to Dodd, who we do not doubt, 75% of the staff of the IMT/Nuremberg was Jewish. No surprises here. For more sane people it is obvious that independent justice is completely impossible under these conditions. It was a travesty of justice, a scandal. But trust me, you folk are not going to escape justice.

 

[Wroclaw]

There were also gassings at Dachau, although relatively few compared to those at Hertheim.

http://www.holocaust-history.org/dachau-gas-chambers/

 

[Wroclaw]

So who testified to gassing at Orienanburg? Or do you accept that you're wrong, as you already have on at least 800,000 Jews killed by the Einsatzgruppen?

 

[TSR]

No it is you who cannot read for comrehension. It is only the first quote where he refers to hearsay, the 2nd quote is without qualification:

.
...which goes on to say

"I was called by Dr. Rascher to examine the first victims. Of the eight or nine persons in the chamber there were three still alive, and the remainder appeared to be dead. Their eyes were red, and their faces were swollen. Many prisoners were later killed in this way. Afterwards they were removed to the crematorium where I had to examine their teeth for gold. Teeth containing gold were extracted. Many prisoners who were sick were killed by injections while in the hospital. Some prisoners killed in the hospital came through to the autopsy room with no name or number on the tag which was usually tied to their big toe. Instead the tag said 'Do not dissect'. I performed autopsies on some of these and found that they were perfectly healthy but had died from injections."

What is your *proof* that these things did not happen?
.

It was a shower.

.
Odd, then, that those showerheads weren't attached to any plumbing.
.

It is screaming hilarious! Insane hilarious. Dodd is presented shrunken heads, he is told that these heads once belonged to Poles who had the nerve to court German girls. Yet in reality these heads originated from South-America.

Here the complete story:

.
Got a *credible* source for this? UV makes many many claims in these videos which are demonstrably lies.
.

Soap from 'jewish fat' or lamp shades from jewish skins, same stories.

.
Of course, that this soap was from "Jewish fat" or that it was "Jewish skin" are claims that no historian has ever made...
.

TSR is completely unconcerned that according to Dodd, who we do not doubt, 75% of the staff of the IMT/Nuremberg was Jewish. No surprises here. For more sane people it is obvious that independent justice is completely impossible under these conditions. It was a travesty of justice, a scandal. But trust me, you folk are not going to escape justice.

.
No, I'm not concerned about it. Because the verdicts stand on their own.


One notes that despite being invited (again) to show a *single* unjust verdict, with the evidence to demonstrate it, you prefer instead to keep harping on "it was thuh Jooos!"

Jewish involvement is apparently enough for *you* to conclude it was a "travesty."

Rational people know different.



Oh, and BTW "you people?" Why should rational people fear the "justice" of an impotent hater halfway across the world?
.

 

[Wroclaw]

Why should rational people fear the "justice" of an impotent hater halfway across the world?

Dude thinks he's Rambo...

 

[Trojan]

75% of the staff of the totality of the Nuremberg trials were not Jewish. The letter in question was not meant for a litteral interpretation. I know of no judge or chief prosecuter who was Jewish.

 

[Craig4]

.
Oh, and BTW "you people?" Why should rational people fear the "justice" of an impotent hater halfway across the world?
.

That is an interesting question. These people obviously don't matter. It's not as if anyone in office would care to be associated with their kind. What politcal leader would take the risk even if they believed this brand of stupidity?

There aren't any textbooks being rewritten based on their intellectual dishonesty. What justice can these people really inflict? You get to odd nut job with a gun I suppose but as tragic as that sort of thing is it doesn't really lead to any major changes. The world understands the truth and just can't be bothered with these people. There's really nothing to differentiate these people from a flat earth believer.