• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged General Holocaust denial discussion Part IV

gabeygoat said:
This has been my position for a long time
Click to expand...

It also was the position of the governments in western europe in the 1930's, leading to the nice tabloids full of freedom-of-speech antisemitism that 'noone takes seriously, so why not let them spout their nonsense'
 
If we taught more logical, evidencing and critical thinking at school, I think there would be less CT drivel.

Examples of the flaws in denier arguments

They claim being asked to evidence their claim of no mass gassings, is reversing the burden of proof.

They dispute that we should know what did happen instead of gassings, with many claiming it does not matter what did happen, all they need to do is show no gassings.

Their claim that if the way a witness describes something happened includes physical impossibilities, there it is physically impossible. Since witness make claims about gassings, graves and pyres that are likely not correct, therefore the Germans did not build gas chambers etc

They rely heavily on arguments from incredulity and ignorance, whereby because what is being claimed is hard to believe and the deniers cannot work out how it was done, it therefore did not happen.

Denial is also intrinsically anti-Semitic, because they are arguing every single Jew who said he saw gassings, mass graves and pyres is a liar and the Nazis were coerced by Jews into false confessions.
 
Nessie said:
If we taught more logical, evidencing and critical thinking at school, I think there would be less CT drivel.

Examples of the flaws in denier arguments

They claim being asked to evidence their claim of no mass gassings, is reversing the burden of proof.

They dispute that we should know what did happen instead of gassings, with many claiming it does not matter what did happen, all they need to do is show no gassings.

Their claim that if the way a witness describes something happened includes physical impossibilities, there it is physically impossible. Since witness make claims about gassings, graves and pyres that are likely not correct, therefore the Germans did not build gas chambers etc

They rely heavily on arguments from incredulity and ignorance, whereby because what is being claimed is hard to believe and the deniers cannot work out how it was done, it therefore did not happen.

Denial is also intrinsically anti-Semitic, because they are arguing every single Jew who said he saw gassings, mass graves and pyres is a liar and the Nazis were coerced by Jews into false confessions.
Click to expand...

Not against that, but the old "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink" applies.
A lot of students would just consider it another BS course they have to take.
 
dudalb said:
Not against that, but the old "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink" applies.
A lot of students would just consider it another BS course they have to take.
Click to expand...

I don't mean teaching that as a course. I mean it being woven into all subjects, so it becomes a soft skill being taught in the background. Pupils will get used to phrases such as "the evidence for", "proof of", "that logically means" or "that makes no sense because" in all their subjects.
 
Nessie said:
I don't mean teaching that as a course. I mean it being woven into all subjects, so it becomes a soft skill being taught in the background. Pupils will get used to phrases such as "the evidence for", "proof of", "that logically means" or "that makes no sense because" in all their subjects.
Click to expand...

I think this is something that is happening as time goes on. People are becoming more aware. The vast majority of people reject things such as racial supremacy, anti-Semitism etc. I fully expect the deniers to continue to decline.
 
Saggy said:
You can surely trust Raul Hilberg, dean of the holohoax historians, who in this rare footage (part of a PBS interview that was not broadcast) admits there is no evidence linking Hitler to the hoax .... https://www.bitchute.com/video/I12BCjlgl282/
[qimg]https://static-3.bitchute.com/live/cover_images/sxqLgNU13em9/I12BCjlgl282_640x360.jpg[/qimg]
"Elie Wiesel and other survivors sometimes ask, ‘Where was God?’
The German prosecutors, the political scientists, the historians, ask a more modest question - ‘Where was Adolf Hitler?’"
Click to expand...
37 pieces of evidence linking Hitler to the genocide:

1. Gestapo Müller, directive on Einsatzgruppen reports, 1 August 1941 (Fleming, pp 109-110, Unwritten, p 124, http://www.genocideeducation.ca/kershaw.pdf)

2. Himmler, instructions to Bradfisch in Minsk, mid-August 1941 (Fleming, pp 50-51)

3. Himmler, explanation, late summer 1941, as related in 1962 by Horst Bender, dept III Himmler’s staff and SS and Police Judge (Fleming, p 51)

4. Himmler, explanation, September 1941, Streckenbach 1962 interrogation (Fleming, p 52)

5. Himmler, explanation, before Heydrich’s death, date unclear, Gottlob Berger 1962 interrogation (Fleming, p 52)

6. Jeckeln, instructions from Himmler, 10-11 November 1941 (Fleming, p 44)

7. Hitler, from notes on meeting with Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, 28 November 1941 (Fleming, pp 102-105; https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/...ttpsredir=1&article=1170&context=constructing)

8. Goebbels’ diary, 13 December 1941 (Unwritten, p 154; https://www.hdot.org/longrole/# - http://www.yadvashem.org/odot_pdf/Microsoft Word - 3875.pdf)

9. Rosenberg diary, 14 December 1941 (Unwritten, p 155)

10. Frank speech, 16 December 1941 (http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/holoprelude/removal.html, Gerlach's Wannsee article)

11. Himmler diary, 18 December 1941 (Unwritten, p 155)

12. Eichmann interrogation, preceding Wannsee Conference - late 1941? (Fleming, p 67)

13. Goebbels diary, 14 February 1942 (Unwritten, p 157)

14. Goebbels diary, 2 March 1942 (https://digitalcommons.iwu.edu/cgi/...ttpsredir=1&article=1170&context=constructing)

15. Goebbels diary, 20 March 1942 (http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/goebbels-joseph/goebbels-1948-excerpts-01.html)

16. Goebbels diary, 27 March 1942 (http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/goebbels-joseph/goebbels-1948-excerpts-01.html - Fleming pp 62-63, 111, Unwritten, pp 172-173)

17. Wisliceny IMT testimony re: Eichmann & Final Solution order, April 1942 (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/01-03-46.asp)

18. Heydrich, Prague conference on SD and Intelligence Service responsibilities, May 1942, declaration of Otto Wagner 1979 (Fleming p 60)

19. Goebbels’ diary, 29 May 1942 (Unwritten, p 184)

20. Himmler, explanation, early summer 1942, Streckenbach 1962 interrogation (Fleming, p 52)

21. Himmler to Gottlob Berger, 28 July 1942 (https://www.hdot.org/longrole/; Fleming, p 112)

22. Himmler, announcing that armaments workers were to be collected into camps, 9 October 1942 (Unwritten, p 189; Fleming, pp 44, 128)

23. Himmler, notes on conversation with Führer, follow-up notes to Müller - on France, 6 and 10 December 1942 (Unwritten, pp 109-110; Fleming, p 66)

24. Meldung 51, 3 December 1942, Himmler to Hitler (http://www.genocideeducation.ca/kershaw.pdf; Unwritten, p 150)

25. Korherr report for Hitler, January 1943 (Fleming, pp 135-139)

26. First Schloss Klessheim meeting, 17-18 March 1943 (Fleming, pp 157-166; Unwritten, p 203; Longerich Irving Trial https://www.hdot.org/longrole/; http://www.genocideeducation.ca/kershaw.pdf)

27. Hitler, 8 June 1943 (1384-PS Red Series vol III, p 959; HC White Paper)

28. Himmler speech, Posen, to generals, 26 January 1944, declaration of Freiherr von Gersdorff 1979 (Fleming, pp 52-53)

29. Himmler, Sonthofen speech, 24 May 1944 (Fleming, p 54)

30. Himmler, secret speech, 21 July 1944 (Longerich Irving Trial https://www.hdot.org/longrole/)

31. Eichmann, Sassen interviews, “. . . the order of the one-time Fuhrer of the German Reich, Adolf Hitler . . .” (http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/german/einsatzgruppen/esg/trials/profiles/eichmannintro.html)

32. Eichmann memoir/papers, Ich (https://www.hdot.org/vanpelt/#note_vanPelt_xi2n1012)

33. Wetzel's 25 October 1941 letter and his 1961 Hannover testimony

34.Ribbentrop to Veesenmayer, 10 July 1944 (Braham, p 1033; Levine Wallenberg, pp 193-194) . . .[/QUOTE]
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12585134#post12585134

35. Hagen to Hitler, 7 December 1942 (http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2019/08/the-hagen-letter-to-deal-with-13-of.html)

36. Röthke in Paris in mid-1943 complained about Laval's distinction between foreign and French Jews when it came to deportations to the East, "the order of the Führer about the Final Solution of the Jewish question in all of Europe is clearly established." (Mitchell, p 134)

37. Thanks to Hans' recent (superb) HC article, we should have to include Francke-Grisch's report, bringing the total number of documented traces connecting the Führer to the Final Solution - remember that deniers like Saggy say there are zero - to 37 (Francke-Grisch: "The most modern methods make it possible to implement the Führer Order very quickly and discreetly. The so called 'resettlement action' for the Jews proceeds as follows").
 
CaptainHowdy said:
This is not a quote from an individual eyewitness but the Nuremberg court took judicial notice of a Polish government report that stated:




Or, elsewhere in the Nuremberg trial transcript we find:
Click to expand...

So tired of the tired use of this silliness. Something like 5 years ago I looked into Jansson's claims about a "steam narrative":

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2016/05/the-revisionist-fabrication-of-myth-of_22.html

In a sample of 83 testimonies from eyewitnesses at Treblinka, I found three early witnesses who were in the camp and who reported that steam was used to kill those packed into the gas chambers (I've since found I think one more). Each of these men escaped from the camp before Stangl's changes were put into operation in early September 1942. Two of these men also named gas as the killing agent, in one case the testimony of steam is a bit cryptic, and one of the two who said gas and steam also said that no one was in a position to know for sure.

After the early days of the camp, as workers in the upper camp stayed longer and they gained more knowledge, testimonies consistently converged on gas.

Some Oyneg Shabes leaders in Warsaw, in fall 1942 - as reports about the camp were coming in and much was unknown, desperate to get word to the world about the mass murder and thus not having the luxury of time - made the decision to include the detail about steam in a report they prepared and sent to London. (We don't know why they made this decision as their decisionmaking isn't documented - it may have been simply because it was the last testimony they looked at or on account of extra trust in who recorded the particular testimonies.) I believe that every single report mentioning steam thereafter, including the UNWCC charge sheet which deniers sometimes link to and 3311-PS, was based on the Oyneg Shabes report.

Reviewing the range of testimonies and evidence available to us today (which were not all gathered and available to reporters in 1942-1944), no serious person would conclude that steam was used at Treblinka; that is why every scholar studying the camp (no, Mattogno is not a scholar) has concluded that Jews were killed there in gas chambers. As we've seen (and as deniers always ignore), for example, the IMT in its 1946 judgment concluded that Jews were killed in gas chambers at Treblinka.

All this is well known. The highlighting of steam is a bit of denier cherrypicking - an ultra-thin reed of some early witness guesses that are easily understood, an OS report to London in fall 1942, and multiple articles and reports based on that report thereafter - set into a vast sea of witnesses, reports, and other evidence (which deniers pretend don't exist) that attest to gas being used to murder Jews at the camp. (The evidence to which I am referring in this post can be cited with precise archival references.)

Finally, to make this discussion even more preposterous, deniers who pick up this meme have never demonstrated even the slightest familiarity with the history - yet in the most insulting and dehumanizing terms imaginable they repeatedly post elsewhere about lobster steaming, squealing with delight in their ignorance each time they do so, along with recycling one or two well-known, cherrypicked facts and fabricating testimony in other cases.
 
LemmyCaution said:
So tired of the tired use of this silliness. Something like 5 years ago I looked into Jansson's claims about a "steam narrative":

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2016/05/the-revisionist-fabrication-of-myth-of_22.html

In a sample of 83 testimonies from eyewitnesses at Treblinka, I found three early witnesses who were in the camp and who reported that steam was used to kill those packed into the gas chambers (I've since found I think one more). Each of these men escaped from the camp before Stangl's changes were put into operation in early September 1942. Two of these men also named gas as the killing agent, in one case the testimony of steam is a bit cryptic, and one of the two who said gas and steam also said that no one was in a position to know for sure.

After the early days of the camp, as workers in the upper camp stayed longer and they gained more knowledge, testimonies consistently converged on gas.

Some Oyneg Shabes leaders in Warsaw, in fall 1942 - as reports about the camp were coming in and much was unknown, desperate to get word to the world about the mass murder and thus not having the luxury of time - made the decision to include the detail about steam in a report they prepared and sent to London. (We don't know why they made this decision as their decisionmaking isn't documented - it may have been simply because it was the last testimony they looked at or on account of extra trust in who recorded the particular testimonies.) I believe that every single report mentioning steam thereafter, including the UNWCC charge sheet which deniers sometimes link to and 3311-PS, was based on the Oyneg Shabes report.

Reviewing the range of testimonies and evidence available to us today (which were not all gathered and available to reporters in 1942-1944), no serious person would conclude that steam was used at Treblinka; that is why every scholar studying the camp (no, Mattogno is not a scholar) has concluded that Jews were killed there in gas chambers. As we've seen (and as deniers always ignore), for example, the IMT in its 1946 judgment concluded that Jews were killed in gas chambers at Treblinka.

All this is well known. The highlighting of steam is a bit of denier cherrypicking - an ultra-thin reed of some early witness guesses that are easily understood, an OS report to London in fall 1942, and multiple articles and reports based on that report thereafter - set into a vast sea of witnesses, reports, and other evidence (which deniers pretend don't exist) that attest to gas being used to murder Jews at the camp. (The evidence to which I am referring in this post can be cited with precise archival references.)

Finally, to make this discussion even more preposterous, deniers who pick up this meme have never demonstrated even the slightest familiarity with the history - yet in the most insulting and dehumanizing terms imaginable they repeatedly post elsewhere about lobster steaming, squealing with delight in their ignorance each time they do so, along with recycling one or two well-known, cherrypicked facts and fabricating testimony in other cases.
Click to expand...

Oh good God!! Once again the boring task of refuting nonsense that has been refuted long ago. Deniers and those who repeat their arguments just keep pressing the reset button!!!

I heard this type of Denier argument decades ago. It is nonsense. I am just so sorry people (Like LemmyCaution), have keep repeating themselves to refute such tired bilge.
 
Deniers only really have assertion to push their claims, due to a complete lack of evidence to back up their beliefs. Repeated assertions are chanted to reinforce those beliefs, since, I suspect, may do realise that their beliefs cannot be backed by evidence and they do not want to face the reality of what that means.

A denier forum I am active on has a new moderator who hates the term denial and referring to people who say no mass gassings as deniers. I started to use the term revisionist/ism instead, but because I had also used the terms deny and denied about what was being denied, I have been banned for 7 days. Calling someone something hideous and suggesting they prefer children can get a 12 hour ban!

It is quite something that the feelings of denial are so strong, that there are now deniers who are in denial that they are deniers!

I sometimes thinK I should have done psychology at uni, instead of history. I find it fascinating that such people exist and they are so utterly convinced they are right, when the evidence and logic absolutely proves them wrong.
 
Nessie said:
I sometimes thinK I should have done psychology at uni, instead of history. I find it fascinating that such people exist and they are so utterly convinced they are right, when the evidence and logic absolutely proves them wrong.
Click to expand...

Deniers of Archaeology orthodoxy are nearly as committed. They have lots of weird ideas and the only thing they can agree on is that the mainstream is wrong and hiding stuff. That they believe completely contradictory ideas between themselves does not give them pause at ll.

As you say that the evidence and logic absolutely proves them wrong is irrelevant - their belief conquerors all!
 
While you throw your shoulders out of joint patting yourselves on the back over your majestic triumph at routing your opponents, said opponents have a different perspective:

"More than 75 years after the six million Jews were gassed to death in steam chambers and turned into furniture and cleaning products, the woman responsible has been identified."

https://www.unz.com/aanglin/germany...-being-charged-with-committing-the-holocaust/

Your sarcasm towards them, in the place of argumentation, has rebounded on you. But then people like Anglin think the way they think, instead of the way you need for them to think.
 
Major Major said:
While you throw your shoulders out of joint patting yourselves on the back over your majestic triumph at routing your opponents, said opponents have a different perspective:

"More than 75 years after the six million Jews were gassed to death in steam chambers and turned into furniture and cleaning products, the woman responsible has been identified."

https://www.unz.com/aanglin/germany...-being-charged-with-committing-the-holocaust/

Your sarcasm towards them, in the place of argumentation, has rebounded on you. But then people like Anglin think the way they think, instead of the way you need for them to think.
Click to expand...

Very, very funny? The article belongs in the loony bin of nonsense. Unz is to serious argumentation what death is to life.

Of course if you were remotely serious you would easily see / read the mountains of evidence etc., those who deny the Revisionists idiocies of Deniers have in here and earlier threads have provided vast amounts of evidence, which over and over again pathological Deniers have dismissed has "forgeries", ignored etc.

Our "opponents" will of course continue their familiar tactics of distortion, nonsense and of course lying over and over again. From their pens, mouths and keyboards will stream a seemly endless stream of falsehoods. And "we" will laugh at their endless stupidity and mindless hatred well into the future.
 
Major Major said:
While you throw your shoulders out of joint patting yourselves on the back over your majestic triumph at routing your opponents, said opponents have a different perspective:

"More than 75 years after the six million Jews were gassed to death in steam chambers and turned into furniture and cleaning products, the woman responsible has been identified."

https://www.unz.com/aanglin/germany...-being-charged-with-committing-the-holocaust/

Your sarcasm towards them, in the place of argumentation, has rebounded on you. But then people like Anglin think the way they think, instead of the way you need for them to think.
Click to expand...

Revisiionist fascists will not be persuaded by honest debate, facts and evidence. The duty of honest, decent people is to point out to people who might be persuaded by their dishonesty that they are being duped by liars.

It matters not whether they throw mockery and sarcasm into the ring, if that's all they have they're finished.

What matters here is that someone involved in wholesale organised murder will not escape justice, regardless of her age and frailty. There are many people who did not have her luck to survive to an old age thanks to her contribution to nazi persecution. The crocodile tears of someone trying to make money out of it re-writing history deserve nothing but contempt.
 
While you throw your shoulders out of joint patting yourselves on the back over your majestic triumph at routing your opponents, said opponents have a different perspective:

All you have is a wish to be non-mainstream and causal mockery.
 
Last edited:
Major Major said:
While you throw your shoulders out of joint patting yourselves on the back over your majestic triumph at routing your opponents, said opponents have a different perspective:

"More than 75 years after the six million Jews were gassed to death in steam chambers and turned into furniture and cleaning products, the woman responsible has been identified."

https://www.unz.com/aanglin/germany...-being-charged-with-committing-the-holocaust/

Your sarcasm towards them, in the place of argumentation, has rebounded on you. But then people like Anglin think the way they think, instead of the way you need for them to think.
Click to expand...

That is a reprint of a Daily Stormer story...
 
Pacal said:
Very, very funny? The article belongs in the loony bin of nonsense. Unz is to serious argumentation what death is to life.

Of course if you were remotely serious you would easily see / read the mountains of evidence etc., those who deny the Revisionists idiocies of Deniers have in here and earlier threads have provided vast amounts of evidence, which over and over again pathological Deniers have dismissed has "forgeries", ignored etc.

Our "opponents" will of course continue their familiar tactics of distortion, nonsense and of course lying over and over again. From their pens, mouths and keyboards will stream a seemly endless stream of falsehoods. And "we" will laugh at their endless stupidity and mindless hatred well into the future.
Click to expand...

And Anglin has thrown back at you the same sarcasm that you employ in place of facts. You don't like it when your opponents use the same tactics on you that you use on them.

But then, I figured that the Holocaust was going to be canceled back in 2009, when Kaukaub Siddique wrote a polite letter citing "facts" (wrong ones, that is) to Holocaust Controversies and got answered with insults and sarcasm, along with a passive-aggressive reply to his offer for a debate.

It was probably just as well. His opponent would have been laughed off the platform when he accused Dr. Siddique of being drunk on Sterno.


The Foucaultian approach, that "facts don't matter, feelings do" is going to turn on you. You see, the Muslims on campus feel hurt by claims that the Holocaust happened.

And then intersectionality kicks in. If the Muslims are hurt, the women are hurt, the Blacks are hurt, the LBGTQQ+ are hurt . . . and all the Holocaust has against them are the facts. But you've deserted the facts.

It seems unfortunate that one of the best-documented historical events ever (yes, I am saying it happened, don't confuse my feelings with the ones that I am drawing your attention to) should be canceled.
 
Where is Andrew Anglin hiding these days? Still in Ohio, or is he hiding somewhere overseas? That could be convenient - tough extradition, no way to pay his multi-million dollar judgement, and more affordably satiating his appetite for Asian women.
 
Major Major said:
But then, I figured that the Holocaust was going to be canceled back in 2009, when Kaukaub Siddique wrote a polite letter citing "facts" (wrong ones, that is) to Holocaust Controversies and got answered with insults and sarcasm, along with a passive-aggressive reply to his offer for a debate.

It was probably just as well. His opponent would have been laughed off the platform when he accused Dr. Siddique of being drunk on Sterno.
Click to expand...

The only time Kaukab Siddique was ever mentioned on Holocaust Controversies was in 2006, after Andrew Mathis brought over an email exchange with Siddique from his personal blog; both of them were publishing their exchanges in newsletters/blogs at the time.

Muslim Holocaust denial was very much a thing in the mid-2000s, thanks to President Ahmadinejad of Iran's campaign around then. It's a bit lame to suggest that anyone would be dumb enough to accuse a Muslim denier of being drunk.

The only denier to ever be accused of being drunk on Sterno is Matt Giwer, a meme/joke dating back to the alt.revisionism days, well before HC ever existed. Giwer's website has been offline for years, he has likely passed away.

There was the possibiity of a formal debate in 2009, but after initially accepting a challenge, the 'revisionist' team pulled out and disintegrated, with one of their initial team members switching sides entirely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom