Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[kageki]

Zyklon B can be used to kill humans; nearly any pesticide can, when you think about it.

.. on a side note.

See, I hate reading books about the holocaust. I read 4 through school and I got the idea the first time. (Incidently, I would like to comment: no school ever gets events on those right. I should have just ignored it but whatever..)

But on the other hand, the military and political aspects of WWII fascinate me. And any of those books ever gives you a good general understanding (And in sometimes a too good specific understanding) about the Nazi's policies re: undesirables.

So generally speaking, anyone who's done research beyond what you learn in the K-12 system (which is watered down due to the sheer mass of details you need to know in general) will understand.

Apparently even believers (or I would like to call de facto believers) don't know their facts.

It's not "can". That is the "fact" of the Holocaust. I'm going to defer to the experts:

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005189

During the summer and autumn of 1941, Zyklon B gas was introduced into the German concentration camp system as a means for murder. At Auschwitz I, in September, the SS first tested Zyklon B as an instrument of mass murder. The "success" of these experiments led to the adoption of Zyklon B for all the gas chambers at the Auschwitz complex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zyklon_B

Zyklon B was the trade name of a cyanide-based pesticide infamous for its use by Nazi Germany against human beings in gas chambers of extermination camps during the Holocaust. The "B" designation was one of several, and indicates the concentration.

I actually did know the name of the gas was Zyklon B before, but I still didn't know it was a pesticide and it was used for that purpose. This was also before the modern internet was invented so forget even Wiki. Netscape wasn't even around. Yet people still wouldn't know if they don't look for it.

 

[truethat]

Apparently even believers (or I would like to call de facto believers) don't know their facts.

It's not "can". That is the "fact" of the Holocaust. I'm going to defer to the experts:





I actually did know the name of the gas was Zyklon B before, but I still didn't know it was a pesticide and it was used for that purpose. This was also before the modern internet was invented so forget even Wiki. Netscape wasn't even around. Yet people still wouldn't know if they don't look for it.

You still aren't making any sense here. Ok so you admit that you didn't do any research into the Holocaust because you just "believed" everything you were told. That's the sign of a poor learner.

I did know that the gas chambers weren't these neat organized "gas chambers" but more crude. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at the pictures of the camps and realize they probably weren't these super technologically advanced systems. The last time I truly remember thinking the people were "gassed" that way, was in high school. I think I was in 10th grade and I'd done my own research.

Every atrocity in history has had urban legends that have come out of it. It's just the nature of the human beast.

But you are still not making any sense. Like I posted earlier. Say it was SUGAR? Say you were giving people sugar in their soup and they were dropping dead because of Insulin issues. What difference does it make if the product wasn't designed to kill if it is used to kill?

It seems to me your argument is along the lines of suggesting that because a cast iron skillet isn't made for killing but cooking, it's a huge conspiracy to suggest that if you hit someone over the head with it you have murdered them.

 

[Dogzilla]

You still aren't making any sense here. Ok so you admit that you didn't do any research into the Holocaust because you just "believed" everything you were told. That's the sign of a poor learner.

I did know that the gas chambers weren't these neat organized "gas chambers" but more crude. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at the pictures of the camps and realize they probably weren't these super technologically advanced systems. The last time I truly remember thinking the people were "gassed" that way, was in high school. I think I was in 10th grade and I'd done my own research.

Every atrocity in history has had urban legends that have come out of it. It's just the nature of the human beast.

But you are still not making any sense. Like I posted earlier. Say it was SUGAR? Say you were giving people sugar in their soup and they were dropping dead because of Insulin issues. What difference does it make if the product wasn't designed to kill if it is used to kill?

It seems to me your argument is along the lines of suggesting that because a cast iron skillet isn't made for killing but cooking, it's a huge conspiracy to suggest that if you hit someone over the head with it you have murdered them.

OK, let's say it was sugar. Let's call it "Zucker" Let's have the website of the USHMM tell visitors that:

"During the summer and autumn of 1941, Zucker was introduced into the German concentration camp system as a means for murder. At Auschwitz I, in September, the SS first tested Zucker as an instrument of mass murder. The "success" of these experiments led to the adoption of Zucker for all the mess halls at the Auschwitz complex."

Or from wikipedia:

"Zucker P was the trade name of a C₁₂H₂₂O₁₁ based 'Süßigkeiten' ingredient infamous for its use by Nazi Germany against diabetic 'untermenschen' in mess halls of extermination camps during the Holocaust. The "P" designation was one of several, and indicates the Powdered form of the chemical."

Then, fill a display case with empty packets of sugar to show to tourists and submit into evidence receipts proving immense shipments of Zucker to a chocolate factory as evidence of an extermination policy.

 

[truethat]

Yes that's a good example. However they still killed them with the Zucker. So what difference does it make?

I think several people asked this but we've never gotten a response?

You guys are making it sound like a couple of thousand people died. Hundreds of thousands of people died in these camps. Can you pause for a second and see why it doesn't fly that they weren't intending to kill them?

 

[Saggy]

Hundreds of thousands of people died in these camps.

Good to see you've become a revisionist, and it didn't take too long. You could be jailed in many countries for that statement. Note: if traveling say 'millions', or better yet, six million.

Can you pause for a second and see why it doesn't fly that they weren't intending to kill them?

No difference between homicide and accidental death? Statements like this are beyond comment and could not be made by a thinking person.

 

[truethat]

Good to see you've become a revisionist, and it didn't take too long. You could be jailed in many countries for that statement. Note: if traveling say 'millions', or better yet, six million.



No difference between homicide and accidental death? Statements like this are beyond comment and could not be made by a thinking person.

We aren't talking about the entire Holocaust. We're talking about one camp.

Ok I keep saying this to you and you keep not understanding what I am saying.

If I am running a camp. And my camp members are dying in the hundreds of thousands, how can I say it was "accidental."

Maybe the first couple of thousand I could get away with it. But after that? This is why you come across as very foolish. You are suggesting that hundreds of thousands of people in the camps were "accidentally killed."

Yah ok.

 

[kageki]

We aren't talking about the entire Holocaust. We're talking about one camp.

Ok I keep saying this to you and you keep not understanding what I am saying.

If I am running a camp. And my camp members are dying in the hundreds of thousands, how can I say it was "accidental."

Maybe the first couple of thousand I could get away with it. But after that? This is why you come across as very foolish. You are suggesting that hundreds of thousands of people in the camps were "accidentally killed."

Yah ok.

Do you first truly understand that the gas was also used for delousing purposes? Not gassing people directly. Something separate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zyklon_B

Zyklon B was used in the concentration camps also for delousing to control typhus. The chemical used in the gas chambers was deliberately made without the warning odorant.[22] In quantitative terms, more than 95% of the Zyklon B delivered to Auschwitz was used for delousing and less than 5% in the gas chambers.[23]

This is the same thing the Americans were doing with DDT. They couldn't just dump Zyklon B right on people so the Germans didn't do that when they were delousing. They gassed just the clothing. If it was 95%, isn't it fair to say the primary purpose of the Zyklon B gas was for delousing purposes?

Are you suggesting death from the typhus disease was intentional?

I asked you earlier to list the cause of death. Please explain with evidence exactly how many died and how at Auschwtiz. I can suggest that in the case of gas chamber executions that the cause of death as "cyanide poisoning".

By the way, we are talking about just this one camp. I stated earlier that this one camp alone was 1.1 million. It was also formerly 4 million. In fact you would be causing an issue if you didn't say "millions" or a "million" just for this one camp alone.

 

[Laton]

What I find really intersting, is that, from a holocaust deniers point of view, if the holocaust happened then apparently:

the Nazi's carelessly rounded up all the Jew's, Roma, homosexuals and other people they deemed undesirable, mistakenly shipped them around Europe, inaccurately counted up their numbers, accidentally worked many to death, wrongly murdered many others (apparently by mis-reading the intructions and putting people in the same room as their clothes when they were being deloused with cyanide gas - and messed up the same way over & over again) and got so distracted by the war that they absent-mindedly let others die of disease and inadvertantly tried to starve the rest to death.

but because the it was all just a big misunderstanding (or were caused by the allies having the audacity to try and kick them out of countries they had a right to be in - spoils of war & all that) the deaths should all be ignored.

All those blunders, not really what I would expect from a "master race"

 

[kageki]

What I find really intersting, is that, from a holocaust deniers point of view, if the holocaust happened then apparently:

the Nazi's carelessly rounded up all the Jew's, Roma, homosexuals and other people they deemed undesirable, mistakenly shipped them around Europe, inaccurately counted up their numbers, accidentally worked many to death, wrongly murdered many others (apparently by mis-reading the intructions and putting people in the same room as their clothes when they were being deloused with cyanide gas - and messed up the same way over & over again) and got so distracted by the war that they absent-mindedly let others die of disease and inadvertantly tried to starve the rest to death.

but because the it was all just a big misunderstanding (or were caused by the allies having the audacity to try and kick them out of countries they had a right to be in - spoils of war & all that) the deaths should all be ignored.

All those blunders, not really what I would expect from a "master race"

Don't you even know that the people sent into gas chambers were naked?

 

[Laton]

Don't you even know that the people sent into gas chambers were naked?

I did, and have for a while as I did my own reseach years ago.

So you actually accept that people were put in gas chambers?

That's a start I suppose.

 

[truethat]

Do you first truly understand that the gas was also used for delousing purposes? Not gassing people directly. Something separate:


This is the same thing the Americans were doing with DDT. They couldn't just dump Zyklon B right on people so the Germans didn't do that when they were delousing. They gassed just the clothing. If it was 95%, isn't it fair to say the primary purpose of the Zyklon B gas was for delousing purposes?

Are you suggesting death from the typhus disease was intentional?

I asked you earlier to list the cause of death. Please explain with evidence exactly how many died and how at Auschwtiz. I can suggest that in the case of gas chamber executions that the cause of death as "cyanide poisoning".

By the way, we are talking about just this one camp. I stated earlier that this one camp alone was 1.1 million. It was also formerly 4 million. In fact you would be causing an issue if you didn't say "millions" or a "million" just for this one camp alone.

I'm not going for "accurate numbers" I'm trying to point something out to you that you keep ignoring. The 1.1 was the end result. But DURING the time this was happening, it doesn't MATTER if they used Zyklon B, bullets or even frickin peanut butter.

If hundreds of thousands of people were dying, they were dying. That's what was happening. If they couldn't handle that many people in a camp, even IF they were just trying to sort of keep them in the camp, if they didn't have the resources to deal with this number of people, then keeping them in the camp ALONE amounts to murder.

I'm asking you to consider how much dead hundreds of thousands of dead bodies are.

These aren't people that just "accidentally died" They died from either the conditions in the camp, gassing bullets etc. So lets take everything off the table. All of it is debatable according to you because of method or intention.

If all these people are dying in the camps SOLELY because of a lack of resources to handle it, and they sent MORE PRISONERS then they were sending them to DEATH. It doesn't matter how it exactly happened.

The US rounded up the Japanese and kept them in camps. How many deaths did we have there?

 

[kageki]

I did, and have for a while as I did my own reseach years ago.

So you actually accept that people were put in gas chambers?

That's a start I suppose.

If you did know then why did you say "putting people in the same room as their clothes"?

 

[Matthew Ellard]

Don't you even know that the people sent into gas chambers were naked?

That would make sense......

"SS Obergruppenfuhrer Oswald Pohl, head of the SS Economic and Administration main office, issued a report on February 6th 1943, regarding "Hitherto utilisation of textile materials originating from the evacuation of the Jews" This report includes the textile materials from Aushwitz and Operation Reinhard and to whom they were submitted. According to this report the Reich Economic Ministry received 262,000 complete men and women's outfits......all transported in 570 railway cars

http://books.google.com.au/books?id...page&q=ss document clothing treblinka&f=false


Here is the list of clothing taken from Treblinka alone and returned to the SS for reuse. Considering there were 713,555 victims transported to Treblinka prior to 3Dec1942 ( Hofle Telegram) it is fairly obvious the clothing was taken off the victims before execution. The 2,000 children's aprons taken from children is particularly disgusting. Holocaust deniers have a fantasy that Treblinka II was a transit camp sending nude people to "the east" but can't say where. Silly holocaust deniers.....

Men's clothing:
overcoats - 99,000
jackets - 57,000
vests - 27,000
pants - 62,000
drawers - 38,000
shirts - 132,000
pullovers - 9,000
scarves - 2,000
pajamas - 6,000
collars - 10,000
gloves - 2,000 pairs
socks - 10,000 pairs
shoes - 31,000 pairs

Women's clothing:
coats - 155,000 pieces
dresses - 119,000 pieces
blouses - 30,000 pieces
pullovers - 60,000 pieces
drawers - 49,000 pieces
panties - 60,000 pieces
jackets - 26,000 pieces
shirts - 30,000 pieces
chemises - 125,000 pieces
pajamas - 27,000 pieces
aprons - 36,000 pieces
brassieres - 25,000 pieces
underwear - 22,000 pieces
kerchiefs - 85,000 pieces
shoes - 111,000 pieces

Children's clothing:
overcoats - 15,000
boys' jackets - 11,000
boys' pants - 3,000
shirts - 3,000
scarves - 4,000
pullovers - 1,000
drawers - 1,000
girls' dresses - 9,000
girls' chemises - 5,000
aprons - 2,000
drawers - 5,000
stockings - 10,000 pairs
shoes - 22,000 pairs

 

[Laton]

If you did know then why did you say "putting people in the same room as their clothes"?

Well, if, as you stated:

They couldn't just dump Zyklon B right on people so the Germans didn't do that when they were delousing. They gassed just the clothing. If it was 95%, isn't it fair to say the primary purpose of the Zyklon B gas was for delousing purposes?

(bolding mine) - and they kept gassing people I would think that it was a fair assumption that they just kept accidently putting people in with their clothes.

Or do you agree that people were gassed on purpose?

Anyway, I don't want to distract you any further from working out if there were 46 bolts on a gas chamber door or only 45 (as that makes all the diference when commiting mass-murder) or whatever minutiae you want to focus on next.

 

[kageki]

I'm not going for "accurate numbers" I'm trying to point something out to you that you keep ignoring. The 1.1 was the end result. But DURING the time this was happening, it doesn't MATTER if they used Zyklon B, bullets or even frickin peanut butter.

If hundreds of thousands of people were dying, they were dying. That's what was happening. If they couldn't handle that many people in a camp, even IF they were just trying to sort of keep them in the camp, if they didn't have the resources to deal with this number of people, then keeping them in the camp ALONE amounts to murder.

I'm asking you to consider how much dead hundreds of thousands of dead bodies are.

These aren't people that just "accidentally died" They died from either the conditions in the camp, gassing bullets etc. So lets take everything off the table. All of it is debatable according to you because of method or intention.

If all these people are dying in the camps SOLELY because of a lack of resources to handle it, and they sent MORE PRISONERS then they were sending them to DEATH. It doesn't matter how it exactly happened.

The US rounded up the Japanese and kept them in camps. How many deaths did we have there?

But why do you keep saying "hundreds of thousands" when you know it was in the millions for this camp alone?

Do we have an understanding that delousing occurred as a protective measure against the typhus disease?

Why doesn't the method matter to you? The method matters to anyone if someone gets beaten to death with a bat or instantly die from a bullet to the head. It matters in any murder case as a simple matter of fact. Sometimes that can mean the difference between suicide and murder. Off course the method matters. Again the question is if it happened.

 

[kageki]

Well, if, as you stated:



(bolding mine) - and they kept gassing people I would think that it was a fair assumption that they just kept accidently putting people in with their clothes.

Or do you agree that people were gassed on purpose?

Anyway, I don't want to distract you any further from working out if there were 46 bolts on a gas chamber door or only 45 (as that makes all the diference when commiting mass-murder) or whatever minutiae you want to focus on next.

So your assumption would indicate your ignorance then because I can't think of any other reason why you would have made such an ignorant statement.

Why do some people still disagree even after being incarcerated?

 

[truethat]

But why do you keep saying "hundreds of thousands" when you know it was in the millions for this camp alone?

Do we have an understanding that delousing occurred as a protective measure against the typhus disease?

Why doesn't the method matter to you? The method matters to anyone if someone gets beaten to death with a bat or instantly die from a bullet to the head. It matters in any murder case as a simple matter of fact. Sometimes that can mean the difference between suicide and murder. Off course the method matters. Again the question is if it happened.

The hundreds of thousands is DURING THE TIME. And this has a direct correlation in proving intention.

I'm suggesting to you that your problem in the first place was hearing information and taking it at face value or based on the values prescribed by the people giving you the information. You aren't thinking logically.


Take it step by step. Let's take all the "dramatic" stories coming out of the camps completely and totally out of the equation. We will say for the sake of argument that the Nazis never intended to kill the Jews in the camps. Let's just agree they sent them to work camps.

(for the rabid others in this thread I do not believe this but I want to make a point)


Ok so now we're just dealing with people dying. Yes the end number is 1.1 but that's not a fair thing to put on people during the process. They had no way of knowing the final numbers if people were accidentally dying in the camp.


Now what I'd like to know, is how many deaths would it take for you to realize you had a major problem on your hands in the camps. You mention typhus. Ok so typhus is running rampant through the camp.

The reason the numbers of deaths IN PROCESS are so important is because of the number of people that could reasonably be housed at the camp.

So I'd like you to tell me how many people was the camp able to hold. And I get it, it's a war, rations tight and all that.

But what you will find, I am sure, is that the number of people who died in the camp, far outstripped it's capacity.

If you logically do the math, you will see that even WITHOUT the ovens gassing and other dramatic parts of the story, you still have a story that doesn't add up.

If your camp is overwhelmed by typhus and you send MORE people to the camp, then basically you are sending them to death.

If your camp has piles and piles of dead bodies and you are only using the ovens to cremate the dead for health purposes, and people are sending MORE people, then they are basically sending them to death.

From the time the camp opened until the end of the war, how many people died in just this camp? What were the numbers month to month. This is a very important detail.

As you examine these facts you will see that it doesn't matter what method was used, starvation, disease, gas, working to death, dropping dead of illness. If you have large numbers of people dying every month and you are sending MORE people you are sending them to death.

Even if the original intention wasn't a final plan, it sure became a reality pretty quickly.

 

[kageki]

The hundreds of thousands is DURING THE TIME. And this has a direct correlation in proving intention.

I'm suggesting to you that your problem in the first place was hearing information and taking it at face value or based on the values prescribed by the people giving you the information. You aren't thinking logically.


Take it step by step. Let's take all the "dramatic" stories coming out of the camps completely and totally out of the equation. We will say for the sake of argument that the Nazis never intended to kill the Jews in the camps. Let's just agree they sent them to work camps.

(for the rabid others in this thread I do not believe this but I want to make a point)


Ok so now we're just dealing with people dying. Yes the end number is 1.1 but that's not a fair thing to put on people during the process. They had no way of knowing the final numbers if people were accidentally dying in the camp.


Now what I'd like to know, is how many deaths would it take for you to realize you had a major problem on your hands in the camps. You mention typhus. Ok so typhus is running rampant through the camp.

The reason the numbers of deaths IN PROCESS are so important is because of the number of people that could reasonably be housed at the camp.

So I'd like you to tell me how many people was the camp able to hold. And I get it, it's a war, rations tight and all that.

But what you will find, I am sure, is that the number of people who died in the camp, far outstripped it's capacity.

If you logically do the math, you will see that even WITHOUT the ovens gassing and other dramatic parts of the story, you still have a story that doesn't add up.

If your camp is overwhelmed by typhus and you send MORE people to the camp, then basically you are sending them to death.

If your camp has piles and piles of dead bodies and you are only using the ovens to cremate the dead for health purposes, and people are sending MORE people, then they are basically sending them to death.

From the time the camp opened until the end of the war, how many people died in just this camp? What were the numbers month to month. This is a very important detail.

As you examine these facts you will see that it doesn't matter what method was used, starvation, disease, gas, working to death, dropping dead of illness. If you have large numbers of people dying every month and you are sending MORE people you are sending them to death.

Even if the original intention wasn't a final plan, it sure became a reality pretty quickly.

I keep telling you the total death toll given at Auschwitz is 1.1 million. It was formerly 4 million total deaths.

It's not like the Nazis caused the typhus epidemic or would have wanted an epidemic on their hands.

So you're saying that as long as people agree that the intention was there that you would be willing to discuss the method? Both issues are disputed, but for the sake of argument is that your point? You can ignore the question all you want, but it doesn't go away.

 

[truethat]

I keep telling you the total death toll given at Auschwitz is 1.1 million. It was formerly 4 million total deaths.

It's not like the Nazis caused the typhus epidemic or would have wanted an epidemic on their hands.

So you're saying that as long as people agree that the intention was there that you would be willing to discuss the method? Both issues are disputed, but for the sake of argument is that your point? You can ignore the question all you want, but it doesn't go away.

NO

I am not saying that as long as people agree that the intention was there that I would be willing to discuss the method.

I'm saying a very simple thing.

I'm asking you a question.

How many people was Auschwitz designed to house without causing death?

How many people died in Auschwitz each MONTH. Forget the end result. Lets look at the numbers for each month.

Give me those two figures from a site you trust. I have my own but let's use your numbers.

When you post them you should be able to see a very logical conclusion.

Let's see.

 

[Laton]

So your assumption would indicate your ignorance then because I can't think of any other reason why you would have made such an ignorant statement.

Why do some people still disagree even after being incarcerated?

As you seem to be having difficulty with my original post I suggest you view it through this lens.

Your replies have been valuable in demonstrating your habit of picking out one minor thing to argue about and ignoring the rest. So, well done indeed.