Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[Mondial]

On the one hand the holocaust propaganda says that after world war 2 there was hardly a Jew left alive in Europe due to a genocide and yet Jewish demographer Sergio Dellapergola issued a report in 2003 stating that there were 1 092 000 holocaust survivors in the world. www.icheic.org/pdf/ICHEIC_demography1.pdf You can't have it both ways. 1 092 000 survivors 58 years after the end of the war! How many survivors were there in 1945? 3 million? 4 million? 5 million? I repeat you can't have it both ways. The claim that the nazis tried to kill every single Jew they could get their hands on is blatantly false. www.holocaustdenialvideos.com www.codoh.com

Jewish supremacists like to claim the holocaust is more important than the suffering of other people. The victims who perished under Stalin and Mao Zedong number in the tens of millions yet compared to the holocaust they hardly rate a mention if at all while the holocaust is talked about on a daily basis in the media - "Holocaust Remembrance:What's Behind The Campaign" www.ihr.org/leaflets/holocaust_remembrance.shtml

 

[Matthew Ellard]

Jewish supremacists like to claim the holocaust is more important than the suffering of other people. The victims who perished under Stalin and Mao Zedong number in the tens of millions yet compared to the holocaust they hardly rate a mention ........

21 million people died in 1961 in China. I read about it in a popular book. I also read about the holocaust. Are you saying because you don't read many books about China the holocaust isn't true?

That's a very interesting argument using your own ignorance as evidence the holocaust didn't happen. By this standard Clayton Moore must be your main "leading light" for holocaust denial.

 

[Nick Terry]

If killing millions of Jews was among the charges, then Goering did deny doing so when he plead not guilty to all the charges. All the defendants at Nuremberg plead not guilty to all the charges. So all the defendants did in fact deny the holocaust.

That's just... pathetic.

Declaring yourself not guilty means denying your own responsibility for a charge. You can deny personal knowledge of a crime but this doesn't deny the crime itself.

"I didn't know" and "it was secret" and "not my department" do not constitute substantive negations or refutations.

 

[little grey rabbit]

That's just... pathetic.

Declaring yourself not guilty means denying your own responsibility for a charge. You can deny personal knowledge of a crime but this doesn't deny the crime itself.

"I didn't know" and "it was secret" and "not my department" do not constitute substantive negations or refutations.

But it was so very very secret, so much so that even people who were not in danger of being tried hadn't heard of it

here is Brunnhilde Pomsel, secretary to Josef Goebbels

She took down every word that Goebbels uttered, both his private correspondence and his official orders, including those ordering round-ups of Jews in Berlin to please Hitler that the capital was becoming 'Jew-free'.
.....

'I didn't know about the Holocaust. I was a stupid, politically uninterested little sausage of simple means. I only learned about the Jewish extermination programme after the war. Goebbels never mentioned it in his correspondence.

There was after all, always the example of Robert Ley to provide guidance.

 

[Clayton Moore]

If you believe that somebody has posted meaningless nonsense as if it were some sort of smoking gun, then say that. Say it is nonsense and say why it is is nonsense. Saying that you just 'threw that page of doublespeak in the trash' and a 'what are you going to do about it?' might be a flippant in-your-face way of saying that the evidence is garbage. It's also something someone might say if they've made up their mind and is planning to simply ignore anything that might challenge their belief.

If you're going to play this game you are going to have to address extremely weak evidence that would be laughed out of the discussion if this were any other topic besides the holocaust. That's the nature of the beast. Weak evidence is all they have. So addressing weak evidence is the yoke we must bear.

I'm not playing a game. I'm not a cat following a string for some fool's amusement. I'm interested in righting a lie that impacts the present to the detriment of much of the world.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

21 million people died in 1961 in China. I read about it in a popular book. I also read about the holocaust. Are you saying because you don't read many books about China the holocaust isn't true?

That's a very interesting argument using your own ignorance as evidence the holocaust didn't happen. By this standard Clayton Moore must be your main "leading light" for holocaust denial.

It's interesting that some nazi apologists and sympathizers bring up communist genocides (they believe communism is a jewish plot and to them jews are always guilty of everything they are accused of, evidence not needed) because by acknowledging the physical reality of communist genocides, they implicitly acknowledge that nazi Germany also had the material and logistical capability to carry out mass human extermination.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I'm not playing a game. I'm not a cat following a string for some fool's amusement. I'm interested in righting a lie that impacts the present to the detriment of much of the world.

Waaaaaaaaaahhhhh!!! It's not true! It's not true! It's not true! If you keep bringing up facts and evidence, I'm going to burn every book I see!

 

[MG1962]

I'm not playing a game. I'm not a cat following a string for some fool's amusement. I'm interested in righting a lie that impacts the present to the detriment of much of the world.

Even though it has been increasingly demonstrated its not a lie

 

[MG1962]

Jewish supremacists like to claim the holocaust is more important than the suffering of other people.

I suppose it is way too much to ask for actual evidence supporting this statement

 

[Wroclaw]

Jewish supremacists like to claim the holocaust is more important than the suffering of other people.

Really? Who says this? And where? Be specific. Provide names and links.

The victims who perished under Stalin and Mao Zedong number in the tens of millions yet compared to the holocaust they hardly rate a mention if at all while the holocaust is talked about on a daily basis in the media

Really? Can you prove these "tens of millions"?

- "Holocaust Remembrance:What's Behind The Campaign"

Stop spamming.

 

[Wroclaw]

I'm not playing a game. I'm not a cat following a string for some fool's amusement. I'm interested in righting a lie that impacts the present to the detriment of much of the world.

I, for one, just want to say you're doing a bang-up job.

 

[carlitos]

...

You need to WTFU.

I realize that Holocaust denial is no laughing matter; however, this made me literally laugh out loud. Clayton, buddy, please do not attempt slang like the kids use. You are out of your depth. Pawned, even.

I'm not playing a game. I'm not a cat following a string for some fool's amusement. ...

 

[TSR]

I'm interested in righting a lie that impacts the present to the detriment of much of the world.

.
... by posting so many of them attempting to hand-wave away real history that everyone not blinded by hate can see the intellectual bankruptcy of Holocaust denial ...
.

 

[Dogzilla]

So you, yourself, admit to having seperate standards of evidence for The Holocaust and everything else? No wonder you think it didn't happen.

I don't have separate standards of evidence for the holocaust. Holocaust scholars and the general public has separate standards of evidence for the holocaust. Applying the same standards of evidence to the holocaust that we apply to every other historical event is what gets me in trouble.

Awww... poor widdle master wace. Our hearts bweed.

Would da widdle nazis wike a cookie?

Is it chocolate?

 

[TSR]

Holocaust scholars and the general public has separate standards of evidence for the holocaust. Applying the same standards of evidence to the holocaust that we apply to every other historical event is what gets me in trouble.

,
Time's up, DZ.

Perhaps you'd like to offer us an example of this separate standard (remembering not to make statements like "there is no physical evidence") regarding any other mass murder in contemporary history, and I will demonstrate how that same standard applies to the Holocaust. Or we can play it the other way -- what standard can you document being used re:the Holocaust which does not apply to other historical events?

I've been biting my keyboard to keep the pledge I made not to respond to you for several months, you don't *appear* to have gotten any better at denying history in that time. C'mon: show me different. I double dog dare ya.
,

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

I don't have separate standards of evidence for the holocaust.

You are either dishonest or completely nuts. You have not presented a single fact, that proves your account of the holocaust. Feel free to prove, that Treblinka for example was a transit camp. You can even make up to 4000 bucks, if you can name 4 jews, that were transited through one of the Aktion Reinhard camps or Chelmno. Not a single one of your chimp buddies has even tried that yet. Kind of pathetic.

That's because there is no evidence for that case. On the other hand there are documents, eyewitness testimonies, confessions, physical remains, audio tapes of Himmler and sometimes even photos, that show details of the testimonies to be true.

So you need absolutly nothing to be convinced of the your current denial of the holocaust, but you reject every possible piece of evidence there is for the holocaust without a reason. Sounds like double standards to me.

Perhaps you'd like to offer us an example of this separate standard (remembering not to make statements like "there is no physical evidence") regarding any other mass murder in contemporary history, and I will demonstrate how that same standard applies to the Holocaust. Or we can play it the other way -- what standard can you document being used re:the Holocaust which does not apply to other historical events?

I second that. But don't hold your breath.

 

[Nick Terry]

I don't have separate standards of evidence for the holocaust. Holocaust scholars and the general public has separate standards of evidence for the holocaust. Applying the same standards of evidence to the holocaust that we apply to every other historical event is what gets me in trouble.

Except you don't know what standards of evidence are applied to other historical events.

Physical evidence is generally not discussed nor deemed necessary to substantiate historical events. The literature on Stalinism and on the multiple other genocides in recent history are not replete with exhumation reports. So that gambit's out.

Even more curiously from a denier perspective, such accounts rely heavily on eyewitness testimony. That's the case in every single relevant example of a war, a famine, a genocide, a mass murder or instance of political/racial persecution. Sheesh, it's difficult to envisage contemporary history without encountering interviews with people who were there.

By the way, Dogzilla, is the Lodz ghetto chronicle a document - yes or no? Just checking on something rather important in order to gauge your grasp of what sources actually are.

 

[Gwynpaine]

Is Ahmadinejad a Categorical Denier

“Interesting people have a tendency to disappear suddenly from Codoh” Thus spake the prophet Nathan - and was immediately disappeared. Codoh nevertheless remains an interesting place – even without Nathan. Being no longer free to comment inside Codoh, I can comment less warily from outside it. The rulers of Codoh inhabit a mental landscape in which Chomsky and Finkelstein figure as “judeo-supremacists” who are objectively hand in glove with Elie Wiesel, much as Marx was once supposed by some to have been objectively hand in glove with Rothschild. Revisionists who share that outlook need never fear expulsion from Codoh. Other revisionists go on tiptoe, lest the great axe fall.


Ahmadinejad is this week’s Codoh lead story. Any small and obscure and persecuted sect will naturally rejoice to have found a champion in a world-famous figure. Although his regime is a repressive one Ahmadinejad does have a mass following, and one way of keeping that mass following is to denounce the aggressive colonialism of the Zionist regime. Even progressive middle-class Iranians will applaud his basic point, namely that the today’s innocent Palestinions are being made to pay the price for yesterday’s guilty Europeans.

That is an obvious truth. But Ahmadinejad got into trouble because he stated it conditionally. IF the Holocaust did occur, he asks, why should the Palestinions be made to pay for it? The scandal shifts away from Israel’s use of the Holocaust to Ahmadinejad’s use of the word “if”. Ahadinejad is holocaust doubter. As to his concern for Rudolf’s free speech it is doubtless no more principled than that of those Zionist bravos who profess to disapprove of censorship laws – because they “ create martyrs” - but who will that any imprisoned revisionist must be discredited and destroyed as a man so that he can be safely dealt with as a criminal. All servile intellectuals will passionately demand free speech for any speech they happen to agree with. To be fair to Ahmadinejad, he does not pretend to appeal to a general principle: his challenge is specific. “IF you are so confident that that this Holocaust story is true then why don’t you allow unfettered research. If you were really sure that further research is otiose then you would not forbid it.” I am paraphrasing the Youtube clips, not quoting them. The merit of these clips is that they tell what us Ahmadinejad actually said rather than what he is variously reported to have said in speeches. It does seem certain, though, that he had to excise the phrase “ the ambiguous and dubious question of the Holocaust” from a draft speech for a UN conference. Elie Wiesel, striking his best oily pulpit note, is trying to sic the UN on to him.

Opinions are only as interesting as the reasons for holding them. What Codoh members seem not yet to have found is any account of Ahamadinejad’s reasons for finding the Holocaust question “ambiguous and dubious”. But Ahmadinejad is a civil engineer of high ability. It is very likely the technical descriptions of the gas chambers that have struck him as dubious. Perhaps he has published something somewhere which will give us a clue. In the Youtubed conversations he does demand that the whole question should be the subject of “independent” research. It is hard even to imagine any research team whose “independence” would command the trust of many parties. Algun2 in Codoh believes A. has offered to fund this research himself but can as yet find no source for this interesting claim..

I am not allowed to post URLs here. To see Ahmadinejad’s youtube clips go to the Codoh front page thread entitled Petition; HOLO CAUST not a myth

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I don't have separate standards of evidence for the holocaust. Holocaust scholars and the general public has separate standards of evidence for the holocaust.

What a laughably stupid and dishonest claim.

See Mondials post above about the communist genocides (the ones you believe the jews are responsible for). The evidence for the Holocaust, the Holodomor, Stalins purges, Mao's "Great Leap Forward" and "Cultural Revolution", the "Killing Fields" of Cambodia, Cubas La Cabana prison, North Koreas mass starvations, and gulags and re-education camps throughout the communist world... are all quite substantial. We know these genocides occurred.

The difference between the communist genocides and the Holocaust is the evidence for the latter is actually much greater. NATO armies didn't roll into Russias gulags after the fall of the Soviet Union. Bringing up Tiannenmen Square with China will only result in a diplomatic incident, North Korea isn't letting inspection teams in anytime soon, Castro isn't letting anyone exhume Che Guevaras victims.

But not so with the Holocaust. The Allied countries had free run of the former third reich. We could go where we wanted to, talk to whom we wanted to and anyone who tried to stop us would have wound up on the docket next to Georing and Himmler.

Ironically, this just gave you people a bigger playground to nitpick over.

Is it chocolate?

Mostly. They may also contain traces of jewish urine.

 

[MG1962]

See Mondials post above about the communist genocides (the ones you believe the jews are responsible for). The evidence for the Holocaust, the Holodomor, Stalins purges, Mao's "Great Leap Forward" and "Cultural Revolution", the "Killing Fields" of Cambodia, Cubas La Cabana prison, North Koreas mass starvations, and gulags and re-education camps throughout the communist world... are all quite substantial. We know these genocides occurred.

Dude seriously thats a stretch. 160 war criminals is now a genocide?