• 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 thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
A mixture of codoh form lies and stupidity is not actually a case though, it's a rant. A rant that evolved under codoh-conditions into this master-piece of holocaust denier raving. Poor Seven-up. Having to read all that Bradley Smithsonian dreck has clearly warped the poor fellow's mind.

Of course there have been investigations, note none of which will satisfy these guys because they are unreasonable and irrational lunatics. You don't believe me? You wait until they start discussing fraudulent archelogical digs. The work of the Holocaust Controversies member Roberto Muehlenkamp upon mass graves at the HC blog should be enough, But it is not. Either they don't read or they are insane. You only have to look at the shouty capitals.

"For instance Elie Wiesel."

For instance?

Seven up you and Clayton have been going on and on and on and on and on and on and on and (ok one more,) on about Elie Wiesel. That's not "for instance." That's "Elie Wiesel is the Holohoax," remember? Or have you forgotten already?

I wish we could have proper separated threads, instead of a One World Government thread.
 
Last edited:
Just a glance at Strawczynski's 'testimony' reveals that it is totally incompatible with the holohoax ....

“At first they wanted to persuade us with nice words. An important person from Lublin came to the camp, gathered us together and spoke to us. We were told that a “Jewish city” was being established and that the Jews would be granted full autonomy there, and if we would work with dedication and earn their trust we would receive leadership positions in the Jewish city."

... as per the holohoax the Nazis didn't persuade the Jews at all but led them from the train to the gas chamber. Strawczynski directly contradicts the holohoax. This is what constitutes 'evidence' for the Zionists.

There is not a single credible Jewish witness to the holohoax.

Now, if you'll give the name of ONE JEWISH WITNESS, and summarize their testimony and how it confirms the holohoax, we'll proceed. I'm not going to waste my time looking up more names.
Are you joking? I'd been hoping for an analysis of the book and comparison to other accounts, written independently from this one, to see how similar and different they were. So what is this "holohoax" that Strawczynski is contradicting? Where did you find that "as per the holohoax the Nazis didn't persuade the Jews at all but led them from the train to the gas chamber"? You are aware, aren't you, that at Treblinka some Jews were selected for labor and not sent directly to the gas chambers, per the "holohoax"? And that Strawczynksi was one such Jew?

Your comment is incredibly ignorant, and capping it with a repetition of your claims, which appear even more bankrupt than before on account of your ignorance and your silly methodology, does nothing to enhance your own credibility.
 
The Zionists cannot produce ONE CREDIBLE JEWISH WITNESS.

Nick Terry gave you TWO HUNDRED witnesses. Yet you neither reacted to that, nor shown the ability to prove ANY event in history to the standard you demand the Holocaust be proven to.

Now who is telling degenerate lies here?
 
Seems to me that Saggy presented facts and you ignored them.
No, Saggy paraded his ignorance. He showed he doesn't know what historians or witnesses say.

Saggy quoted this from Strawczynski: “At first they wanted to persuade us with nice words. An important person from Lublin came to the camp, gathered us together and spoke to us. We were told that a 'Jewish city' was being established and that the Jews would be granted full autonomy there, and if we would work with dedication and earn their trust we would receive leadership positions in the Jewish city." He claims that this contradicts what he calls "the holohoax." I will show below that it doesn't.

But first let's observe that Saggy "forgot" the context for this passage. The context isn't arrival in the camp nor is it when camp guards "led them [victims] from the train to the gas chamber," as Saggy claims, distorting the passage. No, what Saggy quoted was about a calming speech given to Jews already working in the camp in support roles. These Jews had been selected for labor on arrival, and Strawczynski was one of them. Strawczynski's text continues -- with a bit Saggy also "forgot" -- "When these kind words failed, the Germans began to threaten." Details of threats, punishments, and abuse follow, including description of a public hanging to intimidate the camp's inmate workers.

Now it is fine for Saggy to lie or make things up if it makes him feel good. But he did not present any facts. The facts are as follows:

Jules Schelvis in his description of Sobibor, another AR camp, provides a good example of what the history books (Saggy's "holohoax") say about camp arrivals and how the Germans handled them. They mixed threats and reassurance, shock and calming, to confuse and make docile the transported Jews. Paraphrasing the "welcome" words of SS Oberschrfuhrer Hermann Michel in his speeches to Sobibor deportee, here is what Schelvis wrote: 'In wartime, we must all work. You will be taken to a place where you will prosper. Children and elderly will not have to work, but will still be well fed. . . . The conditions under which you have traveled, with so many of you in each wagon, make it desirable that hygiene precautions are taken.That is why you will shortly have to undress and shower. Your clothes and luggage will be guarded. . . ." This, not what Saggy wrote, is what historians say about how victims were handle; they say that violence, threats, and deception were all part of the Nazis' repertoire.

In Birkenau things were similar. According to Abraham Dragon, a surviving member of the Sonderkommando there, "As soon as they [the victims] reached the crematorium yard, an SS man climbed on a chair, gave a short speech, and told the people that they were going to the showers and then they would be sent to work. So they had to remember the number of the hook where they'd hang their clothing. The people believed him."

As for Treblinka, much the same, with the Germans using different means to reassure the victims because, as Strawczynski wrote, if the victims had sensed their fate, especially before the Treblinka process was refined, "they might disperse, try to hide, or, even worse, try to organize resistance."

Wiernik was deported to Treblinka from Warsaw, 23 August 1942, and was at first chosen as corpse handler. He also testified to the reassurances given victims: "We were faced with what was termed 'resettlement' . . ."

Abraham Krzepicki was also deported to Treblinka from Warsaw, in his case on 25 August 1942. According to Krzepicki, his arrival went like this: "'Attention, people from Warsaw!' the signs read in huge letters, followed by detailed instructions for people who supposedly had arrived at a regular labor camp. They were to hand in their clothes to be deloused and disinfected. Our money and our other belongings would be returned to us later on. . . . A little later, an SS man came over to us and delivered a speech. He spoke very cold-bloodedly but here and there his oration was interspersed with humor. 'Have no fear!' he repeated every minute, 'Nothing will happen to you. The dead bodies lying here, he told us, arrived in that condition. They died in the train from suffocation. It’s nobody’s fault. Everyone will be treated well here. Everyone will be employed at his own trade or occupation, tailors in the tailor workshops; cabinetmakers in the furniture shop, shoemakers as shoemakers. Everyone will get work and bread.' Some people began to call off their occupations. When they went up to the German, he laughed at them in a friendly way, felt their muscles and patted them on the back. 'Ja, ja, that’s good! You’re strong, that’s what we need.' Some people began to applaud the German. Most of the Jews who heard this sweet talk did indeed feel better and started to believe that they really were in a labor camp. 'Sit quietly, in order'--the German gently urged them and people sat up straight in their places, like children in a classroom."

Another Jew transported to Treblinka, Richard Glazar, later recalled in his book Trap with a Green Fence, "'To another ghetto in the east' is what was written on the transport documents." Glazar described how the women were separated from the men ostensbily for disinfection, and wrote of "An SS man telling arriving Jews that '. . . you'll work over there, and if you do a good job you can get to be a foreman or a Kapo. Come on, over to your workplace, now!'"

Of course, these witnesses arrived in the camp a few months before Strawczynski, who was transported to Treblinka from Czestochowa in October 1942.

Since what Saggy calls the "holohoax" was constructed in part using the above testimonies, the history of the death camps maintains what is described in these testimonies, not the ignorant and silly claim of Saggy, who is aware of neither the testimonies nor the historical analysis. Once again it is apparent that our intrepid Revs haven't read what they would revise and feel free to make up whatever they feel helps their case. Clayton calls this foolish make-believe the facts; it should be clear that Saggy and Clayton don't know what they're talking about. The fact is that Holocaust historians explain that the Nazis used persuasion to calm and reassure the Jews when they arrived at the death camps, before killing them in the gas chambers, and at various times to help maintain deception and thus order. Strawczynski directly supports what historians explain.
 
Last edited:
Say what? Here's the case: the holohoax is a complete fraud, perpetrated by world Jewry, for the express purpose of blackmailing the world to acquiesce in the rape of Palestine and for untold billions of dollars of 'reparations'.

The fraud is evident in every instance, for example the writings of the Nobel Prize winner and first director of the USHMM holohoax museum Elie Wiesel, who writes in the book 'Night' ....

"Babies were thrown into the air and the machine gunners used them as targets."


All holohoax testimony consists of prima facie degenerate lies just like this one.

The Zionists cannot produce ONE CREDIBLE JEWISH WITNESS.

Bradley Smith waged a campaign on college campuses for the last year challenging the phony academics to name one person gassed at Auschwitz, and the academics ran, to the last/man woman, like the cowards they are, like chickens fleeing the hound. ACADEMIA WILL NOT IDENTIFY ONE SINGLE GASSING VICTIM.

It's all a complete hoax. THERE HAS BEEN NOT A SINGLE FORENSIC INVESTIGATION of a holohoax grave.

Etc.
And so, having failed miserably on Strawcyznski and mainstream histories of the Holocaust, Saggy falls back on his Wiesel nonsense.
 
Strike 1!
Saggy said:
Cremating bodies in a pit is not only impossible it is absurd.
http://www.prwatch.org/files/images/burning_cows.jpg

Strike 2!
Saggy said:
THERE HAS BEEN NOT A SINGLE FORENSIC INVESTIGATION of a holohoax grave

which I made with the assistance of an expert in forensic medicine, it was determined that the ashes are without any doubt of human origin (Treblinka. The Examining Judge, Lukaszkiewicz)."

Coming up to Strike 3
Saggy hasn't actually contradicted Oscar Strawczynski's yet.....
 
Coming up to Strike 3
Saggy hasn't actually contradicted Oscar Strawczynski's yet.....
No, not even close. Saggy doesn't seem to know much about this stuff. He tried making a minor point rather than dealing with the whole work. He presented this single point as somehow opposed to the historical literature, when, in fact, it conforms neatly to the literature. But one would have to read the historical works to know this. And Saggy showed himself ignorant of the literature -- and also to be a poor reader and unreliable reporter, misrepresenting the passage from Strawczynski's book which he chose to use. Finally, the whole premise of his post was ridiculous. So, lost, he fell back on Wiesel, who is not germane. A sad performance. But at least, after days and days and reminders, he did give it a try, sorry as it was.
 
Last edited:
He presented this single point as somehow opposed to the historical literature, when, in fact, it conforms neatly to the literature.

The one name you finally managed to cough up, which is better than Nick Terry can do, Strawczynski, gave testimony that directly contradicts the main feature the holohoax, the indiscriminate mass killing of Jews in the camps. This isn't surprising. So, lacking even one witness to the non-existent mass killing, you pretend that Strawczynski did testify to mass killing. Yep, standard issue Zionist lies.

There is absolutely no sense to the repeated idiocy of your posts, but, they do provide a current illustration of typical Zionist deceit, so, they are appreciated.
 
The one name you finally managed to cough up, which is better than Nick Terry can do, Strawczynski, gave testimony that directly contradicts the main feature the holohoax, the indiscriminate mass killing of Jews in the camps. This isn't surprising. So, lacking even one witness to the non-existent mass killing, you pretend that Strawczynski did testify to mass killing. Yep, standard issue Zionist lies.

There is absolutely no sense to the repeated idiocy of your posts, but, they do provide a current illustration of typical Zionist deceit, so, they are appreciated.
What are you talking about? A name I finally cough up? I put it out there right after you started spewing about no credible Jewish witnesses -- and it took you about a week to reply. LOL

You have really embarrassed yourself. There is no "main feature of the holohoax" featuring the "indiscriminate mass killing of Jews in the camps." The view has long been that almost all arriving Jews at the AR camps and about 2/3 IIRC of those at AB were sent to the gas chambers, that some Jews were selected for labor (at the AR camps for support roles within the camp and at AB for both support roles and for industrial labor in various work camps and slave labor settings), and that the camp guards mixed threats with reassurance to encourage victims to follow orders. Since you believe otherwise, it is down to you to show where historians present the view you claim. Specific citations required. Thank you in advance.
 
Last edited:
. . . directly contradicts the main feature the holohoax, the indiscriminate mass killing of Jews in the camps. . . .
While you are at it (hint: Rees, Van Pelt/Dwork, Hilberg, Langbein), please explain to members of this forum the following terms, what they refer to, and how they relate to the "main feature" of histories of the camps: gold Jews, Kanada, the Sonderkommando, Monowitz, the sorting square, the Reds, the Blues, Kapos, the Hofjuden. Thank you again.
 
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit
This is why makes Holocaust revisionism so vibrant and robust - the fact that there are so many lively points of dispute within the discipline.

I have to disagree, the cold tea easily outranks naked preteens in the gas chamber.
With the naked preteens, Mueller was deliberately aiming for the effect he achieves, although the effect and intent is crass and obvious, it is deliberately. With his "and by now the tea was stone cold" he is blissfully unaware of the absurdity of his statement, the completely unintentional nature heightens the comedy amazingly.

Nice to see that the rabbit finds mass murder hilarious.
 
Saggy cannot produce ONE CREDIBLE WITNESS for this alleged Jewish conspiracy of his in which Jews control of all media everywhere.
Nor can he explain Zionist control of universities except with a complaint that lots of people treat Bradley Smith as the offensive jerk that he is.

Do Zionists also control public schools in the United States? And across the world?
 
This is why makes Holocaust revisionism so vibrant and robust - the fact that there are so many lively points of dispute within the discipline.

You know what they say, put two revisionists in a room and you'll get three different opinions.

I have to disagree, the cold tea easily outranks naked preteens in the gas chamber.
With the naked preteens, Mueller was deliberately aiming for the effect he achieves, although the effect and intent is crass and obvious, it is deliberately. With his "and by now the tea was stone cold" he is blissfully unaware of the absurdity of his statement, the completely unintentional nature heightens the comedy amazingly.

I'm still going to go with twisted fantasy of a child molester. But it goes beyond the pedophilia. The fantasy is absurdity on top of absurdity. The guy decides to die with his people instead of continuing on in this living Hell. So he's hanging out in n empty corner of the gas chamber when these two girls in the full bloom of youth approach him and tell him they know about his plan. How these girls know Filthy Filip's plan is not explained. They tell him that they must die. Why do the girls know that they must die and why do they accept that they must die? They tell him that he must live to bear witness. Why would they feel Filip is better suited to bear witness to the horror than themselves? That's not explained. Naked Nubile #1 (Yana) tells Filip to give the gold chain around her neck to some guy she's been schtupping after she's dead. Why does Yana still have this necklace? What would Yana have done if a Sondercommando hadn't happen to have been in the gas chamber with her? Why does she trust Filip to deliver the gold necklace to some stranger? Wouldn't he want to trade it for bread? The two girls the force Filip through the crowded of screaming wailing martyrs and throw him smack bang into some Nazi dude who pulls out a club and starts wailing on him. After the gassing, Filip goes and finds the necklace and removes it to give to the boyfriend.

It's just about as ridiculous a story as any survivor has made up. It would be merely hilarious like most testimony except the naked preteens add just enough vileness to take it to the next level. It fits with David Olere's drawings and those "Ilse, She wolf of the SS" Nazi sexpoloitation films that all came out in the 1970s.

But the reason I really think this is better than the cold tea crisis is that Yehuda Bauer, in his introduction, specifically calls out this incident as "the beauty of Yana's death."
 
The fantasy is absurdity on top of absurdity.

Just for the record......

You are saying that there are some fake holocaust eyewitness accounts and we agree. We say this does not interfere with other eyewitnesses whose accounts match other surrounding documentary, physical, confessions and other evidence. You do not agree.

Therefore, if holocaust denier Richard Krege faked his entire GPR "analysis" of Treblinka does that mean we should dismiss the views of every other holocaust denier?

Which is the correct treatment in your view, as a holocaust denier?
 
You know what they say, put two revisionists in a room and you'll get three different opinions.

I'm still going to go with twisted fantasy of a child molester. But it goes beyond the pedophilia. The fantasy is absurdity on top of absurdity. The guy decides to die with his people instead of continuing on in this living Hell. So he's hanging out in n empty corner of the gas chamber when these two girls in the full bloom of youth approach him and tell him they know about his plan. How these girls know Filthy Filip's plan is not explained. They tell him that they must die. Why do the girls know that they must die and why do they accept that they must die? They tell him that he must live to bear witness. Why would they feel Filip is better suited to bear witness to the horror than themselves? That's not explained. Naked Nubile #1 (Yana) tells Filip to give the gold chain around her neck to some guy she's been schtupping after she's dead. Why does Yana still have this necklace? What would Yana have done if a Sondercommando hadn't happen to have been in the gas chamber with her? Why does she trust Filip to deliver the gold necklace to some stranger? Wouldn't he want to trade it for bread? The two girls the force Filip through the crowded of screaming wailing martyrs and throw him smack bang into some Nazi dude who pulls out a club and starts wailing on him. After the gassing, Filip goes and finds the necklace and removes it to give to the boyfriend.

It's just about as ridiculous a story as any survivor has made up. It would be merely hilarious like most testimony except the naked preteens add just enough vileness to take it to the next level. It fits with David Olere's drawings and those "Ilse, She wolf of the SS" Nazi sexpoloitation films that all came out in the 1970s.

But the reason I really think this is better than the cold tea crisis is that Yehuda Bauer, in his introduction, specifically calls out this incident as "the beauty of Yana's death."

And yet, the story is entirely peripheral to the core events described. Moreover, it is told in a memoir which was published in 1979, and which was partially ghost-written. In case the peanut gallery are having difficulties with chronology, this was 34 years after the end of World War II, during which time quite a few other witnesses had given evidence regarding the gas chambers at Birkenau.
 
Does anyone else have a problem with the "logic" used that every particular piece of evidence must be lie, because all the others are lies?
 
Dogzilla said:
I'm still going to go with twisted fantasy of a child molester. But it goes beyond the pedophilia. The fantasy is absurdity on top of absurdity.

You know, you could at least use different words each time you use this appeal to ridicule crap, which is retarded anyway. Oh, and of course no one will see the ad hominem argument you tried with that "child molester thing". Even a child molester can be a witness and tell the truth. Yep, you holocaust deniers just define the term "pathetic".

Dogzilla said:
The guy decides to die with his people instead of continuing on in this living Hell. So he's hanging out in n empty corner of the gas chamber when these two girls in the full bloom of youth approach him and tell him they know about his plan. How these girls know Filthy Filip's plan is not explained. They tell him that they must die. Why do the girls know that they must die and why do they accept that they must die?

This demonstrates perfectly, why questions or the lack of an explanation is not evidence. I don't know the source you use and I only know the testimony of Mueller from Lanzmanns "Shoah" (yeah, another evil zionist), but I guess you talk about the gassing of the Theresienstadt sub camp, where of course everyone knew, that they were going to be gassed (even if they denied it, til they finally went to the crematoria), because they were told so by other members of the camp (Vrba comes to my mind).

They were told so, because they should start an uprising with the help of the Sonderkommando, because of their (in comparison) healthy condition and otherwise sure death in their near future. But they failed to do so.

Dogzilla said:
They tell him that he must live to bear witness. Why would they feel Filip is better suited to bear witness to the horror than themselves? That's not explained.

How about, because he wanted to die and not because he had to, like the girls? At that time, he was part of the Sonderkommando and it was his choice to die with them. He could just leave the room, the girls couldn't.

Dogzilla said:
Naked Nubile #1 (Yana) tells Filip to give the gold chain around her neck to some guy she's been schtupping after she's dead. Why does Yana still have this necklace?

Because she's a filthy jew or because it meant something to her and she hid it. Nah, it's just because she's a jew. :rolleyes:

Dogzilla said:
Why does she trust Filip to deliver the gold necklace to some stranger?

Because it was the only chance to deliver it, and if she wouldn't have given it to Mueller, it would have fallen in the hands of nazis right after the gassing? To easy?

Dogzilla said:
Wouldn't he want to trade it for bread?

Still better, than in the hands of the nazis, without any positive results.

Dogzilla said:
It's just about as ridiculous a story as any survivor has made up.

It doesn't even come close to the insanely idiotic **** you are puking into this forum. Here's a tip: If you cannot explain or understand the context of something, it just means that you can't explain or understand it, period!

You are doing the exact same crap as creationists: "What about this bacteria, how could it have evolved through evolution? I don't know, so that must mean evolution is a hoax!" You can prove any kind of BS with this argument from ignorance/incredulity garbage. And especially when it comes to the holocaust you know nothing.

Sometimes I really wish such a reasoning would work, because right now I cannot understand or explain how someone could believe such a reasoning to be rational. What a retarded load of crap.
 
Last edited:
You know, you could at least use different words each time you use this appeal to ridicule crap, which is retarded anyway. Oh, and of course no one will see the ad hominem argument you tried with that "child molester thing". Even a child molester can be a witness and tell the truth. Yep, you holocaust deniers just define the term "pathetic".



This demonstrates perfectly, why questions or the lack of an explanation is not evidence. I don't know the source you use and I only know the testimony of Mueller from Lanzmanns "Shoah" (yeah, another evil zionist), but I guess you talk about the gassing of the Theresienstadt sub camp, where of course everyone knew, that they were going to be gassed (even if they denied it, til they finally went to the crematoria), because they were told so by other members of the camp (Vrba comes to my mind).

They were told so, because they should start an uprising with the help of the Sonderkommando, because of their (in comparison) healthy condition and otherwise sure death in their near future. But they failed to do so.



How about, because he wanted to die and not because he had to, like the girls? At that time, he was part of the Sonderkommando and it was his choice to die with them. He could just leave the room, the girls couldn't.



Because she's a filthy jew or because it meant something to her and she hid it. Nah, it's just because she's a jew. :rolleyes:



Because it was the only chance to deliver it, and if she wouldn't have given it to Mueller, it would have fallen in the hands of nazis right after the gassing? To easy?



Still better, than in the hands of the nazis, without any positive results.


What were the dumb ass Nazi's doing during all that?

The groundwork for the myth was mostly laid by the ridiculous lies of a very few at the post war trials. The fact that so many of the convicted were released when cooler heads prevailed is proof of the ridiculous lies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom