Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[jargon buster]

Zionists are haters, elitists, supremacists who hide beneath the skirts and behind the wealth of Judaism.

Clayton, do you know any Zionists?

Also Clayton your post has a tinge of hatred towards zionists, is that the case?

 

[TSR]

All self serving lies. Remember at your own risk.

.
Yes, these were all self-serving lies on your part.

The only apparent 'risk' involved in remembering them is the associated memory that you ran away from them for so long.

Which I will continue to point out, making that risk entirely yours.

Why did you post such self-serving lies in the first place?
.

 

[Kevin.Silbstedt]

There are false analogies and there are bad analogies. But this one is just weird.

Wait, you are comlaining about false analogies?

For the record, you compared an event for which there is no evidence at all (bible stuff) with an event (=the holocaust), for which there is only a lack of evidence in minor details to conclude, that historians have double standards. And that wasn't your only false analogy.

If you don't let us into the archives you can't really criticize us for not visiting the archives.

Well, so I guess Pressac, who was a holocaust denier back then and was close to Faurisson, teleported himself into the archives secretly.


Btw. I don't know, if everyone knows this little video here, so I just link to it. (There is a better version on the nuremberg trails project site, but I can't find it there at the moment)
A video that shows, how the nazis used engine exhausts to kill people (in this case psychiatric patients) inside a chamber. But hey, doesn't matter, there were no gassings, right?

 

[Walter Ego]

Clayton, do you know any Zionists?

Also Clayton your post has a tinge of hatred towards zionists Jews, is that the case?

Fixed that for you.

 

[LemmyCaution]

Good idea to laud by supporting the Zionist scum who infer the Jewish people of the Holohoax were docile sheep and murderers. What do you think their opinion is of non Jewish people?

Some victims of the Nazis--among them Jews, Poles, POWs--were exploited and murdered without resistance, while other victims fought back. Some victims of the Nazis were in fact criticized by other victims for their failure to resist. One Jewish leader, in fact, wrote on New Year's Day 1942 that "We will not be led like sheep to the slaughter! True, we are weak and defenseless, but the only reply to the murderer is revolt!" Who was that? Abba Kovner. What was the affiliation of Abba Kovner and his immediate followers? They were, of course, Zionists. Who, without any knowledge of the history or apparently of Zionism, are accused by Clayton Moore as being "scum who infer the Jewish people of the Holohoax were docile sheep." Brilliant, as usual.

 

[Wroclaw]

Yeah, really. The Zionists tended to be the most militant Jews in Europe, and they resisted as a general rule. So did Marxists.

 

[Saggy]

No it's not. The article didn't mention Carlo Mattogno. Carlo Mattogno has not been arrested and charged with Holocaust denial in his home country of Italy.

Nick, I really hate to do this, but you've left me no choice. When the usual flack feigns stupidity it's to be expected and isn't much of a stretch to begin with, but in your case I'm perplexed and disappointed, but that won't keep me from fetching up the usual quote, the only answer to this pathetic tactic .....

"The more I argued with them (the Jews) the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid."

 

[MG1962]

Nick, I really hate to do this, but you've left me no choice. When the usual flack feigns stupidity it's to be expected and isn't much of a stretch to begin with, but in your case I'm perplexed and disappointed, but that won't keep me from fetching up the usual quote, the only answer to this pathetic tactic .....

"The more I argued with them (the Jews) the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid."

Wow thats a lightweight response even by your standards

 

[Dogzilla]

I think you need to back up and reflect on how badly your side has failed on finding any survivors full stop.

I'm not talking about family reunions. I'm talking about making a convincing argument showing that the numbers are genuinely wrong and that another set of numbers are right.

But what if the numbers are right? What if there really were six million Jews missing at the end of the war?

Since it's a dead cert that you're only going to reply with drivel like the above post with attempts to obfuscate, move goalposts and play burden of proof table tennis, I should clarify that what I'm talking about is actually fairly simple.

If 'revisionism' was serious and amounted to something more than the antisemitic verbiage that it really is, then it'd be a simple matter to show the world that the numbers were all wrong and lo! here are the millions of Jews, this is what happened to them, some went here, some died, some went there.

That would shut up Saggy's fantasy Zionists, and hit newspaper headlines with the Major Revision to World History you seem to think is your natural birthright.

Tell you what: why don't we dig out a table of prewar population statistics for the Jews of Europe (and even the world), and then you and your buddies tell us, with evidence, what happened to them.

You tell us, the same way that every other historian would tell the story of a population upheaval or mass migration. With evidence.

No obfuscation, no conjectures, no appeals to unknowability, no burden of proof table tennis. It's just you and positive evidence.

That's how history is meant to be revised.

This little exercise of yours might actually yield some meaningful results if the Jews in Europe during WWII were facing only two possible fates: 1) surviving the war or 2) being intentionally killed by the Nazis as part of their plan to exterminate all the Jews. But as we've established already, that is not true.

As it stands you insist that we have six million Jews (or 5.1 million or whatever the number) who perished in the holocaust--meaning intentionally murdered by the Nazis as part of the Final Solution to the Jewish Question. Let's say that's true. How many Jews were missing after the war but not confirmed dead? How many Jews were collateral casualties? How many Jews were executed because they were partisans or spies or common criminals? How many Jews died merely because it was their time to die?

What's the total number of Jewish deaths during WWII? How many Jews were holocausted and how many didn't survive the war above and beyond those who were holocausted? You can find a rough estimate of the number of innocent Polish noncombatants who were killed during the war but weren't killed as part of a Nazi plan to exterminate the Poles. The same is true for innocent Russian noncombatants. You can find this number for Romanians, Bulgarians, Czech, Italians, even Germans. Lots of people died during the war without being murdered by the Nazi as part of a master plan to exterminate them.

If you're going to insist that somewhere between five and six million Jews living in Europe before the war weren't there after the war because they were murdered by the Nazis as part of a plan to exterminate all the Jews, you're saying that the major combat operations that killed millions of innocent Poles, Czechs, Russians, etc. living in the old Pale of Settlement would have had no impact on the Jews living in the same region. You're saying that Jews living in Europe during WWII would not have even died of old age.

The carnage that killed millions of non-Jews in Europe during World War II would have bypassed the Jews completely and they would have all survived the war but for the Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews.

And that's just plain stupid.

 

[Dogzilla]

Opinion presented as fact. Since you lied about Florida K-3 students being taught the Holocaust, why should anyone accept your unfounded personal opinion about anything?

In case anybody thinks Robrob isn't lying about holocaust education for Florida's K-3 students, you can click here to read the Manual for K-3 holocaust education for Florida schools.

How many other topics doesn't Florida teach in it's schools for which they publish a manual for teaching?

 

[Dogzilla]

Wait, you are comlaining about false analogies?

[qimg]http://bahairants.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/irony-meter.gif[/qimg]

For the record, you compared an event for which there is no evidence at all (bible stuff) with an event (=the holocaust), for which there is only a lack of evidence in minor details to conclude, that historians have double standards. And that wasn't your only false analogy.



Well, so I guess Pressac, who was a holocaust denier back then and was close to Faurisson, teleported himself into the archives secretly.


Btw. I don't know, if everyone knows this little video here, so I just link to it. (There is a better version on the nuremberg trails project site, but I can't find it there at the moment)
A video that shows, how the nazis used engine exhausts to kill people (in this case psychiatric patients) inside a chamber. But hey, doesn't matter, there were no gassings, right?

For the record "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" is a valid maxim when we're talking about the holocaust but it's not when we're not talking about the holocaust. That's called a double standard, not a false analogy.

Also, revisionists weren't always banned from the archives. Revisionism wasn't always illegal in the countries where one might want to visit archives. David Irving used to rummage around in the archives all the time.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

How many other topics doesn't Florida teach in it's schools for which they publish a manual for teaching?

Probably all of them.

 

[Nick Terry]

Nick, I really hate to do this, but you've left me no choice. When the usual flack feigns stupidity it's to be expected and isn't much of a stretch to begin with, but in your case I'm perplexed and disappointed, but that won't keep me from fetching up the usual quote, the only answer to this pathetic tactic .....

"The more I argued with them (the Jews) the better I came to know their dialectic. First they counted on the stupidity of their adversary, and then, when there was no other way out, they themselves simply played stupid."

I expect that virtually everyone reading this thread is increasingly at a loss as to why you cannot admit that you are flat-out wrong about Holocaust denial being a criminal offence in every EU member state.

This has been pointed out to you by numerous people on this thread. You have been given links to explanations clarifying the legal situation and asked to account for why prominent deniers living in specific EU states haven't been arrested. No lawyer in Europe would agree with you. None of the case law agrees with you. Events like Toeben not being extradited from the UK to Germany contradict your claim.

You're wrong, and that's that.

 

[Nick Terry]

But what if the numbers are right? What if there really were six million Jews missing at the end of the war?

This isn't about you obfuscating the issue and trying to declare that people were just missing. It's about asking for your side's best explanation of their fate. Currently, revisionism doesn't have one. You only have obfuscation.

This little exercise of yours might actually yield some meaningful results if the Jews in Europe during WWII were facing only two possible fates: 1) surviving the war or 2) being intentionally killed by the Nazis as part of their plan to exterminate all the Jews. But as we've established already, that is not true.

The request wasn't about posing a false dilemma. It asked very simply for a coherent explanation of the fate of Europe's Jews which can run the numbers. Either you have one or you don't. After 65 years it's really not too much to expect that your side could offer some and say, this group met this fate, this group survived entirely, this group emigrated, that group were abducted by aliens, the other group were raptured.

Or whatever it is you can show happened to them.

As it stands you insist that we have six million Jews (or 5.1 million or whatever the number) who perished in the holocaust--meaning intentionally murdered by the Nazis as part of the Final Solution to the Jewish Question. Let's say that's true. How many Jews were missing after the war but not confirmed dead? How many Jews were collateral casualties? How many Jews were executed because they were partisans or spies or common criminals? How many Jews died merely because it was their time to die?

You don't get it, do you? I predicted that you would try to shift burden of proof and lsurprise surprise, now you're asking questions of me when my point was that your side as a whole needs to answer them.

What's the total number of Jewish deaths during WWII?

You tell me.

How many Jews were holocausted and how many didn't survive the war above and beyond those who were holocausted?

You tell me.

You can find a rough estimate of the number of innocent Polish noncombatants who were killed during the war but weren't killed as part of a Nazi plan to exterminate the Poles. The same is true for innocent Russian noncombatants. You can find this number for Romanians, Bulgarians, Czech, Italians, even Germans. Lots of people died during the war without being murdered by the Nazi as part of a master plan to exterminate them.

So? Their deaths can be estimated or calculated using a variety of sources. You just shot yourself in the foot by bringing up non-Jewish deaths because it's a virtual certainty that you're going to apply a different standard to Jewish deaths.

If you're going to insist that somewhere between five and six million Jews living in Europe before the war weren't there after the war because they were murdered by the Nazis as part of a plan to exterminate all the Jews, you're saying that the major combat operations that killed millions of innocent Poles, Czechs, Russians, etc. living in the old Pale of Settlement would have had no impact on the Jews living in the same region.

You can prove that collateral damage from bombing and shelling killed millions in Eastern Europe?

You're saying that Jews living in Europe during WWII would not have even died of old age.

Am I? I didn't actually say anything, I merely asked you to provide a coherent explanation for the numbers without obfuscating or moving the goalposts. Clearly, that was too much to expect.

It's painfully obvious that you're floundering because no guru on the denier side has come up with anything that you can parrot. Unless you're going to try and have us believe Rassinier's dubious arithmetic.

The carnage that killed millions of non-Jews in Europe during World War II would have bypassed the Jews completely and they would have all survived the war but for the Nazi plan to exterminate the Jews.

And that's just plain stupid.

This is a whopping great strawman. And strawmen don't add up to a coherent explanation. Vague assertions and conjectures don't add up to anything much at all.

 

[Nick Terry]

For the record "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence" is a valid maxim when we're talking about the holocaust but it's not when we're not talking about the holocaust. That's called a double standard, not a false analogy.

A double standard you failed to prove existed.

Also, revisionists weren't always banned from the archives. Revisionism wasn't always illegal in the countries where one might want to visit archives. David Irving used to rummage around in the archives all the time.

It seems you have a typical layman's inability to read or comprehend footnotes. I suggest you look over writings by Udo Walendy, Germar Rudolf, Walter Sanning* and Carlo Mattogno and tell us what you see when you cast your eye to the bottom of the page.

*not his real name. Clue!

 

[TSR]

David Irving used to rummage around in the archives all the time.

.
... until it became known that he was not above stealing from them. How many respectable historians do this, and continue to be allowed access?

Or does that reflect a double standard, too?
.

 

[abaddon]

.
... until it became known that he was not above stealing from them. How many respectable historians do this, and continue to be allowed access?

Or does that reflect a double standard, too?
.

Sorry, what? Oh boy.

Got a ref? that's gold.

 

[A'isha]

Sorry, what? Oh boy.

Got a ref? that's gold.

Irving "borrowed" some microfiche plates from a Moscow archive. Deborah Lipstadt mentioned it in her book, and so it came up during the libel trial where Irving was legally judged to be a crappy holocaust-denying historian.

This part of Justice Gray's decision has all the details.

 

[Saggy]

You're wrong, and that's that.

The NYT has made a liar of you Nick, but it doesn't surprise me that you don't admit it.

Let's try another reference....close to home for you ....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6573005.stm

EU agrees new racial hatred law

"Under the agreement, incitement to hatred or violence against a group or a person based on colour, race, national or ethnic origin must be punishable by at least a year in jail."


Now, why is Mattogno, who is obviously guilty of inciting racial hatred against Jews by denying the holohoax, in jail? To discover the answer, you'll have to read the article !

 

[abaddon]

The NYT has made a liar of you Nick, but it doesn't surprise me that you don't admit it.

Let's try another reference....close to home for you ....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6573005.stm

EU agrees new racial hatred law

"Under the agreement, incitement to hatred or violence against a group or a person based on colour, race, national or ethnic origin must be punishable by at least a year in jail."


Now, why is Mattogno, who is obviously guilty of inciting racial hatred against Jews by denying the holohoax, in jail? To discover the answer, you'll have to read the article !

First paragraph of the 2007 article

European interior ministers have agreed to make incitement to racism an EU-wide crime, but have stopped short of a blanket ban on Holocaust denial.

You didn't read it at all, did you?