Merged General Holocaust denial discussion thread

[uke2se]

More from The Black Book,

"Many commandants of concentration camps actually singled out children for particular cruelty. The commandant of the Janowski camp in Lvov, Obersturmfuehrer Wilhaus especially enjoyed this sport. He was in the habit of sanding on the balcony of the camp office and taking pot-shots at the prisoners below to amuse his wife and nine-year old daughter. Sometimes Wilhaus would order someone to throw three- or four-year old children into the air while he shot at them. His daughter would clap her hands and cry: 'Do it again, Papa, do it again.' And he would go on shooting."

And the Jewish parents? Why they just watched their children being used for target practice.

What makes you think they didn't do anything?

These are degenerate lies, and beyond that, absurd degenerate lies. They characterize the holohoax.

Saying something is a lie doesn't make it a lie. Nor does saying something is absurd make it so. You need evidence, and you haven't got any. Drawing this to its ultimate conclusion, this makes you the degenerate liar, characterizing all the lying deniers.

 

[tsig]

More from The Black Book,

"Many commandants of concentration camps actually singled out children for particular cruelty. The commandant of the Janowski camp in Lvov, Obersturmfuehrer Wilhaus especially enjoyed this sport. He was in the habit of sanding on the balcony of the camp office and taking pot-shots at the prisoners below to amuse his wife and nine-year old daughter. Sometimes Wilhaus would order someone to throw three- or four-year old children into the air while he shot at them. His daughter would clap her hands and cry: 'Do it again, Papa, do it again.' And he would go on shooting."

And the Jewish parents? Why they just watched their children being used for target practice.

These are degenerate lies, and beyond that, absurd degenerate lies. They characterize the holohoax.

What were the parents supposed to do?

 

[Nick Terry]

And the Jewish parents? Why they just watched their children being used for target practice.

that presumes (a) the parents were present and hadn't been sent off on a work detail, (b) that the parents were in a position to do anything at all.

Other than get shot themselves if they complained, resisted or reacted.

 

[Saggy]

that presumes (a) the parents were present and hadn't been sent off on a work detail, (b) that the parents were in a position to do anything at all.

Other than get shot themselves if they complained, resisted or reacted.

First things first, the story is preposterous on its face, so it's a lie. Given that, would any other people but the Jews lie to claim that they stood by and did nothing while their children were used for target practice? Answer: no. The holohoax lies are degenerate lies.

 

[Wroclaw]

First things first, the story is preposterous on its face, so it's a lie.

I think if I looked up "begging the question" in the dictionary, I could find the above as an example.

Given that, would any other people but the Jews lie to claim that they stood by and did nothing while their children were used for target practice? Answer: no. The holohoax lies are degenerate lies.

So the Jews are special? Different from other people? Tell us more!

 

[Cyrix686]

Dogzilla is correct. Unslaked lime does not assist decomposition. It has a caustic quality and burns anything containing moisture or water, the overall effect leading eventually to preserved dehydrated material.

Quick lime or unslaked lime has been used in mass graves for centuries, medieval plague pits were lined with it. It is reported by archaeological findings that the top layer in the stratigraphy in at least two of the Belzec mass graves is of lime. The reports are discussed in Roberto Muehlenkamp's Holocaust Controversies blogs. The stratigraphy of grave pits 13 and 25 in Kola's Belzec findings for example show that sand and lime constitute the top layers. Not limestone in this case but lime. Limestone is found in some of the other pits however.

A layer of unslaked lime thrown over a mass grave disinfects and dehydrates the contents. It also discourages insects which are of course to a great part responsible for decomposition.

One possible conclusion from this might be that if the layers of buried and disgorged contents from mass graves at Treblinka had been treated with unslaked lime - then they may well have been that little bit easier to ignite and cremate.

 

[Corsair 115]

These are degenerate lies, and beyond that, absurd degenerate lies. They characterize the holohoax.

There are degenerate lies, and beyond that, absurd, degenerate lies. These characterize Saggy's fantastical worldwide Jewish conspiracy which controls the media, academia, and everything else.

First things first, the story is preposterous on its face, so it's a lie.

Indeed. Your allegation of a worldwide Jewish conspiracy which controls the media, academia, and everything else is absolutely preposterous on its face. And yet you have stated your belief in this utterly ridiculous proposition. Without offering a shred of evidence to prove its existence. You haven't even named ONE CREDIBLE WITNESS to this supposed global conspiracy.

The holohoax lies are degenerate lies.

Your fantastical worldwide Jewish conspiracy which controls the media, academia, and everything else is a degenerate lie.

 

[uke2se]

First things first, the story is preposterous on its face, so it's a lie.

I can play this game too. The story isn't preposteous on its face, so it's true.

Given that, would any other people but the Jews lie to claim that they stood by and did nothing while their children were used for target practice? Answer: no. The holohoax lies are degenerate lies.

Given that the story is true, by not being preposterous, would any other people use Jewish babies for target practice than the Nazis? Answer: Possibly. The holohoax is, as Saggs says, a degenerate lie. The holocaust, on the other hand, is very real and needs to be remembered.

 

[Moss]

I really wonder which neonazi group made Saggy think "degenerate" were a meaningful word. His overuse only displays where he got his socialisation.

 

[Clayton Moore]

What were the parents supposed to do?

Just stand there like the zombies the Holocaust depicts them to be.

 

[uke2se]

Just stand there like the zombies the Holocaust depicts them to be.

Which specific part claims that they stood there like zombies?

What specifically would you expect them to do in the situation, and what makes you think they didn't do just that?

 

[Dogzilla]

Help for the floundering denier trio. Here's a synopsis of one source for the murder action at Ponar in which Pesye Schloss was caught up: Kazimierz Sakowicz, a Polish journalist living in a rude home at Ponar, recorded the events of 2 September 1941, at the site, on a windy, rainy day: shots could be heard starting early in the morning; during the morning "on the road there was a long procession of people . . . two kilometers (for sure)"; "There were, as it turns out, 4,000--so says Jankowski; others claim that it was 4,875, exclusively women and many babies" who were killed; the victims realized what was occurring and shouted; "Eighty Shaulists did the shooting," that is Lithuanian riflemen (the Shaulists were members of a paramilitary nationalist group), while 100 Lithuanians guarded the perimeter; the shooters were drunk; tortures preceded the murders; "The men were shot separately. The women were stripped to their underwear"; as usual, after the murders, the Lithuanian killers pilfered confiscated clothing; "There were many wounded. One woman escaped to Dolna. She was shot in the arm. . . . That day the Heneks met 5 bleeding Jewish women, their clothes torn to shreds"; "These shootings were a punishment for the bogus shooting at German soldiers in Wilno on Sunday, August 31. There on the outskirts of the city, Hingst announced that Jews would be punished for the shooting . . ." The full text of Sakowicz's entry for this event can be found of course in the English language edition of Sakowicz's Ponar diary. Please let us know if your silence is down to your not also having access to the Jaeger report; that report is online but if you would prefer excerpts to be recorded in this thread, do let me know.

Lemmycaution must rue the day that he entered Pesye Schloss into Saggy's Official Show Me an Eyewitness Challenge. Lemmycaution does need to be commended for nominating a single person and not just spamming a list of two hundred or so as others have done. However, his nomination of hearsay evidence that follows the standard holocaust protocol of being light on the details and containing at least one example of excessive and unnecessary cruelty is somewhat mystifying. Perhaps Saggy wasn't clear that when he asked for one credible eyewitness, he was looking for one good example. But that shouldn't need to be spelled out. Lemmycaution attempted to explain that Kruk's description of what Pesye Schloss witnessed is equal to Pesye Schloss' description of what Pesye Schloss witnessed to no avail. And now he's switched back to the argument that eyewitness testimony singular is not the proper unit of analysis--we must consider eyewitness testimony as a whole.

This is a common theme. We hear it from NickTerry who insists that in order to challenge the Treblinka story, we must debunk forty two or so other camps. It appears this is a common strategy for the veteran Defenders of the Faith: avoid being drawn into discussions involving the trees by demanding analysis of the forest. Such a discussion would naturally be far too lengthy even for a single PhD thesis let alone an internet forum. Plus, unless there is a way to analyze the evidence as a whole without addressing any single piece evidence, any analysis of the forest must proceed one tree at a time.

But now we're treated to a synopsis of Sakowicz's entry for the murder action at Ponar that can be found in the English language edition of his Ponar Diary. So because there were many other eyewitnesses to the action at Ponar, Kruk's description of Pesye Schloss' description of what happened is direct eyewitness testimony and it is true? And this can all be confirmed by cross referencing the Jaeger report?

I really don't believe this is the best example you can come up with. Saggy has this theory that there aren't any good eyewitnesses to the holocaust. That's a reasonable assumption to make given that any time we try to discuss one individual survivor testimony, that one survivor is dismissed as irrelevant or not representative of survivors as a whole, or old, confused, traumatized, etc. We've been told the best known survivor of all time isn't respected among the holocaust scholar elite. When we point out the flaws in the survivor testimony that make the biggest impact in the mass media, we're told--not that these survivor's aren't lying--but that their lies aren't important because scholars don't rely on them anyway. Since we keep choosing bad survivors and bad testimony, it's time for you to tell us who is reliable.

Giving us a list of two hundred names isn't choosing one. Choose the one that you think is the best. There should be hundreds to choose from. If you can't name one, it must be because 1) you're still reviewing the list of two hundred and haven't been able to find one that is credible or 2) Pesye Schloss really is the gold standard of eyewitness testimony.

 

[Clayton Moore]

that presumes (a) the parents were present and hadn't been sent off on a work detail, (b) that the parents were in a position to do anything at all.

Other than get shot themselves if they complained, resisted or reacted.

Millions of Jewish children were allegedly brutally killed. Work detail? Not being there would make the rage go away?

 

[A'isha]

Millions of Jewish children were allegedly brutally killed. Work detail? Not being their would make the rage go away?

Do you think that this curious detail which you believe proves the falsity of the Holocaust to be a detail unique to the Holocaust story? Or do you likewise believe in the utter falsity of all those other mass genocides that involved children?

 

[uke2se]

Millions of Jewish children were allegedly brutally killed. Work detail? Not being their would make the rage go away?

What would the parents' rage enable them to do? Do you believe Jews have the powers of the Incredible Hulk?

 

[uke2se]

Giving us a list of two hundred names isn't choosing one. Choose the one that you think is the best. There should be hundreds to choose from. If you can't name one, it must be because 1) you're still reviewing the list of two hundred and haven't been able to find one that is credible or 2) Pesye Schloss really is the gold standard of eyewitness testimony.

You have been given one name several times. Are you blind, or do you have a selective memory?

 

[Dogzilla]

I can play this game too. The story isn't preposteous on its face, so it's true.



Given that the story is true, by not being preposterous, would any other people use Jewish babies for target practice than the Nazis? Answer: Possibly. The holohoax is, as Saggs says, a degenerate lie. The holocaust, on the other hand, is very real and needs to be remembered.

Jewish babies weren't thrown in the air in this example. Jewish children three and four years old were thrown in the air and shot at as they fell to he ground.

 

[Robrob]

Go to the Penn State former defensive coordinator charged with sexual abuse of children thread.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=223360

Notice how people draw the line where children are concerned. People go berserk when they see children being mistreated. Do think Jewish people were any different? Do think Jewish parents who knew their children were going to be harmed were any different? Do you think the Jewish Sonderkommando in the camps were any less humane than the posters in that thread?

"Argument from Incredulity" that's your point?

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are youthful and naive, I suggest you read up on what has actually occurred in some of the previous massacres in world history. People have regularly done some of the most awful things imaginable and for you to (pretend) not to know that is well, deceitful.

Same wingnt response one hears following any mass murder (VA Tech for example), "They outnumbered him, why didn't they just rush him? Only a few would get killed."

That's right though, aren't you the one who said one eyewitness was a liar because he described a father and son fighting over a slice of bread?

 

[Clayton Moore]

Lemmycaution must rue the day that he entered Pesye Schloss into Saggy's Official Show Me an Eyewitness Challenge. Lemmycaution does need to be commended for nominating a single person and not just spamming a list of two hundred or so as others have done. However, his nomination of hearsay evidence that follows the standard holocaust protocol of being light on the details and containing at least one example of excessive and unnecessary cruelty is somewhat mystifying. Perhaps Saggy wasn't clear that when he asked for one credible eyewitness, he was looking for one good example. But that shouldn't need to be spelled out. Lemmycaution attempted to explain that Kruk's description of what Pesye Schloss witnessed is equal to Pesye Schloss' description of what Pesye Schloss witnessed to no avail. And now he's switched back to the argument that eyewitness testimony singular is not the proper unit of analysis--we must consider eyewitness testimony as a whole.

This is a common theme. We hear it from NickTerry who insists that in order to challenge the Treblinka story, we must debunk forty two or so other camps. It appears this is a common strategy for the veteran Defenders of the Faith: avoid being drawn into discussions involving the trees by demanding analysis of the forest. Such a discussion would naturally be far too lengthy even for a single PhD thesis let alone an internet forum. Plus, unless there is a way to analyze the evidence as a whole without addressing any single piece evidence, any analysis of the forest must proceed one tree at a time.

But now we're treated to a synopsis of Sakowicz's entry for the murder action at Ponar that can be found in the English language edition of his Ponar Diary. So because there were many other eyewitnesses to the action at Ponar, Kruk's description of Pesye Schloss' description of what happened is direct eyewitness testimony and it is true? And this can all be confirmed by cross referencing the Jaeger report?

I really don't believe this is the best example you can come up with. Saggy has this theory that there aren't any good eyewitnesses to the holocaust. That's a reasonable assumption to make given that any time we try to discuss one individual survivor testimony, that one survivor is dismissed as irrelevant or not representative of survivors as a whole, or old, confused, traumatized, etc. We've been told the best known survivor of all time isn't respected among the holocaust scholar elite. When we point out the flaws in the survivor testimony that make the biggest impact in the mass media, we're told--not that these survivor's aren't lying--but that their lies aren't important because scholars don't rely on them anyway. Since we keep choosing bad survivors and bad testimony, it's time for you to tell us who is reliable.

Giving us a list of two hundred names isn't choosing one. Choose the one that you think is the best. There should be hundreds to choose from. If you can't name one, it must be because 1) you're still reviewing the list of two hundred and haven't been able to find one that is credible or 2) Pesye Schloss really is the gold standard of eyewitness testimony.

So much the Holocaust atrocity testimony is obviously blue sky spicing up. Like nonsense that a doctor was required to climb the ladder and put the Zyklon B in the gas chamber.

As if the procedure needed the oversight of the most educated persons in a camp. As if even the doctors whose sworn oath was to save lives hated Jewish people so much that they would oversee and mete out the poison.

 

[uke2se]

Jewish babies weren't thrown in the air in this example. Jewish children three and four years old were thrown in the air and shot at as they fell to he ground.

Let me guess, you're going to now state that this is physically impossible then give absolutely no evidence for why that is so, right?