• 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.
Dogzilla said:
That's called a quote. A quote mine is when a person starts with a premise--like, let's say: Nazis planned to exterminate all the Jews. Then that person reads a bunch of Nazi speeches and tries to find a sentence or two that can be retrofitted to sound extermination like. It's a way of working backwards to find evidence to support a predetermined conclusion. What I did was quote Joachim Neander's summary directly to show people just how far off base JN was with his critique of Irene Zisblatt.
Click to expand...

No it is when you leave this bit out of the article you quoted. I highlighted the important part for you

An intelligent reader, however, who has read some scholarly literature about Auschwitz and Neuengamme, as well as one or more memoirs of undisputed survivors of these camps, and uses common sense cannot but question the authenticity and credibility of Mrs. Zisblatt's memoir

Notice the problem? Yeah you forgot to mention that the author cast doubt on this womans story because he was well acquainted with other narratives of the same event
 
Dogzilla said:
That's called a quote. A quote mine is when a person starts with a premise--like, let's say: Nazis planned to exterminate all the Jews. Then that person reads a bunch of Nazi speeches and tries to find a sentence or two that can be retrofitted to sound extermination like.
Click to expand...

That's cute, Dogzilla. But if you're going to accuse Lemmy of quote mining, then you should be able to show that the context of those statements by Ley, Frank, et al. demonstrate that they meant something completely different.
 
Last edited:
Dogzilla said:
That's called a quote. A quote mine is when a person starts with a premise--like, let's say: Nazis planned to exterminate all the Jews. Then that person reads a bunch of Nazi speeches and tries to find a sentence or two that can be retrofitted to sound extermination like. It's a way of working backwards to find evidence to support a predetermined conclusion. What I did was quote Joachim Neander's summary directly to show people just how far off base JN was with his critique of Irene Zisblatt.
Click to expand...

There's definitely something wrong with your brain. It's still open to question at this stage whether it's dishonesty or a cognitive disorder, but there is simply no way that you can spin Joachim Neander's article as a "defense" of Zisblatt's memoir. Just because Joachim doesn't call for her head doesn't make it a "defense".
 
Dogzilla said:
TA quote mine is when a person starts with a premise--like, let's say: Nazis planned to exterminate all the Jews. Then that person reads a bunch of Nazi speeches and tries to find a sentence or two that can be retrofitted to sound extermination like.
Click to expand...
You mean stretches like these?
we should give the Jews short shrift. It's a pleasure finally to be able to get physical with the Jewish race. The more of them that die the better. To smash the Jews is a victory for our Reich. The Jews should be made to feel that we have arrived
Click to expand...
and
The war will end with the extermination of the Jewish race.
Click to expand...
 
FluffyPersian said:
That's cute, Dogzilla. But if you're going to accuse Lemmy of quote mining, then you should be able to show that the context of those statements by Ley, Frank, et al. demonstrate that they meant something completely different.
Click to expand...
It's a bit much for Dogzilla to call my giving a partial answer to his own direct question - "How many statements do you have from German politicians, as opposed to German military leaders, talking about exterminating the Jewish people?" - quote mining. What did he want? A full study of the Third Reich with background for each example? Oh, wait, Nick already gave the context for the types of statements being made by Nazi politicos and why these statements do matter (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7946743&postcount=9245) - and Dogzilla ignored that.
 
Dogzilla said:
That's called a quote. A quote mine is when a person starts with a premise--like, let's say: Nazis planned to exterminate all the Jews. Then that person reads a bunch of Nazi speeches and tries to find a sentence or two that can be retrofitted to sound extermination like. It's a way of working backwards to find evidence to support a predetermined conclusion. What I did was quote Joachim Neander's summary directly to show people just how far off base JN was with his critique of Irene Zisblatt.
Click to expand...
Well, I will take the liberty of copying from a previous post of mine and reminding readers of this thread of the way in which Joachim Neander characterized Zisblatt's memoir in his critique:
This narration contains several inconsistencies. . . .This is historically false.. . . the narration contains three major implausibilities. . . .All the signs are that Mrs. Zisblatt's near-lampshade experience is nothing but the fruit of a prolific imagination. . . . Mrs. Zisblatt's description is rife with exaggerations and inaccuracies. . . . The rain of hot ashes, however, belongs to the realm of fantasy. . . .Though doubtlessly most of the reported atrocities did happen sometime at Auschwitz, it is improbable that a single, child prisoner experienced or witnessed all of them in a relatively short period of time. What is more, some of them are obviously exaggerated, for example having to stand with stretched arms and a heavy stone for twelve hours near the camp fence. What is more, Chana would have been shot without warning by one of the guards in the watch-towers if she had approached the electrified wire so closely. . . . Other events she simply could not have witnessed. . . . This narration, however, also contains implausibilities. . . . Another problem arises (again) with chronology, which does not seem to be Mrs. Zisblatt's strong point at all. . . . The tale of the removal of the prisoner numbers, however, is so full of implausibilities that it must be regarded as pure fantasy, and regretfully not as a good one. . . . This is the most implausible episode in Mrs. Zisblatt's story. . . . Again we find inconsistencies and non-trivial inaccuracies.
Click to expand...

Yes, these characterizations of Zisblatt's book are lifted from the text surrounding them and which they are connected to. So let's read some paragraphs to show what Neander concluded from his study of Zisblatt's purported memoir:

It was shown that Mrs. Zisblatt's Holocaust memoir does not stand scholarly scrutiny. As a whole, the story she tells about her camp experience leaves the impression that it was spiced up with ubiquitous Holocaust legends and enriched with fragments from other survivors' memoirs. It is so full of implausibilities that one can understand some of those who - in a "worst case scenario" - begin to doubt everything she tells. Since the only fellow prisoner whose name she remembers, Sabka, died at the very end of the war, it is also nearly impossible to cross-check her memoir with those of individuals who could be identified as having shared camp life with her.

There can be no doubt that most of the crimes and atrocities reported in The Fifth Diamond did happen sometime, at Auschwitz or another site of the Final Solution. It is utmost improbable, however, that a single prisoner, a child, too, experienced or witnessed all of them at the same place and within a short period of time. Mrs. Zisblatt certainly has survived the Holocaust, but her real life-story must be a different one. Which one, only she knows.
Click to expand...

The above represents the sort of points made by Neander throughout his piece and which Dogzilla ignored in order to try to pass off the article as a defense. It would be like accusing Neander of defending the "Jewish soap" myth! True, as Nick said, Neander did not shriek for Zisblatt to be imprisoned or placed in the stocks. No, what he did was more effective - he showed quietly, methodically, and by use of the sources - and with some dose of understatement and irony - that Zisblatt's "memoir" is false.

The best thing for anyone interested to do is to read Neander's article, which is subtitled "Fact or Fiction?," with Neander concluding that Zisblatt fictionalized: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2010/01/irene-zisblatt-diamond-girl-fact-or.html Read the article and see if Dogzilla is right to call it a defense of Zisblatt.
 
Last edited:
I think we are all wrong. Dogzilla just supports the Death of the Author for political speeches and literature... when it suits him.
 
MG1962 said:
Yes Clayton because we know the powers that be were honest with everyone. And I am guessing you have never looked into the ways the Nazis acted as time went on to encourage Jews to take the final trip

People in the Warsaw ghetto were bribed with food and faked postcards from this cute little place called Treblinka. Why would the Nazis have to do that? If all Jews where compliant and did just what they were told just by asking.

But maybe a better question is why didn't Franz Stangle once protest his innocence? He had 10 years before being arrested to do it
Click to expand...

Faked post cards? Authored by the multilingual omniscient SS Post Card Unit?:jaw-dropp
 
Dogzilla said:
He writes: "My research clearly shows that Irene Weisberg Zisblatt is not only a survivor of Auschwitz and the Holocaust, but that she, indeed, has an interesting and instructive story to tell. A story of endless humiliations and extreme suffering, but also of survival against all odds. It would be similar to those that hundreds of survivors can tell or have already told. It certainly would be less adventurous than that which she tells. But it would be in accordance with the historically established facts. Irene Weisberg Zisblatt should tell her story about survival at Auschwitz without exaggerations and implausibilities. It then would be a really true story, worth to be told and retold and to be listened to."

Yeah. That's what you call giving an old lady a pass.
Click to expand...

It's called imprinting the goyim school children with lies is OK.
 
Clayton Moore said:
No. Bless me with it.
Click to expand...
IIRC at least Dawidowicz, Arad, and Gutman have discussed deported Jews' being compelled by their captors to write postcards from AR camps to create the impression of safe arrival after deportation. Lewin and Ringelblum, I believe, discussed the meaning of postcards coming to Warsaw ghetto from deportees. Sheesh, even Weber & Allen in IHR wrote about this, spinning the postcards as proof of resettlement - and Nick & his co-authors wrote about the denier spin in their critique of Mattogno, Graf & Kues: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2011/12/belzec-sobibor-treblinka-holocaust.html, p 242 of the PDF. What your attempted wise-crack about a "multilingual omniscient SS Post Card Unit" has to do with this is beyond me.
 
Dogzilla said:
You're back to 'where did they go?' You and all of Team holocaust will continue to fail with this gambit because they're not where you think they are. If they're not there, they must be somewhere else. Do you not understand the concept of mutual exclusivity?
Click to expand...

Do you not understand the concept that nazis were jew murdering scum? The kind of scum that murdered homosexuals, gypsies, jews and the handicapped.
 
LemmyCaution said:
IIRC at least Dawidowicz, Arad, and Gutman have discussed deported Jews' being compelled by their captors to write postcards from AR camps to create the impression of safe arrival after deportation. Lewin and Ringelblum, I believe, discussed the meaning of postcards coming to Warsaw ghetto from deportees. Sheesh, even Weber & Allen in IHR wrote about this, spinning the postcards as proof of resettlement - and Nick & his co-authors wrote about the denier spin in their critique of Mattogno, Graf & Kues: http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2011/12/belzec-sobibor-treblinka-holocaust.html, p 242 of the PDF. What your attempted wise-crack about a "multilingual omniscient SS Post Card Unit" has to do with this is beyond me.
Click to expand...

I thought that was the unit that faked all the records.
 
Nick Terry said:
There's definitely something wrong with your brain. It's still open to question at this stage whether it's dishonesty or a cognitive disorder, but there is simply no way that you can spin Joachim Neander's article as a "defense" of Zisblatt's memoir. Just because Joachim doesn't call for her head doesn't make it a "defense".
Click to expand...

From a denier perspective, though, Dogzilla's reaction makes perfect sense. Clayton Moore's post above shows the same reaction.

The fact that Neander calls Zisblatt out on her fictions is overshadowed for them by the fact that Neander thinks she (and, worse, others!) are otherwise telling the truth about being Auschwitz survivors. Since, to deniers, the entire Holocaust story is a lie, Neander is still "defending a lie(r)".
 
ANTPogo said:
From a denier perspective, though, Dogzilla's reaction makes perfect sense. Clayton Moore's post above shows the same reaction.

The fact that Neander calls Zisblatt out on her fictions is overshadowed for them by the fact that Neander thinks she (and, worse, others!) are otherwise telling the truth about being Auschwitz survivors. Since, to deniers, the entire Holocaust story is a lie, Neander is still "defending a lie(r)".
Click to expand...



Quiet please.



Quiet please.



Neander isn't getting anyone's attention by saying Quiet please. He isn't even trying.
 
What on Earth are you talking about?

Look, my brain already hurts after my brief soujourn into thinking like a denier, so you're going to have to be a little bit clearer.
 
Last edited:
Nick Terry said:
There's definitely something wrong with your brain. It's still open to question at this stage whether it's dishonesty or a cognitive disorder, but there is simply no way that you can spin Joachim Neander's article as a "defense" of Zisblatt's memoir. Just because Joachim doesn't call for her head doesn't make it a "defense".
Click to expand...

Sad to see you bogged down in the concepts of fact and fiction, and the distinction between the two, that applies to normal everyday discourse and to scientific research as well, but are wholly out of place with discussion related to the holohoax.

The 'testimony' of holohoax survivors is not to be evaluated with the misplaced notions of fact and fiction, instead it is to be interpreted as a cry from the heart, the voice of the universal suffering, that touches deeper truths than can be reached by others.

As a result, we have to train our ignorant ears to properly hear what the hoax survivors are telling us. That's not what I claim, but it is what the goyim have resorted to in explaining the obvious and degenerate lies of every holohoax survivor ... check out for example respected Austrailian historian Inga Clendenen.....

http://www.holohoax101.com/102/

Clendenen explains, in her book 'Reading the Holocaust', that ....

"We have to train our ignorant ears to hear those communiques from the underworld. The voices we will hear find their context within a vast silence: the multitude of the dead. It is almost impossible to fathom the depth of the silence, to remember that behind the shoulder of every individual who survived the camps stand a thousand who did not."
 
Saggy! You're back!

Are you going to cite that book you quoted last month, Saggy? With the full title, authors/editors, publisher, copyright date, Library of Congress info, and ISBN (if available)?

You said you had the book, and found the quote in question by randomly flipping through the pages, so it should be an easy task for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom