The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers

[mrolonzo]

I don't know what to call a "historian" whose occupation is to suggest alternate possibilities based on lacunae in the corpus of evidence. "Fiction author", maybe.

You're a shithead if you think Holocaust denial is a "harmless belief". Pretending that historically attested events are up for public debate because you think "the numbers from all parties sounded insane" is how a seven year old thinks about the world. But besides being childish and self-centered, this way of life is an affront to facts, reason, and memory. Unfortunately, the longevity of fact-free ideologies like Holocaust denial demonstrate that we can't just expect reason and truth to actually carry the day; misinformation in service of ideology are actually stronger.

1. Mattogno is a real historian obviously.

2. Historically attested events are up for debate. Which was subsequently won.

Instead of childish and self centred or an affront to facts, holocaust revisionism or denial is reasoned, mature, moral. The holocaust is a conspiracy theory based on deliberatemis information and torture. Revisionism simply debunked it.

 

[Stan]

These are all devastating factoids to the narrative.

If you have to say it, it isn't true.

 

[mrolonzo]

If you have to say it, it isn't true.

Pretty much sums up all your posts.

Are you Christian or Jewish anyway Stan?

For real this time..

 

[Chugger]

It's simply the cross of ethnic and national interests. Jews are a politically significant and extremely interested minority across the west. They don't always agree on things except of course, what's good for Jews. We don't have a problem with people seeking their interests. As long as everyone gets to do the same.

yeah well that's the problem. as you see it I think the Jews don't just advocate for their own shit, they consciously subvert and damage other races, and this is part of their national character. it may not be every single Jew, but there is something unique to their ethnicity (biological and/or cultural) that compels them to act this way

Neither. What is the probitive value?

the probative value of analyzing the Strauch/Kube dossier and how it fits with your worldview, is to show you have a brain . revisionists have not covered this document so you are on your own for once.

Further speculation made by Mattogno is just that. He's not able yet to pin down exactly how many there were and where they went.

clarification: Mattogno has not a found a single witness statement, a single document that sheds any light on where these people went or what happened to them. maybe he hasn't given an exact number yet, but his partner Kues said definitely 1.9 million, and that doesn't count the Soviet Jews already there

btw you seem supremely confident about all this, but conspiracy theorists usually are. it's a phenomenon I'm pretty interested in. I came across this post about the hollow earth recently which reminded me of you guys (attn @JohnDoe , this may shed some light on 'geothermal resettlement', which I think is a better explanation for the missing Jews than 'moon resettlement')

Hollow Earth, Ancient Calendar, Subterranean Aliens And Civilizations - Joy Of Satan Forums

 

[JohnDoe]

btw you seem supremely confident about all this, but conspiracy theorists usually are. it's a phenomenon I'm pretty interested in. I came across this post about the hollow earth recently which reminded me of you guys (attn @JohnDoe , this may shed some light on 'geothermal resettlement', which I think is a better explanation for the missing Jews than 'moon resettlement')

You, History, and Stan are all supremely confident, and advance a pretty wackadoodle conspiracy theory - whether there is a causal relationship or not is up for debate. I don't purport to be an expert on conspiracy theorists.

 

[Chugger]

You, History, and Stan are all supremely confident, and advance a pretty wackadoodle conspiracy theory

holocaust is by definition a conspiracy ("a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful") so no arguments there, but as a conspiracy theory it is backed by thousands of perpetrator confessions and documents, as well as being agreed upon by almost every major academic and political institution in the world, including ones in anti-semitic areas

typically, such things aren't called theories anymore. they're just conspiracies, eg watergate

 

[mgc]

There are conspiracies. The US government conspired to kill Bin Laden, for example. The Nazis conspired toinvade the Soviet Union in 1941. The Western Allies conspired to invade Europe in 1944. Belief in a "conspiracy" is not necessarily crackpot.

A "conspiracy theory" is rather different. That term refers to belief in a conspiracy in the absence of any evidence for it. "We faked the moon landing" is an example. "The Allies conspired to fake the Holocaust" (Holocaust denial) is another example.

 

[mrolonzo]

yeah well that's the problem. as you see it I think the Jews don't just advocate for their own shit, they consciously subvert and damage other races, and this is part of their national character. it may not be every single Jew, but there is something unique to their ethnicity (biological and/or cultural) that compels them to act this way

No it's just that they pass for whites, sometimes consider themselves white, yet seek their minority interests.

What do you think? Is every human individual and group the same?

the probative value of analyzing the Strauch/Kube dossier and how it fits with your worldview, is to show you have a brain . revisionists have not covered this document so you are on your own for once.

Well reading it, for a start it looks kinda bitchy and gossipy don't you think?

clarification: Mattogno has not a found a single witness statement, a single document that sheds any light on where these people went or what happened to them. maybe he hasn't given an exact number yet, but his partner Kues said definitely 1.9 million, and that doesn't count the Soviet Jews already there

Okay. We pretty much agree on that. So with the holocaust not happening in the west the final picture remains unclear. What do we have to argue about?

btw you seem supremely confident about all this, but conspiracy theorists usually are. it's a phenomenon I'm pretty interested in. I came across this post about the hollow earth recently which reminded me of you guys (attn @JohnDoe , this may shed some light on 'geothermal resettlement', which I think is a better explanation for the missing Jews than 'moon resettlement')

Hollow Earth, Ancient Calendar, Subterranean Aliens And Civilizations - Joy Of Satan Forums

View attachment 3599403

I'm confident about the well evidenced stuff ie the western area where evidence is clear. The eastern area I have less reason to be.

And we already agree that the holocaust is the conspiracy theory, not revisionists.

I'll ignore this geo thermal stuff since you don't mean it anyway.

holocaust is by definition a conspiracy ("a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful") so no arguments there, but as a conspiracy theory it is backed by thousands of perpetrator confessions and documents, as well as being agreed upon by almost every major academic and political institution in the world, including ones in anti-semitic areas

typically, such things aren't called theories anymore. they're just conspiracies, eg watergate

To be fair. The holocaust is definitely a conspiracy theory, but the difference is it's one cooked up for the cause of strategic interest. Not that that sort of thing is unusual in history.

There are conspiracies. The US government conspired to kill Bin Laden, for example. The Nazis conspired toinvade the Soviet Union in 1941. The Western Allies conspired to invade Europe in 1944. Belief in a "conspiracy" is not necessarily crackpot.

A "conspiracy theory" is rather different. That term refers to belief in a conspiracy in the absence of any evidence for it. "We faked the moon landing" is an example. "The Allies conspired to fake the Holocaust" (Holocaust denial) is another example.

Similarly the allies, not having evidence and already complicit in propaganda conspired to concoct more and used torture and lies to advance their new conspiracy theory.

 

[mgc]

Similarly the allies, not having evidence and already complicit in propaganda conspired to concoct more and used torture and lies to advance their new conspiracy theory.

The problem is that you have no evidence for this, so it is "we faked the moon landing" tier.

Conversely we have a lot of evidence for exterminations - Einsatzgruppen reports, numerous references by top German leaders to the extermination of Jews, the disappearance of millions of Jews in the camp system, overwhelming testimonial evidence, non-coercive confessions (e.g. Eichmann writing in his private papers before he was kidnapped by the Israelis). You can say all this is faked but you do not have a single witness or document attesting to a systematic plan by the Allies to forge documents and coerce testimony.

 

[mrolonzo]

The problem is that you have no evidence for this, so it is "we faked the moon landing" tier.

Conversely we have a lot of evidence for exterminations - Einsatzgruppen reports, numerous references by top German leaders to the extermination of Jews, the disappearance of millions of Jews in the camp system, overwhelming testimonial evidence, non-coercive confessions (e.g. Eichmann writing in his private papers before he was kidnapped by the Israelis). You can say all this is faked but you do not have a single witness or document attesting to a systematic plan by the Allies to forge documents and coerce testimony.

No we just have blatantly false reports from the delagatura, taken on board by the allies, torture evidence , shenanigans at Dachau, remodeling by the soviets, the nuremberg trials denying the need for actual justice. Plus dominating scientific evidence that the claims are fake, a lack of bodies and generally a hard evidence record that accords with a massive propaganda campaign. We do have a smattering of quotations by the allies about atrocity propaganda but it's not definitive.

All this blows the holocaust out the water because even a trillion 'testimonials ' can't destroy hard evidence.

Anyway, you guys agree all this anyway. The holocaust in the west is debunked. All there is to fight about is vague goings on in the east.

 

[mgc]

The holocaust in the west is debunked.

It is not true that there was no Holocaust of Western European Jews. The vast majority of Jews in the Netherlands were killed. A very large percentage of Jews in Norway, France, and Belgium, and Luxembourg were killed.

Thus the postwar governments in these Western-European countries must have been "in on it" for your dumb conspiracy theory to work, insofar as they would have had to rig the survivor and displaced persons demographics and pretend that "resettled" Jews had actually been murdered. (It is not plausible that a state would have no knowledge of the whereabouts of tens or hundreds of thousands of their citizens who had been resettled, and of course if the Western-European Jews were to immigrate to the US or Mandatory Palestine they would need to go to their host countries and collect various forms of paperwork beforehand. You could not just show up and immigrate to the US and mandatory palestine in 1946 much less during the war.

It is also not true that there were no death camps with gas chambers in the West. Natzweiler, liberated by the Allies, had a homicidal gas chamber that was used to murder Jews.

But sure, the Nazis installed their main extermination facilities in Poland and not in the Netherlands or France or Norway. The reasons for this are obvious - 1) The large majority of the Jews they killed in the camps were Polish Jews. 2) The Nazis had absolute control over occupied Poland whereas Western European countries maintained some sovereingty over their territories even during the war. In other words, if they installed death camps in (for example) Denmark they would have been much more likely to encounter opposition from the Danish people and leadership, and also would have been much more likely to be exposed.

 

[mrolonzo]

holocaust is by definition a conspiracy ("a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful") so no arguments there, but as a conspiracy theory it is backed by thousands of perpetrator confessions and documents, as well as being agreed upon by almost every major academic and political institution in the world, including ones in anti-semitic areas

typically, such things aren't called theories anymore. they're just conspiracies, eg watergate

To back this you would have to show that;

Those "confessions " and testimonies were knowledgeable and not pressured or interested in any way.

How and why these confessions made sense in their silly claims

That the historical institutions had near perfect knowledge and were willing to weigh up all evidence without fear or favour.

There are millions of bodies.

The actual documents showing normal operations were fake.

A budget

A plan.

A rationale that excludes all other possibilities.

It is not true that there was no Holocaust of Western European Jews. The vast majority of Jews in the Netherlands were killed. A very large percentage of Jews in Norway, France, and Belgium, and Luxembourg were killed.

Thus the postwar governments in these Western-European countries must have been "in on it" for your dumb conspiracy theory to work, insofar as they would have had to rig the survivor and displaced persons demographics and pretend that "resettled" Jews had actually been murdered. (It is not plausible that a state would have no knowledge of the whereabouts of tens or hundreds of thousands of their citizens who had been resettled, and of course if the Western-European Jews were to immigrate to the US or Mandatory Palestine they would need to go to their host countries and collect various forms of paperwork beforehand. You could not just show up and immigrate to the US and mandatory palestine in 1946 much less during the war.

It is also not true that there were no death camps with gas chambers in the West. Natzweiler, liberated by the Allies, had a homicidal gas chamber that was used to murder Jews.

But sure, the Nazis installed their main extermination facilities in Poland and not in the Netherlands or France or Norway. The reasons for this are obvious - 1) The large majority of the Jews they killed in the camps were Polish Jews. 2) The Nazis had absolute control over occupied Poland whereas Western European countries maintained some sovereingty over their territories even during the war. In other words, if they installed death camps in (for example) Denmark they would have been much more likely to encounter opposition from the Danish people and leadership, and also would have been much more likely to be exposed.

1. Not killed by gas. Nor mass executed. Thus no holocaust.

2. Again trying to move the holocaust east.

3. Supposing that western governments had to do this or that.

4. Natzweiler was not a death camp. You refer to a phosgene experiment and try to stretch that to the holocaust as told. It's a fail. No jews were killed en mass day after day then disappeared.

5. Making suppositions about "death camps" in Denmark. Stop trying to wriggle out. There are no mass extermination facilities in Poland either. This was debunked.

 

[Lemmingwise]

A "conspiracy theory" is rather different. That term refers to belief in a conspiracy in the absence of any evidence for it. "We faked the moon landing"

Everyone knows it just means the theory for a conspiracy. Conspiracies are common as dirt. Husbands conspire against wives as they cheat and vice versa.

Adam Smith wrote "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."

Every government on the earth conspires against their people from time to time, because lying is easier than telling the truth and nobody likes giving up power (and its access it gives to wealth and status).

But better is the specific example you gave. The moonlanding.


Funny you say that.

A. Reasons why it's fake:

1. A number of nasa spokespersons have said we currently don't have the technology to get people safely beyond the van allen belts and thus we don't have the technology to get people to the moon

2. The astronauts that went were unable to tell us if they saw stars or not from the moon in the first press conference

3. All telemetry data and recorded video have been lost by Nasa, besides the videos that are already in the public domain.

4. The videos that people have seen was news broadcasts that set their camera to film in black and white, the color screen at Nasa that showed the video of the moonlandings.

5. When the president "phoned" to the people on the moon, there was no time delay, though you can calculate what the time delay for radio signals would be (2.5 seconds).

6. A number of the official videos have anomalies that are strange, like the rotating head in one spacewalk.

7. The people that died in the challenger all have living twins and/or dopplegangers:



8. Some dutchies tested the moonrock received and found outnit was petrified wood. (It was later claimed they tested the wrong sample)


B. Reasons why it's not fake

1. The retroreflectors placed on the moon show that at the very least we landed something on the moon, with or without humans

2. Why didn't the russians claim it was false (did they actually know? How would they have known or be able to prove it at the time?)

3. How could such a large conspiracy be maintained?

---

C. What could be reasons for faking it?


1. The US lost every step of the space race, so this would be a way to leap forward and beat the USSR in the PR coup of the century.

2. Warfunding was getting less and less popular with the vietnam war and the hippie movement. This would have allowed extraordinary funds to go to rocket technology such as the minuteman II for intercontinental nuclear missiles, which was developed at the same time.

3. Its easier to fake something than to do it for real.

----


Would it be a conspiracy theory to say that OJ Simpson killed his wife? There was evidence for it. There was evidence against it. According to court of law he did not do it. According to his later book "if I did it" he gives a supposedly fictional account of how he would have murdered her if he would have murdered her.

Of course you would have to be a conspiracy nut, a kook, an alex jones, a paranoid kiwifarmer to possibly believe the conspiracy theory that OJ Simpson killed his wife.

 

[Stan]

You, History, and Stan are all supremely confident, and advance a pretty wackadoodle conspiracy theory - whether there is a causal relationship or not is up for debate. I don't purport to be an expert on conspiracy theorists.

I have nothing on mrolonzo when it comes to confidence. The man's ability to roll out ridiculous chestnuts like "there was great healthcare in Auschwitz" is better than anything I could contrive.

Pretty much sums up all your posts.

Are you Christian or Jewish anyway Stan?

For real this time..

I'm a gay, self-hating Jewish man living in Tel Aviv, and I'm mad because my grandparents survived the Shoah.

 

[Bonesjones]

I have nothing on mrolonzo when it comes to confidence. The man's ability to roll out ridiculous chestnuts like "there was great healthcare in Auschwitz" is better than anything I could contrive.

I'm a gay, self-hating Jewish man living in Tel Aviv, and I'm mad because my grandparents survived the Shoah.

Maybe fix your own life before worrying about history bro

 

[mrolonzo]

I have nothing on mrolonzo when it comes to confidence. The man's ability to roll out ridiculous chestnuts like "there was great healthcare in Auschwitz" is better than anything I could contrive.

I'm a gay, self-hating Jewish man living in Tel Aviv, and I'm mad because my grandparents survived the Shoah.

1. You seem to be obsessed with this line. And yet you already recognise the various health measures employed, the drugs used, the types of complicated surgery given to inmates. You guys tried to assert that it was for everyone who wasn't Jewish yet offered no evidence of distinction in treatment and conveniently forgot about the other supposed victims such as the Roma, the Sinti, homosexuals etc. Clearly they're only worth a mention when you feel you can use them in rhetoric.


We already all agree that the very camp garrison medic Dr Wirth, who was supposed to be overseeing mass executions by zyklon b every day or grotesque medical experiments was instead loved and respected by those he served.

Feel free to continue to express your shock at our posts as much as you like. It only highlights your utterly warped view. The narrative of endlessly cruel SS trying to shove thousands of people into spaces they could not physically fit in order to gas them with a pesticide is debunked by actual chemistry. Your testimonials on this are utter fabrication.

2. Amusing but essentially just another example of holocaust peddlers refusing to be straight forward. They literally are unable to be straight forward with anyone here.

 

[Stan]

2. Amusing but essentially just another example of holocaust peddlers refusing to be straight forward. They literally are unable to be straight forward with anyone here.

This being Kiwi Farms, I’ve been thouroughly catchecized in the pitfalls of being forthright to anybody about anything.

1. You seem to be obsessed with this line.

I use it as an example of the ridiculous-on-its-face claims you make about the Holocaust. You had some other choice ones; "who says Jews have memories? They turn rumors into narrative", was one, "Dr. Mengele was a caring physician fighting typhus in the camps", is another "Carlo Mattogno is a respected historian", a third; "I'm a Nazi, AMA" is another. Combine it with your penchant to dismiss any evidence as fake/lies/coercion/Jewish Illuminati conspiracy and you’ve built yourself a nice little mental fortification from which to confidently argue the sky is green.

Maybe fix your own life before worrying about history bro
mmk ty bones

 

[mgc]

I certainly do not deny that Jewish slave-laborers at Auschwitz received health care. Our dispute on health care is over two questions.

1) Did non-working Jews receive health care? (Note that I do not deny that sick able-bodied Jews received health care, but a 25-year old man with the flu receiving health care is not the same as 5 year old or a paraplegic receiving health care. Mattogno's book basically relies on a semantical conflation of ill but able bodied Jews versus non-able bodied Jews. Btw the latter were the overwhelming majority, and killed as "useless eaters" upon arrival.)

2) Was the health care "high-quality"? (This defies common sense. Look at pic related, the living quarters of the Jews. Obviously the Nazis did not care about their well-being, but just wanted to do the bare minimum to keep them alive for labor.)


There is one exception -at the end of 1944, when the Soviets were weeks away, the Germans tried to cover up their crimes. This meant an end to the exterminations at Auschwitz and an order from Himmler to provide better treatment to the Jews, including better health care. At this time, non-working Jews could have received health care.

 

[Jewish Porn Hoe]

That term refers to belief in a conspiracy in the absence of any evidence for it.

Pretty much every single conspiracy theory I've studied relies on tons of evidence for it. It may be misrepresented or falsehoods or the causal relationships may not work out on a second or third look but it's "evidence" nontheless.

In actuality "conspiracy theory" means implicitly low status heterodox belief.

 

[mgc]

It may be misrepresented or falsehoods

That is not evidence then.