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

[Linako 2.0]

Yes, we all know public schooling sucks. But finding out your teacher lied when they told you George Washington chopped down a cherry tree doesn't mean George Washington didn't exist.

My teachers never said that and they didn't have an entire month dedicated to George Washington

 

[Lemmingwiser]

Its a strange thing. Most denialists of anything are of the "but they deserved it" mindset. I am not sure if they are bad faith or just trying to reconcile their feelings in some weird psychological thing.

Can you give some examples?
I literally can't think of any. Those that think moonlanding didn't happen have no deserved it mindset. I've heard people deny armenian genocide but never heard them say they deserve it. I've heard people deny maoist and stalinist genocides, but never heard them say they deserve it. People that deny antropogenic climate change don't believe we deserve climate change. Perhaps the only thing that comes close are deus vulters and muslims, believing that their faith would have been better for the conquered people.

As far as I know this claim stands alone, that a group simultaneously would really want x to have happened while also unpopularly saying x didn't happen.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Holocaust means the planned systematic execution of 6million Jews by the Nazis, because the Nazis were evil.
This is what the majority of people think it is and what is protected by force.

I can see that you are incredibly emotionally attached to the concept.
It would be beneficial for you to try and get rid of your emotional investment towards a certain conclusion.

Just give Hellstorm an honest watch, it's an emotional piece to humanize the Germans.

HellStorm-MUST WATCH-Genocide-Of-Germany

HellStorm - The Genocide Of Germany During WW2

odysee.com

You could also read the book, if you prefer.

Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany 1944-1947: Thomas Goodrich, Arthur Kemp: 9781948323116: Amazon.com: Books

Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany 1944-1947 [Thomas Goodrich, Arthur Kemp] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany 1944-1947

www.amazon.com

If you do not want to change your views, than just watch Inglorious Bastards.

I wonder are you Jewish and did you get taught from a young age that the non-Jews are easily riled up by propaganda to a level that they will try to torture and exterminate you?
If that is the case you should realize that is exactly what a shady cult does and it's child abuse.

Or maybe the holocaust is not part of your personal identity? Which makes me wonder what part of your worldview requires the Nazis to be the ultimate evil or for the Jews to be so hated?
I would really appreciate if you could answer what your personal attachment to the holocaust is?

My stance on the Holocaust is "it happened, deal with it." I like it since it offends the neo-Nazi circlejerkers in this thread and Jews/liberals equally. I'm most interested in actual facts, and the facts say that Germans killed millions of Jews in the 1940s. It wasn't some ultimate or unique evil, although it may have been the largest single genocide in history by death toll (the alleged "Holodomor", Maoist crimes/mismanagement, or colonization of the Americas are not genocides). Nor do I deny that over a million Germans died in massacres and ethnic cleansing after WWII, although were I to use Holocaust denialist logic, then it probably didn't happen and was just Germans deciding to peacefully move to the borders of modern Germany.

I noticed you didn't post any stockpiles of wood or coal to burn 6 million people. I guess you admit defeat. No multiple eyewitness testimony of the endless trains of wood or coal going into concentration camps needed to keep the cremation furnaces constantly going at full blast. The tales of thousands of lumberjacks clear cutting miles and miles of forest to be loaded onto trains. These are hard physical realities that have to be accounted for, not mere suggestions. You either post 6 million skeletons or 6 million worth of cremated remains. If you can't do either, then you are done.

That's the easy thing about getting past everything but basic possibilities. There is no room for arguement, only hard fact.

Here's Belzec, 1940.

And here's Belzec, 1944.

As modern North Korean gulags show, inmate labor is very good for cutting trees and mining coal. The rest of the fuel would have been supplied externally or provided by the dead bodies as the statements of Sonderkommandos attest to. They piled the fattiest bodies (women, especially women who were the least starved) at the bottom and intermixed decomposing bodies giving off flammable methane to make sure it burned most efficiently. This was under the supervision of cremation experts from the SS.

Also just like every Holocaust proponent, you end up constantly validating our arguments on accident. You argue they had a multitude of logistic facilities to transport goods and services all over the eastern front, guess what that also can be used for?

The Op. Reinhard camps were not logistics facilities, but were fed by them.

 

[The Tall Man]

My stance on the Holocaust is "it happened, deal with it." I like it since it offends the neo-Nazi circlejerkers in this thread and Jews/liberals equally. I'm most interested in actual facts.

It is incredibly obvious that you are not on a search for truth. You do not engage with the other posters argument neutrally and when you have been shown wrong you just ignore it.
You are here to preach because you see the existence of revisionists as a threat to your identity or worldview.

I ask you again why is it so important to you that the holocaust had to happen?

 

[Bonesjones]

My stance on the Holocaust is "it happened, deal with it." I like it since it offends the neo-Nazi circlejerkers in this thread and Jews/liberals equally.

No one is offended, we just think you are a retard. Arguing that 10 jews said they saw a unicorn, and 10 jews would never lie just means you are a biased retard.

I'm most interested in actual facts, and the facts say that Germans killed millions of Jews in the 1940s.

If you can't prove they killed anyone then there is no fact, just conjecture. You can't even prove the logistic ability for them to even complete the task whether they did or not, this is because you are a retard. Literally mentally deficient. I know manual labor is a blind spot for jews, but it's actually extremely difficult to move thousands of pounds repeatedly.

It wasn't some ultimate or unique evil, although it may have been the largest single genocide in history by death toll (the alleged "Holodomor", Maoist crimes/mismanagement, or colonization of the Americas are not genocides). Nor do I deny that over a million Germans died in massacres and ethnic cleansing after WWII, although were I to use Holocaust denialist logic, then it probably didn't happen and was just Germans deciding to peacefully move to the borders of modern Germany.

So you admit that Allied war crimes happen but are unable to fathom that they would invent Nazi war crimes as a moralistic argument that they did "what had to be done"? Sounds like you are defeating your own arguments again.

The rest of the fuel would have been supplied externally or provided by the dead bodies as the statements of Sonderkommandos attest to. They piled the fattiest bodies (women, especially women who were the least starved) at the bottom and intermixed decomposing bodies giving off flammable methane to make sure it burned most efficiently. This was under the supervision of cremation experts from the SS.

Do you regularly cook food and used the cooked food to cook the rest of your food while you turn the stove off? Or are you so mentally deficient that you can't cook for yourself?

The Op. Reinhard camps were not logistics facilities, but were fed by them.

"Lmao. This road is a road used for roading but it's definitely not a method of transport for anything but what I say"

Also suggesting that destroying a war camp is a symptom of hiding something shows your lack of basic military knowledge, but you'll keep pretending to be an expert.

 

[Ultima Ratio Regum]

Greetings. Here's a bit of French revisionist lore and news.

While the repression of revisionists continues (Ursula Haverbeck, 94, sentenced to another year in prison; the lawyer Edoardo Longo imprisoned for four years in Italy; Pierre Krebs beaten by the police in Germany and whom had his equipment confiscated; Alexandre Bender imprisoned for revisionism in Switzerland; René-Louis Berclaz, a compatriot who had supported him, searched and soon to be tried, etc.) - the most spectacular case of the moment is that of Vincent Reynouard.

The chemical engineer, mathematics teacher, father of eight, tireless revisionist activist for several decades, winner of the Robert Faurisson International Prize, has received several prison sentences in France since the 1990 anti-revisionist law, — one of the first in Europe, passed in the heyday of the late Faurisson and after a grotesque story about the desecration of a Jewish cemetery in Carpentras — and has been imprisoned twice.

In 2015, while in Belgium, he went into exile in the UK after police tried to arrest him the day before. After taking refuge for a while at a friend's place, he moved to a flat in suburban London where he was tutoring science. At the same time, he continued his revisionist activities, which got him into repeated trouble with the French authorities, as sycophantic Jewish groups work tirelessly to put him to court and leech money off of it.

Initially strictly confined to "crimes against humanity", i.e. the so-called Holocaust, the Fabius-Gayssot law condemning "negationism" was extended, "thanks" to Vincent Reynouard, to "war crimes". Indeed, if he regularly speaks of the German camps, where he went on several occasions; if he proposed, in videos that have remained famous among amateurs, that he himself be gassed in one of the supposed homicidal gas chambers; another subject held his attention: Oradour-sur-Glane. In 1944, this French village was allegedly cleansed for fun by the SS Das Reich division, which, on its way to Normandy, stopped to kill all the men and massacre the women and children by burning them alive in the church.

It is factual that almost the entire population of the village died that day.
As for the conditions, it is more nebulous. In any case, Vincent Reynouard, and others, have theses to expose, corroborated by certain witnesses and survivors, pictures of the village, the Church and the bodies, etc. They are denied this right. I won't go into it for the moment because this message will already be somewhat lengthy and because it would likely be considered off-topic, but if someone is interested I could summarize his thesis. I think there are videos available with English subtitles on Odysee or archive.org.

In 2020, the self-proclaimed "anti-fascist place" memorial at Oradour-sur-Glane was tagged. "Village menteur, à quand la vérité ? Reynouard a raison". This accelerated the investigation by the Office for the Fight against Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes (yes, nothing less), which then mobilised great resources to have Vincent Reynouard arrested and extradited.

​

Located in 2021, police officers knocked on the door of his flat and asked if Mr Reynouard was there. In a surreal scene, he answered in the negative, grabbed some material (hard drive) prepared in case he needed to flee in a hurry, jumped out the back window, got on a bicycle and raced through the city. Finally, he ended up at an acquaintance's house in a small village in the vicinity of Liverpool. He then lived in very precarious conditions, eating only Weetabix cereals for several weeks. In France, no one had any news of him. Some people even thought he was dead.

Finally, he resurfaced, via the weekly Rivarol, whose director, Jérôme Bourbon, despite some disagreements with the Catholic religion (from which Vincent Reynouard had apostasized), is a long-time friend.

He then resumed work, laboriously, but no longer able to work as a private teacher, he survived only on donations from patrons among his - modest - audience who looked at his revisionist content. It remained so for a year.

Finally, last November, Vincent Reynouard was captured and imprisoned... in Scotland. He had taken refuge in the fishing village of Anstruther, hundreds of miles from London, where he rented a small hut under a false identity.

From prison, he wrote articles for Rivarol, as well as his memoirs, which have come down to us. Just before he was imprisoned, as a last ditch effort, he completed his updated book on Oradour which was published in December by friends. He is, as usual, serene, and his prison anecdotes are refreshing to read.

The Scottish courts will rule on his extradition on 9 February 2023. His lawyer is optimistic, given that revisionism is not an offence in Scotland, or even in the rest of the UK. A precedent exists; in 2008, Dr. Frederick Toben avoided extradition from the UK to Australia on revisionist grounds (although he was imprisoned there the next year). Since then, Alison Chabloz in particular has been convicted of mild "antisemitic" remarks, which could also serve as a precedent.

Moreover, since the application of the Brexit, Vincent Reynouard is technically no longer in good standing on British territory. His demand for regularisation, required by the authorities from foreigners following the exit from the EU, had remained a dead letter. This could serve as grounds for extradition; the French authorities are in any case urging this.

At this stage, Vincent Reynouard is expected to serve 27 months in prison in France; other legal proceedings are ongoing. He could theoretically appeal, but this would be unlikely to be successful. In addition, he has participated in the past year in the Democratie Participative podcast, which could get him into further trouble.

However, although he claims to be a national socialist and a racist, ideologically, Vincent Reynouard has never been convicted under the laws against "incitement to hatred" (towards a real or supposed race, a real or supposed sex, a real or supposed handicap, a fictitious gender; you get the idea, freedom of opinion does not exist in France). He claims to be "Judeo-indifferent" and "hate-free"; his placidity and resilience in the face of the turpitudes he has suffered and which have prevented him from seeing his children grow up are revered, and must arouse the ire of his persecutors.

So we will soon know whether or not Scotland will bow to French injunctions to extradite a revisionist activist.

Related links:

• French scholar Vincent Reynouard arrested in Scotland (Archive)​

• Downing Street “boot boy” lobbied for arrest of French scholar (Archive)​

• Vincent Reynouard writes from his prison cell (Archive)​

• New interview with jailed revisionist Vincent Reynouard (Archive)​

MSM (there are some factual mistakes in these):

• French Holocaust denier appears in Scottish court (Archive)​

• Why a Holocaust denier ended up living quietly in an East Neuk village (Archive)​

• Vincent Reynouard: Holocaust denier being sent funds while on remand (Archive)​

• Extradition case ‘will fail’ against French Holocaust denier Vincent Reynouard (Archive)​

 

[mrolonzo]

I literally addressed that claim, dumbass. I said the pits match exactly where they reported finding bone and ash. Meanwhile, the only bones found at those Indian schools were normal graves and not mass graves.

Loli. It was a camp, some people died, and were buried. That some people accurately point out where the pits are doesn't mean anything. You have to acknowledge that.

I never said the Nazis weren't good as mass murder lol. You're the one claiming they couldn't have burned so many bodies because you're basing it on how funeral homes to cremations. And I told youever

Loli, funeral homes today are more powerful and efficient, not less, as are the original krema ovens, than open air pits. Which is why the nazis bought in so many of them for their battle against typhus.

It's the efficiency of the open air pits as well as the functionality of the ovens that you can't get around. This was studied in a tomb of a book by Mattogno that dealt solely with the ovens.

We show you the cremation ovens and pyres for mass cremation, you can only handwave them as fake. Einsatzgruppen leader Karl Jager for instance produced a report boasting of removing X amount of Jews in Y area and making the Baltic states "Judenfrei". The Wannsee Conference demanded mass expulsions of Jews to the East. Since there's no indication those Jews ever made it east and we know the Nazis were already killing Jews, the best interpretation of the evidence is they all fucking died and all the eyewitness accounts of finding bones and ash are true. This is how history actually works.

1/ What pyres have you shown? As above the Kremas have been studied already.

2/ The Jager report is fake in a few different ways clearly shown.

3/ The wannsee conference proved that the policy was deportation. Not execution.

4/ The nazis were not already killing Jews.

5/ Some jews did make it east. Many escaped everywhere else.

6/ The best interpretation of events is mine. Yours is a stupid lie that you can't defend in any way.

Sounds like your sole achievement in life is repeating debunked arguments about the Holocaust for 200+ pages. Not reading your thread lol

What debunked arguments?

Anyway ok. You agree that this point of yours is refuted. Fair enough.

Yes, I'm quoting the king of Belgium because he was citing what at the time was a well-trodden principle in international law that went as far back as the Greek intervention (which itself goes back to Grotius), and in this case a principle not specifically involving protecting Christians, even if that was where the principle started. This constitutes a precedent in international law, of which you are absolutely missing the point. This same principle was actually used to attempt to prosecute members of the Ottoman government for the Armenian genocide before Ataturk booted out the occupation forces from Turkey.

Dude. What you've been citing is casus belli for war. Not actual agreed upon treaties that are broken or laws agreed upon that are broken. Therefore your point that expulsions were war crimes before 45 is completely refuted.

Most of the Nazis he prosecuted were for crimes of embezzlement or corruption, not murder. But hey, you found one Nazi judge who actually did prosecute people involved in mass murder! Better find all the other ones who totally prosecuted people for the thousands and thousands of massacres committed by the Nazis.

Nice dodge, yes he offered various bullshit stories as affidavits for the Soviets after 45 also.

Where does Konrad get the authority to pursue a murder case in an SS camp when such murder is already supposedly authorised at the highest level?

By your logic, mass murder is okay too because it's also common in history. How about you give me a defense of forced labor and forced expulsion that doesn't rely on "other people did it too".

Nice dodge again. You tried to paint 600000 dead due to expulsion as a big deal. I pointed out it's not.

But as to your challenge. It's quite easy to defend. Nation states are sovereign therefore they have the right to kick out anyone they want as well as use people for forced labor as they see fit.

Okay, so you don't actually know what the White Movement is since if you did, you'd know they were very much involved in WWII. Maybe read something besides books made by people who deliberately misread sources, not that you've ever read them that is.

I guess you meant the klan huh? A limited and local issue to the southern United states.

Come off it. You literally haven't read any books ever. This is why you're all over the place.

Nope. The Poles had all the evidence in the world from the invasion alone to do whatever they wanted to the Germans afterwards. They didn't need to make up stories about millions of dead Jews to make the Germans look any worse than they did.

You asked for reasons for lying. I gave them. And they did make up stories. Again and again. I prove this every time you post, because you never post an actual story.

But how about Vrba or Muller. Heard of these guys? These are the guys who are central to the holocaust fable. Want to know about them?

It's never been shown to be impossible except by people making shit up. Your argument is so insane you have to deny every piece of evidence at the Nuremberg trials to even find a foundation.

There is no evidence that helps you and all the hard evidence helps me. This is shown again and again by your curious reticence about intellectually smashing my face in with any of this evidence from the Nuremberg trials.

My mistake, it was the gas chambers excavated.

Fair enough. Ignorance is permissible and accepted where it is honestly admitted.

So, gas chambers, you obviously think they were discovered. They weren't.

There are those documents. You just deny they exist. There are numerous accounts. You just deny every single one of them. It doesn't take much to kill a human, but you're deliberately obtuse.

Indeed there are documents. And there are accounts. But where they are real they they support me. Not you.

Example, the Bischoff letters regarding krema construction showed that ventilation power was planned to be stronger for the undressing chamber than the gas chamber. Thus showing that the gas chambers were for clothing only. Not people.

 

[mrolonzo]

My stance on the Holocaust is "it happened, deal with it." I like it since it offends the neo-Nazi circlejerkers in this thread and Jews/liberals equally. I'm most interested in actual facts, and the facts say that Germans killed millions of Jews in the 1940s. It wasn't some ultimate or unique evil, although it may have been the largest single genocide in history by death toll (the alleged "Holodomor", Maoist crimes/mismanagement, or colonization of the Americas are not genocides). Nor do I deny that over a million Germans died in massacres and ethnic cleansing after WWII, although were I to use Holocaust denialist logic, then it probably didn't happen and was just Germans deciding to peacefully move to the borders of modern Germany.

Here's Belzec, 1940.
View attachment 4308113
And here's Belzec, 1944.
View attachment 4308108
As modern North Korean gulags show, inmate labor is very good for cutting trees and mining coal. The rest of the fuel would have been supplied externally or provided by the dead bodies as the statements of Sonderkommandos attest to. They piled the fattiest bodies (women, especially women who were the least starved) at the bottom and intermixed decomposing bodies giving off flammable methane to make sure it burned most efficiently. This was under the supervision of cremation experts from the SS.

The Op. Reinhard camps were not logistics facilities, but were fed by them.

The resources used were extensively calculated and studied by Mattogno here;

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

It is incredibly obvious that you are not on a search for truth. You do not engage with the other posters argument neutrally and when you have been shown wrong you just ignore it.
You are here to preach because you see the existence of revisionists as a threat to your identity or worldview.

The circlejerkers in this thread are the furthest thing from neutral. None have shown me to be wrong in the slightest, but on the contrary regularly forget basic historical facts we aren't even disputing, like @mrlonzo regularly does.

I ask you again why is it so important to you that the holocaust had to happen?

Because it's a historical fact, and I like facts. A better question is why is it so important to you the Holocaust had to not happen? Why is everybody associated with this ideology either sympathetic to neo-Nazis and their ideology or has an axe to grind against Jews on a nationalistic (i.e. Arab Holocaust deniers) or economic (i.e. black Holocaust deniers) standpoint? Where are all the generic conservatives and liberals who believe this? Where are all the Jews grifting on Holocaust denial (outside of people like Christian convert and schizo Brother Nathanael)?

It's absolutely baffling to me. If I hated Jews or Israel that much, I'd love the Holocaust or at the very least just view it as a necessary evil. If we killed 6 million of the worst promoters of globohomo starting with George Soros, I wouldn't try and say a decade later than Soros and 6 million globalists were still alive. It's such a hilariously self-contradictory ideology you twist yourselves into pretzels trying to rationalize why mass deportation and forced enslavement on such a massive scale is totally fine and dandy but god forbid they kill those people they spent 10+ years calling parasites.

No one is offended, we just think you are a retard. Arguing that 10 jews said they saw a unicorn, and 10 jews would never lie just means you are a biased retard.

If you can't prove they killed anyone then there is no fact, just conjecture. You can't even prove the logistic ability for them to even complete the task whether they did or not, this is because you are a retard. Literally mentally deficient. I know manual labor is a blind spot for jews, but it's actually extremely difficult to move thousands of pounds repeatedly.

I've repeatedly proved millions died, you just ignore what I've said because it's integral to your worldview. And no, it isn't difficult to move thousands of pounds repeatedly when you have a modern industrial economy at your disposal. What a stupid argument, it's akin to those who claim aliens built the pyramids because the Egyptians "obviously" couldn't move the large stones they quarried (since barges, oxen, and the wheel didn't exist or something).

So you admit that Allied war crimes happen but are unable to fathom that they would invent Nazi war crimes as a moralistic argument that they did "what had to be done"? Sounds like you are defeating your own arguments again.

"Both sides did war crimes" does not translate to "both sides did war crimes, but one side made up far worse war crimes." I know logic isn't your strong point, but seriously?

Do you regularly cook food and used the cooked food to cook the rest of your food while you turn the stove off? Or are you so mentally deficient that you can't cook for yourself?

LMAO, looks like the tangent about the laws of thermodynamics was pretty relevant.

"Lmao. This road is a road used for roading but it's definitely not a method of transport for anything but what I say"

Also suggesting that destroying a war camp is a symptom of hiding something shows your lack of basic military knowledge, but you'll keep pretending to be an expert.

Problem is we have not a single document suggesting anything you claim, but plenty of documents and testimony suggesting everything I claim, hence why your only solution is denialism.

Loli. It was a camp, some people died, and were buried. That some people accurately point out where the pits are doesn't mean anything. You have to acknowledge that.

Except you made a false equivalence to the Indian residency schools. Given the number of pits combined with how the ash, corpse wax (still present in the late 40s), and bone fragments, this implies the death toll is far beyond what you'd expect from a transit camp along the countless other reams of damning evidence that shows trips to these camps was one way.

Loli, funeral homes today are more powerful and efficient, not less, as are the original krema ovens, than open air pits. Which is why the nazis bought in so many of them for their battle against typhus.

It's the efficiency of the open air pits as well as the functionality of the ovens that you can't get around. This was studied in a tomb of a book by Mattogno that dealt solely with the ovens.

It's a completely false equivalence because the Nazis didn't care if the body was totally cremated. This was not supposed to be a clean funeral and it was done on a fuel budget, hence the very specific recollections of how the bodies were stacked--and just who (SS cremation specialists) told them how--to produce the most efficient burn. Did Mattogno even account for the bodies of children or elderly (less fuel) or those suffering malnutrition (many of them, but some died before malnutrition set in)?

1/ What pyres have you shown? As above the Kremas have been studied already.

2/ The Jager report is fake in a few different ways clearly shown.

3/ The wannsee conference proved that the policy was deportation. Not execution.

4/ The nazis were not already killing Jews.

5/ Some jews did make it east. Many escaped everywhere else.

6/ The best interpretation of events is mine. Yours is a stupid lie that you can't defend in any way.

1) The areas above and around the pits--already demonstrated
2) Of course, you deny the most damning evidence against your "hypothesis", hence why you are a denialist interested in spinning a fantastic story of little relation to history. Good luck denying every single Einsatzgruppen reports, their correlation to actual mass graves, and constant use of terms like "Judenfrei" in the 40s
3) Deportation to where? Are the Nazis incapable of using code? Does Nazi "liquidation" of ghettos means they made the Jews into juice?
4) They were.
5) Based on zilch evidence. On the other hand, millions of Jews vanished from the historical record, never to be taxed, recorded in a census, or communicate with surviving family. The well-documented German railroad train schedules shows the death camps were final destinations.

What debunked arguments?

Anyway ok. You agree that this point of yours is refuted. Fair enough.

The ones I've debunked, braintrust.

Dude. What you've been citing is casus belli for war. Not actual agreed upon treaties that are broken or laws agreed upon that are broken. Therefore your point that expulsions were war crimes before 45 is completely refuted.

Which constitutes an international legal precedent, other it wouldn't actually be a legal casus belli for a just war. Of course there were actual treaties like France's role in protecting Christians in Lebanon (which is nominally a product of the Franco-Ottoman "Unholy Alliance" but was renewed post-Crimean War) or those enforced on Vietnam or China. Point is, by 1900 European civilization exalted itself as civilized protectors of humanity and practically all viewed bloody massacres and expulsions as barbarism. Some intellectuals went a step further and called out their civilization for its hypocrisy (i.e. everyone in Leopold's Congo or Savorgnan de Brazza in French Congo). If anything, Holocaust denialism owes a lot to this tradition of human rights, since you are desperate to portray your German supremacist heroes as moral and good against all evidence.

Nice dodge, yes he offered various bullshit stories as affidavits for the Soviets after 45 also.

Where does Konrad get the authority to pursue a murder case in an SS camp when such murder is already supposedly authorised at the highest level?

Based on no evidence whatsoever as always. But anyway, just checking the list, camp commandant Karl Koch was executed for 3 murders of prisoners. Turns out these 3 had been named as witnesses to the main crimes he was charged with (corruption) so they added murder to his charges. This was at Buchenwald too, which was a labor camp and had many prisoners who were not Jews. Can't find the ethnicity of the three he killed, but it doesn't matter since you're using Morgen's efforts as a way to claim the Nazis didn't commit war crimes.

Nice dodge again. You tried to paint 600000 dead due to expulsion as a big deal. I pointed out it's not.

But as to your challenge. It's quite easy to defend. Nation states are sovereign therefore they have the right to kick out anyone they want as well as use people for forced labor as they see fit.

But that doesn't make it moral (I mean it theoretically can be, but the method you're claiming certainly isn't), nor does it make it legal as I've shown with the precedents in international law.

I guess you meant the klan huh? A limited and local issue to the southern United states.

Come off it. You literally haven't read any books ever. This is why you're all over the place.

You wanted to talk about how benevolent the Nazis were to the Slavs, I brought up the White Movement because the Nazis deliberately marginalized them and found a new batch of collaborators like Vlasov and Kaminski who did not share the aims of the White Movement in restoring the Russian Empire. Why do you Holocaust denialists project so much?

You asked for reasons for lying. I gave them. And they did make up stories. Again and again. I prove this every time you post, because you never post an actual story.

But how about Vrba or Muller. Heard of these guys? These are the guys who are central to the holocaust fable. Want to know about them?

Sure, by all means tell me why people who actually witnessed these events, if not perpetrated them, are somehow wrong but a bunch of neo-Nazis backed by East German/Soviet money and loons like Rockwell trying to sell Nazism to segregationists are somehow correct. You only have evidence because you deny evidence as it suits you. That is not how historiography works.

There is no evidence that helps you and all the hard evidence helps me. This is shown again and again by your curious reticence about intellectually smashing my face in with any of this evidence from the Nuremberg trials.

Because it's evidence that critically undermines your position, therefore you deny it. You cannot prove every bit of the mountains of documents, affidavits, and eyewitness testimony was fraudulent. Even if people lied (IIRC the lampshade claim showed up there) or exaggerated, a broad look at the evidence paints a picture of just what actually happened, not some fantasy about your German superheroes forced into lying.

Indeed there are documents. And there are accounts. But where they are real they they support me. Not you.

Example, the Bischoff letters regarding krema construction showed that ventilation power was planned to be stronger for the undressing chamber than the gas chamber. Thus showing that the gas chambers were for clothing only. Not people.

>planned
I mean was it? Tiny little minutiae like that doesn't disprove the many other facts that people were jammed in there and gassed. It's clear there was ventilation in the gas chambers because there's remains of the ducts used.

 

[The Tall Man]

@Save the Loli

The circlejerkers in this thread are the furthest thing from neutral.

You knew exactly what you were getting into when you came into "The Holocaust Thread", don't play dumb with me.

Because it's a historical fact, and I like facts.

You show that you are not looking for the truth you came here with a preconceived answer, to preach at revisionists because they are an affront to your identity or worldview.

A better question is why is it so important to you the Holocaust had to not happen?

"No, you" is not an answer to my question.

But unlike you I am not scared to answer a simple question.
It's absolutely not to me. I am looking for the truth and if compelling evidence is presented I will change my position.

Why is everybody associated with this ideology either sympathetic to neo-Nazis and their ideology or has an axe to grind against Jews on a nationalistic (i.e. Arab Holocaust deniers) or economic (i.e. black Holocaust deniers) standpoint? Where are all the generic conservatives and liberals who believe this? Where are all the Jews grifting on Holocaust denial (outside of people like Christian convert and schizo Brother Nathanael)?

I haven't seen anyone here call you a Communist or Zionist, but you felt the need to label everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi, black Hebrew Israelite or Jew hating Muslim.
Again you show that this is an overly emotional subject for you. If I am to be in any camp I am more aligned with libertarians and do not care for national socialism and there are many like me. I am simply a person who values the truth over comfortable lies.

It's absolutely baffling to me. If I hated Jews or Israel that much, I'd love the Holocaust or at the very least just view it as a necessary evil. If we killed 6 million of the worst promoters of globohomo starting with George Soros, I wouldn't try and say a decade later than Soros and 6 million globalists were still alive.

You have this insane defense in your head that every revisionist is a Nazi. This is so far from the truth that it's laughable.
Is David Cole a secret Nazi in your head? Is Ryan Dawson a half Native American, libertarian, atheist who has children with an Asian wife (classic libertarian right there) a White supremacist Nazi?

Statements like this make it apparent that the holocaust is either important to your identity or world view.
Anyone who has to pre-emptively make all people with different ideas into dishonest and hate-driven monsters, all to easily be able to avoid engaging with their arguments honestly, is definitely an ideologue only looking to disparage his perceived enemies.

It's such a hilariously self-contradictory ideology you twist yourselves into pretzels trying to rationalize why mass deportation and forced enslavement on such a massive scale is totally fine and dandy but god forbid they kill those people they spent 10+ years calling parasites.

And again you assume Revisionist have some dark secret agenda to paint the NASDAP as the perfect wonderful entity, because in your mind every revisionist is a Nazi or crypto-Nazi who wants for the 3rd Reich to rise again to destroy all ze joos.

Once again I'll ask you the question
Why are you so heavily personally invested in the holocaust having to be true?

And "because it is true" or "no you" is not a valid answer. You came into the holocaust thread to preach, you call everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi and you are unwilling to change your mind since you already dogmatically believe the holocaust is a fact.
Answer why the holocaust is so important to you.

 

[WonderWino]

Not everyone who questions the narrative denies the logistics. The burning part is troublesome because it's physically not possible to kill this many people by burning them or their bodies in such a short period of time. There were thousands, tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands killed by the Sonderkommando action in the Eastern Front, but not millions.

Stopped reading right there. Nobody was killed by the sonderkommando. You couldn't even get that right. You're talking about the einsatzgruppen. Two entirely different groups

Yet again proving holocaust deniers don't understand basic facts and are some of the most gullible idiots on the planet

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

@Save the Loli

You knew exactly what you were getting into when you came into "The Holocaust Thread", don't play dumb with me.

You show that you are not looking for the truth you came here with a preconceived answer, to preach at revisionists because they are a affront to your identity or worldview.

"No, you" is not an answer to my question.

But unlike you I am not scared to answer a simple question.
It's absolutely not to me. I am looking for the truth and if compelling evidence is presented I will change my position.

I haven't seen anyone here call you a Communist or Zionist, but you felt the need to label everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi, black Hebrew Israelite or Jew hating Muslim.
Again you show that this is an overly emotional subject for you. If I am to be in any camp I am more aligned with libertarians and do not care for national socialism and there are many like me. I am simply a person who values the truth over comfortable lies.

Right, I'm sure you're "just a libertarian" and not someone with an axe to grind against Jews for whatever reason. Lemme guess, you believe they control the world, you probably believe the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is not just an Okhrana forgery, the whole typical shit. As a "libertarian", you're probably just reflexively anti-establishment, incapable of actually holding beliefs other than "well they believe it, so it must be false.

I came into this thread mostly curious about how you denialists think. I love a good fanfic after all. I can now understand why your reputation is akin to flat earthers and creationists, as I suspected, because you argue using the same tactics. And please, I don't believe for a second any one of you are actually after truth. I'm here to provide the truth to anyone who cares. It's not my fault you turned this place into your clubhouse.

You have this insane defense in your head that every revisionist is a Nazi. This is so far from the truth that it's laughable.
Is David Cole a secret Nazi in your head? Is Ryan Dawson a half Native American, libertarian, atheist who has children with an Asian wife (classic libertarian right there) a white supremacist Nazi?

I've never heard of them (why should I, I don't hang out in these circles), but a quick search shows David Cole seems to dispute Auschwitz in particular and apparently said 4 million Jews died. Doesn't really disprove the Holocaust. His arguments look dubious to me, but that's far from the wild fables peddled in this thread of millions of Jews being resettled across Eastern Europe and then vanishing or saying the Nazis committed very few war crimes at all. Ryan Dawson looks like he has an axe to grind against Israel and unironically believes the JEWS DID WTC meme. I don't see why his race matters when Chief Red Cloud was a famous pro-Nazi native leader in the 30s.

But go on, show me the mainstream people who believe in this ideology. If it makes so much sense, why don't more boomer conservatives/boomer liberals adhere to it? Why are all the political parties who support it extremist organizations like Svoboda in Ukraine or Golden Dawn (and their splits) in Greece?

Statements like this make it apparent that the holocaust is either important to your identity or world view.
Anyone who has to pre-emptively make all people with different ideas into dishonest and hate-driven monsters, all to having to avoid engaging with their arguments honestly, is definitely an ideologue only looking to disparage his perceived enemies.

And again you assume Revisionist have some dark secret agenda to paint the NASDAP as the perfect wonderful entity, because in your mind every revisionist is a Nazi or crypto-Nazi who wants for the 3rd Reich to rise again to destroy all ze joos.

This is nothing but projection on your part. You can repeat you "just want to debate", but you have no intention of considering the evidence because if you accept the Holocaust, that means someone you don't like--liberals, Jews, academics, the establishment--was right about something. And if they're right about that, what else might they be right about? Meanwhile, a group of terminally online losers who are 99% some flavor of fascist or neo-Nazi and often believe other insanity being right doesn't affect me at all. I mean I've long since accepted /pol/ is more accurate than the news.

Once again I'll ask you the question
Why are you so heavily personally invested in the holocaust having to be true?

And because it is true or no you is not a valid answer. You came into the holocaust thread to preach, you call everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi and you are unwilling to change your mind since you already dogmatically believe the holocaust is a fact.
Answer why the holocaust is so important to you.

@mrlonzo identified as a Nazi a few pages ago. Pretty sure at least one other denialist here has, and all in this thread seem to support the ideals, if not the leadership, of historic Nazi Germany, so what else am I going to call you?

Defending facts is important to me. Echo chambers are bad. Answer why denying the Holocaust is so important to you?

 

[Lowlife Adventures]

I have no horse in this race, and I don't know which side is telling the truth since you're all vomiting so many books and sources that I don't have the time to comb through, but I have to say that the point the revisionists made about violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics sounds very persuasive. The one pages back where History Speaks couldn't understand what they were trying to say or come up with a proper response. Really seems like that's something the people defending the traditional view should address the most.

I think it was BonesJones who detailed how even if you had a 100% efficient furnace, it wouldn't be able to kill as much people as the claims suggest.

 

[The Tall Man]

@Save the Loli

Right, I'm sure you're "just a libertarian" and not someone with an axe to grind against Jews for whatever reason.

I don't believe for a second any one of you are actually after truth.

your reputation is akin to flat earthers and creationists, as I suspected, because you argue using the same tactics.

Again you have to convince yourself that people who don't share your views are dishonest, hate-driven, retarded liars.
This is a sure sign that you are not looking for truth but are instead fighting from a ideological standpoint with the purpose of smearing and discrediting people representing different opinions than yours, because the holocaust is an important part of either your whole world view or your identity.

I've never heard of them

They are two well known revisionists and you not knowing them shows that this is not about rational arguments or honest discussion for you since you don't even bother to look at what the other side of the argument has to say.

unironically believes the JEWS DID WTC meme.

The Empire Unmasked - By Ryan Dawson (Complete).

www.bitchute.com

Here you go. It's a very informative film about 9/11 including the role Israel played in it.

Why are all the political parties who support it extremist organizations

show me the mainstream people who believe in this ideology

I refuse to believe you are that ignorant, so please stop pretending to be dumb.
It's an incredibly taboo subject that will get you put in jail in many countries around the world.
So of course the only people willing to tackle this subject are truth fanatics and people who are already on the fringes (aka extremists) and you already know this or are you going to deny that revisionist get harassed and put in jail?

You are honestly trying to make me believe that you are baffled that no one on TV or at a cushy government job is openly revisionist?

I am not being dishonest with you despite you trying to paint me in that light, so please stop being dishonest with me.

because if you accept the Holocaust, that means someone you don't like--liberals, Jews, academics, the establishment--was right about something.

You are the one constantly trying to make this about team sports and try to put people who disagree with you in your preconceived boxes so you can easily dismiss them as bad people. How is this so hard for you to grasp that some people like to look for the truth.

This is nothing but projection on your part.

Saying "No, you" doesn't mean anything if you have nothing to back it up.

I am taking your own words at face value.
You said "the holocaust is a historical fact", this is an absolute position showing your complete unwillingness to change this.
You assume everyone who disagrees with you is a dishonest, evil, dumb liar from the get go.
This makes you an ideologue.

@mrlonzo identified as a Nazi a few pages ago.

If you believe that you are pretty gullible. I highly doubt mrlonzo is close to a hundred years old.

Answer why denying the Holocaust is so important to you?

Okay I will answer it again for you (did you not read my previous reply?) and I hope you will than answer the only question I ever asked you.
It isn't important to me. I am looking for the truth and if compelling evidence is presented I will change my position.

I will ask you another question since you are unwilling to answer why the holocaust being true is so important to you.

Who taught you about the holocaust?
And what is the most important thing regarding the holocaust that convinces you it is true?

Take a deep breath relax and try to look at things objectively instead of assuming malice in all people that don't share your opinion.

I have no horse in this race, and I don't know which side is telling the truth since you're all vomiting so many books and sources that I don't have the time to comb through, but I have to say that the point the revisionists made about violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics sounds very persuasive. The one pages back where History Speaks couldn't understand what they were trying to say or come up with a proper response. Really seems like that's something the people defending the traditional view should address the most.

I think it was BonesJones who detailed how even if you had a 100% efficient furnace, it wouldn't be able to kill as much people as the claims suggest.

There is another funny little detail that usually gets ignored by both sides.
The bone powder and ashes were supposedly disposed on the fields around the camps. Any farmer could tell you if you put that much ash and calcium in the ground it would completely ruin the soil and potentially even the groundwater of the area.

 

[Bonesjones]

Hey look the schizo retard confused cooking things in rendered fat as a flavor and heat transfer aid, with cooking things with fat as a fuel source. I'm glad you can prove for a fact that you are actually just another no nothing Jewish idiot.

Since you have so much documentation to back up your argument, then you can post one single piece of paper of the Nazis being directly told to genocide the jews. I'll wait till I'm dead before you can dig one up though. I can just point to the Wansee conference report though.

 

[VasonJoorhees]

I know manual labor is a blind spot for jews, but it's actually extremely difficult to move thousands of pounds repeatedly.

Did you forget people figured out how to move tons of heavy shit with much less than the technology we had in the 40s or something? We were using basic systems such as pulleys as early as the 2nd millennium BCE, likely even before recorded history. People didn't just suddenly forget how to move shit 80 years ago dumbass.

No one is offended, we just think you are a retard.

Right, that's why you're spending god knows how long debating him. Because you aren't offended and do not care. Sure. The fact you've spent this long debating shows that your belief system only stands as long as other like minded dipshits agree with you lol. People with common sense don't need constant reassurance.

So you admit that Allied war crimes happen but are unable to fathom that they would invent Nazi war crimes as a moralistic argument that they did "what had to be done"?

Well yeah, because that is retarded and there is no evidence of that.

Also suggesting that destroying a war camp is a symptom of hiding something shows your lack of basic military knowledge, but you'll keep pretending to be an expert.

"Lack of basic military knowledge" yet you don't know what Scorched Earth is - your self awareness level is zero. Scorched earth is a tactic that's been used in pretty much every war ever. You must have missed 8th grade history, or didn't go to school at all... explains a lot actually lol

It is incredibly obvious that you are not on a search for truth. You do not engage with the other posters argument neutrally and when you have been shown wrong you just ignore it.
You are here to preach because you see the existence of revisionists as a threat to your identity or worldview.

ITT: Local cow is surprised when saying retarded shit is not met with kindly.

Yes, your proof is ignored because it's horse shit. I don't care how much "proof" you have that Santa is real, or that the moon is made out of cheese, or that skinwalkers are real and one is standing right behind me right now, I wasn't born yesterday. Keep schlanging that cope.

 

[Polentic]

109 countries can't be wrong.

I mean, Menorca can be wrong, they have plenty of jews returning sooo....
108 can't be wrong.

EDIT : checked the list. Most of it is Rome trolling so like 50ish can't be wrong.

 

[mrolonzo]

/
Except you made a false equivalence to the Indian residency schools. Given the number of pits combined with how the ash, corpse wax (still present in the late 40s), and bone fragments, this implies the death toll is far beyond what you'd expect from a transit camp along the countless other reams of damning evidence that shows trips to these camps was one way.

I didn’t make any false equivalency. Because there isnt one. There is no actual lab analysis of cremated remains in the ground for example in Belzec and the claimed waxy corpses is about 133 bodies arranged haphazardly that correspond to the previously existing gypsy camp on that spot. Meanwhile the maps of the camp and the found archeological remains at Belzec corrpespond with normal camp operations; no gas homicidal chambers, as per the Mattogno’s study on Belzec. The camp was never secret, and claims about the camp were and are ridiculous from the start.

It's a completely false equivalence because the Nazis didn't care if the body was totally cremated. This was not supposed to be a clean funeral and it was done on a fuel budget, hence the very specific recollections of how the bodies were stacked--and just who (SS cremation specialists) told them how--to produce the most efficient burn. Did Mattogno even account for the bodies of children or elderly (less fuel) or those suffering malnutrition (many of them, but some died before malnutrition set in)?

Oh really? They didn’t care about total cremation? And allegedly sent people around the entire theatre to back to every single grave site and make them disappear?

And they had a bone mill machines that also conveniently cant be tied to the camps?

Specific recollections? Of bullshit? Who by?

In fact Mattogno accounted for the extra bodies by giving generous estimates.

1) The areas above and around the pits--already demonstrated

Ok where? Show us a pyre then.

2) Of course, you deny the most damning evidence against your "hypothesis", hence why you are a denialist interested in spinning a fantastic story of little relation to history. Good luck denying every single Einsatzgruppen reports, their correlation to actual mass graves, and constant use of terms like "Judenfrei" in the 40s

EG reports have no correlation with the normal incident reports of the same groups. The Jeager report is without foundation in terms of lineage, the lack of bodies, the possibility of the groups being where they are supposed to have been as well as the missions briefs they are given.

The report is completely refuted in section 4.1.5 of the Einsatzgruppen study by Mattogno.

3) Deportation to where? Are the Nazis incapable of using code? Does Nazi "liquidation" of ghettos means they made the Jews into juice?

Deportation to the east.
Yes they can use code, and their enigma code, thought to be at the time unbreakable by the germans, was found to contain no reference to the holocaust. Liquidation simply means turning a solid body into a disparate body, as one actually does in liquidation.

4) They were.

Oh really where? Who told you?

5) Based on zilch evidence. On the other hand, millions of Jews vanished from the historical record, never to be taxed, recorded in a census, or communicate with surviving family. The well-documented German railroad train schedules shows the death camps were final destinations.

These Millions of jews didn’t even exist under Nazi control to vanish as detailed in this very thread. So thus they were not taxed, recorded or in communication. The train records you refer to are missing both outbound and inbound records. But of course, details are hard for you so lets agree you concede all these points.

The ones I've debunked, braintrust.

Ok like what? We’ve not even started.

Which constitutes an international legal precedent, other it wouldn't actually be a legal casus belli for a just war. Of course there were actual treaties like France's role in protecting Christians in Lebanon (which is nominally a product of the Franco-Ottoman "Unholy Alliance" but was renewed post-Crimean War) or those enforced on Vietnam or China. Point is, by 1900 European civilization exalted itself as civilized protectors of humanity and practically all viewed bloody massacres and expulsions as barbarism. Some intellectuals went a step further and called out their civilization for its hypocrisy (i.e. everyone in Leopold's Congo or Savorgnan de Brazza in French Congo). If anything, Holocaust denialism owes a lot to this tradition of human rights, since you are desperate to portray your German supremacist heroes as moral and good against all evidence.

An international legal precedent has to be agreed upon by interested parties, not made up ad hoc in the event of victory by one side and doesn't become so just because you want it to. The treaties you refer to don’t involve the Nazis.

Based on no evidence whatsoever as always. But anyway, just checking the list, camp commandant Karl Koch was executed for 3 murders of prisoners. Turns out these 3 had been named as witnesses to the main crimes he was charged with (corruption) so they added murder to his charges. This was at Buchenwald too, which was a labor camp and had many prisoners who were not Jews. Can't find the ethnicity of the three he killed, but it doesn't matter since you're using Morgen's efforts as a way to claim the Nazis didn't commit war crimes.

Yes, indeed. Karl Koch was in fact in collusion with the communist cell of the camp, which was indeed a labor camp as was Auschwitz, and who, through ideological unity, murder and subterfuge took over the camp in the context of a flooding of the camp with prisoners and a lack of camp staff, as detailed here;

Buchenwald: Legend and Reality | CODOH

codoh.com

Go on, read it. You’re not a communist so you should appreciate this actual history of Buchenwald.

But that doesn't make it moral (I mean it theoretically can be, but the method you're claiming certainly isn't), nor does it make it legal as I've shown with the precedents in international law.

Of course its moral, its a nations sovereign right at the time and no international precedent was agreed to and be then broken by the nazis, where they found criminality they executed the perpetrators – even their own.

You wanted to talk about how benevolent the Nazis were to the Slavs, I brought up the White Movement because the Nazis deliberately marginalized them and found a new batch of collaborators like Vlasov and Kaminski who did not share the aims of the White Movement in restoring the Russian Empire. Why do you Holocaust denialists project so much?

LMAO
Oh the White movement as in the anti communist opposition to the Reds in the russian civil war?

Ok, lets look at the Nazi opposition to slavs;

"He [Himmler] then singled out those nations which he regarded as belonging to the German family of nations and they were: the Germans, the Dutch, the Flemish, the Anglo-Saxons, the Scandinavians and the Baltic people. ‘To combine all of these nations into one big family is the most important task at the present time’ [Himmler said]. ‘This unification has to take place on the principle of equality and at that same time has to secure the identity of each nation and its economical independence.

After the unification of all the German nations into one family, this family has to take over the mission to include, in the family, all the Roman nations whose living space is favored by nature with a milder climate. I am convinced that after the unification, the Roman nations will be able to persevere as well as the Germans.

This enlarged family of the White race will then have the mission to include the Slavic nations into the family also because they too are of the White race. It is only with such a unification of the White race that the Western culture could be saved from the Asiatic race.

At the present time, the Waffen-SS is leading in this respect because its organization is based on the principle of equality. The Waffen-SS comprises not only German, Roman and Slavic, but even Islamic units and at the same time has proven that every unit has maintained its national identity while fighting in close togetherness. I know quite well my Germans. The German always likes to think himself better but I would like to avert this. It is important that every Waffen-SS officer obeys the order of another officer of another nationality, as the officer of the other nationality obeys the order of the German officer.”

Heinrich Himmler quoted in a conversation with Artur Silgailis, General of the Latvian Legion-SS // Source: Arthur Silgalis, Latvian Legion (R. James Bender Publishing, San Jose,1986), Pp. 348-349, also cited in: Jonathan Trigg, Hitler's Gauls (Spellmount, 2006), Pp. 49.

Quoted from codoh.com forum thread;
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.p...sid=beb9e462c3258131f6a5711c3102f99d&start=15

Sure, by all means tell me why people who actually witnessed these events, if not perpetrated them, are somehow wrong but a bunch of neo-Nazis backed by East German/Soviet money and loons like Rockwell trying to sell Nazism to segregationists are somehow correct. You only have evidence because you deny evidence as it suits you. That is not how historiography works.

They’re simply wrong because what they say is implausible and unreliable.

Example Rudolf Vrba, a central "witness" to the holocaust

Rudolf Vrba exposes himself as a liar | CODOH

codoh.com

This is how historiography works.

Because it's evidence that critically undermines your position, therefore you deny it. You cannot prove every bit of the mountains of documents, affidavits, and eyewitness testimony was fraudulent. Even if people lied (IIRC the lampshade claim showed up there) or exaggerated, a broad look at the evidence paints a picture of just what actually happened, not some fantasy about your German superheroes forced into lying.

Of course we can. In fact its already been done. All the most relevant testimony has been examined. This thing is over 75 years old. You think this stuff cant be examined?

Oh a broad look is it? You think that helps you?

In fact the broad look helps us, its called the convergence of evidence, an excuse that your side made up to try and buttress the falsity of their individual excerpts when these were examined and found wanting but revisionists have found that the convergence of actual hard evidence demonstrates that the holocaust is a lie.

Findings that your side's most authoritative authors couldn’t respond to.

All your major holocaust promoting authors are still alive today. None of them can respond, because the holocaust cannot be defended or debated reasonably by a peddler, as you yourself have shown.

>planned
I mean was it? Tiny little minutiae like that doesn't disprove the many other facts that people were jammed in there and gassed. It's clear there was ventilation in the gas chambers because there's remains of the ducts used.

Indeed, planned. And planned when supposedly mass murder was the idea of building numerous more krema for Auschwitz camp.

Indeed there was ventilation planned for all the gas chambers, to make the chambers safe for the delousing of clothing and not planned for the killing to mass numbers of people which would take far too long, people would simply fight out of, was against camp regulations, would not kil everyone anyway, would take hours to empty of bodies even if everyone was dead, with whom the safe airing of the chambers would not be possible until every body had been cleared out.


Want to hear more? The Van Pelt report is instructive here, examined in detail by the study known as The Real Case For Auschwitz by Mattogno. I guarantee you actually don’t want to talk about this aspect of the debate.

 

[mrolonzo]

Did you forget people figured out how to move tons of heavy shit with much less than the technology we had in the 40s or something? We were using basic systems such as pulleys as early as the 2nd millennium BCE, likely even before recorded history. People didn't just suddenly forget how to move shit 80 years ago dumbass.


Right, that's why you're spending god knows how long debating him. Because you aren't offended and do not care. Sure. The fact you've spent this long debating shows that your belief system only stands as long as other like minded dipshits agree with you lol. People with common sense don't need constant reassurance.


Well yeah, because that is retarded and there is no evidence of that.


"Lack of basic military knowledge" yet you don't know what Scorched Earth is - your self awareness level is zero. Scorched earth is a tactic that's been used in pretty much every war ever. You must have missed 8th grade history, or didn't go to school at all... explains a lot actually lol


ITT: Local cow is surprised when saying retarded shit is not met with kindly.

Yes, your proof is ignored because it's horse shit. I don't care how much "proof" you have that Santa is real, or that the moon is made out of cheese, or that skinwalkers are real and one is standing right behind me right now, I wasn't born yesterday. Keep schlanging that cope.

1/ They are supposed to be moving hundreds of bodies in small teams to a small elevator not designed for the weight day and night rapidly over and over again while the bodies are covered in cyanide.

Get your story straight retard.


2/ We're debating and owning holocaust peddling retards and lolcows here, not being offended by them. Get a fucking grip or fuck off to another thread.

3/ Read the thread before you open your "mouth", the allies even created their own fake gas chamber at Dachau and presented shrunken heads and allegedly human skin lampshades at Buchenwald.

4/ LMAO you don't even know how the scorched earth argument applies here. You're completely out of your depth.

5/
Santa isn't real, it's the parents buying the presents.
The moon isn't made of cheese, it's made of rock like every other planet excepting gas giants.
The holocaust is isnt real, about 300000 innocent jews died of typhus and starvation. Not gassing or mass shooting.

It's all pretty straight forward and there's no reason for you to think otherwise.

 

[mrolonzo]

While we wait for Loli and miisha's next screeching let's have a look at the actual gas chambers of Auschwitz. Also attached is a guide on how to argue, me having a smoke waiting for the next retarded response and the guys on this thread like me and Bonejones who actually know about this hunting all the faggot normies who come here to try to tell us something about this subject and lastly another very interesting labor camp.