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

[Stabmaster Arson II]

You should read the thread. However, asking questions is reasonable.

He should ask himself this.
He says he thinks no side has definitive proof. So he admits, there is no proof for the holocaust. Why in that case, does he believe it happened?
The answer is that faith based practice you talk of.

 

[Linako 2.0]

Read Mein Kampf. The elimination of Jews is pretty fucking self-evident there.

Where exactly?
can you provide the chapter or even an excerpt?

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

He should ask himself this.
He says he thinks no side has definitive proof. So he admits, there is no proof for the holocaust. Why in that case, does he believe it happened?
The answer is that faith based practice you talk of.

No definitive proof I've personally seen, though I haven't really looked in either direction, so it could exist. I'm just wondering if there's a smoking gun.

I do think the burden of proof rests on the claimant, of course. The only decent evidence I've seen that it happened is pictures of mounds of naked corpses, but that could easily be faked.

I'm only leaning towards it being real because I'm unaware of any evidence to the contrary (I could read through this thread as was suggested, but I don't want to gas 6 million seconds of my life if someone can just sum it up), but in any case I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that the numbers are fudged.

 

[mrolonzo]

No definitive proof I've personally seen, though I haven't really looked in either direction, so it could exist. I'm just wondering if there's a smoking gun.

I do think the burden of proof rests on the claimant, of course. The only decent evidence I've seen that it happened is pictures of mounds of naked corpses, but that could easily be faked.

I'm only leaning towards it being real because I'm unaware of any evidence to the contrary (I could read through this thread as was suggested, but I don't want to gas 6 million seconds of my life if someone can just sum it up), but in any case I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that the numbers are fudged.

You make a good point. I can direct you to smoking gun after smoking gun but to sum it's like this:

Atrocity propaganda is created and promulgated around ww2. After the war the allies begin to forget about those lies though they make sure that germans keep up the propaganda against themselves. As the 60s dragged and the west becomes more liberal the focus on minority rights comes to the fore. So some people start putting together wild claims from the post ww2 kangaroo courts into a grand tale of a term now known as genocide.

But no one ever asks them to back it up. There's alot riding on all this now. Hundreds of millions of dollars, people executed as war criminals for crimes they had no way to know of, people assaulted, and imprisoned for questioning this - and that's just those who say it's all fake. So unlike wmds this thing keeps going and in fact after the cold war ends and the west doesn't have a great eastern enemy anymore this grand tale has more support not less from those in power seeking to support minorities as well as their benefactors.

There is no actual hard evidence of the holocaust. What there are is wild claims forged documents and self referential books by mediocre historians. When this is exposed for real the west brings in hate speech and incitement laws .

Are there bodies? None so far. Does revisionism want to dig some up? Absolutely. It's all right there in easy reach. There are supposed to be some million bodies buried in the marsh land around Auschwitz, this the most accessible and largest genocide museum in the world. Yet the last thing you'd be able to do is properly investigate this.

The thing is, again the holocaust doesn't have hard evidence, but revisionists have a barrel load. Which is why you see the revisionist posters here like me posting large amounts of information..

As you go along. You'll have holocaust peddlers telling you there is this vast mountain of evidence. Simply ask to see this mountain. Watch them shrink.

More broadly, as you'll see in this thread, a holocaust peddler is essentially an intellectual and physical coward who cannot engage in any way with those who disagree. They are corrupt souls who swim in a sea of intense ignorance breathing it all in. We are their intellectual and spiritual opposites.

 

[Sissyagamben]

Ok I do believe it happened, but no way 6 million died if you look at the population of Jews and gypsy etc there’s just no way. Now 1-2 or even slightly more million being in camps I can believe, but no way every single Jew and roma in Western and Northern Europe and Poland, every single one of them died in the camps and no one managed to go anyway else. yeah there were retarded ppl and faggots and Let’s say there were half a million that actually DIED, that’s how the 6 million would come about. that would just be silly

theres this unconfirmed urban legend in China that the real number of death in an earth quake, freak fire, factory explosion etc that you can somewhat accuse the government of negligence is the number of officially published data times ten.and that will be a somewhat accurate ball park. Now ccp has little to do with this how shebang, but I believe manipulating numbers is common for propaganda purposes and the west and le zhews are not immune from doing this. so instead of the official number times ten, the real death toll would probably be the published number divided by ten. I would believe 600k up to maybe a million, and still I wouldn’t say oh hitler did nothing wrong or it wasn’t bad, it was pretty bad and indeed targeted against Jews, just no way 6 million. me thinks 600k puts hitler on a way lower level compared to Stalin or mao, who already killed way more than 6 million, not badass enough for the whole world to treat rich zhews as literal baby angels who can do no wrong.

 

[mrolonzo]

Ok I do believe it happened, but no way 6 million died if you look at the population of Jews and gypsy etc there’s just no way. Now 1-2 or even slightly more million being in camps I can believe, but no way every single Jew and roma in Western and Northern Europe and Poland, every single one of them died in the camps and no one managed to go anyway else. yeah there were retarded ppl and faggots and Let’s say there were half a million that actually DIED, that’s how the 6 million would come about. that would just be silly

theres this unconfirmed urban legend in China that the real number of death in an earth quake, freak fire, factory explosion etc that you can somewhat accuse the government of negligence is the number of officially published data times ten.and that will be a somewhat accurate ball park. Now ccp has little to do with this how shebang, but I believe manipulating numbers is common for propaganda purposes and the west and le zhews are not immune from doing this. so instead of the official number times ten, the real death toll would probably be the published number divided by ten. I would believe 600k up to maybe a million, and still I wouldn’t say oh hitler did nothing wrong or it wasn’t bad, it was pretty bad and indeed targeted against Jews, just no way 6 million. me thinks 600k puts hitler on a way lower level compared to Stalin or mao, who already killed way more than 6 million, not badass enough for the whole world to treat rich zhews as literal baby angels who can do no wrong.

And how do you think these 600k died?

 

[Chugger]

No definitive proof I've personally seen, though I haven't really looked in either direction, so it could exist. I'm just wondering if there's a smoking gun.

I do think the burden of proof rests on the claimant, of course. The only decent evidence I've seen that it happened is pictures of mounds of naked corpses, but that could easily be faked.

I'm only leaning towards it being real because I'm unaware of any evidence to the contrary (I could read through this thread as was suggested, but I don't want to gas 6 million seconds of my life if someone can just sum it up), but in any case I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that the numbers are fudged.

I think asking for both sides' smoking guns is a decent approach.

Both sides do make claims. Mainstream historiography claims the Nazis had a policy of killing Jews deemed unfit for work (which going by Nazi documents were 60-80% of the total population under their control). Revisionists like mrolonzo claim these Jews were interned in the USSR.

I've put forward many smoking guns in this thread, eg Goebbels diary (60% of the Jews in the GG "will be liquidated") , Wetzel's letter on "gassing devices" , but here's one I haven't mentioned or gone into detail about I don't think. The Franke Gricksh report

Revisionist critique is basically that this was a crude forgery, but the original German wartime copy was found and forensically demonstrated with high probability to have emerged from a typewriter associated with Franke Gricksch (based on certain defects in the type). To this revisionists say such defects are common (which I guess means the forgers got very lucky or were very easily able to find a similarly defective typewriter). If this was the case one should be able to find other documents displaying the same characteristics. I challenged revisionists on Codoh to do this and you can see the results https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?p=100556#p100556

 

[John.Doe]

Cool, name a single Jew who was resettled in the USSR (or on the moon?) through Auschwitz, Belzec, Treblinka, Sobibor, or Chelmno

I think asking for both sides' smoking guns is a decent approach.

Both sides do make claims.

Another point of evidence that you're an NPC with a badly written and looped script, as we come back to this tired canard where you try to shift the burden of proof:
"There is no confirming evidence that positively demonstrates every detail of a position I assigned to you, therefore you are wrong and I am right."
"Uh, that's cool and all, but then where is your positive evidence proving your thesis?"
"There is no evidence, therefore you can't disprove my thesis."
"You just said a second ago that a lack of positive, detailed evidence demonstrates probable falsity, so how can you-"
"SHUT UP IDIOT, THERE WAS NEVER A MOON RESETTLEMENT AND YOU'LL NEVER PROVE YOUR CONSPIRACY THEORY, RETARD!"

I'll just repeat myself, since you're doing it.

You purport to be an academic with considerable education and subject matter expertise in this area in particular, and discussions of this topic should not be novel, so why do you seem so ill-equipped to respond in a measured and clear fashion? One might think that the information and demonstrable proof would be at your fingertips, so why has it taken you so long to respond in even this unsatisfactory fashion?

It leads me to believe that you are, in fact, not an educated academic but rather are posting copy-pasted arguments from off-site without understanding what anyone, including yourself, is posting. You just look for keywords and desperately try to stitch together responses with insults and deflection as the mortar. It is tiresome.

 

[Chugger]

shift the burden of proof

you're misunderstanding my point -- both sides have the burden of proof regarding claims that they make. if your side (holocaust deniers) makes no claim about what happened to the deported Jews, this looks pretty bad, since in history millions of people should be traceable in some sense thru witness and documentary evidence. unlike you I'm not making specific demands on what to see (such as food deliveries to all these people). Any concrete evidence would suffice, but there appears to be nothing.

 

[John.Doe]

you're misunderstanding my point

No, I get you completely. Whenever you are questioned on your own ridiculous claims (like 1940's Germans were able to psychically coordinate genocide and also able to vaporize corpses with magic) then you create a strawman position and then task people to then try and defend whatever ridiculous thing you've made up, a clear attempt in bad faith to dodge arguments and try reversing the burden of proof. Whether there exists any evidence of a Moon or Eastern Resettlement or not has no relationship whatsoever to your consistent and repeated inability or unwillingness to defend your points. Stop throwing out these desperate attempts to distract the issue and defend your points or kindly suck start a shotgun.

I personally don't care about any resettlement theories, and they don't matter because they aren't the point of contention. The real issue is that you are making some pretty extraordinary claims (6 GORILLION!) and not backing that up with evidence. The burden of proof is on you, my dude, to demonstrate that the Holocaust happened.

And yet......

Any concrete evidence would suffice, but there appears to be nothing.

 

[Chugger]

Whether there exists any evidence of a Moon or Eastern Resettlement or not has no relationship whatsoever to your consistent and repeated inability or unwillingness to defend your points. Stop throwing out these desperate attempts to distract the issue and defend your points or kindly suck start a shotgun.

I personally don't care about any resettlement theories, and they don't matter because they aren't the point of contention. The real issue is that you are making some pretty extraordinary claims (6 GORILLION!) and not backing that up with evidence. The burden of proof is on you, my dude, to demonstrate that the Holocaust happened.

The burden of proof is on both of us my because the question at hand is, "what happened to the deported Jews?"

The best evidenced theory is the one we should go with, no?

 

[John.Doe]

The burden of proof is on both of us my because the question at hand is, "what happened to the deported Jews?"

The best evidenced theory is the one we should go with, no?

No, it isn't. Stop trying to play these semantic games where you try to burden shift. You have to prove that whatever you asserted happened, and its weird you keep insisting that I prove something like there is some zero-sum game of evidence where if I don't prove something then what you say is true by default. That isn't the case, you have to prove your assertions.

You claim millions died, show us their corpses.

 

[Chugger]

Stop trying to play these semantic games where you try to burden shift.

What semantic games and what burden shift lol? I'm applying the same criteria to both sides. You aren't. You demand a high level of evidence for one theory and don't care that there's virtually nothing for the opposing one. This is hypocrisy my friend.

 

[Sissyagamben]

And how do you think these 600k died?

Like in any labor camps, hunger illness weakness exhaustion etc. When you work ppl like animals and dont care about their well-being or livelihood of course many of them could die. And when you don’t gaf when you transport them and stuck ppl like cargos in a train many would just suffocate or die of thirst etc. I’m sure many who were too weak on arrival were just eliminated as well, i don’t think anyone can say Hitler couldnt have been sooo evil and murderous etc. One thing about “conspiracy theory“ and propaganda is that they never have to completely fabricate something, people everywhere do horrendous shit all the time, they just have to dig sth up, exaggerate it, and really really stress about it and talk about it all the time.

many leftists love to say no one died at the gulag or there are no concentration camps on xinjiang, anyone saying so is just perpetrating anti-commie imperialist war apologist etc etc. Yeah sure when they put this shit all over the news it serves a purpose to manipulate public opinions, but it doesn’t mean those shit don’t happen. Them choosing to make a gigantic deal about it, talking about it all the time, make everything about it even after almost a century, and making north American Jews seem as having the exact issues as a polish Jew in 1939 is the point of contention.

 

[Matajudios]

>This is a fact CHUD, that's why even nearly a century after, we sue, jail, and make laws to target anyone who even dares to question things
>And let's keep this thread fair and factual, so please don't use any ad Homs, you sad little flat earther incels
I love the faggots coming in here. I wonder where Autism @History Speaks is though.

 

[Bonesjones]

>This is a fact CHUD, that's why even nearly a century after, we sue, jail, and make laws to target anyone who even dares to question things
>And let's keep this thread fair and factual, so please don't use any ad Homs, you sad little flat earther incels
I love the faggots coming in here. I wonder where Autism @History Speaks is though.

I saw him try to post on /pol/ a few weeks ago.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

You think I'm abusing you and obfuscating something?

You're right to an extent. I am now abusing you as your behaviour warrants. But obfuscating of course not. I generally stick to exact points and answer every one.

Anyway, I refer you here to the Treblinka study by Mattogno. The best work that exists as it takes in all the angles of inquiry. The pits are claimed to be filled with waxy corpse at the bottom only.

You've been abusing me from the beginning and like the "scholars" you read, you do nothing but obfuscate facts and details.

Nope. Feeding them and caring for them is more convenient for various reasons and as demonstrated by the history of Auschwitz, in terms of morale, crowd control, war production and they were releasing Jews anyway from Auschwitz. There was no ideological reason to murder any Jews and they even had Jewish blood in their army.

Every calorie given to a Jew is one not given to a German or useful collaborator as evidenced by the Hunger Plan employed in Eastern Europe to ensure the German people ate enough. The Nazis were virulently antisemitic as proven by literally everything about their regime from Mein Kampf onwards and had every ideological reason to murder Jews, namely the fact they might give their manpower to the Soviets and the fact postwar settlement in Eastern Europe demanded they be killed.

Mattogno's lies give rise to the question of "why are the pits so deep to begin with?"

Babi Yar is without foundation as the EG study shows. But feel free to show us the bodies.

1943 aerial photo. Appears to contain burn scars from mass cremation, although this isn't necessarily from the initial massacre there since the Nazis executed other people at Babi Yar in smaller massacres until the liberation of Kiev. And of course eyewitness testimony and Nazi documents reporting that yes, they killed people here.

In fact he quotes the actual documents people actually used. So no.

There doesn't even need to be a resettlement and the resettlement issue is dealt with in this very thread. I took great pains to lay ot all out for HS and Chugger. You yourself were aware of this thread at the time as you had made a few snatched responses. So no. It's dealt with and you have no answer.

If there wasn't a resettlement, then where did they go? It wasn't Israel or the US, since we have immigration records and decades of censuses. They didn't stay where they were in Eastern Europe, since we have more census evidence. There is not a single bit of evidence for any sizable resettlement.

I refer you to Dalton on the Jewish population statistics and the pages in which its dealt with here. Pages 68 to 72. Attached.

That argument is absolutely terrible. Wanna know another impoverished, persecuted population that grows rapidly? Africans. Many ethnic groups in Africa are/were persecuted by the ethnic group in charge of their government, yet these actions don't play out in demography. He also argues Jews are overinflating their own numbers, despite the fact that this would mean the millions of dead Jews could not have been resettled in Israel. It is not unreasonable at all for the Jewish population to grown that quickly because it is barely higher than world population growth at the time as a whole, assuming those old NYT reports are accurate (since I'm using actual demography and not what a random newspaper said).

Actually it's existence only applies to the extent it's rulings can be applied. And that only applies to the extent a nation has agreed to these laws and incorporates them into its own body of law. The only other applicable extent is where another country or group of countries imposes its will on another: which is therefore a might makes right argument. Not a legal argument.

You can indeed say the USA breaks international law because these are laws it itself signed on to and then may have broken.

There were no such precedents as the actions of all countries previously showed.

That's the point, you don't need to sign any agreement to be subject to international law, because it exists independently of anything else. It is not simply "might makes right", since it is based on precedent. And I've shown you plenty of precedent that Nazi Germany's conduct in WWII was illegal, hence why there was a WWII to begin with.

Ah so group morality is defended in your own link?

Thus Germans were simply acting morally, in their biological interest when excluding Jews back to the east from whence they came.

Congrats you played yourself again.

Group interest existing doesn't prove there aren't universal morals. German group interest in this case resulted in the destruction of their nation, proving that it was a bad idea to take that path toward advancing group interest. In the case of bans on Holocaust denial promoted by Jewish groups, I believe they are also using their group interest in a wrong manner, since this thread proves the single biggest draw of Holocaust denial is its appeal as "stuff (((THEY))) don't want you to hear." If it wasn't banned, few would care.

Yes he regarded them as inferior. This was pro German rather than anti slav as his actions demonstrated. Banning and executing pro Hitler Slavs etc is perfectly reasonable where they cross German interests. Particularly if, while being pro Hitler they had also been nationalist in their own cause and therefore been involved in action against ethnic german civilians. I would execute such men even if I did respect Slavs and so would you.

They weren't executed for any any action against German civilians, they were executed for being politicians tangentially associated with nationalists. They accepted Poland's defeat and advocated an alliance with Germany yet gained no political power whatsoever which is in stark contrast to movements like Bandera's in Ukraine.

In 1985, at the first Zündel trial in Toronto, where Vrba was a witness for the prosecution, he claimed to have maintained frequent contacts with members of the Sonderkommando. He added that he had drawn up the sketch of the furnace room of Crematories II and III on the basis of information received from these contacts."

This Filip Muller had been working at these furnaces for 22 months yet could not actually describe it accurately. How's that for context.

Okay, so he was unable to 100% accurately describe how something worked decades after the fact, and that's assuming your source isn't lying out the ass misinterpreting what he said. So what? A lot of people can't do that. That also ignores Mueller gave testimony elsewhere too.

1/ "Morgue 1, allegedly diverted from its intended use to a gas chamber, had an area of 210 square meters. It is not possible to pack 2,000 people into such an area. Six to seven (adult) people per square meter, thus in total approximately 1,300 to 1,500, would be the maximum in the case of a cooperative and disciplined attitude on the part of the victims."

>(Adult)
Well there you go, because up to 1/3 of Holocaust victims were children and in general this assumes a healthy, nourished person. Many Eastern European Jews were never healthy or nourished because they grew up during WWI/Russian Civil War. This is case in point with what I mean by the dishonest "science" used to "refute" the Holocaust.

I therefore have no reason to believe any of the rest of what you posted isn't some other flavor of distortion or at best something that can be explained away by "these people were prisoners, not camp architects." I can't describe to you in meticulous detail how everything in my job works, even if I could try and get 80-90% of it correct.

3/ "Zyklon B was not a “preparation in powder form”, but was provided in the form of gypsum pellets.

– That all victims would have been dead already three minutes after the insertion of the Zyklon is an impossibility.

As we have seen, the hydrogen cyanide discharged from the carrier pellets very slowly in order to guarantee a uniform distribution of the gas in a disinfestation chamber and simultaneously guarantee the safety of the disinfectors.

Furthermore, it must be recalled that in a U.S. gas chamber, in which the doomed individual was instantly exposed to the full effect of the hydrogen cyanide, on average approximately 9 minutes went by until his death occurred (Christianson 2010, p. 220; cf. Section 1.8."

If a single person in a US gas chamber is your baseline, then that's another example of how Holocaust deniers lie and obfuscate evidence. People die a lot faster crammed inside such a room--hell, they'd probably start dying on their own since it would be so easy to start a panic and a human crush And that's assuming the eyewitness didn't misremember how long it took. You've perfectly proved my point about how Holocaust denial is based on taking things out of context and lying.

As you all may imagine there are numerous lines of breathless bullshit here but a more entertaining expose of this is that July 17/18, 1942 was the last time Heinrich Himmler had been in Auschwitz, therefore it’s impossible for him to have participated in the inauguration of the first Birkenau crematory, no matter whether this took place in January or March of 1943.


Tell me what you think about a guy who could actually write this.

And how do you know that he didn't mistake someone else for Himmler, just like how do you know Himmler DIDN'T visit Auschwitz in 1943? Oh that's right, I guess German documents are only reliable when they 100% agree with you.

Our beliefs are rooted in facts, not ideologies. You don't have to be nazi or german to research this stuff and most revisionists aren't Hitlerists like me.

Our arguments are unanswerable and this is shown in the responses as well as the real life debates in writing or in person that have occurred.

Revisionists succeed on the basis of history, demography, logistics, culture, ideology, engineering, physics, and common sense.

My personal ideology national socialism also succeeds in this fashion because it's just , like gravity, a natural phenomenon, but that's a different matter.

And as I've demonstrated, nobody believes your ideology besides fellow loons, hence why your strategies include dishonesty, lies, faulty/bad science, and deluging your opponent with bullshit i.e. Gish gallop.

Blah blah. These aren't quotes they are claims about history written down on paper.

Despite changing priorities and practices the Nazis were not chaotic. There was no telepathic meeting of minds that caused a holocaust because obviously that's impossible and anyway there are no bodies and it's just stupid to bother trying to kill people all the time anyway.

The only person exposed as stupid here is you. The claims and allegations are made, these are then questioned from the earliest days, the exterminationists then change their story over time always making sure to avoid revisionists in person or in writing and instead castigated them such that jewish goons assault revisionist researchers and Jewish lawyers seek to imprison them.

Or maybe they're getting put in prison because people find them offensively stupid, and offending people in some countries is literally illegal. I'd be pretty pissed if some anti-white group was going around telling me how all my family members are actually still alive/didn't die in the way my surviving family saw them.

What have you shown of my claims to be wrong?

You've just dodged and spun around that's all.

Nothing ive said is dead wrong obviously which is shown by your cowardly behaviour.

But then we see the strange claim that I am not a revisionist, who apparently now have 'good name's now, but a instead a 'denialist'. This term is straight from Deborah Lipstadt who, like her friends, refuses to acknowledge the existence of a debate.

I've shown all your claims to be wrong, you just refuse to accept it because that would mean I'm poking holes in your worldview. You and your sources are not "revisionist" because "revisionist" implies you are here to argue with the actual facts. Your side picks and chooses what are "facts" and then inserts their own nonsense into them, as the source you've quoted here does. This is not how history works, ergo you are a denialist.

 

[potato in mah painus]

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.

>Post WWI Wymar Republic hell hole, which a lot of Germans blamed the Jews for
>Civil wars and attempted communist revolutions during this era from the Jews, which resulted in genocide via famine long before WWII.

Consequences of actions are ugly, and its why redpilled historians have little to zero sympathy for the ones that got lined up against walls and shot.

 

[mrolonzo]

I think asking for both sides' smoking guns is a decent approach.

Both sides do make claims. Mainstream historiography claims the Nazis had a policy of killing Jews deemed unfit for work (which going by Nazi documents were 60-80% of the total population under their control). Revisionists like mrolonzo claim these Jews were interned in the USSR.

I've put forward many smoking guns in this thread, eg Goebbels diary (60% of the Jews in the GG "will be liquidated") , Wetzel's letter on "gassing devices" , but here's one I haven't mentioned or gone into detail about I don't think. The Franke Gricksh report

Revisionist critique is basically that this was a crude forgery, but the original German wartime copy was found and forensically demonstrated with high probability to have emerged from a typewriter associated with Franke Gricksch (based on certain defects in the type). To this revisionists say such defects are common (which I guess means the forgers got very lucky or were very easily able to find a similarly defective typewriter). If this was the case one should be able to find other documents displaying the same characteristics. I challenged revisionists on Codoh to do this and you can see the results https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?p=100556#p100556

Well,well, well. Looks like Chugger has decided to make a return just at the very moment someone turns up in the thread wanting to know more and purportedly being even handed. This fellow asks for smoking guns, so Chugger decides it's time to give him one.

The Frank Gricksh report.

He then links to the HC bloggers site who boost it and to codoh where he shows a challenge he threw down for them to prove that this carbon copy was not from the original document.

He of course didn't comment on his performance on codoh or tell you about this report or the history behind it. He simply presents it to you for you to read. What could be more innocent? Hmmm?

To be fair, this report is central to the allied propaganda being attempted at the time in the immediate post war, pre cold war scenario when the west didn't need allies in Europe as much as it needed to justify what it just done to Europe.

 

[Calandrino]

No definitive proof I've personally seen, though I haven't really looked in either direction, so it could exist. I'm just wondering if there's a smoking gun.

I do think the burden of proof rests on the claimant, of course. The only decent evidence I've seen that it happened is pictures of mounds of naked corpses, but that could easily be faked.

I'm only leaning towards it being real because I'm unaware of any evidence to the contrary (I could read through this thread as was suggested, but I don't want to gas 6 million seconds of my life if someone can just sum it up), but in any case I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that the numbers are fudged.

Real science requires reproducible results. The only way to definitively settle the debate would be to gas 6 million Jews and see how much fuel it takes to burn them and how hard it is to dispose of the ashes.