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

[Chugger]

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.

and what if it wasn't central at all, but first made public in 1976? (with the original document only being located in 2019)

 

[mrolonzo]

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.

A number of actual experiments have been done and there exists good science already both in terms of toxicology, pesticide development, forensic science and cremation research.

Of course all of this was researched by revisionists.

 

[CowPox]

Was it all just propaganda run amok and out of control?

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

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.

Does it have to be Jews? Can it be LGBT? Or at least LGBT Jews.

 

[mrolonzo]

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

I've been educating you and treating you kindly and clearing up the details and the facts.

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.

The EG study showed the nazis were concerned about eastern Europe feeding itself and camp regulations showed that Jews were to be fed and treated well. Certainly jews could give their manpower to Soviets, where they were found to be commisars they were indeed executed. But old people women and children could not do so.

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

Disease prevention.

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.

What does it show? Nothing.

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.

They went where they are. This was covered in pages 190 to 205 here.

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).

Lol. Go ahead and tell us about some Africans somewhere. As detailed by Dalton Jews weren't the only impoverished group in Europe and the growth rate they gave themselves was double that of any other so it's fake.

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.

It's simply a might makes right position and precedence is irrelevant because the precedent wasn't something either encoded somewhere or agreed to by interested parties. You've shown no conduct in ww2 that was illegal and cited no law.

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.

Go ahead and show these universal morals, something like the ten commandments?

The success or failure of the defence of group interest action does not decide the pertinence of group interest. Logically. Palestinians fought Zionism and failed. Doesn't mean they shouldn't have fought. Basic logic.

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.

Oh just give it up. This is pathetic. Hitler had excellent relations with Poland through the 30s until the Marshal died and allied with Bulgaria, Slovakia and Croatia so he wasn't murderous about Slavs.

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.

No the poor description comes weeks or months not decades after the fact. It's from Muller then written in the Vrba Wetzler report remember? Vrba wasn't even there. Vrba was cross examined in court and found wanting so badly his own sides prosecution didn't come to the defence of his witness but instead took him down from the stand. Yes, Muller gave testimony elsewhere too. His story is pure bullshit. But of course you wouldn't know because you haven't read it.

>(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.

Nice try but these people were no different than any other as the photos of recently arrived Jews showed as well as all the many photos of jews in Auschwitz on arrival. They were shipped in from different places such as Hungary so your response is just bullshit.

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.

Indeed. You can't describe everything in your job but you'd get 80 to 90% right. You wouldn't make large ridiculous errors about the most important and meaningful event - unless you were lying. So you have every reason to believe me because I am correct.

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.

1/ People can indeed die from crushing. Or from suffocation. But not quickly and not completely. Read the history of crush accidents.

2/ The single person in a gas chamber is the perfect scientific baseline ; here the hydrogen cyanide is thrown up into the air immediately in a thick cloud. Even then it takes 9 min to kill one individual. So killing with zyklon b with the results described would take an astonishing amount, which didn't happen therefore the gassing didn't happen. This is examined in detail by Germar Rudolf's authoritative work The Chemistry of Auschwitz mentioned again and again in this thread.

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.

LMAO. This is fucking pathetic. Not even your own side disputes where Himmler was.

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.

You've said things. You've demonstrated nothing. Everybody believes our ideology in the end. Nationalism is the fundamental bedrock, race is real, and about a third of people think the holocaust is fishy.

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.

Most people aren't Jews so your argument doesn't apply. It's just jews using their influence to deny free speech and free inquiry. You should concede this point early. It's not something you can hang on to.

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.

Call me whatever you wish. You've shown only your own desperation and ignorance. Your answers have been pretty bad…

'Oh they were maybe children there and they're all starving so they're so thin you can fit them all in!

Nazis wanted to starve everybody!

Why dig a deep pit?

There are dark patches on the ground!

But where did they go ?!

You can't use an actual execution experience as a baseline !

'Maybe Himmler really was there?! Maybe the witness mistook him for someone else?!'



All pathetic and stupid. But fortunately the tranny retard war is over so we can go over things in great detail from now on.

The facts are on my side which is why you don't have any to offer.

Was it all just propaganda run amok and out of control?

This too has been examined in great detail. Think about it. Who is telling you about the holocaust? And who is telling the historians and how do they know? See attached, Danuta Czech is examined here, her "work" is the basis of the claims about the holocaust as are the sonderkommados stories examined in this trilogy.

and what if it wasn't central at all, but first made public in 1976? (with the original document only being located in 2019)

Yes I did say attempted. But it wasn't really something worthy to be made much of until later. I'm surprised you haven't refuted my criticism of you by posting something about the history of this document. Would you prefer that I do the honours?

 

[Chugger]

@mrolonzo you said "this report is central to the allied propaganda being attempted at the time in the immediate post war, pre cold war scenario"

Where do you get central from? Do you know something I don't? Or is this more careless speculation like the time you claimed the SS spent trillions of USD (2022 equivalent) fighting typhus at Auschwitz?

 

[mrolonzo]

@mrolonzo you said "this report is central to the allied propaganda being attempted at the time in the immediate post war, pre cold war scenario"

Where do you get central from? Do you know something I don't? Or is this more careless speculation like the time you claimed the SS spent trillions of USD (2022 equivalent) fighting typhus at Auschwitz?

Well from the history it's clear that they were after a smoking gun, and attempted to create one. Thus it's 'centrality'.

 

[Wizardly Intentions]

Well from the history it's clear that they were after a smoking gun, and attempted to create one. Thus it's 'centrality'.

Oof seems like you gotta hit the books again chief, you can't just swap up your excuse for why the document exists like that. It makes you look stupid as hell.

 

[Fatniggo1488]

This was so dumb I had to post it here.

New Study Claims Trauma Of Holocaust May Have Shrunken Brains of Jewish ‘Survivors’ And Their Children​

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

I've been educating you and treating you kindly and clearing up the details and the facts.

Yes, we know you're a dishonest, disingenuous liar who's too cowardly to praise the actual consequences of national socialism. But I digress.

The EG study showed the nazis were concerned about eastern Europe feeding itself and camp regulations showed that Jews were to be fed and treated well. Certainly jews could give their manpower to Soviets, where they were found to be commisars they were indeed executed. But old people women and children could not do so.

Women and children contributed extensively to the war effort in every country. Babushka sows Ivan a scarf out of her clothes, that's aiding the war.

Yes, they were concerned about feeding Eastern Europe precisely in the grander scheme of rationing and exports from Ukraine. Push Eastern Europe too hard for food, support evaporates as it eventually did. In reality, we have documents--and eyewitness accounts--of just how much food was given to which group.

Disease prevention.

LMAO that's fucking retarded. Mattogno doesn't know what he's talking about because he is not capable of accepting evidence that contradicts his worldview. If you've already burnt the corpses, the ash cannot spread disease, especially not by Mattogno's estimate of corpses which is orders of magnitude below the actual facts and would leave the pits almost entirely empty. That's just silly. Use some common sense.

What does it show? Nothing.

This is what burned land looks like. The scarring is too uneven to be shadows and resembles actual burned land. It's fairly close to burn scars I saw when I took a vacation to (state with wildfires) last year or contemporary pictures of burned areas.

They went where they are. This was covered in pages 190 to 205 here.

I can't imagine what sad sack would pay almost 70 dollars for a shoddily researched alternate history novel, but you do you. You have yet to present any evidence the Jews remained where they were or went to Russia. Millions and millions of people, 100K plus of whom should still be alive, do not just vanish off the face of the earth and are never mentioned again by relatives, governments, etc.

If they can charge 70 bucks for pisspoor scholarship about Auschwitz, shouldn't there be decades of Jews telling us what "really" happened about how Treblinka was a pretty shitty transit camp but their new village wasn't so bad? Look how much fame David Cole got and I'm sure it's part of why people watch that schizo Brother Nathanael.

Lol. Go ahead and tell us about some Africans somewhere. As detailed by Dalton Jews weren't the only impoverished group in Europe and the growth rate they gave themselves was double that of any other so it's fake.

Jews didn't give themselves any growth rate because the people running the census in Poland were at the very least sympathetic to the concerns of antisemites. Stalin was also no friend of Jews and had the ultimate power to revise censuses and Jews gained no numbers. This argument fails because Dalton is not quoting from census material that disproves him, he's using a NYT estimate. Typical intellectual dishonesty expected of your lot. We also know from the case of Israel (nationally, not speaking of individual districts) that Jews did not inflate their numbers beyond reason in the 50s

It's simply a might makes right position and precedence is irrelevant because the precedent wasn't something either encoded somewhere or agreed to by interested parties. You've shown no conduct in ww2 that was illegal and cited no law.

It was encoded in the past, by past conduct from all parties involved. Precedent weighs heavily on how the law works. For instance, just because there's no written constitution of England doesn't mean the King can just do as pleases, because he's restrained by precedent. Germany was also a signatory to the Kellogg-Briand Pact which banned aggressive war.

The success or failure of the defence of group interest action does not decide the pertinence of group interest. Logically. Palestinians fought Zionism and failed. Doesn't mean they shouldn't have fought. Basic logic.

It clearly does. Every group has their own interest, therefore it's in the best group interest to navigate these other group interests. Game theory shows that egoism is often not the solution.

Oh just give it up. This is pathetic. Hitler had excellent relations with Poland through the 30s until the Marshal died and allied with Bulgaria, Slovakia and Croatia so he wasn't murderous about Slavs.

And Poland had no equivalent to Pavelic, Hacha, or Tiso, because Hitler was either a murderous anti-Slavic or did not care his officials and generals were such (hint: it's both). We have endless propaganda depicting Slavs as subhumans or obstacles in Germany's way, and favored Slavs like the Ukrainians or Croatians were deemed "Goths" or "Illyrians" respectively.

Trying to refute Nazi Germany as anti-Slavic is denialism a step above Holocaust denial. The sheer amount of documentation you have to deny is absurd.

No the poor description comes weeks or months not decades after the fact. It's from Muller then written in the Vrba Wetzler report remember? Vrba wasn't even there. Vrba was cross examined in court and found wanting so badly his own sides prosecution didn't come to the defence of his witness but instead took him down from the stand. Yes, Muller gave testimony elsewhere too. His story is pure bullshit. But of course you wouldn't know because you haven't read it.

Lots of people don't do well in court, doesn't mean they're wrong. Just look at the Big Tobacco lawsuits, they had some very good lawyers able to make smart people who spent decades studying Big Tobacco malfeascence look bad. You cannot do anything but deny his testimony because it makes your side look bad.

Nice try but these people were no different than any other as the photos of recently arrived Jews showed as well as all the many photos of jews in Auschwitz on arrival. They were shipped in from different places such as Hungary so your response is just bullshit.

You didn't even refute my point. Do the bodies of children and malnourished elderly people take up less space than a full-grown Western adult? What is the baseline being used for this claim?

Indeed. You can't describe everything in your job but you'd get 80 to 90% right. You wouldn't make large ridiculous errors about the most important and meaningful event - unless you were lying. So you have every reason to believe me because I am correct.

Except the part they mentioned that a lot of people died. You have nothing to impeach their testimony on that besides "well this guy forgot how many mufflers were on the chimney" which ignores the many other witnesses who confirm the same thing.

1/ People can indeed die from crushing. Or from suffocation. But not quickly and not completely. Read the history of crush accidents.

2/ The single person in a gas chamber is the perfect scientific baseline ; here the hydrogen cyanide is thrown up into the air immediately in a thick cloud. Even then it takes 9 min to kill one individual. So killing with zyklon b with the results described would take an astonishing amount, which didn't happen therefore the gassing didn't happen. This is examined in detail by Germar Rudolf's authoritative work The Chemistry of Auschwitz mentioned again and again in this thread.

Have you ever actually seen a gas chamber? If you have, you'd know it's totally different than cramming people into a tiny room which will literally suck out the oxygen. Unconsciousness and death can come in under 2 minutes when people are exposed to an inert gas atmosphere. I would say an actively toxic substance like HCN being introduced into the lungs as the oxygen is rapidly being sucked out by the victims. Human crush deaths occur from asphyxiation.

Rudolf either doesn't know or doesn't care about these inconvenient facts that are maybe a step above saying the crematoria couldn't work because funeral home crematoria don't work like that.

LMAO. This is fucking pathetic. Not even your own side disputes where Himmler was.

Actually refute my point. How do you know that Himmler was not mistaken for someone else, or that Himmler didn't Auschwitz in 1943?

Although with your logic, I can thoroughly refute that there ever was a person named Heinrich Himmler. All documents claiming his existence are unreliable because they were made by the EVEEEEEEEEEL German Empire/Weimar/Nazis (or worse, churches), and all his writings were actually done by Hitler under a pseudonym. His public appearances were various other people, one of whom was executed at Nuremberg. Holds up perfectly with the pick and choose approach to history you denialists have.

You've said things. You've demonstrated nothing. Everybody believes our ideology in the end. Nationalism is the fundamental bedrock, race is real, and about a third of people think the holocaust is fishy.

I've demonstrated plenty of things, including your dishonesty and lies. If so many people believe your ideology, why are the bulk of them races like blacks, Arabs, and Pakis whose average IQ ranges from 80-85 and frequently suffer from generations of cousin-fucking?

Most people aren't Jews so your argument doesn't apply. It's just jews using their influence to deny free speech and free inquiry. You should concede this point early. It's not something you can hang on to.

The argument absolutely applies. Some countries have criminalized hurt feelings, and lying about people's dead relatives is a great way to hurt feelings.

Call me whatever you wish. You've shown only your own desperation and ignorance. Your answers have been pretty bad…

'Oh they were maybe children there and they're all starving so they're so thin you can fit them all in!

Nazis wanted to starve everybody!

Why dig a deep pit?

There are dark patches on the ground!

But where did they go ?!

You can't use an actual execution experience as a baseline !

'Maybe Himmler really was there?! Maybe the witness mistook him for someone else?!'



All pathetic and stupid. But fortunately the tranny retard war is over so we can go over things in great detail from now on.

The facts are on my side which is why you don't have any to offer.

You're the one trying to argue the Nazis wasted time digging dozens of deep ass pits for "a few hundred corpses" and that no women, children, or elderly died in the Holocaust, or that Eastern European Jews were not on average shorter and skinnier like the bulk of people who grew up in Eastern Europe 1914-1923. These claims are simple and lay bare the intellectual bankruptcy of your ideology. They HAVE TO be true for your analysis to work, but at the end of the day, they're just obvious distortions.

 

[Slobs]

If the holocaust really happened we wouldn't have anime avatars. Hitler would definitely gas them first. The Jewish ones would get double gassings. And the lolicons? A personal gassing from Hitler himself after eating a massive bowl of Sauerkraut, eggs, and bratwurst (don't eat these it makes mustard gas).

 

[mrolonzo]

Oof seems like you gotta hit the books again chief, you can't just swap up your excuse for why the document exists like that. It makes you look stupid as hell.

The document only exists as a copy of a copy of a fake.

Yes, we know you're a dishonest, disingenuous liar who's too cowardly to praise the actual consequences of national socialism. But I digress.

You don't know any such thing. Killing innocent people is wrong no matter who it is. That's the ideology of national socialism.

Women and children contributed extensively to the war effort in every country. Babushka sows Ivan a scarf out of her clothes, that's aiding the war.

Nope that's wrong. Women manned civilian air defense guns. Were occasionally spies, as well as snipers and medics in the east. They were not infantry on either side nor were they ever treated harshly by the nazis for being women or enemy. Though of course non combatants of either sex were executed outright. Children, I.e adolescents and teenagers participated in combat as non combatants also. They were, again executed as they were found.

Yes, they were concerned about feeding Eastern Europe precisely in the grander scheme of rationing and exports from Ukraine. Push Eastern Europe too hard for food, support evaporates as it eventually did. In reality, we have documents--and eyewitness accounts--of just how much food was given to which group.

Yes indeed. They needed the population on side and did not push them too hard. The tiny EG had many different tasks in this regard. This is all detailed in the study.

LMAO that's fucking retarded. Mattogno doesn't know what he's talking about because he is not capable of accepting evidence that contradicts his worldview. If you've already burnt the corpses, the ash cannot spread disease, especially not by Mattogno's estimate of corpses which is orders of magnitude below the actual facts and would leave the pits almost entirely empty. That's just silly. Use some common sense.

Mattogno's knowledge of the issues here is peerless. There's literally no superior historian on this subject.
The corpses referred to are those at the bottom in a soporified state.

Indeed it is common sense. The graves are almost entirely empty and their arrangement concords logically with the previous gypsy camp on that spot.

This is what burned land looks like. The scarring is too uneven to be shadows and resembles actual burned land. It's fairly close to burn scars I saw when I took a vacation to (state with wildfires) last year or contemporary pictures of burned areas.

"It's too uneven to be shadows"

"It's close to burn scars from wildfire I saw on a vacation once"

What are you trying to say?

I can't imagine what sad sack would pay almost 70 dollars for a shoddily researched alternate history novel, but you do you. You have yet to present any evidence the Jews remained where they were or went to Russia. Millions and millions of people, 100K plus of whom should still be alive, do not just vanish off the face of the earth and are never mentioned again by relatives, governments, etc.

It's all been done right here on the pages mentioned.

People do vanish off the face of the earth when they're really only paper counting numbers.

If they can charge 70 bucks for pisspoor scholarship about Auschwitz, shouldn't there be decades of Jews telling us what "really" happened about how Treblinka was a pretty shitty transit camp but their new village wasn't so bad? Look how much fame David Cole got and I'm sure it's part of why people watch that schizo Brother Nathanael.

Why? There were hundreds of small camps. This was a stop off. The further destinations were even less well established and treblinka itself was so insignificant it was cleared easily anyway.

Jews didn't give themselves any growth rate because the people running the census in Poland were at the very least sympathetic to the concerns of antisemites. Stalin was also no friend of Jews and had the ultimate power to revise censuses and Jews gained no numbers. This argument fails because Dalton is not quoting from census material that disproves him, he's using a NYT estimate. Typical intellectual dishonesty expected of your lot. We also know from the case of Israel (nationally, not speaking of individual districts) that Jews did not inflate their numbers beyond reason in the 50s

Oh they did inflate their numbers but just not beyond reason? LMAO

Anyway, as detailed already here, Dalton cites Walter Sanning who's study found that about 6m Jews lived in the 30s in the areas the nazis would control. From 39 to 42 this drops to 3m.
The start of the holocaust only had 2.7m Jews available. Of these 1.4m are identified as survivors by Jewish groups leaving 1.3m missing. This is the maximum possible death toll. Sanning then estimates a therefore likely death toll attributable to nazi actions of some 300,000.

It was encoded in the past, by past conduct from all parties involved. Precedent weighs heavily on how the law works. For instance, just because there's no written constitution of England doesn't mean the King can just do as pleases, because he's restrained by precedent. Germany was also a signatory to the Kellogg-Briand Pact which banned aggressive war.

Right so its not actually encoded anywhere in particular, neither is it anything objective, it's just something you made up to sound smart. Thanks for playing.

Indeed Germany did sign the Kellog Briand pact, which allows for self defence and also signed the Locarno pact before that giving it the option to revise its eastern borderlands Poland had taken from it.

It clearly does. Every group has their own interest, therefore it's in the best group interest to navigate these other group interests. Game theory shows that egoism is often not the solution.

Meaningless babble again. Group interests are often contradictory so one group must give in to what other groups may want? How many other groups?

And Poland had no equivalent to Pavelic, Hacha, or Tiso, because Hitler was either a murderous anti-Slavic or did not care his officials and generals were such (hint: it's both). We have endless propaganda depicting Slavs as subhumans or obstacles in Germany's way, and favored Slavs like the Ukrainians or Croatians were deemed "Goths" or "Illyrians" respectively.

Excuses excuses. You do not have endless propaganda depicting Slavs as subhuman and germans, again, made numerous alliances with slavs.

Trying to refute Nazi Germany as anti-Slavic is denialism a step above Holocaust denial. The sheer amount of documentation you have to deny is absurd.

I don't need to deny any documents. I just pointed out it's various close alliances. This actual hard fact defeats all your silly notions.

Lots of people don't do well in court, doesn't mean they're wrong. Just look at the Big Tobacco lawsuits, they had some very good lawyers able to make smart people who spent decades studying Big Tobacco malfeascence look bad. You cannot do anything but deny his testimony because it makes your side look bad.

It generally does mean they're wrong. Especially when they're supposed to be the most relevant experience but cannot stand up under cross examination. Big Tobacco also faced opposition lawyers able to make their witness look good. In this case, the prosecution lawyer was given every opportunity to recover his star witness's argument/ allegations. But the witness had been found out so thoroughly he was no longer of any use.

You didn't even refute my point. Do the bodies of children and malnourished elderly people take up less space than a full-grown Western adult? What is the baseline being used for this claim?

I don't even need to refute your point. You haven't made one. You're only saying there were children there. Not how many, not how big.

What gassing would you like to discuss? Maybe the very first?

Except the part they mentioned that a lot of people died. You have nothing to impeach their testimony on that besides "well this guy forgot how many mufflers were on the chimney" which ignores the many other witnesses who confirm the same thing.

Oh my, they said alot of people died did they?

Ok who said it? Exactly who died?

Ive got about 32 escapee reports, 20 testimonies from inmates and about 8 from nazis at Auschwitz right here.

Have you ever actually seen a gas chamber? If you have, you'd know it's totally different than cramming people into a tiny room which will literally suck out the oxygen. Unconsciousness and death can come in under 2 minutes when people are exposed to an inert gas atmosphere. I would say an actively toxic substance like HCN being introduced into the lungs as the oxygen is rapidly being sucked out by the victims. Human crush deaths occur from asphyxiation.

No sorry, it's reasonable to argue that a very few may die very quickly perhaps from having multiple co-morbidities for example, but not everyone. This was examined using actual studies of HCN in the chemistry of Auschwitz by Germar Rudolf last updated in 2020

Rudolf either doesn't know or doesn't care about these inconvenient facts that are maybe a step above saying the crematoria couldn't work because funeral home crematoria don't work like that.

Again nope. The cremation ovens were extensively examined by Mattogno.

Actually refute my point. How do you know that Himmler was not mistaken for someone else, or that Himmler didn't Auschwitz in 1943?

Easily, the writer is adamant that it's Himmler. There would logically be plenty of officers around to choose from these areas but he's saying clearly that it's Himmler. On the one specific checkable detail he can manage he can't even be accurate about that. Therefore it's not reliable testimony.

Although with your logic, I can thoroughly refute that there ever was a person named Heinrich Himmler. All documents claiming his existence are unreliable because they were made by the EVEEEEEEEEEL German Empire/Weimar/Nazis (or worse, churches), and all his writings were actually done by Hitler under a pseudonym. His public appearances were various other people, one of whom was executed at Nuremberg. Holds up perfectly with the pick and choose approach to history you denialists have.

Oh you can, can you? Go ahead and try.

Nevermind the lack of motive for a pseudo Himmler. The existence of his wife and children. His many photographic records. The simple fact that his existence either elsewhere from when Vrba reports he was or in general isn't even in dispute.

So you're just wriggling around in the hope you can get off the hook while trying to defend this rubbish.

I've demonstrated plenty of things, including your dishonesty and lies. If so many people believe your ideology, why are the bulk of them races like blacks, Arabs, and Pakis whose average IQ ranges from 80-85 and frequently suffer from generations of cousin-fucking?

Still can't mention what you demonstrated?

You make strong claims then refuse to detail anything. This makes you look bad. Congrats again you played yourself.

The argument absolutely applies. Some countries have criminalized hurt feelings, and lying about people's dead relatives is a great way to hurt feelings.

Right so the truth is irrelevant according to you. Congrats again for playing yourself.

You're the one trying to argue the Nazis wasted time digging dozens of deep ass pits for "a few hundred corpses" and that no women, children, or elderly died in the Holocaust, or that Eastern European Jews were not on average shorter and skinnier like the bulk of people who grew up in Eastern Europe 1914-1923. These claims are simple and lay bare the intellectual bankruptcy of your ideology. They HAVE TO be true for your analysis to work, but at the end of the day, they're just obvious distortions.

They obviously didn't at Belzec as per the camp maps and where the bodies were found.

Sure women and children died. Just not from nazis gassing or shooting them.

These jews were little different from anyone else in Europe though it's likely alot of them were malnourished on arrival which of course, as detailed here, initiated the nazis to feed them, give them time off to rest and play and treat their health problems with various measures.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

You don't know any such thing. Killing innocent people is wrong no matter who it is. That's the ideology of national socialism.

You know, I think calling you a Nazi is wrong. you might be a national socialist, but you aren't a Nazi since you're so desperate to deny the reality of Nazi ideology as practiced and advocated by the Nazis. You have no understanding of actual Nazism, only the fantasy version of Nazism that exists in your head based on your cherrypicked quotes from Hitler and your favorite Nazis.

Nope that's wrong. Women manned civilian air defense guns. Were occasionally spies, as well as snipers and medics in the east. They were not infantry on either side nor were they ever treated harshly by the nazis for being women or enemy. Though of course non combatants of either sex were executed outright. Children, I.e adolescents and teenagers participated in combat as non combatants also. They were, again executed as they were found.

Working in factories and fields is contributing to the war effort just as much as any infantryman does, but I wouldn't expect someone who believes in a fantasy version of Nazi Germany to understand the importance of such roles.

Yes indeed. They needed the population on side and did not push them too hard. The tiny EG had many different tasks in this regard. This is all detailed in the study.

Except when they did, hence the frequent partisan activity. They even lost many of their collaborators such as the OUN (at least until 1944 when Soviet reconquest was inevitable). Actual studies, not just cherry picked documents and quotes, prove that the Nazis systematically starved Eastern Europe and their brutality and unwillingness to use the full spectrum of local collaborators lost them the war. This was not the sane, intelligent policy Imperial Germany pursued in 1918, because Nazi Germany was a racial supremacist project first and foremost aimed at colonizing Eastern Europe as evidenced by the actual conduct of the Nazis toward local populations and their own words!

Mattogno's knowledge of the issues here is peerless. There's literally no superior historian on this subject.
The corpses referred to are those at the bottom in a soporified state.

Indeed it is common sense. The graves are almost entirely empty and their arrangement concords logically with the previous gypsy camp on that spot.

You still haven't explained why the graves are almost entirely empty. That does not happen because why would the Nazis dig graves that deep in an area with such limited space? Further, there is clearly bone and ash poured in there as evidenced by what was discovered. People do not dig graves that large or numerous for a few hundred corpses. The gypsies don't dig graves like that either. Your story makes no logical sense while my evidence agrees with the actual testimony.

"It's too uneven to be shadows"

"It's close to burn scars from wildfire I saw on a vacation once"

What are you trying to say?

You know exactly what I'm trying to say. Those are burn scars, as attested by the numerous witnesses to executions at that site during the Nazi occupation of Kiev. No one who was executed there was ever seen again. It sure is convenient there's photographic evidence of documents telling Jews to gather in the area right around the time they were killed.

Excuses excuses. You do not have endless propaganda depicting Slavs as subhuman and germans, again, made numerous alliances with slavs.

This assertion is absolutely insane.

Spoiler: Nazis on Slavs

"We are a master race, which must remember that the lowliest German worker is racially and biologically a thousand times more valuable than the population here [Ukrainians]." - Erich Koch, Reichskommisar for Ukraine

"On the infinite a steppes of Russian territory lay Eastern Europe. A sharp contrast is noticed when comparing central Europe with this enormous space. On both sides of the border is the same earth but not the same man.

It is the man who makes his mark on the landscape, while on the German side is planned orderly fields yielding abundant harvests; the other side is only impenetrable forests, vast and unkempt, miles of uninhabited steppes where even the rivers wind endlessly through the nothingness.

This poorly kept land which hides fertile soil could be a paradise for man, a potential "California of Europe" alive with fields and fruit, but instead it lies neglected and wasted, lost to the abyss of cultural nihilism.

This land cries out against the subhuman and his wasteful ways! This fertile black earth watered by burning tears, is only barely separated from the rest of Europe. However its Eastern European masters have not risen above their primitive ways." - Der Untermensch, 1942

"The Führer’s verdict on the Poles is damning. More like animals than human beings, completely primitive, stupid, and amorphous. And a ruling class that is an unsatisfactory result of a mingling between the lower orders and an Aryan master race. The Poles’ dirtiness is unimaginable. Their capacity for intelligent judgment is absolutely nil." - Goebbels, 1939

"One basic principle must be the absolute rule for the SS men: We must be honest, decent, loyal and comradely to members of our own blood and to nobody else. What happens to a Russian, to a Czech, does not interest me in the slightest. What other nations can offer in the way of good blood of our type, we will take, if necessary, by kidnapping their children and raising them here with us. Whether nations live in prosperity or starve to death interests me only so far as we need them as slaves for our culture; otherwise, it is of no interest to me. Whether 10,000 Russian females fall down from exhaustion while digging an antitank ditch interests me only insofar as the anti-tank ditch for Germany is finished." - Himmler, 1943

"The war against Russia is an important chapter in the German nation's struggle for existence. It is the old battle of the Germanic against the Slavic people, of the defence of European culture against Muscovite-Asiatic inundation[...]" - Colonel-General Erich Hoepner

It generally does mean they're wrong. Especially when they're supposed to be the most relevant experience but cannot stand up under cross examination. Big Tobacco also faced opposition lawyers able to make their witness look good. In this case, the prosecution lawyer was given every opportunity to recover his star witness's argument/ allegations. But the witness had been found out so thoroughly he was no longer of any use.

You're not arguing my point, the point is smart people can look bad under cross-examination. The job of a lawyer is to win the case for their client, not prove a point, and if your witness is becoming a liability to winning your case, you cut them off no matter who they are.

I don't even need to refute your point. You haven't made one. You're only saying there were children there. Not how many, not how big.

That is a point, dumbass. Children are smaller than adults. Up to 1/3 of Holocaust victims were children.

Oh my, they said alot of people died did they?

Ok who said it? Exactly who died?

Ive got about 32 escapee reports, 20 testimonies from inmates and about 8 from nazis at Auschwitz right here.

I'm sure they're all selectively edited by your favorite denialists and liars.


Have you ever actually seen a gas chamber? If you have, you'd know it's totally different than cramming people into a tiny room which will literally suck out the oxygen. Unconsciousness and death can come in under 2 minutes when people are exposed to an inert gas atmosphere. I would say an actively toxic substance like HCN being introduced into the lungs as the oxygen is rapidly being sucked out by the victims. Human crush deaths occur from asphyxiation.

No sorry, it's reasonable to argue that a very few may die very quickly perhaps from having multiple co-morbidities for example, but not everyone. This was examined using actual studies of HCN in the chemistry of Auschwitz by Germar Rudolf last updated in 2020

Can you actually refute my point? I'm not just saying, "nope, read [Holocaust scholar]" since I'm actively engaging with you (I shouldn't because you're probably among the most disingenuous people I've ever argued with here). Science says you die quickly when the oxygen is sucked out of a room, replaced by a gas which isn't toxic. Now suck the oxygen out of the room and inject an actually toxic gas.

Again nope. The cremation ovens were extensively examined by Mattogno.

You've yet to prove me wrong on this point. You just take him on his words, but this is the same guy claiming the ovens worked like a modern funeral home. You claim the Holocaust has holes, but denialists come up with abject nonsense trying to refute it.

Easily, the writer is adamant that it's Himmler. There would logically be plenty of officers around to choose from these areas but he's saying clearly that it's Himmler. On the one specific checkable detail he can manage he can't even be accurate about that. Therefore it's not reliable testimony.

How would he know the names of random officers? If the guy looked important, it would be an easy mistake to think he was Himmler.

Missing a fact, or even embellishing one by claiming a random officer was Himmler, does not make the testimony inherently inaccurate. Unreliable narrators still serve as valuable sources, especially when other details match other testimony and match archaeological fact.

Oh you can, can you? Go ahead and try.

Nevermind the lack of motive for a pseudo Himmler. The existence of his wife and children. His many photographic records. The simple fact that his existence either elsewhere from when Vrba reports he was or in general isn't even in dispute.

So you're just wriggling around in the hope you can get off the hook while trying to defend this rubbish.

Pseudo-Himmler? Oh I know, how about because Hitler was actually so evil "they" had to make him less evil by inventing a guy with a similar name who got attributed a lot of Hitler's evil to make Hitler more believable to the public. Or something. It doesn't make sense, but neither does Holocaust denial. You can't give me a motive for why the Holocaust should be made up, since the Nazis were already considered the peak of evil that needed to be destroyed because they led their nation into starting ANOTHER world war (Allied perception, yes I know Germany did not start WWI).

Still can't mention what you demonstrated?

You make strong claims then refuse to detail anything. This makes you look bad. Congrats again you played yourself.

I've explained evidence of graves, burnings, burials and showed how your claims as to gassing or burning not being possible are not based in science. Likewise I've shown that your theories of Jews being transported are ludicrous and do not match demographic evidence and your views on international law exist only in your head. When your points are refuted, you do nothing but double down or resort to strawmen. But you don't understand, maybe because your IQ is on par with those races I mentioned, I dunno.

Right so the truth is irrelevant according to you. Congrats again for playing yourself.

Why shouldn't anyone be offended by people making things up about their family? Holocaust deniers don't have any evidence. Maybe they should find Shlomo, age 99, who did NOT die at Auschwitz like his family who saw him vanish maintains, and reunite him with his Holocaust survivor brother Moshe. Maybe then people would take these "scholars" seriously.

They obviously didn't at Belzec as per the camp maps and where the bodies were found.

Sure women and children died. Just not from nazis gassing or shooting them.

These jews were little different from anyone else in Europe though it's likely alot of them were malnourished on arrival which of course, as detailed here, initiated the nazis to feed them, give them time off to rest and play and treat their health problems with various measures.

1) Yes, the pits overflowing with bodies as per eyewitnesses and later confirmed to have once been overflowing with bodies.
2) Once again you disingenuously ignore my point, given I was referring to Jews being AS A WHOLE smaller than Germans because they were very poor and suffered greatly during the wars from 1914-1923, which affected the growth of people born during those years and years before. But this is typical of Holocaust denialists, you're just learning from what you've read on how to selectively read writings and use what you need to prove your point. Not how history works.

 

[Bonesjones]

The Nazis were so dumb and evil, instead of just shoving them all in a room and letting them breathe all the oxygen, they wasted all their time pumping it full of poisonous gas. Then, lacking any time to let it evacuate, they forced jews to move the dead bodies into crematory. This didn't kill the corpse moving jews for no particular reasons. This is what you have to actually believe, you know since they never mention gas masks or evacuation pumps for the poison gas.

Remember you have to make the holocaust narrative fit the available facts, otherwise you are a holocaust denier.

 

[Stabmaster Arson II]

1) Yes, the pits overflowing with bodies as per eyewitnesses and later confirmed to have once been overflowing with bodies

Oh, how was it confirmed?
What physical evidence?

 

[Bonesjones]

Oh, how was it confirmed?
What physical evidence?

I think something in your quotes broke.

 

[Stabmaster Arson II]

I think something in your quotes broke.

Yeah, that was meant to be directed at @Save the Loli
Maybe if he can stop jerking off to images of children he can find that physical evidence.

 

[Bonesjones]

Yeah, that was meant to be directed at @Save the Loli
Maybe if he can stop jerking off to images of children he can find that physical evidence.

I'm still waiting for even one autopsy report proving a jew was gassed to death, or even one direct order of genocide. Or one fully investigated mass grave that isn't just a cover up.

 

[John.Doe]

I'm still waiting for even one autopsy report proving a jew was gassed to death, or even one direct order of genocide. Or one fully investigated mass grave that isn't just a cover up.

Come on now, you know the rules they play by - burdens only fall on the goyimcattle, so first we have to present all the MOON RESETTLEMENT evidence, then he'll consider showing us some evidence, assuming it isn't eaten by their cat first.

 

[Chugger]

I'm still waiting for even one autopsy report proving a jew was gassed to death, or even one direct order of genocide. Or one fully investigated mass grave that isn't just a cover up.

Come on now, you know the rules they play by - burdens only fall on the goyimcattle, so first we have to present all the MOON RESETTLEMENT evidence, then he'll consider showing us some evidence, assuming it isn't eaten by their cat first.

actually you guys are demanding very specific things like a 'kill all Jews' order or creating strawmen (there is zero evidence of a "cover up" at the grave sites), whereas we're asking for any evidence, any evidence at all. witness, documentary, it doesn't matter

but the only evidence concerning the fate of the 1.5 million Reinhard deportees has them being killed at various sites with very few taken as slave laborers (most of these people died too)