Denying the holocaust

Post Reply New Topic

Each and every one of us is entitled to his own opinion and judgment. None of us are entitled to our own facts.

ruveyn

Other than the stupidity of suggesting that the Germans put humans into a chamber filled it with cyanide gas in an attempt to delouse their clothes and did not expect them [humans] to be killed; it is well documented that delousing was done using heat and I think steam. There is a very good description of the burst lice still attached to the clothing in 'Is this a man' by Primo Levi (Which by the way is a well written description of life in Birkenau )

I wasn't suggesting that - clearly! Obviously you'll believe any and all of these testimonies. Probably the one's which have been retracted up and until they were too.

How many gas chambers have you seen? I've seen a few - or what remains of them - it's ludicrous to suggest they that the amount of people said to have gone through them is tenable. Not to mention them not being air tight , doors opening inwards etc etc.

In TESTIMONY sonder kommando said they used to go in and clear out the bodies an HOUR after everyone was dead - have a look into how long hydrocyanide remains lethal I guess it was a real good idea of the Nazis to build the crematoria right next to where they were supposed to have been using all this HIGHLY FLAMMABLE gas, as seems to be the case in many of these camps

I guess you've actually spent the time to look into the architecture of the camps and the chemical properties of zykon B too? I know I have.

I think maybe you're more swayed by emotive testimony than actual hard research into the matter tbh

So how can that testimony be real? Why were the doors with windows and made out of wooden and totally not airtight. soooo many things that you won't even look into because you know it all already - after all Primo Levi has explained it for you. lol

Enjoy living in a spell. It's not for me.

I'd direct you to very good research into it but it's wasted on you, obviously.

Thanks for declaring me stupid because I challenge the orthodox unquestioned version with salient critique. You aere what is known as thought police.

Last edited by Concenik on 02 Apr 2009, 7:25 am, edited 2 times in total.

There are two distinctions to make here. The first is that the person in the bar who denies the holocaust took place may have a case for not being aware of the consequences of their actions (being drunk), though they may well be arrested and charged anyway in France or Germany. The second is that the judge may be setting a legal precedent for accepting that the holocaust did not take place, which is much more serious than letting someone deny the holocaust.

There was another case in Canada where a teacher was eventually sacked for teaching his (elementary school social studies) students that the holocaust didn't happen, among other more explicitly hateful statements. The distinction here is similar to that of the judge; the judge and the teacher are both effectively forcing this opinion on their people, which is not the same as discussing it.

Last edited by Hector on 02 Apr 2009, 7:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

Yes, you said it all in one sentence - anyone who questions the 'proof' deserves shooting - ironic how much like a nazi that makes you sound, you should consider joining the IDF

yawn I think the OSS were more concerned with ratlines than anything else around that time apart from the OSS vatican desk which was busy setting up Mossad for the Haganar and putting the final touches to operation Gladio.

Sure, there was no political leverage to be found from the 6,000,000 number even though it was already being quoted years before

What is interesting that wherever there is an extradition attempt form some country that considers holocaust denial a crime, there is rightly uproar, however some of the some people who criticise would not dare criticise Israel, which has the same law.

It you don't believe me look it up.

Some point in the 80s-90s bunch of politician decided that it was too dangerous to deny acts of genocide. These laws got through quite silently. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of people in these countries are completely unaware of these laws.

The worst kind of just is based on emotion or retribution. People forget that justice is not just for the victim it is for everyone as a whole. You are not breaking the law of the victim rather the law of the land and hence it's citizens.

YES, the judge should be held in contempt. A trend toward denying in court and using it as judgments aganist plaintiffs should not be tolerated.

As for others that deny, they just look like idiots when you consider the overwhelming evidence.

Which may have fabrication in it too. I'm generous when I say 'may have'. ALSO the accepted version of events from TESTIMONY is that bodies were burnt laid 6 deep on top of railway sleepers using wood from the surrounding forests - it's taken as FACT. It's the ONLY evidence of it - the testimony of it.

Grisly as it is people have actually conducted experimentally a version of this claim - obviously not using human bodies but comparative amounts of meat, by ratio, which otherwise would have been purchased by people for the purpose of eating.

Not only does it patently not work but the amount of wood needed for this would mean that the nazis simply would have had to clear cut a sizeable amount of the forests of Central and Eastern Europe just for the process to have any chance of having worked. Not to mention that the ground water was only a few feet under ground in the camps where TESTIMONY has been given that this happened.

So I DO challenge much of these testimonies, yes! It's understandable that people were happy to vilify the NSDAP but it doesn't mean they were always telling the TRUTH.

You have managed to completely avoid many of the points, nay, all of the points I have made thus far - trying to reasonably debate this with you is a lost cause - you're mind is made up - and it's made up because of testimony.

As I've already said in this thread - all it takes to prove the case either way is to take soil samples at the camps and analyse them - unfortunately, under pressure from lobbyists both the German and Polish governments have quashed all applications for this scientific experiment to take place.

We have the testimonies, that's all we need - they are such overwhelming 'evidence'. Excuse me, while I go and get brought up with a pack of wolves for a few years

You take away that Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mao were the ultimate evils in the world, that Marilyn Monroe was not the juiciest sex creature, that Groucho Marx was not the wittiest man, that Einstein was not the greatest genius, and what has my generation left? I am bereft of absolutes and must lean on a stupid pisser like G.W.Bush to grind my teeth about. I am lost.

Is this a contest? This smells like a red herring. Just because we have Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, and the others doesn't take away from the fact that 6 million people were killed and not just killed but suffered tremendously. This is what we know. You cannot deny it. Other people's evils doesn't take away from this evil. Evil is evil.

oops

Precisely. Lets not have the Holocaust depreciate 9/11 or 9/11 take away from the death of over 4000 US soldiers since or that take away from the 1 million Iraqis blown away or that from the horrors in Sudan or the massacres in the Congo or Rwanda or let's see, did I miss something more current? Evil is evil is evil is evil etc.

wow, I just noticed 77% of people who voted in this poll for criminalising freedom to dissent from the program. Well, I guess they are on the right planet



This image and text from 1919 is possible to authenticate. How premonitory it's authors were to write history DECADES in advance before the Nazi party even existed. Well, in either case one group of people are patently brainwashed gullible fools whether it be those who question or those that accept unquestioningly and seek to criminalise debate. I know what my opinion is

My browser is very slow right now and I don't want to risk it's instability by opening another tab to consult the site restrictions - is it permissible to bump threads?

About the Article in "The American Hebrew" of 1919 (if the article is genuine): The number of 6 Mio. reflects roughly the number of Jews in eastern Europe. 1919 was, as may some remember, a year in which civil war and a general unrest (including anti-semitic riots) was common in eastern Europe.

The author just took this number and suggested the reader that they were in danger.