Your donations are appreciated and help keep this site running. Even the smallest amount helps.
Thankyou

 
PROMOTE YOUR SITE
HERE
Only $3 USD/month
TRUTHSPOON.COM
The man they can't recruit!
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: The Holocaust

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 18:58 #3461

  • Flare
  • Flare's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 14637
  • Likes received: 5649
Voltaire wrote:
That is a kind of deflection. If it happened they need to provide evidence. Period. What they stand to gain is secondary.

Such a huge genocide of millions of people should be extremely easy to prove.

And knowing how the jews operate, the forensic evidence would be rubbed in our faces on a daily basis, in stead of whining kike 'holocaust-surivor' stories.

Yet there isn't any evidence for it.

The fact that in a lot of countries in Europe the Holocaust is protected by the law clearly shows there's something gravely wrong with the story, because the truth should be self-evident in stead of being enforced.
Last Edit: 29 Jul 2019 19:00 by Flare.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 19:11 #3462

  • Flare
  • Flare's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 14637
  • Likes received: 5649


Holocrap


February 12, 2017 Digger for Truth



20 definitive reasons why the jewish holocaust is pile of steaming horse dung

…if exposing the Holocaust narrative as political propaganda makes one a “Holocaust denier,” all of us who put truth before politics ought to wear that label as a badge of honour.” ~ Nicholas Kollerstrom



This huge lie in history must be exposed and decimated. Think of all the innocent, good people who have and are currently spending time behind bars, just for questioning this ridiculous fable. This humongous lie is a buffer for the plethora of jewish criminality. Once this global fib gets exposed (which is will/is); then it will be the beginning of the end of this tyrannical cult. That is why it is essential we all make efforts to expose this insult to history, insult to the Truth and an insult to all who have really suffered under this judaic beast.

These twenty reasons are my personal choices why I know the holocaust to be a lie. I am not saying these are the most important damning evidence; but just obvious common sense reasons why I realised the holocaust was in fact a holohoax. I am certainly no revisionist, but I don’t think with common sense one needs to be. I think we could collectively create a post titled ‘100 Reasons Why The holocaust Is a Hoax’.

These points are deliberately concise and not in order of importance; nor are they particularly academic or scientific. They are meant to be just reminders for those of us who are aware of this hoax, and teaser for newcomers to this Truth, to investigate themselves. It is only when one unravels information themselves, that it truly resonates within. There is a link at the bottom to a plethora of independent information on this touchy subject, from various eminent revisionists.

In essence, I feel the camps were a favourable location to be during the war years. This was a haven during unpredictable times (caused by International jewry), where one stood a much better chance of survival than on the front line, or even being targeted by bombing raids. The German people were the real victims in all of this mess. The poor Germans and other Aryans didn’t have the luxury of good food and entertainment facilities during the height of the war. [please watch the film Hellstorm below]

I would say these work camps were nothing more than watered-down holidays camps, whilst everyone outside truly suffered. And these rats are demanding compensation for being in a holiday camp, whilst the real (German) victims get demonised to this day. My word, what hubris; what inversion of Truth!



1. Pink

Lobster pink is the colour of a corpse from cyanide and carbon monoxide poisoning (the two gases supposedly used by the evil Nazis). Both gases block body oxygen absorption; therefore the corpses being full of oxygen (oxy-haemoglobin) turn into a pink/red. All of the reports claim to have only seen blue/greenish coloured corpses by all of the witnesses; even testified at the Nuremberg trials.


2. Blue


Prussian blue is the colour of stained walls left as residue from iron deposits from the cyanide gas, as were the walls in the delousing chambers. Cyanide was used only to delouse the clothing of the inmates, and certainly not for killing jews. And this why no blue staining appears in the supposed gas chambers claimed by the jews. Fredrich Leuchter and others have done scientific experiments to prove this. Although, again one does not need to be an expert to see the obvious. However, these independent scientists and revisionists are tremendously useful in standing up to the mainstream, mind-controlled and compromised academics.


3. Red


The International Red Cross were regular, spontaneous visitors to the supposed ‘death’ camps. This alone should ring alarm bells to newcomers to this ridiculous fairytale. Why would a humanitarian organisation wish to pay visits to a death camp?? And what did they find? They found healthy nutritional food, served to healthy inmates (prisoners). That’s it! No deformed bodies, no piles of lobster-coloured nor blue/green corpses, nor experimental chambers.

The real stinger for me in this, is that the jews were receiving far better nutrition than the Germans (and other Aryans) who were suffering outside of these camps – and all caused in the first place by collective jewry. God, you couldn’t make this shit up.


4. Jew Mathematics


The actual figure of 6 million deaths due to gassing and shooting is quite preposterous. This magic figure has been cited 166 times from 1900 – 1945. With claims of (or alluding to) torture or torment of jews. When the reality is there were more jews AFTER the war, than before. Now get a pen and paper and try and work that maths equation out.

There have been 5’360’710 claims from so-called Holocaust survivors. So let’s look at this:

4 million jews under Hitler’s government, yet somehow 6 million died and then 5 million remained to claim compensation … now that’s jew mathematics. These lying bastards want empathy and reparations. It matters not that the figures do not equate.


5. Taboo


If you dare even show a sniff of doubt that 2+2=5, Big Brother will incarcerate you. And that’s where we’re at. If you simple question these ridiculous myths of the Holocaust Religion in 17 countries you will go to prison under ‘hate crimes’ law (legislation not actual law). That fact alone should ring very loud alarm bells to anyone looking into this myth. Because surely if this atrocity on the jews really did happen, and could easily be backed up by real history and real scientific evidence – then surely this debate should be transparent for all to see.

If this holocaust really did happen, then the jews would be the first to want to make a mockery of all these non-jewish revisionists. That would be their ultimate trump card.

And as with all history, and science and any area of study we need to be able to independently review and revise it. Yet somehow this hot topic is a closed case, written in stone, never to be questioned. With any academic questioning the holo-religion demonised and outed from his career. How convenient. To me this point alone is enough to highlight The Holocaust’ as a sham.


6. Facilities


In the so-called Auschwitz ‘death’ camp, where the evil nasty Nazis were gassing the poor victim jews, they inappropriately had the following facilities: swimming pool, theatre (for music and drama), kindergartens, orchestra, library, art museum, football pitch, sports relay events, post office (where death victims could write postcards to the outside world), hospital/medical unit (to make people better), Auschwitz currency, brothel, underfloor-heated quarters, canteens, kitchen and a bakery. Phew, some death camp, hey.

And any officer who harmed a jew was punished. There were strict legal measures set in place in order that no mistreatment of inmates would occur. It was not beneficial to harm the valuable labour force.


7. Logistics


Why, why, why would the Germans invest so much precious energy and time transporting millions of jews to death camps in war time? Why? What would be the logic for this insane logistics? Think of the cost of the fuel alone. If the Germans really wanted to kill off all the jews, why didn’t they just locally round up the jews and kill them in situ? This would have been so much more productive and economical. The Germans were not stupid and in fact were excellent strategists. It makes no sense ‘if one believes this ridiculous fairytale’; yet makes perfect sense that the Germans simply wanted to remove jews from Europe (due to their destructive nature) and place them in labour camps to assist their defence.

The Germans needed as much labour as possible during the war to make ammunition and stock. It would make sense that they would use the perpetrators of this war to compensate in way of enforced labour. That’s what every army has done throughout history.


8. Coke

(i) Likewise in regards to reserving fuel. Why would the Germans waste so much precious fuel in burning millions of bodies, using up mountains of coke, when this coke could have been used to fight the war. Remember the Germans were in a desperate situation, with fuel embargoes and economy of resources were paramount. It is a ludicrous suggestion to think they would waste this on gassing and burning jews, which could be utilised for precious labour instead. Not to mention the time and effort used up to do this.

(ii) And where are the arial shots of the mountains of coke which would be needed to consume these furnaces and gas chambers? There were thousands of areal shots taken of the work camps throughout the war. None show any extraordinary coke reserves, nor do any of the detailed paperwork show any stockpiling of large amounts of coke.

If the Germans wanted to kill off jews as the kosher narrative goes, then they could have simply rounded them up in location and starved them of water and food. That would have been the most economical and quickest solution without any fuel whatsoever. Exactly what happened in Eisenhower’s (the jew) camp to the German POWs. Do school children hear about that atrocity?!


9. Jewspapers


(i) Who can trust the media? Even ’normals’ out there know deep down that the newspapers and general media are lying to them (even though they habitually keep consuming these lies). And who owns the media [newspapers (main and local), magazines, TV, cinema, etc]? Ermm, is it the Arabs? The Irish? The Hare Krishnas? Nope – it’s the jews. And everyone secretly knows this fact. So we have a jewish-owned media perpetually giving us the narrative (religious doctrine) of the poor 6 million victims and survivors. And we’re all supposed to believe it.

Don’t forget the jews have control of the academic world too – kindergarten, junior school, senior school, colleges, universities, home study courses, industrial run training courses, etc.

And we’re supposed to believe all this is not going to effect our cognitive thinking and ability to independent come up with our own reasoning to what really happened?

(ii) And when did this narrative suddenly appear in our society? Did the press report these findings at the time of the supposed ‘death’ camps? No. But instead it began to creep out in the 70s. How bizarre!! If one quizzes elderly people whether they heard of holocaust death camps in the late 40s/50’s they will tell you the Truth – that there was no social talk of death camps. Because this fabricated narrative didn’t really come into the psyche of people until decades later.


10. Producer gas

The fact that there were about a half million Producer Gas Vehicles all over Germany and other parts of Europe, and the utter simplicity of the design of a Producer Gas Generator renders the use of Diesel exhaust, or Zyklon B as idiotic as trying to start a fire by rubbing two sticks together in a match factory.” ~ Nickolas Kellerstrom


11. Air tight


The elementary fact that the supposed gas chambers had a flimsy wooden door, with a glass window, and drains for the gas to escape is a bit of an easy giveaway. If one is to use a pinch of logic and not use one’s emotions, dogma and enforced conditioning. The wooden door in a facility, which would need to be super air tight, is beyond ridiculous. And to think billions across the planet (including myself at one time) have fallen for this horse crap.


12. Fake chimney


The chimney at Auschwitz is merely a prop. It was built in 1946 by Stalin. THAT’S AFTER THE WAR, by the way. After the period of the supposed holocaust. And it isn’t even physically connected to the building. It is just a free-standing, symbolic, non-functioning chimney. I suppose all that matters to the masses is the illusion. After all, this whole world seems to be one big illusory existence. Altered reality will do for the masses, just so long as they’re in their comfort zone and amongst the herd.


13. Emotions vs Facts


When one dares to discuss this exceptionally raw topic, the immediate defiant reaction from most people is “Well what about the piles of skeletal bodies they were piling up with a bulldozer?!” And they deliver this one off statement as if they know. As if they’ve got unshakable evidence.

Well what about them? They were simply a pile of bodies. This whole holo-religion is built on EMOTIONS. The music, the weeping sentimental eye-witness (paid off jews) and symbolism. The shoes, the railway tracks, the shaved hair. None of it is evidence. It’s just symbolism around a fabricated narrative. When a jew stands next to a railway track on the talmudvision with sentimental music, we immediately get triggered into empathy mode. When the reality is it’s just a jew standing next to a railway track.

It’s only when one dares to take out one’s emotions and looks at the actual evidence from independently resourced facts, with logic and reason (and common sense); then all these symbols and dreary music stop having an effect. The piles of shoes were simply donations by kind, caring Germans. The shaved hair were simply shaved hair – carried out for pragmatic reasons to prevent lice in the camps. And the piles of bodies were just piles of emaciated bodies of non-jews and jews which were abundant at that time due to typhoid rampant in the camps … due to the jewish-funded American attacks on the infrastructures, preventing foods getting into the camps. So blame the fuckin jews!

There were thousands of bodies like this all over Germany and Europe, due to food embargoes and mass bombing raids on farms and general infrastructure. Just look at the starving of the civilians in the streets of Germany at the end of the war. All caused by international jewry.

But interesting enough, the film director Billy Wilder who created the footage of these camps JUST HAPPENED TO BE JEWISH. Yessss, how convenient. Now I wonder if he had any bias??


14. Nuremberg


When you think of the Nuremberg trials, think of kangaroo. Think of fraud and deception. The biggest public legal trickery in modern history. Jewish lies at their best. If ever there was a case of lack of justice, it was in these sham trials. The lampshades as ‘evidence’, the false testimonials by SS officers who had their live’s threatened, their family’s threatened. Having had to give testimonials forced with alcohol and having their balls crushed. It was imperative that the jews got this trial to go the way they wanted. Because it was this trial that was on global display, for all their jewish media to report on. This set the precedence for the Holo-Religion to begin. From this fake trial the whole world would be put on a mass guilt trip.


15. Why the tattoos?


Why the hell would you go to the effort to tattoo people whom you intended to murder? Or is that a silly question? I really would like to hear the explanation for this. I have heard that the nasty Nazis first used the jews as labour, and burnt them out, then destroyed them. But would you really go to the effort of constantly replacing and re-training your work force? And as discussed the costs and time involved in destroying this work force would be phenomenal in war times. Why not just look after your work force (as the Germans did) in order get better production from them? Logic.


16. Pits and Piles


(i) Where are the mass death pits that the jews speak of? And how about the tons and tons of ash piles? Where are they? Remember we are talking large volumes here. We’re talking SIX FKN MILLION. That is a hell of a lot remnants of connective tissue, sinew, cartilage, and bone mass. Where is the evidence of the crime scene?

Oh of course – it’s been covered up. By the jews. With memorial stones scattered all across the supposed areas of pits. Of course for ethical reasons. With the jewish-controlled BBC explaining to us …

No excavation was carried out and the ground was not disturbed, which would be a violation of Jewish law and tradition, banning the exhumation of the dead.”


Arhhh, how convenient.

(ii) And how could the bodies be burned on soil which was basically marshland? Soaked boggy landscape. I’m not saying it would be impossible, if structures were built, and engineered drainage carried out, but where is the evidence of these structures and accommodation for this perfect environment?

There have been tentative scientific experiments on locations of these supposed death pits. But zero evidence has been produced for mass graves or mass body ash. Surprise surprise.


17. Logistics


(i) The simple logistics of killing people in ovens or pretend shower rooms and huge fires is almost childlike in its imagination. Only a jew could have the chutzpah to come up with such utter crap and expect the world to believe him (it).

Just pause. Stop for a minute and think about the practicality of murdering SIX MILLION jooos by ovens or pretend shower rooms or fire pits. It’s insane to go along with this narrative. This couldn’t be done even today with modern technology in the time span this was supposed to have been done in. Never mind in war time, when the Germans were fighting an intense war, with limited resources. Just the time alone would be a factor, even if they did have the facilities and fuel.

(ii) And what about the contamination of the Zyklon B gas from the corpses to the SS officers when they went into the shower/gas rooms? There is no mention of ventilation facilities to omit the gas prior to the officers entering the chambers and handling the corpses. Remember we are talking about a 24/7 schedule running non stop for years. Yet zero reported deaths of SS officers. Strange that.


18. Absurdity


Shrunken heads – that turned out to be a fabrication. Soap bars – that again were later verified as a mere conjecture (I always pondered why the Nazis would want to wash with Jew residue if they hated them so much). And of course the classic lampshade – ha, the lampshades made from tattooed kikeskin pervaded on display at The Hague and Nuremberg (later verified as animal skins).

And how about the sign at Dachau reading: GAS CHAMBER – disguised as a “shower room” – never used as a gas chamber. Ahahaha. Oh if it wasn’t so serious. And the swimming pool sign stating it was a water reservoir.

And how about the Anne Frank’s fairy story written in Biro pen when Biros were extremely rare to come by before 1951.

And tell me how could these survivors escape three ‘death’ camps? What a fkn joke.

And the story of Irene Zisblatt swallowing and defecating diamonds. Only a jew could come up with a shitty narrative like that.

Apparently the evil Nazis bashed jew’s brains in with a pedal-driven brain-basing machine, whilst listening to the radio; then burned the bodies in 4 portable incinerators. ? ? This is laugh out loud humour.

They also ground the bones of 200 bodies [3/4 ton] at one time as described in photographs and documents (which have conveniently disappeared) – studied bone grinding in special 10-day crash-course seminars. Ha ha ha.

Absurd, absurd, absurd. To the point of being laughable. And this is what the whole world should be doing with this ridiculous fable – laugh out loud at it. Ridicule is our serious defence against this insult to common sense.


19. Fat Jews


You’ve undoubtedly seen the images of the poor emaciated jews… again and again and again. But Have you seen the images of the smiling fat jews in the concentration camps? I am being serious. Start digging. Start to unravel the Truth about this historical fable and you will see another side to this. Take a look at the healthy jews being released from Birkenau and Auschwitz in January 1945. These were images of happy campers. Not oppressed victims of experimentation and death camps.


20. Suddenly evil


If Hitler and his motley gang of evil jew-murderers were hell bent on killing jews, why oh why did Hitler not round up ALL the jews in his country? Why on earth did he leave the synagogues and jewish communities? Why did he just round up the trouble makers and communists (who just happened to be 90% jewish)?

The most puzzling thing to me when hearing about Hitler’s death camps and having visited Dachau is that I could never understand why the Germans, as a race and nation, allowed such atrocities. Especially years later when I lived in Germany and got to really know the Germans and observed first hand how stoic and good willed they all were. How? How could a civilised, intelligent, kind-hearted nation with such affinity to natural law allow such evil under their national interest? Why would they suddenly go off on a tangent for a few years and become mass murdering monsters? I think many of us have been confused on that one.

Well they didn’t is the answer to that. Because they and their leaders were certainly not evil – quite the reverse. Hitler wasn’t evil. The SS officers were not evil. NSDAP was not evil. The common folk of Germany were not evil. And the nation as a whole held no evil philosophies. It’s all a jewish-created fabrication, pushed out there by the saturation of jewish-run Hollywood illusion and mass indoctrination. Lies, lies, lies.

It is our responsibility to stand up for the souls of these German heroes. For the present day Germans who are to this day being decimated by jewish perfidy. It is also our responsibility to stand up for the Truth, for our Aryan folk and for our future. This enormous lie on humanity must be crushed before we can begin to talk about our freedoms.

Please do your bit to spread this Truth.


Come on people. Isn’t it time we finally put our emotions to one side and embrace not only true history and science; but reason, common sense and a bit of logic?

2+2 will never be 5, despite the mainstream media, legal system and repeater zombies all around us telling us it is.




Further information on this topic


Amended History
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 19:15 #3463

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 17079
  • Likes received: 1801
Flare wrote:
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]



So what?

ZyklonB was an insecticide, which couldn't be used for homocidal, let alone genocidal gassings anyway.

So it comes as no surprise that the door at the delousing chamber was made of wood.

:lolplac:
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 19:32 #3464

  • Gaia
  • Gaia's Avatar
  • Online
  • Gold Member
  • Posts: 7415
  • Likes received: 1585
Ugh wrote:
Holocaust-denier historian David Irving was jailed a while back, I just sent the e-mail below to his website and will post his reply if I get one-

Hi, if the Holocaust never happened, why was Mr. Irving jailed for saying so?
Didn't he have any solid irrefutable PROOF that it never happened, to prove his case?
Mick in Plymouth


Guardian Weekly news item-
Holocaust denier jailed.
David Irving, the discredited British historian and Nazi apologist, was this week starting a three-year prison sentence in Vienna for denying the Holocaust and the gas chambers of Auschwitz.
www.theguardian.com/guardianweekly/story/0,,1715580,00.html

Irving's website-
fpp.co.uk/

The Irving vs Lippstadt "trial" was a show trial, much in the same tradition as Purimfest '46 - Nuremberg.

Irving is not even a Holocaust "denier", and he is rightfully criticized in the informed, academic and scientific people who write at IHR.

He's a plant, just like Libby and Dolfy of course.
The Only Limit is Your Own Imagination
A truth seeker is someone who dares to wade through thick series of toxic smoke screens and tries not to inhale - Gaia
"What do you call 'genius'?" "Well, seeing things others don't see. Or rather the invisible links between things."
- Vladimir Nabokov (1938)
"The silence of conspiracy. Slaughtered on the altar of apathy." - Lords of the New Church (1982)
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 19:47 #3465

  • Flare
  • Flare's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 14637
  • Likes received: 5649
Frothy wrote:
Flare wrote:
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]



So what?

ZyklonB was an insecticide, which couldn't be used for homocidal, let alone genocidal gassings anyway.

So it comes as no surprise that the door at the delousing chamber was made of wood.

:lolplac:

Zyklon B tested on humans



:)


Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 19:48 #3466

  • Flare
  • Flare's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 14637
  • Likes received: 5649
Gaia wrote:
He's a plant, just like Libby and Dolfy of course.


You are a plant.

Ask your wife. :chuckle:
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 20:10 #3467

  • Ugh
  • Ugh's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Silver Member
  • Name is Mick, Age 71, right winger, Christian, English
  • Posts: 3644
  • Likes received: 407
Incidentally, why exactly did Irving plead guilty at his trial?

News item- "Irving's defence lawyer, Elmar Kresbach, appealed for mercy for an ageing man with a 12-year-old daughter and an ill wife. Even if he did voice views which were "horrible" or "repellent", he was no danger to Austria.
Irving pleaded guilty, but under Austrian law the trial went ahead."
www.theguardian.com/guardianweekly/story/0,,1715580,00.html
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 20:16 #3468

  • Gaia
  • Gaia's Avatar
  • Online
  • Gold Member
  • Posts: 7415
  • Likes received: 1585
Ugh wrote:
Incidentally, why exactly did Irving plead guilty at his trial?

Indeed, that was the set-up.

If you are really interested in this subject, which you are obviously not with your "attention span", you should read Mattogno, Kues, Graf, Rudolf and Dalton.
The Only Limit is Your Own Imagination
A truth seeker is someone who dares to wade through thick series of toxic smoke screens and tries not to inhale - Gaia
"What do you call 'genius'?" "Well, seeing things others don't see. Or rather the invisible links between things."
- Vladimir Nabokov (1938)
"The silence of conspiracy. Slaughtered on the altar of apathy." - Lords of the New Church (1982)
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 20:18 #3469

  • Voltaire
  • Voltaire's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Silver Member
  • Posts: 3480
  • Likes received: 2074
pleading guilty usually means less time served.


Truth is anti-semitic
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 21:31 #3470

  • Gloria
  • Gloria's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Fresh Member
  • Posts: 82
  • Likes received: 30
during the Nazi Regime THEY decided about who is worthy to live and who´s not
better be not psychically instable to that time :iitm:

:)

"always laugh when you can, it is cheap medicine"
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 23:45 #3471

  • Ugh
  • Ugh's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Silver Member
  • Name is Mick, Age 71, right winger, Christian, English
  • Posts: 3644
  • Likes received: 407
Ugh wrote:
Incidentally, why exactly did Irving plead guilty at his trial?
Gaia wrote:
Indeed, that was the set-up.
If you are really interested in this subject, which you are obviously not with your "attention span", you should read Mattogno, Kues, Graf, Rudolf and Dalton.

Sorry mate but as I've said before in TZ, if people can't give a short sharp answer I'm not interested..:)
"The more the words, the less the meaning,and how does that profit anyone?" (Bible:Ecc 6:11)
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 29 Jul 2019 23:52 #3472

  • Ugh
  • Ugh's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Silver Member
  • Name is Mick, Age 71, right winger, Christian, English
  • Posts: 3644
  • Likes received: 407
Voltaire wrote:
pleading guilty usually means less time served.

Thanks, when I was on trial on a vigilante rap in 2002 my solicitor begged me to plead guilty and throw myself on the mercy of the court, but I stood my ground and said "Not guilty" loud and clear, I got 3 months jail but it was worth it..:)
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 30 Jul 2019 11:40 #3473

  • Flare
  • Flare's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 14637
  • Likes received: 5649
Gloria wrote:
during the Nazi Regime THEY decided about who is worthy to live and who´s not
better be not psychically instable to that time :iitm:

:)




Hi Gloria,

This Mainstream media source is not trustworthy at all, since it is controlled by the jews.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 30 Jul 2019 11:53 #3474

  • annabelle
  • annabelle's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Silver Member
  • Posts: 2361
  • Likes received: 1630
It's ridiculous that anyone would be facing charges for up to ten years in prison for denying the holocaust.

quote:

The Lies and Deceptions of Deborah Lipstadt

Let’s start with a statement she made right at the beginning of her speech. The time into her recorded presentation at which each clip starts that I will show can be gleaned from the time stamp given beneath the slide number of this presentation.

Here are Dr. Lipstadt’s words:

The Holocaust, which has the dubious distinction of being the best-documented genocide in the world.

This is a bold claim to make. But let’s not take this for granted. Let’s ask a few basic questions here. The first one is: “How are genocides and massacres documented?”

The answer to this is rather simple, because a genocide is nothing other than a mass murder committed against a group of people defined by their ethnic, religious or national identity with the aim to wipe them all out. So we are dealing with murder. The rules for investigating a mass murder are not much different than those for single murder cases. So, like in all murder cases, here, too, we would prove that a mass murder has taken place by first finding the victims or whatever is left of them, by determining the causes, places and times of their death as best as possible, and by trying to pinpoint who the perpetrators were.

That this is indeed the way genocidal mass murder cases are investigated, can be seen in a number of cases. I give only three examples here:

The first is the genocide committed by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia in the 1970s. Investigations have found some 20,000 individual mass grave sites with a total of almost 1.4 million victims.

The next case are the mass murders committed during the war in former Yugoslavia in the second half of the 1990s. While world attention has focused on atrocities committed by Serbs, I may point out here that they were not the only ones committing such atrocities. They were simply singled out as the bad guys by western media in that conflict, and atrocities committed by Croats and Kosovo Albanians were simply swept under the carpet. But that’s beside the point I want to make here. Fact is that numerous investigations of mass graves were conducted in the aftermath of that conflict, carefully exhuming and identifying the victims’ remains.

My last example is the Soviet mass murder committed against the Polish elite during the first Soviet occupation of eastern Poland between late 1939 and June 1941. Two mass-grave sites were excavated in 1943 under the aegis of the German occupational authorities near the towns of Katyn and Vinnitsa.

This case is probably more pertinent than the first two, as it set an example on how it should be done in times of conflict. Remember, in 1943 World War Two was raging at its peak, with the Axis Powers slowly being pushed back.

At that point in time, the Germans were wise enough not to do their crime scene investigations using exclusively their own experts, but they invited observers and experts from neutral countries to participate.

Their report on Katyn, for instance, is a perfect example of rigorous forensic research done correctly. Their report can be accessed online at the address given. During these investigations, the mass graves were excavated, all victims exhumed, their identities determined, their causes, places and times of death pinpointed, and the perpetrators identified within the limits of what was possible. Today, that report is generally accepted as being correct even by the Russian authorities.

After this long introduction into this topic, let’s ask ourselves what the situation is with regard to the many mass-murder sites of “the Holocaust.”

First of all, it is a sad fact that for the first 55 years after the end of World War II, not a single forensic investigation by experts from countries not involved in the conflict has ever been conducted.

Next, not a single autopsy has ever been carried out on a victim of any German wartime camp demonstrating that their death was caused by poisoning or asphyxiation.

To make matters worse, not a single document has ever been found that proves the existence of homicidal gas chambers. I emphasize here the adjective homicidal, because there are many documents proving the existence of fumigation gas chambers. But that’s not what we’re looking for.

For instance, there are two cases where physical evidence for the existence of gas chambers do indeed exist, and for which orthodox historians claim that they were used to kill people. The first case is in the Stutthof Camp. This image shows the inside of that building. And the second example is the Majdanek Camp. Here an outside view of that building. However, in both cases, original wartime documentation clearly shows that these buildings were built and used as delousing chambers, not mass-murder chambers.

I will not go deeper into that topic here. If you want to learn more about it, see the respective entries in the list of further reading which you can find at the end of this presentation.

In addition to that, there are three more cases where rooms in former Nazi concentration camps are claimed to have served for mass slaughter: One each in Dachau, Mauthausen and Hartheim. Again, this is not the place to treat this in detail. For the present purpose, it is enough to note that the claims made about these buildings, which are not based on forensic investigations at all but merely on witness testimony, are technically absurd.

Let’s now look into a few examples of how claims about mass-graves filled with victims of the Nazi genocide against Jews and others were treated.

First, there is the most infamous camp of them all, Auschwitz.

Right at the end of the war, it was claimed by a Soviet investigative commission that some 4 million people perished there. Today, that death toll has been reduced to roughly a quarter of that figure. It is not based on any forensic research, however, but merely on train records showing how many people were ever deported to Auschwitz, minus some of those who can be shown to have survived.

The camp with the second-largest death toll claimed today, Treblinka, saw some forensic investigation after the war, but it was done in absence of any neutral expert or even observer. Yet still, the findings of these two distinct investigations did not even remotely confirm the claims that mass graves holding the remains of up to 3 million victims did indeed exist. Today that death toll has shrunk to some 800,000.

More-recent research has managed to located some soil disturbances. This map was prepared by the lead research of those recent efforts. The white areas are suspected to be mass graves, but no effort was made to excavate these areas, let along exhume any remains and try to identify them.

Yet even if all the site that could be mass graves turned out to be mass graves, their combined volume is far too small to be compatible with the claims made about this camp. In fact, to accommodate the claimed number of buried victims, almost the entire area free of trees shown here needed to be covered with mass graves. Just as is the case for Auschwitz, here, too, the death toll is therefore not based on forensic research, but on deportation figures to this camp.

The situation is pretty much the same with regard to the Belzec Camp, where to my knowledge no forensic research was done at all right after the war.

They were looking (in the late 1990's) for leftovers of the claimed homicidal gas chambers, but all they found were the foundation walls of a garage building as shown here. Anyway, here as well, that death toll number is based on deportation figures, not on the result of forensic research, which never went beyond taking a few core samples.

Another major claimed place of mass murder is the former Majdanek Camp. Right after the war, death toll claims ranged between 1.5 and 1.7 million, but that has subsequently been reduced in several steps, and currently stands at some 78,000, as this chart shows, so merely 5% of the original claim. No forensic research was ever done here.

The case of Majdanek shows that wartime propaganda has had a major distorting influence on claims made about German atrocities, and that independent forensic research is desperately needed, indeed.

My next example is the Sobibór Camp. It’s claimed death toll currently stands at some 200,000. No forensic research was done here right after the war.

A large forensic research effort was initiated only in the year 2000, of which this image of 2014 is from the final stages of the dig. Although a number of mass graves were located, they are not compatible with the claims made, and once they had been located, any further research was halted.

So no effort to exhume, count, and identify the victims.

It goes without saying that such an effort is exceedingly difficult 55+ years after the crime.

What they did find, though, were the remnants of a building with four rooms which they declared to have been “the homicidal gas chamber”, although there is no forensic evidence to back up that claim. It could have had any other purpose, for all we know.

My last example is Babi Yar, which was a ravine just outside of the Ukrainian city of Kiev. Some 100,000 victims are said to have been murdered and buried there by the Germans, who shortly before their retreat in 1943 are said to have excavated those graves and burned the remains.

This is the single-largest mass-murder case of the so-called Einsatzgruppen, German units behind the Russian front fighting partisans and at once mass-murdering a total of somewhere between 1.5 and 3 million civilians – depending on who you believe.

Right after the Soviets re-conquered this area, they forced German PoWs to excavate the area, and some Soviet experts wrote a very superficial report about it.

Interestingly, that report only mentions the discovery of some 150 unidentified victims in two mass graves, and they even published a blurred image of one of the opened graves. They also claimed to have found some charred remains, but neither their nature, their origin nor their quantity is mentioned. The site has since been re-purposed and plowed-over many times, so any further investigation seems hopeless.

To sum it up, calling the Holocaust the “best-documented genocide in the world” pretty much turns things upside down. The opposite is true.

Now, let’s move on to Lipstadt’s next flawed line of argument.

For deniers to be right, who would have to be wrong?

After that passage, Dr. Lipstadt lists a number of groups who all would have to be wrong.

First, there are the victims. Now, I’m not sure what she means by that, because victims of mass murder are usually dead. But of course, in an indirect way, victims of mass murder can testify, if they are properly, that is to say, independently exhumed and forensically examined, but as I mentioned before, that has never happened.

It wasn’t even tried to systematically locate any mass graves, let alone excavate them, exhume the bodies and subject them to an autopsy. And I’m not talking here about the sham CSI cases conducted by the Soviet Union starting in 1943, used to shore-up numerous show trials in Charkov, Krasnodar and Leningrad, for instance.

These expert reports are notoriously mendacious, as is emphasized by the Soviet forensic report on Katyn made after the war which blamed the Soviet mass murder on the Germans.

Next, we have the survivors.

I’m going to mentioned only a few revealing facts on that topic. First, there are some 200,000 documented inmates who survived Auschwitz in terms of either having been transferred out of the camp by the Germans or still having been in that camp when it was occupied by the Soviets in January 1945.

That’s a huge number of potential witnesses the Germans allowed to live. Only a small fraction of them has ever testified about German atrocities allegedly committed in Auschwitz. An Israeli study concluded in the year 2000 that at that time a little more than one million Holocaust survivors were still alive.

From well-documented longevity data compiled by life-insurance companies, it can be calculated that there must have been some 5 million Holocaust survivors alive in 1945. That fact has provoked the mother of U.S. scholar Norman Finkelstein to exclaim: “if everyone who claims to be a survivor really is one, who did Hitler kill?” You can find that quote in Finkelstein’s book on the Holocaust Industry on page 81.

Next, there are the bystanders.

As one example, Lipstadt talks about how people experienced the Jews being arrested and deported in trains to the east. Now, there can be no doubt about that fact, but seeing how people are herded together and shipped away does not prove that they were murdered.

The same is true for Lipstadt’s second example of people in Poland seeing how trains full of Jews went into the camps and came out empty. Again, that merely proves that the deportees left the trains at the respective train stations. It doesn’t prove that they were murdered.

To prove my point, the 200,000 Auschwitz survivors just mentioned were all arrested, herded together, deported in trains to Auschwitz, and the trains that brought them there subsequently returned empty. Does that prove these 200,000 people were killed? Of course not!

And last but not least, there are the perpetrators.

For Lipstadt, and with her probably for most people, their quote-unquote “confessions” prove it all, if nothing else does. So it’s a very important point. So important, in fact, that it is worth its own separate documentary. I’ll make it brief, here, though, but before addressing this, I want to make some more general observations.

First, there is the issue of majority. If the vast majority thinks something is true, it just has to be true, right? Wrong. The English-born American theoretical physicist Freeman John Dyson made that clear when saying,

“In the history of science, it has often happened that the majority was wrong and refused to listen to a minority that later turned out to be right.”

Well, what can we learn from this? There are some very general observations we can make from the history of science: First, every new hypothesis which challenges old views is initially an extreme minority opinion.

Second, every new hypothesis challenging the power structure of its time is met with fierce opposition.

And last but not least, science is not a democratic enterprise. We cannot vote for a thesis to be right or wrong. So, it doesn’t matter whether 99.99% of humanity rejects a scientific thesis or not. The only thing that counts is solid evidence. In that sense, science is an absolute dictatorship of evidence, not a democracy.

Let’s now return to the perpetrators. Here is what Dr. Lipstadt claims about them:

In not one war-crimes trial since the end of World War Two has a perpetrator of any nationality ever said it didn’t happen.

Some of what Dr. Lipstadt said is misleading, and some of it is simply wrong.

One of the first trials conducted by the Allies after Germany’s defeat was the trial against the bosses of the Tesch & Stabenow Company which, among other things, delivered Zyklon B to various German wartime camps, Auschwitz most prominently among them.

For that trial, the British arrested all the employees of that company. Many of them were threatened that, if they don’t confirm their bosses’ active involvement in mass murder with Zyklon B, they would be extradited to the Soviets, where they might even be tortured.

And still, all defendants insisted that they knew nothing about a mass murder with gas, and also insisted that what they delivered could be explained and was exclusively used for disinfestations.


The most famous of all trials that also dealt with the “Holocaust” was the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. Here, too, all defendants insisted that they were unaware of any mass murder program. The highest Nazi official on trial, Hermann Göring, actively denied that such a plan existed, and he even stated that he considered the claim made by the Allies technically unfeasible.

Another defendant who survived this lynch trial, Hans Fritzsche, a subordinate of Joseph Goebbels, wrote in his autobiography after the war how none of the defendants initially believed the charge that Germany had committed a wholesale mass slaughter on the Jews.

That attitude changed only after they had been shown two things: first, a propaganda movie produced by the Americans showing scenes with piles of corpses found in various German camps, who were presented as victims of mass murder. Next, the testimony of Rudolf Höss, the former camp commander of the Auschwitz Camp. Höss confirmed with a terse “Jawohl!” the accuracy of an affidavit signed by him where the mass murder with Zyklon B in that camp is described.

But there are massive problems with both pieces of evidence introduced during the Nuremberg Trial: First, the footage shown, though genuine, did NOT show victims of mass murder, but victims of Germany’s utter collapse, where everyone was dying like flies toward the end of the war, both inside and outside the camps, mainly due to diseases, starvation, and Allied bombing.

Three concentration camps featured prominently in that footage: Bergen-Belsen, Dachau and Nordhausen.

Everyone agrees today that the dead bodies of Bergen-Belsen belonged to the victims of a catastrophic typhus epidemic. The bodies found in railroad cars at Dachau were the victims of Allied fighter planes attacking this train while en route to Dachau. Regarding the Nordhausen camp, let’s watch a section of the following documentary:

The Allies also directly bombed concentration-camp prisoners, and today we are told this is proof of a German-planned Holocaust. This is another segment from the American propaganda film Nazi Concentration Camps, which was shown at the Nuremberg Trials.

“The slave-labor camp at Nordhausen, liberated by the Third Armored Division, First Army. At least 3,000 political prisoners died here at the brutal hands of SS troops and hardened German criminal who were the camp guards. Nordhausen had been a depository for slaves found unfit for works in the underground V-bomb plants, and in other German camps and factories.”

A deceptively captioned image of Nordhausen appears in Steven Spielberg’s The Last Days companion book. We see American soldiers walking past corpses strewn on the ground. The caption reads: ‘The horrific scene of mass annihilation within the Nordhausen concentration camp.’

Let’s look closer at the photograph. We can see the buildings have been bombed. Testimony of former prisoners shows they were lucky to survive Allied bombing attacks.

This Jewish former prisoner and doctor describes prisoners lying in the camp hospital sick of tuberculosis in the final days of the war. ‘And there, I had over 4,000 prisoners lying on tuberculosis. Sick! What you’re doing? It’s tuberculosis! No medications, nothing. Hardly food. It was very meagre already. The Germans didn’t have to eat.’

This former prisoner and doctor described conditions in the camp in the final days of the war. Sick prisoners didn’t have enough supplies. However, he points out the Germans themselves also didn’t have enough – even to eat. Clearly, the Germans could have killed the sick prisoners at any time, yet instead treated them in hospitals.

‘And all of the sudden, it was April 3rd, at 3 o’clock, alarm, and American Air Force over us, and dropped the bombs just on our camp. And the whole camp was entirely destroyed.

And out of this, 4,000 people, we were 200 [who] survived. Because they died there. They were in the camps, you know, hanging in the ceiling, dead bodies. It was awful. It was burning days and days. We were still, the nurses, the doctors, administration people, working administration, we ran away. And the Americans made a mistake, because they didn’t know this is a concentration camp.’


The same documentary bearing the title Why We Believed, which you can find on Youtube and on www.HolocaustDocumentaries.com, also presents evidence for the just-mentioned cases of Bergen-Belsen and Dachau. So watch the whole thing if you are interested in finding out more about this.

The former camp commander Höss, on the other hand, was made drunk by force, beaten, and kept awake for three days straight before the British could get him to sign an affidavit in English, which he didn’t even understand. Here is a portrait of Höss right after his arrest by the British while descending from the truck that brought him to prison. And here is Höss a few days later, after three days of torture.

See his bloody nose and the various wounds in his face. It is now generally accepted as a fact that Höss was severely tortured, also because his tormentors admitted it and published the tale years afterwards. That extorted affidavit was then presented at Nuremberg. It’s not worth the paper it’s written on.

Unfortunately, Höss was not a single case. In fact, the British, the Americans and the Soviets systematically tortured their prisoners to extract so-called “confessions” from former SS men and Nazi officials.

Now, after the Nuremberg Trial had sentenced the surviving top officials of the Third Reich, its verdict became a kind of starting point for all other war-crime trials and for all historians writing about the Third Reich.

Hence, in all subsequent trials, the fact that a Holocaust had occurred was no longer open to dispute.

Actually, it wasn't even open to dispute during the Nuremberg Trials themselves, because the defense could not challenge most of the evidence submitted to the court.

By the very statutes of the trial, it had to accept as fact what the prosecutors presented as findings of their authorities.

As a result, for any subsequent defendant charged with having contributed in any way to “the Holocaust,” a defense strategy challenging the over-arching story was not only logistically impossible—one single defendant could not take on a huge task like that—but was also legally impossible, for they could not defend themselves against charges they had not been accused of, and no later defendant has ever been charged with having organized “the Holocaust.”

They were only charged with small aspects in the larger picture. Hence, the only way to mount a defense that had some prospect of success was to concede the uncontestable, yet minimize one’s own involvement or responsibilities.

One of the most-active German prosecutors handling many cases of claimed mass murders, Helge Grabitz, wrote once that he was utterly amazed by the total lack of any remorse among the defendants, which was very unusual.

He even floated the idea that, under normal circumstance, he would suspect the defendants to be innocent, but he then stated that this was, of course, not an option.

And there’s the rub: innocence has never been an option in any of those trials, none of which ever employed forensic methods to determine whether the claimed crime had been committed in the first place.

While denying the crime has always been socially and legally unacceptable, nowadays it is even outright illegal in most of the countries that have ever conducted Holocaust-related trials.

So, what do we expect defendants to do in such a situation?

If you think that the conditions of war-crime trials conducted for instance in Germany many years after the war must have been better than those conducted by the Allies right after the war, think again.

The German defense lawyer Hans Laternser participated both during the Nuremberg Trials and during the big West-German Auschwitz trial in the 1960s. Here is what he said about that. Quote:

“In the major international criminal trials in which I participated, there has never been as much tension as in the Auschwitz trial – not even at the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg.”

As a matter of fact, there is an almost perfect historical parallel to what has been occurring since the end of World War Two. In that other comparable historical case: During early court cases, many defendants were tortured. Almost all defendants confessed.

In later trials, defendants usually confessed voluntarily. Throngs of witnesses – victims, survivors, and bystanders – confirmed the crime.

The overarching crime was “self-evident”, which means it could not be challenged. Requests by the defense for evidence were usually denied. Defense lawyers defending their clients too ambitiously were indicted themselves. Denying the crime was the worst of all crimes and led to prosecution for “denial.”

Let’s move on to the next set of clips where Dr. Lipstadt demonizes her opponents:

Deniers are wolves in sheep’s clothing. They are the same Nazis, neo-Nazis, you can decided whether you want to put a neo there or not. […]

What I found instead were people parading as respectable academics. […]

It was anti-Semitism, racism, prejudice parading as rational discourse. […]

But underneath it’s that same extremism that I found in Holocaust denial parading as rational discourse.

She calls revisionists “extremists.” But what exactly is an extremist? On an individual level, an extremist can be described as a person who pursues his political agenda with all kinds of means, violence included.

As far as I know, there is not a single case of revisionist violence, because violence is not among the methods with which revisionists are pursuing their goals. Hence, revisionists are not extremists, but some of their opponents certainly are.

codoh.com/library/document/4637/
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 30 Jul 2019 12:46 #3475

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 17079
  • Likes received: 1801
Flare wrote:
Frothy wrote:
Flare wrote:
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]


So what?

ZyklonB was an insecticide, which couldn't be used for homocidal, let alone genocidal gassings anyway.

So it comes as no surprise that the door at the delousing chamber was made of wood.

:lolplac:

Zyklon B tested on humans



:)




:lolplac: Flare's great evidence that Zyklon-B won't kill humans, because someone made a bogus home video.

Even though it's proved to be HCN, and HCN is proved to be deadly to humans, the boy's an utter tool, and throws up some dodgy video of who knows what as evidence for his bogus claim.
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 30 Jul 2019 12:46 #3476

  • annabelle
  • annabelle's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Silver Member
  • Posts: 2361
  • Likes received: 1630
Let’s move on to the next set of clips where Dr. Lipstadt makes false accusations and false factual claims. First, here is what she claims British historian David Irving thinks about the fate of the Jews during the Nazi era:

And the Jews, whatever happened to them, they sort of deserved it.

I don’t think Irving ever said anything remotely like it.

He merely raised the question that maybe the Jews should ask themselves why, for the past 2,000 years, they have been consistently thrown out of one country after another.

As provocative as that question may seem, Irving never gave an answer to it, and he certainly never said they deserved “it,” whatever “it” may be in each case.

But let me try to give an answer to Irving’s question. I will limit myself to one of the root causes of National Socialist anti-Semitism, and I’ll quote Jews, because when it comes to these issues, most of us Gentiles never believe anything a Gentile says anyway. It must come from a Jew to be acceptable, right? That tells you a lot about the world we live in.

Already in 1924, a group of Jewish intellectuals wrote the following prophetic words, quote:

“The overly ambitious participation of the Jewish Bolsheviks in the subjugation and destruction of Russia is a sin that already contains a revenge within itself. […] All nations and all people will be flooded by waves of judeophobia. Never before have such storm clouds gathered above the heads of the Jewish people.” Unquote

That was while Hitler was in jail for treason, and nine years before he rose to power.

Here is another, more recent quote in the same vein by a certain Jerry Muller, taken from an article of his published in the Jewish periodical Commentary. Muller discussed the issues of Jewish involvement in communism, and concluded his essay in a similar fashion; quote:

“The Trotskys make the revolution [that is to say, including the communist atrocities] and the Bronsteins pay the bills” in the Holocaust.

So, Irving’s question has in fact been addressed by some Jews, and the results have been published somewhat prominently. It’s just that certain other Jews like Lipstadt won’t face that issue, because it is highly embarrassing and dulls Jewry’s sword and shield, the Holocaust.

Now to Lipstadt’s next false statement about what Irving allegedly claims.

And what is that version? There was no plan to murder the Jews. There were no gas chambers. There were no mass shootings. Hitler had nothing to do with any suffering that went on. And the Jews have made this all up to get money from Germany and to get a state. And they’ve done it with the aid and abbetance of the Allies. They’ve planted the documents and planted the evidence.

Fact is, however, that Irving never said there were no mass shootings. Not even the most radical revisionist claims that there were no mass shootings. The guerilla warfare in the east was extremely brutal and entailed lots of mass shootings – of partisans, collaborators, and normal civilians as reprisal, to name only a few reasons.

It also makes no sense to state that Hitler had nothing to do with any suffering. There is no denying that Jews suffered under Hitler and because of his politics; you don’t need gas chambers to inflict sufferings, you know.

Furthermore, neither Irving nor any serious revisionist has ever claimed that “the Jews made it all up” – again, whatever “it” may be in this context. Even mainstream historians have admitted on many occasions that certain claims were indeed made up, but not necessarily by Jews. It’s called wartime atrocity propaganda. The question is: what part of the narrative is true, and what part is propaganda. Finally, no one has ever claimed that anyone planted all the evidence. What evidence are we talking about anyway? The physical evidence that doesn’t exist to begin with and that no one ever bothered looking for?

Now to the next clip:

We proved that what he said happened, and by extension all deniers, because he either quotes them, or they get their arguments from him, is not true. What they claim, they don’t have the evidence to prove it.

That is the old lie of revisionists having no evidence for their claims, and that they therefore engage in, quote- “incestuous citation cartels” unquote, where they support their claims merely by quoting each other in turn. It’s a lie, plain and simple.

To prove it in the present case, I have done my homework. First, I have searched the books by Carlo Mattogno, the most prolific revisionist writer. Here is what I found out about Mattogno referring to David Irving: In 20 English-language books written or coauthored by him so far, Irving is mentioned in only 8 out of 11,887 footnotes.

Among those 8, 5 are not even Mattogno’s footnotes, but footnotes of his co-authors. Not a single one of Irving’s writings can be found in any of Mattogno’s bibliographies. Not ONE! On the other hand, David Irving admitted to me personally that he has never even read a revisionist book, let alone quoted it! Not paying attention to what others in the field are writing is one of Irving’s major flaws.

When Lipstadt talks about having shown in court that the deniers are wrong, she primarily refers to her expert witness on Auschwitz – Robert van Pelt. But van Pelt did not refute revisionism.

Revisionism wasn’t on trial in London. David Irving’s views were scrutinized. But Irving has never written a single article on the Holocaust, let alone a monograph. He is not an expert in the field. So, refuting him, if that’s really what happened in London, doesn’t equate refuting the quote-unquote “deniers.” Van Pelt may have addressed some aspects of revisionist’s claims about the Holocaust, but he never addressed anything major revisionists have written about it.

In fact, with a major rebuttal of van Pelt’s writings, we revisionists refuted him.

Here is a picture of the 2015 edition of Mattogno’s 760-page volume The Real Case for Auschwitz, the first edition of which appeared already in 2010.

If Lipstadt were a scholar, she would be aware of it and would be more careful with her claims. This book is packed with references to primary source material from various archives around the world – and not a single reference to anything of what Irving has written.

The next set of brief clips reveals Dr. Lipstadt’s anti-intellectual mindset:

Many of us have been taught the thing: there are facts and there are opinions. After studying deniers, I think differently. There are facts, there are opinions, and there are lies. And what deniers want to do, is take their lies, dress them up as opinions – maybe edgy opinions, maybe sort of out-of-the-box opinions. But then, if they are opinions, they should be part of the conversation. And then, they encroach on the facts.

That needs explanation. In her book Denying the Holocaust, Lipstadt has developed the hypothesis that anything claiming to be an opinion has to be based on undeniable facts. If that is not so, she denies it the status of an opinion, and thus the right to be heard.

Censorship of non-opinions is therefore perfectly alright, according to her.

The question is, of course, who defines what counts as an undeniable fact? A government Ministry of Truth? Or maybe Dr. Lipstadt herself?

To get to the core of this, we again need to define our terms. So, bear with me for a few moments. First of all, a fact is a true statement about reality. How do we know it is true? Well, fact is that we can never be absolute certain, but… we can gain a very high probability of certainty for our views by exposing them to attempts at refutation. That is called the critical, scientific method. If even the toughest attempts at refuting a claim fail, we can be rather certain that our claim is true. If those refutations succeed, however, we’re back to square one and have to start over.

It is plainly obvious from all her writings and speeches that Dr. Lipstadt does not want the mainstream Holocaust narrative to be exposed to critical scrutiny and attempts at refutation.

Quite to the contrary, she wants to protect it from all skeptical eyes. However, this attitude is profoundly anti-academic, anti-intellectual, anti-scholarly, and anti-scientific. It is exactly the hallmark of a dogmatist whose world view can be maintained only by declaring it a taboo, and by arrogantly dismissing any dissident as not worthy of recognition, let alone debate.

Here is her next clip proving my point:

…where we were taught, everything is open to debate. But that’s not the case! There are certain things that are true! There are indisputable facts! Objective truths! Galileo taught it to us centuries ago. Even after being forced to recant by the Vatican that the earth moves around the sun, he came out, and what is he reported to have said? ‘And yet, it still moves!’

Did you notice something? She actually got it all upside down, because if anyone can be compared to Galileo and the fate he had to suffer, it’s the revisionists, not Dr. Lipstadt and her oppressive ilk.

Her philosophy of certain undeniable truths that are not open to debate is also profoundly flawed.

In an article by her printed on April 19, 1983, on page five of the Los Angeles Times, she revived the claim that 1.7 million inmates had died at the Majdanek Camp, even though that figure had been exposed as vastly exaggerated wartime propaganda already in the late 1940s by the Poles themselves.

Next, in her 1986 book Beyond Belief, she wrote on page 262 that the claims made by the Soviets about Auschwitz at war’s end were “essentially correct”, and then she repeated the false four-million death toll claim, which had been denounced as wrong by many Jewish mainstream historians for decades, yet Dr. Lipstadt still bandied it about as “truth” in the mid-1980s.

Considering all this, it is beyond ridiculous, nay, it is idiotic for anyone to claim that the orthodox narrative of this complex set of historical events called the Holocaust, which spanned an entire continent, lasted some 4 years, and affected the fate of millions of people, and which is indubitably steeped in wartime propaganda, is absolutely beyond debate.

As a matter of fact, precisely the opposite is true: exactly because the orthodox Holocaust narrative is the only topic that is protected by a worldwide taboo, and also by penal law in many countries, it needs and deserves the most intense skeptical scrutiny by scholars and lay persons alike.

From all this we can conclude with certainty that those who are avoiding an open debate on the orthodox Holocaust narrative either have something to hide or a lot to lose – or probably both.

Now to a few points where Dr. Lipstadt and I actually agree.

We cannot be beguiled by rational appearances. We’ve got to look underneath, and we will find there the extremism.

Well, I totally agree with her there. Of course, that applies to everyone. So let’s not be beguiled by Lipstadt’s rational appearance and let’s look beneath the upper varnish. Here is what I have found, written down in my recent analysis of Lipstadt’s Denying the Holocaust:

After what I have exposed during this presentation, it should not surprise you anymore that Lipstadt exhibits the same kind of dogmatic, anti-intellectual attitude in her book as she does in her speeches.

In fact, it appears that Dr. Lipstadt – how did she get that academic degree? – that she has not even understood the principles and methods of science and scholarship – or at least she doesn’t apply them.

While I am not a trained historian myself, I was struck by her superficial knowledge of the historical issues involved.

Next, I found that she misquotes her sources, relies on faulty translations, and misrepresents and misinterprets the evidence she adduces.

In addition, throughout her book she makes a lot of claims she doesn’t back up with any sources, and many of the sources she does quote are considered unquotable by serious scholars.

Even though she claims that we revisionists don’t recognized general standards of evidence, she is the one who puts so-called survivor stories at the top of what she considers reliable.

One of the most important rules of scholarship is that you deal with factual arguments and strictly abstain from personal attacks, but her book is mainly an exercise in demonizing individuals she disagrees with.

All this taken together makes it very clear that scholarship and reason are not at the top of her agenda. In fact, trying to get to the truth of the matters involved is evidently the opposite of what she is trying to achieve. She wants to prevent people from digging for the truth and to uncritically accept her version of history as indisputable truth.

What she has said about us revisionists therefore hits her like a boomerang: Her book is an exercise in anti-intellectual pseudo-scientific arguments, an exhibition of ideological radicalism that rejects anything which contradicts its preset conclusions.

Now listen to another clip from her speech that I find rather revealing:

I’m reminded of a New Yorker cartoon, a quiz show, recently appeared in the New Yorker, where the host of the quiz show is saying to one of the contestants: ‘Yes, ma’am, you had the right answer, but your opponent yelled more loudly than you did, so he gets the point.’

Again she turns the truth upside down. While those peddling the orthodox Holocaust narrative have all the funding and publishing venues of the world at their disposal, we revisionists get censored and muted everywhere:

governments persecute, prosecute, fine and imprison us, eBay and Amazon ban our books, YouTube regularly blocks our videos Google censors their search results to exclude or downgrade our websites; credit card processing companies refuse to deal with revisionist outlets; PayPal closes any account used for, quote, “denial” activities; and so do other banks on occasion. Internet service providers delete our websites, and in some cases, the phone companies owning the internet backbone deny our servers any access to the internet.

The list could go on, but you get the picture. Not the revisionists screaming at the top of their lungs to drown out the truth and to get their flawed message across. There is no other group of people on this planet who are so successfully gagged and muzzled as we are. Dr. Lipstadt is the individual with the highest profile among those arguing to censor us and to deny us any right to be heard. But what is freedom of speech worth, if there is a lobby so powerful that they can make sure nobody hears us? Their power to put just about anyone under pressure is incredible.

What does that teach us? Well, if you want to know who controls your country, find out whom you cannot criticize or disagree with without having to deal with career- or life-destroying retaliation. Hence the shoe is on the other foot, Dr. Lipstadt: Yes, we revisionists are right, but the Lobby screams the loudest, so they get all the points.

Now to the next clip where Dr. Lipstadt says somethings that’s very true:

When someone makes an outrageous claim, even though they may hold one of the highest offices in the land, if not the world, we must say to them: Where is the proof? Where is the evidence? We must hold their feet to the fire!

Yeah!!! That’s exactly what we revisionists have been saying and doing all along. We have been asking those in power, and those who have spread powerful messages with the help of those in power. They did spread outrageous claims about mass-murder chambers operated with

* high voltage,

* with steam,

* with vacuum,

* or with chlorine

* with Zyklon B,

* with diesel exhaust,

* or with bottled carbon monoxide

Together with Dr. Lipstadt, we ask:

* Where is the proof for these homicidal gas chambers?

* Where is the evidence for one single gassed inmate?

We ask those making outrageous claims about mass graves:

* Where are they located?

* How big are they?

* How many corpses did or do they contain?

* What was their cause and time of death?

* What is the identity of the victims?

* Can it be determined with certainty who the perpetrators were?

Contrary to what many think, this is not trivial at all, in particular when talking about the territory of the former Soviet Union.

In a land where millions were killed by communist atrocities prior to the war, where millions more died during the war of many causes, and where millions died during the postwar purges and ongoing communist atrocities, how can we be certain that a mass grave located in the former Soviet Union contains victims of German atrocities, rather than victims of any of the other tragedies?

In addition, we also ask those making outrageous claims about mass cremations of thousands of corpses every day:

* How was that possible, technically speaking, be it in crematories or on pyres?

* And where are the traces of those cremated?

And to be absolutely clear: Just because a powerful person claims something, that doesn’t make it true. In fact, we can generalize that statement: Just because any person claims anything, that doesn’t make it true either. It doesn’t matter whether that person is the President of the United States or a Holocaust survivor. A claim is not evidence. It requires evidence before it can be accepted as true.

Now to the last two clips, which I’ve merged together. Here, Dr. Lipstadt tries to be funny, but strictly speaking, it backfires on her. Here she goes:

Holocaust denial? The flat-earth folks? The Elvis-is-alive people? I should study them? […]

The earth is not flat! The climate is changing! Elvis is not alive! And most importantly: truth and fact are under assault!


And I can add here that pigs cannot fly, and that’s where things backfire on her:

* corpses don’t burn fast and by themselves, as has been claimed by “survivors”

* mass graves don’t disappear tracelessly, as is also one of the standard stories told about the Holocaust

* or consider the claim that corpses were burned in deep trenches in a swampy area – not possible

* diesel exhaust is unsuited for mass murder, because killing with it takes hours at best, or worst, rather.

* Zyklon B leaves tell-tale traces in masonry, but we don’t find them in the walls of the buildings at Auschwitz where mass gassings are said to have been carried out.

* You cannot squeeze 20 people onto 10 square feet, as several witnesses have claimed

* or 25 corpses into a cubic meter, as some want to make us believe in order to make the claimed death toll of the so-called extermination camps fit to the limited volume of disturbed soil found there.

* Or take the claim by some “survivor” that mass graves squirted blood geysers.

I could go on for hours telling stories like this.

What I am getting at is the following: The orthodox Holocaust narrative is full of logically, physically, and technically impossible or untrue claims. Hence, the shoe is once more on the other foot. It is true that revisionists deny some aspects of the orthodox narrative, but Lipstadt and her ilk are evidence deniers, fact deniers, logic deniers, you name it.

So, with all her dodging the facts and demonizing her opponents, the question is What are you afraid of, Deborah debate-denier Lipstadt?

codoh.com/library/document/4637/
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Flare, Lux Interior

The Holocaust 30 Jul 2019 12:53 #3477

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 17079
  • Likes received: 1801
Frothy wrote:
Flare wrote:
Frothy wrote:
Flare wrote:
Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]


So what?

ZyklonB was an insecticide, which couldn't be used for homocidal, let alone genocidal gassings anyway.

So it comes as no surprise that the door at the delousing chamber was made of wood.

:lolplac:

Zyklon B tested on humans



:)




:lolplac: Flare's great evidence that Zyklon-B won't kill humans, because someone made a bogus home video.

Even though it's proved to be HCN, and HCN is proved to be deadly to humans, the boy's an utter tool, and throws up some dodgy video of who knows what as evidence for his bogus claim.

I don't even know why I entertain Flare's idiotic notion that Zyklon-B won't kill humans, but those granules in that home video that he posted are white, Zyklon-B is blue granules, so even at idiot level, it truly is idiotic.
Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 30 Jul 2019 14:09 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 30 Jul 2019 13:16 #3478

  • Frothy
  • Frothy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • True life is elsewhere
  • Posts: 17079
  • Likes received: 1801
Hydrogen cyanide, also called formonitrile (HCN), a highly volatile, colourless, and extremely poisonous liquid (boiling point 26° C [79° F], freezing point -14° C [7° F]). A solution of hydrogen cyanide in water is called hydrocyanic acid, or prussic acid. It was discovered in 1782 by a Swedish chemist, Carl Wilhelm Scheele, who prepared it from the pigment Prussian blue. Hydrogen cyanide and its compounds are used for many chemical processes, including fumigation, the case hardening of iron and steel, electroplating, and the concentration of ores. It also is employed in the preparation of acrylonitrile, which is used in the production of acrylic fibres, synthetic rubber, and plastics.

Hydrogen cyanide is highly toxic because it inhibits cellular oxidative processes. An adult human can withstand 50–60 parts of hydrogen cyanide per million parts of air for an hour without serious consequences, but exposure to concentrations of 200–500 parts per million of air for 30 minutes is usually fatal.A method of inflicting capital punishment consists of administering a fatal dose of hydrogen cyanide gas.
www.britannica.com/science/hydrogen-cyanide


I guess next Flare is going to argue that Zyklon-B isn't a brand name for granulated Hydrogen cyanide, rather it's just shower crystals to keep the Jews nice and fresh smelling :chuckle:

lol at Flare's version of 'holocaust revisionism' there must be a special group for extra specially retarded holocaust deniers that he's joined.

Once a hyena always a hyena.
Last Edit: 30 Jul 2019 13:28 by Frothy.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

The Holocaust 19 Aug 2019 17:20 #3479

  • Lux Interior
  • Lux Interior's Avatar
  • Online
  • Silver Member
  • Do you know de way?
  • Posts: 3629
  • Likes received: 1097
Hahaha, the duty clown retard still flagellating himself with the holohoax stick. Yay Frothy spazza!
Tragicomedy at its finest.
liberabo te ab inferno

875 020 079

Keep an eye on the media and their shills, know their duplicity.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Gaia

The Holocaust 24 Aug 2019 08:22 #3480

  • Flare
  • Flare's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 14637
  • Likes received: 5649


Israeli Holocaust Museum – There’s no Physical Evidence of the Holocaust


August 23, 2019 renegade



Ephraim Kaye, a director at Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum in Israel confirms there’s no physical evidence of the holocaust.






Bitchute link
Last Edit: 24 Aug 2019 08:24 by Flare.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Related topics

Topic subjectRelevanceDate of latest post
The Holocaust: What A LIE!5.22Monday, 06 January 2020
MH17 & The Holocaust5.16Wednesday, 23 March 2016
[excerpt of] The Holocaust5.16Sunday, 16 October 2016
Holocaust Deniers: Why Would They Lie.5.16Monday, 12 October 2015
why can't anyone talk about the holocaust?5.16Sunday, 26 March 2017
21 more questions regarding the holocaust5.16Saturday, 03 February 2018
No Nazi was ever a holocaust denier5.1Sunday, 20 November 2016
The Holocaust Issue Settled.5.1Tuesday, 04 July 2017
How Holocaust Denial Works5.1Saturday, 13 January 2018
The Holocaust Cult, Revisited.5.1Saturday, 13 August 2016
Moderators: novum, rodin, Flare
Powered by Kunena Forum

Annual Server Target

Whether its 50 cents or five dollars, your donations are appreciated and help keep this community site running so we can all continue to enjoy using it. Secure transactions via paypal.
This target is to meet our server cost for one year, June 2019 - May 2020, in USD.
$ 340 - Target
( £ 260 GBP )
donation thermometer
donation thermometer
$ 210 - Raised
( £ 160 GBP )
donation thermometer
62%
Updated
6th January 2020

No one is obliged to donate, please only donate what you can afford. Even the smallest amount helps. Being an active member is a positive contribution. Thank You.