Was the Holocaust... a lie?
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-03-2012, 04:03 PM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
Mr. Froze out his brain in the arctic, and is no sage :

Yep, it's all a lie.
Well, no, actually it's 93.2358685412 % truth only, (since that sort of thing IS important ya know).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2MsBqlNzDk

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
23-03-2012, 04:26 PM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
(23-03-2012 04:03 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Mr. Froze out his brain in the arctic, and is no sage :

Yep, it's all a lie.
Well, no, actually it's 93.2358685412 % truth only, (since that sort of thing IS important ya know).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2MsBqlNzDk

Yeah... I could show you a bunch of Africans with tuberculosis and you wouldn't say they were being mass-murdered. Though Tuberculosis was a disease found in the camps the most common was Typhus.
Find all posts by this user
23-03-2012, 05:53 PM (This post was last modified: 23-03-2012 06:05 PM by cufflink.)
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
(22-03-2012 02:52 PM)TheArcticSage Wrote:  I don't think questioning anything is taboo, I think taboos are gay . . .

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?


(17-03-2012 05:11 PM)morondog Wrote:  zombie thread will not die.

My sentiments exactly.

I've been away for a while; I come back and this wretched thread is still going strong. Wish someone would drive a stake through its heart (or does that only work on vampires?).

The Holocaust is the most extensively documented event in recent world history. Holocaust denial is like the denial of evolution: it's not based on evidence but rather on a desire to support a certain "ism" at all costs. In the case of evolution the "ism" is religious fundamentalism; in the case of the Holocaust it's anti-Semitism. The OP positions himself as a seeker after truth, an iconoclast, a destroyer of taboos. What's abundantly evident from his posts is that he is nothing more than a classic anti-Semite . . . and apparently a homophobe as well.

This thread is an embarrassment and unworthy of further expansion. It brings down the whole tone of TTA.

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 4 users Like cufflink's post
23-03-2012, 06:31 PM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
Staking only works on vampires.

o be sure a zombie is truly dead you must completely destroy the body and the brain.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
23-03-2012, 07:21 PM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
(23-03-2012 05:53 PM)cufflink Wrote:  My sentiments exactly.

I've been away for a while; I come back and this wretched thread is still going strong. Wish someone would drive a stake through its heart (or does that only work on vampires?).

The Holocaust is the most extensively documented event in recent world history. Holocaust denial is like the denial of evolution: it's not based on evidence but rather on a desire to support a certain "ism" at all costs. In the case of evolution the "ism" is religious fundamentalism; in the case of the Holocaust it's anti-Semitism. The OP positions himself as a seeker after truth, an iconoclast, a destroyer of taboos. What's abundantly evident from his posts is that he is nothing more than a classic anti-Semite . . . and apparently a homophobe as well.

This thread is an embarrassment and unworthy of further expansion. It brings down the whole tone of TTA.

Right, questioning the holocaust means I'm ant-semitic. Did I make a few mistakes in my original post? Yes I did, I failed to classify when I said 'jews' I didn't mean all the jews, but rather a few people who so happen to be jewish. But it's easier just to say 'The Jews' and not 'A Few People Who Are Working Together For Profit Who Also Just Happen To Be Jewish'. I didn't think anyone would actually think I was talking about all the Jews. My bad, I'm sorry.

I don't even know where you got the idea that I was a homophobe. We are all seekers of the truth, the only thing we must be careful of is to make sure we don't corrupt our judgments by giving the truth we want to believe in more value against the truth we don't want. Now then this thread wasn't supposed to be a place where you come to insult the person who has a different truth than you do.
Find all posts by this user
12-04-2012, 03:20 PM (This post was last modified: 12-04-2012 04:02 PM by spookiewon.)
Exclamation RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
(09-03-2012 07:39 AM)TheArcticSage Wrote:  The Holocaust was relatively low on my list of things to eventually inquiry... that was until I found out in the European Union you'll be sent to prison for up to 3 years for merely questioning the holocaust. That sent the alarm and caused me to wave the red flags in my brain, surely something as 'irrefutable' as the holocaust didn't warrant such a penalty?

I had always been worried about how little scientific evidence there was to support the holocaust, I mean something that would really bind the holocaust actually happening. Like testing for Cyanide in the supposed gas chambers... eventually one scientist did test for cyanide. Keeping it secret to avoid tampering with, the result was that no traces of cyanide were found except for in a small gas chamber. Oh yes, there were gas chambers, used to delouse clothing brought into the camps to kill lice and prevent epidemics of Typhus.

Another interesting thing about the holocaust is that they claimed that the bodies of those 'gassed' were cremated in crematoriums, which they said it took about 20 minutes to fully incinerate the body. When in reality it takes a few HOURS to do it with a Modern Crematorium... this was 70 years ago.

The Jews even in the holocaust story were originally going to be deported from Nazi Europe. The only question was where? The answer is relatively simple, the Jews would've been deported to Palestine once the Nazi's conquered it. But they never did conquer the then British controlled state, and so the Jews remained in the camps so close to a zionist movement... but the Jewish state of Israel DID come to fruition despite the Nazi failure to deport them. The reason being that the Nazi's actually lied about deporting Jews and actually mass murdered them in the camps, and now all these Jews without home nor country needed a new place to go.

The problem with that is now the ENTIRE state of Israel DEPENDS on people believing in the Holocaust for it's very existence. Without it, the support for their nation would be severely undermined (and the U.S. gives tons of support for Israel). So in order to silence dissent, they made it illegal to question the holocaust. They bribed, or threatened the EU I don't know how they did it, to make it illegal. Thank goodness Americans value their freedoms so much... otherwise I would be in jail right now.

For not only is questioning the holocaust illegal in Europe, but denying it ever happened is also illegal. Your thoughts on this?
The holocaust isn't about jews or Israel, it's about hatred of the different. The Nazis didn't just round up jews, they also rounded up gays, jehovah's witnesses, atheists and other free-thinkers, and the physically and mentally disabled, in addition to jews. There is no credible evidence it was a hoax. In fact, the nazis kept meticulous records, and have, in actuality, proved it themselves beyond any doubt.

I oppose laws that inhibit free speech, because I think the answer to bad speech is more speech, but not only do I believe the holocaust happened, I think to deny it is to deny reason. As a member of several of the groups the Nazis targeted I find it incomprehensible that anyone could believe it didn't happen.

I also caution care in getting too smug about America's so-called "freedom." We are well down the road to a closed and repressive society ourselves. There are ten steps every society that has ever become closed society takes in becoming repressive. Not only did Hitler's Germany take these steps, time and again they have been used to shut down the freedoms of an open society. They are:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy

After we were hit on September 11 2001, we were in a state of national shock. Less than six weeks later, on October 26 2001, the USA Patriot Act was passed by a Congress that had little chance to debate it; many said that they scarcely had time to read it. We were told we were now on a "war footing"; we were in a "global war" against a "global caliphate" intending to "wipe out civilisation". There have been other times of crisis in which the US accepted limits on civil liberties, such as during the civil war, when Lincoln declared martial law, and the second world war, when thousands of Japanese-American citizens were interned. But this situation, as Bruce Fein of the American Freedom Agenda has noted, is unprecedented: all our other wars had an endpoint, so the pendulum was able to swing back toward freedom; this war is defined as open-ended in time and without national boundaries in space - the globe itself is the battlefield. "This time," Fein says, "there will be no defined end."

Creating a terrifying threat - hydra-like, secretive, evil - is an old trick. It can, like Hitler's invocation of a communist threat to the nation's security, be based on actual events (one Wisconsin academic has faced calls for his dismissal because he noted, among other things, that the alleged communist arson, the Reichstag fire of February 1933, was swiftly followed in Nazi Germany by passage of the Enabling Act, which replaced constitutional law with an open-ended state of emergency). Or the terrifying threat can be based, like the National Socialist evocation of the "global conspiracy of world Jewry", on myth.

It is not that global Islamist terrorism is not a severe danger; of course it is. I am arguing rather that the language used to convey the nature of the threat is different in a country such as Spain - which has also suffered violent terrorist attacks - than it is in America. Spanish citizens know that they face a grave security threat; what we as American citizens believe is that we are potentially threatened with the end of civilisation as we know it. Of course, this makes us more willing to accept restrictions on our freedoms.

2 Create a gulag

Once you have got everyone scared, the next step is to create a prison system outside the rule of law (as Bush put it, he wanted the American detention centre at Guantánamo Bay to be situated in legal "outer space") - where torture takes place.

At first, the people who are sent there are seen by citizens as outsiders: troublemakers, spies, "enemies of the people" or "criminals". Initially, citizens tend to support the secret prison system; it makes them feel safer and they do not identify with the prisoners. But soon enough, civil society leaders - opposition members, labour activists, clergy and journalists - are arrested and sent there as well.

This process took place in fascist shifts or anti-democracy crackdowns ranging from Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s to the Latin American coups of the 1970s and beyond. It is standard practice for closing down an open society or crushing a pro-democracy uprising.

With its jails in Iraq and Afghanistan, and, of course, Guantánamo in Cuba, where detainees are abused, and kept indefinitely without trial and without access to the due process of the law, America certainly has its gulag now. Bush and his allies in Congress recently announced they would issue no information about the secret CIA "black site" prisons throughout the world, which are used to incarcerate people who have been seized off the street.

Gulags in history tend to metastasize, becoming ever larger and more secretive, ever more deadly and formalized. We know from first-hand accounts, photographs, videos and government documents that people, innocent and guilty, have been tortured in the US-run prisons we are aware of and those we can't investigate adequately.

But Americans still assume this system and detainee abuses involve only scary brown people with whom they don't generally identify. It was brave of the conservative pundit William Safire to quote the anti-Nazi pastor Martin Niemöller, who had been seized as a political prisoner: "First they came for the Jews." Most Americans don't understand yet that the destruction of the rule of law at Guantánamo set a dangerous precedent for them, too.

By the way, the establishment of military tribunals that deny prisoners due process tends to come early on in a fascist shift. Mussolini and Stalin set up such tribunals. On April 24 1934, the Nazis, too, set up the People's Court, which also bypassed the judicial system: prisoners were held indefinitely, often in isolation, and tortured, without being charged with offenses, and were subjected to show trials. Eventually, the Special Courts became a parallel system that put pressure on the regular courts to abandon the rule of law in favor of Nazi ideology when making decisions.

3 Develop a thug caste

When leaders who seek what I call a "fascist shift" want to close down an open society, they send paramilitary groups of scary young men out to terrorise citizens. The Blackshirts roamed the Italian countryside beating up communists; the Brownshirts staged violent rallies throughout Germany. This paramilitary force is especially important in a democracy: you need citizens to fear thug violence and so you need thugs who are free from prosecution.

The years following 9/11 have proved a bonanza for America's security contractors, with the Bush administration outsourcing areas of work that traditionally fell to the US military. In the process, contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars have been issued for security work by mercenaries at home and abroad. In Iraq, some of these contract operatives have been accused of involvement in torturing prisoners, harassing journalists and firing on Iraqi civilians. Under Order 17, issued to regulate contractors in Iraq by the one-time US administrator in Baghdad, Paul Bremer, these contractors are immune from prosecution

Yes, but that is in Iraq, you could argue; however, after Hurricane Katrina, the Department of Homeland Security hired and deployed hundreds of armed private security guards in New Orleans. The investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill interviewed one unnamed guard who reported having fired on unarmed civilians in the city. It was a natural disaster that underlay that episode - but the administration's endless war on terror means ongoing scope for what are in effect privately contracted armies to take on crisis and emergency management at home in US cities.

Thugs in America? Groups of angry young Republican men, dressed in identical shirts and trousers, menaced poll workers counting the votes in Florida in 2000. If you are reading history, you can imagine that there can be a need for "public order" on the next election day. Say there are protests, or a threat, on the day of an election; history would not rule out the presence of a private security firm at a polling station "to restore public order".

4 Set up an internal surveillance system

In Mussolini's Italy, in Nazi Germany, in communist East Germany, in communist China - in every closed society - secret police spy on ordinary people and encourage neighbors to spy on neighbors. The Stasi needed to keep only a minority of East Germans under surveillance to convince a majority that they themselves were being watched.

In 2005 and 2006, when James Risen and Eric Lichtblau wrote in the New York Times about a secret state program to wiretap citizens' phones, read their emails and follow international financial transactions, it became clear to ordinary Americans that they, too, could be under state scrutiny.

In closed societies, this surveillance is cast as being about "national security"; the true function is to keep citizens docile and inhibit their activism and dissent.

5 Harass citizens' groups

The fifth thing you do is related to step four - you infiltrate and harass citizens' groups. It can be trivial: a church in Pasadena, whose minister preached that Jesus was in favor of peace, found itself being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service, while churches that got Republicans out to vote, which is equally illegal under US tax law, have been left alone.

Other harassment is more serious: the American Civil Liberties Union reports that thousands of ordinary American anti-war, environmental and other groups have been infiltrated by agents: a secret Pentagon database includes more than four dozen peaceful anti-war meetings, rallies or marches by American citizens in its category of 1,500 "suspicious incidents". The equally secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (Cifa) agency of the Department of Defense has been gathering information about domestic organizations engaged in peaceful political activities: Cifa is supposed to track "potential terrorist threats" as it watches ordinary US citizen activists. A little-noticed new law has redefined activism such as animal rights protests as "terrorism". So the definition of "terrorist" slowly expands to include the opposition. [emphasis mine]

6 Engage in arbitrary detention and release

This scares people. It is a kind of cat-and-mouse game. Nicholas D Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn, the investigative reporters who wrote China Wakes: the Struggle for the Soul of a Rising Power, describe pro-democracy activists in China, such as Wei Jingsheng, being arrested and released many times. In a closing or closed society there is a "list" of dissidents and opposition leaders: you are targeted in this way once you are on the list, and it is hard to get off the list.

In 2004, America's Transportation Security Administration confirmed that it had a list of passengers who were targeted for security searches or worse if they tried to fly. People who have found themselves on the list? Two middle-aged women peace activists in San Francisco; liberal Senator Edward Kennedy; a member of Venezuela's government - after Venezuela's president had criticized Bush; and thousands of ordinary US citizens. [emphasis mine]

Professor Walter F Murphy is emeritus of Princeton University; he is one of the foremost constitutional scholars in the nation and author of the classic Constitutional Democracy. Murphy is also a decorated former marine, and he is not even especially politically liberal. But on March 1 this year, he was denied a boarding pass at Newark, "because I was on the Terrorist Watch list".

"Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that," asked the airline employee.

"I explained," said Murphy, "that I had not so marched but had, in September 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the constitution."

"That'll do it," the man said.

Anti-war marcher? Potential terrorist. Support the constitution? Potential terrorist. History shows that the categories of "enemy of the people" tend to expand ever deeper into civil life.

James Yee, a US citizen, was the Muslim chaplain at Guantánamo who was accused of mishandling classified documents. He was harassed by the US military before the charges against him were dropped. Yee has been detained and released several times. He is still of interest.

Brandon Mayfield, a US citizen and lawyer in Oregon, was mistakenly identified as a possible terrorist. His house was secretly broken into and his computer seized. Though he is innocent of the accusation against him, he is still on the list.

It is a standard practice of fascist societies that once you are on the list, you can't get off. [emphasis mine]

7 Target key individuals

Threaten civil servants, artists and academics with job loss if they don't toe the line. Mussolini went after the rectors of state universities who did not conform to the fascist line; so did Joseph Goebbels, who purged academics who were not pro-Nazi; so did Chile's Augusto Pinochet; so does the Chinese communist Politburo in punishing pro-democracy students and professors.

Academe is a tinderbox of activism, so those seeking a fascist shift punish academics and students with professional loss if they do not "coordinate", in Goebbels' term, ideologically. Since civil servants are the sector of society most vulnerable to being fired by a given regime, they are also a group that fascists typically "coordinate" early on: the Reich Law for the Re-establishment of a Professional Civil Service was passed on April 7 1933.

Bush supporters in state legislatures in several states put pressure on regents at state universities to penalize or fire academics who have been critical of the administration. As for civil servants, the Bush administration has derailed the career of one military lawyer who spoke up for fair trials for detainees, while an administration official publicly intimidated the law firms that represent detainees pro bono by threatening to call for their major corporate clients to boycott them.

Elsewhere, a CIA contract worker who said in a closed blog that "waterboarding is torture" was stripped of the security clearance she needed in order to do her job.

Most recently, the administration purged eight US attorneys for what looks like insufficient political loyalty. When Goebbels purged the civil service in April 1933, attorneys were "coordinated" too, a step that eased the way of the increasingly brutal laws to follow.

8 Control the press

Italy in the 1920s, Germany in the 30s, East Germany in the 50s, Czechoslovakia in the 60s, the Latin American dictatorships in the 70s, China in the 80s and 90s - all dictatorships and would-be dictators target newspapers and journalists. They threaten and harass them in more open societies that they are seeking to close, and they arrest them and worse in societies that have been closed already.

The Committee to Protect Journalists says arrests of US journalists are at an all-time high: Josh Wolf (no relation), a blogger in San Francisco, has been put in jail for a year for refusing to turn over video of an anti-war demonstration; Homeland Security brought a criminal complaint against reporter Greg Palast, claiming he threatened "critical infrastructure" when he and a TV producer were filming victims of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. Palast had written a bestseller critical of the Bush administration.

Other reporters and writers have been punished in other ways. Joseph C Wilson accused Bush, in a New York Times op-ed, of leading the country to war on the basis of a false charge that Saddam Hussein had acquired yellowcake uranium in Niger. His wife, Valerie Plame, was outed as a CIA spy - a form of retaliation that ended her career.

Prosecution and job loss are nothing, though, compared with how the US is treating journalists seeking to cover the conflict in Iraq in an unbiased way. The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented multiple accounts of the US military in Iraq firing upon or threatening to fire upon unembedded (meaning independent) reporters and camera operators from organisations ranging from al-Jazeera to the BBC. While westerners may question the accounts by al-Jazeera, they should pay attention to the accounts of reporters such as the BBC's Kate Adie. In some cases reporters have been wounded or killed, including ITN's Terry Lloyd in 2003. Both CBS and the Associated Press in Iraq had staff members seized by the US military and taken to violent prisons; the news organisations were unable to see the evidence against their staffers.

Over time in closing societies, real news is supplanted by fake news and false documents. [emphasis mine] Pinochet showed Chilean citizens falsified documents to back up his claim that terrorists had been about to attack the nation. The yellowcake charge, too, was based on forged papers.

You won't have a shutdown of news in modern America - it is not possible. But you can have, as Frank Rich and Sidney Blumenthal have pointed out, a steady stream of lies polluting the news well. What you already have is a White House directing a stream of false information that is so relentless that it is increasingly hard to sort out truth from untruth. In a fascist system, it's not the lies that count but the muddying. When citizens can't tell real news from fake, they give up their demands for accountability bit by bit.

9 Dissent equals treason

Cast dissent as "treason" and criticism as "espionage'. Every closing society does this, just as it elaborates laws that increasingly criminalize certain kinds of speech and expand the definition of "spy" and "traitor". When Bill Keller, the publisher of the New York Times, ran the Lichtblau/Risen stories, Bush called the Times' leaking of classified information "disgraceful", while Republicans in Congress called for Keller to be charged with treason, and rightwing commentators and news outlets kept up the "treason" drumbeat. Some commentators, as Conason noted, reminded readers smugly that one penalty for violating the Espionage Act is execution.

Conason is right to note how serious a threat that attack represented. It is also important to recall that the 1938 Moscow show trial accused the editor of Izvestia, Nikolai Bukharin, of treason; Bukharin was, in fact, executed. And it is important to remind Americans that when the 1917 Espionage Act was last widely invoked, during the infamous 1919 Palmer Raids, leftist activists were arrested without warrants in sweeping roundups, kept in jail for up to five months, and "beaten, starved, suffocated, tortured and threatened with death", according to the historian Myra MacPherson. After that, dissent was muted in America for a decade.

In Stalin's Soviet Union, dissidents were "enemies of the people". National Socialists called those who supported Weimar democracy "November traitors".

And here is where the circle closes: most Americans do not realize that since September of last year - when Congress wrongly, foolishly, passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 - the president has the power to call any US citizen an "enemy combatant". He has the power to define what "enemy combatant" means. The president can also delegate to anyone he chooses in the executive branch the right to define "enemy combatant" any way he or she wants and then seize Americans accordingly. [emphasis mine]

Even if you or I are American citizens, even if we turn out to be completely innocent of what he has accused us of doing, he has the power to have us seized as we are changing planes at Newark tomorrow, or have us taken with a knock on the door; ship you or me to a navy brig; and keep you or me in isolation, possibly for months, while awaiting trial. (Prolonged isolation, as psychiatrists know, triggers psychosis in otherwise mentally healthy prisoners. That is why Stalin's gulag had an isolation cell, like Guantánamo's, in every satellite prison. Camp 6, the newest, most brutal facility at Guantánamo, is all isolation cells.)

We US citizens will get a trial eventually - for now. But legal rights activists at the Center for Constitutional Rights say that the Bush administration is trying increasingly aggressively to find ways to get around giving even US citizens fair trials. "Enemy combatant" is a status offense - it is not even something you have to have done. [emphasis mine] "We have absolutely moved over into a preventive detention model - you look like you could do something bad, you might do something bad, so we're going to hold you," says a spokeswoman of the CCR.

Most Americans surely do not get this yet. No wonder: it is hard to believe, even though it is true. In every closing society, at a certain point there are some high-profile arrests - usually of opposition leaders, clergy and journalists. Then everything goes quiet. After those arrests, there are still newspapers, courts, TV and radio, and the facades of a civil society. There just isn't real dissent. There just isn't freedom. If you look at history, just before those arrests is where we are now. [emphasis mine]

10 Suspend the rule of law

The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 gave the president new powers over the national guard. This means that in a national emergency - which the president now has enhanced powers to declare - he can send Michigan's militia to enforce a state of emergency that he has declared in Oregon, over the objections of the state's governor and its citizens.

Even as Americans were focused on Britney Spears's meltdown and the question of who fathered Anna Nicole's baby, the New York Times editorialized about this shift: "A disturbing recent phenomenon in Washington is that laws that strike to the heart of American democracy have been passed in the dead of night ... Beyond actual insurrection, the president may now use military troops as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, terrorist attack or any 'other condition'."

Critics see this as a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act - which was meant to restrain the federal government from using the military for domestic law enforcement. The Democratic senator Patrick Leahy says the bill encourages a president to declare federal martial law. It also violates the very reason the founders set up our system of government as they did: having seen citizens bullied by a monarch's soldiers, the founders were terrified of exactly this kind of concentration of militias' power over American people in the hands of an oppressive executive or faction.

---Naomi Wolfe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not only did the holocaust happen, it could happen again unless we stop it.
(10-03-2012 10:05 PM)TheArcticSage Wrote:  
(10-03-2012 09:47 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  Blood, Peterkin, Sol,

We have masses of evidence that the moon landings happened. Mountains of it. Yet I've never seen anyone react like this to a moon landing sceptic. The only reason I can conclude is that it is the sensitivity of the subject that makes everyone so hostile.

The flat Earth society don't get vilified like this and their claims are even more demonstrably false. Again, I can only conclude that it is the sensitivity of the subject that makes everyone so hostile.

Actually he's made several points about possibilities of malnutrition and disease killing people, not gas.

Engaging him would be to present evidence that gas was used.

My type of evidence, not dead jews, not photos, not eye-witness testimonies, not survivor accounts, not confessions.... my type of evidence is something else. Physical and forensic evidence. Such is a case in a murder trial.

Physical Evidence like this

Until you give me evidence which can contradict the above with the same kind of physical evidence I am simply declined to disagree with the holocaust ever happening. being that the holocaust is a plan to mass murder the Jews via gas.

When the above, which would provide physical evidence if one cared enough to investigate it for themselves contradicts all the eye-witness accounts, survivor accounts, and confessions because it's physical evidence. (doesn't really contradict any photos or dead jews laying around the camps.

This is what I would expect from a middle class murder trial, they go in, okay? look for forensics and physical evidence which would prove whether or not the suspect was innocent or guilty.

Seriously... it's not asking much... I want this kind of evidence. Not to mention that these tests should have been conducted by the prosecution and not the defense.

(10-03-2012 09:56 PM)Peterkin Wrote:  ... well that, and the fact that neither moon landing doubt nor flat earth assertion does anybody any harm, nor denies any victim the legitimacy of their grievance or acknowledgment of their suffering, nor tries to absolve perpetrators of a huge crime against humanity.

See now that's where you're doing something wrong, you're already assuming that there are are victims, grievers, and suffers of a huge crime against humanity. Without any physical evidence to back up the claim besides testimonies.

The link I've provided with this post provides physical evidence. That's the kind of evidence I want, you're saying they used gas chambers, they testing the gas chambers for residue of cyanide should undoubtedly adhere to your side right? There's a reason why I just brushed off the amonia or what ever it was removing traces of Zyklon B... that's because of what the above article mentions and even a scientific article about the effects of long term use of zyklon B SATURATING the walls through and through, you can't 'rub' it out.

The second thing you're doing is you're putting one ethnic group above all the other ethnic groups giving them more status... what's that called?
In a murder trial, eyewitness accounts would be considered excellent evidence.
Find all posts by this user
21-05-2012, 08:56 PM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
(12-04-2012 03:20 PM)spookiewon Wrote:  The holocaust isn't about jews or Israel, it's about hatred of the different. The Nazis didn't just round up jews, they also rounded up gays, jehovah's witnesses, atheists and other free-thinkers, and the physically and mentally disabled, in addition to jews. There is no credible evidence it was a hoax. In fact, the nazis kept meticulous records, and have, in actuality, proved it themselves beyond any doubt.

I oppose laws that inhibit free speech, because I think the answer to bad speech is more speech, but not only do I believe the holocaust happened, I think to deny it is to deny reason. As a member of several of the groups the Nazis targeted I find it incomprehensible that anyone could believe it didn't happen.

I also caution care in getting too smug about America's so-called "freedom." We are well down the road to a closed and repressive society ourselves. There are ten steps every society that has ever become closed society takes in becoming repressive. Not only did Hitler's Germany take these steps, time and again they have been used to shut down the freedoms of an open society. They are:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy

After we were hit on September 11 2001, we were in a state of national shock. Less than six weeks later, on October 26 2001, the USA Patriot Act was passed by a Congress that had little chance to debate it; many said that they scarcely had time to read it. We were told we were now on a "war footing"; we were in a "global war" against a "global caliphate" intending to "wipe out civilisation". There have been other times of crisis in which the US accepted limits on civil liberties, such as during the civil war, when Lincoln declared martial law, and the second world war, when thousands of Japanese-American citizens were interned. But this situation, as Bruce Fein of the American Freedom Agenda has noted, is unprecedented: all our other wars had an endpoint, so the pendulum was able to swing back toward freedom; this war is defined as open-ended in time and without national boundaries in space - the globe itself is the battlefield. "This time," Fein says, "there will be no defined end."

Creating a terrifying threat - hydra-like, secretive, evil - is an old trick. It can, like Hitler's invocation of a communist threat to the nation's security, be based on actual events (one Wisconsin academic has faced calls for his dismissal because he noted, among other things, that the alleged communist arson, the Reichstag fire of February 1933, was swiftly followed in Nazi Germany by passage of the Enabling Act, which replaced constitutional law with an open-ended state of emergency). Or the terrifying threat can be based, like the National Socialist evocation of the "global conspiracy of world Jewry", on myth.

It is not that global Islamist terrorism is not a severe danger; of course it is. I am arguing rather that the language used to convey the nature of the threat is different in a country such as Spain - which has also suffered violent terrorist attacks - than it is in America. Spanish citizens know that they face a grave security threat; what we as American citizens believe is that we are potentially threatened with the end of civilisation as we know it. Of course, this makes us more willing to accept restrictions on our freedoms.

2 Create a gulag

Once you have got everyone scared, the next step is to create a prison system outside the rule of law (as Bush put it, he wanted the American detention centre at Guantánamo Bay to be situated in legal "outer space") - where torture takes place.

At first, the people who are sent there are seen by citizens as outsiders: troublemakers, spies, "enemies of the people" or "criminals". Initially, citizens tend to support the secret prison system; it makes them feel safer and they do not identify with the prisoners. But soon enough, civil society leaders - opposition members, labour activists, clergy and journalists - are arrested and sent there as well.

This process took place in fascist shifts or anti-democracy crackdowns ranging from Italy and Germany in the 1920s and 1930s to the Latin American coups of the 1970s and beyond. It is standard practice for closing down an open society or crushing a pro-democracy uprising.

With its jails in Iraq and Afghanistan, and, of course, Guantánamo in Cuba, where detainees are abused, and kept indefinitely without trial and without access to the due process of the law, America certainly has its gulag now. Bush and his allies in Congress recently announced they would issue no information about the secret CIA "black site" prisons throughout the world, which are used to incarcerate people who have been seized off the street.

Gulags in history tend to metastasize, becoming ever larger and more secretive, ever more deadly and formalized. We know from first-hand accounts, photographs, videos and government documents that people, innocent and guilty, have been tortured in the US-run prisons we are aware of and those we can't investigate adequately.

But Americans still assume this system and detainee abuses involve only scary brown people with whom they don't generally identify. It was brave of the conservative pundit William Safire to quote the anti-Nazi pastor Martin Niemöller, who had been seized as a political prisoner: "First they came for the Jews." Most Americans don't understand yet that the destruction of the rule of law at Guantánamo set a dangerous precedent for them, too.

By the way, the establishment of military tribunals that deny prisoners due process tends to come early on in a fascist shift. Mussolini and Stalin set up such tribunals. On April 24 1934, the Nazis, too, set up the People's Court, which also bypassed the judicial system: prisoners were held indefinitely, often in isolation, and tortured, without being charged with offenses, and were subjected to show trials. Eventually, the Special Courts became a parallel system that put pressure on the regular courts to abandon the rule of law in favor of Nazi ideology when making decisions.

3 Develop a thug caste

When leaders who seek what I call a "fascist shift" want to close down an open society, they send paramilitary groups of scary young men out to terrorise citizens. The Blackshirts roamed the Italian countryside beating up communists; the Brownshirts staged violent rallies throughout Germany. This paramilitary force is especially important in a democracy: you need citizens to fear thug violence and so you need thugs who are free from prosecution.

The years following 9/11 have proved a bonanza for America's security contractors, with the Bush administration outsourcing areas of work that traditionally fell to the US military. In the process, contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars have been issued for security work by mercenaries at home and abroad. In Iraq, some of these contract operatives have been accused of involvement in torturing prisoners, harassing journalists and firing on Iraqi civilians. Under Order 17, issued to regulate contractors in Iraq by the one-time US administrator in Baghdad, Paul Bremer, these contractors are immune from prosecution

Yes, but that is in Iraq, you could argue; however, after Hurricane Katrina, the Department of Homeland Security hired and deployed hundreds of armed private security guards in New Orleans. The investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill interviewed one unnamed guard who reported having fired on unarmed civilians in the city. It was a natural disaster that underlay that episode - but the administration's endless war on terror means ongoing scope for what are in effect privately contracted armies to take on crisis and emergency management at home in US cities.

Thugs in America? Groups of angry young Republican men, dressed in identical shirts and trousers, menaced poll workers counting the votes in Florida in 2000. If you are reading history, you can imagine that there can be a need for "public order" on the next election day. Say there are protests, or a threat, on the day of an election; history would not rule out the presence of a private security firm at a polling station "to restore public order".

4 Set up an internal surveillance system

In Mussolini's Italy, in Nazi Germany, in communist East Germany, in communist China - in every closed society - secret police spy on ordinary people and encourage neighbors to spy on neighbors. The Stasi needed to keep only a minority of East Germans under surveillance to convince a majority that they themselves were being watched.

In 2005 and 2006, when James Risen and Eric Lichtblau wrote in the New York Times about a secret state program to wiretap citizens' phones, read their emails and follow international financial transactions, it became clear to ordinary Americans that they, too, could be under state scrutiny.

In closed societies, this surveillance is cast as being about "national security"; the true function is to keep citizens docile and inhibit their activism and dissent.

5 Harass citizens' groups

The fifth thing you do is related to step four - you infiltrate and harass citizens' groups. It can be trivial: a church in Pasadena, whose minister preached that Jesus was in favor of peace, found itself being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service, while churches that got Republicans out to vote, which is equally illegal under US tax law, have been left alone.

Other harassment is more serious: the American Civil Liberties Union reports that thousands of ordinary American anti-war, environmental and other groups have been infiltrated by agents: a secret Pentagon database includes more than four dozen peaceful anti-war meetings, rallies or marches by American citizens in its category of 1,500 "suspicious incidents". The equally secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (Cifa) agency of the Department of Defense has been gathering information about domestic organizations engaged in peaceful political activities: Cifa is supposed to track "potential terrorist threats" as it watches ordinary US citizen activists. A little-noticed new law has redefined activism such as animal rights protests as "terrorism". So the definition of "terrorist" slowly expands to include the opposition. [emphasis mine]

6 Engage in arbitrary detention and release

This scares people. It is a kind of cat-and-mouse game. Nicholas D Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn, the investigative reporters who wrote China Wakes: the Struggle for the Soul of a Rising Power, describe pro-democracy activists in China, such as Wei Jingsheng, being arrested and released many times. In a closing or closed society there is a "list" of dissidents and opposition leaders: you are targeted in this way once you are on the list, and it is hard to get off the list.

In 2004, America's Transportation Security Administration confirmed that it had a list of passengers who were targeted for security searches or worse if they tried to fly. People who have found themselves on the list? Two middle-aged women peace activists in San Francisco; liberal Senator Edward Kennedy; a member of Venezuela's government - after Venezuela's president had criticized Bush; and thousands of ordinary US citizens. [emphasis mine]

Professor Walter F Murphy is emeritus of Princeton University; he is one of the foremost constitutional scholars in the nation and author of the classic Constitutional Democracy. Murphy is also a decorated former marine, and he is not even especially politically liberal. But on March 1 this year, he was denied a boarding pass at Newark, "because I was on the Terrorist Watch list".

"Have you been in any peace marches? We ban a lot of people from flying because of that," asked the airline employee.

"I explained," said Murphy, "that I had not so marched but had, in September 2006, given a lecture at Princeton, televised and put on the web, highly critical of George Bush for his many violations of the constitution."

"That'll do it," the man said.

Anti-war marcher? Potential terrorist. Support the constitution? Potential terrorist. History shows that the categories of "enemy of the people" tend to expand ever deeper into civil life.

James Yee, a US citizen, was the Muslim chaplain at Guantánamo who was accused of mishandling classified documents. He was harassed by the US military before the charges against him were dropped. Yee has been detained and released several times. He is still of interest.

Brandon Mayfield, a US citizen and lawyer in Oregon, was mistakenly identified as a possible terrorist. His house was secretly broken into and his computer seized. Though he is innocent of the accusation against him, he is still on the list.

It is a standard practice of fascist societies that once you are on the list, you can't get off. [emphasis mine]

7 Target key individuals

Threaten civil servants, artists and academics with job loss if they don't toe the line. Mussolini went after the rectors of state universities who did not conform to the fascist line; so did Joseph Goebbels, who purged academics who were not pro-Nazi; so did Chile's Augusto Pinochet; so does the Chinese communist Politburo in punishing pro-democracy students and professors.

Academe is a tinderbox of activism, so those seeking a fascist shift punish academics and students with professional loss if they do not "coordinate", in Goebbels' term, ideologically. Since civil servants are the sector of society most vulnerable to being fired by a given regime, they are also a group that fascists typically "coordinate" early on: the Reich Law for the Re-establishment of a Professional Civil Service was passed on April 7 1933.

Bush supporters in state legislatures in several states put pressure on regents at state universities to penalize or fire academics who have been critical of the administration. As for civil servants, the Bush administration has derailed the career of one military lawyer who spoke up for fair trials for detainees, while an administration official publicly intimidated the law firms that represent detainees pro bono by threatening to call for their major corporate clients to boycott them.

Elsewhere, a CIA contract worker who said in a closed blog that "waterboarding is torture" was stripped of the security clearance she needed in order to do her job.

Most recently, the administration purged eight US attorneys for what looks like insufficient political loyalty. When Goebbels purged the civil service in April 1933, attorneys were "coordinated" too, a step that eased the way of the increasingly brutal laws to follow.

8 Control the press

Italy in the 1920s, Germany in the 30s, East Germany in the 50s, Czechoslovakia in the 60s, the Latin American dictatorships in the 70s, China in the 80s and 90s - all dictatorships and would-be dictators target newspapers and journalists. They threaten and harass them in more open societies that they are seeking to close, and they arrest them and worse in societies that have been closed already.

The Committee to Protect Journalists says arrests of US journalists are at an all-time high: Josh Wolf (no relation), a blogger in San Francisco, has been put in jail for a year for refusing to turn over video of an anti-war demonstration; Homeland Security brought a criminal complaint against reporter Greg Palast, claiming he threatened "critical infrastructure" when he and a TV producer were filming victims of Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana. Palast had written a bestseller critical of the Bush administration.

Other reporters and writers have been punished in other ways. Joseph C Wilson accused Bush, in a New York Times op-ed, of leading the country to war on the basis of a false charge that Saddam Hussein had acquired yellowcake uranium in Niger. His wife, Valerie Plame, was outed as a CIA spy - a form of retaliation that ended her career.

Prosecution and job loss are nothing, though, compared with how the US is treating journalists seeking to cover the conflict in Iraq in an unbiased way. The Committee to Protect Journalists has documented multiple accounts of the US military in Iraq firing upon or threatening to fire upon unembedded (meaning independent) reporters and camera operators from organisations ranging from al-Jazeera to the BBC. While westerners may question the accounts by al-Jazeera, they should pay attention to the accounts of reporters such as the BBC's Kate Adie. In some cases reporters have been wounded or killed, including ITN's Terry Lloyd in 2003. Both CBS and the Associated Press in Iraq had staff members seized by the US military and taken to violent prisons; the news organisations were unable to see the evidence against their staffers.

Over time in closing societies, real news is supplanted by fake news and false documents. [emphasis mine] Pinochet showed Chilean citizens falsified documents to back up his claim that terrorists had been about to attack the nation. The yellowcake charge, too, was based on forged papers.

You won't have a shutdown of news in modern America - it is not possible. But you can have, as Frank Rich and Sidney Blumenthal have pointed out, a steady stream of lies polluting the news well. What you already have is a White House directing a stream of false information that is so relentless that it is increasingly hard to sort out truth from untruth. In a fascist system, it's not the lies that count but the muddying. When citizens can't tell real news from fake, they give up their demands for accountability bit by bit.

9 Dissent equals treason

Cast dissent as "treason" and criticism as "espionage'. Every closing society does this, just as it elaborates laws that increasingly criminalize certain kinds of speech and expand the definition of "spy" and "traitor". When Bill Keller, the publisher of the New York Times, ran the Lichtblau/Risen stories, Bush called the Times' leaking of classified information "disgraceful", while Republicans in Congress called for Keller to be charged with treason, and rightwing commentators and news outlets kept up the "treason" drumbeat. Some commentators, as Conason noted, reminded readers smugly that one penalty for violating the Espionage Act is execution.

Conason is right to note how serious a threat that attack represented. It is also important to recall that the 1938 Moscow show trial accused the editor of Izvestia, Nikolai Bukharin, of treason; Bukharin was, in fact, executed. And it is important to remind Americans that when the 1917 Espionage Act was last widely invoked, during the infamous 1919 Palmer Raids, leftist activists were arrested without warrants in sweeping roundups, kept in jail for up to five months, and "beaten, starved, suffocated, tortured and threatened with death", according to the historian Myra MacPherson. After that, dissent was muted in America for a decade.

In Stalin's Soviet Union, dissidents were "enemies of the people". National Socialists called those who supported Weimar democracy "November traitors".

And here is where the circle closes: most Americans do not realize that since September of last year - when Congress wrongly, foolishly, passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 - the president has the power to call any US citizen an "enemy combatant". He has the power to define what "enemy combatant" means. The president can also delegate to anyone he chooses in the executive branch the right to define "enemy combatant" any way he or she wants and then seize Americans accordingly. [emphasis mine]

Even if you or I are American citizens, even if we turn out to be completely innocent of what he has accused us of doing, he has the power to have us seized as we are changing planes at Newark tomorrow, or have us taken with a knock on the door; ship you or me to a navy brig; and keep you or me in isolation, possibly for months, while awaiting trial. (Prolonged isolation, as psychiatrists know, triggers psychosis in otherwise mentally healthy prisoners. That is why Stalin's gulag had an isolation cell, like Guantánamo's, in every satellite prison. Camp 6, the newest, most brutal facility at Guantánamo, is all isolation cells.)

We US citizens will get a trial eventually - for now. But legal rights activists at the Center for Constitutional Rights say that the Bush administration is trying increasingly aggressively to find ways to get around giving even US citizens fair trials. "Enemy combatant" is a status offense - it is not even something you have to have done. [emphasis mine] "We have absolutely moved over into a preventive detention model - you look like you could do something bad, you might do something bad, so we're going to hold you," says a spokeswoman of the CCR.

Most Americans surely do not get this yet. No wonder: it is hard to believe, even though it is true. In every closing society, at a certain point there are some high-profile arrests - usually of opposition leaders, clergy and journalists. Then everything goes quiet. After those arrests, there are still newspapers, courts, TV and radio, and the facades of a civil society. There just isn't real dissent. There just isn't freedom. If you look at history, just before those arrests is where we are now. [emphasis mine]

10 Suspend the rule of law

The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 gave the president new powers over the national guard. This means that in a national emergency - which the president now has enhanced powers to declare - he can send Michigan's militia to enforce a state of emergency that he has declared in Oregon, over the objections of the state's governor and its citizens.

Even as Americans were focused on Britney Spears's meltdown and the question of who fathered Anna Nicole's baby, the New York Times editorialized about this shift: "A disturbing recent phenomenon in Washington is that laws that strike to the heart of American democracy have been passed in the dead of night ... Beyond actual insurrection, the president may now use military troops as a domestic police force in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, terrorist attack or any 'other condition'."

Critics see this as a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act - which was meant to restrain the federal government from using the military for domestic law enforcement. The Democratic senator Patrick Leahy says the bill encourages a president to declare federal martial law. It also violates the very reason the founders set up our system of government as they did: having seen citizens bullied by a monarch's soldiers, the founders were terrified of exactly this kind of concentration of militias' power over American people in the hands of an oppressive executive or faction.

---Naomi Wolfe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not only did the holocaust happen, it could happen again unless we stop it.
(10-03-2012 10:05 PM)TheArcticSage Wrote:  My type of evidence, not dead jews, not photos, not eye-witness testimonies, not survivor accounts, not confessions.... my type of evidence is something else. Physical and forensic evidence. Such is a case in a murder trial.

Physical Evidence like this

Until you give me evidence which can contradict the above with the same kind of physical evidence I am simply declined to disagree with the holocaust ever happening. being that the holocaust is a plan to mass murder the Jews via gas.

When the above, which would provide physical evidence if one cared enough to investigate it for themselves contradicts all the eye-witness accounts, survivor accounts, and confessions because it's physical evidence. (doesn't really contradict any photos or dead jews laying around the camps.

This is what I would expect from a middle class murder trial, they go in, okay? look for forensics and physical evidence which would prove whether or not the suspect was innocent or guilty.

Seriously... it's not asking much... I want this kind of evidence. Not to mention that these tests should have been conducted by the prosecution and not the defense.


See now that's where you're doing something wrong, you're already assuming that there are are victims, grievers, and suffers of a huge crime against humanity. Without any physical evidence to back up the claim besides testimonies.

The link I've provided with this post provides physical evidence. That's the kind of evidence I want, you're saying they used gas chambers, they testing the gas chambers for residue of cyanide should undoubtedly adhere to your side right? There's a reason why I just brushed off the amonia or what ever it was removing traces of Zyklon B... that's because of what the above article mentions and even a scientific article about the effects of long term use of zyklon B SATURATING the walls through and through, you can't 'rub' it out.

The second thing you're doing is you're putting one ethnic group above all the other ethnic groups giving them more status... what's that called?
In a murder trial, eyewitness accounts would be considered excellent evidence.
Okay I read through a good deal of your post and I don't think you even know what you quoted. A lot of what you quoted only helps the cause to prove that the U.S. is indeed corrupt and very well capable of doing mischievous and nefarious things. One of which they do commonly is framing people.

There's only two things I can really reply to in your quote one of which is that the Nazi's were indeed very good record keepers, but you will find some things that they never took records of... mainly because they never happened. One was an order from Hitler to mass murder the Jews and everyone in the concentration camps, and the other is the use of gas chambers to execute prisoners. Somehow, despite the fact of being prim and shiny the Nazi's just never did keep any records of these.

And the other is that, in a murder trial eye witnesses are important yes. But scientific backed evidence over-rule eye witness testimony. Say for example if there were a group of prisoners saying the Nazi's used their morgues as gas chambers (morgues were called death chambers I believe) and a scientist came up to test for zyklon b. residues and found next to nothing. It would be kind of hard to go against the scientific fact that as much as these 'gas chambers' were supposed to be used that there is no zyklon b residues other than one or two stray times when the camp was cleaned of lice by using zyklon b to clean the barracks and buildings.

Seriously though, don't copy and paste.
Find all posts by this user
22-05-2012, 05:16 AM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
Cufflink

With respect, I disagree with you: he's not a classic anti-Semite. He's a classic idiot.

I seriously can't believe this stupid discussion is going on in multiple threads, much less getting any attention. I'm reminded of a wise old saying: never argue with an idiot as they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

And with that, I'm done.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
22-05-2012, 05:47 AM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
(22-05-2012 05:16 AM)BnW Wrote:  Cufflink

With respect, I disagree with you: he's not a classic anti-Semite. He's a classic idiot.

I seriously can't believe this stupid discussion is going on in multiple threads, much less getting any attention. I'm reminded of a wise old saying: never argue with an idiot as they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

And with that, I'm done.
Alright then, so am I to understand that you have no skepticism at all about whether the holocaust happened? So just because a group of people came together and said something happened automatically makes it impervious to questioning? Maybe they through in a few pictures of some dead bodies killed by diseases as well. But using this logic I suppose then we should all return to our religions because obviously a group of people say that a god exists so therefore 'according to you' logically a god must exist!

Or am I to understand that such a case as god is excluded from eye-witnesses?
Find all posts by this user
22-05-2012, 09:25 AM
RE: Was the Holocaust... a lie?
(22-05-2012 05:47 AM)TheArcticSage Wrote:  
(22-05-2012 05:16 AM)BnW Wrote:  Cufflink

With respect, I disagree with you: he's not a classic anti-Semite. He's a classic idiot.

I seriously can't believe this stupid discussion is going on in multiple threads, much less getting any attention. I'm reminded of a wise old saying: never argue with an idiot as they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

And with that, I'm done.
Alright then, so am I to understand that you have no skepticism at all about whether the holocaust happened? So just because a group of people came together and said something happened automatically makes it impervious to questioning? Maybe they through in a few pictures of some dead bodies killed by diseases as well. But using this logic I suppose then we should all return to our religions because obviously a group of people say that a god exists so therefore 'according to you' logically a god must exist!

Or am I to understand that such a case as god is excluded from eye-witnesses?
Just because a group of people came together and said something happened? That group of people includes the Germans. How many murder trials do you know of where the defendant was found not guilty after making a full confession? I know, they were coerced, not just the high profile ones but the hundreds of ordinary soldiers also.

I'm sure there was widespread disease in the camps. If I locked you in my basement then you developed a disease due to malnutrition, would that still be my fault? Or would the fact that I never actually killed you exonerate me.

Your argument about eye witnesses above is badly thought out, makes no sense and demonstrates a sad lack of basic spelling let alone logic.

Credible, reliable and believable information has been provided for everything you can think of in this thread. Yet you keep banging the same drums. It really isn't a question of critical thinking, it is more like a not very bright person with a hard on for something.

Lets simplify the process once and for all. Make a list of all your points why you think the holocaust did not happen. Only factual points mind, no hearsay. We can then counter balance this with the evidence pointing towards it. We can then see what sources there are for the information on both sides. Then taking the reliability of sources, quality of information and all of the facts into account we should be able to say quite clearly which is the most likely.

If that doesn't tickle your fancy then may I suggest taking heed of this saying.

When all around think your daft, it is far better to keep quiet, than it is to open your mouth and confirm it.

"Belief means not wanting to know what is true"
Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Eternal's post
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: