One Third Of The Holocaust:More Compelling Evidence It Never Happened

Originally posted by resistor
Many think that the way WWI was ended made WWII inevitable.

Yes I would be one of those. The Paris Peace Conference did everything but establish peace. The division of Prussia alone was enough to ensure a continuation of hostilities, combined with Article 231 (drafted by the Dulles brothers), war was inevitable.

Originally posted by KRISKALI777
The Russians beat the Nazi forces all the way back to Berlin, and then took the Reichstag.
It was only at the eleventh-hour that America and co-allition forces 'Liberated' the 'Occupied' territiories.
How noble of the west.
To step in when the Nazi's had been all but crushed!
To step in and plunder the spoils of the Nazi loot!
To demonize the Soviet republics after the war; they would not have won if the soviets hadn't done most of the fighting.

Precisely, and this was Britain's policy, brilliantly and efficiently executed, get Russia and the US to fight a war to ensure British independence. Churchill set up an elaborate deception to fool Hitler into believing that if he attacked Russia, a vote of no confidence would be instituted against Churchill and his government overthrown. The new government and Britain would then form an alliance with Germany against the common enemy Bolshevism. Germany had no plans for aggression against Russia for at least another five years. Russian supplies were essential to the German war machine and for feeding the German population. Despite how history has reported it, Hitler was not a mad man to set up two fronts, he did so in the belief that Britain would soon be his ally and that they would be fighting alongside each other against the 'Asian Hoards'. Obviously he was misled.

Britain then, throughout Barbarrossa, provided the Soviets with the German Order of Battle, in minute detail. This information, obtained in part from Ultra decrypts, was fed to the Soviets via double agents who were working in Switzerland for the Lucy Spy Ring. The Soviets had information about the Germans every military thought and used it to good effect.

Originally posted by KRISKALI777
How about all the Nazi's that found 'Absolution' within America???

All the booty, human or otherwise, was grabbed on a first come first served basis, some areas were divvied up in advance, though those agreements were not always honoured. France too would later use units of former SS troops in Indo-China, they also took large portions of the aeronautical operations, lock, stock and barrel. As did Britain, the Soviets and the US. With few exceptions all the nations involved displayed immense hypocracy or worked along principles established in 18th century warfare. There were special units set up to penetrate enemy lines prior to the 'liberation' forces in order to get to some items and possibly individuals, before anyone else did or before they could be 'removed' by other means. The US was by no means alone, they're either more honest than most, or not as good at covering their tracks.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout

Originally posted by resistor
Many think that the way WWI was ended made WWII inevitable.

Yes I would be one of those. The Paris Peace Conference did everything but establish peace. The division of Prussia alone was enough to ensure a continuation of hostilities, combined with Article 231 (drafted by the Dulles brothers), war was inevitable.

And still is? I agree with you that WWII isn't quite done yet, but then, neither was WWI.

Whether it happened, or didn't happen, doesn't concern me; it's the fact that there are Ph.D. researchers in prison for the mere publication of findings that do not go with contemporary history's "findings" stating it did indeed happen.

Why the need to implement laws abolishing research on history? VERY "1984" in my opinion.

To put ANYONE in prison for researching history, is not just absurd, it means something. I had never even heard/read of holocaust revisionists, UNTIL I read about laws in the UK and Europe that are putting scientists,
and historians in prison for bringing forth mere ideas about their opinion based on historical research.

That would be like the U.S. putting it's own citizens in jail for publishing papers on anything contrary to what U.S. history states.

The laws forbidding anyone to publicly announce, or write anything contrary to what "HIS-story" says, is a red flag waving, in my opinion not to alarm to stay away, but "COME RESEARCH ME!"

What's the first thing a child does when you tell him or her not too? They do it. Making a law(s) to not do something so trivial as research on history and publication, be it from a neo-nazi, auschwitz survivor, or doctorate in history just doesn't make sense...unless the logic for the laws is not to draw people from the subject (holocaust revisionism) but to draw people TO the subject.

Really, are there any other laws so ridiculous and orwellian/1984ish sounding as the laws stating: no research indicating anything other that what WE SAY HAPPENED or we will JAIL YOU?

Are there?

You know, in the U.S. it really is something of great value we have in our Freedom of Speech. It doesn't matter what we write about, it's our right to do so. Can you imagine a new U.S. Law forbidding the research of the Civil War, and publishing anything contrary to what U.S. historians have recorded? It would be absurd!

So, in closing, I will say again, I don't have any concerns over whether or not it happened, or did not. My concern is why are people in prison for questioning and researching history?

reminds me of a slogan from 1984, "History is Bunk."

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by N34Li3Z


Right on, the fact that holocaust denial is a crime in some countries is the smoking gun that something fishy is going on here, and we're not talking about third world dictatorships, we're talking about France and England! (Iran, the supposed "barbaric" country, actually has more freedom on this point than the "developed" world).

If the American Revolution suddenly became "off-limits" to discuss intellectually or historically, wouldn't that be more of a reason to research it?

Originally posted by Nygdan

sbob
And you will say that it was played with the other way. Good for you. Have an unhuman life.

I'm no fan of nazi revisionism, but the absolute worst we can say about Truth4hire (supicious name aside) as of right now is that he's/she's watching a video on the subject, and he/she thinks it makes a good case for its position.
That hardly makes him/her a nazi or scum. At worst, it makes him/her incorrect. Lets at least reserve judgement for what sort of evidence is presented to us.

Originally posted by Edn
You know you could all just watch the video instead of waiting to attack what Truth4hire thinks after he posts his thoughts.

Why should any of us watch a 4 hour propaganda film?
If it makes good points, or presents worthwhile evidence, then Truth should be able to communicate that to us.

This is several years old but WOW.

You didn't even bother to look at the video or evidence and you call them incorrect? You should never have gotten the that little subject matter patch LoL.

All the haters telling their stories of meeting holocaust survivors and attacking this guy without even watching any evidence. Typical and pathetic.

Originally posted by nine0099thousand
reply to post by Truth4hire

 

Hm, your evidence intrigues me. It has inspired me to research. However, I have one question that MUST be answered before anyone can continue:

If one third of the holocaust didn't happen, who didn't it happen to?

They could only find 1 "survivor" to represent over 700,000 people who were supposedly killed at the Sob. camp. They cannot find anyone else from that camp that agrees.

And the whole business of them burning bodies with gasoline doesnt work
then the guy claims they were gassing people with the exhaust pipe of an old soviet diesel tank
then the guy claims the nazis were cutting the womens hair to make beds and pillows out of
then the geography of the swamp and his own escape run counter to everything he said prior

Even better during his testimony they asked him to shut the F up because he was blowing the whole thing

sounds like payback propaganda

Originally posted by neformore

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by o2bwise
It would be really nice if more people could understand that there actually are human beings like myself who are not hateful.

OK. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for a minute, and ask a simple question.

Which other genocides don't you believe in - and why?

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

I hope you are not still a moderator.

Pathetic and immature response.

Originally posted by MasterGemini
They could only find 1 "survivor" to represent over 700,000 people who were supposedly killed at the Sob. camp. They cannot find anyone else from that camp that agrees.

No, they can. There was more than one survivor.

Thomas Blatt recounted: "The remaining Germans: Bauer, Richter, Frenzel, Wendland and some guards with machine guns, who had initially been in shock, now effectively blocked the main gate. People were killed and the front line Jews mostly unarmed fell back, then a new wave of determined fighters pushed again forward towards in a suicidal thrust.

Someone was trying to cut an opening in the fence with a shovel. Within minutes, more Jews arrived. Not waiting in line to go through the opening under the hail of fire, they climbed the fence. Though we had planned to touch the mines off with bricks and wood, we did not do it. We couldn't wait; we preferred sudden death to a moment more in that hell.

Corpses were everywhere. The noise of rifles, exploding mines, grenades and the chatter of machine guns assaulted the ears. The Nazis shot from a distance while in our hands were only primitive knives and hatchets.

We ran through the exploded mine field holes, jumped over a single wire marking the end of the mine fields and we were outside the camp. Now to make it to the woods ahead of us. It was so close. I fell several times, each time thinking I was hit. And each time I got up and ran further...100 yards...50 yards... 20 more yards...and the forest at last. Behind us, blood and ashes. In the grayness of the approaching evening, the towers' machine guns shot their last victims."

www.sobibor.info...

"In the period from October 17 - 19, 1943 Jews who escaped from Sobibor on October 14, were apprehended in the area of Sobibor and Rozanka, fifty two kilometers north of Chelm. The military police killed forty-four more Jews and fifteen Jews were taken into custody. Seized: one rifle, one pistol, one hand-grenade."

"October 21, 1943 Sawin, fifteen kilometers north of Chelm, Wehrmacht posts in Sawin apprehended six Jews from Sobibor. One Jew was shot death attempting to escape."

"Security zone Bug:
"October 28, 1943, o 540, in the area of Sawin, one Jew from Sobibor was shot in an escape attempt by Wehrmacht post 27."

"October 29. 43, in the municipality of Wyryki, o 489, the military police apprehended two escapees from Sobibor. They were executed.

The Jewish Side:
Original number of prisonsers at the time of the revolt 550
• Not able or willing to escape, including 30 in Lager I (150)
• Killed in combat and mine fields (80)
Number of prisoners to initially escape Sobibor 320
• Captured in dragnet and executed (170)
Number of prisonsers to successfully escape Sobibor 150
• Killed fighting Germans as partisans or in the army (5)
• Killed in hiding, mostly by hostile native elements (92)
Number of revolt survivors to be liberated by the Allies 53
* Additionally, 9 Jews survived from earlier individual escapes,
which makes a total of Sobibor survivors: 62

The Nazi Side:
Germans and Ukrainian guards on duty at the time of the revolt 137
Germans killed including 2 Volksdeutsche guard leaders 12
Germans wounded 1
Ukrainians guard killed 8
Ukrainian guards wounded 12
Ukrainian guards not accounted for...(Fled for fear of German reprisals) 28

www.sobibor.info...

On the third day we were sitting, binding our wounds, when we saw an armed Gentile suddenly come out into the clearing... He came near us and began speaking. He questioned us and decided to take us to his group. Then he asked us if we were hungry and said he would bring back some food.

He left and came back with a whole gang of armed villagers and gave us some bread. We were sitting around and eating and they asked us if we had guns, or gold. They told us to hand over our guns. That's is how it's done, they told us; later they'd return the weapons. Though we knew we shouldn't, we gave up the few light weapons we had... They started shooting at us point-blank. We were trapped! We had nothing to return fire with and it ended in tragedy. We came out of Sobibor to be gunned down by the likes of these..."

Fifteen year old Berl managed to get away.

www.sobibor.info...

Originally posted by N34Li3Z
Whether it happened, or didn't happen, doesn't concern me; it's the fact that there are Ph.D. researchers in prison for the mere publication of findings that do not go with contemporary history's "findings" stating it did indeed happen.

Why the need to implement laws abolishing research on history? VERY "1984" in my opinion.

To put ANYONE in prison for researching history, is not just absurd, it means something. I had never even heard/read of holocaust revisionists, UNTIL I read about laws in the UK and Europe that are putting scientists,
and historians in prison for bringing forth mere ideas about their opinion based on historical research.

Perhaps before deciding on whether there is any validity both in the accusations against these 'Ph.D researchers' and in those Ph.Ds themselves, you should research the subject a little more, it seems as though, to me, that your knee just jerked.

No-one has been put into prison for 'bringing forth mere ideas', and where prosecutions have arisen they have done so much more on the basis of opinions held by those prosecuted than on any legitimate research. I don't agree with prosecuting people for their opinions, but then I have never been sufficiently offended by someone's opinion of me or something important to me to consider it. Nor has my entire family been murdered and I called a liar for saying that they have. I'd perhaps take offence at that. Is respect too much to ask by those still alive to have memories? Not every survivor has a book to sell or an axe to grind, most are quietly living in obscurity.

Read up on those that have been imprisoned or penalised in any way for their denial of the holocaust. They were given warnings, just as anyone passing through the legal system is, they continued with the behaviour that was causing offence. There are exceptions, and they are more interesting and highlight discrepancies, but you and your jerky knee will have to get past the smoke screen first. But in short, no-one is getting imprisoned for researching history.