Calling all Debunkers, and anyone who thinks Holocaust Denial is offensive, debunk this!

reply to post by neformore


Other events are disputed.For example,plenty of people believe the Irish 'Famine' was an act of genocide and have evidence to support the claim.Others believe it was an induced mass labor movement,to build US railroads and cities,filling the gap left by the abolition of slavery.

Yet the official line is that 8 million people were existing exclusively on potatoes and incidental crop failure slashed the population in half............. just a random act of God or something.Do you hear the Irish going around accusing anyone who believes the official story of being a denialist.

The Armenian genocide is hotly debated right to this very day.See todays court ruling in MA?

Hutus and Tutsis is hardly a closed topic is it?


Serbia/Kosovo is still an unfinished story.And I could go on an on.

The holocaust argument is presented as finite.The book is closed.We know all that has happened and how and NOTHING can alter it.
Anyone who questions the official story is not merely wrong but is assumed to be launching a hostile attack at the heart of every Jew on earth.
An absolutist view of history leaves no room for revision or the presentation of fresh evidence.It is in effect, arguing from the point of ignorance.

As an example,if you applied this thinking to the Gulf of Tonkin incident,you would have to say that Robert MacNamara was lying his ass off in 'The Fog of War'.

I actually do find this offensive, simply because I have both sides of my family (one from my mother another from my wifes side) who experienced it first hand and a coworker who raided a camp himself then later married a jew who was in a camp herself. My great grandfather was part of the original groups who raided the camps and described some quite disgusting things... My wifes grandmother lived in Germany next to a camp during the war. She can safely say they were taking jews into the camps and stacking the corpses because the Nazis working in there did not stay in the camps. So for you to say that these were not real or did not happen is not only incredibly ignorant but plain stupid because you can try to twist or find facts that might make a good argument but it wont change what my family actually saw with their own eyes.

Please stop wasting your time with this because there is no conspiracy with the camps, at least shift your focus to what might have really happened to Hitler...

reply to post by s7ryk3r


Sorry about your relatives experiences during the war, how ever could you explain to me why zee Germans would use Zyklon B ( a known insecticide ) to gas Jews instead of hooking up a trucks exhaust and using carbon monoxide ?

Jews did not want to go to Palestine. Why would they give up their wealth to go live in squalor of Palestine? They would not! Most Jews felt that God does not permit them to in the Bible, or the Talmud, many remained in Europe, especially Germany.

To understand “Zionism” and Nazism one must start with Theodore Herzl, the father of Zionism. I suggest you listen to “Zionism and Herzl: The Antisemitic Side of Zionism on google video. It is in Hebrew and subbed in English. The most important video made in Israel.

Google Video Link

“Whenever someone expresses views that are in any way critical of Zionism or the policies of the state of Israel, the Zionist organizations (ADL, SPLC, etc.) immediately start screaming "anti-Semite" in an attempt to silence their critics”

So before ranting may I suggest these links which is 100% Jewish owned and operated:

True Torah Jews Against Zionism
www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/holocaust/index.cfm
Jews United Against Zionism
nkusa.org...
Jews Not Zionists
www.jewsnotzionists.org
Jews Against Zionism
www.inminds.co.uk/jews-against-zionism.html
Orthodox Jews Against Zionism
www.iwilltryit.com/zion1.htm

“From a Zionist Executive Meeting speech by Yitzhak Gruenbaum on Feb. 18, 1943:
And when some asked me: "Can't you give money from Keren Ha Yesod (Palestine Foundation Fund) to save Jews in the Diaspora?" I said: "No!" And again I say no....And, because of these things, people called me an anti-Semite, and concluded that I'm guilty, for the fact that we don't give ourselves completely to rescue actions. (p. 211)”

Ben-Gurion opposed a plan to allow German Jewish children to emigrate to Britain in 1938. To justify himself, Ben-Gurion said: "If I knew that it would be possible to save all the children in Germany by bringing them over to England, and only half of them to [Israel], then I would opt for the second alternative. For we must weigh not only the life of these children but also the history of the people of Israel." In other words the “STATE” of Israel was more important than saving the Jews!"

“If the Zionists, world-wide, had not persuaded various
countries to refuse to accept Jews from Germany and the
Zionists in America persuaded President Roosevelt to shut
the door and not allow Jewish refugees into America before
the war when there was still a chance for Jews to leave
Germany the Holocaust may not have happened.”

“It is an historical fact that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that:
a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and
b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and
c) $1000.00 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.
The Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti.
The answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments:
a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees.
b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war.
c) No ransom will be paid


This response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.
These treacherous Zionist leaders betrayed their own flesh and blood. Zionism was never an option for Jewish salvation. Quite the opposite, it was a formula for human beings to be used as pawns for the power trip of several desperadoes. A perfidy! A betrayal beyond description! “

www.jewsnotzionists.org...

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin
Well, help me out here. We were talking about Fürlers testimony. Does Mattogno not use his testimony to establish that putting more than one bodies in the oven would break it?

I think you ment Prufer rather than Furler, correct? And Prufer stated that the Auschwitz "ovens" could incinerate one body per our. That right there already punches a big whole into Zimmerman's claims for numbers cremated(25 and some cases 15 minutes per body).
It seems as though Zimmerman is making the claim without reference that the ovens couldn't stand the strain of that one instance.
Let's read what Mattogno says about it in his "Risposta"

Let us now consider the "enormous strain" on the crematoria which damaged the "brick lining on the ovens." Quantitatively speaking, what does this "enormous strain" signify?

Let us make a quick calculation for the two most important crematoria respecting the economics of "extermination." Krema II went into operation on 15 March, Krema III on 25 June. 16

There is a six-month period between March and September 1943 coinciding with the visit to Auschwitz of Prüfer on 10 September 17. During this period Krema II was closed down for 3 months for repairs (Krema IV was already out of operation from the end of June).18

For this reason Kremas II and III each functioned for about 45 days. Since, according to the admission of Zimmerman, the duration of a cremation of one cadaver in one muffle was one hour, these crematoria could each have theoretically cremated, working hypothetically for 24 hours a day, 360 (=24 × 15) cadavers per day, so in 45 days 16,200 (=45 × 360) cadavers each, that is, 1,080 (=16,200 : 15) per muffle.

Therefore Zimmerman admits that the refractive masonry of the crematoria was damaged after 1,080 theoretical cremations

I never claimed that was the whole point. I'm trying to discuss the details here, something you seem very resolute not to do.

It seems that you are making the same mistakes that Zimmerman was already called out for when it comes to the "details".

In reality Kurt Prüfer stated the very opposite of what Zimmerman attributed to him by means of a despicable manipulation.

On page 200 of the cited work, this is how Fleming summarizes part of the interrogation which K.Prüfer underwent on 5 March 1946:

"Normal crematoria 8 work with prewarmed air 9 so that the corpse burns quickly and without smoke. As the crematoria in the concentration camps were constructed differently, this procedure could not be used.10 The corpses burned more slowly and created more smoke, necessitating ventilation.
Question: How many corpses were incinerated in Auschwitz per hour?
Answer: In a crematorium with five furnaces and fifteen muffles, fifteen corpses were burned." [my emphasis]

During the interrogation of 19 March, K.Prüfer declared:

"I spoke about the enormous strain on the overused furnaces. I told Chief Engineer Sander: I am worried whether the furnaces can stand the excessive usage. In my presence two cadavers were pushed into one muffle instead of one cadaver. The furnaces could not stand the strain." 11 [my italics]

What other possible evidence is there besides eyewitness testimony when it comes to the methods implemented to dispose of the bodies? It seems to me that pertaining to the actual process there is no other possible evidence.

It would seem, since the NAZI's kept such great records of everything, you could refer to original(not 2nd and 3rd hand like Zimmerman does often) documentation, and Mattogno does this in his original and response papers.

Ah. So there were cremations? At least something. I'll adress the fuel question later. It's dissapointing that you're not willing to lay it out for me. It would save so much time.

Yes, and there is tons documentation for causes of death and for cremations. There does some dates that are missing from the records(and Zimmerman would blame the NAZI s that had little time to search through records to destroy specific dates while the camps where being liberated, while Mattogno would blame the Soviets that did have plenty of time to pick and choose which records to destroy.)

How can the evidence for "some open pit burning" be discriminated against evidence for "open pit burning en masse"?

Isolated cases of small numbers of open air cremations is a far cry from the claimed mass open air cremations. Mattogno has done am experiment and another paper on the subject that I posted earlier that refutes "eyewitness" testimony and claims from Zimmerman on the open air cremations.

This claim seems rather disingenious to me. What exactly is the testimony you accept as evidence for open pit burning? Am I to extrapolate that some testimony is true, some is false?

The "testimony" that I accept for evidence of open air cremations are actual documents about real open air cremations that took place and where discussed by Mattogno if I recall correctly.

It's not as if they found some ashes, just not much of it. Somehow you seem to contradict yourself. I have presented the evidence for open-pit-burning. Only by selective discounting a part of that evidence can you speak of "only some". I would not know what the basis is for that discounting.

I don't believe I did contradict myself. There were probably isolated open air cremations, but there is no evidence for the large numbers claimed.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by PplVSNWO]

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin
I'm not concerned with how efficient the process was. It's clear that your link establishes that it was absolutely not efficient nor practical to dispose of the bodies that way.

Well, I am concerned with the efficiency and apparently so was Zimmerman or he wouldn't have gone to such great lengths to try and boost the Crematoria efficiency to several times greater than actuality. The efficiency is important because there are some very specific claims made about the number deaths/murders and subsequent cremations in specific time periods. Sure, if the Germans began exterminating people years before and after the war, then you may have a case. But in reality, there is a very specific time frame where these cremations must have taken place.

No historian claims it was efficient or practical. It was a Notmassnahme, a special measure whenever the Crematoria where overwhelmed. You refute the idea by quoting a technical argument saying that bodies would not be fully reduced by such low-intensity fires. Which historian has ever claimed that they would be fully reduced?

If the bodies are not fully reduced, you must have mass graves where all these partially cremated bodies are buried. Has ground penetrating radar found any such mass graves, you know, besides the ones where the documented burials took place?

It's rather naive to think that the SS burned some people in open pits, then saw the results and went...

"Well, Hans - look this doesn't do the job. There's still remains of the bodies left... Let's not use this method anymore".

Considering how things were at the camp at that time burning the corpses to indistuinguishable blobs would have been absolutely sufficient for the SS. Their goal, after all, was not to have a nice pile of ashes that they could put in an urn and then send to the family.

Again, where is the evidence for these mass graves of partially cremated bodies? You do realize that it would take around at least 28 minutes to even evaporate the water from a body in a coke fired oven at optimum.

And technically? Technically such an hypothesis is senseless: according to engineer Kessler's experiments on cremation. Even the phase during which water evaporated from the cadaver required on average 28 minutes in an optimum coke-operated oven!

from "Risposta" under 'Let us now consider my "Omissions."'
Which would still leave an intact body minus water and probably fat. This time still destroys Zimmerman's 25 minute and less cremation times.

That's why I have consistently asked you to present individual claims. It's so much easier. But you don't seem to be interested in that - and I can understand you, since that is very time intensive. But if all you do is make the argumentum ad linkum, *snicker", I will reply with the same in order to give the interested reader both sides of the debate. ( I will point out again that I would prefer taking up individual claims since this would enable said reader to form an opinion without leaving the thread.

The reason I posted the link to the complete paper to begin with, as stated in my first post, there is just too much information and it's all best viewed in the whole context, rather than taking small snippets. Attempting to dissect the original article into individual claims would likely leave us with several threads worth of debate.

An honest and dedicated effort will always be appreciated on and by ATS. jealous? or just paranoid?

Well, I just don't see how somebody can star a post within 5 minutes that uses sources with thousands of words to make a point? Oh, well, I guess there will always be people staring the poster rather than content(I guess this means you have a fan?)

Originally posted by KIZZZY
Jews did not want to go to Palestine. Why would they give up their wealth to go live in squalor of Palestine? They would not! Most Jews felt that God does not permit them to in the Bible, or the Talmud, many remained in Europe, especially Germany.

The entire point of Zionism was a return to the Holy land. Since before 1935 there were already Jews immigrating from Russia and other sectors of Europe to Palestine, tending the lands as farmers and shepherds, much to the disdain of the Palestinians. Yes, most jews would probably not give up their jobs to go make a new Zion, but the zionists would, and they did, pre WWII.

Originally posted by WolfofWar

Originally posted by KIZZZY
Jews did not want to go to Palestine. Why would they give up their wealth to go live in squalor of Palestine? They would not! Most Jews felt that God does not permit them to in the Bible, or the Talmud, many remained in Europe, especially Germany.

The entire point of Zionism was a return to the Holy land. Since before 1935 there were already Jews immigrating from Russia and other sectors of Europe to Palestine, tending the lands as farmers and shepherds, much to the disdain of the Palestinians. Yes, most jews would probably not give up their jobs to go make a new Zion, but the zionists would, and they did, pre WWII.

If you want to know the point of Zionism perhaps you should know the

History of it which apparently you do not by way of your retort. I have

provided a link to "Zionism the anti-Semitic side on google video in my

first comment which is over one hour long!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d9a9063bf028.jpg[/atsimg]

Zionists Do Not Represent Jews


Zionism is NOT Jewish Tzionut


"From the inception of the Zionist State and particularly in recent times, the impression has been created in the World that there is some connection between the State, which falsely calls itself Israel, and the Jewish people as a whole. Therefore, we who continue to uphold the never-changing tradition of the Jewish people find it proper to again clarify the following points:

A Jew is one who remains faithful to the laws of the Jewish religion, that is, the Holy Torah and its commandments.

The Jewish people became a people before they had their own land, and continued to exist as a people also after they went Into exile, because our very people hood is based exclusively on the Torah.

The Holy Land was given to the Jewish people on the condition that they observe the Torah and its commandments. When they failed to do this, their sovereignty over the land was taken from them, and they went into exile. From that time, we are prohibited by the Torah with a very grave prohibition to establish a Jewish independent sovereignty in the Holy Land or anywhere throughout the world. Rather, we are obligated to be loyal to the nations under whose protection we dwell.

This situation has existed for close to 2000 years when the Jewish people were dispersed throughout all corners of the world. During this time, the Jews always remained faithful to the country in which they lived.

The Jewish people are grateful to all those merciful nations which have allowed them to observe Torah and the commandments undisturbed.

The Zionists have no right of any sovereignty over even one inch of the Holy Land. They do not represent the Jewish people in any way whatsoever. They have no right to speak in the name of the Jewish people. Therefore, their words, declarations and actions are not in any way representative of the Jewish people.This is because the Zionists' seizing of power over the Holy Land is antithetical to Jewish law, and also because the Zionists do not behave like Jews at all rather, they desecrate the sanctity of the land."


www.jewsagainstzionism.com...



[edit on 13-8-2010 by KIZZZY]

reply to post by King Loki


re winston churchill, you are of course correct. also in stalins writings and also in eisenhauers which together total several thousand pages there is no reference to jews being gassed. unfortunately in this world, not many have even half a brain.

Originally posted by mazzroth
Sorry about your relatives experiences during the war, how ever could you explain to me why zee Germans would use Zyklon B ( a known insecticide ) to gas Jews instead of hooking up a trucks exhaust and using carbon monoxide ?

They did both.

They decided the carbon monoxide wasn't "efficient" enough.

Zyklon B is a pelletised form of Hydrogen Cyanide (HCN)

Hydrogen Cyanide

Hydrogen cyanide (with the historical common name of Prussic acid) is a chemical compound with chemical formula HCN. Hydrogen cyanide is a colorless, extremely poisonous liquid that boils slightly above room temperature at 26 °C (79 °F).

A hydrogen cyanide concentration of 300 mg/m3 in air will kill a human within about 10 minutes. It is estimated that hydrogen cyanide at a concentration of 3500 ppm (about 3200 mg/m3) will kill a human in about 1 minute. The toxicity is caused by the cyanide ion, which halts cellular respiration by inhibiting an enzyme in mitochondria called cytochrome c oxidase.

Hydrogen cyanide is commonly listed amongst chemical warfare agents that cause general poisoning and skin blisters.[24] As a substance listed under Schedule 3 of the Chemical Weapons Convention as a potential weapon which has large-scale industrial uses, manufacturing plants in signatory countries which produce more than 30 tonnes per year must be declared to, and can be inspected by, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.

HCN was also used to enforce the death penalty in US Gas Chambers.

If you are going to try and be crassly blunt, it pays to understand the subject and also what you are talking about, instead of being ignorant.



[edit on 13/8/10 by neformore]

"The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics

Eugenics was born as a scientific curiosity in the Victorian age in 1863,by Sir

Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin.


"The Rockefeller Foundation helped found the German eugenics program and

even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to

Auschwitz.

Eugenics was the racist pseudoscience determined to wipe away all human

beings deemed "unfit," preserving only those who conformed to a Nordic

stereotype. Elements of the philosophy were enshrined as national policy by

forced sterilization and segregation laws, as well as marriage restrictions,

enacted in twenty-seven states. In 1909, California became the third state to

adopt such laws. Ultimately, eugenics practitioners coercively sterilized some

60,000 Americans, barred the marriage of thousands, forcibly segregated

thousands in "colonies," and persecuted untold numbers in ways we are just

learning. Before World War II, nearly half of coercive sterilizations were

done in California, and even after the war, the state accounted for a third of

all such surgeries."

"Eugenics would have been so much bizarre parlor talk had it not been for extensive financing by corporate philanthropies, specifically the Carnegie Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Harriman railroad fortune. They were all in league with some of America's most respected scientists hailing from such prestigious universities as Stamford, Yale, Harvard, and Princeton. These academicians espoused race theory and race science, and then faked and twisted data to serve eugenics' racist aims.'

"The most commonly suggested method of eugenicide in America was a "lethal chamber" or public locally operated gas chambers. In 1918, Popenoe, the Army venereal disease specialist during World War I, co-wrote the widely used textbook, Applied Eugenics, which argued, "From an historical point of view, the first method which presents itself is execution… Its value in keeping up the standard of the race should not be underestimated." Applied Eugenics also devoted a chapter to "Lethal Selection," which operated "through the destruction of the individual by some adverse feature of the environment, such as excessive cold, or bacteria, or by bodily deficiency."

The US was not ready for the lethal version.

hnn.us...


See "Applied Eugenics by Popenoe

en.wikipedia.org...





[edit on 13-8-2010 by KIZZZY]

Originally posted by mazzroth
reply to post by s7ryk3r

 

Sorry about your relatives experiences during the war, how ever could you explain to me why zee Germans would use Zyklon B ( a known insecticide ) to gas Jews instead of hooking up a trucks exhaust and using carbon monoxide ?

Lol.. That's rich. First of all - they did both. Zyklon @ Auschwitz and CM @ the Reinhard camps.

Second of all. If Zyklon B is such a sexy thing, I presume you wouldn't mind being put into a sealed room with a bucket full of these pellets?

Whoever claims that Zyklon B is "just a disenfectant, totally not dangerous" should walk the walk and put himself into a sealed room with a bucket full. Whoever says so and doesn't do that - well, it's obvious to me, to say the least.

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

Whoever claims that Zyklon B is "just a disenfectant, totally not dangerous" should walk the walk and put himself into a sealed room with a bucket full. Whoever says so and doesn't do that - well, it's obvious to me, to say the least.

Not sure if you've seen this vid ?

there is no question the holocaust was real...general Eisenhower put out an order to film and photograph the death camps, because he knew that in the future, there would be people that would deny it happened, just because it was so horrific and unimaginable that humans could do this to other humans on such a grand scale
there are thousands of photgraphs and hundreds of hours of film that documented what happened, also the testimony of thousands of death camp survivors, along with their own filmed stories.
because the "deniers" don't have the evidence handed to them on a silver platter, does not mean it didn't happen. they might have to actually take some time out of their day and visit the many sites available that has the evidence, on a massive, but grisly scale.

Originally posted by PplVSNWO


Can we please stop discussing quote-mined quotes? that's why I provided to full passage. I want to deal with the reality, not with the toasted reality of Mattogno.

Prüfer said:

I was telling Sander that I attended testing of ovens in crematorium in concentration camp Auschwitz, that I came to conclusion that crematoriums could not cope with such a number of corpses, which were there to be burned, because the ovens of the crematoriums are of low capacity. At that, gave an example to Sander, that when I were in Auschwitz, in my presence two-three corpses were being pushed into crematoria muffles instead of one, and even then crematorium's ovens did not cope with that load, because there were too many corpses to burn. At the same time I said to Sander that the corpses seen by me were killed in gas chambers earlier.

Would you mind repeating Mattogno Jedi-quote-mine technique on this quote? Or do we just want to leave it up to the reader?

Anyone can look at this quote and establish for himself if Mattogno's representation of this quote is legit. Mattogno's contention is that this passage proves that the SS guards could only put 1 coprse into each oven...

Funny how Prüfer himself, in this part that you take as evidence, admits to the guards putting more than one corpse into the oven.

Deniers use the idea that you basically can compare the techniques of your local, small scale crematoria with that of Auschwitz, apply the same techniques and time-frames they use, and then see that it was impossible to dispose of the bodies.
They omit that the reasons for cremating they way we cremate in local, small scale crematoria is dictated by custom and piety, not technical limitations. Any crematoria you contact will gladly admit that you could radically speed up the process of cremation if you don't give a # about the piety and dignity of the whole process.

At least that is what I learned when I asked the Crematoria of the city of Zurich.

Deniers will convince you to apply private, peace time procedures that are restricted by piety and dignity for cremating to Auschwitz in order to show that large scale body disposal didn't take place.

When clearly all the evidence we have - including the testimony of Prüfer on his many visits to Auschwitz as well as the testimony of the people who actually operated the crematoria - that anything but that was the case.

It would seem, since the NAZI's kept such great records of everything, you could refer to original(not 2nd and 3rd hand like Zimmerman does often) documentation, and Mattogno does this in his original and response papers.

Is your contention that the Nazis kept an exact papertrail of their Genocide?

if yes, would you like to prove that assertion? If what you say is true, where is the full documentation concerning the Wannsee conference? Why didn't they document all of the entries into Auschwitz?

Would you mind proving your assertation "that the Nazis kept such great records of everything" ?????

What is that some sort of pun on Deutsche Gründlichkeit? Or is that honestly what you believe? Are you saying that the germans kept a complete log on all their crimes?
Where did you pick up that idea?

Yes, and there is tons documentation for causes of death and for cremations. There does some dates that are missing from the records(and Zimmerman would blame the NAZI s that had little time to search through records to destroy specific dates while the camps where being liberated, while Mattogno would blame the Soviets that did have plenty of time to pick and choose which records to destroy.)

Are you saying that it is your contention that all non-gassing deaths have been documented by the Nazis? That claim is simply untrue.

You'd have to be disingenious to claim that the evidence does not clearly point to at least 750,000 undocumented entries into Auschwitz. I mean this is so basic I can't even believe you'rse saying this.

Is it your contention that the Nazis did fully document entries, exits and deaths at Auschwitz? Let's leave away the missing dates for a moment: Do you believe that the documents for the days that aren't missing give a complete picture of what was going on in Auschwitz? Honestly?

Isolated cases of small numbers of open air cremations is a far cry from the claimed mass open air cremations. Mattogno has done am experiment and another paper on the subject that I posted earlier that refutes "eyewitness" testimony and claims from Zimmerman on the open air cremations.

Ah. So the evidence for the scale of historical open air pit burning is deduced from Mattognos post 2000 experiments? Interesting. Later on you claim the evidence for the scale is in the documents. Shouldn't you like get your story straight?

How did Mattogno exactly prove that only "small scale" would be possible? Is there some sort of onthological barrier to piling up corpses in pyres? Please elaborate.

The "testimony" that I accept for evidence of open air cremations are actual documents about real open air cremations that took place and where discussed by Mattogno if I recall correctly.

Documents? Open air pit Burnings? You wouldn't be talking about Dejaco's drawings that are disputed by most deniers?

Please point to the documents. I'd be very interested. As if there were documents that would clearly establish the scale of open pit burning. My ass.

I don't believe I did contradict myself. There were probably isolated open air cremations, but there is no evidence for the large numbers claimed.

Can you please explain to me how you can discriminate "isolated open air cremations" from "large numbers"? The fact that it is alluded to by perps and victims, civians and later Optint speaks for open pit burnings. How do you go from there to establishing the "islolated" character of those burnings? Aren't you basically doing what you are accusing our side of doing?

How would, IYO, "isolated" open air pit burning be phenomenologically distinct from "large scale"?

Please elaborate.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]


[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

Originally posted by ken10

Not sure if you've seen this vid ?

Mmmh... Argumentum ad youtubum.

Please, dear Ken10. If you are convinced that this is the truth, then please, for God's sake, seal yourself into an airtight room with a bucket full of Zyklon B pellets. Why haven't YOU done that yet?

- Watching the vid now.

Edit after watching:

Honestly, how naive are you? I can't even comment on that. I'll just leave it to the readers. But you seem to be extremely gullible.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


I merely posted that video in response to an earlier remark you made !

It is a fact afaik that Zyklon b needs to be above 25.7 degrees in order to turn gaseous.......And in that case that youtube vid would be possible considering the temp was only some 15 degrees ?

However just because i post something to counter someones statement, That does not mean i take that view......it has always been my argument that the numbers are wrong based on the available facts....Not that atrocities never occurred.

I'm fully accepting that "some" people could have been gassed and cremated !

But i'm also accepting of other claims of women being raped, pinned to barn doors and Butchered.

Why not just do away with the term "holocaust" and remember all the innocents that died equally. ?

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin
Originally posted by PplVSNWO


Can we please stop discussing quote-mined quotes? that's why I provided to full passage. I want to deal with the reality, not with the toasted reality of Mattogno.

Prüfer said:

I was telling Sander that I attended testing of ovens in crematorium in concentration camp Auschwitz, that I came to conclusion that crematoriums could not cope with such a number of corpses, which were there to be burned, because the ovens of the crematoriums are of low capacity. At that, gave an example to Sander, that when I were in Auschwitz, in my presence two-three corpses were being pushed into crematoria muffles instead of one, and even then crematorium's ovens did not cope with that load, because there were too many corpses to burn. At the same time I said to Sander that the corpses seen by me were killed in gas chambers earlier.

Your full quote does not support your case any bettery than the "quote mined" quote. Notice "the ovens of the crematoriums are of low capacity" and "there were too many corpses to burn"
If the ovens couldn't handle as many bodies as there were, how did they handle the numbers Zimmerman claims? Is this even a direct quote to begin with? It looks like, "I heard this guy say this in my presence" How did he know the "corpses seen by me were killed in gas chambers earlier"?

For the rest of your post, how can you pretend that I haven't been giving evidence of these claims all along? Are you completely ignoring the works of Mattogno that I have been posting? You accuse of quote mining and then pick and choose tiny details to argue over, as if the whole document doesn't stand. I think you are pretending that Zimmerman's paper was the final word in the debate despite "Risposta" completely smashing his responses.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by PplVSNWO]

Originally posted by orangutang
reply to post by King Loki

 

re winston churchill, you are of course correct. also in stalins writings and also in eisenhauers which together total several thousand pages there is no reference to jews being gassed. unfortunately in this world, not many have even half a brain.

And what is that supposed to prove?

I read the memoirs of Dulles - Dulles, Allen W. (1963). The Craft of Intelligence. - and there is no mention of MK-Ultra. Your logic dictates that therefore, MK-ultra did not happen. So we can easily gloss over all of the eyewitness, documentary and material evidence that points to it, right?

I'm sure pretty much everyone - except for split brain patients and the occasional freak of nature - has a complete brain. It's just that some people see no incentive in using it.

Why would "Eisenhauer" (sic - you wouldn't have spelled his name that way because deniers like to do that to give him a jewish touch, would you?) write about the gassings?
The people who had evidence for it did:

www.buch.ch... .html?jumpId=3353420

Why would Eisenhower, who was responsible for the Western front, write about the gassings? Is that such a given?
That's like the disingenious claim that Patton didn't find any gas chambers at Ohrdurff. Maybe that's because there weren't any extermination camps on German soil?

And Stalin, who was by these years becoming a rabid Anti-Semite himself. Where's the necessity of his writing about gassings? Did he write a history of the second world war? Did he write memoirs about the second world war?

The sheer dishonesty in this argument is staggering.

Why not go to the individual unit commanders that actually liberated the camps? How come they all talk about gas chambers? Did they get instructions beforehand? Like cliff notes from the "Jewish Cabal" or something?

" Hey.. Ivan.. We have determined that your unit will probably be the first to liberate an extermination camp. Please incoroporate the following talking points in your memoirs if you're going to publish them ..."

Come on.

Chamberlin, Brewster S., and Marcia Feldman, editors. The Liberation of the Nazi Concentration Camps 1945: Eyewitness Accounts of the Liberators.



[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

Originally posted by PplVSNWO

Your full quote does not support your case any bettery than the "quote mined" quote. Notice "the ovens of the crematoriums are of low capacity" and "there were too many corpses to burn"

The "quote mining" was done by Mattogno, I presented the full quote. Please don't muddy the waters.

I don't deny that Prüfer was under the impression that the existing material was not sufficient for burning all of the corpses. Maybe that's why, always when the camp was under heavy influx, there is testimony talking about open pits.

The point is that your side claims that this quotes proves that they did and could not stuff more than one body into the oven, when this quote clearly does not say any such thing. That was the point I was trying to make.

But we can discuss the individual merit of the quote, too. But wouldn't it be clearer if we would do that seperatly?

If the ovens couldn't handle as many bodies as there were, how did they handle the numbers Zimmerman claims? Is this even a direct quote to begin with? It looks like, "I heard this guy say this in my presence" How did he know the "corpses seen by me were killed in gas chambers earlier"?

How did he know? Probably because the firm he worked for was responsible for installation and maintenance of all the ovens INCLUDING the installation of the Zyklon B input devices?
Maybe because Prüfer himself visited Auschwitz more than a dozen times? Maybe because representatives of the firm visited Auschwitz up to 30 or 40 times during that period?

All this quote establishes is that Prüfer saw no way in which the guards could dispose of all of the bodies using the usual crematoria methods WITH THE EXISTING AMOUNT OF OVENS. Which would be pretty consistent with the correlation between heavy influx of inmates and witness accounts of open pit fires during exactly that period.

Whoever is interested in the full details (very extensive page)

rodohforum.yuku.com...

holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com...

So what was actually said is that there were too many bodies in the camp for furnaces to effectively cope with (those were 6 muffles of the old crematorium - Birkenau crematoria with 46 muffles had not been built yet), not that several bodies couldn't have been burned at the same time. This is also confirmed by testimony of Sander, taken on March 13, 1946:

Pruefer then gave me an example that in his presence two-three corpses were being put into each muffle, and even then they did not cope with the load, because there were too many corpses for incineration in the concentration camp. (Emphasis mine - SR)

And this would be the nail in the coffin of the argument; I knew someone would fall for it.

Prüfer could only be talking about the 6-muffled, old crematoria of Birkenau.

Now think about that. You say " This quote shows that Prüfer said it was impossible to dispose of all of the bodies with this machinery "

YET you fail to mention that the capacity of the Crematoria was SIGNIFICANTLY EXPANDED (6 muffle crematoria vs. 46 muffle crematoria) after the period Prüfer was referring to in this interview.

Now.. Is this simple carelessness? Or is this proof of an agenda?

I would guess that as far as PeopleVSNWO goes, it's carelessness. As far as Mattogno goes - it's proof of an agenda. How could he omit the fact of the subsequent increase in crematoria capacity when it totally demolishes his argument? Dishonesty seems to be the only possible answer.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 13-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]