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

Originally posted by Truth4hire

The pictures you mentioned earlier were from Bergen-Belsen, and the bodies were examined, and there was no gas or carbon monoxide involved in their killing.

I did not say that at all, I said that there were no bodies found in camps under German control which showed that they were killed by gas or carbon-monoxide.

As early as 1944 it was recognized by both the Germans and even the Red Cross that the situation in the camps (in general) was deteriorating rapidly, and that inmates were dying in large numbers because of disease and malnutrition. One of the reasons was that there were insufficient supplies of chemicals (yes, Zyklon-B) to disinfect barracks and clothing from lice which carried pectoral typhus, another reason is that supplies were very hard to bring into the camps because the breakdown of the German infrastructure. These essential supplies (food, medication) were needed to keep the inmates alive. Tyfus was a huge killer in the eastern camps and spared friend nor foe.

Naturally many perished at the end of the war for the above reasons. This still is not proof of gassing or systematic extermination. If anything I would say it was careless of the Allies to bomb the railways which carried supplies to the camps (not soldiers).

Have you bothered to read any of the transcripts at all? I wish you would, because your reactions are biased.
[edit on 13-3-2007 by Truth4hire]

Not as biased as yours. Yes, I have read the transcripts. I have looked at the Holocaust extensively and I followed the Irving Trial with great attention. When the verdict came in I then had a large beer and felt better about the world.

The death camps of the east were massive. They existed. They carried out the industrial mass-murder of the jews. The mass graves in Russia, where at least a million were shot for the "crime" of being jewish also existed. We have a vast amount of evidence to show that something inexplicably terrible happened there. The Holocaust makes no practical sense. Murder never does.

As for statement blaming the Allies for the deaths in the camps, how dare you make such a laughable statement. Can I remind you that the railways were still shipping in Jews into Bergen-Belsen towatrds the end of the war - so they could also have shipped in food. They didn't because no-one cared about the jews there. There were surplus to requirements. That was the Nazi mentality. Death by malicious indifference. How many millions of Soviet prisoners starved to death in 1941-1942 because they were shut away in POW camps and not sufficiently fed? No, your argument is baseless.

And to return to the start of your post - yes, the bodies were from Bergen-Belsen. What's your point? It was a CONCENTRATION camp - not an extermination camp. No-one was gassed there. They died of typhus and starvation and gratuitous cruelty and indifference.

My grandfather was there to see its liberation.

Originally posted by Darkmind
Not as biased as yours. Yes, I have read the transcripts. I have looked at the Holocaust extensively and I followed the Irving Trial with great attention. When the verdict came in I then had a large beer and felt better about the world.

Well good for you, and good for the propaganda machine. The Irving Trail is not really a good representation I feel because Irving was defending himself and failed miserably at it. Try Zündel.

The death camps of the east were massive. They existed. They carried out the industrial mass-murder of the jews.

Yes. Yes. and No. I hate to bring this to you, but Rudolf and Leuchter have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the designated gas chambers in the Leichenkellern of Auschwitz were never exposed to cyanide gas (Zyklon-B). Despite massive and careful attempts to discredit them the reports are there, and are not going away.

Excerpt showing Rudolf and Leuchter findings and persecution

Why would these researchers be persecuted like this if there was no provable truth to their reports? Why?

I´ll tell you why: if the reports get out into the mainstream, the Nazi´s no longer have a murder weapon for their alleged crime, and the house of cards come down. Please study at least the methods of disposal of the bodies: removal from the gas chambers immediately after the killings? That is simply impossible, the workers, even when fitted with gas masks would have been killed. The rooms needed to be heated to 78.3 farenheit to disperse the gas, otherwise the process would take hours, not minutes. How where the damp rooms heated?

The mass graves in Russia, where at least a million were shot for the "crime" of being jewish also existed. We have a vast amount of evidence to show that something inexplicably terrible happened there.

Who is we, and if that evidence is forensic I would like to see it.

The Holocaust makes no practical sense. Murder never does.

O, but it does! It makes a lot of sense to me if it is being used for creation and protection of the state of Israël , and the enrichment thereof.

As for statement blaming the Allies for the deaths in the camps, how dare you make such a laughable statement.

I dare to make such a "laughable" statement because it is well accepted by contemporary historians that the infrastructure in Germany collapsed end of 1944 and during 1945 by the Allies´incindiary and carpet bombings. If chemical factories get bombed, they can no longer produce chemicals like Zyklon-B. Or medication. If supply lines get bombed they can no longer supply. What is so laughable or illogical about that?

Can I remind you that the railways were still shipping in Jews into Bergen-Belsen towards the end of the war - so they could also have shipped in food.

You sure may remind me of that, and ofcourse food was shipped as well, but didn´t reach the camps in nearly enough quantities.

The major problem in Bergen-Belsen towards the end of the war was lack of delousing chemicals, medication and food.

They didn't because no-one cared about the jews there. There were surplus to requirements. That was the Nazi mentality. Death by malicious indifference.

I might call that a biased opinion again.

How many millions of Soviet prisoners starved to death in 1941-1942 because they were shut away in POW camps and not sufficiently fed? No, your argument is baseless.

How many millions of German soldiers were beaten tortured and starved to death in the Eastern Soviet camps in 1945-1946?

No, your argument is baseless too.

And to return to the start of your post - yes, the bodies were from Bergen-Belsen. What's your point? It was a CONCENTRATION camp - not an extermination camp. No-one was gassed there.

My point is that these pictures are used as propaganda to prove that the Nazi´s gassed millions of Jews and had an extermination policy.

They died of typhus and starvation and gratuitous cruelty and indifference.

The first two reasons are proven, the latter is under discussion.

My grandfather was there to see its liberation.

Sorry he had to experience that, now I can see why you are reacting the way you are. Have you ever seriously discussed this with your Grandfather, or did he not want to discuss it.

I (cruelly and in secret) wish someone in my direct environment had first hand experiences so I could ask them. Even if you would not wish such experiences to your best enemies I would want to know what their eyes have seen exactly.

On a sidenote, the link I have posted here is but one of 22 (or 23) parts of the entire movie, which is currently being counterposted by someone who is using these parts to debunk the original movie part by part.

It is strange to see that parts 18 & 19 have not triggered such replies. Link to part 18 is in this post. I have watched a few debunking parts, but I´m not too impressed so far. Anyone else watching those?

There are simply too many unanswered critical questions unanswered. Many questions about burning victims in the open air remain. Many questions about the capacity of the crematoria remain. They really have not been answered. If you or anyone can answer these I am all ears, and this thread can finally be closed.

Edit: The author of the movie probably did not know about the Australian scientific expedition to Treblinka. They did take ground samples at Treblinka

[edit on 14-3-2007 by Truth4hire]

I think i'll take the word of the thousands of eye witnesses that lived through WWII over your BS.

What exactly do you hope to gain with this nonsense anyway?

It would be laughable but for the seriousness of the subject matter.

Originally posted by Smack
I think i'll take the word of the thousands of eye witnesses that lived through WWII over your BS.

What exactly do you hope to gain with this nonsense anyway?

It would be laughable but for the seriousness of the subject matter.

I am hoping to find the truth determined by forensic evidence, not by evidence provided by eye witnesses.

Would you rely simply on testimony by eye witnesses in a crime of such magnitude? Maybe in Stalin´s Russia my friend, but not in the modern western world. Ofcourse forensic evidence is needed, and the biggest investigation in the history of mankind should have followed WWII.

It did not.

Would you rely simply on testimony by eye witnesses in a crime of such magnitude?

The simple answer is: Yes, wholeheartedly, without reservation. You see, in criminal prosecutions, the word of the victim counts for a lot - the word of several thousand, recounting the same story, counts for everything.

Sorry but, no 'forensic' evidence is going to trump that.

The problem is that they did not tell the same story. On the contrary, some stories were so outrageous that not even current historians believe them. I could name Kurt Gerstein as an example, claiming 25 million were killed. You will find in this thread access to a vast amount of information with regards to the eye witness accounts, and their testimonies.

Smack has a point.
I mean many people claim to have witnessed the event with their own eyes. Some of the perpetrators even admitted it, prior to being executed. We also have a few other patchy bits of evidence.
Therefore it is an irrefutable and never-to-be-challenged fact that witches rode on broomsticks at night-time, cast spells on their neighbours and had sex with Satan.

Case closed.

Anyone who contests this, using logical analysis of the available facts / documents / testimonies is a 'witchcraft denier' and should be shunned and criticised by all.

Well, that is a point too.

Why do I get the feeling that any form of real active discussion about this is going to be hard and cumbersome?

Is this not the place to discuss conspiracies?

Is this not a probable conspiracy?

Interesting.

Someone mentioned he was wowed by Paul Rassinier, I dug up his initial work (freely available still), translated from French to English.

Ulyssee´s lie by Paul Rassinier considered by most the start of revisionism, written by a man who was interned himself by the Germans.

About:

Paul Rassinier was born on March 18, 1906, in Beaumont, a small village near Montbéliard, the son of a farmer. He received his formal education in the schools of the area and passed the necessary examinations which allowed him to teach history and geography at the secondary school level and to use the title of "professor." He taught in the secondary school at Faubourg de Montbéliard where students were prepared to take the "brevet," an examination that is somewhat inferior to that examination which is taken by students in the lycées who desire to matriculate at the university. It was at this school that he was arrested by the Gestapo in October 1943.

Having joined the Socialist Party, SFIO, in 1934, Paul Rassinier became the head of that party in the Belfort area when the war broke out in 1939. Following the German occupation of France, he participated in the founding of the "Libre-Nord" organization which became involved in various forms of "passive resistance," including the smuggling of Jewish refugees over the Franco-Swiss border into Switzerland in cooperation with the Swiss Jewish Committee. Rassinier's activities eventually came to the attention of the German authorities who caused him to be arrested and to be deported to the concentration camp at Buchenwald. Later he was sent to the camp at Dora where he was incarcerated until the end of the war.

Upon his liberation in 1945, he returned to France where he was elected to the Assemblée Nationale as a Socialist deputy. He served for one year and then retired He was awarded the highest decoration which the French government bestowed for service in the wartime resistance movement. Due to his frail health, a consequence of his two years of imprisonment at Buchenwald and Dora, he retired from teaching and received a small pension from the French government. He died on July 29, 1967, at his home in Asnières, near Paris. He is survived by his wife, Jeanette, and his only son, Jean-Paul, who is a practicing physician

Start here if you are new to revisionism. It´s "only" 308 pages.

Anyone who contests this, using logical analysis of the available facts / documents / testimonies is a 'witchcraft denier' and should be shunned and criticised by all.

Sarcasm aside, are you really equating holocaust survivor’s testimony to that of ignorant religious zealots of the 15th century? Seriously, how can you compare the two? I think you lose the argument when you make absurd comparisons like that.

If the OP is saying, there might be some exaggeration attached to the stories since the end of WWII, then I will concede that point.

If the OP is saying, that certain Zionist groups may have capitalized on this for political purposes, I agree with that supposition also.

If the OP is saying, it never happened at all... I don't think he's saying that because it would be a ridiculous argument.

If the OP is saying it merits study and objective research; again I agree.

However, my argument stands, that the testimony of the victims should carry more weight, than speculation, based on somewhat dubious forensic evidence.

Smack,
i actually think there are a lot of parallels between the witchcraft trials and the Holocaust situation. But I accept the fact that the witchcraft thing is a bit of a red herring which we don't need. There's no need to discuss it further - it'll just complicate an already complicated situation.
The problem here is that people are joining the debate late, not reading the previous posts and making comments / asking questions that have already been dealt with. Please scroll back and read some of my previous posts. You will see that the matter of eyewitness testimony versus other evidence has already been covered. Its not a question of calling the eyewitnesses liars - its just that is regarded as a wholly unreliable form of evidence.
Anyway - I agree with some of what you wrote, regarding exaggeration, manipulation of opinion etc.

Good post by Smack, and good advice by kenochi.

Thank you both

I'm always amazed at how everyone interprets posts like these as them saying 'it didn't happen' they're not saying this at all, they're only questioning the extent as to which it happened.

Then people will be posting things like 'ohhh you try telling that to my grandfather who was IN the camp'
Yeah i know, he was there and it was hell. Your point?

If theres any truth in the matter of it being exaggerated, why not examine it? I'm all for it.
No matter what it doesn't change what did happen and it doesn't take away from the evilness of the whole thing.
Some people just like to make sure the facts are straight.

Originally posted by T0by
Some people just like to make sure the facts are straight.

Exactly what drives me, thank you.

I have a question, I miss Nygdan.

Where is he? Why is he no longer a mod and why did he stop posting to this thread? Was it something I said?

Ah well, I will just start debunking myself for a change.

I have ran into a report by Richard J. Green which pretty much reverses the findings by Fred Leuchter and Germar Rudolf and their analysis of the Crematorium walls in Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Leuchter, Rudolf and the Iron Blues

ABSTRACT: Leuchter and Rudolf have published pseudoscientific reports purporting to show that chemical residues present in the gas chambers of Auschwitz-Birkenau are incompatible with homicidal gassings. Markiewicz, Gubala, and Labedz have shown unequivocally that cyanides are present in Kremas I-V and bunker 11, at levels above background levels measured in other facilities. Many of the delousing chambers exhibit blue-staining that is not obviously present in the homicidal gas chambers. Leuchter and Rudolf found higher levels of cyanide in these installations than they found in the homicidal gas chambers. The blue-staining present in the delousing chambers is most likely one of the iron blues, a class of compound including Prussian blue. Markiewicz, Gubala, and Labedz discriminated against the presence of this compound, whereas Leuchter and Rudolf did not.

It raises at least serious doubts about the reports made by Leuchter and Rudolf. There is more, but for now I would say the Rudolf Report is off my evidence list for the Revisionist case, unless someone else can de-debunk this.

[edit on 16-3-2007 by Truth4hire]

there's a lot of info and technical data regarding all the cyanide sample studies done at Auschwitz here...

codoh forum cyanide thread

interesting TV interview with Bradley Smith, one of the foremost 'deniers'. I believe this interview was recorded for American TV. If so, it must surely be the first mainstream broadcasting of revisionist views and if so, I would like to heartily congratulate the station responsible, whoever they may be.

brad smith interview

[edit on 17-3-2007 by Truth4hire]

Originally posted by kenochi
there's a lot of info and technical data regarding all the cyanide sample studies done at Auschwitz here...

codoh forum cyanide thread

Thanks for that kenochi.

The problem is simply, who do you believe?

I was quite impressed by Rudolf´s report, but equally impressed with Green´s report. I´m simply not a chemist, maybe that´s the problem.

Thanks for the Bradley link too, watching shortly.

Add: one more thing which was in the back of my mind: someone (I think Nygdan mentioned that the Gas chambers where hosed down after each gassing, which would wash away most of the cyanide residues from the walls. This did not seem very plausible at the time to me, but after reading Green I think this may very well be a valid argument against Leuchter/Rudolf.

Do you have any thoughts on that? Did either Leuchter or Rudolf ever comment on that?

[edit on 17-3-2007 by Truth4hire]

Originally posted by kenochi
interesting TV interview with Bradley Smith, one of the foremost 'deniers'. I believe this interview was recorded for American TV. If so, it must surely be the first mainstream broadcasting of revisionist views and if so, I would like to heartily congratulate the station responsible, whoever they may be.

brad smith interview

For the source of this video see below:

[quote from www.exposingisraeliapartheid.com...]
“Myth, Terrorism & Taboo”, produced by television talk show host Mark Green, presenting highlights from his program “FLASHPOINT” in 2003 on matters concerning U.S. foreign policies in the Middle East. Included are dramatic moments from his interviews with informed and often controversial guests, including Jeffrey Blankfort, Wendy Campbell, Ivan Eland, Richard D. Hecht, Mark Gery, David Nueneubel, Bradley Smith and Stephen Zunes . Among the topics are “Zionism: Kosher Apartheid?”, “Holocaust Skepticism: The Last Taboo?”, “Washington, D.C.: Israeli Occupied Territory” and related topics rarely seen on television. Groundbreaking. 57 mins Also available in DVD.

Yeah - I know what you mean, Truth. If you read the thread on Codoh, the general conclusion seems to be that all the studies have faults which could lead to them being disbelieved. Its a question of which faults you think are the most telling. The issue of weathering and hosing is addressed in the thread. I know that there are also issues raised by comparisons between the Auschwitz cyanide studies and the studies conducted at other camps, which have a bearing on the question at hand.
I think the thing that comes out of all the studies - and I'm not a chemist either - is that it needs a real team of UN scientists to go in there and conduct a proper, well funded, thorough investigation that can then be analysed by the scientific community and peer reviewed. Really, this should have happened as part of the Nuremburg process. I guess its unlikely to happen now. While all we have are small teams of guys going in there without permission and conducting studies on the sly, their results will always be open to criticism.

In a free world there is never anything wrong with going back and analyzing the authenticity of events. Whether you agree with someones position or not. In a free society that is your right. It is your right to have an opposing view, no matter how distasteful others might think it is. Be happy if you are in a part of the world where you can still voice an opposing view.

You have to stop and think about what is happening when you can be jailed for voicing dissent. Especially when you can disrespect or deny atrocities done to anybody except a certain privaledged group.