It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 15
23
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2007 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by kenochi
I've been interested in the subject for a few years but I find it amazing that anyone can still believe this story.

As a PhD student in Conflict Resolution and Analysis, I find your assertion that YOU spent "a few years" near ludicrous, along with your belief system.

Personally, I find it utterly amazing that people like you still don't believe that such occurred. Pretty sad if you ask me. The proofs and evidences speak for themselves. To dispute them is not revisionism, as some skeptics would have you believe, but pure unadulterated, self-delusional denial.


so phd STUDENT, what proofs are you talking about. The scam trial, the hundreds of thousands of SURVIVORS still alive today. how many of those survivers seen an oven? Im supposed to believe that soap was made from victims, and i can buy a lamp shade made of jew skin, bu there is no way that any of the evidence was lied about or exagerated?

who is the senstationalist here?

why have all the so called proof with nazi records been boarded up in a safehouse for the last 60 years?


sorry to everyone else, but i could not let that nonsense be the last word of this thread.

Good job truthforhire, dont let these gullible sheep break your spirits.
i wonder if even half of these people giving argument ever actually watched video you posted?




posted on May, 28 2007 @ 07:42 AM
link   
the Holocaust functions these days on a 'need to believe basis', much like religion. I've had these sorts of discussions many times and have lost count of the people who attempt to argue against revisonist facts, evidence and logic by blasting emotionally, using personal attacks and bluster.
You may have a PHD in conflict resolution, but you have nothing in your comment other than hot air. As was said earlier in this thread, go and find some evidence for gas chambers - if you can, you'll be doing more than the leading Holocaust historians (Hilberg, Pressac, Gilbert, Shermer etc) because none of them can provide any.

I've come to the conclusion that the Holocaust (tm) will always be a part of our lives. Even if, as I believe it will, official history comes to regard the gas chambers and the 6 million as a propaganda myth, people will still write books, make films and wax lyrical about it. Its become a cultural giant - bigger than WW2 itself - bigger than history, bigger than politics, bigger than rational sense.
That's why its believers can't stand to see it questioned. To them it is a 'sacred cow'.

All things are subject to interpretation. Whatever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not of truth (nietzsche)



posted on May, 28 2007 @ 11:30 AM
link   
A Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust

This site has lots of information on the Holocaust

Keep in mind that probably less than half of the people killed during the Holocaust were killed in the camps may died in ghettos and were killed by special SS units during the occupation of eastern Europe.



posted on May, 29 2007 @ 06:59 AM
link   
I see, less than half were killed in gas chambers now, is it? where did you hear that? Its certainly an interesting manouevre. And is that less than half of the 6 million Jews or less than half of the 11 million, including non-Jews?
How come originally we were told 4 million had been gassed at Auschwitz alone? How come originally we were told there was gassing at Dachau and Belsen? Why is the story changing? I thought it was pure, unchallengeable fact?

The thing is, its changing because as the holocaust industry realises that sections of its mythology are becoming untenable, they back away from them. Just like the human-soap factories and the lampshades made from Jewish skin / furnishings from Jewsih hair absurdities, they are now beginning, very gently, to back down from the gas chamber claim, because they realise that more and more people are seeing it for the fabrication that it really is. By trying to emphasise the activities of the 'einsatzgruppen' (special action squads) who fought eastern european partisans in guerilla combat, and claiming that to be the bulk of the 'holocaust' they hope to shift focus and therefore avoid crushing defeat when the gas chamber claim is finally abandoned.

I had a look at the site you linked to and its dreadful. If you want to read stuff supporting the standard story go to www.holocaust-history.org... or even Nizkor. At least they present some proper evidence.

[edit on 29-5-2007 by kenochi]



posted on May, 29 2007 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Actually i just provided a link to the information. Approx 11 million were killed approx 6 million were jewish some were killed in the camps and some were killed elsewhere. What is clear is that the government of Nazi Germany had a policy that sought the elimination of certain undesirables and they put that policy into practice. It doesnt really matter how they were killed, They were killed and they are just as dead if they are starved, gassed or shot they are just as dead.

[edit on 5/29/2007 by DarkStormCrow]



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 04:37 AM
link   
But it does matter...

It does matter how many and how they died. Because if you start arguing that "only" half were dead in the gas chambers, that mythical six million figure -which holds so much religious importance to the Jews btw- vanishes into thin air.

Most undesirables were rounded up and put to work as slaves. And yes, some were executed because they were political enemies. But for the life of me I do not see how this is worse than Stalin´s Gulags, Japan´s internment camps or the P.O.W. camps on U.S. soil during WWII for that matter.

The Holocaust Religion makes it sound as if only Jews were suffering, and the WWII soviet propaganda machine was there without a doubt exaggerating evidence and rolling out lying witnesses on cue to cover their own (and Allied) atrocities.

Atrocities you seldom hear about, and are not in the history books.

It all becomes quite clear once you start studying the materials. Maybe that is why the powers that be do not want independent investigations into the Holocaust? It is sickening, and I do not mean the Nazis.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 07:49 AM
link   
It doesnt matter to me


It does matter how many and how they died. Because if you start arguing that "only" half were dead in the gas chambers, that mythical six million figure -which holds so much religious importance to the Jews btw- vanishes into thin air


I dont know about religious importance as I am not jewish.


Most undesirables were rounded up and put to work as slaves. And yes, some were executed because they were political enemies. But for the life of me I do not see how this is worse than Stalin´s Gulags, Japan´s internment camps or the P.O.W. camps on U.S. soil during WWII for that matter.


In regards to US POW and Internee camps how many died in those camps? Was it the policy of the US government to kill Pows or Internees?

Problem I have with "investigations of the Holocaust" is that it is never done by nuetral sources but but groups or individuals with a anti jewish agenda.

Joos control the Media
Joos control the Banks
Joos control the Government

Gimme a break

My family lost a a family member at Dachau he wasnt Jewish he was probably more "Aryan" (a misused term if ever there was one) than the Nazis that had him imprisoned there.

I dont think there should be laws against questioning I am not big on government thought control.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarkStormCrow
Problem I have with "investigations of the Holocaust" is that it is never done by nuetral sources but but groups or individuals with a anti jewish agenda.


DSC, this is simply not true. Check out vho.org...

You seem like a reasonable person, why not look into it youself like I did?



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 09:10 AM
link   
VHO links to Jew Watch so that throws nuetrality out the window.



posted on May, 30 2007 @ 06:46 PM
link   

so phd STUDENT, what proofs are you talking about. The scam trial, the hundreds of thousands of SURVIVORS still alive today. how many of those survivers seen an oven? Im supposed to believe that soap was made from victims, and i can buy a lamp shade made of jew skin, bu there is no way that any of the evidence was lied about or exagerated?

who is the senstationalist here?

why have all the so called proof with nazi records been boarded up in a safehouse for the last 60 years?


sorry to everyone else, but i could not let that nonsense be the last word of this thread.

Good job truthforhire, dont let these gullible sheep break your spirits.
i wonder if even half of these people giving argument ever actually watched video you posted?


How about the proof in the case of my family members that lived through it and had to watch their friends and families go to the gas chambers and die..


[edit on 5/30/07 by RedDragon]



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 12:24 AM
link   
How did they watch it. where were they standing? why were they not gassed as well if they were so close?

can you give any more detail to your grandparents experiences?

i would love to know. Ive never met anyone that said they could give first hand acount of the executions.



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I'm just curious but are there any Jewish/Nazi/U.S. military personnel that can claim that The Holocaust didn't happen as such?



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Thanks for the headsup: the link to the video is broken...

Here a direct link to the video on Google:


Google Video Link


On another note, the video was removed from Youtube for "violating terms".. ??? What is that all about? The video responses to the video are not removed, so why is this?

If you need more scientific proof about the "Holocaust" I recommend:

Germar Rudolf(ed.): Dissecting The Holocaust The Growing Critique of ‘Truth’ and 'Memory', 2nd. revised edition

The editor is currently in jail in Germany as are many other scientists who have spoken out against the facts presented with regards to the Holocaust.

Two warnings:

1) The PDF file is 16MB large
2) If you are in Europe it may now no longer be legal for you to have, read or spread these documents.

Entire archive here (still)

Scary, isn´t it?



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 04:41 AM
link   
I believe that the Nuremberg Trial was a travesty, I believe that as a result of it men were wrongly sent to their deaths. I believe that the greatest inhumanity was inflicted upon Rudolf Hess for no other reason than the British were fearful of what he might say. I also believe that Hitler never ever intended to murder the Jews, but he did.

I can tell you exactly why the Nuremberg trials were a sham, but it has nothing to do with the gas chambers, they existed, they gassed at least 2 million people - men, women and children to death. I can point you to several books which will change your perception of why the genocide that occured did not take place for the reasons we are led to believe, but it did take place and undoubtably in the numbers estimated.

I will not get arrested or imprisoned for revising second world war history. I will get arrested for telling lies that are libelous or downright disrespectful. The very best example is David Irving, David Irving was not arrested for revising history, he was arrested for an ill-advised and impetuous denial of the gas chambers. This is the opportunity that had been long awaited and he was jumped on and imprisoned. Irving has been telling the truth for years and as a result, he has been marginalised, ridiculed and the victim of disinformation. That is what really happens to people who tell the truth.

They don't imprison you for telling the truth, they ignore you and hope you go away, if that doesn't work they try to make sure that no-one will listen to you.

The very fact that this guy is getting so much publicity is proof enough that there is little substance in what he has to say.

BTW - expect much Armenian holocaust denial arrests soon as Turkey is releasing its archives on the matter - in France it is a crime to deny that holocaust too. I don't agree with these laws, they are slight of hand designed to make us look the other way. Don't be fooled.



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout
I will not get arrested or imprisoned for revising second world war history. I will get arrested for telling lies that are libelous or downright disrespectful. The very best example is David Irving, David Irving was not arrested for revising history, he was arrested for an ill-advised and impetuous denial of the gas chambers. This is the opportunity that had been long awaited and he was jumped on and imprisoned. Irving has been telling the truth for years and as a result, he has been marginalised, ridiculed and the victim of disinformation. That is what really happens to people who tell the truth.

They don't imprison you for telling the truth, they ignore you and hope you go away, if that doesn't work they try to make sure that no-one will listen to you.


Good post.

Well, I only half agree with you. It is without a doubt that gas chambers existed in the larger camps, but I challenge your statement that "at least 2 million" people were gassed there.

It was common practice to delouse huge piles of bedlinen to avoid the spread of tyfus in these chambers. Zyklon-B is an extremely dangerous chemical which can only be used in an highly controlled environment.

The irony is that most people in the camps started to die of tyfus at the latter stages of the war because supplies of Zyklon-B ran out. Seriously.

If you say or write the following in Germany, Austria, France or Poland:
"I have serious doubts about Holocaust survivors testimonials with regards to the gassings of people" You will do a minimum of 5 years.

Any documentation or proof or scientific experts you may introduct to the courts will be denied. Look it up if you do not believe me.

I hope listeners will at least read one book. Like the one I mentioned above. The truth is really out there in PDF form, all you need to do is read, deduct and conclude. There is a reason this literature is banned, and it is not because they are written by Neo-nazis (because they are not), it is not because they incite racial hatred (because they do not). No, it is because: (drumroll) revisionism endangers the establishment and current global power structures.

Can you imagine what would happen in Germany if the published information became public (accepted) knowledge? All hell would break loose that´s what!

Ask and you will get answers...



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Truth4hire
My opinion as I mentioned earlier is that I do not think Auschwitz was a death camp and that most victims died of malnutrition and disease at the latter stages of the war due to insuficcient supplies reaching the concentration camps which, in turn was caused by a breakdown of the German railway infrastructure caused by Allied bombings.


Then perhaps you should read the book "Night" by Elie Wiesel, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986.



Born:
1928
Sighet, Transylvania (now in Romania)

Background:
Wiesel's parents, Shlomo and Sarah Wiesel, were Orthodox Jews. His father ran his own grocery store and was active in the community. Wiesel had three sisters, Hilda, Beatrice and Tzipora.

Holocaust Experience:
When Wiesel was 15, he and his family were forced by Nazis into a Jewish ghetto and then deported to Auschwitz–Birkenau. His mother and younger sister, Tzipora, were killed at Auschwitz. He and his father survived together for one year, but his father died shortly before American troops liberated the camp.

Night:
Wiesel describes his experience during the Holocaust in Night, which was first published in French in 1958 as La Nuit. Night has been translated into more than 30 languages. Wiesel released a new English translation of Night in 2006, which was translated by his wife, Marion Wiesel. The new translation was chosen for Oprah's Book Club, propelling it on to the bestsellers lists.

Other Writings:
Wiesel has published more than 40 fiction and nonfiction books.

After the Holocaust:
After the war, Wiesel lived in a French orphanage where he learned French and found his two older sisters, Hilda and Beatrice. Wiesel began studying philosophy at the Sorbonne in 1948. He became a professional journalist, but refused to write about or discuss his Holocaust experience for 10 years after the war. Wiesel moved to the U.S. in 1955 and became a U.S. citizen in 1963.

Teaching:
Wiesel is the Andrew Mellon Professor of Humanities at Boston University.

Humanitarian Work:
Wiesel won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986 for speaking out against violence and oppression. Shortly afterward, he and his wife started the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity to combat indifference, injustice and intolerance.


You can get this book "Night" as an audiobook, too.

Aside from reading this book, I've met several holocaust survivors and seen the tattoos they were given. They all told horrible tales of inhumanity.

If you haven't been to the Museum of Tolerance, I suggest you take a trip down there.

Whatever movie you are watching is spoonfeeding you garbage and trying to brainwash you with more Nazi propoganda. Stop believing that crap.

[edit on 9/24/2007 by pjslug]



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Elie Wiesel.

I´m sorry but if you actually read "Night" he is to be considered as an unreliable source for proof of mass-exterminations.



A few words force themselves to our attention in regard to Elie Wiesel (...). In Night, a biographical account particularly regarding his internment at Auschwitz and Buchenwald, Mr. Wiesel does not even mention the gas chambers but it appears, by way of a sort of universal media convention, that he is considered as a witness par excellence on the ‘Holocaust’ and the gas chambers. According to him, if the Germans exterminated large numbers of Jews, it was by forcing them either into raging fires or ovens! The conclusion of his testimony includes an extremely curious episode (pp. 129-133) over which I have been waiting years for Elie Wiesel to furnish us an explanation: in January 1945 he tells us, the Germans gave him and his father the choice between staying behind in the camp to await the arrival of the Soviets, or leaving with the Germans; after agreeing between them, the father and son decided to depart for Germany with their executioners instead of staying in place to await their Soviet liberators…


Robert Faurisson, Dissecting the Holocaust Page 141.



R: But these were all lies, as Spanish mainstream historian Benito Bermejo found out in early 2005. During the war, Marco actually volunteered in 1941 to work in a German navy dockyard, from where he returned to Spain in 1943. He never saw any German camp form the inside. Norman Finkelstein clearly illuminated the blind loyalty aspect of Holocaust liars by recalling Elie Wiesel’s stubborn loyalty towards Holocaust impostor
Jerzy Kosinski, long after Polish journalist Johanna Siedlecka exposed Kosinski’s basic Holocaust text of 1965, The Painted Bird, as a fabrication. Alfred Kazin’s reproach in the Chicago Tribune is fitting when he claims that Elie Wiesel, Primo Levi, and Jerzy Kosinski “tried making a fortune off the Holocaust and inventing atrocities.”

L: Elie Wiesel and Primo Levi have also been exposed as fabricators?

R: They have been accused of being dishonest. Elie Wiesel, probably the most famous of all Auschwitz survivors, was repeatedly and massively attacked by his own Holocaust allies, among others by Norman Finkelstein as well as by Pierre Vidal-Naquet, the arch-rival of revisionist scholar Dr. Robert Faurisson. Vidal-Naquet claimed: “For instance, they have Rabbi Kahane, this extremist Jew, who is less dangerous than a man like Elie Wiesel, who tells all sorts of things… One only has to read a few descriptions in ‘Night’ in order to know that some of his depictions are not
true and that at the end he turned into a Shoah peddler. And so he as well damages the historical truth, and this to a tremendous extent.”

R: Later I shall return to some contextual aspects of Wiesel’s biography La Nuit (Night), but now only mention an extraordinary aspect: In the original French version of his book he does not mention the gas chambers at Auschwitz. His view was that Jews were killed at Auschwitz by pushing them alive into burning pits. I will get back to that later. Only in the German version was this “deficiency” rectified by substituting the
words “cremation oven” with “Gaskammer” (gas chamber). This was done so mechanically that even the concentration camp Buchenwald had its crematory turned into a gas chamber, though it had never before been asserted that there was a gas chamber at Buchenwald.



Germar Rudolf - Discussions on the Holocaust, Page 423.



4.5.15. Elie Wiesel

R: In conclusion of our consideration of incredible testimonies, and as introduction to testimonies that are more credible, we will now consider the statements of our last witness. Since Wiesel does not claim that homicidal gas chambers existed at Auschwitz (see Table 25, p. 427), he had to come up with a different way of exterminating his fellow Jews.

L: But he does claim that flames shot out of the crematory chimneys!

R: Thanks for the additional detail. In order to murder his victims, Wiesel hit upon the idea of having the victims of Auschwitz burned alive in huge open fires:



“Not far from us, flames were leaping up from a ditch, gigantic flames. They were burning something there. A lorry drew up at the pit and delivered its load – little children. Babies! Yes, I saw it – saw it with my own eyes… those children in the flames. (Is it surprising that I could not sleep after that? Sleep had fled from my eyes.) So this is where we were going. A little farther on was another and larger ditch for adults. […] ‘Father,’ I said, ‘if that is so, I don’t want to wait here. I’m going to run to the electric wire. That would be better than slow agony in the flames.’”


R: The French original actually reads “vegetating for hours in the flames,” an exaggeration which had been obviously edited out in the English translation. As we all know, he did not have to “vegetate for hours in the flames,” though.

L: As if it would have been possible to “vegetate for hours in the flames.”

R: A bit of an exaggeration, to be sure.

L: How can it be that the SS let him wander around freely in the camp so that he could become a witness of such atrocious cruelties in the first place?

R: Let’s say it that way: Wiesel saw flames, where there were none. Here two more examples:



“[…] the flames were gushing out of a tall chimney into the black sky. […] Do you see that chimney over there? See it? Do you see those flames?”



Continued...

[edit on 24-9-2007 by Truth4hire]



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 03:29 PM
link   


R: At any rate, Wiesel was saved by a wondrous event:



“Our line had now only fifteen paces to go. I bit my lips so that my father would not hear my teeth chattering. Ten steps still. Eight. Seven. We
marched slowly on as though following a hearse at our own funeral. Four more steps. Three steps. There it was now, right in front of us, the pit and its flames. I gathered all that was left of my strength, so that I could break the ranks and throw myself upon the barbed wire. In the depth of my heart I bade farewell to my father, to the whole universe; and, in spite of myself, the words formed themselves and issued a whisper from my lips: Yitgadal veyitkadach shmé raba… May His name be blessed and magnified…. My heart was bursting. The moment had come. I was face to face with the Angel of Death… No. Two steps from the pit we were ordered to turn to the left and made to go into our barracks.”


L: Well, it could be true!

R: Except that it contradicts everything that every other witness has said about Auschwitz. In a different context, Elie Wiesel himself gave us a clue of what to think about his writings:



“‘What are you writing?’ the Rebbe asked. ‘ – Stories,’ I said. He wanted to know what kind of stories: true stories. ‘About people you have knew?’ Yes, about people I might have known. ‘About things that happened?’ Yes, about things that happened or could have happened. ‘But they did not?’ No, not all of them did. In fact, some were invented from almost the beginning to almost the end. The Rebbe leaned forward as if to measure me up and said with more sorrow than anger: ‘That means that you are writing lies!’ I did not answer immediately. The scolded child within me had nothing to say in his defense. Yet, I had to justify myself. ‘Things are not that simple, Rebbe. Some events do take place but are not true; other are – although they never occurred.’”


L: But it is not certain that Wiesel meant his Auschwitz memoirs with this.

R: No, but it is certain that his Auschwitz tale is neither true nor did it take place, so I guess that he is covering himself here. But wait a little while, Wiesel’s amazing finale is still to come.

R: The end of Elie Wiesel’s testimony on Auschwitz includes a very strange episode. When the Red Army was about to overrun Auschwitz in January 1945, the Germans evacuated the camp, but left it up to the sick inmates to decide whether they wanted to flee with the Germans or await the arrival of the Red Army. Some of Wiesel’s exact words of how he and his father made their decision read as follows:



“The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor, get him [the father] entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the others. ‘Well, what shall we do, father?’ He was silent. ‘Let’s be evacuated with the others,’ I told him.”


R: You need to fully realize what this means: For years Elie Wiesel and his father, so they claimed later, had been living in hell, where people had been burned alive in masses. The living inmates had been abused and mistreated with all methods one can think of. Then early 1945 there was a chance to flee from the clutches of these mass murderers and to be liberated by the advancing Russians. And how did they decide? They decided to flee from their liberators with their diabolic mass murderers. They decided to remain slave workers in the hell created by the evil Germans. They decided to reach out for the uncertainty of the cold and dark night under the guard of their German Satans. Ladies and Gentlemen! Here the key to the truth lies hidden! Elie Wiesel and his father feared the liberation by the Red Army more than they feared whatever the Germans or whatever fate would do to them when fleeing. In order to show that this is not a single case, I may support this with statements by Primo Levi. In his entry of January 17, 1945, Levi writes in his book Survival in Auschwitz, how he would have followed common instincts and would have joined the other inmates that fled with the SS, if only he had not been so sick:



“It was not a question of reasoning: I would probably also have followed the instinct of the flock if I had not felt so weak: fear is supremely contagious, and its immediate reaction is to make one try to run away.”


R: Keep in mind: The fear he writes about here is the one that drove the inmates - he talks about the instinct of the flock – and which drove them to flee with the Germans. They therefore did not fear the Germans, but the Russians. And Levi even gives us the result of this referendum by feet: 800 mostly incapacitated inmates decided to stay in Auschwitz, but 20,000 others joined the National Socialist mass murderers. Wiesel and Levi, two of the most influential atrocity propagandists against the Germans, admit here in the midst of their most important propaganda works – unnoticed by a world lulled into believing their atrocity stories – that they did not really fear the Germans. What would you expect how both would have reacted if they themselves had believed in their own stories?

L: They would have longed for the liberation by the Russians and would have done anything to get away from the Germans.

R: Quite so. The importance of the decision made by Wiesel and his father as well as by many hundreds or even thousands of their co-inmates cannot be overestimated. Or as American revisionist scholar Friedrich Paul Berg had put it:



“In the entire history of Jewish suffering at the hands of gentiles, what moment in time could possibly be more dramatic than this precious moment when Jews could choose between, on the one hand, liberation by the Soviets with the chances to tell the whole world about the evil ‘Nazis’ and to help bring about their defeat – and the other choice of going with the ‘Nazi’ mass murderers and to continue working for them and to help preserve their evil regime. […]



Germar Rudolf - Discussions on the Holocaust, Pages 471,472.

Do you still believe Elie Wiesel´s "Night"?

If so I would really like to hear your reasoning please.



















[edit on 24-9-2007 by Truth4hire]



posted on Sep, 24 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Last quote:



Dubbed by Novick the "sacralization of the Holocaust," this mystifications's most practiced purveyor is Elie Wiesel. For Wiesel, Novick rightly observes, The Holocaust is effectively a "mystery" religion. Thus Wiesel intones that the Holocaust "leads into darkness," "negates all answers," "lies outside, if not beyond, history," "defies both knowledge and description," "cannot be explained nor visualized," is "never to be comprehended or transmitted," marks a "destruction of history" and a "mutation on a cosmic scale." Only the survivor-priest (read: only Wiesel) is qualified to divine its mystery. And yet, The Holocaust's mystery, Wiesel avows, is "noncommunicable"; "we cannot even talk about it." Thus, for his standard fee of $25,000 (plus chauffeured limousine), Wiesel lectures that the "secret" of Auschwitz's "truth lies in silence."

Rationally comprehending The Holocaust amounts, in this view, to denying it. For rationality denies The Holocaust's uniqueness and mystery. And to compare The Holocaust with the sufferings of others constitutes, for Wiesel, a "total betrayal of Jewish history." Some years back, the parody of a New York tabloid was headlined: "Michael Jackson, 60 Million Others, Die in Nuclear Holocaust." The letters page carried an irate protest from Wiesel: "How dare people refer to what happened yesterday as a Holocaust? There was only one Holocaust...." In his new memoir Wiesel, proving that life can also imitate spoof, reprimands Shimon Peres for speaking "without hesitation of 'the two holocausts' of the twentieth century: Auschwitz and Hiroshima. He shouldn't have." A favorite Wiesel tag line declares that «the universality of the Holocaust lies in its uniqueness." But if it is incomparably and incomprehensibly unique, how can The Holocaust have a universal dimension?


Norman Finkelstein: The Holocaust Industry: HOAXERS, HUCKSTERS AND HISTORY Page 25.

So, is the Jew Norman Finkelstein a Neo-nazi because he questions Wiesel´s motives?

It gets worse.



posted on Sep, 25 2007 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth4hire
Well, I only half agree with you. It is without a doubt that gas chambers existed in the larger camps, but I challenge your statement that "at least 2 million" people were gassed there.

You see here we hit the first problem. You are right BUT this is common knowledge. Very few of the concentration camps did have gas chambers, this is correct, Auschwitz was used in extension of the Action Reinhard camps and therefore did have gassing facilities.

The Action Reinhard Camps - Belzec, Sobibor and Treblinka (it was thought Madjanek was involved but this has since been disproved) were death camps. They really only ever functioned for this purpose. Some 1-1.5 million Jews were murdered at these camps.

Auschwitz murdered the remainder. It was at first estimated, based on Hoess's interrogation, that 3 million Jews had been gassed at Auschwitz, this has been since radically revised and it is agreed that the number was about 1.5 million.

Prior to the arrival of the crematoria, the bodies were first buried, then when this was considered too messy, the bodies were disinterred and burned in open pits. It is highly labour intensive to do this, so Topf and Son provided purpose built crematoria.

The majority of the Concentration Camps were not involved in Action Reinhard which only represents a very short period in the war.

www.historylearningsite.co.uk...
www1.ca.nizkor.org...
www.holocaustresearchproject.org...
www.sobibor.info...

Those camps in the Reich (from Lublin westward) were for the purpose of providing forced labour and the internment of "enemies of the state" (which was a pretty broad spectrum). The jews that were held in these camps died from infection, starvation, experimentation, brutality and slavery. They were mostly men and boys, though some women were required for work details they were in the minority and were more likely to be non-Jews.


Originally posted by Truth4hire
It was common practice to delouse huge piles of bedlinen to avoid the spread of tyfus in these chambers. Zyklon-B is an extremely dangerous chemical which can only be used in an highly controlled environment.

The irony is that most people in the camps started to die of tyfus at the latter stages of the war because supplies of Zyklon-B ran out. Seriously.

Carbon Monoxide was more commonly used, but as you say Zyklon B was a highly dangerous chemical and proved effective. There is sufficient testimony from both sides to support the belief that it was used.

As to its running out at the end of the war, well there could be a number of reasons for that. Supply lines being cut - IG Farben could not manufacture something if they could no longer get the ingredients. Also by 1944 at the latest most investors in the Nazis had realised that their horse was on to a losing streak. As they would have known what Zyklon B was used for (and it wasn't just to kill bugs) do you think that they may have wanted to distance themselves from the killing process? I certainly think that the Board of Directors would have seen a halt in production as a shrewd move - of course by default it makes them culpable for all those that subsequently died as a result of pestilence. Collateral damage?


Originally posted by Truth4hire
If you say or write the following in Germany, Austria, France or Poland:
"I have serious doubts about Holocaust survivors testimonials with regards to the gassings of people" You will do a minimum of 5 years.


That is indeed excessive. Ignorance should be treated with education not imprisonment. As I said I do not agree with these stringent laws, they are excessive and only give credence to pseudo-academics who should more justly be ignored.


Originally posted by Truth4hire
Any documentation or proof or scientific experts you may introduct to the courts will be denied. Look it up if you do not believe me.


Denied or refuted?


Originally posted by Truth4hire
I hope listeners will at least read one book. Like the one I mentioned above. The truth is really out there in PDF form, all you need to do is read, deduct and conclude. There is a reason this literature is banned, and it is not because they are written by Neo-nazis (because they are not), it is not because they incite racial hatred (because they do not). No, it is because: (drumroll) revisionism endangers the establishment and current global power structures..


This type of revisionism doesn't - in fact it serves quite the opposite purpose. It actually detracts attention from the crimes that they themselves committed during this period in history, by proliferating it you are helping them to do this.

If you're seeking the truth, you're going to have to dig a little deeper, you haven't even scratched the surface! And really you need to research the entire history. If you already think you know the answer you are blind and will never see what it right before your eyes.

Best wishes



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join