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

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

It is part of my nature to default into believing ALL purported holocausts likely occurred. I now say "likely" instead of "definitely" because I am frankly amazed how often I have been lied to.

It took a few years, but after awhile I found the evidence for the Jewish holocaust NOT having occurred to be vast. So, that is the only one I am highly confident did not occur. I confess to have not seen any evidence for the non-occurrence of others.

By the way, did you know that the ADL and Israel do not recognize the Russian or Armenian holocausts?


O2

[edit on 23-6-2009 by o2bwise]

Perhaps some holocaust believers can watch the following Youtube produced by a Jewish man named David Cole.

www.youtube.com...

Points of tension:
How can forensics be so incompetent as to predict 4 million dead in Auschwitz, given the total has been revised downward to 1.1 million?

Should the Russians be trusted?

Why does the disinfectant chamber have far greater levels of Zyklon B use than the alleged gas chamber? How is this possible?

There are a number of discrepancies.

A first estimate of 4m killed and they do not even know what the murder weapon is.

That is astonishing in the extreme.


o2


[edit on 23-6-2009 by o2bwise]

reply to post by maybereal11


I accuse you of being in a "Hate Group" ( a term I absolutely despise ) by attacking people who want the truth....I label this group the "Anti-Truth Seeking Hate Group".

My Grandfather helped liberate 2 camps in Germany. Quiet man, strong, great head on his shoulders, tough ass country boy. The only time I ever saw that man shed a tear was 1) When my Grandmother had a stroke that left her in a child like state and 2) when he would talk about how inhumane those camps were. This was a man who saw the mass graves, smelled the ovens and saw human life reduced to animal like states. Tell him there was no Holocaust.

reply to post by Jimi2012


You know that tear jerky "tug on the heart" strings style may work on people were you come from being able to discuss Historical events rationally but personally I think for myself and testimonies don't stack up against facts and evidence in a Court of Law.

There is a difference between saying it didnt happen and saying numbers were inflated for sinister purposes, but the title of the post is "..Never Happened" so I think people are right for being mad at truth4hire... there is overwhelming evidence that countless people were tortured, and suffered, and executed.

Originally posted by euleberlin
One thing to add: I understand, free speech is very important and NOTHING should ever be censored. But this is not free speech, it´s hate speech.

Hate speech is still free speech though. If you wish to deny the poster his right to say that then I dont believe you understand free speech at all. It is an all or nothing thing, not subjected to emotional response.

Originally posted by seagull
Playing with numbers is what they do...

Take a mistake and magnify it beyond all recognition, that too is what they do.

But to say one group is able to do that but not another is just illogic, based on what you believe to be right.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
6 millions HUMANS were murdered - Jews, Catholics, mentally and physically challenged, .... Holocaust deniers make me sick.

I dont believe Catholics were because there is much evidence Hitler was Catholic, he loved Benito Mussolini, and had the Pope's consent

Originally posted by neformore
I don't see anyone on here starting threads denying the death toll in the WTC, or in WW2, or Hiroshima, or Nagasaki.

What did the Japanese gain after WWII? They lost their military, so no longer self-determination. They had very many American bases all over, with countless cases of rape and assault against them. They had harsh penalties, lost all of their prestige and sense of national pride...
I have been to Japan. Nagasaki has a cold feeling to it that is not due to the temperature. Some descendents look like living dead with sickly yellowish skin.
But Jews gained prime real estate in the Middle East where they could make their own laws and take what they want by force. Blank cheque.

Maybe the Japanese should have claimed 6 million died and then they would have been cut a better deal. Of course, no offense meant, I am being serious.


PS Falstad and Grini and such in Norway were *literally* concentration camps, not extermination camps. People were executed but that was not their intended purpose.

[edit on 24-6-2009 by Ridhya]

Originally posted by mazzroth
reply to post by maybereal11

 

I accuse you of being in a "Hate Group" ( a term I absolutely despise ) by attacking people who want the truth....I label this group the "Anti-Truth Seeking Hate Group".

What you are doing is not seeking truth. That has been clearly demonstrated here. What you are doing is playing with the margins of inaccuracies...

did 6 Million die? No...maybe more, maybe less...while you shout it didn't happen...that type of BS. Forensics? 70 years ago? for Millions of murders? During wartime? I will forgive some inaccuracies under that context.

What we have is countless testimonies from brave american soldiers and people who survived atrrocities you are unable to fully imagine.

As the survivors pass in the comming decade your vileness fills the void in hopes of furthering HATE filled propaganda unopposed.

As far as the debate on why some were fed etc.

These were Labor camps...these people were viewed as a resource, for labor to further the military campaign, to experiment on etc. When they became too sick or malnutritioned, too weak to be of use, they were disposed of in the cheapest way possible. Sometimes they were simply killed for amusement.

Complete disregard for humanity...and you have chosen to deny this in spite of overwhelming evidence and testimony...what does that make you?

[edit on 24-6-2009 by maybereal11]

folks, please remember to attack the post and not the poster.

thank you

Post removed due to reflection and dissapation of heat.
[edit on 24-6-2009 by maybereal11]

[edit on 24-6-2009 by maybereal11]

Originally posted by mazzroth
reply to post by maybereal11

 

I accuse you of being in a "Hate Group" ( a term I absolutely despise ) by attacking people who want the truth....I label this group the "Anti-Truth Seeking Hate Group".

Lets try this..Hi Mazzroth.

Your motives for disbelieveing the Holocaust are founded not in any bias, but rather an interest in truth?

Okay. I respect seeking truth and to that end would like to respectfully ask a question

..Can you please explain what you meant by your previous post on your thread entitled "Its Official now USA is controlled by Jewish Money!"

Where you appear to acknowledge the Holocaust rather than deny it while at the same time inferring that the Jewish people might have deserved it for meddling?

The stark contrast of this post and your current claims of only "seeking truth" has me confused?

Originally posted by mazzroth
15 years ago I always said to myself....self why would the Germans target the Jews and do such horrendous things to them..I couldn't work out why there was so much hatred. Perhaps it wasn't just mindless stupid racial hatred but there may have been some meddling even back then..I don't know.

After wading through most of this garbage, I can only be dismayed at how some people's brains work, if that term can be applied to this.

I've noticed that virtually every obsfuscatory technique available to debating has been used. Everyone here on ATS, or should be, familiar enough with them that I don't have to, and won't, enumerate them individually.

I personally know several survivors, their testimony is rock solid as far as I am concerned, because in the course of my reading (I read lots of books, on many subjects; WWII is an era I've mined deeply and broadly), virtually every detail they've told me I've been able to corraborate through official reports, photos, eyewitness testimony, etc, in such overwhelming amounts and details from widely diverse sources as to preclude any notion whatsoever that the Holocaust didn't occur.

It occurred horrendously: any quibbles over whether it was this number or that number are morbidly idiotic. Millions were murdered: they didn't "just die".

And all those horribly different ways to kill people, while they may not have been official SOP, occurred individually here and there, accepted as sort of a "boys willl be boys" mentality.


Truth4hire, kenochi, what's your point, really?

Statements like the Holocaust was insufficient reason for the Jews to be given Israel leads me to believe that you are both basically anti-semitic, grasping at whatever straws you can to justify your racism which leaks through your writings no matter how hard to try to be "scientific".

Let's look at your premise:

The Nazis didn't gas Jews.

Ok, let's say for the sake of argument I agreed with you. Where does that leave us? They still murdered millions of people.

So what's your point?

That the Nazis were better than we give them credit for? Hardly, even if the premise were true.

If there were only three million Jews killed by the Nazis, would that make you feel better? How would that change the fact that the Nazis deliberately, with conscious thought and very considerable effort, murdered millions of other people based on their racist idealogy. What difference does how they went about it make?

What exactly is the point you're trying to make?

Sometimes I get the feeling through your writings that you're actually disappointed that they didn't complete the job.

So again, what's your point?

I think many people are confused about the meaning of the word "Holocaust".

If you look at "wiki" for the term Holocaust you will see the first line:

The Holocaust (from the Greek ὁλόκαυστον (holókauston): holos, "whole" and kaustos, "burnt"), also known as Shoah (Hebrew: השואה, Latinized ha'shoah; Yiddish: חורבן, Latinized churben or hurban[1]) is the term generally used to describe the genocide of approximately six million European Jews during World War II,

And again half way down the page:

Since the 1960s, the term has come to be used by scholars and popular writers to refer exclusively to the genocide of Jews.[2]

Now since there were according to "wiki" some 42 million non Jewish civilians killed/murdered in WW2, Then the term Holocaust is hardly fitting wouldn't you say ?

And this is where i agree with the Holocaust deniers, It is an affront to all those innocents that were killed/murdered to credit the term Holocaust to just the Jews.

Also similarly the term "Semite" or "Anti-Semite" Has been taken away from those it represents to be a totally Jewish/Anti-Jewish term......But thats another story.

[edit on 25/6/09 by neformore]

I'm not being "Pedantic" or anything of the sort, Merely reading what "Wiki" says about things.

Now regards to your comment of Jews being the largest number killed.........Then again looking at "WIKI" i see there were 10 million Soviet civilians killed/murdered and the same number for Chinese civilians.

If you don't agree then take it up with "Wiki"............I'm not a revisionist or a historian, Just someone who uses "Google" for answers to questions.

Originally posted by o2bwise
Perhaps some holocaust believers can watch the following Youtube produced by a Jewish man named David Cole.

www.youtube.com...

Those videos are very old and made by a boy who has since grown up.

Originally posted by o2bwise
Points of tension:
How can forensics be so incompetent as to predict 4 million dead in Auschwitz, given the total has been revised downward to 1.1 million?

Forensics were not used to arrive at the figure of 4 million, it was an estimate based upon the testimony of Rudolf Hoess the commandant of Auschwitz. The revised figure was based upon an academic archival study and has been recognised by both Auschwitz, the Jewish community and the academic world. And not one of the researchers involved in that study suffered any repercussions for their academically based revisionism.

Of the 1.1 million that are estimated to have died at Auschwitz, 750,000 are believed to have died as part of Aktion Reinhard and therefore were never 'booked' into the concentration camp system, ie not recorded or tatooed. This is why it has been very hard to establish exact figures of those that died. The rest died as part of 'normal' concentration camp operations, apart from a brief surge towards to end of the war when the SS attempted to kill off as much of the evidence of the extermination process and slave labour operations as they could. But most died by being worked to death or as human guinea pigs, Bayer could get through as many as 150 in a single drug trial. Since Bayer paid the SS 170RM per person, it was a lucrative business.

Originally posted by o2bwise
Why does the disinfectant chamber have far greater levels of Zyklon B use than the alleged gas chamber? How is this possible?

And where did you get this information? Supply your source and we can take it from there.

Robert Faurisson, a prominent Holocaust Revisionist hired Jean Claude Pressac to disprove the use of Zyklon B and gas chambers in mass exterminations. He was unable to do so and his paper of his findings is incredibly technical and incredibly detailed.

It is also free to read, in it's entirety, on line. It'll answer your questions I am sure, no one else has produced anything to rival it, or disprove it.

www.holocaust-history.org...

Originally posted by o2bwise
There are a number of discrepancies.

A first estimate of 4m killed and they do not even know what the murder weapon is.

That is astonishing in the extreme.

If you would like to outline what discrepancies you are aware of I would be more than happy to help you out with those. It is a very wide and complex field of study, which is why it tends to be glossed over and things plonked together. It can cause confusion. As I have already explained, the 4 million (it was 3.5 million actually I think) came from Hoess. He was a flake, and like many involved in the mass killing, had lost his mind somewhere along the road. He was not a reliable witness and much of his testimony is useless. A lot of it is like this, but some amazing academic work has been conducted in the last two decades. The history of that period has been completely rewritten, except no one has read it.

this is silly.. Why are we arguing about technicalities.. the event happened but were arguing about 1million or so people being killed? really.. .. who cares if it was 5 minllion or 500 thousand those people how ever many they were were starved and tortured and worked to DEATH! To get this notion the the event never is WACKO! I get this thread and maybe put in another way this would be a really good discussion but some of us are trying to prove the difference of a few million lives. One to many on my book. when we look back a history do you think the numbers on dafur will be inflated? Maybe.. there is no exact number...and i am sure ther will be some who say it didnt happen the THE WAY it is said to happend.. the problem is the people ...it did happen.. and the people it happend to are all dead so the point is moot.. You'll never know the exact because the germans covered there tracks! sorry about the rant it makes no sense... you proving 3 million people died instead of 5 they still died and horribly at that.