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.
Originally posted by Nygdan
[for the 6 million count]
Bit early isn´t it?
No, I don't see why its early.
They didn't want lice and disease spreading throughout the population.
The argument that you would not shave prisoners if you are going to kill them anyway. This is a point.
And, agian, question this, WHY are the prisoners in the FIRST place? Its because the nazis thought that the jews, as a people, culture, and practice, are a problem that needs to be 'dealt' with.
When you start installing secret gas chambers into such a situation, its pretty clear that the solution to the problme isn't to move them out, re-educate them, or anything other than to kill them.
The nazis used the people in the camps as slaves. That means that they had to do basic things to keep the camp operational, such as dealing with head lice, and rather than treat head lice, they just cut their hair off. They didn't do it to be nice or make the prisoners comfortable.
Diesel Fumes Kill 21,000 Americans Yearly.
What's more, who cares if diesel couldn't kill? Zyklon-B certainly does,
and a methodological programme of starvation certainly does, and the actual death counts clearly show that around 6 million jews went into the death camps, and only a tiny fraction ever made it out.
The secret gas chambers at the camps had air-tight, pressure doors. They were NOT showers. THey had FAKE shower heads. They had drawers for inserting zyklon-b in them, and the 'exit' door lead straight
to the camp morgue.
The forensic evidence clearly shows that they were using gas chambers and starvation and just plain old shootings to execute millions of jews.
I would accept only experiments if they were of logical use to the Nazis
So people who witnessed these things can't give an accurate accounting, or docuemnts must be fake, if they don't seem like sensible experiments?
What is 'lrational' to a irrationialist like a nazi?
Since they cremated many remains, hardly seems like a sensible claim. What mathematics prove this?
The soap story at least is urban legend, debunked by Yad Vashem et al:
And what does Yad Vashem, Yehuda Bauer, et al, say about the holocaust itself?
They say it happened, and that it consumed around 6 million Jews.
True enough, there are untrue stories surrounding the holocaust
, BUT, it is still true that the nazis planned to exterminate the jews in germany,
moved them into death camps, and killed around 6 million before they
were defeated, many of which were annihliated in gas chambers.
Anyone questioning history as it happened should not be called or be classified as a Nazi./quote]
I think its fair enough to be convinced by a slick presentation. But the people that made that film are flat out
liars, they are making stuff up and distroting the facts to deny the holocaust.
THere are plenty of serious researchers out there who've looked into the holocaust to sperate fact from fiction, debunking some stories, getting accurate counts, etc. The people that made that film clearly are not 'honest, radical, historians', they are promoting lies, to vilify the jews. They are neo-nazis.
Noone should be punished for researching the past.
If only that was what most holocaust deniers were actualy doing. THey're not. Rather, they are simply
interested in covering up the holocaust, reducing the number of people killed, and puting up more attacks
on the jews.
It sure is. And if these records are tamper-proof, validated by several independent authorities and undisputed by all parties, I rest my case and humbly apologize if I offended anyone by questioning history.
Short of an all powerful jewish conspiracy that magically made up all sorts of records and somehow dumped all these bodies into mass graves and moved all these jews out of europe and fabricated every eyewitness account of the executions, both by prisoners and nazi's operating the camps and the nazis weren't really all that bad and just wanted the jews to move......then we'll have to go with 'it happened, it was real, they killed around 6 million people'
One of the reasons I have asked to change the subject of this thread is that there are indications (not evidence) that there was tampering.
I mean, you started out with 'i want to look at the evidence, and let it lead me', but now you are saying 'the evidence can't be trusted, because the jews and zionists MIGHT have gotten to it.
Again, what does it matter if some zionists were in talks to relocate jews to palestine, spain, etc?
Again, what does ANY of this have to do with the actual number of people murdered in the death camps as part of a plan to exterminate the jews?
quote: While German men were off fighting the jobs they had as civilians still needed to be done, materials for WAR needed to be created, hence the term LABOR camps.
These were slave labour camps, and only 'undesirables' and soviet prisoners were put into them. If the nazis put people into camps, and didn't feed them, even if they intended to feed them, then they are still responsible for their deaths.
They wanted to exterminate them, and did so in large part by scientifically rationing out their food to give them enough strength to be able to perform the forced labour, until the next trainload of healthier prisoners showed up to obsolete them.
The Jews were NOT enemies of the state. They were innocent GERMAN civilians.
quote: The Zionists wanted the Jews out, the German leadership wanted the Jews out. They BOTH colluded to get this done. FACT. Its true that zionists wanted to have the jews have the option to leave germany for zion. Thats a fact. THe distortion is that they worked with the nazis to create the holocaust. The distortion is that the fact that the zionists were smart enough to want a homeland for the jews to avoid the persecution that they were experiencing, somehow legitimatizes the holocaust, or somehow contradicts the fact that the holcaust happened.
And what does any of it matter, since the nazis had de-parasitizing fumigation chambers right next to the death chambers that used toxic gas on clothing, and that clearly the commandant wasn't so stupid as to have his quarters sitting in wafts of toxic gas???
Odd that you would cite IHR as proof that there were no gas chambers at aushwitz, when they offered a $50,000 to anyone that could prove they existed, and ended up paying it to a camp surivor.
There is aerial photography showing that the chambers, vents and all, existed, if the eyewitness accounts of prisoners and camp operators isn't enough. There are chamber blue prints, forms to order the zyklon-b, foresnic evidence that they were being used to exterminate human beings, etc.
by sdcigarpig:
If I recall correctly, back in the 1970's/1980's in a court of law in California it was proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Holocaust really did happen.
by sdcigarpig:
I have met about 2, were very convinced on what had happed to them and what was going on around them and to their families.
by MasterRegal:
Saying the Holocaust never happened is saying hundreds of thousands of jewish people lied and are all keeping a secret.
by MasterRegal:
Now everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when the facts are right in your face and you fail to realize it, it just shows pure ignorance.
by tom goose:
I think what ticks people off the most about the holocaust is the compulsory guilt that gets spun from it.
by tom goose:
The Armenian massacre was probably just as brutal,(...) how the American dealt with the american native indian, real civilized
Originally posted by subz
There are also many accusations of the falsification of documents. Where are these aerial photographs and how do we know when they were taken? Since the reconstruction of the "gas chambers" seemed to be an American priority following the end of the War it would also stand to reason that the motive for such haste would also compel the perpetrators to recreate other so-called evidence.
Originally posted by subz
WTF said it was a shower? I didnt.
Oh, so when you're wrong it just doesn't matter eh?
The "gas chambers" at Auschwitz are not authentic, they are reproductions.
Care to cite any evidence of this $50,000 pay out or should we just accept everything you say as Gospel?
www.nizkor.org.../m/mermelstein.mel//mermelstein.text
Defendants LIBERTY LOBBY, WILLIS CARTO, ELISABETH CARTO, LEGION FOR SURVIVAL OF FREEDOM, INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW, and NOONTIDE PRESS, and each of them, are jointly and severally liable to plaintiff MEL MERMELSTEIN for the sum of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000.00)
There are also many accusations of the falsification of documents.
Where are these aerial photographs and how do we know when they were taken?
would also compel the perpetrators to recreate other so-called evidence.
Truth4hire
If they were so secret, they would have built them underground.
I have looked at the aerial photos, and wonder how anyone can determine that any building would have been certainly used to gas people. If you can prove this to yourself please convince me too.
There is a big difference between cancer and heart disease risk and claiming that everyone in a non-hermetically sealed room died within half an hour because of Diesel fumes.
If several Treblinka witnessess claim that masses were killed using Diesel fumes, and this turns out to be untrue I want to know why they lied, and what else was lied about!
but I have not once encountered a source with actual death counts where not the word "estimates" was present
I want to know who is right, and want to find this out by analyzing as much "raw" information -not propaganda either way- as is available preferably.
Not according to people like Gemar Rudolf.
www.nizkor.org...
Markiewicz, Gubala, and Labedz of the Institute for Forensic Research, Cracow demonstrated that HCN was present in the homicidal gas chambers, i.e., Krema I, Krema II, Krema III, Krema IV, Krema V, and the cellars of Bunker 11, at levels above other facilities in the AB complex
Anecdotal != Forensic by a long shot.
Do you not think that some claims of eyewitnesses seem over the top?
Are experiments which served no obvious purpose to the German Reich or the war effort more likely to have happened or not to have happened?
My point being that some stories simply were not true. What they say about the Holocaust itself is irrelevant to the soap argument.
Why? Give me one good reason why some witnesses have lied
I simply fail to understand why someone e.g. invent a story about the damned soap.
. I´m trying to figure out if it was scientifically possible with whatever forensic evidence is available.
because I am stubborn until I see the forensics
Why the anger?
I´d rather see specifics before calling anyone flat out liars.
I am not degrading the memory of the victims, but just saying what I think seems logical, and doing so without emotion.
I do not even know what neo-nazi means. Truly. What is that, someone who hates Jews? Someone who admires Hitler? Someone who has National-Socialist beliefs as in cravings for a fascistic regime with a single leader and persecutions of minorities?. I do not think that the author of this film hate Jews.
What I do think is that the author tries to warn about the influence of the Jewish race in the current time. See above about the Jewish influence in Media, Politics, Business etc. What annoys me is that if you even say the word Jew or mention that there are a lot of Jewish people in important positions all over the world you are labelled a neo-nazi.
What if tomorrow suddenly top executives of banks and media were all Finnish?
Well thanks, I wasn´t aware I was doing that at all until you mentioned it.
That´s precisely what I am looking for. Was there a conspiracy? Were documents faked? Is it at all possible that eyewitness accounts were faked? These questions must be asked if you are to review the entire evidence presented in the case of the Holocaust.
Zionists doing backroom deals with the Nazi regime is not exacly popular history is it?
He is trying to prove his point that the Holocaust scenario might have been planned by the Zionists to obtain the state of Israël.
You seem to forget that the Red Cross visited all three compounds on a regular basis, and that they did not find evidence of systematic extermination by either gassing or starvation.
www.nizkor.org...
[Red Cross] president admits "moral failure" in Holocaust
Sommaruga, in a statement to mark the 50th anniversary of the conflict, said that the ICRC regretted what he called its "possible omissions and errors of the past."
www.nizkor.org...
WWII documents bolster Nazi-Red Cross connection
One OSS document, dated Jan. 11, 1944, says: "A series of observations commenced by the French and continued by this organization indicate that the I.R.C.C. is probably controlled by the German I.S. The German delegate to the I.R.C.C. in Geneva is known to be a German agent and the head of the I.R.C.C. to be German controlled."
The document adds: "Enough is known to warrant the assumption that any delegate of the I.R.C.C. should be considered a potential if not actual German I.S. agent." The letters I.S. stood for Intelligence Service.
[emph added]
www.nizkor.org...
You will see from the enclose that it is, unfortunately, extremely difficult for the International Red Cross Committee to help the Jewish population in Germany and the occupied countries. As we have written to you before, the German authorities do not consider the civilians who are arrested in occupied countries, including France, as civilian internees, thereby excluding them. from the application (by analogy) of The Geneva Convention regarding Prisoners of War. The International Red Cross Committee's field of action, unfortunately, does not include this large category, known as "detained civilians".
Inasmuch as it is impossible for the International Committee to visit the camps where these people are interned, the Committee is not in a position to check on the distribution of relief supplies. For this reason these concentration camps are not included in the category of internment camps to which the Blockade authorities allow relief supplies from overseas to be sent, Furthermore, the International Red Cross Committee does not receive any lists of the names of the Detained Civilians.
Wrong and Right. They were enemies of the state by law, and they were innocent german (...) civilians.
but until I need to read the books you referred to earlier in this thread to see why you think that
Look at the map of Auschwitz-Birkenau, the three delousing chambers lay to the north east, clear of the prisoner barracks, and even further clear of the crematoria, which were located to the south.
And the allies admitted to gaining that confession through torture, and we all know people will say anything to end their agony.
The Nazi's were systematically KILLING them, didnt they ADMIT to it during the Nuremburg trials?
Nygdan
The claim was that they can't be gas chambers, because they are too close to the camp commander's quarters. THe camp commander himself claimed that they were gas chambers. That seems to nullify that that can't have been because the gas would kill him.
Hilberg says that the murders were committed with diesel motors in Belzec and Treblinka and that the Saurer trucks used for killing persons in Chelmno were also equipped with diesel motors. Hilberg claims 1.45 million Jews were killed by this method (750,000 in Treblinka, 550,000 in Belzec and 150,000 in Chelmno). The suitability of diesel exhaust gas for purposes of mass murder has been addressed most thoroughly by German-American engineer Friedrich P. Berg, whose analysis we summarize here briefly: While it is not in principle impossible to kill people with diesel exhaust gas, it is very difficult, since the latter contains very little poisonous carbon monoxide. While with a gasoline motor one can easily achieve a concentration of carbon monoxide of seven percent or more per cubic meter of air, with a diesel motor one cannot produce a concentration of carbon monoxide of even one percent. Experiments on animals have shown that it is impossible to kill the occupants of a diesel-fed gas chamber within the half hour claimed by the witnesses.
It would take at least three hours, and the motor would have to be run constantly under a heavy load. In these circumstances, the fact that the motor might break down several times a day would also have to be taken into account.[1]
In 1992, a working draft paper authored by Walter Lüftl, President of the Austrian Federal Chamber of Engineers, described mass murder with Diesel exhaust as a “sheer impossibility.” Shortly hereafter, he substantiated his view as to the relative harmlessness of Diesel exhaust in an essay, which was publicly attacked as well. For readers familiar with auto emission issues, much of what follows represents a kind of ‘overkill’ and rightly so. But in order to put the Holocaust monster to its final, well-deserved rest – at least its Diesel portion – one must be rigorous and even exhaustive.[2]
According to the exterminationists, the gassing was always done in about half an hour or less. To determine the carbon monoxide concentration needed to kill in only half an hour instead of a full hour[ref 25], one can use a widely accepted rule of thumb known as “Henderson’s Rule,” which is:
%/vol. CO × exposure time = Constant for any given toxic effect.
In other words, for any given toxic effect, the poisonous concentration must be inversely proportional to the time of exposure. This means that to kill in half an hour, one needs twice the concentration that one would need to kill in a full hour. Applying this rule to the ‘0.4% and above’ needed to kill in “less than 1 hour,” we get 0.8%/vol. as the minimum concentration needed to kill in less than half an hour. Applying the same rule to the 0.15 to 0.20%/vol. range, which is “dangerous” for one hour of exposure, we get 0.3%/vol. to 0.4%/vol. as the range of CO concentration, which is dangerous for half an hour of exposure. What all this means is that to have any kind of practical gas chamber using carbon monoxide as the lethal agent, one needs an average concentration of at least 0.4%/vol. carbon monoxide – but, possibly as much as 0.8%/vol. We should keep ‘0.4% to 0.8%’ in mind as benchmark numbers to which we will refer shortly. Please note that these data hold true only in the presence of a normal oxygen content of the air! If one were to reduce the oxygen content by half for example – from the normal 21%/vol. to only 10.5%/vol. – any given concentration of CO will be twice as toxic. Even a CO concentration of only 0.2%/vol. would then suffice to kill in one hour. So, in order to determine the actual effectiveness of a (...)
[25] According to the eyewitness statements in E. Kogon, H. Langbein, A. Rückerl et al. (eds.), Nationalsozialistische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, Fischer, Frankfurt/Main 1986, p. 159 (E. Fuchs, 10 mins.), p. 167 (K.A. Schluch, 5-7 mins.), p. 174 (K. Gerstein, 18 mins.), p. 181 (A. Goldfarb, 20-25 mins.), the gassing procedure allegedly sometimes took much less time; in accordance with Gerstein: Matthes, in H. P. Rullmann, op. cit. (note 23), p. 167: 30 min. [3]
by Germar Rudolf:
While researching historical events, our highest goal must be at all times to discover how it actually was – as the 19th century German historian Leopold Ranke maintained. Historians should not place research in the service of making criminal accusations against, for example, Genghis Khan and the Mongol hordes, nor to whitewash any of their wrong-doings. Anybody insisting that research be barred from exonerating Genghis Khan of criminal accusations would be the object of ridicule and would be subject to the suspicion that he was, in fact, acting out of political motives. If this were not so, why would anyone insist that our historical view of Genghis Khan forever be defined solely by Khan’s victims and enemies? The same reasoning applies to Hitler and the Third Reich. Both revisionists and their adversaries are entitled to their political views. The accusation that revisionists are only interested in exonerating National Socialism and that such an effort is reprehensible or even criminal, is a boomerang: This accusation has as a prerequisite that it is deemed unacceptable to partially exonerate National Socialism historically, and by so doing, always also morally. But by declaring any hypothetical exoneration based on possible facts as unacceptable, one admits openly not to be interested in the quest for the truth, but in incriminating National Socialism historically and morally under any circumstances and at all costs. And the motivation behind this can only be political. Hence, those accusing revisionists to misuse their research for political ends have themselves been proven guilty of exactly this offense. It is therefore not necessarily the revisionists who are guided by political motives – though quite a few of them certainly are – but with absolute certainty all those who accuse others of attempting to somehow historically exonerate a political system which has long since disappeared. As a consequence, our research must never be concerned with the possible ‘moral’ spin-off effects of our findings in relation to politicians or regimes of the past, but solely with the facts. Anyone who argues the opposite does not understand scientific research and should not presume to condemn others on the basis of authentic research.”
by SiRiNO:
And the allies admitted to gaining that confession through torture, and we all know people will say anything to end their agony.
by BlueRaja:
There is so much evidence that the Holocaust did happen, I have to wonder about the faculties of the doubters. Victims, witnesses, photos, etc... I've seen nothing to cause any doubts. 10 seconds on Google will provide countless links.
by Nygdan:
I am angry with the so called 'holocaust revisionists' because they are lying cowardly scum, who try to hide behind the very freedoms and protections that people died trying to defend at home and restore to germany, and they do all this just to be able to attack the jews. They are lying cowardly scum. I don't have any anger at people who read their propaganda and become convinced by it. The nazis are good at propaganda, so good infact that they are able to use it to convince people that the holocaust itself is just 'anti-nazi propaganda'.
Who are the Holocaust Revisionists?
Holocaust Revisionists are not a homogenous group. Our numbers include Jews (Josef G. Burg, Roger-Guy Dommergue, David Cole, Stephen Hayward); Christians (Germar Rudolf, Michael A. Hoffman, Robert Countess); Muslims (Ibrahim Alloush, Ahmed Rami) and Atheists (Bradley Smith, Robert Faurisson).
Some Revisionists suffered persecution by the National Socialist regime as well as internment in concentration camps (Paul Rassinier, Josef G. Burg). Others are Army veterans of World War II, from both the German and Allied armies (Werner Rademacher, Wilhelm Stäglich, Douglas Collins.)
Some Revisionists are professors (Prof. Robert Faurisson, Prof. Arthur R. Butz, Prof. Christian Lindtner, Prof. Costas Zaverdinos) and some have Ph.D degrees (Dr. Wilhelm Stäglich, Dr. Robert Countess, Dr. Stephen Hayward, Dr. Herbert Tiedemann). Some have degrees in Chemistry, Physics, or Engineering (Michael Gärtner, Germar Rudolf, Arnulf Neumaier, Friedrich Berg), others are Historians (Mark Weber, Robert Countess, Carlo Mattogno), or teachers in other fields, such as Jürgen Graf.
The ranks of Holocaust Revisionists include Communists and Socialists (Paul Rassinier, Roger Garaudy), moderate Left-
ists (Pierre Guillaume, Serge Thion), Liberals (Andrew Allen, David Cole, Bradley Smith, Richard Widmann), Conservatives (Germar Rudolf, Carlo Mattogno, Werner Rademacher), Rightists (Udo Walendy, Mark Weber) and National Socialists (Ernst Zündel). Since the author does not consider it important to classify revisionists according to political orientation, he can not vouch for the correctness of these designations. Included also are Frenchmen (Robert Faurisson, Pierre Guillaume, Roger Garaudy, Paul Rassinier, Vincent Reynouard, Jean Plantin), Americans (Bradley Smith, Mark Weber, Arthur Butz, Richard Widmann, Fredrick Leuchter), Germans (Germar Rudolf, Werner Rademacher, Michael Gärtner, Arnulf Neumaier, Wilhelm Stäglich), Swiss (Jürgen Graf, Arthur Vogt), Italians (Carlo Mattogno), Spaniards
(Enrique Aynat), Jordanians (Ibrahim Alloush), Moroccans (Ahmed Rami), Swedes, Danes, Britons, Poles, and Russians, to name just a few.
(...) In contrast, the governments and media of most western societies publicize the cliché that all Revisionists are right wing extremists who are attempting to rehabilitate the National Socialist regime in order to usher in a new authoritarian government of the right. This may be true for Revisionists of the extreme right wing, but they are a small minority within Revisionist ranks. Perhaps a few prominent examples will illustrate the political variety of Revisionist opinion:
Paul Rassinier: what would motivate a French Communist who was interned in a German concentration camp on account of his activities in the Resistance, to rehabilitate National Socialism in Germany?
Josef G. Burg: What would motivate a Jew who suffered under the occupation of both the Germans and Russians during the Second World War?
David Cole: What would motivate a liberal young American of the Jewish faith?
Fredrick Leuchter: What would motivate an entirely non-political American expert in the technology of gas execution chambers?
Pierre Guillaume, Serge Thion: What would motivate left-anarchist Frenchmen to rehabilitate National Socialism in Germany?
Roger Garaudy: What would motivate a longtime prominent French Communist?
Bradley Smith, Richard Widmann: what would motivate liberal Americans?
Vincent Reynouard, Jean Plantin, Germar Rudolf: young liberal and conservative European professionals, born in the mid-60s. What would motivate them to rehabilitate National Socialism?
Does it really matter what a Revisionist is trying to achieve with his political or other ideas? (...)
by Germar Rudolf:
“To everyone who has ever suspected that revisionists are motivated by a desire to whitewash National Socialism, or
restore the acceptability of right-wing political systems, or assist in a breakthrough of Nationalism, I would like to say
the following:
Originally posted by Glyph_D
this here could be proof they infact were not gas chambers. the commander in question could have claimed they were gas chambers to illustrate they infact could not be gas chambers. because if they were real gas chambers he would indeed be dead.
vho.org...
Experiments on animals have shown that it is impossible to kill the occupants of a diesel-fed gas chamber within the half hour claimed by the witnesses.
working draft paper authored by Walter Lüftl, President of the Austrian Federal Chamber of Engineers, described mass murder with Diesel exhaust as a “sheer impossibility.”
www.nizkor.org...
"The Toxicity of Fumes from a diesel Engine Under Four Different Running Conditions", by Pattle et al., British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1957, Vol 14, p. 47-55. These researchers ran a few experiments in which various animals were exposed to diesel fumes, and studied the results.
In the experiments, the exhaust of a small diesel engine (568 cc, 6 BHP) was connected to a chamber 10 cubic meters (340 cubic feet) in volume, and the animals were put inside it. In all cases, the animals died.[...]
Even in cases where the CO output was low, the animals still died from other toxic components - mainly irritants and nitrogen dioxide.
They sure for days beat the crap out of Höss, former Auschwitz camp commandant before he signed his confession.
www.nizkor.org...
A lurid book by one Rupert Butler called Legions of Death. Butler tells of seeing Hoess beaten when he was first found.
A piece of hearsay that is supposedly contained in a secret document which the "revisionist" Robert Faurisson is not at liberty to reveal.
There are so much indications that the Holocaust did not happen as history tells us
This is why it matters that for example the mainstream media are not controlled by a single group. (In this case individuals from Jewish origine with a clear pro-Israël stance. Partial reply to previous question)
Originally posted by Nygdan
You said its not a gas chamber.
Originally posted by Nygdan
So what is it subz?
Originally posted by Nygdan
What is that chimney venting if not toxic gas?
Originally posted by Nygdan
What was that room labeled 'showers' on their blueprints, if not a fake shower or a real shower, and what was the chimney for?
Originally posted by Nygdan
I never said I was wrong, so I fail to see how this statement is relevant.
Originally posted by Nygdan
Subz, no one is saying that the gas chambers that are at the museums now were entirely built by the nazis.
Originally posted by Nygdan
The americans didn't build gas chambers, they were already there.
Originally posted by Nygdan
The camp was attacked, raided, and the structures, to say the least, weren't being preserved by anyone. Are you saying that there were infact gas chambers, but that they were destroyed, and these ones are just reproductions, or that there were never any gas chambers there at all and the whole thing is fantasy?