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.

 

The Real Aushwitz

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 06:37 PM
link   
What do you think of this;




Legislation that would make Holocaust-denial committed overseas an offense under Israeli legal jurisdiction was approved unanimously in first reading by the Knesset on Tuesday.



The passage of the measure would enable Israel to demand the extradition of Holocaust-deniers for prosecution.


www.rense.com...


Remember, A holocaust denier, can be anyone who questions any of the official claims made by the keepers of the "official holocaust history".
Who would that be?! They might be trying to extradite some of us right now.




posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Howie47
What do you think of this;




Legislation that would make Holocaust-denial committed overseas an offense under Israeli legal jurisdiction was approved unanimously in first reading by the Knesset on Tuesday.



The passage of the measure would enable Israel to demand the extradition of Holocaust-deniers for prosecution.


www.rense.com...


Remember, A holocaust denier, can be anyone who questions any of the official claims made by the keepers of the "official holocaust history".
Who would that be?! They might be trying to extradite some of us right now.


While I believe that the Holocaust happened, I do think Israel is over reaching by the very suggestion that citizens of other nations should be subject to laws they pass.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Many of those revisionists who claim that the numbers of deaths are grossly inflated like to claim that the vast majority emigrated.

However it should be pointed out that William L. Shirer, who wrote in his book 20th Century Journey—The Nightmare Years 1930-1940:

“Not all the Austrian Jews perished in the Nazi camps and prisons. Many Jews were allowed to buy their way out of captivity and go abroad. Usually, it cost them their fortune. . . . Perhaps nearly half of Vienna’s 180,000 Jews managed to purchase their freedom before the Holocaust began.”
.

So it is true that many were able to flee. This policy was in effect in the 1930's.

However, Shirer explains that although the Office for Jewish Emigration was set up, under Reinhard Heydrich, “later it would become an agency not of emigration but of extermination, and organize the systematic slaughter of more than four million Jews.” This “final solution” was directed by Karl Adolf Eichmann, who was eventually executed in Israel for his war crimes.

You have the eyewitness accounts, the confessions of the camp commanders, like Rudolf Hoss, and guards who were brought to trial.

Yet, some self-styled revisionist historians, claim, that there never was a Holocaust.
Why? Because of nationalism, their own ideology, or anti-Semitic or other such sentiments. Once atrocities are forgotten, revisionists reason, responsibility vanishes.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by DisInfo
I find it really interesting that the very countries that sit quietly by and watched Hitler relocate millions and kill them are now suggesting it was just an isolated event that was used as 'propaganda' by the Allies.


I suppose that's like those claiming that a horrible event such as a historical genocide should be constantly recognized so that it never happens again, yet watching as one takes place in areas like Darfur.

That further strengthens the notion and hypocrisy of one life being more important than another on all levels in my mind.

- Lee



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by lee anoma
I suppose that's like those claiming that a horrible event such as a historical genocide should be constantly recognized so that it never happens again, yet watching as one takes place in areas like Darfur.

That further strengthens the notion and hypocrisy of one life being more important than another on all levels in my mind.

- Lee


I agree that Darfur is a serious problem and that a Holocaust is occuring. Unfortunately, the countries that have the ability to do anything about this are occupied doing other things, and ultimately probably dont really care about a bunch of Africans killing each other.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Here, you imply that the ONLY reason someone could deny the holocaust happened is because of racism.


Hmm. Seems I did.

Thats because its true.

You can dress it any way you want. You can try and hide behind manipulations of figures. You can try and make excuses and discredit information (using "evidence" from minority sources that people are, apparently supposed to believe when you present it, but you don't offer them the same courtesy when they present much better evidence from compelling majority sources) but when it boils down to it, when you think about it properly the ONLY reason that people deny the holocaust and go to such lengths to try and discredit it is because of race.

Because - really - it either boils down to the fact that deniers either dislike jews because they see them the same way that the Nazi's did, or they dislike jews because they claim the holocaust is jewish propaganda to serve the zionist cause and its milked for all its worth.

Either way the common link is Jewish people, and disliking them.

Now if thats not racially motivated, what is it?

Unless, of course, you are trying to tell us that the Nazi's were just really nice people and were totally misunderstood, in which case you are denying WW2 ever happened - and I'd like some of what you are on if thats the case


"Its springtime, for Hitler...in Germany......"


Wow. It's almost as if I haven't heard this exact thing before.

Do the math. Show me I am wrong. Don't argue opinions. Go through the steps I mentioned, and SHOW ME I am wrong with math. Really, how hard could it be?

As to people who say they "burned the bodies in ditches", well then, if getting rid of a human body is so easy, why don't serial killers dispose of their bodies by burning them in ditches? Know why? The human body is incredibly hard to reduce to ashes. Don't take my word for it, call your local mortuary. Look it up. Everything I have seen says that if you start adding bodies together, they burn SLOWER than if they were burnt separately. Let's even exclude the fact that you can't run crematoria 24x7x365 without some downtime for maintenance.

Don't offer opinions. SHOW ME THE MATH.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 04:18 AM
link   
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 


If I must....

In the camp there were 6 Cremation units.

120 Burning chambers in total.

3 bodies per chamber.

Ovens running 12 hours a day, with new bodies being burnt every 30 minutes.

So thats 120*3 = 360 bodies per half hour, but lets say, for the sake of it, that it takes an hour.

And lets say, for the sake of it, that the ovens worked for 12 of the 24 hours available, with 12 hours downtime.

360x12=4320 bodies every 12 hours.

Lets say, for the sake of it, that the ovens only ran half a year.

4320x182.5, thats a capability of 788,400 bodies per year.

The camp ran at its full capacity from 43-45, but started in 1942, so lets assume that a third of that yearly figure occurred in '42.

So. 788,400/3 = 262,800 in 1942

And in 1943, 788,400
And in 1944, 788,400

788,400+788,400+ 262,800 = 1,839,600 from 42 to the end of 44.

Hey - lets say it takes two hours to burn 360 bodies shall we? (such a happy fun subject huh?
), we'll divide that figure in half. So...thats 919,800 people.

And thats with the ovens running at half capacity, half the year, thus giving plenty of "downtime" for maintenance, and not including the burning of bodies in outdoor pits.

It also fits in with the "conservative" estimates of 1.1-1.5 million killed at Auschwitz.

So thats Auschwitz.

Theres Dachau, Buchenwald, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka, Majdanek to take into account for the overall total figures as well.

People can dispute the numbers, if they really want to - and no doubt they will - you could say - for example that my 1942 figure is high (maybe so, as only two ovens were running until the Spring 1943 "refurbishment"). Anyway round, your just playing a game with numbers and trying to "limit" the extent of the genocide.

Even if it was "just" a million people, its genocide. Its still disgusting. It still needs to be remembered and those who carried it out, their mindset and their ilk need to be taught about to prevent something like that occuring again.

Like I said earlier, there is only one reason why people choose to argue against that, and it has no place in a modern society where everyone is equal.








[edit on 15/0408/08 by neformore]

[edit on 15/0408/08 by neformore]



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Howie47
What do you think of this;




Legislation that would make Holocaust-denial committed overseas an offense under Israeli legal jurisdiction was approved unanimously in first reading by the Knesset on Tuesday.



The passage of the measure would enable Israel to demand the extradition of Holocaust-deniers for prosecution.


www.rense.com...


Remember, A holocaust denier, can be anyone who questions any of the official claims made by the keepers of the "official holocaust history".
Who would that be?! They might be trying to extradite some of us right now.


All the material that I ever seen on ATS has been repetition from other sources, namely Faurisson, Irving, Zundel and Rudolf. These people have been at one time or another prosectuted for dissemination (excluding Irving to an extent, a bit more complicated that one). No one as far as I know has ever been prosecuted for reading or repeating this information, therefore it is very unlikely that anyone is even remotely interested in prosecuting us for discussing these concepts.

Those who have been prosecuted were given ample warning but continued to repeat those claims to gullible audiences, like Iran, where, for obvious reasons there is anti-Israeli feeling. They are exploiters of ignorance.

I have read any number of books that question and ratify the so-called 'official' version, but the fact is there is no official record as the information is not all in. I myself, have on a number of occasions stated that it was not the intention of the Germans to eradicate the Jews of Europe. I stand by that. I do though believe they intended to eradicate the 'low-slavic' peoples and IMO this is of equal importance to the Jewish experience and is not given adequate attention. However, the disparity is not necessarily about a bias towards the Jews but more a question of the slavic experience being suppressed by the cold war. These people were unable to talk about their experiences until fairly recently. Fortunately many scholars are working hard to redress the balance.

There is a vast body of work out there that contradicts the commonly held belief that Hitler hated the Jews and wanted them all to be annihilated. It is up to the individual to seek out that information, most do not and do not want to - each to their own, but this gap permits the 'deniers' to use propaganda techniques to disseminate their clearly racist views and to cloud the issues even further. It is quite clear as well, when you study the backgrounds of these people that they are receiving funding from somewhere. There are many who would rather we believe that the Jews brought it upon themselves or that it was all a hoax to justify the establishment of Israel or to justify Israeli atrocities. The fact is though that organised Jewish militancy in Palestine pre-dates the persecution of the Nazis against the Jews. To me this is a far more interesting subject of study.

The laws may seem all-encompassing but in practice they are not. Unless you are promoting the belief that the Jewish experience is a fabrication and that the evidence of that experience has been manufactured - and doing so for personal gain, then you are highly unlikely to face any form of prosecution. There are of course exceptions, and I reiterate that I do not agree with these laws, but I do to an extent understand them. The fact is that internet provides a cheap and easy means of disseminating hate and this detracts from the real issues. It is complicated and I see no solution other than to encourage an open debate. I doubt anyone would take issue with the way ATS deals with these issues certainly.

Denial and questioning are two entirely different things. That the deniers refuse to enter into debate and prefer to simply sling mud, is to me testament enough to their motives. They merely wish to muddy the waters to further whatever agenda it is they are working for, and there will always be many who would rather believe that than comprehend that people can be murdered simply because our governments inability or unwillingness to intervene. And, so it continues. War and profit come first, starvation and suffering of the innocent a poor second. If the Jews are guilty then our governments are vindicated and the ends will always justify the means.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by DisInfo
I agree that Darfur is a serious problem and that a Holocaust is occuring. Unfortunately, the countries that have the ability to do anything about this are occupied doing other things...


Everyone is always doing something. The point is to do something else as well. Which we can and selectively do at times. The world never stops from being busy so there is no good time to stop a slaughter from happening especially not when the problem is simpler to approach than the ones we are unnecessarily tackling right now.

Either you help or you don't. Can't take a raincheck on genocide.


...probably dont really care about a bunch of Africans killing each other.


Ah from that dismissive and somewhat stereotypical statement alone I see you are ignorant of the issue, which doesn't surprise me so I'll just have to regret bringing it up for a comparison. For the record you are incorrect on your assessment of what is actually happening. It isn't a "bunch of Africans killing each other". You describe a war or battle not genocide.

Although you are correct in the "apathy" part.

I'll just have to assume we currently care about Iraqi's killing each other more, however I am a bit skeptical of the motives behind it.

Too busy...lol...man that is sad.

- Lee



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   
The top & bottom of the whole problem is that we only see what the powers that be want us to see, & I have to say that in America you have virtually no concept of anything that goes on outside your own borders.

Your whole lives are born of fantasy of the "good guy" yanks & "bad guy" everyone else, with the lack of education & Nazified indoctrination only exacerbating the problem.

Prior to Iraq invasion no.1 we were told that the Iraqis were killing babies in incubators in Kuwait, going on murderous rampages, etc, which was largely completely fictitious.

The kind of carnage purported to be happening then in order to garner public support is probably occuring continuously in some part of the World or other with little response because it isn't highlighted on the propaganda machine sat in the corner of your living room.

Think of Stalin, think of Pol pot & all of the rest, we didn't lift a finger to help, so you have to wonder why. Perhaps there is no economic benefit to doing so.

Also put yourselves in the shoes of a common Iraqi now - you've had your town bombed, your loved ones killed or maimed, you have no electricity, medicines, sewerage facilities, clean water, or regular supply of food.

When Saddam was in power they didn't have to worry about being bombed in markets, or shot on the way to work, or whether their would be food on the table to feed the children. That is a very Western consequence of our interference.

Undoubtedly some of you will automatically respond with the preprogrammed drivel of "he was a dictator," or " he used gas on his own people."

Well, in the short time that we've been there we've killed & maimed more Iraqis than Saddam did in his entire 24 year reign. Is that something to be proud of. Is that the signature of the "good guys?"

Do you think the Iraqis see us as saviours, or do you think that they view us as we are taught to view the Nazis & other "enemies" of our states?

Would YOU swallow the propaganda of freedom if your life was worse, if your children or parents had been killed or maimed, if you had no food, medicine, work, or security, or would you want rid of the obvious evil that made your life a misery?

Its all too easy to swallow the Hollywood drivel of us being the "good guys," but unless you can wear another mans shoes and imagine how life must be for him because of our actions, then you will never really appreciate the reality of life for some poor souls on this Earth.

Whilst you're all sat at home in luxury after your trip to the mall full of choices, think about the lifestyle & lack of basics that we have inflicted around the World without the choice of even having food on the table.

Think about how other people suffer because of our regimes, & then think about how you can justify characterising the Nazis, Saddam, or any other "bad guy" as being the bad ones, when we ourselves create more pain, suffering, & misery than all the lot of them added together.


The World is full of idiots, charlatans, & liars, & I'm almost afraid to say that 99.9% of them come from America, with the mix between the greedy self serving & the uneducated, jingoistic morons being hard to seperate in any meaningful way.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Power_Semi
 


Power_Semi, I dont agree with your skewed ideas sometimes, but your previous post I can agree with alot of it.

While, you or I know there is genocide happening right now all over the place, the US Government, and to a lesser degree, our allies do nothing. Surely if we know about it, they do. I agree we were lied to about the reasoning for invading Iraq. Economics of the situation were probably the real reason. At first we were told about potential WMDs, then it was changed to make sure Saddams stuff was kept out of the hands of terrorists, then it was to liberate the Iraqis because Saddam was such an evil prick. Now the story is we are trying to stabilize the Middle East. Im sure its about oil, but I would like someone to come clean about it and start delivering some dividends at least.

Yeah, we knew to a lesser degree of what Stalin was doing, and we sure as hell knew what Pol Pot was doing. While I believe the Jewish Holocaust happened, I would be willing to bet that FDR would never have entered WWII for that reason alone. It was kind of a bonus in a lot of ways that we liberated the camps. It gave the Allies a nearly stainless mantle to hang their human rights achievements on.

Now reality is different. While we were building up Israel, laws of segregation and inequality were in full effect and enforced throughout much of the South. Theres a reason that the poor black areas became known as ghettos. The similarities of treatment were similar in alot of ways.

While our involvement in Iraq is tragic, I think as a country we have a responsibility to fix what we broke as best we can. We should also put our actions where we say our intentions are and actively stop the genocide in Darfur. There is no economic advantage for us to do so, but the humanitarian message is important.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   
i have always wondered why the people in the ghettos \camps didnt fight\riot etc...why wait in line to die?...surely they could see what was going to happen to them ....



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by fatdad
i have always wondered why the people in the ghettos \camps didnt fight\riot etc...why wait in line to die?...surely they could see what was going to happen to them ....


He who has the machine gun has the control.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by fatdad
 


It is hard to riot with machine guns on the towers. Rioters run out very fast. Even with machine guns, little food , hard work and "walls with ears" there were escapes, by individuals but also by large groups. Not a lot survived also.
en.wikipedia.org...
As for ghettos - individuals escaped,of course. But people with families would have hard time to escape guarded perimeter and all the eyes on the other side of ghettos. However there were several attempts to armed resistance ,which did not succeed.
en.wikipedia.org...
In Stalin's Gulag system and in North Korean camps system it was (is) very hard to escape/rebel also since life of inmate costs nothing.
Links from wiki,however you can search in other locations.
It is very easy to ask this kind of questions now.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by fatdad
i have always wondered why the people in the ghettos \camps didnt fight\riot etc...why wait in line to die?...surely they could see what was going to happen to them ....


There were uprisings the most famous one being at the Warsaw.

www.ushmm.org...

Even at Auschwitz there was a small uprising of the Sonderkommando (those responsible for moving the bodies from the gas chambers, disposing of the victims bodies etc). And there were isolated escapes. There most significant and relatively succesful revolt/escape attempt was from the Sobibor Death Camp by the Sonderkommando. From the web site of one of the survivors, Tuovi Blatt.


The Jewish Side:
Original number of prisonsers at the time of the revolt 550
• Not able or willing to escape, including 30 in Lager I (150)
• Killed in combat and mine fields (80)
Number of prisoners to initially escape Sobibor 320
• Captured in dragnet and executed (170)
Number of prisonsers to successfully escape Sobibor 150
• Killed fighting Germans as partisans or in the army (5)
• Killed in hiding, mostly by hostile native elements (92)
Number of revolt survivors to be liberated by the Allies 53
* Additionally, 9 Jews survived from earlier individual escapes,
which makes a total of Sobibor survivors: 62

The Nazi Side:
Germans and Ukrainian guards on duty at the time of the revolt 137
Germans killed including 2 Volksdeutsche guard leaders 12
Germans wounded 1
Ukrainians guard killed 8
Ukrainian guards wounded 12
Ukrainian guards not accounted for..(Fled for fear of German reprisals) 28



www.sobibor.info...



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 


There is a quote from the Bible that says. "Because of their fear of death, they where held captive"! paraphrased
When the Jews were about to be taken by Rome at Masada. They all
committed suicide! Makes we wonder why they remained so demoralized and didn't become united; under such harsh persecution?
I realize without being there it would be impossible to know for sure.
Which is also why I believe some of this (canonized history) should be viewed with some skepticism.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   
I dont understand how people can deny the holocaust.

There are photos that document the whole event, from moving them
to ghettos, trashing their neighborhoods, rounding them up to board trains heading to the concentration camps, starving and working at the camps, mass graves, lining up to be shot( pregnant women and kids standing in line also), medical experiments(on kids too), finally liberation, Eisenhower and army in camps littered with dead and dying people.
There are photos of all this, easily found on the internet.

How can people look at these horrific photes then deny the holocaust?

Germany fully owns up to what happened and, in fact has taken extreme measures AGAINST Nazis. For example, it is illegal there to say Sieg Heil.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by josephine
 


People are called Holocaust deniers when they question any of the official history, painted by a few scholars, and made sacred.
All history, always has alternate views of exactly what, why, when
and where. The true facts always come to the surface as shinning
lights in the darkness of skepticism. If allowed to proceed naturally.
When artificially forced to be (sacred history). It only feeds
more skepticism.
The Bible is a perfect example of this. Though it is held sacred by millions, skepticism, and out right attacks. Against it's legitimacy. Are allowed. They only
end up bringing it more attention, making it ever more realized to be true.
There is an old saying. "Skeptics have hammered on the anvil that the Bible is for centuries. It has warn out many a hammer. Yet it still stands as
the most revered book on earth."
If the holocaust as it is written is true. It also will stand on it's on merits. If they try and force feed it. It will be denied. The same way the
Bible is, when forced on those who aren't ready to hear it.



posted on Apr, 15 2008 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by JanusFIN
 


Might I suggest you read:

www.goantiques.com...

Try this site: www.holocaustcamps.zoomshare.com...

Then google Sonnderkommando:

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...

Do some more research because you have got a very long way to go!



posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38
When people are dropping by the dozen on a daily basis because of a Typhus epidemic...and you kill the lice FAR AWAY from the sick people with the cyanide....is it STILL MORE LETHAL?

NO! It is actually the exact opposite. It is helping to RESTORE health!


Hmmmm. I read in one of the posts with a great deal of facts that they found 1.2 million pieces of clothing from victims just piled up.

If cyanide was used to "cleanse" people (WTF!?!) because of typhus...wouldn't you think that these discarded items would have been burned immediately after removal?

And I seem to recall...you can prove me wrong, if I am wrong...that pellets of the Zyklon B were dropped into water, which I might guess would add moisture to its reaction and cause something less likely to accumulate rapidly upwards.

And I just can't reconcile the differences between how much for how long it takes to kill fleas vs. humans and envision ANY situation where flea-killing was the motivation for applying it to humans.

If the humans were not killed, the fleas surely were not.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join