Only one percent of the Holocaust claims can be proven - Says Holocaust Scholar and Expert

This is a report with the leading Holocaust Scholar Robert Jan Van Pelt, what I've found interesting.

www.thestar.com...

There is one sentence, which is... hmmm, strange a bit.

Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

So my question is, if a leading expert in this report says they can prove only ONE PERCENT of these claims, why they're suprised when people have doubts regarding this matter? And also if this is true, and why a Holocaust expert and scholar would lie, why the officials are saying this is the most documented event in history, while it's clearly can be heard from an official expert, it's not.

Please debate about this matter in a civilized manner. Please skip any sort of racism in this thread. But I'd like to hear both sides' opinion in this matter, because I find it really interesting.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Sharrow]

Not that i condone Nick Griffin, but this is his belief also.
If this is true then what we think we know about nazi motivation may not be correct.
Maybe The jesuit regime was uncovered by hitler.
Just my two cents

Originally posted by GW8UK
If this is true then what we think we know about nazi motivation may not be correct.

Yes, the same flashed into my mind, when I saw a thread here, called "A curious Nazi occult tale". Maybe it's just a tale as the thread's title says, a pure propaganda. So how could it be true, if as even an expert confirms already only one percent of everything can be confirmed, while the rest 99 is... well, a myth, a legend... similar to tales which cannot be proven. I'm just meditating.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Sharrow]

Originally posted by Sharrow

Originally posted by GW8UK
If this is true then what we think we know about nazi motivation may not be correct.

So how could it be true, if as even an expert confirms already only one percent of everything can be confirmed, while the rest 99 is... well, a myth, a legend... similar to tales which cannot be proven.

Well what is myth and ledgend of today probably started out in circumstances where the truth was obscured by propagander etc.
What can we do?

reply to post by GW8UK

What can we do?

Searching and revealing the truth, whatever it is, as we're doing a long time ago here at ATS regarding conspiracies, myths and legends. What else can we do?

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Sharrow]

look up:

Zyklon B
Typhus
Gas Chamber Execution (in America)

good starting points.

I have often wondered how much is written and known about the holocaust was actually true. In my mind, I think it would be pretty easy to fake/grossly exaggerate the numbers of people who were killed.

However, ask any WW2 vet who liberated any of those death camps, and they will tell you that they were definitely death camps.

also, look up:

Red Cross Reports (on the camps)
Allied Bombing of Germany at the end of WWII

reply to post by Monts

However, ask any WW2 vet who liberated any of those death camps, and they will tell you that they were definitely death camps.

Death camps or labor camps where people died? The two are not the same I believe.

I have often wondered how much is written and known about the holocaust was actually true. In my mind, I think it would be pretty easy to fake/grossly exaggerate the numbers of people who were killed.

Yes. Exaggerate the numbers is pretty easy. Proving it is the hard way. And if what Mr. Van Pelt is true, it's not proven at all. So the question remains, what the truth really is in this matter?

What Queen Annie said, those look ups are partially proving this claim completely. So how a story can be true and false at the same time? It can't be. Stories are true or false, but cannot be both.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Sharrow]

I have had an interest in this for some time. I believe any selfish death and torture to be wrong on any scale, yet I also believe that using any such event to promote an agenda through contrived action to be the root of that very same evil.
I've have found through sifting through alot of information, a great starting point for anyone whom I ever share my opinion with,
to be to refer to the Jews and not the Zionists.
There is a remarkable difference between the two.

www.jewsnotzionists.org...

There's a lot of solid honesty to be found, but put your pre conception to bed first.

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfterever share my opinion with, to be to refer to the Jews and not the Zionists. There is a remarkable difference between the two.

Yes. It seems to be a valid point. But the Zionists are like to merge the two sides and claim it as one. And who is going to suffer for this? My guess: the Jewish people.

So it is wrong on so many ways. Is it possible that the Jewish people has enough of the Zionists and that's why they're revealing these information?

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Sharrow]

reply to post by Sharrow

I've read alot, talked alot, watched alot, and the link I posted sums up what I've learned so far, and it will help to get to other good information.

I don't really know how to look at this from the angle of the liberating soldiers. There is a mountain of proof for both sides of the argument, but several things always sticks out in my mind: has anyone ever looked at the number of camp guards and officers that died of disease and starvation? It's of course smaller than the number of dead prisoners, there were far less Germans than prisoners in the camps.

Another would be the fact that by the time the camps were liberated, the supply lines had been cut off for a notable length of time. In that situation, who would you choose? Your own men to get the food and treatment or the prisoners? Of course they could have let the prisoners go, but that would negate all the effort made to imprison them in the first place.

Plus, by the end of the war let's face it... Everyone was out for their own ass. Why risk setting prisoners free when you have a leader who is totally out of control and not thinking clearly? Hitler obviously thought his side was salvageable right to the Allies getting to Berlin. What if he had been correct with this thought and they HAD been able to push the Allies back? Yeah, everyone involved in setting prisoners/slaves free would have been lined up and shot. And so we go back to everyone looking out for their own asses.

[edit on 1/6/10 by Magnivea]

reply to post by Sharrow


When the last survivor and the last witness dies,I'm sure there will be
a celebration.Then the job of completely denying the holocaust will
continue,until it is thought of as a fairy tale.
Since we don't learn from our mistakes,we are doomed to repeat them.

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by Sharrow

 

When the last survivor and the last witness dies,I'm sure there will be
a celebration.Then the job of completely denying the holocaust will
continue,until it is thought of as a fairy tale.
Since we don't learn from our mistakes,we are doomed to repeat them.

You're the only one who has made complete sense here. Good for you. Thanks for reconfirming my hope that there are some sane people.

reply to post by mamabeth
Actually one of your very own people said this, who is a scholar in this matter and an expert. So at the moment, don't blame others for this, please. At the moment those people that for you may pointing or may referring has no connection to this at all.

Since we don't learn from our mistakes,we are doomed to repeat them.

Unfortunately it's human nature, what I also hate. But at the moment as I said above, a scholar whose is an ace in this matter said this. So the question remains, why? At the moment your very own scholar is doing what you hate so much.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Sharrow]

reply to post by Sharrow


I am not jewish,I just support the jewish people and Israel! I also had
a relative who helped liberate one of those camps during WW2.Until the
baby boomers and WW2 buffs all die out, there will be a rememberence
of the holocaust.

reply to post by mamabeth

Sorry, I misunderstood. But the question still remains why one of their own scholar says this? Is it not true? Or he just knows that the numbers or some legends are not covering the truth? I don't know what his reason is, but it clearly seems he directly added this little snippet into his interview. The question is; what his reason really was?

I just support... Israel!

I don't. I don't like when Israelis are stating they're willing up to buy my nation's lands, claiming our land is theirs (Hungary) and willing to ruin my proud nation and our traditions. But that's a different story. But they're Zionists what is a great difference as someone above already mentioned.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by Sharrow]

I was always wondering why there are so few remaining examples or furnaces allegedly used to burn bodies of the victims. They were supposedly destroyed. Now, then, why does one destroy such a compelling monument to the victims and then proceeds to erect multiple Holocaust museums? Beats me. Actually, scratch that.

reply to post by Sharrow


Or...it could be that time,in history, is too painful to think of.Since,most
of the survivors and witnesses,are dying off,it would be easier to let the
past go and forget it.The old saying...out of sight,out of mind!
Then people can say,no proof, no witnesses,no survivors,it didn't happen.
Then, you sound like that president in Iran,who denies the holocaust ever
occured.