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.

 

Calling all Debunkers, and anyone who thinks Holocaust Denial is offensive, debunk this!

page: 22
61
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 





But this point is moot anyway, because the 6 million number was never scientifically established. No historian ever claimed that 6 million is the absolute or the most correct number. As this thread has repeatedly established, for many reasons the 6 million number just stuck.


So in your words, the number 6 million has no bearing in reality ........But if you question it you are wrong, A holocaust denier, an anti-semite and a jew-hater.

That makes perfect sense...




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 





But this point is moot anyway, because the 6 million number was never scientifically established. No historian ever claimed that 6 million is the absolute or the most correct number. As this thread has repeatedly established, for many reasons the 6 million number just stuck.


So in your words, the number 6 million has no bearing in reality ........But if you question it you are wrong, A holocaust denier, an anti-semite and a jew-hater.

That makes perfect sense...


Please provide me with any case of anyone who has made a coherent argument that the exact number was not 6 million and was indicted for that. IMO this thread has already established that this has never happened for the simple reason that no one can point to such a ruling.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 


I have made my case based on the undisputedknown factsFrom (a) the Nuremberg trial (b) the original Auschwitz plaque, and (c) the current Auschwitz plaque.

But i know this will be refuted by mere opinion.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 


I have made my case based on the undisputedknown factsFrom (a) the Nuremberg trial (b) the original Auschwitz plaque, and (c) the current Auschwitz plaque.

But i know this will be refuted by mere opinion.


You have proved that NMT and the plaques somehow constitute a verdict against questioning the 6 million number?
Can you help me with this? How is NMT or the plaque an example of a verdict against someone questioning the 6 million number?

That makes absolutetly no sense to me.

Do you think the falsehoods you peddled become facts just because you bold them?
That's like screaming in a debate. It doesn't look very convincing from the audiences perspective.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Because no one ever reads the whole thread... Here again is what the guy playing the role of self-hating Jew in these Videos (David Cole) has to say about those today:







www.nizkor.org.../c/cole.david//cole.recants

THE STATEMENT OF DAVID COLE
Prepared January 2, 1998

This statement is given in an attempt to set the record
straight about my current views regarding the Holocaust and
Holocaust denial. As anyone who follows the subject of
Holocaust denial knows, from 1991 until 1994 I was well
known in the movement as a Jewish Holocaust denier [a
self-described "revisionist"]. For the last three years I
have no longer been associated with this movement, having
realized that I was wrong and that the path I was taking
with my life was self-destructive and hurtful to others. I
have spent the last few years in silence on the subject of
my time with the denial movement, a silence caused mainly by
my shame at what I had done with my life and my desire to
distance myself from that life.

[....] edit by Nichirasu

I would like to state for the record that there is no
question in my mind that during the Holocaust of Europe's
Jews during World War Two, the Nazis employed gas chambers
in an attempt to commit genocide against the Jews. At camps
in both Eastern and Western Europe, Jews were murdered in
gas chambers which employed such poison gasses as Zyklon B
and carbon monoxide (in the Auschwitz camp, for example, the
gas chambers used Zyklon B). The evidence for this is
overwhelming and unmistakable.

[...] Edit by Nichirasu

It has been brought to my attention that Bradley Smith is
still using one of my videos in advertisements he is running
on college campuses. Therefore, I would like to make these
additional points: This video is being advertised without my
consent, and I denouce this video as being without worth.
Bradley Smith is no historian, and denial is no "historical
field." Students on college campuses should look elsewhere
to find out about the Holocaust.



This is the guy who is walking around with Zundel in the Video. He has recanted on these videos years ago. He has been severly misused for Revisionist Propaganda.

If you believe his words - you might as well believe the last words he had to say on this subject: The videos are Garbage and the Holocaust happened.




Case closed?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 


Awesome, just like the "confessions" at the Nuremberg trials, we have a typed statement that is signed by David. Even if this admission were true, and if(that's a big if) it had nothing to due with death threats from the Jewish Defense League, that does not negate any evidence that David Cole may have brought to light.

Read the documents on his home page found here, and tell me how any of the evidence is negated by a (probably) false retraction? How are the interviews and video evidence from his visit to Auschwitz in any way "zeroed out" so to speak, by this retraction?



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by PplVSNWO
 


Damn! Just read the statement the JDL made about him on their site:

David Cole: Monstrous Traitor

Man, that's some serious ripping there! I havent' read anything that hate filled in a long time.

Here's some interesting snippets:


Holocaust denier of the Six Million Jews


Which we already know is an incorrect number.


This despicable low-life beast is worse than the Julius Streichers and Joseph Goebbels. He is more evil than they were-because he is a Jew! This pathetic excuse for a human being is a neo-Nazi traitorous sell-out to his own Jewish people.


Hold on! So a Jewish guy that's questioning the numbers is worse than Goebbels?? I fail to see the logic there.

And here's all the threats:


After all, this Cole mania that the media have played on, don't you think it's time that we flush this rotten, sick individual down the toilet, where the rest of the waste lies? One less David Cole in the world will certainly not end Jew-hatred, but it will have removed a dangerous parasitic, disease-ridden bacteria from infecting society.



An evil monster like this does not deserve to live on this earth.



Cole is an abominable psychopath who must be stopped.



Just as we must get rid of this monster, Cole, we must also get rid of the word "revisionism" from our vocabulary. This awful word and Cole, too, must be eliminated altogether.



This world would be a happier place, indeed, when all the Jew-baiters and Jew-haters have disappeared, especially the most vicious hater of them all, David Cole.

Reward for Information

JDL wants to know the location of Holocaust denier David Cole, pictured above. Anyone giving us his correct address will receive a monetary reward. Contact us through e-mail immediately if you have information leading to the current location of David Cole.


Does that make the person that wrote this a self-hating Jew?


No wonder he signed that statement.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin
 


Even if this admission were true, and if(that's a big if) it had nothing to due with death threats from the Jewish Defense League, that does not negate any evidence that David Cole may have brought to light.



Yes. The problem is, though, that all the so called "evidence" in the video has been refuted.

And you could click on the link and read the whole statement. David talks about the methods used and how honest the overall outlook of the project was too.

Please provide sources for any other claims. He didn't talk about death threats. He hasn't retracted this statement even though it's years gone now. Zundel, his friend from the videos, and the revisionist scene with him believe in the authenticity of the document, allthough they also talk about a "forced confession" even though they have not a shred of evidence to convince me anything in that style transpired at all.

What other reasons besides your cognitive bias - and I do not mean this in a demaning way, but you seem to have a strong prima facie notion of the power of the "Zionist Cabal" - do you have to suspect the retraction is fishy?




Read the documents on his home page found here, and tell me how any of the evidence is negated by a (probably) false retraction? How are the interviews and video evidence from his visit to Auschwitz in any way "zeroed out" so to speak, by this retraction?


They're not. The so called evidence is negated in this thread. Or, better: No one is able to bring up the "explosive" material found in the video.

This very much reminds me of the Jarrah White moon hoax thread. There people also make big claims of "new" evidence but when you look at it it's the same old arguments from the 70's. Very much like in this thread; 90% of the claims made by revisionists in this thread can be found in the earliest and oldest revisionist materials; no one cares that these claims have repeatedly been answered. Sometimes I get the feeling that the so called "absence of debate" on the subject has more to do with these kinds of reasons than with the power of the presumed but still unproven, deus ex machina like "Cabal".

[edit on 10-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

What's also really funny is that the 2 of you are jumping on this NOW. This is the 6th time I've posted this in this thread - proof positive that you guys don't even care to look what already has been debated and what hasn't yet. How serious should I take such an approach?

[edit on 10-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

+ I never claimed that the JDL was a friendly organization. Naturally, they were absolutely deplored by Cole's whole attitude in the 90's. And yes, they can be very extreme fellows. I'm not particularly fond of them which doesn't hinder me from being able to look at things from their perspective in order to get some perspective on the situation.

But I find it notable that this tetraction is now 12 YEARS OLD. If what you guys say is true about this letter, why was it the last word? Why didn't he ever come out with the whole truth?
If things are as you interpret them regarding Cole, then this shouldn't have been the last time we heard anything from him.

He could have fled to Zundel, Irving etc. and live within their eyesight and therefore be protected from being killed unnoticed or whatever else the claim is. If I was threatened to be killed by a "Zionist Cabal" I would most definitely not pursue the course that Cole did. I find the story to be more consistent when the narrative is that he changed his mind. Perfectly consistent, actually.

Of course you can go to Wacky land and claim that Cole "had a hit put on him" and is now dead, the letter being forged. But maybe, if that's the road you're gonna take, you should back it up with more evidence than the last guy had in his post, which, as everyone can see, consisted of absolutely nothing except for the mere assertion.


[edit on 10-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 10-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   
@ NichirasuKenshin

Allow me to use your own words in order to illustrate a point.

You said



Yes. The problem is, though, that all the so called "evidence" in the video has been refuted.


Notice how you use quotations around "evidence" in order to show us you dismiss it, without giving any detail I might add. In the same way, David Cole called his documentaries "documentaries" as if to dismiss his own work, which, as you know, only someone who is insulting someone else's work does this. In addition, the letter was type written but a signature at the bottom. So, those are two good reasons that you can DENY prove the letter is a forgery.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
@ NichirasuKenshin

Allow me to use your own words in order to illustrate a point.

You said



Yes. The problem is, though, that all the so called "evidence" in the video has been refuted.


Notice how you use quotations around "evidence" in order to show us you dismiss it, without giving any detail I might add. In the same way, David Cole called his documentaries "documentaries" as if to dismiss his own work, which, as you know, only someone who is insulting someone else's work does this. In addition, the letter was type written but a signature at the bottom. So, those are two good reasons that you can DENY prove the letter is a forgery.



I have already given arguments why your version of the "forged letter" is not plausible.

I will continue to write "evidence" until you or someone else can point to anything in those videos that refutes the Holocaust. So far no one has, therefore it's "evidence" (claimed) and not evidence (real).

I see we are running out now? Were are your arguments that it didn't happen or happened differently?


Where's the so called "explosive" material?


[edit on 11-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 04:07 AM
link   
one can ponder it this way ,

famine contributed to poor conditions, famine cause by bombings of infrastructure, famine resulted in mass death and masses of dead bodies that had to be disposed of ,

taken in to consideration when the bombings where done that lead to famine
and when the troops arrived at the camps, one can but conclude that one must be naive or blind not to realize thatis what awaits you at the gates,

if you look at factual history from that perspective then the allied caused the famine that lead to the mass deaths of civilians and military personal in the camps, be it intentional or not.

i dono , would be nice to acturly know for sertain what realy happened back then ,seams the same madness is echoing back



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 04:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by zerbot565


if you look at factual history from that perspective then the allied caused the famine that lead to the mass deaths of civilians and military personal in the camps, be it intentional or not.



So because the Nazis decided to wage a war that they didn't have the economic and agricultural means to succeed in, it was the Allies fault? How's that?

The Nazis (Backe, Darré the whole Reichsnährstand as well as several others) knew that there would be no sufficient stocks of food if the war was going to last longer than 1941. They decided to solve the problem by starving the POW's and the Poles and the people in the camp to some extent. Where do the Allies come into this equation?

Is your suggestion that the Allies should have made food drops over Germany? Or what?

The starvation scheme was consciously decided on before the war, before the first allied intervention was even discussed. I can't understand your reasoning.
See Adam Tooze, The wages of destruction, especially the first chapters.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by silhouette
 


The argument is whether or not there was a holocaust or a Jewish holocaust. Very simple. Why do you have trouble understanding this?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by zerbot565
 


You mean the same famine that removed the German army's ability to fight on an Eastern and Western Front, in North Africa and in the Meditteranean, lasting from 1939 through to 1945, right?

Oh wait... there wasn't one.

(Heres a hint - historical record indicates that the majority of the slaughter in the holocaust took place between late 1942 and 1944, before the major collapse of the Reich. Operation Reinhard was in effect between 1941 and 1943, when the Reich was occupying most of Europe and reaping the benefits of the countries it occupied.)

Maybe, when inventing excuses, you should consider facts?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


I am sure you already read the Auschwitz-Birkenau crematoria study I posted, so maybe you need to go back and re-read some parts.
Read sections 5.3 on the actual time different crematoria where in service, section 4.4 on the capacity of the crematoria and then read 5.6 on alleged cremations vs actual coke fuel consumption and get back to us on that.

(hint: link was my first post in this thread)



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by NichirasuKenshin

Yes. The problem is, though, that all the so called "evidence" in the video has been refuted.

And you could click on the link and read the whole statement. David talks about the methods used and how honest the overall outlook of the project was too.

How about a visit to Auschwitz by D. D. Desjardins? Link. Or is that easily refutable because he is not a Jew like David Cole, so it has no significance?



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
we are discussing this issue on the ATSEuro show right now.

ATS Live Page



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by PplVSNWO
 


Try reading this.

The maths

And more..



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


I read what you posted(is that what you where refering to? I had errors so it didn't direct me to a specific post). And I see a lot of claims and little(actually no) sources, especially to uncontested documention, to back em up.
The study I linked to uses real world data on operation of crematoria as well as German documentation on the real world operation in Auschwitz.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
reply to post by neformore
 




(hint: link was my first post in this thread)


I'll bite. I haven't heard of this study before and therefore had to do some reading before I could comment. Overall I would say that the study you linked to by Carlo Mattogno and Franco Deana was one of the best-made revisionist arguments I ever read. Even their tone is barable. If the debate from the revisionist side would always have this character then real progress in the debate would have been possible.

Anyways, I have some severe objections to the study. I'd prefer it if you would take up individual claims from the study and we could discuss them 1 by 1. I still have some reading to do to get familiar with the technical details.

As long as the whole study is your argument, I will pick just one point that has come up in my reading which I find quite convincing. The oven-talk is very technical and quite boring, but if you want to go there, after some additional sighting of sources I'll bite if no one else with better expertise does.

John C. Zimmerman is one of the academics that has delved deeply into this study and the whole set of technical details. As far as I have read, he was able to refute some claims made in the study and he was also able to point out inconsistencies in the study itself.

The first of his texts pertaining to this debate can be found here:

www.holocaust-history.org...

The cited study's answer to this work and Zimmermans subsequent reply can be found here:

www.holocaust-history.org...

From there I shall select just one quote in which Zimmerman takes a step back from detailed technical questions to ask a very enlightening question:




www.holocaust-history.org...

One of the interesting factors to note in Mattogno's reply to my essay is that he never addressed the demographics of Hungarian Jewry. I was able to show that at least 80% -- and the real number is 90% -- of the 437,000 Hungarian Jews who were deported from mid May to mid July 1944 disappeared and that their destination was Auschwitz. Mattogno -- and indeed the whole denier movement -- could easily prove their case of no genocide by simply producing some evidence that these Jews were somewhere other than Auschwitz. Like all deniers, Mattogno cannot actually explain what happened to the Jews who came under German control.



I find this to be so enlightening because my personal guess as to the final number of Jews gassed in Auschwitz that once will be ageed on by all will be somewhere between 500'000 and 800'000.

In the case of the Hungarian Jews we know the exact number; and we can materially demonstrate by clear sources that they were deported to Auschwitz. If Auschwitz was - by this time, July 1944 - not an extermination camp, yet we know it was their final destination, where have those Hungarian Jews gone? Seems no one can find them.
If you add this number to the known deported but missing Polish Jews and the Reinhardt victims you start to get the picture.

Remember that the Soviets started the 4 million-gassed-at-Auschwitz number. Over the course of decades, the concensus tended to one million. Today, as the picture keeps adding details and details, most people would agree on somewhere under 1 million (except those deniers who deny gassing wholesale.)

There's a very good article about the evolution of the Auschwitz gassing toll, if sufficient german language skills permit it:

www.scribd.com...


I'm still reading about Mattogno's claims but as I said if you want to take up individual claims I feel like I'm in possession of the relevant facts now. Let's see where this goes. What do you find to be the most convincing of his arguments?




top topics



 
61
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join