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

page: 47
61
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


The himmler passage mentions 100, 500, thousand dead bodies. The wrong assumption is he means jews, but proper context show he says WE the germans endured this, yet with few exceptions they were still decent people. 1) how do you remain a decent people if you wholesale murder a minority group? 2) How is this an endurance of Germans if it was against the jews?

The passage I think is a rebuttal to those who say the jews must be wiped out, yet they did not witness the hundreds of dead war bodies, clearly the context is war, not a death chamber. So I think this passage is a straw argument for a proof of a secret code network executing the holocaust.
edit on 6-8-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


He is saying that those party members who openly claim they are winning by wiping out the jews have not seen the puled bodies. And that their moral gwin and glory was in killing those who would kill them. Nothing about killing them in gas chambers. More lijely on the battlefield, and as people say, in war there are casualties.

Plus it makes no sense that this speech somehow proves a secret holocaust order was given and yet they also talk about jewish murders already committed? How was that possible if this speech supposedly gave the order.

The main reason though why this claim is suspect is because the speech is a long history speech with no ref er ence to gas chambers, yet you claim its proof of the holocaust because he mentions one thousand dead bodies. Why not millions?
edit on 6-8-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


There you go sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'La la la - can't hear you' again.

I'm beginning to suspect that you are little more than a wind up merchant



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Biliverdin
reply to post by filosophia
 


There you go sticking your fingers in your ears and singing 'La la la - can't hear you' again.

I'm beginning to suspect that you are little more than a wind up merchant


Let me guess, you will say that this too is not a personal statement.


Uh lets see, pointless ad hominem attack...therefore not necessary to respond.

Two holocaust deniers may not agree on everything, but two holocaust scholars must agree on the magic six million number despite official auschwitz revisions of three million. So who is putting their fingers in their ears? Smile.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Lets put this so called discussion into perspective. I am the only one defending holocaust revision, yet I am the 'conspiracy' while all the other members and moderators conspiring together as pro holocaust official story tellers are just free democratic people all believing the same official story line, from a secluded category of LOL an ats gulag if you will
a microcosm of the world?



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
Let me guess, you will say that this too is not a personal statement.


Uh lets see, pointless ad hominem attack...therefore not necessary to respond.

Two holocaust deniers may not agree on everything, but two holocaust scholars must agree on the magic six million number despite official auschwitz revisions of three million. So who is putting their fingers in their ears? Smile.


I don't agree with the six million figure, nor do the majority of scholars, if you were to read some books on the subject then you might actually learn something about those numbers. If we take into account the murders in the East, which as I have already stated, are less well documented at present due to the time lapse in study caused by the rise of the Iron Curtain, the figure is more likely to be closer to 10 million. But I also think that many of those people were killed less because they were Jewish and more because they were Slavic. As, if you have read Mein Kampf, you are aware, the Slavs were considered a degenerate race by the Nazis and no such debate exists into the morality of killing them, as it does with the Reich Jews. And, also, because they were not Northern European, in appearance and culture, there was no need to enter into subterfuge in killing them, that was done with relative transparency. Compared to the subterfuge involved in killing their own people, the Jews of the Reich which was viewed as potentially detrimental to morale, and as a show of failure since they had promised that they would evacuate them out of Germany. At no point, until the decision was made to commit mass murder, were the emigrations stopped, but unfortunately, due to the increasing intensity of the war, and the unwillingness of Hitler to introduce rationing to the German people, the emigrations did not occur fast enough, and there were inadequate resources to feed the Jews that were then starving on the doorstep of Germany, and attracting criticisms from those who had expected the problem to be sorted by then.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


The first passage is talking about masses of german bodies, not jews. The translation is also suspect as my text does not say exterminated. The second passage says nothing of gas chambers or secret code. The third passage says he is not justified in killing the men, which is why the jewish question of deportation was so difficult.

So where does himmler lay out a secret code plan? A few empty passages somehow makes this impossible code holocaust possible? Sorry I dont think so, plus himmler was ousted as a traitor so other than a history lesson I dont see any smoking gun in the speech.


Please cite your text. The Posen speech has been examined in great detail. If you are talking about the ujse of the word Ausrottung it meant extermination in 1943 and it still means that now. David Irving tried to prove otherwise and was made into a figure of fun when someone pointed to a German-English dictionary from 1935 that had the same translation. And no, he's talking about Jews.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by Biliverdin
 


Oh no, I understand the nuremberg laws, which establish a hoax war crime as legal basis to outlaw holocaust denial and revisionism in over a dozen european countries, the same fake war crimes trial that gives israel carte blanch to do as they please with palestine. Yes I know the significance of nurmberg.


You seem to be mistaken. I'm referring to the Nuremburg Laws of 1935.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


The himmler passage mentions 100, 500, thousand dead bodies. The wrong assumption is he means jews, but proper context show he says WE the germans endured this, yet with few exceptions they were still decent people. 1) how do you remain a decent people if you wholesale murder a minority group? 2) How is this an endurance of Germans if it was against the jews?

The passage I think is a rebuttal to those who say the jews must be wiped out, yet they did not witness the hundreds of dead war bodies, clearly the context is war, not a death chamber. So I think this passage is a straw argument for a proof of a secret code network executing the holocaust.
edit on 6-8-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


He is saying that those party members who openly claim they are winning by wiping out the jews have not seen the puled bodies. And that their moral gwin and glory was in killing those who would kill them. Nothing about killing them in gas chambers. More lijely on the battlefield, and as people say, in war there are casualties.

Plus it makes no sense that this speech somehow proves a secret holocaust order was given and yet they also talk about jewish murders already committed? How was that possible if this speech supposedly gave the order.

The main reason though why this claim is suspect is because the speech is a long history speech with no ref er ence to gas chambers, yet you claim its proof of the holocaust because he mentions one thousand dead bodies. Why not millions?
edit on 6-8-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


Please see my earlier post. The speech has been examined in great detail, especially as it was recorded. The speech is chillingly clear and is not a matter of debate.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


If hitler wanted to kill every last jew, he probably would have talked about it in mein kampf, unless you believe he secretly wanted to do so, which is a subjective unproven claim.


It's thought that Hitler's decision to exterminate the Jews did not occur until some point in the 1930's, as his views became more extreme over time. Let's not forget that large chunks of Mein Kampf are also based on the false premise that Germany wasn't defeated in the First World War. In fact large chunks of what appsed for Hitler's philosophy were based on similar false premises.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
Lets put this so called discussion into perspective. I am the only one defending holocaust revision, yet I am the 'conspiracy' while all the other members and moderators conspiring together as pro holocaust official story tellers are just free democratic people all believing the same official story line, from a secluded category of LOL an ats gulag if you will
a microcosm of the world?


Please ask yourself why this thread - your thread - has been moved to the LOL section.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Biliverdin
 


If you dont agree with the six million figure that is good, just dont be surprised if someone calls you a holocaust denier or revisionist, because on the news, in movies, in universities, the official number is still six million.
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


What are you talking about false views of german victory in ww 1? Mein kampf is all about how the trearty of versailles was oppressive which was the justification for a revolution.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Oh so something you claim is a fact is 'not open for debate' well that is a red flag for a weak piece of evidence which collapses under scrutiny, hence why you would like it to be above the realm of debate.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


But in context, he is ridiculing the party members who openly declare the jews were exterminated, YET they did not see the dead bodies. This is akin to calling someone unpatriotic for not actually fighting in a war. There is absolutely no ptoof of a secret oral holocaust order from this speech. No mention of gas chambers or extermination plans. Only death on the battlefield which he shudders to think about. So how can someone who shudders over a thousand dead bodies be able to stomach killing six million?

The term Ausrottung can also mean eradication according to google translate, this could be a reference to the expulsion of jews from germany. But it is so vague that it certainly does not spell out some type of secret code for the holocaust. It also does not make sense if this order is for the holocaust yet they talk about the holocaust? You say it was all euphemisms, 'evacuations east' is code, but then you say it is all clear and not debateable. So nazi code is not debateable? You just instinctively know all the euphemisme? That sounds a bit subjective.
edit on 6-8-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


What are you talking about false views of german victory in ww 1? Mein kampf is all about how the trearty of versailles was oppressive which was the justification for a revolution.


Erm, no. I'm talking about the statements in that book that claim that the defeat of Germany in the First World War was due to being stabbed in the back by revolutionaries, and not due to the fact that the German Army was in full retreat in November 1918, having been beaten again and again. It's called the Stab In The Back theory.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


But in context, he is ridiculing the party members who openly declare the jews were exterminated, YET they did not see the dead bodies. This is akin to calling someone unpatriotic for not actually fighting in a war. There is absolutely no ptoof of a secret oral holocaust order from this speech. No mention of gas chambers or extermination plans. Only death on the battlefield which he shudders to think about. So how can someone who shudders over a thousand dead bodies be able to stomach killing six million?

The term Ausrottung can also mean eradication according to google translate, this could be a reference to the expulsion of jews from germany. But it is so vague that it certainly does not spell out some type of secret code for the holocaust. It also does not make sense if this order is for the holocaust yet they talk about the holocaust? You say it was all euphemisms, 'evacuations east' is code, but then you say it is all clear and not debateable. So nazi code is not debateable? You just instinctively know all the euphemisme? That sounds a bit subjective.
edit on 6-8-2012 by filosophia because: (no reason given)


No, he's talking about how hard it was to achieve, especially as according to him people agreed with it, but then brought up the fact that the knew a . The speech doesn't mention the methods of extermination - why should it, Himmler was talking to the scum who carried it out! But he admits that the extermination of the Jews is taking place. This speech has been done over with a fine toothcomb. Irving brought it up at the Libel trial and was ridiculed for it (but then that trial destroyed what shreds of his reputation as a historian he had left).
And Himmler was talking about the shooting of the Jews that he had witnessed. The coward fainted by the way.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Probably because the ats staff is biased, but why I like to think it is here is because the holocaust story is so LOL hilarious: you have to kill every member of a group, but first, you must give them a hair cut


I fail to see what's funny. Oh wait, the fact that even on ATS, where I've seen one thread that claims that a German U-boat sank the Titanic, holocaust denial is seen as utterly ridiculous - now that's funny!



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Well obviously any conspiracy theory involving Germany is A-OK, even if it involves u boats and titanic. It is funny because it shows peoples bias. Zionist leaders never commit conspiracies, but Hitler was a drug user gay occult space alien lance of destiny owner underground moon base dictator who had the holicaust done all by underlings all in secret code speak. Yes, it would be funny if it wasny so ridiculous or teagic, since the holocaust and hitler myth was used to justify many wars including the invasion of iraq which killed over a million iraqis, and soon the holocaust will be used once again on iran. Tragically funny, but more sad than funny.



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
Hitler was a drug user gay occult space alien lance of destiny owner underground moon base dictator who had the holicaust done all by underlings all in secret code speak.
If you mean euphemisms like "Evacuation to the East", then yes that was code. Once again: Hitler gave the order verbally. That was his style of government. One of his secretaries (it might have been Traudle Junge, I'll have to check) once said that in the Autumn of 1941 Hitler had an 'Under Four Eyes" meeting with Himmler. After it Himmler came out into the antechamber, white as a sheet and muttered to himself "My god, how am I going to do this", or similar words, and Junge later concluded that it was then that Hitler gave the order.





new topics
top topics
 
61
<< 44  45  46    48  49  50 >>

log in

join