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

reply to post by AngryCymraeg
Maybe they did it because the jews controlled 95% of the banking & credit institutions in Germany. And please it was six million people, not six million jews. I am so personally sick & tired of hearing that thrown around its pathetic.

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

Maybe they did it because the jews controlled 95% of the banking & credit institutions in Germany. And please it was six million people, not six million jews. I am so personally sick & tired of hearing that thrown around its pathetic.

Please provide a cite for your statement about the Jewish control of banking & credit unions in Germany. It sounds hideously like the usual baseless myths about the Jews and banking.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


On March 27, 1933, the Jewish War Veterans announced an American boycott of German goods. Before any anti jewish laws passed by Hitler came about.

On March 12, 1933 the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Gardens for March 27. At that time the commander in chief of the Jewish War Veterans called for an American boycott of German goods. In the meantime, on March 23, 20,000 Jews protested at New York's City Hall as rallies were staged outside the North German Lloyd and Hamburg-American shipping lines and boycotts were mounted against German goods throughout shops and businesses in New York City.

www.wintersonnenwende.com...

Even the holocaust museum admits the first anti jewish laws occurred in April 1933. Thus the legislation was created as a response to international agitation.

www.ushmm.org...

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

On March 27, 1933, the Jewish War Veterans announced an American boycott of German goods. Before any anti jewish laws passed by Hitler came about.

On March 12, 1933 the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Gardens for March 27. At that time the commander in chief of the Jewish War Veterans called for an American boycott of German goods. In the meantime, on March 23, 20,000 Jews protested at New York's City Hall as rallies were staged outside the North German Lloyd and Hamburg-American shipping lines and boycotts were mounted against German goods throughout shops and businesses in New York City.

www.wintersonnenwende.com...

Even the holocaust museum admits the first anti jewish laws occurred in April 1933. Thus the legislation was created as a response to international agitation.

www.ushmm.org...

Hmmmmm, you seem to have missed something there, I wonder what it could be? Oh yes - it might just be this: en.wikipedia.org... In other words the boycott was in response to the organised violence against Jewish shops in Germany. Which started the moment that Hitler came to power in January 1933.
You seem to be very selective in your use of facts. I wonder why that might be?

reply to post by filosophia


It seems archeology refutes your ideas, too.
Dig at concentration camp.

reply to post by Chamberf=6


Fascinating. Many thanks for posting that. I often wondered what will happen when Thomas Blatt dies and we are left we no eyewitnesses to the horror of Sobibor, but this dig helps to support his account of the activities of Sobibor and the role it played in the Holocaust. I was reading about similar archaelogical work that they are doing at Treblinka, but there they are constrained by the Jewish belief that it is sacriligious to disturb the burial place of Jews, and have therefore been limited to geophysical exploration of the site. They have identified a number of possible mass graves, but cannot delve further because of those constraints. I wonder if, because the victims were burned at Sobibor, that this overrides those beliefs... Interesting, and thanks again.

Link to story about Treblinka exploration...

www.bbc.co.uk...

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by filosophia

 

It seems archeology refutes your ideas, too.
Dig at concentration camp.

The heavy concentration of ashes led him to estimate that far more than 250,000 Jews were actually killed at Sobibor.

'far more' is vague and unspecific. 250,000 is a reasonable estimate (not 6 million). They are trying to allow the reader to imagine more than 250k were killed but they can't even give a specific number.

reply to post by Biliverdin


So we can't find out the truth about the camps because it is a holy site for jews? Convenient excuse not to dig for the truth. You want the truth about the holocaust? Sorry, religion gets in the way of science yet again. Now you know why people are skeptical.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


And prior to the jewish boycotts was the treaty of versailles, which Hitler used as a rallying point because it crushed their way of life, so don't forget that fact while you are calling others selective in their reasoning. Also communists were committing violence prior to Hitler coming to power (like 20 years prior).

Originally posted by filosophia

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by filosophia

 

It seems archeology refutes your ideas, too.
Dig at concentration camp.

The heavy concentration of ashes led him to estimate that far more than 250,000 Jews were actually killed at Sobibor.

'far more' is vague and unspecific. 250,000 is a reasonable estimate (not 6 million). They are trying to allow the reader to imagine more than 250k were killed but they can't even give a specific number.

I'm not sure what you're claiming here. We know that at least 200,000 were killed at Sobibor, but the place was totally destroyed in 1943 after the revolt there. Of course the numbers are fuzzy.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

And prior to the jewish boycotts was the treaty of versailles, which Hitler used as a rallying point because it crushed their way of life, so don't forget that fact while you are calling others selective in their reasoning. Also communists were committing violence prior to Hitler coming to power (like 20 years prior).

Are you saying that the jews were responsible for Versailles therefore? Oh and the SA were murdering people at the same time as the communists. So you therefore have no argument.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by Biliverdin

 

So we can't find out the truth about the camps because it is a holy site for jews? Convenient excuse not to dig for the truth. You want the truth about the holocaust? Sorry, religion gets in the way of science yet again. Now you know why people are skeptical.

It's a murder site as well. I wouldn't want people digging there, especially just to satisfy those who claim that it never happened.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg

 

And prior to the jewish boycotts was the treaty of versailles, which Hitler used as a rallying point because it crushed their way of life, so don't forget that fact while you are calling others selective in their reasoning. Also communists were committing violence prior to Hitler coming to power (like 20 years prior).

By the way, what do you mean by "crushed their way of life"? I don't think it banned the use of lederhosen and the drinking of beer. Although if it had improved their food it would have been a good thing. Marzipan is a terrible thing.

I can't believe that this thread is still going.... Seems like years ago...

I've got some time on hand and will chip in and deny me some ignorance. Consider me reintroduced ;-)

Even the holocaust museum admits the first anti jewish laws occurred in April 1933. Thus the legislation was created as a response to international agitation

To begin with, one formal comment. There is a logical fallacy in the quoted statement: It is called post hoc ergo propter hoc. Establishing the temporal priority of one event is not proving its causation of later events. This causation, if it wants to be taken as something more than a mere argument from incredulity, must be separatly established by further argumentation.

Now to the content of the claim:

You presuppose that "laws" are the only measures that the Nazis had in stock for the Jews. Widespread harassment, fraudulent disenfranchisment of property and random violence against Jews did occur long before any laws that the Nazis put in place. The SA and the precursor of the SS as well as different NSDAP-chapters (and surely some Nazi-independent actors, of which there were many) were all engaged in loosely coordinated local actions against Jews. There are documents (such as Goebbels' diary) that prove that the highest echelon of Nazism was aware of those actions. While having conflicting ideas about how to react against these spontaneous, uncontrolled bottom-up actions, they eventually settled on harvesting the wave of antisemitic hatred by centrally controlling them, which eventually lead into the "boycot".

There is a very good synopsis, written by a certain Hellmuth Aurbach (whom I've never heard of and therefore don't vouch for more than that article) here
It is in german though.

What "deniers" don't understand, is that the exchange between Nazi Germany and foreign Jewish Agencies in the months of April/March/June is not to be taken literal, but polemical.

"Judea declares War on Germany" was a polemical title chosen by a british journalist - not some (nonexistent) secret Jewish HQ - for the Daily Express headline of March 24, 1933.

In answer to this, the Nazi party paper, Der Völkische Beobachter, tried to sell the Daily Express headline as some kind of unified declaration of war from the Jewish people. The Beobachter of March 27, for example, concocted a story about "200 cars with "Judea delcares war - boycot german goods" banners drove through London" in order to make it seem like more than it actually was. Notably, the Jewish Board of Deputies (the (legally) official organ of the Jews in Britain at the time) refused to comment on the controversy when approached for a Times article on March 27, declaring that it had no interest in commenting on inner-german affairs. So much about the supposed "unified jewish reaction" that "deniers" like to proclaim....

It takes a Nazi's - or a revisionist's - mind to concoct anything nearing "a de jure declaration of war from the Jews" out of these meager facts. This all while the Nazis' de facto declaration of war against alll Jews within their reach was making its first deadly steps.

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


So you're saying the headline 'judea declares war on germany' means something else other than judea declares war on germany?

Considering the British did everything in their power to a) give Palestine to the jews, and b) defeat Hitler, I would say the British were wrapped around world jewery's fingers.

How about 'Germany Must Perish' by Theodore Kaufman? Is he also just a British journalist?

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

 

So you're saying the headline 'judea declares war on germany' means something else other than judea declares war on germany?

Considering the British did everything in their power to a) give Palestine to the jews, and b) defeat Hitler, I would say the British were wrapped around world jewery's fingers.

How about 'Germany Must Perish' by Theodore Kaufman? Is he also just a British journalist?

Well, you just jumped the shark yet again. And I note that you still haven't addressed my point earlier on. So, that probably means that you can't. Again, how interesting.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by NichirasuKenshin

 

So you're saying the headline 'judea declares war on germany' means something else other than judea declares war on germany?

You certainly haven't offered anything in this thread that would lead me to believe that it was anything else than a sensationalist title by a BRITISH JOURNALIST - as opposed to some SECRET JEWISH HQ that you're implying.

I have given full context on how that headline came to be. You have offered nothing of the sort. You didn't even seem aware of who wrote that headline. Again, taking headlines from newspapers is a far cry from actually offering documents or such stuff. There simply was no Judea in 1933 that could have declared war, except a loose confederation of Jewish advocacy groups, some European, some American, all working on their own agendas. You confuse the polemical with the literal.

Let's take Filosophia's research methods and apply it to another, more contemporary issue:

Gays declare war on Ron Paul

In Filosofia's world, there are no polemics. Every headline is to be taken literal.

Does this mean that some Pink Brigades or on their way, locked and loaded, to attack a country named Ron Paul?

Or are Filosophia's research methods - here, especially the confusion of what is polemical and what is literal - simply worhtless?

You decide.

Considering the British did everything in their power to a) give Palestine to the jews, and b) defeat Hitler, I would say the British were wrapped around world jewery's fingers.

There were plenty of Anti-Zionist Brits. Certainly, the british populace was not ready to start a war based solely on what some extreme Zionists demanded (even the articles quoted so far in this thread make this abundantly clear) - if so, the Second World War might have started simultanously in the Far Eastern and European theaters.

How about 'Germany Must Perish' by Theodore Kaufman? Is he also just a British journalist?

No, he was an extreme, American-born Zionist and a verry shoddy anti-Nazi /anti-German propagandist. What does that prove as to your alleged conspiracy? Zilch....

Are you insinuating that Kaufman was part of some secret plot to bring about World War 2? If so, this might just be a function of your antisemitic brain overestimating the importance of any given Jew.

Simply name-dropping Zionist propagandists is a long way from proving some kind of conspirational plot by the Jews in order to bring about World War 2.

But you already knew that. Jumping the shark indeed.


So my question would be thus: Are you seriously claiming that the Daily Exrpess was the official organ of world Jewry at that time?

It seems you do.

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


Of course he jumped the shark - he lost the argument on this thread a long, long time ago, but he's been sticking his fingers in his ear, humming really loudly and as a result is having delusions of competance. Holocaust deniers are all the same - they can't handle the truth!

reply to post by NichirasuKenshin


Kaufman had some incredible support for his book

A sensational Idea -Time magazine
A provacative theory-interestingly presented-washington post
A plan for permanent peace among civilized nations - new york times.
www.radicalpress.com...