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

page: 52
61
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
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!



Thanks for the good example of psychological projection. So, why do you stick your fingers in your ears and refuse to accept the truth? It's sad, really, but that's your choice. Maybe you'll stop trolling on this thread if it really bugs you. Go 'debate' with someone who shares your viewpoint, that way you never evolve out of your predisposed mentality.




posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
Thanks for the good example of psychological projection. So, why do you stick your fingers in your ears and refuse to accept the truth? It's sad, really, but that's your choice. Maybe you'll stop trolling on this thread if it really bugs you. Go 'debate' with someone who shares your viewpoint, that way you never evolve out of your predisposed mentality.


Interesting. I point out a few facts - as opposed to baseless speculation from you - and you regard that as trolling? I think you have that backwards. Again. Not that I'm too surprised by that.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by filosophia
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...


I feel physically ill reading that filth on your link.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Sorry but it is documented that no visible zyklon b residue exists on the walls. So why would you need a special light to see it if it was used so much? Whereas the delousing chamber has visible residue without any speciwl light. So the delousing chambers were used more than the gas chambers which supposedly killed six million? And why would the nazis use a delousing agent as the main gas chemical? Couldnt they find a better more powerful cyanide?


Documented where? And please don't say the Leuchter Report, which has been shown to be unscientific rubbish.


You and others consistently seem to forget The Rudolf Report.

I wonder why?



"These scientific analyses are perfect." -- H. Westra, Anne-Frank-Foundation

"[T]he report must be described as scientifically acceptable." -- Dr. Henri Ramuz, Professor of Chemistry, Expert Report --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Product Description
In the years after its first publication, the so-called Leuchter Report about the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz and Majdanek has been subject to massive, and partly justified, criticism. In 1993, Rudolf, a researcher from the prestigious German Max-Planck-Institute, published a thorough forensic study about the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz which irons out the deficiencies and discrepancies of the Leuchter Report.

The Rudolf Report is the first English edition of this sensational scientific work. It analyzes all existing evidence on the Auschwitz gas chambers and exposes the fallacies of various failed attempts to refute Rudolf’s Report. The conclusions are quite clear: The alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz could not have existed.

In the appendix, Rudolf des­cribes his unique persecution.


www.amazon.com...

Germar Rudolf is a Summa Cum Laude Chemist who went to Auschwitz to once and for all determine the level of blausäure residue in the walls of the alleged gas-chamber(s) and delousing chamber of Auschwitz.

His findings were unpopular and he was severely punished for it.

His entire report is available for free online in several languages - the English version is here:

www.vho.org...

Now you really can stop saying:

- There are no real scholars being persecuted for investigating the Holocaust
- There is no real report on the usage of Zyklon-B and the residual contents of the walls in Auschwitz

Make sure you read what happened to Rudolf after publication.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by MoonMine
 


Sorry, but you're bringing up Germar Rudolf? The man who was shot down in flames more than a decade ago? That Germar Rudolf? www.holocaust-history.org...



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
reply to post by MoonMine
 


Sorry, but you're bringing up Germar Rudolf? The man who was shot down in flames more than a decade ago? That Germar Rudolf? www.holocaust-history.org...


Shot down?

Where exactly was Rudolf shot down?

Either you have Blausäure (Blue Iron) residue in the walls of buildings that were claimed to have been used for the gassing of million or you have not. It is a simple binary equasion, no matter what kind of pseudo-scientific mumb-jumo they have tried to use to discredit the Rudolf Report. The conclusions still stand as he said:

No gassings took place in the buildings that the eye-witnesses have indicated as gas-chambers where humans were killed. There was however a LOT of residue found both inside and outside of the walls of the fumigation chambers where clothes were desinfected. The REAL gas chamber with a real airtight steel door and ventialation systems.

Nice try - but totally rebutted.

"His opinion is just one man's opinion, and it happens to be wrong. " - oh please, because they twist it so that clear evidence cannot be seen through the garbage?

No thank you - I have actually READ the report.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by MoonMine

Shot down?

Where exactly was Rudolf shot down?

Either you have Blausäure (Blue Iron) residue in the walls of buildings that were claimed to have been used for the gassing of million or you have not. It is a simple binary equasion, no matter what kind of pseudo-scientific mumb-jumo they have tried to use to discredit the Rudolf Report. The conclusions still stand as he said:

No gassings took place in the buildings that the eye-witnesses have indicated as gas-chambers where humans were killed. There was however a LOT of residue found both inside and outside of the walls of the fumigation chambers where clothes were desinfected. The REAL gas chamber with a real airtight steel door and ventialation systems.

Nice try - but totally rebutted.

"His opinion is just one man's opinion, and it happens to be wrong. " - oh please, because they twist it so that clear evidence cannot be seen through the garbage?

No thank you - I have actually READ the report.


So have I. And it was shot to pieces. The man has steadily retreated from the wave of actual science that destroyed his report. Try again.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
So have I. And it was shot to pieces. The man has steadily retreated from the wave of actual science that destroyed his report. Try again.


Really? Because YOU say so right?

In refusing to face facts you become part of the smear campaign.

Rudolf´s rebuttal to "your" rebuttal.


He who smears his opponents politically, cannot have scientific motivations for so doing. In a lengthy article intended to refute the scientifically orientated Rudolf Report about the alleged Gas Chambers of Auschwitz, Dr. Richard J. Green and Jamie McCarthy waste roughly a third of their text to attack me with mere political insinuations. Originally I intended to refuse to lower myself to their gutter-level argumentation, but after considering that staying silent might be wrongly interpreted as a confession of "guilt," I decided to speak out.


vho.org...

Try actually reading for a change before you spout propaganda in blanket statements - clearly showing you have not studied this subject objectively and in high detail as I have.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
...and I will pre-empt your next reply:

Green/Mccarthy tried again to refute him - be it with less vigor:

www.holocaust-history.org...

To wish Rudolf wrote as a final response:

vho.org...

Let me leave you with this:



The writer René-Louis Berclaz (of Route des Misets 110, CH-1918 Châtel-St.Denis) was prosecuted at the instance of the organisation LICRA (Ligue Internationale conte le Racisme et l'Antisémitisme, the European counterpart to the New-York based ADL) for "racial discrimination". Reason: He had circulated the French-language edition of the RUDOLF-REPORT about the gas chambers at Auschwitz [demonstrating that the installations palmed off as "gas chambers" are simply not].

When Berclaz submitted that the court produce a rebuttal to the Rudolf-Report, the examining magistrate Jean Pierre Schröter of the Third District Court ("3e Ressort de la Veveyse", Avenue de la Gare, CH-1618 Châtel-St.Denis) appointed professor of chemistry Dr. Henri Ramuz (of Rheinparkstrasse 3/8, CH-4127 Birsfelden) to assess the disputed document. Dr. Ramuz submitted his affidavit to the court on May 18, coming to the conclusion that the RUDOLF-REPORT had to be described "as scientifically correct."


Scientifically correct. Determined by a professor of chemistry appointed by a French Court.
So you see - the report still stands today - and it's conclusions however politically incorrect - with it.

You know, I find it strange that a while back you appearantly had not heard of the Rudolf report "documented where? and don't tell me the Leuchtner report" YOUR WORDS. And all of a sudden you are an expert in determining the in-validity of a true expert report.

Makes me wonder.


But hey, don't take it bad - we all make mistakes - it is what denying ignorance is all about.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by MoonMine
 


Hardly. Rudolf is still a joke, whose report - like Leuchter's - isn't brought up by sensible people. By the way, I have a degree in history, so I'm a pretty fast reader. Oh and I found this tonight - www.nizkor.org...



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


As a practicing Jew, and an individual hoping for better relations between Jews and all peoples, I have trouble understanding why there is such resistance to revising and correcting in a concrete way that which we now know to be in error. If the initial Nuremberg Trial estimate was that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust and the Auschwitz Facility itself estimates that not 4 million but 1.5 million were killed there, why isn't the official death count racketed back to reflect what we know to be the truth? We know 6 million were not killed. Can we not be more fair here? It's as though the exaggerated death count is forever being forced down everyone's throat and I far as I can see, this is lying and does not serve anyone.

The way the official story is so vehemently defended despite the truth, despite the facts, one cannot help but believe this is all political and ultimately will have a terrible result.
edit on 22-11-2012 by StanTheMadTurk because: capital correction



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
When I went to Auschwitz a couple years back, just to test the waters, I challenged our tour guide a bit and pointed out tactfully the openings that the poison was tossed through were not the original portals of entry and were added, in the same way the walls had been knocked down in that chamber. This is a point previously made by the infamous David Cole who I don't particularly like. But what is fair is fair. The guide balked and would address my point. This doesn't help anyone.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by StanTheMadTurk
reply to post by filosophia
 


As a practicing Jew, and an individual hoping for better relations between Jews and all peoples, I have trouble understanding why there is such resistance to revising and correcting in a concrete way that which we now know to be in error. If the initial Nuremberg Trial estimate was that 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust and the Auschwitz Facility itself estimates that not 4 million but 1.5 million were killed there, why isn't the official death count racketed back to reflect what we know to be the truth? We know 6 million were not killed. Can we not be more fair here? It's as though the exaggerated death count is forever being forced down everyone's throat and I far as I can see, this is lying and does not serve anyone.

The way the official story is so vehemently defended despite the truth, despite the facts, one cannot help but believe this is all political and ultimately will have a terrible result.
edit on 22-11-2012 by StanTheMadTurk because: capital correction


The figure is likely (we will never know exactly) to have been just under six million and that is a figure that has been arrived at by looking at the prewar and post war census figures, documentary evidence and the physical proof on the ground. The 4 million figure at Auschwitz was arrived at by the post war Communist Polish and Soviet authorities and not by any historians. It was not therefore taken into account in the total, which remains around six million.
By the way there is no "Official Story". There is only history, which is a terrible enough thing to deal with.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by AngryCymraeg
reply to post by MoonMine
 


Hardly. Rudolf is still a joke, whose report - like Leuchter's - isn't brought up by sensible people. By the way, I have a degree in history, so I'm a pretty fast reader. Oh and I found this tonight - www.nizkor.org...


No, only rational people who pursue the truth.

Both Leuchter and Rudolf were experts in their field until their research results conflicted with history.
Then all of a sudden they were nailed to the cross - slandered and persecuted.

History is indeed written by the victors - but it is a comforting thought that the truth will always out. No matter how long it takes. And as you say you are a student of history try studying the trial notes of the Canadian Zündel trials.

vho.org...

Then after truly reading and understanding what happened there come back in here and say what you think of these "testimonials" by individuals like Wiesel or the writings of Raul Hilberg.

It is there for all to see - once you get past emotional knee-jerk responses.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by MoonMine

No, only rational people who pursue the truth.

Both Leuchter and Rudolf were experts in their field until their research results conflicted with history.
Then all of a sudden they were nailed to the cross - slandered and persecuted.

History is indeed written by the victors - but it is a comforting thought that the truth will always out. No matter how long it takes. And as you say you are a student of history try studying the trial notes of the Canadian Zündel trials.

vho.org...

Then after truly reading and understanding what happened there come back in here and say what you think of these "testimonials" by individuals like Wiesel or the writings of Raul Hilberg.

It is there for all to see - once you get past emotional knee-jerk responses.


Sorry, but you think that Leuchter is an expert in his field??? Seriously? ROFL!!!



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


I always thought the 6,000,000 figure came out of the Nuremberg trial testimonies. Don't some say now the figure is more like 4,000,000? I have even seen as low as 700,000 in Auschwitz and roughly 1,500,000 total.

The problem I have with the gassing stories is that these guys claim they pull the victims out with canes and what not. But you never hear about them evacuating the bad air and taking precautions as you'd need to under those circumstances. For this reason I don't believe the gassing stories can be believed.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by minafromRio
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


I always thought the 6,000,000 figure came out of the Nuremberg trial testimonies. Don't some say now the figure is more like 4,000,000? I have even seen as low as 700,000 in Auschwitz and roughly 1,500,000 total.

The problem I have with the gassing stories is that these guys claim they pull the victims out with canes and what not. But you never hear about them evacuating the bad air and taking precautions as you'd need to under those circumstances. For this reason I don't believe the gassing stories can be believed.


No, the Six million figure did not come out of Nuremberg. It was still far too soon after the war for the first estimates to emerge I think. And the figure remains at around six million due to extensive research and census information.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by AngryCymraeg
 


Thanks! How about the other point made. I have read that too. Initially there was a plaque or something at Auschwitz that said 4 million died there. Now the new plaque says 1.5 million died at Auschwitz. How do they deal with these numbers that seem at odds with the story as typically told in the main?



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   
The laws in Europe are far too severe, draconian, the way any dissent from the conventional view is not tolerated.
edit on 22-11-2012 by minafromRio because: too severe



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Last point for me. I do think much of our donating public funds to Israel comes out of this Holocaust guilt. Not sure what the figure is, but the Israelis are more than capable of taking care of themselves these days. Enough with giving them money. We need it more than they do at this point.





top topics
 
61
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join