Adolf Hitler - The Greatest Story Never Told

[Cosmored]

At the 1:17:00 time mark...
http://avalonlibrary.net/Adolf_Hitle...Never_Told.mp4

...it's said that the real reason that England and France declared war on Germany was that they didn't want to see any German expansion that would threaten their own empires. It's probably true. Germany practiced imperialism before and during WW1.
https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/German_colonies
https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/File:D...e_Kolonien.PNG

The Strangest Warship Battle of WW1 - Africa's Lake Tanganyika
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6TYl-L7GDg


Imperialism is evil. Assuming this scenario reflects reality, if Germany hadn't been an imperial power before WW2, England and France wouldn't have seen it as a threat to their empires and probably wouldn't have interfered with the dispute between Germany and Poland. If we look at the big picture, we can't say that Germany is entirely innocent.

[loungelizard]

Posted by Cosmored (here)
Could you have another go at trying to explain why no bureaucrats, Nazis, SS officers or Gestapo ever denied the reality of the events of the Holocaust, as your original answer made no sense, I’m afraid.

Posted by Cosmored (here)
I think you're being deliberately obtuse. You're basing your assumption on what the mainstream media say. If any of those people you cite were to deny the holocaust, the media wouldn't report it so we don't know if any of them really denied the Holocaust or not.

The question that you didn't answer was how the testimonies made under oath of thousands of people in court - filmed for posterity and witnessed by the press, members of the public across the world and the court and legal representatives - were altered by "them". Without anyone noticing.

PS and I think we all know now who you mean by "them".

[loungelizard]

Posted by Cosmored (here)

Where did the 6 million go?

You're assuming that your source is credible. There are other sources that say different things.

http://vho.org/GB/Books/thottc/5.html
(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------------------
The problems inherent in a demographic study are formidable. First, all sources of post-war primary data are private Jewish or Communist sources (exclusively the latter in the all important cases of Russia and Poland). Second, it appears that one can get whatever results desired by consulting the appropriately selected pre-war and post-war sources. Consider world Jewish population. The 1939 study of Arthur Ruppin, Professor of Jewish Sociology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, gave 16,717,000 Jews in the world in 1938.[20] Because Ruppin (who passed away in 1943) was considered the foremost expert on such matters, on account of many writings on the subject over a period of many years, the estimates of other pre-war sources tend to agree with him. Thus, the American Jewish Committee estimate for 1933, which appears in the 1940 World Almanac, was 15,315,359. The World Almanac figure for 1945 is 15,192,089 (page 367); no source is given, but the figure is apparently based on some sort of religious census. The 1946 World Almanac revised this to 15,753,638, a figure which was retained in the editions of 1947 (page 748), 1948 (page 572), and 1949 (page 289). The 1948 World Almanac (page 249) also gives the American Jewish Committee estimate for 1938 (sic), 15,688,259 while the 1949 World Almanac (page 204) reports new figures from the American Jewish Committee, which were developed in 1947-1948: 16,643,120 in 1939 and 11,266,600 in 1947.
--------------------------------------------------------

Oh dear. You really do need to broaden your field of research: the World Almanac gambit is sooooo old hat.

As you say, your source has to be credible - and for starters, the World Almanac was a non-academic, general-purpose reference book and it’s therefore not a reliable source of demographic data.
It states clearly that its figures are all estimates, and that it bases on them on second party sources.

When citing the World Almanac as a source for data "proving" that there was no Jewish population decline during World War II, Holocaust deniers are simply propagating one of the standard denier myths
which is easily debunked.

The apparent discrepancy has nothing to do with rates of population increase: it is the result of how often the World Almanac's sources had access to fresh estimates of religious populations.

Whoever first started propagating this “World Almanac Gambit” neglected to mention that all figures before 1949 were from 1938 estimates.

These are the figures of the global Jewish population as printed in the Almanac for the following years:

1941 15,748,091
1944 15,192,089
1947 15,688,259
1948 15,688,259
1949 11,266,600

It’s clearly stated that the figures for 1941, 47 and 48 are estimates made in 1938 (circled in red)



In 1949, the Almanac revised the 1939 population estimate (16,643,120) to 11,266,600, giving a difference of between 1938 and 1947 of 5,376,520. Pretty close to 6 million, wouldn’t you say?

So the answer is really very simple. Tthe Almanac did not have any updates to its numbers due to the horrendous war that had ravaged Europe and displaced millions of people. The figure was not updated until the 1949 issue.

[loungelizard]

Posted by Cosmored (here)
I googled around and found thisl.

https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Holoca...onial_evidence
(excerpts)
-----------------------------------------

Metapedia is not a reliable source: a quick glance at the registered publisher, Anders Lagerstrom, reveals its agenda.



It’s a Swedish far-right “community” that pushes white nationalist, white supremacist, white separatist, antisemitic, Holocaust denial and neo-Nazi propaganda. As an extremist white nationalist site, it’s is considered to be a purveyor of hatred - and you said such people were “morons” yet you believe every word they spew.



I was curious about that handful of people listed on that site whom you seem to think have spoken up to deny the Holocaust so I did some research - which, yet again, exposed the lies told by Holocaust deniers in the hope of confusing and snaring an unwitting public.

NONE OF THOSE MEN ACTUALLY SAID, UNDER OATH, THAT THE HOLOCAUST DID NOT HAPPEN.

[Cosmored]

The question that you didn't answer was how the testimonies made under oath of thousands of people in court - filmed for posterity and witnessed by the press, members of the public across the world and the court and legal representatives - were altered by "them". Without anyone noticing.

PS and I think we all know now who you mean by "them".

I never said they were altered. I said that people can lie because they've been threatened and/or bribed. Therefore, it's possible that the witnesses were lying. If someone important had wanted to come clean and say there were no gas chambers after the trial, he would have had a hard time getting the word out as the press wouldn't have reported it.

Also, the revisionists don't say there was no Holocaust. They say there were no gas chambers at the camps and there were no gassings.

https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Anti-H...an_revisionism


I've been googling around trying to find out how many "witnesses to the gassings" testified at the Nuremberg trial. I found this.

https://iwitness.usc.edu/SFI/modules...aterialid=3220
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------
In Robinson’s own calculation, more than 800 Nazi documents and the testimony of thirty-three witnesses were devoted, in whole or in part, to the question.
----------------------------------------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials


I can't find an exact number. What do you know?


Please comment on post #275. Here's a link to it.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1380220

[Cosmored]

Metapedia is not a reliable source

I'm sure you're familiar with the Apollo hoax.

https://www.giraffeboards.com/showthread.php?t=31034

(see post #561)
https://www.giraffeboards.com/showpo...&postcount=561


Compare Metapedia's analysis of it with Wikipedia's analysis of it.

http://www.moonfaker.com/documents/Metapedia-Moon-Hoax/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_l...iracy_theories

Which one do you think is the better source?

[Cosmored]

As you say, your source has to be credible - and for starters, the World Almanac was a non-academic, general-purpose reference book and it’s therefore not a reliable source of demographic data.
It states clearly that its figures are all estimates, and that it bases on them on second party sources.

In post #278 I made it clear that this was all second-hand info and we couldn't use it to come to any conclusions. Your info is from the establishment which has been lying for years about other things so what it says should be taken with a grain of salt.

See post #265.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1379571

In 1949, the Almanac revised the 1939 population estimate (16,643,120) to 11,266,600, giving a difference of between 1938 and 1947 of 5,376,520. Pretty close to 6 million, wouldn’t you say?

That's a good point but we can't just conclude that they were killed.
http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en...te/015-18.html


I haven't read this but I'm posting it anyway so that other people can read it.
http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en.../dsmrdtoc.html

I'll get around to reading it later.

[Cosmored]

You've ignored several of my requests that you address several things:

The top of post #262...
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1378920

You never addressed the issue I raised in post #275.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1380220

[Cosmored]

At the 1:19 time mark of this video Hitler makes clear that he wants the return of Germany's colonies* which were taken after WW1.

Adolf Hitler talks about Czechoslovakia. Part 1.
https://archive.org/details/AdolfHit...91938Part1360p


Colonialism is evil so the fact that Hitler wants to continue having colonies makes him evil as far as I'm concerned.


Germany and Britain were fighting in Libya during WW2. Maybe they both knew about the oil there. Why else would Italy, Germany, England and the US have been so interested in Libya? The allies ended up with the oil after the war.

http://libyasos.blogspot.com.es/2012...us-and-uk.html
(excerpts)
---------------------------
Concessions on oil extraction is granted to two US oil companies. More companies would follow later.
---------------------------
1961:
September - With the opening of a 167 km long pipe line, oil exportations start from Libya. US oil companies begin to reap huge profits, as do corrupt Libyan officials. Oil goes on to make a few in Libya very rich, but most of the populus do not benefit and remain poverty stricken.
---------------------------

All we can do is speculate and try to talk to Arabians who know what was going on then I suppose. It looks to me like the Americans, British, Italians and Germans were all the bad guys in the battles that were taking place in Libya during WW2. They were fighting over the oil and the allies won. The good guys were the Libyans who finally got the benefit of the oil when Gadafi took over and stopped the theft of Libyian oil.

Outside of the US people view the US as the bad guy. Most political conversations I hear are based on this kind of info.
https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=145531

Outside of the US there's nothing more amusing than a group of typical Americans discussing politics and there's nothing more pathetic than a typical American who thinks the US defends freedom and democracy in the world.

[loungelizard]

Posted by Cosmored (here)

I've been googling around trying to find out how many "witnesses to the gassings" testified at the Nuremberg trial. I found this.

https://iwitness.usc.edu/SFI/modules...aterialid=3220
(excerpt)
----------------------------------------
In Robinson’s own calculation, more than 800 Nazi documents and the testimony of thirty-three witnesses were devoted, in whole or in part, to the question.
----------------------------------------

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials


I can't find an exact number. What do you know?

I'm not clear what you’re researching, or why you’ve chosen the trials at Nuremberg.

But as you’ve started, here is an amazing resource: The Harvard Law School Library provides access to approximately one million pages of documents
relating to the trials. You can search trial transcripts, books documents, legal briefs, evidence files etc etc.
https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu

Approximately 100,000 Germans and Austrians were sentenced for their crimes in wartime, while the courts in the Soviet Union convicted 26,000 Germans
and Austrians for their actions during the Third Reich.
Once you’ve finished researching the Nuremberg trials, will you then do the same for all the other trials? The Frankfurt Auschwitz trial? The Eichmann trial?
Majdanek? Dachau? Belsen? Sobibor? ...

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by Cosmored (here)

Please comment on post #275. Here's a link to it.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1380220

Good forum etiquette requires at least a brief description of the material and hopefully your take on it.
I, for one, won’t be opening any of the links you post here any more unless there is an explanation of the content.

[loungelizard]

Posted by Cosmored (here)

In 1949, the Almanac revised the 1939 population estimate (16,643,120) to 11,266,600, giving a difference of between 1938 and 1947 of 5,376,520. Pretty close to 6 million, wouldn’t you say?

That's a good point but we can't just conclude that they were killed.

So where did they go? Show me the demographics of the countries in that region that demonstrate a sudden surge in population due to the mass relocation of 5m+ people.

Explain to millions of families how their loved ones wandered off somewhere to live another life, never to contact them again any time during the following decades without even bothering to say goodbye.

And where are all the children and grandchildren of these missing people?

If they merely moved to another country, why has the world population of Jews still not reached pre-WW2 levels? Natural increase would mean that the current population of Jews should be around 32 million if the Holocaust had not taken place (according to the leading expert in demographics Professor Sergio Della Pergola).

And yet:

In 1939, there were 16.6 million Jews worldwide.
In 1948, there were 11 million Jews worldwide.
In 2010, there were 14 million Jews worldwide.

If the figures you post in 278 were actually anywhere near the truth -

Posted by Cosmored (here)
“Thus, the American Jewish Committee estimate for 1933, which appears in the 1940 World Almanac, was 15,315,359. The World Almanac figure for 1945 is 15,192,089 “

- that would mean that the Jewish population living in the heart of war torn Europe managed to survive completely unscathed. Quite a feat, considering the death toll in that region in WW2.

Posted by Cosmored (here)
The World Almanac figure for 1945 is 15,192,089 (page 367); no source is given, but the figure is apparently based on some sort of religious census.

I’m pretty sure the Almanac didn’t publish figures for 1945 - how would they be able to gather such information in the aftermath of a world war with millions missing and displaced? And what is meant here by the vague term, “some sort of religious census”?

Posted by Cosmored (here)
That's a good point but we can't just conclude that they were killed.

Er, yes we can.

The fact is that there are just under 6 million European Jews who are missing. Unaccounted for. That can only be explained by a systemic programme of extermination on an industrial scale, a theory that is supported by physical, circumstantial and documentary evidence.

[loungelizard]

Question number 3, Cosmored.

Do you deny any other genocides? Cambodia? Rhwanda? Tibet? Armenia? The Marsh Arabs?

If genocide denial is your thing, why not make life easier and choose another genocide that hasn’t the dubious accolade of being the best-documented genocide in history and, as such, is impossible to deny.

Why have you chosen to deny the Holocaust specifically?

[Cosmored]

I'm kind of busy now so but I'll get around to everything eventually.

Why have you chosen to deny the Holocaust specifically?

I don't actually deny the holocaust. According to the revisionists the Germans killed close to three hundred thousand Jews by shooting and hanging them. The revisionist researchers seem to have proven that there were no deaths by gassing.

I found some lies in the official story of WW2 which are explained at the top of post #1 of this thread.
http://www.flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=12196&start=0

I started looking at the revisionist info on the Holocaust too. Look at post #2 of the above thread.

Phisical proof* trumps testimony and published statistics as people can lie and forget.


I'm mainly posting this for the viewers.

http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndvalue.html
(excerpt)
------------------------------
1. Introduction

In the debate about the Holocaust one of the main arguments of popular opinion is that there are a great many statements of eyewitnesses to document the National Socialist mass extermination, and that especially the many confessions of perpetrators among the SS are irrefutable proof of the existence of a program of deliberate extermination of the Jews in the Third Reich.[2] For this reason, it is claimed, the lack of documentary and material evidence is irrelevant.[3]

First of all, it is incorrect to say that there is no material evidence. The present work is a compendium of such material evidence, which, however, all goes to refute certain aspects of the Holocaust as these are related by witnesses and maintained accordingly by the courts and by academia. The justice system as well as academics of the establishment ignore this material evidence; nevertheless, the question arises as to how eyewitness testimony is to be evaluated.

It is important to note that neither objective historians nor jurists may uncritically accept everything that someone recounts as being the plain truth, but must establish the value of such reports. The first step in this process is to fit eyewitness testimony properly into the hierarchy of the various types of evidence. Then one must consider how the individual testimony came to be – for example, whether there were manipulative factors that may have impinged on the witness and influenced his testimony.

Since most of the eyewitness statements concerning the Holocaust were made in the course of preliminary legal proceedings and of trials, we shall first clarify the value accorded to eyewitness testimony in court.

2. The Value of Eyewitness Evidence in General

In academia as well as in the justice system of a state under the rule of law, there is a hierarchy of evidence reflecting the evidential value. In this hierarchy, material and documentary evidence is always superior to eyewitness testimony.[4] Thus, academia as well as the justice system regard eyewitness testimony as the least reliable form of evidence, since human memory is imperfect and easily manipulated.[5] According to Rolf Bender, a German expert on the evaluation of evidence, its unreliable nature renders eyewitness testimony merely circumstantial evidence, in other words, not direct evidence.[6]

What standards must be met for eyewitness testimony to be usable in court?[7]

1. The witness must be credible.

While making no claims to completeness, the following lists a few criteria for determining credibility:

Emotional involvement. If witnesses are emotionally too involved in the cases under investigation, this may distort the testimony in one direction or the other, without this necessarily being a conscious process.
Veracity. If it turns out that a witness is not overly concerned about truthfulness, this casts doubts upon his further credibility.
Testimony under coercion. The frankness of testimony may be limited if a witness is subjected to direct or indirect pressure that makes him deem it advisable to configure his testimony accordingly.
Third-party influence. A person’s memory is easy to manipulate. Events reported by acquaintances or in the media can easily become assimilated as ‘personal experience’. Thus, if a witness has been exposed intensively to one-sided accounts of the trial substance prior to testifying, this can very well affect his testimony to reflect these impressions.
Temporal distance from the events to be attested to. It is generally known that the reliability of eyewitness testimony diminishes greatly after only a few days, and after several months has been so severely influenced and altered by the replacement of forgotten details with subsequent impressions that it retains hardly any value as evidence.[8]
2. Testimony must be plausible.

Internal consistency. Testimony must be free of contradictions and in accordance with the rules of logic.
Correctness of historical context. Testimony must fit into the historical context established conclusively by higher forms of evidence (documents, material evidence).
Technical and scientific reality. Testimony must report such matters as can be reconciled with the laws of nature and with what was technically possible at the time in question.
While the issues listed under 2. are easily verified, the circumstances listed under 1. are often difficult or impossible to determine and thus involve the greatest effort for the least return. One must keep in mind that every witness experienced a certain event differently, from a purely subjective and personal point of view. He or she internalized it differently, depending on his/her physical and psychological state. He/she will ultimately recount the experience in a strictly subjective manner depending on his/her abilities and on the occasion at hand. So even if two witnesses are completely impartial and credible and their statements are plausible, they nevertheless may not report the same thing.[9]

The testimony of parties in dispute before the Court – i.e., the statements of the prosecution and the defense – must naturally be considered in an especially critical light since each party has a vested interest in incriminating its opponent and exonerating itself.[10] But even impartial witnesses are often very far removed from the objective truth, and the fact that (although this has been well known for centuries) eyewitness testimony is still accorded disproportionately great significance in court even today, has repeatedly drawn sharp criticism from qualified sources[11] and has frequently resulted in gross miscarriages of justice.

From a judicial point of view, confessions – both in and out of court – are considered to be circumstantial evidence, since past experience has shown that a large part of all confessions are false. False confessions may be made in order to

cover for a third party;
bask in the limelight of a crime;
put a stop to grueling interrogation;
gain a mitigated sentence by exhibiting remorse and repentance;
as a result of psychological disorders; etc…
In the Federal Republic of Germany as well, miscarriages of justice unfortunately occur time and again as a result of false confessions.[12] The same goes accordingly for self-incriminating testimony which need not always be true. It is all the more surprising, therefore, that the otherwise knowledgeable R. Bender would categorize a self-incriminating witness as being generally truthful.[13]
------------------------------

The Holocaust Testimonies You DIDN'T Hear
https://www.altcensored.com/watch?v=nCkT31koqRo

The Majdanek Gas Chamber Myth
https://www.altcensored.com/watch?v=63j13dB6JdY


*
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndgcger.html

(post #269)
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1379688

[Cosmored]

You didn't respond to this.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1380687

I think this shows that the Wikipedia info was written by paid sophists who didn't even believe their own arguments and the Metapedia info was written by objective truth-seekers.

Please comment on post #275. Here's a link to it.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1380220

It's an argument that there were no killings in gas wagons. It says that diesel was said to have been used and that diesel fumes only make people sick. It says that diesel fumes don't kill.

Approximately 100,000 Germans and Austrians were sentenced for their crimes in wartime, while the courts in the Soviet Union convicted 26,000 Germans
and Austrians for their actions during the Third Reich.

The revisionists don't deny that there were atrocities. They say there were no gas chambers.

But as you’ve started, here is an amazing resource: The Harvard Law School Library provides access to approximately one million pages of documents
relating to the trials. You can search trial transcripts, books documents, legal briefs, evidence files etc etc.
https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu

This would take hours and hours. If you know of something specific about the gas chambers, could you link to it?


You never responded to this.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1378364


You seem to have a lot of faith in mainstream sources of info. I posted some stuff on that.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1379571

Mainstream info is controlled by a bunch of liars and sophists. The viewers and lurkers who read this forum are pretty much people who are aware of this. You're not impressing very many of them by relying on mainstream info.


There's some more info on the mainstream here.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index....ost-1066548138

[Cosmored]

That's a good point but we can't just conclude that they were killed.

Er, yes we can.

The fact is that there are just under 6 million European Jews who are missing. Unaccounted for. That can only be explained by a systemic programme of extermination on an industrial scale, a theory that is supported by physical, circumstantial and documentary evidence.

The viewers can decide for themselves.

http://vho.org/GB/Books/thottc/5.html

http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en...te/015-18.html
(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
How Many Jews Were Eliminated In Europe By The War?

This is the leading question and one now impossible to answer with any assurance. There are many . . . estimates made by Jews or based on Jewish figures, but most of these are either copied from statements of the Institute of Jewish Affairs or the World Jewish Congress or, like Fay's statement in Current History of 6 million, round numbers loosely used without any investigation of the facts and reflecting the prevailing mood of the day. To quote them adds nothing to the picture . . .

The foregoing pages should have made it clear that the answer to our title question is, for the time being, unanswerable in terms that satisfy any scientific standards. There are so many loopholes amid so few relatively sound figures that the calculator can set his own figure in advance and arrive there by estimates and guesses, all of which can be given a certain plausibility. Even the best studies, therefore, are little more than crazy quilts of conjectures made somewhat more substantial than a tissue of lies by scattered bits of fact. . . .

(M)ost of the figures which have to be used are those of Jewish students of the problem or are based on figures given out by Jews and Jewish organizations. . .

My aim has not been to seek a more decisive estimate than those made by others, who may have spent many months and consulted thousands of original documents. Rather it has been to show the transparently conjectural nature of the current estimates and to point out some of the probable sources of error, which are mainly lack of adequate and up-to-date population statistics, the manufacture of statistics where they are actually lacking, the manipulation and juggling of such statistics (both reliable and manufactured) as are used, to exaggerate the number of Jews in Europe and the world in 1939 and decrease the number known . . .

(E)ven if it could be proved that vast numbers of Jews died in the Nazi concentration, euthanasia, and death camps, it would not follow that all, or possibly even a majority of these, were deliberately exterminated by the Nazis. There was a huge death rate in all of these camps due to disease. In one camp, at least, there was a serious typhus epidemic. Lack of drugs and medical treatment, coupled with general low vitality and lowered physical resistance to disease, made the death rate abnormally high. Many died from exposure, and others from hard labor. Starvation was common, especially toward the end of the war, when supplies ran low even for soldiers and civilians.

And, best if all, Hankins offers an alternative way of looking at this question:

The soundest basis for skepticism regarding any such figure as 6 or even 4 million Jews exterminated by Hitler and the Nazis is that contributed by logistics rather than statistics. As you have seen, the latter are inadequate, manufactured, garbled, and consciously manipulated to establish a thesis and figure assumed in advance. Logistics is a well-established science, knows no political, racial or religious bias, and in this case relies upon a vast body of materials accumulated during the Second World War. Evidence in this field is as copious and precise for the years between 1939 and 1945 as it is sparse and fugitive for population changes and shifts during the same period.

Students of logistics who have given some attention to the charge that the Nazis, however evil-minded and however much they wished to do so, actually exterminated 4 to 7 million Jews in less than two years during a desperate two-front war which turned against Hitler at the very moment he is alleged to have set up his extermination program, contend that it would have been utterly impossible for them to have achieved anything like such a result. Itwould have required so much more effort and manpower and would have brought such confusion and added strain to the already overtaxed transportation facilities that the Nazis could not have waged even a reduced one-front conflict . . .

By 1944, Allied bombing in the West and Russian victories in the East rendered the German situation much more desperate and placed ever greater strains on German war material, plant, manpower, and transportation. Hitler could not have diverted enough effort to the extermination of the Jews between November 1943, and May 1945, to have disposed of 6 million Jews without producing a virtual collapse of his whole war effort. . . .

The 6 million theme was picked up by President Truman early in his first administration, without anything but hearsay on his part, and has been so frequently repeated during the last decade that it is used almost automatically by journalists who have never made the slightest study of the subject. It has now become commonplace in journalistic lore.

[Cosmored]

I know there are testimonies by Germans who worked as guards, etc.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1378849


But there is other stuff that contradicts the story they tell.

http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en.../dsmrdtoc.html
(excerpts)
------------------------------------------
http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en...3felderer.html

Aerial photographs of Auschwitz:

Aerial photographs taken of Auschwitz by the Americans during the war were released by the CIA in 1979 in a book entitled The Holocaust Revisited: A Retrospective Analysis of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Extermination Complex. Using slides of these photographs, Felderer pointed out to the jury the main buildings in the camp, including the electrified fence, the alleged gas chamber, Commandant Hoess's house, the administration buildings, the swimming pool, the hospital block, the gynecological block (as children were born at Auschwitz), the SS hospital, blocks where inmates learned a trade such as sewing and the two largest buildings in the camp, the kitchen, and the theatre. (18-4255 to 4259) Close-up slides of the aerial photographs indicated that the alleged gas chamber in Auschwitz I was about 30 metres from the SS hospital building. (18-4260) Felderer was told by people in the town of Auschwitz that during the war people could obtain special permission to take tours of the camp on special days. (18-4323; The Holocaust Revisited entered as Exhibit 85, 19-4605)

Auschwitz I Map:

A map taken from a book by former Auschwitz inmate Maximillian Kobler was, to Felderer's knowledge, the only map of the camp to indicate the theatre as a theatre, and to label the alleged gas chamber, not as a gas chamber, but as a crematory, which, in Felderer's opinion, it actually was. (18-4263)
------------------------------------------
http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en...tophersen.html

Christophersen, asked if he denied there were gas chambers at Auschwitz, replied that he had not found anybody who could give him details about the gas chambers although he had made efforts to do so. (20-4982) He had read the book by Kogon, Langbein and Rückerl, Nationalsozialistische Massentötungen durch Giftgas (National Socialist Mass Killings Through the Use of Poisonous Gas), a book which he saw as an attempt to bring many different statements or opinions into one line. (21-5091) He knew Kogon was a professor, and that Langbein had been interned at Auschwitz and spent his time there working in an office. Rückerl was the head of an institute in Germany. (21-5092)
------------------------------------------
http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en...19kneuper.html

The day after Dachau was taken, Kneuper and a friend drove a Jeep over to the camp. His friend's father had been incarcerated in Dachau for a week or two during the 1930s and he wanted to see it. (23-5640) Kneuper testified that he saw dead and emaciated bodies of camp inmates but also saw camp inmates who looked just as well off and husky and hardy as the German veterans. There were plenty of these latter inmates. Kneuper testified that they "certainly weren't starving; they certainly didn't act as though they were." Kneuper was shown the photograph of released Dachau inmates on page 25 of Did Six Million Really Die?. Kneuper stated that while definitely not all the inmates looked like that, the great majority of the inmates were like those in the photograph. (23-5638, 5639)

He never saw a gas chamber. They drove by the crematorium but did not make a detailed examination of the camp when they were there. (23-5640)
------------------------------------------
http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en...erwaarden.html

From Linz, Herwaarden was transported to Vienna and from there to Auschwitz. There were about twenty other women on the train travelling from Vienna to Auschwitz. She could not say if any were Jewish. They received food on the train. A gypsy told Herwaarden that they were going to be gassed when they arrived at Auschwitz. They arrived in the camp on 2 December in the afternoon. (25-6625, 6626, 6627)

That night the SS people came and took them to Birkenau. They were taken to a cold, windowless room and told that they had to take a cold shower. They handed over their clothes and all hair was shaved, both head and pubic. Herwaarden was "terribly scared" when she went into the shower room because "they said gas would be coming from the top but it was only water." They received soap, but the water was cold. When they finished, they received their numbers and prisoners clothing and were taken to the barracks. Herwaarden was listed as an Aryan. (25-6628, 6629)
---------------------
Herwaarden confirmed many of the observations of Thies Christophersen quoted in Did Six Million Really Die?. In the period of time she was in the camp, she saw no indication of "millions" of people; nor did she ever see any indication of a mass murder or extermination of Jews. While gassings were talked about at the camp, she personally never saw anything of the sort. There was a terrible smell in the camp, however, and she confirmed that there was a horseshoe place on the way from Birkenau to the tree plantation. Herwaarden agreed that she had difficulty getting people to believe what she saw in Auschwitz-Birkenau: "Many don't believe that." (25-6643 to 6647)
--------------------------------------------
http://www.zundelsite.org/archive/en...22rudolph.html

In 1942, Rudolph became a soldier himself. He served as a member of the Signal Corps with Rommel in North Africa. The entire unit was captured by the Americans in 1945. They were discharged after one month. (25-6667)

Rudolph met Ernst Zündel in 1969 and in the intervening years he had discussed his experiences with him very often, including his experience concerning the Red Cross visit. (25- 6654, 6656)

Rudolph did not believe that there was an extermination of Jews in Auschwitz Birkenau. He said: "...Germany had to fight a terrible fight against Bolshevism. They didn't fight against Jews. But the Jews did declare war on Germany in 1933 and so it has been known that they are enemies of Germany. They had to be kept close in any camp and this was done. It wasn't an extermination. I never have seen any Jews gassed. It's absolutely lie." (25-6658)
--------------------------------------------


You may have to copy and paste this link.

file:///C:/Users/David/Downloads/Report%20ICRC%201939-1947%20-%20scan%20&%20summary.pdf

file:///C:/Users/David/Downloads/Report%20ICRC%201939-1947%20-%20scan%20&%20summary (dot) pdf

(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------
In dealing with this comprehensive, three-volume Report, it is important to stress that the
delegates of the International Red Cross found no evidence whatever at the camps in Axis
occupied Europe of a deliberate policy to exterminate the Jews. In all its 1,600 pages the
Report does not even mention such a thing as a gas chamber. It admits that Jews, like
many other wartime nationalities, suffered rigours and privations, but its complete silence
on the subject of planned extermination is ample refutation of the Six Million legend. Like
the Vatican representatives with whom they worked, the Red Cross found itself unable to
indulge in the irresponsible charges of genocide which had become the order of the day.
So far as the genuine mortality rate is concerned, the Report points out that most of the
Jewish doctors from the camps were being used to combat typhus on the eastern front, so
that they were unavailable when the typhus epidemics of 1945 broke out in the camps
(Vol. I, p. 204 ff) - Incidentally, it is frequently claimed that mass executions were carried
out in gas chambers cunningly disguised as shower facilities. Again the Report makes
nonsense of this allegation. "Not only the washing places, but installations for baths,
showers and laundry were inspected by the delegates. They had often to take action to
have fixtures made less primitive, and to get them repaired or enlarged" (Vol. III, p. 594).
--------------------------------------------


You act as if the only info that existed was the mainstream info. You don't seem to want the viewers to even see the alternative info. If the truthers here didn't post it, you pro-official version posters would never give a clue that it existed.


Sites such as this...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=323257
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=322913

... where truthers' posts get deleted only show a bunch of pro-official version posters talking to each other.

I've given up posting there. Whenever I started winning debates too decisively, the moderators would simply delete or edit my posts.

Here's an example. I'll copy the whole post.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...32&postcount=1

Collins' jacket corner bounces up and down the way it would in gravity when they were supposed to be halfway to the moon in this clip.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
(00:52 time mark)

It moves in the same manner that the corners of this guys' jacket move.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4
(00:14 time mark)

The corner goes up, stops, and goes back down the way it would in gravity. There's no identifiable force making it go back down except for gravity.

The movement of Collins' jacket corner is very different from that of the straps in this clip which is in zero-G.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1ofwzby1c7o
(3:17 time mark)

This footage in zero-G shows jacket corners moving quite differently from the way Collins' jacket corner moved.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4

They obviously faked some of the footage of the Apollo 11 astronauts' being halfway to the moon. This closes the whole case by itself. They never went to the moon.

Edited by LashL: Removed link spam


When I make several posts in one sitting, the posts in which I made my main points usually get deleted so I'll only be making one post per day.

Here's the link they deleted.
https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=144487


It's pretty clear that those posters are a bunch of paid sophists* who don't even believe their own arguments.


*
https://www.clubconspiracy.com/count...ues-t4702.html

[Jad]

We are all living in an artificial mental construct that we didn’t create.
I’m just going to leave these questions for you to make of them what you want:
1- Who created the 3 monolithic religions?
2- Who wrote history?
3- Who prints the money?
4- Who controls Hollywood?

So coming back to the Holocaust did you know that there’s one that’s ongoing in Palestine since the 1940s till today and no one seems to care about it. The ironic thing is that these Palestinians are semites too yet no one seems to be offended about their daily abuse.

[Cosmored]

So coming back to the Holocaust did you know that there’s one that’s ongoing in Palestine since the 1940s till today and no one seems to care about it.

This info on that is suppressed.

Look what the moderator did to those links to the video in this thread.
https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=203308


Here's the video.

The Zionist Story.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...6FORM%3DHDRSC3

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...ry&FORM=HDRSC3
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...+zionist+story


This thread got closed.
https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=203235


It's not marked as closed but it's impossible to do more posting on it.

[loungelizard]

My, you've been busy again! The quantity of material you post on here is immense - it's not feasible to go through even a fraction of the stuff. Readers realise that is a tactic, by the way ...

Posted by Cosmored (here)

Why have you chosen to deny the Holocaust specifically?

I don't actually deny the holocaust.

By all of the many definitions of Holocaust denial, you do actually deny the Holocaust.

Posted by Cosmored (here)
According to the revisionists the Germans killed close to three hundred thousand Jews by shooting and hanging them.

Could you explain why you have gone for the 300,000 victims. Is it based on the Red Cross documents (and if so, your claim is of course easy to refute)?

Posted by Cosmored (here)

The revisionist researchers seem to have proven that there were no deaths by gassing.

If that was indeed the case, the IHR would not have lost in the case of Mermelstein V IHR, and Irving would not have experienced such a crushing defeat in his suit against Lipstadt.

Both lost. When the evidence was presented and considered, one judge stated that gas chambers were “simply a fact”.


Regarding question 3 https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1381027

You didn't answer it. I asked whether you deny any other genocides, and why you deny the Holocaust specifically.

[loungelizard]

Posted by Cosmored (here)
... people can lie and forget.

Lie and forget? Wow. Who are you to make such a statement that the testimony of tens of thousands of people at events where you, fortunately, were not present, are lies?

We forget what we had for lunch 3 days ago. We do not forget living through horror: people pray to forget such things.

Your cut and paste about eyewitness testimonies ignores convergence of evidence which is the key to historical proof.