Thoughts on Ernest Zündel and "Holocaust Denial Laws?"

How does deciding to wage a war on two fronts for no reason fit in with your concept of the Nazi's being master planners?

It was a necessity.

>each country makes his own legislation
It's not a nation. It's..I believe every nation in Europe save 2. These same European nations are signatories to the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights," yet have no problem imprisoning their own citizens for what are nothing more than historical opinions, and thus directly violate that convention.

Thus the reason they hated Dr. Ahmadinejad so much. See his interviews where "journalists" like Manapour question his nation's human rights record, and he throws it right back in her face what Europe does.

And no, user, in the modern world, when nations take away basic human rights (such as freedom of conscience) they almost always face sanctions. But since this issue involves a very special group who controls the media (just ask Rick Sanchez "Jews have a lot of power in the media." No we don't. By the way, you're fired).

The stupidity here is outright amazing. And somehow consider yourselves to be brighter than any other board on here? Just as I predicted, other than a few ad hominem insults, no one would have even a semi-decent argument.

Which just shows how close the house of cards is to collapsing.

Seriously, how do you expect cogent arguments, whe all you do is presenting lies like (Red Cross documents suggest this was due mostly to typhus, starvation, etc..) or giving academical titles to people who don't have them?

>how do you expect cogent arguments
He doesn't expect cogent arguments. He poisons the well up front, and then when no one responds to this obvious b8, he will claim victory

Is "The Greatest Story Never Told" a pile of shit? I just finished part 3 on the Anschluss, and it makes it sound like it was a peaceful reunification.

But Germany intimidated and rigged the referendum to reunify, right? And they bullied the reigning president into resignation, right?

But why did Austria welcome them so universally? Is it because they wanted the Nazi economy? Did they really just excuse everything else? Or did Germany actually do nothing wrong?

SOMEBODY TELL ME WHAT TO THINK

>Thoughts on Ernest Zündel
лишний чeлoвek

>"Holocaust Denial Laws?"
Not exactely kosher, as I support McVay's doctrine. But hey it's not like holocaust deniers are valuable members of society and putting them behind jails will do harm.

>But why did Austria welcome them so universally?
sauce?

I disagree with genocide denial laws (because the vast majority are not just about the Holocaust, but prohibit denying any recognized genocide), but they are hardly the only restriction on free speech in Western society like your post seems to imply. It's illegal to make false claims about living people (slander, defamation, libel), so why shouldn't it be illegal to do the same to the dead?

What makes you think most people on this board agree with those laws? I personally think they are absurd.

It's still stupidly ignorant to deny the holocaust though.

>Red Cross documents suggest this was due mostly to typhus, starvation, etc..

No they don't.

Here's a real red cross document.

i.imgur.com/xJCzhbc.jpg

>as the German infrastructure and access to food, medicine, and delousing equipment was destroyed.

Please show me a record of Allied air raids into Poland, where the bulk of the extermination was carried out.

Please explain how Auschwitz, a camp that can generously be described as capable of housing 130,000 or so people, got crammed with 1.5 million, and why the camp officials felt a need to build crematoria that could process almost 5,000 people a day if they weren't intent on mass murder?

>Can one intellectually honest person make an argument here for how this is in keeping with Western secular, humanist values without spewing profanities or trying to have this thread deleted?

Western Secular, humanist values don't actually include freedom of speech outside the Anglosphere. They consider it the perogative of governments to keep tabs on assembly, public discourse, and incitements to violence, and as such, the enormous anti-semetic bent of holocaust denial usually runs afoul of the above.

But of course, you'd know all this already if you weren't an intellectually dishonest /pol/tard.

Under no circumstances should any manner of speech be restricted in any way. Only pussies will say otherwise.

the nazis were not at all efficient. especially their governance. go and read speers autobio

Going to jail for Holocaust denial is fucking stupid whether or not you agree with the person. Shouldn't even be a debatable point.

>Bergjude detektiert.

Agree with everyone who has posted in this thread. I'd say it's dumb to go out and dney holocaust alltogether but it's equally as dumb having government force a legislation banning an historical opinion.

I respect Ernest Zündel, nice guy.

youtu.be/A5sbegfCz7o

>i.imgur.com/xJCzhbc.jpg
>that pic where not even the bame of the depicted is spelled consistently

You don't actually know anything about Nazi Germany

it's actually a rense link, look it up.

>But why did Austria welcome them so universally?
I dunno lad. Might have had something to do with this, or the armed goons outside the polling places gently informing people of their viewpoints and exercising their right to free speech.

how is being 'intellectually honest' or 'intellectually dishonest' any different from being honest or dishonest?

Because you're discussing something you know you have no idea what you're talking about or you're completely wrong, and yet keep going for the sake of the argument/to not be proven wrong.

Actually, its a misconception on both sides of issue that the Nazi's gas 6 million jews.

They did not...

However 6 million Jews died.

Germans weren't stupid. They had millions in camps. Not just Jews. Gays, gypsies, socialists, communists, social democrats, and millions of Soviet pows.

That said, most of these prisoners were worked to death or died of stuff like Typhus.

I mean after all, millions of Soviet pows died. The Germans kept records of how many they captured and the Soviets were aware how many they got back after they liberated camps. It was several million who died. They didn't gas the Soviets, they simply worked them to death, didn't feed them, or let them die of tyhpus.

Same thing happened to the Jews. The Germans found the ones who could work and made them work as hard as they can and fed them as little as they could (because why waste food on them) and didn't really keep the camp health conditions that well. Well they deloused them because Germans hated lice, but that was about it.

Anyways... They would gas those too weak to work or those who could not labor. I mean that was a smart move. Why waste tons of food on those who could not work for the war effort.

That said... A great deal of Germans and other manpower was used to hunt Jews on the Eastern front and killed them where they found them (not gassed or burned).

There was so much an effort many German Generals complained about the manpower usage and some even ignored the orders. (There were many documentation cases of this and the Germans even took pictures of themselves doing this).

Anyways... What I am saying is that yes, 6 million Jews were gassed, but 6 million Jews died due to various reasons. Its well documented and it would be a shame to deny the Nazis what they felt to be their greatest achievement.

And to be honest Soviets killed more Ukrainians but only Tankies shout Holomodor was a hoax.

do you have an allied commander meme or do you only have german and soviet commander memes

The Holocaust did not happen, and to claim that there is no conflict of interest in the narrative of the Holocaust and the hasbara the West is subject to, and the shift of the Overton window by mysterious shadows who, when named, vanish into "conspiracy", is intellectually dishonest.

I challenge anybody to prove me wrong. Prove to me that 6 million Jews were killed by gassing (or however many million, outside of shootings and other inefficient methods; bulk of execution was via gassings, as per the narrative) and that their bodies were cremated, and the ash disposed of. Prove to me that the six extermination camps were capable of doing this feat, and all those corpses were cremated, 2-3 hours per body (with modern technology). If you can prove this beyond reasonable doubt, I cede my stance immediately. The only proof I have seen is here-say and smoking guns, which is not legitimate evidence for what is the largest genocide in recent human history. Such massive claims require absolute evidence. Testimonies are almost always cited, but I can pull up testimonies of UFO spottings, this does not verify them, as those people wish to believe in things that did not occur within the confines of reality.
And all of these claims lie in the lovey-dovey world where whites can not defend against their own ethnic citizens/culture. One never asks what the Jews did to the Germans, or the Eastern Europeans, or to all other groups along the timeline of history, one only says that the burden of guilt is on all other nations for being anti-Semitic. Well, what have they all said of the Jew? What has been the consistent claims against them? Their usurious behaviours, their over-representation/manipulation of power, their conniving/calculating mindset? They are a wandering people, blending in with the citizens of their host nation and conducting their businesses surreptitiously. Tight nationalism for themselves, but not for the host nation. How convenient.

Actually I got a British one somewhere, but I have too many memes and haven't organized them in a while. I just know it exists.

I guess you didn't read my posts.

Most people in camps died from overwork, starvation, and typhus.

I don't know where you are getting your claims that they gassed that many.

Even Holocaust Museum says they only exterminated 2.7 Jews in concentration camps specifically made for killing Jews.

ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005145

And it doesn't specifically say they were gassed but also says they "or shooting"

Most Jews on the Eastern front were shot as they didn't have portable gas chambers back then.

I did not read your post if you are OP, I agree with altering the narrative of the Holocaust, therefore I agree with you. I understand the nature of Veeky Forums, which is why I posted what I did.

Also, you need to read the following link: owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/606/01/

First off the mere recognition of the people that were said to have killed millions in the holocaust is inciting hatred towards an identifiable group; their descendants. In the modern state of human rights there has never been something as illogical, wrong. corrupt and variable as the nazi genocide.

Welcome to the world of the Benei Brythe. The biblical Brythonic people. They get everything.

I'm not OP, but I'm saying not even the Jewish authorities on the subject say that the entire Jewish 6 million were gased in camps.

Its just people who go to high school and aren't playing attention and here the teacher say "gassed" and "6 million" near it other and come to the mistaken belief that 6 million Jews were personally put into gas chambers.

6 million Jews died along with millions of Russians, but it wasn't because they crammed them all in gas chambers.

In my original post, I stated: 6 million Jews were killed by gassing (or however many million, outside of shootings and other inefficient methods; bulk of execution was via gassings, as per the narrative)
I addressed that other methods of execution, which are more believable, were implemented.
>Russians
Russians, what Russians? Are you being anti-Semitic? What about the Jews?

It begs to question if the Holocaust is true why would you imprison people that try to question it knowing its already true and they will look crazy anyway? Because the Holocaust is a lie the greatest lie in history made by jews since 2/3rds of the Old Testament.

Did you not read the Holocaust Memorial figures?

The Jews themselves only say 2.7 million were specifically killed in specifically designated "death camps" and not all by gassing.

The rest were worked to death, died of typhus, or met other fates related to living in a slave labor camp.

Out of the 5 million Soviets captured about 3.3 to 3.5 million died in the prisoner camps (not to say Germans had similar casualty rates in Soviet Gulags).

And the Soviets new how many men they lost and how many they got back after the war.

So its not that farfetched that millions of other people died due to camp conditions under Nazi supervision.

Its simple.

Same reason you cannot wear a Nazi armband or do the Hitler salute in Germany.

Also if you haven't paid attention people listen to crazies and false news.

Get enough crazies together and you get the Nazi party back in Germany.

Not that would be a bad thing, but that is why its illegal.

>I've yet to see a cogent argument.

Let me point you towards a few books that will help you out with that. You won't read them since there is nothing anyone can show you or tell you that will change your mind.

amazon.com/Denying-Holocaust-Growing-Assault-Memory/dp/0452272742
This is the book in which David Irving took the publisher to court in Britain. It is important that it occurred in British courts since burden of proof is on the defendant. The defense had to prove that what Irving wrote was bogus, nonsense and they did just that.

The book about the Irving vs Penguin trial is covered here:
amazon.com/Lying-About-Hitler-Richard-Evans/dp/0465021530/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1480751504&sr=1-1&keywords=lying for hitler

The author describes the court case, and goes into Irving's """""historical""""" research and found that it was deliberate mistranslation, cherrypicking sources that lined up with his preconceived view, etc

That is not the point of contention, I also agree that mismanagement of resources was a large factor. The point of contention is deliberate intent and execution of the plan in the form of gassings and cremation, or, the Holocaust.

Bullshit the real reason is to prevent people from figuring out the jews lied about the Holocaust which would make Europeans double think of what Hitler said about them being the seeds of evil among humanity. The jews know this thats why they also cover up all historical evidence of their evil in the first place. Why is the only evidence of jew evil found in the Bible? Because thats the only ALLOWED thing that shows Jew evil, all child sacrifices and all other sick jew shit they did to europeans and even middle eastern people is covered up and sometimes completely erased from history.

I know that this is next level shitposting, but I will take the bait....
Let me guess, you think the Black Death was caused by Jews poisoning wells as well?

The gassing were done primarily at first to those specifically unable to work. The old, sick, and children.

Why would you feed people unable to contribute?

You could let them starve, but then you had to do something with them in the meantime.

So to speed things along, they would just shoot them, but then they realized they were wasting bullets and moral on their soldiers.

So then the resorted to gasing and other methods.

So the issue was they weren't feeding the prisoners anywhere (Jewish or Soviet camps) so lots of people were continuing to being too weak to work.

So they couldn't let these too weak to work camps lie in their barracks all day waiting to die because they would actually result in people shitting themselves because too weak to go to latrine and causing typhus to those who were able to work so the Germans when possible would try to send those too weak to work to the gas chambers and then to be burned.

The reason they burned them is because the Germans guards certainly did not want to get typhus either so they had other Jews cremate them and so on.

> Jewish Child Sacrifices

So you believe in witches and werewolves too?

Because that's what the people in the Medieval times believed in when they told stories about the Jews.

To be honest... Meeting a real witch with real powers seems kind of awesome. If I could meet a Jew who could make a Golem go on a murderous rampage that would be awesome too.

No, but jews did poison wells.

Jews have a ritual that involves the sacrifice of goyim children, the reasons behind this ritual is pure savagery. They also still do this ritual to this day but its covered up, most missing children yh now you know exactly what happened to them.

The German Double Verdict:

1. The Christian church in Germany ruled for a long time, even during the hitler epoch. You could not make technology that could hold or transfer information. Otherwise you'd see yourself facing crimes against humanity. Therefore all Germany had was mechanical engineering.
2. The loophole here is that you could not use technology that could be used to store or transfer information. The Germans had no records of shit. Anybody couldve tried to sue the state for its lack of accountability.
3. Germans got fed up and instead left to Russia and other countries due to the church and the vast neglect of necessary progress.
4. A good share of the pictures available are photoshopped and depict the gulag.
5. Hitler had to have put them in force labor camps. He had too many supporters of color and to hate based on skin color would warrant him a risk not only for him but those in his family and circle. His closest associates were said to be diplomats from all over latin america.
6. I heard a recording from a post nuremberg trial. The judge had asked questions to gather statements. As an indirect route to the situation, the questions were meant to father logical statements, since the story was changing back and forth. Brits and US took the blame once they answered that they were bombing the tracks to and from the camps that were mass producing necessities for the nazis. The brits said they did not bomb any concentration camp. The judge just asked if their intentions were a perpetual war. They stayed mute. This would not be feasible since gas runs out and becomes a expensive commodity to abuse. And if that is what they desired then these victims would have die gassed via continous exposure to exhaust. Since Germans would be building them over and over. Remember allies took over so they couldve fixed it to their advantage. one could conclude that they werent prisoners but unpaid laborers supporting the war effort.

Well this escalated quickly.

Were were talking about the feasibility of millions of people dying under Nazi supervision and now we are talking about Jewish blood rituals purported by people who used to bleed themselves because of humors.

What the fuck you on? Germans invented the goddamn printing press.

How else was that dirty protty going to print his mistranslated Bibles?

>The gassing
Read my original post here: Address it in full instead of pivoting away from it.

I'm not sure what you want?

I pointed out that the Germans did not intend to gas every single Jew since they were good slave labor.

Even the Jews themselves state they only killed 2.7 in specific death camps.

I mean millions of people were dying around this time. This is a fact. Body disposal wasn't really a problem

One could turn around and say "Where are the 6 to 7 million dead German bodies?"

Yes, 6 to 7 million Germans died in the war.

Lots of people died. 6 million Jews dying isn't unreasonable giving the circumstances.

And I think the issue as to why its illegal is because saying otherwise promotes the image the Nazis were innocent of war crimes.

Do you deny the rape of Nanjing?

In these days and age of fake news, dubious google results, one could forsee if Holocaust denial was legal in Germany it would eventually result in a political party that brings Nazism back to Germany because they lied their way about what really happened.

>I'm not sure what you want?
It isn't my job to improve your reading comprehension. I was more than clear. Point out which parts of my post are not clear and I will elaborate.
>did not intend to gas
This, as well as your last post, implies gassings occurred. Prove this in accordance to my original post. As I mentioned before, the point of contention is related to gassing/cremation.
>Do you deny the rape of Nanjing?
Non-sequitur, we are not discussing the events related to Japanese history, if you cannot stay on topic, why bother commenting?

holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/index-of-published-evidence-on.html
4archive.org/board/his/thread/509405

I don't know.

Is Jewish and Nazi testimony, Himmler's Writing, physical evidence of location, and existence of gas and its production not good enough for you?

On a side note, the Nazis experimented with carbon monoxide poisoning first which they documented on using on Poles.

Look. Even if there were no gas chambers as you say...

The Germans shot a great deal of Jews. They took pictures of themselves doing it and many German soldiers have testified they participated in such actions.

Does it really matter if they were gassed, shot, starved, died of typhus, or were worked to death?

The evidence is pretty much clear that large amounts of Jews died under Nazi supervision (as well as Soviet Pows).

I mean there were a great deal of Jews in Poland before the war and there magically not that many after? What happened?

Could it be... I don't know... Nazi supervision?

>Is Jewish and Nazi testimony
Read my original post.
>physical evidence of location
Does nothing to prove gassings occurred as described.
>existence of gas
Was the gas used to execute millions of Jews? Prove this.
>The Germans shot a great deal of Jews.
Yes. The point of contention is gassing/cremation.
>I mean there were a great deal of Jews in Poland before the war and there magically not that many after? What happened?
>Could it be... I don't know... Nazi supervision?
Smoking guns are not proof of the largest genocide in recent human history. Not even close to proof/an argument.

>beyond reasonable doubt
There is no "beyond reasonable doubt" to /pol/tards. In fact there is no reasonable doubt for anyone that has a preconceived idea that he doesn't want to change. Nazi testimonies become forced testimonies, victim and civilian testimonies are a conspiracy, forensic evidence is faked, documents are faked, etc.

Not him but:
>Does nothing to prove gassings occurred as described.
False. See the Cracow Forensic Institute.

>Was the gas used to execute millions of Jews? Prove this.
Why were the camps ordering gas-tight doors for "special treatment" of the jews and zyklon b for special treatment? What was the special treatment user?

Also, how come train records show massive deportations to Auschwitz and nobody coming out? What happened there?

Nazi rule being efficient is a bad meme. The Holocaust was largely possible because Hitler gave his underlings vast, often overlapping powers.

Some historians argue that the Holocaust was the product of bloody competition between certain nazi groups in an attempt to garner favour from Hitler.

>le Germans are hyper efficient and effective maymay

How does them fucking about with one off super weapons and rockets that serve no purpose other than killing negligible numbers of allied civilians, all while the Soviets are smashing the Reichs back doors in.

>2-3 hours per body (with modern technology)
You are assuming only one body at a time was put in the cremation oven. You are also assuming that 2-3 hours per body that a modern cremation service takes is the same amount it would take to burn a body in an Nazi cremation oven. Both assumptions would be wrong.

In modern cremation ovens almost without exception the bodys are placed in a coffin and set into the crematory. So having to burn through a wooden box would certainly add more time. Also the modern crematory takes extra time so as to recover the ashes in a respectful manner. A modern crematory could burn a body MUCH quicker.

Btw, upwards of 7-8 bodies could be burned at once in a death camp crematory.

If you have a buddy who reads German, you can read the telegram the Cremation oven manufacturer describe how many bodies a day his oven can burn. (It's a Lot!)

Ad-hominems are not arguments.
But I will entertain you. Prove that there are those who frequent the /pol/ board in this thread. It is a ridiculous question only because it is a ridiculous claim, both boards are on the same website, and there are posters who parcel time out equally.
>Nazi testimonies become forced testimonies
I have many testimonies proving the existence of UFO spottings. Many millions of people, actually, watch/spread around/share UFO sightings, many tens of thousands claim to have seen it, too.
>documents are faked
What documents are faked? Show me undeniable proof proving the gassings and cremation occurred as described within the time frame, beyond reasonable doubt.
The physical evidence of the location's mere existence does nothing to actually prove that such events actually transpired, that is projecting your own arbitrary narrative upon reality. You need proof for the largest genocide in recent human history.
>ordering gas-tight
The same logic as to why you conduct experiments involving dangerous chemicals in a well-ventilated/controlled environment.
>"special treatment"
Not an argument, extending your own arbitrary narrative and "gotchya" speculation does nothing to prove the existence of this alleged genocide.
>Also, how come train records show massive deportations to Auschwitz and nobody coming out? What happened there?
"They played with sunshines and rainbows" is an equally valid statement given the parameters of your sentence, as any judgement calls on the claim rely solely on personal narrative. One does not point at a splatter of blood and scream murder, you prove it before a judge. Thank goodness the courts are not in the hands of conspiracy theorists who fabricate such things.

>Btw, upwards of 7-8 bodies could be burned at once in a death camp crematory.
How many ovens were there? During what hours did they operate? How frequently did they require repair? How efficiently did they operate? There were many millions of bodies that were gassed to account for, even if all the ovens existed and burned 10 bodies, would it fit within the time frame?
>You are also assuming that 2-3 hours per body that a modern cremation service
youtube.com/watch?v=BHBaCZ3slis
butlerfuneralhomes.com/_mgxroot/page_10745.php
cremationresource.org/cremation/how-is-a-body-cremated.html
You need to directly refute the claims instead of just saying that they are wrong. Prove why they are wrong.
>No. For sanitary reasons, ease of placement, respect and dignity, many crematories require that the deceased be cremated in a combustible, leak proof, rigid, covered container. This does not need to be a casket as such. Cremation Caskets and containers are available in a wide variety of materials ranging from a simple cardboard container to solid wood cremation caskets in a variety of species. These are designed with little or no metal and facilitate the cremation process while meeting the needs of survivors.
Modern ovens do not see cardboard or wood as big obstacles, it is dishonest to extend our tech to the Third Reich in order to bolster their capabilities.
If you claim: A modern crematory could burn a body MUCH quicker.
Then this infers that older ovens are less efficient. Can you be specific, with sources?

Why did the Nazi's dynamite these rooms at these locations when forced to leave because of the Soviet advance?

Why would they waste valuable time and explosives on a menial labor camp in these specific locations throughout the camp?

Were the afraid that the soviets would get some sort of benefit of having delousing rooms for their own troop?

Seems kind of odd don't you think?

Just admit it, no matter what anyone says or shows you, there isn't anyway you are changing your mind.

You've reached the point where you believe all eye-witnesses are liars, all nazi confessions were done under torture, all photographs faked, all diary entries forged, all documents manufactured, etc.

Let me ask you two questions. Why did not a single nazi use the defense in court that what they are accused of doing never occured?

>The physical evidence of the location's mere existence does nothing to actually prove that such events actually transpired
>physical evidence of gassing does not prove gassing
This is why "beyond doubt" means nothing.

>Not an argument, extending your own arbitrary narrative and "gotchya" speculation does nothing to prove the existence of this alleged genocide.
Cool. Could you tell us what was the special treatment then, user? Remember, it involved gas tight doors and zyklon b. It certainly does not involve gassing people though!

>documentation show germans order gas tight doors for special treatment of jews
>documentation shows germans order pesticide of special treatment of the jews
>train records show million of jews deported and magically disappearing
>forensic evidence shows gassing took place
>hundreds of testimonies confirm gassing took place
Oh yeah, i'm really "pojecting my arbitrary narrative upon reality".

Special treatment meant delousing of course!

It just so happened the delousing conditions were terminal.

>Why did the Nazi's dynamite these rooms at these locations when forced to leave because of the Soviet advance?
"Because they didn't want the Soviets to find their fanfictions" is an equally valid statement. If all you wish to do is extend your own narrative on historical events, then you are just a conspiracy theorist. Funny how you berate /pol/ users, you have more in common than you think.
>Just admit it, no matter what anyone says or shows you, there isn't anyway you are changing your mind.
This is not even remotely close to forming an actual case for the Holocaust, you are just saying that you cannot believe how intolerant and dumb I am. That is not an argument, that is not proof.
>You've reached the point where you believe all eye-witnesses are liars, all nazi confessions were done under torture, all photographs faked, all diary entries forged, all documents manufactured
I have many UFO sighting testimonies, why believe one but disbelieve in the other? Your own arbitrary narrative is not valid when discussing these affairs.
>Why did not a single nazi use the defense in court that what they are accused of doing never occured?
"Because it did not happen" is an equally valid statement to make, until you have proof which shows otherwise. Smoking guns and ad-homs are not proof.

I also forgot to mention that modern funeral homes also have cooldown and retrieval of the remains which would take sometime....but that isn't anything the nazis would worry about.

you misread or misunderstood what I wrote. Let me clarify.

Why is it not a single nazi under trial for war crimes in the holocaust used the defense that the prosecution is making things up and nothing described ever occurred?

Why is it they always went with the "I was simply following orders" defense?

So these rooms being specifically targeted for demolition not mean anything?

Sure the Germans were blowing up lots of shit strategically important like rail ways, factories, bridge, and various other random shit.

But why specifically blow up these room in the labor camps and not the rest of the camp?

Can you give me a valid reason?

nizkor.org/hweb/camps/auschwitz/crematoria/furnace-capacity-analysis.html

>This is why "beyond doubt" means nothing.
As I said, glad that conspiracy theorists are not in charge of determining verdicts, you have admitted that you have no standards of proof when you claim "beyond doubt means nothing".
I did not state that "physical evidence of gassing does not prove gassing". The first sentence was "The physical evidence of the location's mere existence does nothing to actually prove that such events actually transpired". That was the claim, it is literally right there above your strawman. The physical evidence of the location is not equivalent to the physical evidence of gassing.
> Cool. Could you tell us what was the special treatment then, user? Remember, it involved gas tight doors and zyklon b. It certainly does not involve gassing people though!
"Cool" is not a refutation of my claim. If you do not wish to engage properly, why should I? But I will, because it would be harder if you actually brought arguments to the table. You need proof to ascertain the special treatment. Unless you have it (i.e. sufficient evidence), I can equally state that they wanted to give the Jews foot massages.
>Oh yeah, i'm really "pojecting my arbitrary narrative upon reality".
At least you admit it.
The nature of dangerous chemicals would have it that they be out of harm's way.
See above for the special treatment claims.
You are pointing at a blood splatter and screaming murder. You need proof in order to reach a verdict.
The forensic evidence that shows gassings occur is what you should be posting. Post this and prove that millions of Jews were gassed as described (i.e. exact methodology) and then cremated.
I personally saw the UFO spotting myself.

"If the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world w^ar, then the result will not be the bolshevization of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe."
Hitler, January 30 1939.

youtube.com/watch?v=4AFhwwgL-94

There is plenty of proof (it is the most widely documented crime in the history of the world), but as I mentioned before no amount of evidence could ever change your mind.

There is no "reasonable doubt" for you, and i didn't admit anything. Are you one of those autists that reads everything literally?

The fact is that whether you like it or not the holocaust is one of the best documented events in history. I don't have anything more to add since you didn't really refute anything, beyond adopting a solipsist stance that makes ANY historical truth inaccessible by default.

And with that I'm out, nothing more can be accomplished here

Well if you discount all the Nazi guard testimony that they were following orders and the few guards that confessed up front what they did the gassing, then I guess you can believe whatever you want.

I mean its one thing to claim you saw a UFO, its another to actually say you flew one personally.

As much as I appreaciate the fact that you're trying to start an intellectual discussion, I think this topic is too tainted not to attract a shitstorm of trolls and /pol/tards from coming in and ruining it.

>Why is it they always went with the "I was simply following orders" defense?
"Because they didn't want the judge to find out about the tickle chambers" is an equally valid statement to make, you are projecting your own arbitrary narrative on the situation in order to fabricate reality. "You didn't deny it, though!" is not an argument, you need to prove it.
>not mean anything?
Yes, until you can prove their intent/methodology with evidence. Otherwise, you are projecting your own beliefs onto history, which is not good if you wish to weigh things objectively.
>Can you give me a valid reason?
Of course I can't, but my point is neither can you unless you can prove it beyond reasonable doubt (i.e. remove my "they wanted to get rid of their porno" claims).
It takes longer than one hour to cremate a body, and stacking corpses actually takes longer for the cremation process to occur, by nature of reactions and surface area. In order to increase the rate of the reaction, increase the surface area so that there is more exposure. This is not a logically consistent claim made by this source. Those are some mighty powerful ovens that defy common sense. vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html
That is not an argument or proof for your claims.
>There is no "reasonable doubt" for you
If you can prove that the gassings occurred and that many people died, then I will cede my point, as I originally stated.
>autist
Ad-homs are not arguments.
Being conveniently outraged and leaving the conversation does nothing to prove your point, in fact, it diminishes it because you are not even capable to withstand scrutiny of your claims.
In your extension of my UFO analogy, shouldn't the person who is testifying claim to have been part of the alleged gassings themselves, in order for the analogy to be complete (as opposed to flying the UFO, if that is what you want to claim). Jews, themselves, gassed themselves?

sage goes into the options bar.

I'm not "outraged". I already proved gassing did happen to anyone that accepts documentation, forensic evidence and/or testimonies. Since it is by definition impossible to prove that anything happened to someone that adopts extreme solipsism, i don't have anything more to say. It would be equally impossible regarding any other historical event.

>of colour
Fuck off back to tumblr

>I already proved gassing did happen
No, you haven't. You mentioned testimony, strawmanned how you thought I said physical evidence, when it was actually physical location, and sourced logically inconsistent claims. On the topic of physical location, you are assuming that it is as concrete a definition (of the location's purpose) as it is with a pool (that it is always meant for swimming, just as certain Third Reich labour facilities were always used to kill, which is projecting your own arbitrary narrative).
>extreme solipsism
Not an argument, you need proof for your claims that establish your claims beyond reasonable doubt.
Like I said above: Being conveniently outraged and leaving the conversation does nothing to prove your point, in fact, it diminishes it because you are not even capable to withstand scrutiny of your claims.
Thank you for the recommendation and the digits.

Also,
>but you don't hold x to be true/untrue about y!
is not an argument for your specific claims. We are not discussing Japanese, Soviet, Chinese, etc. history, we are discussing a very specific topic. Before having even stated my thoughts on the matter, you make up my mind for me (based off of my alleged "distaste for truth" you put forth) and state that I do not believe in these such cases? The issue is that the burden of proof is met with some of them, but is not met with others, such as the Holocaust. The largest genocide in human history is going to need more proof that "I saw it happen, trust me!", or "but you never said you didn't do it!", or "well, what else do you think they were doing there?".

this is fucking hilarious

>You mentioned testimony
See >On the topic of physical location, you are assuming that it is as concrete a definition (of the location's purpose) as it is with a pool (that it is always meant for swimming, just as certain Third Reich labour facilities were always used to kill, which is projecting your own arbitrary narrative).
No, the study of the cyanide compounds of the cracow institute reached the conclusion that it was used for gassing.

>is not an argument for your specific claims
>"distaste for truth"
Don't start with the imaginary quotes. Nothing constitutes an argument towards my "specific claims", or any other claim, because such a thing is impossible under solipsism. Can you prove any historical event under your own criteria? As i said, i'm happy enough with proving my "specific claims" to people who accept evidence.

Those are sources just as Wikipedia is a source (i.e. a collection of sources). Useful in bulk, not useful in cases like these, where time is of the essence. I linked you one source (vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html) which challenges the cremation narrative.
>No, the study of the cyanide compounds of the cracow institute reached the conclusion that it was used for gassing.
Until they can prove that all those Jews were gassed and cremated, it does nothing to prove anything. This is not the same as other alleged genocides, by nature of gassing and cremation, it requires absolute evidence. There is a presence of toxic chemicals, therefore we arrive at the judgement that however many million Jews were gassed during this time frame, then cremated accordingly? This is no different than extending your narratives to pervert the truth. Until there is absolute proof, no absolute statements can be made about the topic.
>Don't start with the imaginary quotes.
Have you not been pointing the finger at me and calling me stupid the entire time? You do so here: "to people who accept evidence." You contradict yourself in the same post. Let me guess, those people are true intellectuals, like yourself, who accept the absolute and objective truth, like you. What a coincidence.
>Can you prove any historical event under your own criteria?
As I said above:
>but you don't hold x to be true/untrue about y!
is not an argument. We are not discussing Japanese, Soviet, Chinese, etc. history, we are discussing a very specific topic. Before having even stated my thoughts on the matter, you make up my mind for me (based off of my alleged "distaste for truth" you put forth) and state that I do not believe in these such cases? The issue is that the burden of proof is met with some of them, but is not met with others, such as the Holocaust. No need to pivot if you cannot substantiate your claims, just let me know and we can be done with it.

>vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndcrema.html
holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com.ar/2014/10/rebuttal-of-mattogno-on-auschwitz-part.html

I'm more apt to agree with this guy. Where's you proof that the gassing didn't happen at all?

Some /pol/ infographic that claims Prussian Blue stains were "only for delousing"?

The other poster even says that they used it to delouse people, but there is documentation of high-level Nazi officers speaking of people being killed via gas (SS-Oberscharführer Josef Klehr, SS-Rottenführer Oskar Gröning).

You have a right to your opinion, but until you actually prove the poster wrong with links/factual proof, your claims are entirely unsubstantiated.

>It should be emphasized that these sources contradict Mattogno’s central hypothesizes that the cremation rate of the Topf two-, three- and eight-muffle ovens were not exceeding one corpse per 60 min, or that multiple cremations were not possible or at least not beneficial in crematory ovens.
It is not possible to cremate a body in under an hour with technology that is 80 years old.
>Sonderkommando, testimony
Okay, I'll go get the UFO eye-witnesses, you don't seem to understand that they actually saw it. Why don't you believe them? Could it have something to do with the fact that you have faith that the Holocaust occurred, but not in UFOs? Again, arbitrary narratives.
I am seeing reports on cyanide concentrations, aerial shots, and other claims that do not directly prove that 6 million were gassed to death and cremated. You cannot cremate bodies with such efficiency, and until you can prove that they were gassed as described, you cannot make absolute statements, such as these. I am seeing a fair many amount of smoking guns, but using Occam's suggestion, until you have absolute, irrefutable evidence (not here-say or smoking guns) to prove the case, you don't get to make speculative analysis. That is why the jury must reach a unanimous conclusion and weigh the evidence to do away with any shred of doubt.
You cannot prove a negative assertion, that is not how the burden of proof works. I'd much rather talk to the guy who calls me a moron, at least he understands this concept.

Yes, after Hitler made it a necessity.

Veeky Forums would be a much better place if half of you read some actual thorough documentation about the war. When you just hear about parts here and there from YT and such you make instant opinions from the information you hear. Reading these things through comprehensively allows you to see a lot more factors, the bigger picture if you like.

You can tell someone doesn't know what they're talking about when all of their arguments involve single-tiered connections, 'this was because of this and only this'. It's a mistake to think like that with most historical subjects and if you find yourself doing it a lot, then go to your library and get some goddamn reading material.

You know, these threads always come down to the motivation someone would have to so stridently and stubbornly deny the Holocaust's existence.

What is it?

Do you genuinely believe Jewish people to be evil? Do you believe in some historical ill will that is proprietary to all Jews? Did little David Goldbergowitz steal your lunch money as a kid?

>"Because they didn't want the Soviets to find their fanfictions" is an equally valid statement. If all you wish to do is extend your own narrative on historical events, then you are just a conspiracy theorist. Funny how you berate /pol/ users, you have more in common than you think.

So basically what you're saying is that, you are extending your narrative on history, and despite overwhelming evidence put forward by both the allies and the Nazi high command, and soldiers stationed at the camps, your narrative is correct?

Your also making the assumption that the Germans tried to cremate every body of the people they killed. Have you not seen pictures of the mass graves they uncovered outside the camps? Are all those pictures faked too? Computer photography editing didn't exist until well after these photos were made public.