Stop Denying the Holocaust?

>The purpose of this thread is to provide proof that the Holocaust did occur as alleged by debunking their claims.
We've had a thread like this before, and it's archived:
4archive.org/board/his/thread/509405

>Boston Molasses Disaster

I'd like some elaboration on that one.

Not him, but a gigantic molasses tank (I think it was holding 2.3 million gallons) burst because it got unseasonably warm and the molasses expanded.

It flooded, going rather quickly and just sweeping things aside. You had 21 dead and I think around 150 injured.

They were used as slave labor before being killed once they weren't fit to work anymore. It always amazes me how people who evidently don't know even the basics about an event can go to a thread and argue about it.

That's not actually true. Birkenau victims, for instance, were gassed on arrival. The Aktion-Reinhard program was again, kill on entrance to the camp. The Einsatzgruppen killings were again, kill on sight.

Sure, you had incidental murdering on the side, but a lot of the killing, especially camp killing, was murder on arrival. Birkenau was the extermination camp of Auschwitz, and that is estimated to have killed about 85% or so of the total victim count there.

"Danzig massacre" doesn't exist even in Nazi propaganda. It's a modern neo-Nazi invention. Yes, Goebbels' propaganda mentions individual killing of Germans in Western Poland, but nothing about "Danzig massacre".

Well, not all victims were immediately killed, only the worthless ones (too old or weak, unable to work).

Still, why waste money on killing them if they were going to die naturally? That's still spending unnecessary money.

If that's true explain the death camps to me then. The death camps AKA the only camps that were investigated by soviets, very trustworthy individuals indeed.

I heard the director of the Blob used that as his inspiration. I could be wrong though, so please don't quote me on it.

>Still, why waste money on killing them if they were going to die naturally?
A neglieable amount of resorces to relieve the slave camps from the burden of dealing with the dead and the dying.

Fair enough. You said they worked until they could no longer until gassed though. Looks like you disproved extermination camps though, whoops. How can the six million number be accurate if these camps where prisoners were simply killed on arrival existed?

>Still, why waste money on killing them if they were going to die naturally? That's still spending unnecessary money.
gather jews > send them to labor camps > work them until they aren't able to keep working > get rid of them and get ready for the next batch
It's not really inefficient.
In any case, history doesn't really give a fuck about your opinion of the rationality of nazi resource management. Whether it happened and whether it was rational are two different discussions, and there's a shit ton of documentation about it:
holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com.ar/2012/10/index-of-published-evidence-on.html

>The death camps AKA the only camps that were investigated by soviets, very trustworthy individuals indeed.
Nobody ever gave a fuck about what the soviets said about the camps.

No, but the majority of those killed in the camps were immediately killed, and not "used as slave labor before being killed once they weren't fit to work anymore".

?

>If they were gassed on arrival, none was worked to death
Why do Neonazis always deal in absolutes?

I still don't 'get it.' Yes the holocaust happened, no six million didn't die, but we should wish that they did. Why deny the holocaust if we support it?

You claimed that the Jews were worked until they could no longer, and then gassed. I agree with that. Unfortunately for you, that claim goes against the idea that death camps existed. These were camps that killed new arrivals on the spot and didn't utilize their labor. Which is it, your claim of working them to death which is logical or the widely accepted claim that death camps existed?
Hey man I'm just parroting what wikipedia and other sites say. They say death camps existed, which of course means nobody there worked.

It's a political strategy to make neonazism more appealing to people that don't support mass genocide (aka most people). And 12 million died.

>but we should wish that they did
This alone disqualifies them from further discussion.

>Hey man I'm just parroting what wikipedia and other sites say.
You aren't. In fact, you don't even know the official narrative.

>We may have numerous piles of shoes, however this evidence merely suggests that the prisoners were told to take off their shoes or be robbed of them.

Why would the Nazis do that? If they just wanted to force all those prisoners to work they would still need shoes. At least I never heard testimonies about prisonrers having to work barefoot.

So if the Nazis took their used shoes they would need to manufacture new ones for the prisoners. Not very practical. And what would they do with all those new shoes? Distribute them among the army or civilians? Wouldn't it be easier to just create new shoes specifically for the army's or civilians' needs.

True, they gave the prisoners uniforms but those served a purpose: marking them, preventing escapes.

>They say death camps existed, which of course means nobody there worked.
Therefore?

>you're wrong, you don't even know the whole story
>no I'm not gonna prove you wrong I'm just gonna tell you you're wrong
What?

*with all those used shoes

>some people were killed on arrival instead of used as slave labor therefore the holocaust didn't happen
This is quite the mental juggle. Not everyone was fit to work (most weren't), prisoners were moved from labor camps to extermination camps, some camps were both slave labor and extermination at the same time (like auschwitz), and extermination itself was an objective independent of having cheap labor.
And again, i don't give a fuck whether you think the actions of nazis were rational or not. On the other hand, you aren't really qualified to make such a claim since you evidently don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

So you agree that death camps aren't real? If not everybody was killed on arrival then it's not a death camp, it's a hybrid death/concentration camp.
>more ad hominems

Except he explicity stated that numerous prisoners were moved to extermination camps.

No, exclusive extermination camps did exist. Auschwitz was technically several camps put together, some of them for killing people, call that whatever you wish.

>more ad hominems

You don't actually know what that term means, do you? He did not once use an ad hominem anywhere in post He refuted your arguments and then insulted you.

>No burden of proof

People provide proof all the goddamn time. Deniers trash it out of hand because "lol kikes where's the real proof". Once you do that, the burden of proof is on you.

Can a 1488er answer this please?

>Alright. Please show me the extermination order please. I've yet to see it.
ghwk.de/ghwk/deut/protokoll.pdf Page 142.
>hurr durr it's not Hitler giving the order but a high ranked meeting hurr
The 3rd reich was a Leviathan, not a Behemoth.

>Also, explain to me why in every genocide throughout history people were killed on the spot wherever they were found. Why, in this so-called genocide, were the undesirables sent to various locations throughout Europe, clothed, fed and killed in some convoluted and over the top manner? Why would the extremely organized and efficient Germans waste money like that, especially in wartime? It's illogical.
Slave labor and you are wrong actually. We see death camps in many instances during the 20th century. You should also reader Zygmunt Bauman on some elaborated arguments.
In general tho mass violence is inherently illogical and irrational. People don't kill just to kill in those instances. Look how the French killed Muslims in Algeria. It's irrational and illogical too but acting like this is part of human nature.
PLUS the Germans also killed millions of Jews on the spot (Babi Yar, Celler Hasenjagd). This is also a strong sign that /pol/ is retarded. The narrative, they claim to know, doesn't say all Jews were killed in death camps. Many of them were massacred and the ratio is more like 50/50. I mean just look at this stuff: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumbula_massacre

>can have against the holocaust was that all of the documents, letters, and testimonies by nazis and the allies who saw the camps and took pictures is all just jewish lies and that their feelings matter more than evidence.

Yeah. When asked, the Nazi guards and death camp personnel, never said "Lies. Never happened!", they basically "I was just following orders!"

Lots of the personnel gave detailed accounts about what they did. None of those hanged ever used the defense that it was a hoax.

Answer what?

>Germans are organised and efficient

He fell for it!

Yeah the biggest misconception I see deniers make is the belief that everyone who accounts for the Holocaust number died in camps.
The Holocaust is just the systematic and intentional removal of "undesireables" from Europe, and millions were killed well before ever reaching a camp.

>thinly disguised /pol/ post

>thinly

>disguised

>Why would the extremely organized and efficient Germans

Veeky Forums has taught me that Enlightenment philosophers thought too highly of human intelligence. People would rather be right than be knowledgeable.

no nazi ever denied the holocaust

/thread

hey guys, remember the second jewish revolt when the jews literally started the holocaust tradition by slaughtering every man, woman, and child that wasn't jewish all throughout egypt, judea, and syria?

I guess karma gets everyone's number eventually.

>why didn't they kill them on the spot?!!!
They did, but a large amount of inmates in Auschwitz and other camps (not Treblinka, not Bełżec) were slave laborers who'd work their asses to death like they did in GULag. Those fancy barracks, whorehouses and hospitals were for the gypsies, poles, stron jews to keep them actually useful for a while. Ask any guy with a number on his arm and he'll explain to you how this shit went down.

>20th century jews are accountable for events from distant history
>nazis are not morally accountable for their actions because they were following karma
look at those jewish children scum. finally got what was coming to them

>stop having a different opinion than me

>did an event in fact occur
>opinion
nobody is this retarded

>21st century gentiles are expected to pity modern day jews for the suffering of their ancestors

see, we can both play this game.

>straw man
has nothing to do with denying the holocaust happened. if antisemite didn't think it was relevant today they wouldn't feel the need to deny it

part of the reason is in a lot of countries denying the holocaust is literally a crime, so people will naturally look for more behind it.

now while I think denying the holocaust is stupid, it shouldn't be considered a crime, just like denying any other historical event for whatever reason should not be a crime.

holocaust denial precedes laws against it by decades

The thing that slays me is when people claim that arresting innocent people, sending them to labor as slaves in camps, and then intentionally allowing them to starve and die of disease "doesn't count" as a death in the holocaust.

true, I am not talking about all holocaust deniers, just a part of them

>Ancestors
This didn't happen centuries ago. There's still people alive today that lived through it.

also, just now reading the letter of those laws, they primarily prohibit sympathizing with, justifying or approving of (or, yes, minimizing) the actions of the national socialist Regime

Lots of good goys in this thread. Like 6 million jews died. Laughable.

An Arrow moves like a wind. Mike from Helsinky makes $5.017 a week. Pyramidal.

something I've learned from these discussions-

reading any blog, watching any video or listening to anyone who theorizes that the holocaust didn't occur, you can do a quick search on this collection of nearly all of man's knowledge known as the internet and see where a lot of misconceptions come from. People who are exposed to these theories will either put it to the test and come to the conclusion that it is absurd or not scrutinize it at all and believe whatever claims because they simply want to. THERE IS NO IN BETWEEN. nobody who does research for themselves believes the holocaust didn't happen, which is why discussions with people who do hold such beliefs are futile

I appreciate this post.

What kind of mentality leads to disbelieving the giant academic consensus on a subject and then believing in a random infopic without researching its claims though? I don't understand.

jews never mention their genocidal rampage. They want it forgotten from history, but to never4get their suffering. Nobody intelligent denies the holocaust. Nobody who is a true historian would deny that their fate was building from centuries of interaction, with dirty play on both sides. Jews notoriously cannot get along with the native inhabitants of wherever they go, nobody ever wants to talk about why their reputation was so bad in the first place to create an environment where people would be so easily rallied against them. Hitler chose jews as his target because everyone by that point knew the jews were only ever looking out for the jews, and often at the expense of the state. They needed resources and a common purpose, and jews had just the sort of resources and just the sort of easily-demonized behavior that made them fit perfectly for Hitler's plan, his true plan, which was to make germany the ruler of the world. He couldn't do that if the richest part of his population was actively conspiring against his interests.

>Dont talk with normal poeple about politics
>Stay within your safe-space on the internet, connected with tiny international fraction of humanity that share your feefees
>Feel special, cuz you are redpill! You are a hero that will save the humainity!

Normal life is rather bleak and boring, in an echo chamber you can escape into a world of fantasy. And since you unironically believe in it with other people who unironically believe it, it stops being just a LARP.

I'll bite. what does it mean?

Making fun of the disconnected thoughts and sentence structure. I think.

The mongols fully destroyed one of the biggest cities at the time with the following system:

>estimate population of city
>estimate size of army
>do simple math
>each soldier has to kill X number of people
>if you don't prove you killed X people, you don't get paid
>you prove it by bringing the right ear, which is easier cut if you kill the person first

At the end of the day, all soldiers got paid. The city was utterly destroyed, and having heard about that, other cities surrendered without a siege.

Anyway, my point was, that the mongols did large scale genocide, in days or weeks, just using hunting knives.
Where there is a will, there is a way.

OP are you by any chance a person of jewish descent?

>nazis dig a mass grave for 12 people
>6 million died i promise

And also I haven't reviewed every single Nuremberg testimony and neither have you. So to say that absolutely no one denied the holocaust is absurd.

So basically hitler became the jew?