Why The Holocaust Must Be Questioned

[woody54]

The biggest arguement that deniers and revisionist use is arguing about the burden of proof. The mainstream opinions of the hollocaust actualy occuring IS support by a mountain of evidence. BUT, people such as yourself keep hiding behind descredited theories, and irrational argumentation. YOU DO HAVE A BURDEN OF PROOF!

OK, lets go the burden of proof way.

If there was a provable case for the Holocaust , why did the Canadian legal system fail to convict Ernst Zundel based on the Holocaust record "supported by your mountain of evidence" when even eyewitnesses from the time put up as prosecution witnesses , failed under crossexamination to prove the veracity of their "evidence", some even admitting it was false or flawed.

In the Zundel cases, the burden of proof was on the prosecution to prove a Holocaust had existed if it was to convict Zundel of denying such an event yet they were unable to do so and it took extrajudicial secret evidence at the end of the trial, not open to the defence , for a conviction to be made.

As always in the Holocaust story, if you cant win fairly, you win by any means..

What this case record shows logically and legally , is that there is no damning evidence for a Holocaust on the body of evidence available in the public record or among any eyewitnesses or experts that could be called on.

The Nuremburg trials were no valid legal precedent for such proof and even the Judges post trial commentaries infer it was a premeditated hatefest seeking revenge on the Germans in the worst possible way.

So I take your burden of proof from the Zundel trial and raise it two myths. Want another card?

 

[Valcorie]

proof

Holocaust Denial: Truth or Hoax?
One Survivor's Testimony

by William Samelson, Ph.D.

The Holocaust is an irrefutable fact. As a survivor of several labor and concentration camps, and as one whose entire family, save my elder brother, was murdered by Nazi thugs, I sincerely wish it had not occurred. It is also irrefutable that I am still here - a reminder of those barbaric acts perpetrated not so long ago on the European Jews by an ostensibly civilized German nation. Law-abiding, ordinary citizens of the Third Reich turned fanatical, implementing their beloved Führer's agenda of murder and destruction. They became killers for him and we became the survivors of his madness. We were not expected to remain alive and give testimony to their crimes against humanity. Alas, it can not be denied that I survived this disaster: the most horrendous calamity of the twentieth century. I am here, alive. I represent the tragic truth. It is my belief that I was spared for this purpose. It is now my moral responsibility to bear witness for as long as I shall live, for I am the truth and will not be silenced by lies. To deny the truth, the awful facts of the Holocaust, is simply to lie.

The evidence, of course, is overwhelming. The countless photographs (most of them taken by Nazi SS and military personnel), testimonies of survivors, and Allied liberators as well as from Nazi documentation media and their war-time propaganda films all prove that this mass Judeocide took place. Yet, there are a number of people that claim it was all nothing more than a hoax. These deniers call themselves "revisionist historians." Their express purpose is to alter documented historical fact. In the process, they turn scholarship into mockery, transforming truth into a make-believe fantasy spawned from unmitigated cynicism. They use the resulting misinformation to spread their anti-Jewish beliefs to the general public. Moreover, their theories, derived from blatant fabrication of data, misquotations, and quotations used out of context, are presented under the deceptive mask of scholarship and are made available to the world by way of the Internet, radio, and television. Although only relatively few fringe groups, propagandists, and pseudo-scholars embrace Holocaust denial, their activity is increasing and the potential for their influence to grow is evident. Therefore, it is incumbent upon all Holocaust survivors, historians, and those sincere chroniclers of the Holocaust to inform the world of the truth before the peoples around the world potentially fall prey, over time, to collective amnesia and adopt a romantic mythical view of the past events.

In Mein Kampf (My Struggle), Adolf Hitler expressed his belief that "the great masses of people...more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a little one" (p. 231); and that the simplest ideas "should be repeated thousands of times" so people will remember them (p. 185). Essentially, Holocaust denial is one big, bold, lie. In an attempt to legitimize the Nazi regime, revive National Socialism, forward their theory of a Jewish-Zionist conspiracy and, evidently, justify their virulent anti-Judaism, deniers repeat this lie over and over. They hide their aims under such legitimate-sounding organizations as the "Institute for Historical Review" and the "Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust." Some deniers have the audacity call themselves "scholars" or "historians." Whichever way they chose to identify themselves, their intentions have nothing to do with the preservation of history but with its distortion.

The deniers' basic belief is that the "myth" of the Holocaust is a way for "organized world Jewry" to gain sympathy and financial support for the Zionist cause and to render themselves immune from criticism. Furthermore, the deniers also claim that the Allies' atrocities during the Second World War were just as bad, if not worse than the Nazis' atrocities, and finally, that Hitler did not even want war and did not order the extermination of the Jews in Europe. These are main points of the deniers' "big lie."

Denying the fact that the Holocaust occurred makes about as much sense as claiming that the earth is flat. It was the meticulous Nazis themselves who produced a large portion of the documents now available to anyone who desires to peruse them. They all point to the deniers' hypocrisy and make it plain that their claim to a "Holocaust hoax" is an unmitigated farce. Furthermore, contrary to the deniers' assertions, Hitler was fully aware of and did, in fact, order the annihilation of the European Jews. The facts of the Holocaust are so well documented in serious scholarly accounts that denial of Hitler's responsibility for the murder of the Jews is too preposterous to require refutation and argument. Hitler explicitly stated his murderous intentions in some of his speeches, as in the following:

Today I want to be a prophet once more: If international finance Jewry inside and outside of Europe should succeed once more in plunging nations into another world war, the consequence will not be the Bolshevization of the earth and thereby the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe...



In fact, most serious historians also believe that the extermination of the Jews was Hitler's most consistent policy, in whose execution he persisted relentlessly. Hitler's compulsive-obsessive attitude in regard to the Jews may even have cost him his war. I can attest to the fact as one of the frequently "resettled" victims, that the Jewish transports of slave laborers and those destined for extermination in Hitler's killing factories, were always given highest priority right of way on our journeys. This was done even at the expense of retarding the flow of vital transports of materiel and personnel to the Nazi front lines at a time when those were critically needed.

To this day, documents demanding the annihilation of the European Jews are being discovered in Russian archives. Hitler's intentions, as outlined in his various speeches, written orders, and his Mein Kampf, were obvious. His obsession with war was also plain. Hitler raved incessantly about a "Holy War," "preparing for war," and a "plan for the next war" (pp. 658-660). After reading Hitler's speeches and his book, it is impossible not to acknowledge his plans for Germany, for Europe, and the world. The deniers ignore these words or grossly misconstrue them in order to formulate their own fanciful fables.

Another tenet of the deniers' philosophy is that there is a moral equivalence between the wartime actions of the Allies, which may have resulted in civilian deaths, such as the bombing of Dresden, and atrocities committed by the Nazis. It is similar to the comparison a few make between a legal execution and a murder during a robbery. One of the most prominent American "revisionist" historians, Harry Elmer Barnes claimed that:

...the atrocities of the Allies in the same period were more numerous as to victims and were carried out for the most part by methods more brutal and painful than alleged extermination in gas ovens ...

Barnes failed to note the difference between war casualties and the mass murder of the millions of non-combatant people. The Jews of Europe never declared a fight against Hitler in his "Holy War," although he vowed to annihilate them. War between armed military entities is not genocide, therefore Nazi atrocities are not comparable to the war action of the Allies. It is inappropriate to even compare the two. The deniers and the revisionists ignore the obvious distinctions between war and murder, Nazi pagan barbarism and Allied necessity.

Another revisionist claim, an obvious result of anti-Judaism, makes the assertion that the Jews' primary concern regarding the Holocaust is the acquisition of money. According to the deniers, Jews use the "hoax" of the Holocaust in order to milk money from sympathizers for their homeland in Israel and to accomplish total domination of the financial world. For example, the infamous French "revisionist," Paul Rassinier declared that:

...the aim of the Zionists is the gold of Fort Knox. If the plan should succeed - and all that is needed is for the American branch of international Zionism to get its hand on Wall Street - the Israeli home-port of the Diaspora would become the command post of all the world's industry. Then at the very least, it could be said that the designation 'Chosen People' which the Jews claim for themselves, would assume its full significance.

This is pseudo-historical interpretation to ridiculous limits. Sparked by their innate hatred of Jews, deniers stereotype Jews as money-grabbers, dishonest businessmen, and avaricious bankers. Through this racist-revisionist theory, the deniers can not only write off the Holocaust as a "hoax"; they can use it as a means to justify their misinterpretation of Jewish intent. As a survivor of the Holocaust, I can not permit this injustice being wrought on the millions of innocent victims of Nazi assassins. Allowing this deception to flourish unabated would subject all those gentle, beloved people to suffer their deaths a thousandfold. Clearly, the deniers' currency is counterfeit; mine is legitimate tender.

Their theories are proof positive that Holocaust deniers must be either incredibly ignorant or utterly unrealistic. But if Holocaust denial is so absurd, why should we bother to research its aims? I believe that in order to separate fact from fiction, it is important to learn about the fiction as well as the facts. As a survivor of the Holocaust, I have experienced the factual consequences of that tragic event at great losses to myself and my family. When I confront the deniers' fictional interpretations of the Holocaust, I can distinguish between them accordingly. Needless to say, there is a large segment of the general public that does not have this advantage. This population will inevitably grow with ignorance, ingrained prejudice or plain naiveté. There will always exist people who will be susceptible to the propaganda generated by the deniers of the Holocaust.

Even in America, TV show and radio hosts, in their efforts to gain better ratings, try to convey "both sides of the story" by inviting both Holocaust survivors (or historians) and Holocaust deniers to explain themselves on their programs. The problem with this idea is that the Holocaust did happen. There is no "other side" to the issue. The very fact that the radio-TV host invites the denier to the show in order to debate the issues opposite a survivor or a bona-fide historian gives the deniers' revisionist beliefs undeserved legitimacy and publicity.

Moreover, Holocaust denial has filtered through in other ways to an unsuspecting public. For instance, syndicated columnist Pat Buchanan, who twice ran for president, has made references to the so-called Holocaust "Survivor Syndrome" and claimed that it was "physically impossible for the gas chambers at Treblinka to have functioned as a killing apparatus." Although Holocaust denial is an idea shared only by a few fringe groups, Jew-baiters, and propagandists, its theories have already taken root in American media and politics.

Historian Michael Sturmer asserts that "in a land without history, the future is controlled by those who determine the content of memory, who coin concepts and interpret the past." Such an assertion is especially applicable to the Holocaust. As we, the survivors, become scarce, there will be fewer sources of primary information about the Holocaust in the world. Furthermore, the essence of truth vested with the authority of the eyewitness, will no longer prevail. They will no longer be able to impress future generations with the horrors of Nazi genocide. It is hard to conceive whether or not the Holocaust denial movement could further its influence. However, it is up to the vigilance of authentic historians and serious scholars to prevent its spread by educating the general public on how to separate fact from fiction and valid historical interpretation from the "revisionist" propaganda. We hope that future generations of discerning individuals will realize that the deniers' diatribes are used not only to discredit the Holocaust victims, but also to tarnish the veracity of eyewitness accounts.

Moses Maimonides said it most succinctly in his brilliant treatise Guide of the Perplexed (xxxi, p. 41): "...A proposition which can be proved by evidence is not subject to dispute, denial or rejection; no one but the ignorant would contradict it, and such contradiction is called 'denial of demonstrated proof.' Facts are only doubted by those who ignore things fully proved."



Last modified: October 21, 1999
Copyright © 1999 Dr. William Samelson. All rights reserved.
Technical/administrative contact: webmaster@shoah.org

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

The answer is yes. In fact, lower death tolls means that the indicated crime, a state-directed policy of extermination, never happened.

But it did. And we BOTH know it.

 

[Valcorie]

more proof

from this web site: http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1281

An Interview with Holocaust survivor Laura Hillman:

Casey: Thank you so much for your willingness to participate in this interview. To familiarize our readers with who you are, could you please briefly tell us about your story and your personal connection to the Holocaust?
Ms. Hillman: I’m a holocaust survivor. That means I survived eight concentration camps including Auschwitz Berkenau. My entire family of 63 people were killed, that includes my parents, my brothers, aunts, and uncles. I was born in Germany. My father fought in the First World War for Germany. He received the iron cross for bravery and was severely wounded. In 1942 they killed him in Buchenwald, an infamous concentration camp.

Casey: For those who haven’t seen the movie Schindler’s List, who were the Schindler Jews?
Ms. Hillman: Oscar Schindler was an industrialist and he came to Poland and took over a factory from the Jews. These people worked so hard for him and made him a wealthy man. He was 37 at the time and had never succeeded before. When he saw how these Jews were mistreated in the concentration camp called Plaszow he decided to start a labor camp in Brinnlitz. Although he was a Nazi party member, he bribed all the officials with whatever he could, with money that came from the Jews and he was successful to take 1100 people out of this infamous concentration camp and bring them to Brinnlitz, saving their lives. I was one of those. If not for that, I would not be talking to you now.

Casey: Why is the Holocaust important for us to understand today?
Ms. Hillman: It is important so that it may never never happen again. Because something like this is unheard of in history, where human beings by the millions were put in gas chambers and then burned in crematories. Go back in history, to the Romans, to the Byzantine times, and never in history has an ethnicity been killed in such a way. This didn’t come from people that were uneducated, but from a country that had scientists, poets, and writers--highly intelligent people. And that was the danger—it didn’t come from a 3rd world country, it came from a country that was very civilized. We must understand it so it never ever happens again. That’s why I lecture in schools all the time and that’s why I wrote the book.

Casey: Are there people out there who actually deny the Holocaust--and if so, what do you think causes people to do such a thing?
Ms. Hillman: The people who deny the Holocaust are often-times people on the fringe of society. Others want to make thsmelves important—they have not had their voices heard anywhere in life, and so by having this view they can make themselves important. They are in the minority—there are only a handful of such people and so I dismiss them.

Casey: Recently, some people have compared those who have scientific doubts about Darwinian evolution to Holocaust deniers. From your perspective as a Holocaust survivor, do you feel such remarks should be made, and how do you think recipients of such accusations should respond?
Ms. Hillman: What has one thing to do with another? I don't see the connection. I don’t close my eyes or ears to evolution, but I don’t think I could be swayed to believe in it. I’m too religious.

Casey: Do you feel that the Holocaust should be tossed around lightly in scientific debates?
Ms. Hillman: It is a travesty to do it. To compare [having doubts about evolution] with [doubting] the six million Jewish people who lost their lives, including 1,500,000 children, it is a travesty to toss the Holocaust around lightly in scientific debates. It’s a bad analogy. Definitely a bad analogy.

Casey: Intelligent design theory is known to attract the interest of scholars from a variety of different faiths, including Jewish scholars. What does it mean when someone compares a group known to contain many Jews to those who are “Holocaust deniers?”
Ms. Hillman: I’ve never heard of anyone calling a group which includes Jews Holocaust deniers. Once when speaking in a school a skinhead said to me that I had no proof of the Holocaust. I said to him, when you bring back my brothers and my parents, then you have proof. But until that time, I am living proof of the Holocaust. And he walked out of a crowded room of a few hundred people.

Casey: On a lighter note, can you tell us a little about your forthcoming book and book tour?
Ms. Hillman: The book will be released April 24, 2005. It’s in the juvenile division of Simon and Schuster, and it’s for readers 13 and older. But since then it has been marketed as a crossover book for adults as well. Simon and Schuster is very excited about it. I will be going on tour, probably starting in late April. I’m excited because I will leave this book behind, and anyone who wants to deny the Holocaust can read my book, because I was a young girl who was there.

Casey: If there is any take-home message you have for our readers, how would you have them view about the importance of the Holocaust and how it should be treated in scientific debates?
Ms. Hillman: I don’t think that the Holocaust belongs in scientific debates. Maybe I am oversimplifying it, but I don’t see the connection. It’s too gruesome an event – how does that come into a debate over the theory of evolution? What has one thing to do with another. It’s an unfair comparison and it doesn’t belong in the debate. I feel very strongly about the fact that the Holocaust does not belong in these scientific debates.
If people have further questions, Ms. Hillman has offered to permit the posting of her e-mail address where she can be contacted personally at grahil@aol.com.

 

[unculbact]

6

That does not use logic. If the death toll is lower, then german government did not order it? It would only mean if the death toll was lower, then the nazi's killed less people. It doesn't mean they didn't kill anyone.

But I never said, or even implied, that they didn't kill anyone. I said that a lower death toll means that here was no order for mass extermination.

If extermination is a state policy, a national objective, if the order is given to use the resources of the state to exterminate large numbers of people, high numbers in a short period are the prime indicator.

In Rwanda, it only took a month to murder 1,000,000 Tutsi's with nothing more than machetes. A modern industrial state can obviously do better.

And according to the Holocaust myth, the order (never documented!) to begin exterminating people was given in October of 1941, and was rescinded (again, no documentation!) on November 27 of 1944. So, in 37 months, using machetes, they could have killed 37,000,000 people.

But nobody has ever claimed that many. As has been pointed out, the death toll at any number of camps has been dropping, and in very large increments.

A lower death toll is not only not consistent with a state policy of extermination, it means that there was never any need for gas chambers. If the death toll goes to say, two million, then there were obviously no huge, expensive extermination machines built. The Soviets killed that many people from 1937-1939, during the Yezhovchina, using only pistols and a single shot in the neck.

The Turks killed maybe 3 million Armenian's in only 3 months, using only sabres, rifles and forced marches.

If the Nazi's had had a policy of mass extermination, they could have exceeded any of those numbers. In any war, there will be atrocities and massacres, but that's not what the Holocaust(TM) is about. It's about mass extermination as a matter of state policy and national objectives. There's no proof of that.

 

[ImpWizard]

Dont let him intimidate you with his revisionist history.

Dig deep enough into every holocaust denier and you'll find that anti-semite hiding within.

What a load of BS!

 

[Valcorie]

OK, lets go the burden of proof way.

If there was a provable case for the Holocaust , why did the Canadian legal system fail to convict Ernst Zundel based on the Holocaust record "supported by your mountain of evidence" when even eyewitnesses from the time put up as prosecution witnesses , failed under crossexamination to prove the veracity of their "evidence", some even admitting it was false or flawed.

Zundel was convicted on February 26, 1985 of publishing false news about the Holocaust. He was sentenced to fifteen months in jail, and three years probation, during which he was prohibited from publishing on the subject. Zundel did not serve his sentence. In January 1987, the Ontario Court of Appeals overturned the 1985 conviction, citing procedural errors during the trial.

EVEN HE COULDN"T PROVE IT!


http://www.adl.org/holocaust/zundel.asp

 

[woody54]

Even Woody admitted that Hitler specificly, intentionaly commited genocide, using torchure, brutality and propaganda. That was the hollocaust.

I have heard a clear voice for denial accross the board and woody just refuted it.

You are a twister of words. Read my post and you have interpreted the concept of genocide from them to suit your case. That is corrupt. By your reasoning, the USA are criminally genocidal in Iraq for adopting similar strategies. I am a critic of their operations there but consider Fallujah their only genocidal event of record.

I have never been at ease with the word Holocaust because of its mythological link to the Jewish religios dogma. I do not deny that there was a human tradegy that affected the designated enemies of the third Reich but it is the scale and intent behind this tragedy on which the basis of your "Holocaust" stands or falls. Labelling it as a religion based myth distances it from thecold analytical investigation the facts deserves for a real historical record.
After 60 years, there is still not enough openness and honesty to allow an objective evaluation of the truth although there is a growing body of real , cold hard facts that dispute the Holocaust integrity as an unquestionable icon of history.
If you are prepared to accept it as of myth, fine do that but dont denigrate others who are objective and analytical in their approach to what is obviously a misrepresented event in history..

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

You are a twister of words. Read my post and you have interpreted the concept of genocide from them to suit your case. That is corrupt. By your reasoning, the USA are criminally genocidal in Iraq for adopting similar strategies. I am a critic of their operations there but consider Fallujah their only genocidal event of record.

I have never been at ease with the word Holocaust because of its mythological link to the Jewish religios dogma. I do not deny that there was a human tradegy that affected the designated enemies of the third Reich but it is the scale and intent behind this tragedy on which the basis of your "Holocaust" stands or falls. Labelling it as a religion based myth distances it from thecold analytical investigation the facts deserves for a real historical record.
After 60 years, there is still not enough openness and honesty to allow an objective evaluation of the truth although there is a growing body of real , cold hard facts that dispute the Holocaust integrity as an unquestionable icon of history.
If you are prepared to accept it as of myth, fine do that but dont denigrate others who are objective and analytical in their approach to what is obviously a misrepresented event in history..

Hey Woodrow!

What about that PROOF of your 9/11 conspiracy theory!

We're still waiting.

 

[krastner]

Casey: Why is the Holocaust important for us to understand today?
Ms. Hillman: It is important so that it may never never happen again.


This is sheer bullshit. It just happened in Kosova and while it was going on the people like ms. hillman and her entire israeli madmen never even said shit..

If there were any truths to the words then it would not happen . Yet it still does..In Kosova, in the Congo and other places in African.. People who make a litany of words like Ms Hillman are pitiful. So you know what you can do with your oh so clever example.

 

[woody54]

Zundel was convicted on February 26, 1985 of publishing false news about the Holocaust. He was sentenced to fifteen months in jail, and three years probation, during which he was prohibited from publishing on the subject. Zundel did not serve his sentence. In January 1987, the Ontario Court of Appeals overturned the 1985 conviction, citing procedural errors during the trial.

EVEN HE COULDN"T PROVE IT!


http://www.adl.org/holocaust/zundel.asp

Of course, did I say he wasn't convicted?

What I did say was he was not convicted on the floundering evidence of the Holocaust Industry that never stood the rigours of legal examination, but was convicted by special secret evidence he was not able to question as evidence.
There were two trials by the way.

The outcome of the second trial is all the more telling in that the Zionists, who were so ho-hum about the first one , just expecting an automatic conviction, had time to organise a major effort on defence which still fell over in court for lack of compelling evidence to back their case.
This is tantamount to saying the Holocaust doesn't stand on facts but on myth alone.

Your thang here was burden of proof. The Holocaust industry proved it cant do the business with cross examinable facts hence the secret heads up in the second trial. Canada is chronically anal about Holocaust denial so the man had to be convicted somehow.

 

[Valcorie]

http://www.adl.org/holocaust/response.asp#1

There is no single Nazi document that expressly enumerates a "master plan" for the annihilation of European Jewry. Holocaust-denial propagandists misrepresent this fact as an exposure of the Holocaust "hoax"; in doing so, they reveal a fundamentally misleading approach to the history of the era. That there was no single document does not mean there was no plan. The "Final Solution" — the Nazis' comprehensive plan to murder all European Jews — was, as the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust observes, "the culmination of a long evolution of Nazi Jewish policy." 1 The destruction process was shaped gradually: it was borne of many thousands of directives.2

The development and implementation of this process was overseen and directed by the highest tier of Nazi leadership, including Heinrich Himmler, Reinhard Heydrich, Adolf Eichmann, Hermann Goering and Adolf Hitler himself. For the previous two decades, Hitler had relentlessly pondered Jewish annihilation.3 In a September 16, 1919, letter he wrote that while "the Jewish problem" demanded an "anti-Semitism of reason" -- comprising systematic legal and political sanctions -- "the final goal, however, must steadfastly remain the removal of the Jews altogether."4

Throughout the 1920s, Hitler maintained that "the Jewish question" was the "pivotal question" for his Party and would be solved "with well-known German thoroughness to the final consequence."5 With his assumption to power in 1933, Hitler's racial notions were implemented by measures that increasingly excluded Jews from German society.

On January 30, 1939, Hitler warned that if Jewish financiers and Bolsheviks initiated war, "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."6 On, September 21, 1939, after the Germans invaded Poland, SD chief Heydrich ordered the Einsatzgruppen (mobile killing units operating in German-occupied territory) to forcibly concentrate Polish Jews into ghettos, alluding to an unspecified "final aim." 7

In the summer of 1941, with preparations underway for invading Russia, large-scale mass murder initiatives -- already practiced domestically upon the mentally ill and deformed -- were broadly enacted against Jews. Heydrich, acting on Hitler's orders, directed the Einsatzgruppen to implement the "special tasks" of annihilation in the Soviet Union of Jews and Soviet commissars.8 On July 31, Heydrich received orders from Goering to prepare plans "for the implementation of the aspired final solution of the Jewish question" in all German-occupied areas.9 Eichmann, while awaiting trial in Israel in 1960, related that Heydrich had told him in August 1941 that "the Führer has ordered the physical extermination of the Jews."10 Rudolf Hoess, the Commandant of Auschwitz, wrote in 1946 that "In the summer of 1941... Himmler said to me, 'The Führer has ordered the Final Solution to the Jewish Question... I have chosen the Auschwitz camp for this purpose.' "11

On January 20, 1942, Heydrich convened the Wannsee Conference to discuss and coordinate implementation of the Final Solution. Eichmann later testified at his trial:

These gentlemen... were discussing the subject quite bluntly, quite differently from the language that I had to use later in the record. During the conversation they minced no words about it at all... they spoke about methods of killing, about liquidation, about extermination.12

Ten days after the conference, while delivering a speech at the Sports Palace in Berlin that was recorded by the Allied monitoring service, Hitler declared: "The result of this war will be the complete annihilation of the Jews. . . the hour will come when the most evil universal enemy of all time will be finished, at least or a thousand years."13 On February 24, 1943, he stated: "This struggle will not end with the annihilation of Aryan mankind, but with the extermination of the Jewish people in Europe.14

Approximately 6 million Jews were killed in the course of Hitler's Final Solution.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

Casey: Why is the Holocaust important for us to understand today?
Ms. Hillman: It is important so that it may never never happen again.


This is sheer bullshit. It just happened in Kosova and while it was going on the people like ms. hillman and her entire israeli madmen never even said shit..

If there were any truths to the words then it would not happen . Yet it still does..In Kosova, in the Congo and other places in African.. People who make a litany of words like Ms Hillman are pitiful. So you know what you can do with your oh so clever example.

And so it would be with Hamas and Iran but we dont see you criticizing them!


Whats pitiful is you and your wallowing around in that cesspool of hate called anti-semitism.

 

[woody54]

Hey Woodrow!

What about that PROOF of your 9/11 conspiracy theory!

We're still waiting.

I started with the video evidence. I am still waiting for your analysis of how so many casual bystanders heard explosions. Are they the stupid Americans or is that just you and your ilk who deny reality?

Comeon wingnut boy, make this one fly.

 

[unculbact]

Holocaust Denial: Truth or Hoax?
One Survivor's Testimony

by William Samelson, Ph.D.

Moreover, Holocaust denial has filtered through in other ways to an unsuspecting public. For instance, syndicated columnist Pat Buchanan, who twice ran for president, has made references to the so-called Holocaust "Survivor Syndrome" and claimed that it was "physically impossible for the gas chambers at Treblinka to have functioned as a killing apparatus."

And here, that was proven.

Treblinka: Extermination Camp or Transit Camp?

http://vho.org/GB/Books/t/

I've never seen their data refuted.

 

[woody54]

Casey: Why is the Holocaust important for us to understand today?
Ms. Hillman: It is important so that it may never never happen again.


This is sheer bullshit. It just happened in Kosova and while it was going on the people like ms. hillman and her entire israeli madmen never even said shit..

If there were any truths to the words then it would not happen . Yet it still does..In Kosova, in the Congo and other places in African.. People who make a litany of words like Ms Hillman are pitiful. So you know what you can do with your oh so clever example.

Ah even you must realise that a Jewish tragedy is far more important than any gentile travesty.

A million Palestinians arent worth a Jewish fingernail, the Rabbi said. He meant it too. Its a tenet of Judaism.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

I started with the video evidence. I am still waiting for your analysis of how so many casual bystanders heard explosions. Are they the stupid Americans or is that just you and your ilk who deny reality?

Comeon wingnut boy, make this one fly.

LOL...

WHAT other explosions??? And according to who?

BTW... Can you name one conspiracy theory you DONT buy into?

 

[Valcorie]

Of course, did I say he wasn't convicted?

What I did say was he was not convicted on the floundering evidence of the Holocaust Industry that never stood the rigours of legal examination, but was convicted by special secret evidence he was not able to question as evidence.
There were two trials by the way.

The outcome of the second trial is all the more telling in that the Zionists, who were so ho-hum about the first one , just expecting an automatic conviction, had time to organise a major effort on defence which still fell over in court for lack of compelling evidence to back their case.
This is tantamount to saying the Holocaust doesn't stand on facts but on myth alone.

Your thang here was burden of proof. The Holocaust industry proved it cant do the business with cross examinable facts hence the secret heads up in the second trial. Canada is chronically anal about Holocaust denial so the man had to be convicted somehow.

This particular person wasn't even a Nazi. He was 10 in 1947. The trail for clarification of people reading these posts was solely built around free speach rights. Did he have the right to state his views on the hollocaust, anti-semitism, and white power. Tp base an existance of an event off his trail is a little out therewouln't you say? Or is that all you have for evidence? I don't know the fact surroundind his second case, but I will look it up.

I do find it odd that EVERY one of the people you mentined in the previous pages as a historian, spokesmen, or researcher who supports your veiw is a self proclaimed anti sematic, white sepresmist, Nazi sympathiser, or bigot.
hey ALL are noted for it, and are very free with that knowledge. The only ones you sited that aren't used to be, but appologized and publicly acknowledged that they lied about the hollocaust facts.

 

[BlueEyesInLevis]

Ah even you must realise that a Jewish tragedy is far more important than any gentile travesty.

A million Palestinians arent worth a Jewish fingernail, the Rabbi said. He meant it too. Its a tenet of Judaism.

You'ld LOVE to see 'em nuked wouldnt you Woodrow. That would be sweet justice for you! Then you could set your eyes on kicking them out of New York.

 

[Valcorie]

And so it would be with Hamas and Iran but we dont see you criticizing them!


Whats pitiful is you and your wallowing around in that cesspool of hate called anti-semitism.

maybe because we aren't talking about them, we are discussing the hollocaust and it is pretty pitiful I am wallowing around on this thread with a bunch of hateful, anti- semists

 

[Valcorie]

I started with the video evidence. I am still waiting for your analysis of how so many casual bystanders heard explosions. Are they the stupid Americans or is that just you and your ilk who deny reality?

Comeon wingnut boy, make this one fly.

Um that is all you have to support your crack pot 9/11 theories???

 

[woody54]

And so it would be with Hamas and Iran but we dont see you criticizing them!


Whats pitiful is you and your wallowing around in that cesspool of hate called anti-semitism.

If you had a clue about geopolitics to do with Arab unrest, underneath it all is Westerners with a corrupt and greedy desire to exploit them and more latterly, the forced imposition of a Jewish State ,again by Westerners, right in the bowels of one Muslims holiest areas.
It is only when you acknowledge these influences into the mix, can you get any balance in your assessments.

The cesspool of hate the West wallows in is the cause of Arab dissention while the construct of antisemitism is the result of Jews and Gentiles being of oil and water culturally. History never showed the West finding jews compatible or prepard to assimilate, thereby making themselves aliens within others countries because they recognised only Israel of biblical myth.

The reason most European Jews never filterd back to the Middle east was that they weren't Middle eastern but East European with a cultural bent of a Middle eastern religious background.... much like why Christians dont all want to be back in the promised Land I suppose. Is this antisemitic or just reality?
Just asking , like?

 

[woody54]

LOL...

WHAT other explosions??? And according to who?

BTW... Can you name one conspiracy theory you DONT buy into?

You are such a fake.
You dont even know how to watch the video, do you?
Good God, no wonder you are so fucking blind.
The explosions were never a conspiracy , dickhead.

They are a matter of public record.
Your denying them IS a conspiracy, wingnut sychophant.

 

[Valcorie]

I just gave you all that great proof about Hilter's final solution,
dates of public addresses he gave speaking about the long term plan for genocide
letters written about it wiping out jews
indiviuals in charge of the final solution
Plus you admited that Nazi's did kill lots of jews and others.
Woody admited he did speciaficly target jews w/ torchure, brutality and propaganda
You don't deny there were concentration camps,
I showed a survivor interview
a link to 50 or so photos showing the stages of the final solution

OH and you can't deny that historians and others that support your views (you quoted several of them as sources) are self proclaimed white sepresmist, anti-sematics who would like to finish what Hitler started.

HMMM sounds like you don't have a leg to stand on, and never will

 

[Valcorie]

If you had a clue about geopolitics to do with Arab unrest, underneath it all is Westerners with a corrupt and greedy desire to exploit them and more latterly, the forced imposition of a Jewish State ,again by Westerners, right in the bowels of one Muslims holiest areas.
It is only when you acknowledge these influences into the mix, can you get any balance in your assessments.

The cesspool of hate the West wallows in is the cause of Arab dissention while the construct of antisemitism is the result of Jews and Gentiles being of oil and water culturally. History never showed the West finding jews compatible or prepard to assimilate, thereby making themselves aliens within others countries because they recognised only Israel of biblical myth.

The reason most European Jews never filterd back to the Middle east was that they weren't Middle eastern but East European with a cultural bent of a Middle eastern religious background.... much like why Christians dont all want to be back in the promised Land I suppose. Is this antisemitic or just reality?
Just asking , like?

Hey I think I found Osama....Do I get a Prize???