Why The Holocaust Must Be Questioned

[ImpWizard]

Interesting article I just found by accident. Written by Carlo Mattogno

Where is it then? You forgot to post it.

 

[ImpWizard]

I'd heard about this problem with the Holocaust claim that "six million Jews died" in that the population figures worldwide didn't show this...

Even though we get it rammed down our throats repeatedly, without any real evidence all the way through school.

But I wasn't sure until I came across the (very hard to find) world population figures for Jews. Of course I could just tell you what they are, but our Holocaust Propagandists would just make their usual excuses and quote from unreliable sources like wikipedia (word of God indeed... not likely)

So here's the scans of the relevant pages instead for everyone to see for themselves.

The 1940 World Almanac

Worldwide population of Jews = 15,192,089


The 1948 World Almanac

Worldwide population of Jews = 15,713,638

So...let's see where did those SIX MILLION JEWS come from that died?
Very odd, as the Jewish population WORLDWIDE didn't go down, like everyone else who was dying and fighting in a horrible war that wiped out a couple of hundred million non-Jews.

No, instead of going down,the WORLDWIDE population of Jews went UP.

I guess they magically appeared out of thin air and went into those magic gas chambers that nobody can prove worked, and into those IMPOSSIBLE TO EXIST "gas vans" and "diesel gas chambers", and magically disappeared again...or somebody is telling GREAT BIG WHOPPING LIES!!!

So we have a claim of six million dying, um....so where did they come from? Outer Space? Mars maybe? Dimension-X?

It looks like it was a lot smaller than six million. A LOT smaller....and non-Jews died a lot more and suffered a lot more from WW2 as well....

This is fucked. Honestly, it's fucking sickening that we've been lied to this much.

That's why I always figured the death toll was probably around 250,000 to 300,000 from Typhus, starvation, other diseases, and a few mass murders at gun point - for all the camps all together for all of the people in them, not just the Jews.

I don't believe any of the diesel gassing claims. But I haven't yet had the chance to study the Zyklon-B gas chamber problems. A little bit, but not extensively.

 

[ImpWizard]

Here is some more info, of course it is not on a site touting UFO's or secret government plots to put birth control in Wheaties, but I think it is still useful.

http://www.hdot.org/ieindex.html

Someone else posted the same article ages ago, but from the BBC. It's been done over already.

 

[Drinking Cap]

It's not up to me to show that the World Almanac is correct and reliable, since it's YOU who are trying to argue that it's not then it's up to YOU to prove that the World Almanac's experts got it wrong.

So I'm supposed to disprove a couple of faded pages from a 50 year old book that you can't even quote a method from?

Are you referring to those difficult to read photo of an actual page from the 1940 World Almanac? I already explained the typo, and nevertheless you are quite capable of reading the pages yourself and therefore should be quite capable of seeing that the "six million Jews killed" claim simply isn't supported by comparison with pre-war and post-war Jewish population statistics.

And you continue to not be able to validate the statistics quoted especially considering the uncertainty of the time.

When did "God" enter the picture? Did I ever say such a thing?

It was a simile, hence the use of the word "like". Were you even remotely bright you might be able to understand that.

What ALL OF THEM?! Or do you mean just ONE MAN?

I didn't hear anything about them doing any choral singing, it must have been a big event. How many members do they have? And seriously they ALL said the same thing at the same time?! No individual differences of opinion at all?!

It's a quote from a statement released by the organization.

 

[Drinking Cap]

The figure in the 1940 World Almanac that states that the population of Jews in Europe was 9,372,666, has a more interesting provenance.

And he arrived at that number how?

 

[phrodeau]

Someone else posted the same article ages ago, but from the BBC. It's been done over already.

That was me. You didn't respond to it.

I suppose you'd rather accept Lovelynice's explanation that they analyzed a totally different diary. That's fine, because Anne Frank did mention making a copy.

 

[ImpWizard]

That was me. You didn't respond to it.

You're apparently confused there. You were debating with Lovelynice at the time, and had posted that article in response to one of her comments, so it was Lovelynice who responded to it. You didn't ask me to respond to it, you asked her.

I suppose you'd rather accept Lovelynice's explanation that they analyzed a totally different diary.

You're confused there. That was my explanation, not hers. She just agreed with it and attempted to point that explanation out a little clearer as you didn't seem to notice it in your response.

Besides, how else would you explain the same examination having two entirely different and contradictory results. Disappearing magic ballpoint ink perhaps?

That's fine, because Anne Frank did mention making a copy.

Did Anne Frank say that she'd copied her entire diary - in her own words recorded on tape - or is this claim written in the questionable alleged "diaries" in the same handwriting style which doesn't match the letters and postcards? Or is this claim only stated on various sites and in books about Anne Frank without any supporting evidence such as mentioned above (e.g. stating that Anne Frank began copying her diary, but not showing in any way that this is true, only stating it as if it was true)?

Let's cut to the heart of the problem>

The fact remains that the original was not examined on at least one of those occassions, in 1986 or 1980, since it can't be both (the examined documents weren't the same unless you believe in disappearing magic 1951 ink), that makes it apparent that on at least one of those occassions an alleged copy was fraudalently given for examination as being the "original".

So which one is the alleged "original" and which one is the alleged "copy", and how can you show that either of them were written by Anne Frank, since it's apparent she didn't have access to a 1951 ballpoint with 1951 ink to make corrections and notations with, or write most of the 4th volume in for that matter for the alleged "diary" examined in 1980.

If we accept that both versions were written (as alleged) with the same handwriting throughout, and that the same person wrote both versions, then we have to accept that this same person was using a ballpoint pen with 1951 ballpoint ink in the case of the corrections and notations and most of the 4th volume of the version of the alleged "diary" that was examined in 1980 - and since this is presumably the same person who wrote the alleged "diary" that was examined in 1986 which did not have any corrections and notations, then that logically leads to the conclusion that either
-a) If it was Anne Frank who wrote both versions, then you are claiming she had access to a 1951 ballpoint pen with 1951 ballpoint ink which she used back in 1944 to write one of the alleged "diaries" (the one with corrections and notations plus most of the 4th volume in the futuristic ink) but not the other (the alleged "diaries" without those corrections and notations.
OR
- b) It definitely wasn't Anne Frank who wrote EITHER of the alleged "diaries" because she definitely did not have access to a 1951 ballpoint pen with 1951 ballpoint pen ink to write those corrections and notations plus most of the 4th volume of the 1980 examined version which was presumably written in the same handwritting by the same person as the 1986 examined version.

a) Is an impossibility, so that leaves b).

The alleged "diaries" can only be fake, and both versions examined (both the 1980 version submitted for examination, and the 1986 version submitted for examination) were fraudalently described as "original" when neither was - and neither were written by Anne Frank.

It doesn't look like the real original Anne Frank diary was examined on either occassion.

 

[unculbact]

And he arrived at that number how?

I am indeed very curious about that. After more digging...

Ruppin's book has been out of print since before World War II, but I'm guessing I can get a copy at my local university. His sources were something he'd developed for decades - from 1902 to 1907, he was director of Berlin's Bureau for Jewish Statistics and Demography, where he first started publishing The sources he built there were continued and augmented after he became head of the Jewish National Fund, which gave him the tools to poll all over Europe.

At the time he published Les Juifs dans le Monde moderne, he was head of the sociology department at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. A building there now bears his name. His motivations for his 1938 population study are interesting, at the time he was a leading member of the World Zionist Organization (WZO), where demographics and population studies were his main brief. One of his main jobs was to figure out how many Jews could make up the population of a future Israel.

Ruppin's main sources are claimed to be the official census of different countries (with the redrawing of national borders after World War I, everybody took extensive census, so his reports after 1919 must be interesting), compared to his own tables via the World Zionist Organization, which he had been building since 1902, in turn compared with data he got from the Jewish Telegraph Agency. That last source is important; it allowed Ruppin to poll shetls, synagogues and villages in the remotest parts of Europe, in fact, all over the world. Thanks to the JTA, he was able to build population statistics for the considerable pre-war Jewish populations in Shanghai, Manchuria and Hong Kong.

Zionist organizations also owned stock in the giant Italian life insurance company Assicurazioni Generali, which pre-war had offices and was selling policies all over Eastern Europe, even in the remotest parts of Galacia and Romania. Their tables - life insurance companies keep remarkable actuarial and demographic tables - were also a source for Ruppin. During the Depression, a life insurance policy, which paid interest, was considered to be a very sound investment.

Besides the book I've listed, he was writing a yearly report for the WZO, I bet if those are ever published they will provide some very interesting data.

Ruppin is a new name to me, and worthy of further study. He does seem to be the key to the population question. For 41 years, he was the leading demographer for Jews in Europe, in fact, he founded, and monopolized, the field of study.

His books are the source for all Jewish population statistics in pre-war almanacs.

I reconciled one difference between his figures and the one's Himmler published. The Nazi definition of "who was a Jew" was far broader than the criteria Ruppin used. Ruppin counted only those who stood up to be counted, or were included on census and tax rolls. Under the Nazi definition, you could be considered a Jew if, to the best of my memory, you had one Jewish ancestor going back three generations, or something like that. So Himmler's tables on Jewish population are always going to be bigger than Ruppin's.

That complicates things.

 

[phrodeau]

Besides, how else would you explain the same examination having two entirely different and contradictory results.

Human error. Or a fat payoff.

How would you explain that "The Diary of Anne Frank" was published several years prior to 1951?

 

[Lovelynice]

Human error. Or a fat payoff.

How would you explain that "The Diary of Anne Frank" was published several years prior to 1951?

Your question ignores the fact that neither of the versions provided for examination in 1980 and 1986 could be the "original" if they were both written with the same handwriting by the same person both with a 1951 ballpoint pen and 1951 ballpoint ink and without, and that shows that fraud was still being engaged in by presenting those two different versions of the alleged "diary" as being the "original".

Since fraud was engaged in, that then leads to suspicion about the legitimacy of what was published prior to 1951 too, because neither the 1980 or 1986 examinations can substantiate the claim that the alleged "diary" ever existed in the form that was published. It also means that since fraud was committed by presenting fake "diaries" for examination on either occassion (1980 or 1986), that the owner(s) of the alleged "diaries" was deliberately engaging in the continuation of a hoax.

So what is there to prove that the versions published before 1951 were any more legitimate?

 

[Veryknowing]

So I'm supposed to disprove a couple of faded pages from a 50 year old book that you can't even quote a method from?
.

Not really a valid excuse that. All of the sources and books from the time period would be 50+ years old, as would all the documents from the time period.

The age of the text does not in any way reduce it's validity in and of itself.

I would be more curious about what other sources confirm those population figures.

 

[Veryknowing]

It's a quote from a statement released by the organization.

Signed by who? Was it voted on, debated, or did the man making the statement just make it on his own and this was presented as an official statement in the news media because he was in a senior position?

It's interesting that you avoided mentioning exactly who made the statement, as if you were merely quoting another source far removed from the original news source and the organisation itself and thus it only has the validity of hearsay.

 

[Veryknowing]

I'd heard about this problem with the Holocaust claim that "six million Jews died" in that the population figures worldwide didn't show this...

Even though we get it rammed down our throats repeatedly, without any real evidence all the way through school.

But I wasn't sure until I came across the (very hard to find) world population figures for Jews. Of course I could just tell you what they are, but our Holocaust Propagandists would just make their usual excuses and quote from unreliable sources like wikipedia (word of God indeed... not likely)

So here's the scans of the relevant pages instead for everyone to see for themselves.

The 1940 World Almanac

Worldwide population of Jews = 15,192,089


The 1948 World Almanac

Worldwide population of Jews = 15,713,638

So...let's see where did those SIX MILLION JEWS come from that died?
Very odd, as the Jewish population WORLDWIDE didn't go down, like everyone else who was dying and fighting in a horrible war that wiped out a couple of hundred million non-Jews.

No, instead of going down,the WORLDWIDE population of Jews went UP.

I guess they magically appeared out of thin air and went into those magic gas chambers that nobody can prove worked, and into those IMPOSSIBLE TO EXIST "gas vans" and "diesel gas chambers", and magically disappeared again...or somebody is telling GREAT BIG WHOPPING LIES!!!

So we have a claim of six million dying, um....so where did they come from? Outer Space? Mars maybe? Dimension-X?

It looks like it was a lot smaller than six million. A LOT smaller....and non-Jews died a lot more and suffered a lot more from WW2 as well....

This is fucked. Honestly, it's fucking sickening that we've been lied to this much.

Okay, I can see what you mean by these population figures fitting very well with the small death tolls listed in the Arolsen Red Cross report of 1979

but with the population estimates of a very small, and widely spread group such as Jews, it seems difficult to be sure that the population figures would be correct enough. Still 6 million as a plus or minus on 15 million does look a little unbelievable and unlikely.

However, are there any other reliable/credible sources for Jewish population estimates which have roughly equivalent numbers (15-16 million) both before and after World War 2?

Do they all depend on Ruppin (the man that unculbact mentioned), or do they have an independent method of checking the population that is equally as good?

As well, would Mr Ruppin (or those who came after him) have any reason to somehow miss around 6 million people while collecting their population statistics?

 

[Sean Renaud]

While I hate to truly defend the Revisionist crowd I would ask a better question. It seems that the Red Cross Death rates have the total loss of live at 271,501 if I'm reading that crap properly. And the World almanac has the death toll at -525549 can anybody provide a single source that claims that the number of Jews decreased during this period. Or a single document outside of a Holocaust that says that 6 million died? Or any number against what they have provided?

It seems to me that even if their counting system was off, and to account for different ways of identifying and thus counting Jews the number still should have been well into the millions, which it isn't.

 

[nyminus]

While I hate to truly defend the Revisionist crowd I would ask a better question. It seems that the Red Cross Death rates have the total loss of live at 271,501 if I'm reading that crap properly. And the World almanac has the death toll at -525549 can anybody provide a single source that claims that the number of Jews decreased during this period. Or a single document outside of a Holocaust that says that 6 million died? Or any number against what they have provided?

It seems to me that even if their counting system was off, and to account for different ways of identifying and thus counting Jews the number still should have been well into the millions, which it isn't.

It is hard to figure out just how many died but the main thing to remember is that the 6million figure was decided years back, well before WW11. That figure is a figment of some idiotic rabbis imagination.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Obviously this question wasn't aimed at you.

 

[unculbact]

Ruppin is going to be the only reliable source for pre-war total Jewish population around the world. Some countries, like the United States, didn't break down their population by religion - though non-government agencies did a pretty job of measuring that. Some countries, like the Soviet Union, did list the number of Jews and other religions as part of their census, but the trouble with that of course, is whether or not people declared their religion on the census form. In atheistic Russia, many didn't.

Ruppin can be regarded as reliable for figures before the war; but he died in 1943, and his network was disrupted, as were the networks for both government census bureaus and non-government agencies. Reliable figures for AFTER the war are going to be difficult, and that 1948 World Almanac report is wildly incorrect.

Note that most of the figures are unchanged from the 1938 almanac. For instance, the 1938 figures for European Jews is 9,372,666 - the same figure is in the 1948 almanac. The same for total European population: 153,026,476 for 1938; the same figure for 1948.

Most of the figures weren't updated in the ten year period. The World Almanac, lacking data after the chaos of World War II, just repeated data from the previous Almanac. The only columns I can see changes in are:

U.S. Protestant population, with an increase of 2,944,637

U.S. Jewish population, with an increase of 561,549

South American Jewish Population, with an increase of 200,004

These are probably the only reliable changes in the 1948 Almanac.

The only other column with changes is Oceania, and it is all screwed up:

There's a misprint on the 1938 Catholic's in Oceania, it should be 1,468,764, not 10,468,764...so between 1938 and 1948, there is an increase of 389,724 Catholics.

And a decrease of 240,004 Jews in Oceania between 1938 and 1948? That doesn't make any sense.

The totals in the 1948 Almanac are either unchanged, or don't make sense, like listing NO change in the Catholic population in the U.S. between 1938 and 1948.

I'm prepared to accept the 1938 Almanac as reasonably accurate, even with some obvious mistakes and misprints in the Oceania column.

The 1948 Almanac is hopeless.

 

[miles]

It is hard to figure out just how many died but the main thing to remember is that the 6million figure was decided years back, well before WW11. .

Oh, so they decided that 6 million was the magic number of Jews that would be killed in a war that hadn't begun?

Are you from fucking Pluto?

 

[Sean]

Oh, so they decided that 6 million was the magic number of Jews that would be killed in a war that hadn't begun?

Are you from fucking Pluto?

Now I'm agreeing with miles. Another reason to fucking hate nazis.

 

[Sean Renaud]

With the chaos of the war it and the obvious point of identical numbers the 1948 Almanac is obviously innacurate (in my opinion. I've no interest in arguing this point with anybody.) So when would be the next time that the records should be accurate? How often are census performed? There must be other ways of getting accurate or semi accurate numbers from some place. The deaths of 6 million people would (I would think) still be felt to this day.

 

[woody54]

Okay, I can see what you mean by these population figures fitting very well with the small death tolls listed in the Arolsen Red Cross report of 1979

but with the population estimates of a very small, and widely spread group such as Jews, it seems difficult to be sure that the population figures would be correct enough. Still 6 million as a plus or minus on 15 million does look a little unbelievable and unlikely.

However, are there any other reliable/credible sources for Jewish population estimates which have roughly equivalent numbers (15-16 million) both before and after World War 2?

Do they all depend on Ruppin (the man that unculbact mentioned), or do they have an independent method of checking the population that is equally as good?

As well, would Mr Ruppin (or those who came after him) have any reason to somehow miss around 6 million people while collecting their population statistics?

Most countries have detailed census records covering such information but the specialist nature of the records you seek would need a dedicated research effort such as that undertaken by Ruppin and the Thrid Reich who have published their own records of jewish populations in Europe, a necessity with their planned programme of transfer.

Any capable researcher can tediously create their own record but obviously this is not popular... whining and stone throwing is much easier.

 

[woody54]

Oh, so they decided that 6 million was the magic number of Jews that would be killed in a war that hadn't begun?

Are you from fucking Pluto?

You have expressed yourignorance before but the religious and historical record shows 6 million is a religious icon previously used in 1918 for the Ukrainian starvations when Zionists thought the Balfour Agreement would see them in Palestine at the end of WW1.

Perhaps you should read Finklestein's discussion of the religious implications of the 6 million cleansing penalty from Judaic decree for jews to righteously return to Israel.

This fucked up interpretation of Jewish lore is the root of Holocaust propaganda from WWII.

 

[miles]

You have expressed yourignorance before but the religious and historical record shows 6 million is a religious icon previously used in 1918 for the Ukrainian starvations when Zionists thought the Balfour Agreement would see them in Palestine at the end of WW1.

Perhaps you should read Finklestein's discussion of the religious implications of the 6 million cleansing penalty from Judaic decree for jews to righteously return to Israel.

This fucked up interpretation of Jewish lore is the root of Holocaust propaganda from WWII.

Perhaps you should take a good look at yourself and figure out whay you're so obsessed with this bullshit.

You're truly a pathetic human being.

 

[krastner]

It is hard to figure out just how many died but the main thing to remember is that the 6million figure was decided years back, well before WW11. That figure is a figment of some idiotic rabbis imagination.

Oh, so they decided that 6 million was the magic number of Jews that would be killed in a war that hadn't begun?

Are you from fucking Pluto?.

I think if you will go back in this thread you will find that the figure had already been debated and authenticated. The Nazis didn't decide on the six million....the Jews did...

Woody...don't let anything this creature who calls himself miles bother you..It can't help being the way it is...Well there's the thing with it's mother...but then I digress...The bottom line is that the miles character is locked away in a mental hospital in Ohio , but has internet privileges. He is in the hospital for...well ..that kind of talk is TABOO even for LIT. Needless to say that when he is finally released, if ever, he will have to report his address or wear a locator...

 

[Sean Renaud]

He is in the hospital for...well ..that kind of talk is TABOO even for LIT. Needless to say that when he is finally released, if ever, he will have to report his address or wear a locator...

You mean *gasp* he's a German Revisionist?