Why The Holocaust Must Be Questioned

[sharpchick]

You can't re-write history, as much as you might like to - that's all there is to it. The Holocaust didn't start with the Jews, its torture and extermination tactics were perfected with them. Nazis had been "practicing" on people with disabilities (primarily mental retardation, but they also used people with physical disabilities) long before Auschwitz.

Krastner, have you ever read Shoah? Here's a little excerpt. . .

A 1942 memorandum describing changes in the design of German vehicles:

Since December 1941, ninety-seven thousand have been processed by the three vehicles in service, with no major incidents. In light of observations made so far, however, the following technical changes are needed:

The vans’ normal load is usually nine per square yard. In Saurer vehicles, which are very spacious, maximum use of the space is impossible, not because of any possible overload, but because loading to full capacity would affect the vehicle’s stability. So reduction of the load space seems necessary. It must absolutely be reduced by a yard, instead of trying to solve the problem, as hitherto, by reducing the number of pieces loaded. Besides, this extends the operating time, as the empty void must also be filled with carbon monoxide. On the other hand, if the load space is reduced, and the vehicle is packed solid, the operating time can be considerably shortened. . . alance is automatically restored, because the merchandise aboard displays during the operation a tendency to rush to the rear doors, and is mainly found lying there at the end of the operation. . . [T]he load naturally rushes toward the light when darkness sets in, which makes closing the doors difficult. Also, because of the alarming nature of the darkness, screaming always occurs when the doors are closed.

 

[unculbact]

Krastner, have you ever read Shoah? Here's a little excerpt. . .

By "Shoah", you're referring to the 8-hour movie by Claude Lanzmann, who admits that he wasn't trying to present history in the movie, but making a work of art.

Which explains what you just posted, which is a very poor translation (the use of yards instead of meters should have clued you to that) of a note purportedly sent from Willy Just (rank, position and other biographical details in the SS unknown) to Obersturmbannführer Walther Rauff on June 5, 1942.

What you have posted is also mendaciously edited, deliberately omitting important parts of the Just letter.

Here are the only complete copies of the June 5 letter I could find, in the original German and in French. A complete and correct English translation is unavailable, but luckily, I speak pretty good French.

http://www.phdn.org/histgen/camionsagaz/rauff420605.html

The first paragraph of the June 5 Just to Rauff note actually reads:

Since December 1941, for example, with the three special wagons, 97 000 have been processed, whose operation did not reveal any defects. The explosion which, as one knows, took place in Kulmhof [Chelmno] must be regarded as an isolated case. It is with an error of handling that it is necessary to allot the cause of it. Special instructions were addressed to the departments concerned to avoid such accidents. The instructions given have increased the degree of safety considerably.

Notice the difference? Who BEGINS a letter with "for example"?

And the numbers are incredibly exaggerated. Just's letter refers to gas vans being used on the Eastern Front by the Einstatzgruppen. If the letter refers to 97,000 people being killed in 3 gas vans in the 182 days between Dec. 1 of 1941, and May 31 of 1942, that comes out to 177 people per day per gas van (three loads of 60 people per day), but the vans could not have been in operation every day. December of 1941 was the winter of the Battle of Moscow! Temperatures were around 40 degrees below zero, with supply lines shut down and machinery inoperable. That spring (March-May of 1941) came the Rasputitsa, when the roads of Russia turned into a sea of mud.

During winter operations in the time frame of the letter (That would be December 1941 to March of 1942) what did they do with all the dead bodies? They could't bury them, the ground was rock hard, in winter Germans discovered that picks and shovels shattered like glass while trying to dig trenches. They couldn't burn them, at least to ashes, not enough fuel, certainly under these mobile conditions. The body disposal problem has no winter solution.

How could they have held such intense operations under these conditions? Tanks weren't moving, much less converted furniture vans! And no downtime moving from village to village, or being transferred from one sector to another?

Ingrid Weckert tears this "letter" to pieces in one of the most comprehensive analysis of a forgery I've ever seen.

3.3.2. RSHA 'Note' of June 5, 1942

http://vho.org/GB/Books/dth/fndwagon.html

The analysis is very long, so I'll skip to the summation paragraphs:

A closer examination of the Note of June 5 and a comparison with the RSHA letter of June 23, 1942, shows that the Note is a sort of plagiarism of the letter of June 23. Both items are subdivided into 7 points pertaining to the RSHA's requested changes. The Note interprets these requests in a way that would point to exhaust-gas murders of human beings.

We submit that the 'Note' of June 5 is a fabrication. Its authors wrote it after the letter of June 23 was written, and predated it. The various points were rewritten, and supplemented with additional remarks in such a way that murderous intentions are made apparent. One proof for this fabrication is the fact that the 'Note' of June 5, in point 2, refers to a consultation between the RSHA and Gaubschat[the alleged manufacturer of gas vans] which the letter of June 23 shows not to have taken place until June 16, fully 11 days after (!) the alleged writing of the 'Note' of June 5!

The operative paragraph from Point 2 of the Just letter that she's talking about reads as follows:

During a discussion with the firm in charge of installations,[my note - as Weckert notes, that discussion took place 11 DAYS after the June 5 date of this note] they pointed out that a shortening of the superstructure would involve the disadvantage of a displacement of the weight forwards. The front axis would thus be likely to be overloaded. Actually, there is a spontaneous compensation in the distribution of the weight, owing to the fact that, at the time of operation, the load, in the efforts which they make to approach the back door, is always there for the most part. This is why the forward axis does not suffer from any overload.

This paragraph brings up an interesting technical point. If they packed people in like sardines, so that there was as little free space as possible, how could the load have shifted from one axis to another at all?

Finally, the note of June 5 references Saurer trucks, which, as I've noted ad infinatum, were, since 1912, exclusively diesel powered, and diesel exhaust isn't toxic.

As I mentioned, this is a letter purportedly sent from Willy Just to Walter Rauff.

Rauff, a former naval officer, was on and off, a Technical Director with the SS. But, this letter is dated June 5, 1942. At that time, Rauff was on his way to North Africa to serve with the SD (Nazi Party Security Police) in North Africa, after serving only one month (May, 1942) in his second tour as a technical director with the SS.

And, Just's letter is addressed to Berlin. Rauff's office was in Prague.

That quote from the Lanzmann movie is duplicated on several sites, including educational sites. It's about time that Lanzmann's complete misrepresentation of that note was brought into the mainstream. As Belgian historian Jean Stengers has declared, Lanzmann's Shoah contains "scientifically untenable elements", and should long ago have been relegated to the dust bin of history.

 

[Anachron]

Finally, the note of June 5 references Saurer trucks, which, as I've noted ad infinatum, were, since 1912, exclusively diesel powered, and diesel exhaust isn't toxic.

Wrong.

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/dieselexhaust/chemical.html

 

[2ndSight]

Wrong.

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/dieselexhaust/chemical.html

I really hate to be on their side of the argument, but I have to correct you a little.

Yes - Diesel Exhaust is toxic

But NO - it's not that lethal, it'll make you sick, but it'll take hours to kill anybody and it won't be the CO in the exhaust that will do that, as there's hardly any in it.

 

[unculbact]

Wrong.

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/dieselexhaust/chemical.html

I guess I'll have to post it again.

Here’s the 1957 British Industrial Medicine study, using live animals exposed to diesel exhaust. Unlike spark-ignition engines, diesel exhaust contains almost no carbon monoxide, and is so safe, you can run a diesel in a coal mine.

R.E. PRATTLE, Et al: THE TOXICITY OF FUMES FROM DIESEL ENGINES UNDER FOUR DIFFERENT RUNNING CONDITIONS (1957)

http://www.vho.org/GB/c/FPB/ToxDiesel.html

Under normal operating conditions, they couldn't kill a laboratory mouse with it.

FINALLY, by practically tearing the engine apart and running it at a ridiculous profile, they were able to kill the mice, the rats, and the rabbits. BUT IT TOOK THEM THREE HOURS AND FORTY-FIVE MINUTES! Even after the first hour, some of the mice - MICE! - were still alive.

That's highly technical and thick, this is a a little easier to read, and it references that study. You might want to skip directly to Chapter 7, that's where he addresses diesel toxicity.

Diesel Gas Chambers Ideal for Torture — Absurd for Murder
by Friedrich Paul Berg

http://www.nazigassings.com/dieselgaschambera.html

Death from diesel exhaust, IF it comes, comes from pulmonary edema - fluid buildup in your lungs - induced by irritants and particulates. That not only explains why it's so slow, but means that it would be more efficient to use smoke from a campfire, since that contains many more irritants.

 

[Anachron]

So the British government's and the U.S. government's environmental health divisions disagree on the toxicity of emissions from diesel engines. Huzzah. It has nothing to do with the Holocaust anyway. Ever hear of Zyklon-B? That's what they used at Auschwitz, not the tailpipes of delivery vans.

If the Jews are lying about the Holocaust, then so are the Germans themselves. The Nazis documented every detail, down to the last pair of gold fillings removed from the corpses of gassed/burned/shot Jews.

This will be my last post in this thread. This thread is absurd anyway. Next someone will make a post asserting that the Earth is flat and the sun and planets revolve around it.

 

[nyminus]

So the British government's and the U.S. government's environmental health divisions disagree on the toxicity of emissions from diesel engines. Huzzah. It has nothing to do with the Holocaust anyway. Ever hear of Zyklon-B? That's what they used at Auschwitz, not the tailpipes of delivery vans.

If the Jews are lying about the Holocaust, then so are the Germans themselves. The Nazis documented every detail, down to the last pair of gold fillings removed from the corpses of gassed/burned/shot Jews.

This will be my last post in this thread. This thread is absurd anyway. Next someone will make a post asserting that the Earth is flat and the sun and planets revolve around it.

To begin with someone has already argued that the earth was flat. As a mattrer of fact the entire population of the civilized world thought that. That's right. They were stupid then just like YOU are today. The problem was that people like you were allowed to put people like me to death for challenging people like you in their stupidity. That doesn't happen today. The only thing that happens is that there are still STUPID people like you around.. Way too many of them.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Congratulations to both of you for well thought out posts. To Anach. The lack of hard evidence is exactly the problem here. Nobody who believes in the Holocaust has been able to prove that ANY document suggests that anywhere near 6 million people died. The vans were "proven" to be impossible. Zyklon-B is a pesticide and should have left evidence of its use because it would take a lot to kill a person as opposed to using it for delousing purposes. The Jews were tattooed to keep track of them. Something rather absurd if you plan to kill and cremate the bodies. Nobody has provided any solid proof that any of this even could have happened. So it is not an absurd threat. What is absurd is the fact that these ideas aren't being discussed in colleges everywhere and on the Discovery chanel. At least on the same level that they try to prove that the Bible is really just a series of coincidences that can be explained scientifically. I do believe the Holocaust happened. Still doesn't make this thread unneeded.

To Nym. What the fuck is the matter with you? Haven't we learned that if nothing elsecalling names and accusing people of being stupid accomplishes precisely Jack? Posts like that one are meant to be ignoredas they have no merit to the conversation at hand.

 

[nyminus]

Congratulations to both of you for well thought out posts. To Anach. The lack of hard evidence is exactly the problem here. Nobody who believes in the Holocaust has been able to prove that ANY document suggests that anywhere near 6 million people died. The vans were "proven" to be impossible. Zyklon-B is a pesticide and should have left evidence of its use because it would take a lot to kill a person as opposed to using it for delousing purposes. The Jews were tattooed to keep track of them. Something rather absurd if you plan to kill and cremate the bodies. Nobody has provided any solid proof that any of this even could have happened. So it is not an absurd threat. What is absurd is the fact that these ideas aren't being discussed in colleges everywhere and on the Discovery chanel. At least on the same level that they try to prove that the Bible is really just a series of coincidences that can be explained scientifically. I do believe the Holocaust happened. Still doesn't make this thread unneeded.

To Nym. What the fuck is the matter with you? Haven't we learned that if nothing elsecalling names and accusing people of being stupid accomplishes precisely Jack? Posts like that one are meant to be ignoredas they have no merit to the conversation at hand.

Sean. I pretty much resent your attack on me. You go on the attack and argue the technical aspect of a subject and I will argue the psychological. What Anachron wrote brings up an important fact of why such lies like the holocaust are accepted by the mass of people today. In the far distant past, intelligent people didn't argue the substance of something which had not yet been proved, but argued against the stupidity that most people had , that you would fall off the earth if you tried to sail past a certain point.

You may argue and argue the technical points of a subject but what you are arguing against is not that aspect of an issue, but what you are arguing against is STUPIDITY. What you are arguing against is generations of brain dead people that refuse to use their God given brains to dissect an issue. It could be also said that no amount of proof to the contrary will sway these people from their dogmatic beliefs. The only thing left is that you attack their intelligence.

Sean. Your anger shows, just as mine dooes at times, by your haste in posting.

 

[phrodeau]

He must have been breathing diesel fumes for too long.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Do you believe in any way that calling these individuals stupid will make them come around to your way of thinking? That anything can be gained by insulting them? I understand that this is a war of psychology. But calling people stupid doesn't make them take more time to think about the facts, it makes them tune you out. Hense I blasted both sides as I always do when I feel that these debates have degraded into name calling contests. I'm actually interested in the subject so I like it when people give facts and figures and even opinions. But not. You're dumb. No you are. Well your dumber. Well your dumberest. Which seemed to be where this was starting to go.

 

[krastner]

I really hate to be on their side of the argument, but I have to correct you a little.

Yes - Diesel Exhaust is toxic

But NO - it's not that lethal, it'll make you sick, but it'll take hours to kill anybody and it won't be the CO in the exhaust that will do that, as there's hardly any in it.

I hate to have you on my side of an argument too but I know a lot of very old diesel mechanics...they might be strange but they ain't dead..

 

[nyminus]

Do you believe in any way that calling these individuals stupid will make them come around to your way of thinking? That anything can be gained by insulting them? I understand that this is a war of psychology. But calling people stupid doesn't make them take more time to think about the facts, it makes them tune you out. Hense I blasted both sides as I always do when I feel that these debates have degraded into name calling contests. I'm actually interested in the subject so I like it when people give facts and figures and even opinions. But not. You're dumb. No you are. Well your dumber. Well your dumberest. Which seemed to be where this was starting to go.

I thimk I have already stated that I did not wish to have them come around to my way of thinking. I am particular who thinks like I do. Yeah I gain something from insulting them. It's called pleasure and don't tell me that you don't have balls that pull up when you put some idiot asshole down. You might be interested in the subject but I am more interested how people view it. So with or withpout your permission I'll keep insulting them.

 

[krastner]

Thats my Boy...insult away.

 

[nyminus]

Saw this on the web today http://www.bintjbeil.com/E/occupation/ameu_iraqjews.html

It's written by a jew so no one can call him anti semetic. It does give some insight into the criminal behavior and deviousness of the zionist . They have been planning this for a long time and the holocause was just a

 

[Lovelynice]

Ever hear of Zyklon-B? That's what they used at Auschwitz, not the tailpipes of delivery vans..

That was ONLY at Auschwitz.

Eventually we'll get around to Zyklon-B.

The diesel gas chambers and diesel murder vans definitely don't work.

 

[unculbact]

That was ONLY at Auschwitz.

Eventually we'll get around to Zyklon-B.

The diesel gas chambers and diesel murder vans definitely don't work.

There's allegations that Zyklon was also used at Majdanek, Stutthoff and Mauthausen, but they don't check out.

Also, you have to wonder - if there was a central, systematic plan to exterminate people, wouldn't the optimum method have been decided upon in high places, and been ordered in writing as a procedure to be followed by all commands?

That's the way any government works. Instead, the story we're given has local commanders finding their own way, using their own improvised methods. What's systematic about that? For anybody who's even cursorily studied governmental methodology, what's LOGICAL about that?

 

[Big_Drum]

There's allegations that Zyklon was also used at Majdanek, Stutthoff and Mauthausen, but they don't check out.

Also, you have to wonder - if there was a central, systematic plan to exterminate people, wouldn't the optimum method have been decided upon in high places, and been ordered in writing as a procedure to be followed by all commands?

That's the way any government works. Instead, the story we're given has local commanders finding their own way, using their own improvised methods. What's systematic about that? For anybody who's even cursorily studied governmental methodology, what's LOGICAL about that?

It was all hush-hush, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, and secret handshakes

 

[krastner]

It was all hush-hush, wink-wink, nudge-nudge, and secret handshakes

This is a typical reply from a typical Jewidh zionist Israeli supporter. Or maybe a typical Jewish Zionist Israeli. Oi vey oi vey all we got to do is shrug a lot and make hand gestures and look at the gentiles like they are crazy and it will all go away...You wait ...you see...I'm right ..I'm a Jewish zionist Israeli... Sheeeessshhhh or how about Jeassssuuuus sss Chrisssssstttttt.

 

[unculbact]

This is a typical reply from a typical Jewidh zionist Israeli supporter. Or maybe a typical Jewish Zionist Israeli. Oi vey oi vey all we got to do is shrug a lot and make hand gestures and look at the gentiles like they are crazy and it will all go away...You wait ...you see...I'm right ..I'm a Jewish zionist Israeli... Sheeeessshhhh or how about Jeassssuuuus sss Chrisssssstttttt.

That's a little harsh, he was being sarcastic. Geez, does everything have to be an accusation with you?

He got the explanation right. The Wannsee Protocol contains NOTHING about mass extermination, but post-war, everybody said that the document actually contains "code words", including, I guess, the part about the retirement villages.

Same with the Auschwitz construction documents, and Riga transports, etc., code words, code words, and more code words. As Raul Hilberg said, "an incredible meeting of the minds". So incredible, it was never done before and has never been repeated.

So yeah. Wink-wink, nudge-nudge, secret handshake. That really IS the postwar explanation. Total bullshit, but he got it right.

 

[krastner]

Yes I am sarcastic as all get out. By the by have you read this out on Rense today..just for yallzies information

Revisionists only deny one aspect of Holocaust story: Butz
TEHRAN, Feb. 1 (MNA) -- In the wake of the international uproar that arose in response to Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad’s contention that the Holocaust is a myth, the Mehr News Agency spoke with Arthur R. Butz, an associate professor of electrical engineering and computer science at Northwestern University, about his views on the issue.

Following is the text of an interview of Butz conducted on December 26:



In 1976 I published a book entitled "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century", in which I argued:



1. The alleged slaughter of millions of Jews by the Germans, during World War II, did not happen.



2. The extermination allegation is properly termed a hoax, that is to say, a deliberately contrived falsehood. It was not at its source an honest misunderstanding or accidental falsehood.



3. The hoax had a Zionist provenance and motivation. That is, while some of the original obscure stories did not come from Zionist sources, the elevation to allegations repeated by the American and other governments, and major institutions, was due to Zionist circles within those countries, who acted with Zionist motivations.



I continue to maintain those three theses, which have become core features of what is called "Holocaust" revisionism. Apart from some nuances of wording, the three theses were repeated by President Ahmadinejad. Therefore, there can be no question that I endorse his remarks in those respects.



In the years since the publication of my book in 1976 there were two developments that I did not expect:



4. Western countries undertook a massive repression of revisionism. In some cases, particularly in Europe, legally formulated persecution has sent revisionists to prison, in blatant contradiction of the sermons we have given the rest of the world on "human rights" and "freedom". In other cases, revisionists have been ruined professionally with the cooperation of government bodies.



5. The cognizance of the "Holocaust" in the West was transformed into a loud, never-ending series of ceremonies that can only be interpreted as religious in nature.



President Ahmadinejad's remarks also included the last two observations, so of course I also endorse the remarks in those respects. I congratulate him on becoming the first head of state to speak out clearly on these issues, and regret only that it was not a Western head of state.



His political remarks receive no comment on my side. By "political remarks" I mean those that deal with questions of what ought to happen now.



Explanation:



Butz says he is not a Holocaust denier but a Holocaust revisionist. However, he says: I have no objection to being called a "Holocaust denier" provided the meanings of terms are clear. The following has been on my website (http://pubweb.northwestern.edu/~abutz/abhdhr.html) since 1997:



Arthur Butz. Holocaust Denial or Holocaust Revisionism?



A minor question that sometimes arises is the relative merits of the terms "Holocaust denial" and "Holocaust revisionism" to describe the views on the Jewish "extermination" claim that I and others have expressed. Generally, my side says "Holocaust revisionism" and our enemies say "Holocaust denial". I did not originate either term.



I am willing to accept both terms under appropriate circumstances, but I usually say "Holocaust revisionism".



The problem with the term "Holocaust denial" is that it conveys, to most people, a false idea of what we say. For the typical person the term "Holocaust" refers to a complex of events. He thinks of Nazi persecution of Jews, concentration camps, crematoria, dead bodies strewn about camps (especially Belsen) at the end of the war and, of course, "extermination" of millions of Jews in gas chambers located in some camps. Thus he tends to take the meaning of "Holocaust denial" as denial of all of these things, whereas we deny only the last among them. The effect is to make us seem, to passing observers, detached from reality.



In general I prefer the term "Holocaust revisionism" because it does not imply a complete rejection of all that is popularly understood by "Holocaust", and invites the observer to consider carefully what is being accepted and what is being rejected.



On the other hand I, and Holocaust revisionists generally, emphatically reject the "extermination" claim and, by implication, any figure of Jewish dead (due to Nazi policies) in the millions. Provided this is what is clearly meant by "Holocaust", I have no objection to calling my thesis "denial". Such a context of comprehension is sometimes difficult to achieve. An exception is when our enemies speak of us. They understand quite well what we do and do not claim, and they also understand that most in their audiences do not. Thus they use "denial" as a rhetorical device conveying an implicit false representation.



Dr. Arthur R. Butz was born and raised in New York City. He received his bachelor of science and master of science degrees in electrical engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1965 he received his doctorate in control sciences from the University of Minnesota. In 1966 he joined the faculty of Northwestern University (Evanston, Illinois). Dr. Butz is the author of numerous technical papers and the book The Hoax of the Twentieth Century: The case against the presumed extermination of European Jewry. The book is available from the Institute for Historical Review. Since 1980 he has been a member of the Editorial Advisory Committee of The Journal of Historical Review, published by the Institute for Historical Review.

 

[Lovelynice]

That's a little harsh, he was being sarcastic. Geez, does everything have to be an accusation with you?

He got the explanation right. The Wannsee Protocol contains NOTHING about mass extermination, but post-war, everybody said that the document actually contains "code words", including, I guess, the part about the retirement villages.

Same with the Auschwitz construction documents, and Riga transports, etc., code words, code words, and more code words. As Raul Hilberg said, "an incredible meeting of the minds". So incredible, it was never done before and has never been repeated.

So yeah. Wink-wink, nudge-nudge, secret handshake. That really IS the postwar explanation. Total bullshit, but he got it right.

It's all to cover the ridiculousness of the claims lack of any real evidence. Make believe and nonsense.

 

[krastner]

Why the Holocaust must be questioned?

Because there are a lot of insecure people out there who need to question it because it makes them think that they are intelligent. Pedants.

And to think that they are doing it on a literotica message board.

pathetic.

I know you prefer to write about sucking someones infected anus but literotica is for you too...so go find someone to talk about rotten crotches..there are plenty of them here..And guess what ...? you can have all them...


Lovelynice...evre feel like you are casting swine before pearls...wait a minute...that's not right..it's supposed to be casting truths before liars or something kike that..

 

[unculbact]

I recently found this. Seems like a good reason to raise questions.


“World history: There are two world histories. One is the official and full of lies, destined to be taught in schools – the other is the secret history, which harbors the true causes and occurrences.” – Honore de Balzac

I've read very little of Balzac, but looking not just at Holocaust history, but also at Vietnam War history and even, for the love of God, the history of the space program, there is indeed much that is deliberately left out of the official versions.

 

[krastner]

I recently found this. Seems like a good reason to raise questions.


“World history: There are two world histories. One is the official and full of lies, destined to be taught in schools – the other is the secret history, which harbors the true causes and occurrences.” – Honore de Balzac

I've read very little of Balzac, but looking not just at Holocaust history, but also at Vietnam War history and even, for the love of God, the history of the space program, there is indeed much that is deliberately left out of the official versions.

So true....so true... I see where the president of Iran ( thany you God for a real world leader in him) has told the German people to stop bearing the stigma of the holocaust ..enforced on the German people by the Jews...They always wanted to get Germany ever since the world council of Jews declared war on Germany well before WW2 actually started.

The German people are a good people and don't need this crapola..