Holocaust matters

Split from "A new look at the origins of WW2"

Could you elaborate on that I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you mean?

 

Ok, but I think we would need another topic.
Btw: may I ask you why is this so interesting for you?

 

Because it might be disturbing, politically incorrect, revolutionary and/or ridiculous, and people tend to enjoy debates like those.

The very reason for political correctness to exist lies therein that even the most evil chains of thought and ideologies contain some elementary logic; after all, they wouldn't have gotten any support if they hadn't. Therefore people need to be morally prevented from following through with certain lines of thought and ideas. The best way to prevent this is to make certain ideas and ideologies "incorrect", or taboo, unspeakable. It's 'only' to make sure that there won't be another Holocaust, or Nazi regime, or Stalinist regime - which all have certain things to speak for them, unfortunately...

 

I don´t follow how talking about inconsistencies of some aspects of the Holocaust official history could lead to another Holocaust.

Btw: not all evil chains of thoughts contain some elementary logic. Take WITCHES for ex.

 

That about sums it up, and when your whole education teaches you something as an absolute fact it makes you curious when someone argues against it

 

...I am still waiting for the new topic, and Charley - is that all?

 

Thats all. Am I missing something here? :-?

 

I was talking about PC-PI in general. I can't say anything about your remarks yet because you haven't made them. However, it is obvious that both denying the Holocaust ever happened and giving reasons to justify genocide will lead to it happening again some day, simply because people will once again believe that "people can't do that" or "it was a good thing anyway".

In the case of those denying the Holocaust, it isn't even about political correctness, it's about their theory being a big fat lie.

 

Nothing to do with "denying" the mass murder of European Jews, however you call it, with big or small "H". It happened.

There are some people boring small or large holes in the official line and showing that this or that could not happen - so - there was no holocaust!
This is what their agenda is.

In MY PERSONAL opinion there is nothing wrong about discussing the inconsistencies. It is avoiding and covering them that makes the lives of revisionists so exciting and their arguments so persuasive for some people. Why should anybody be afraid to change some dogmas? It is a big mistake.

For some years ago, the official number of killed in Auschwitz was reduced from 4 to 1,2 millions. A huge mistake had been made, originally by Stalinist propaganda gonzo Ilya Ehrenburg, who cried about the 4 millions even before Auschwitz was in Soviet hands (the same guy who appealed to Soviet soldiers to rape German women and kill every German on sight.
It needed some brave people to correct the absurd number. But it changes nothing. Several millions have never been found again. But how and where it happened is not the crux of the problem.

You should see Hebrew discussion sites. You would have believed you´d found a neo-fascist site, by mistake. People discuss that too, and very lively. The official line is not very tenable but nobody has guts to try to correct the inconsistencies openly. And, I repeat, only on Hebrew sites. For obvious reasons.

And as to tact and tone of Israeli/Jewish debates: I´ll only tell you that conc. arrogance and polarizing - I am a quiet donkey by those standards.
:-?

 

Well, I don't care about the standards of other forums, I have the standards of this one to maintain.

Anyway, the topic is yours.

 

Ok, to kick us off - Izaak, could you please explain for the benefit of all about the 'holes that are not there'...

 

Yes, sure.
Irving and other "revisionists" have been pointing out tihs:

In Birkenau, near Auschwits (so called Auschwitz II), by far the largest camp in the area (you remember the place where Schindler´s Jewesses com mistakenly). At the end of the track there were two identical buildings with crematoria, one on each side of the tracks. Several furnaces in each. Perpendicularly to the rail track, behind tne buildings, there were cellars with roofs a little above the niveau of the ground. (We are now talking about the most sacred place in Auschwitz - the main pillar of Holocaust, so to speak).

The official story goes that there were several holes in the roofs, where Germans were pouring cyclon B, into sort of columns of metal meshwhere the gas evaporated.

When the Germans were leaving the camp, they removed the crematory owens (in order to avoid the sort of compromitation as after liberation of another camp, more east - Majdanek, where Soviets found the crematoria and instantenously began to cry loud to the whole world about "gas chambers"). After the more healthy inmates left the camp (they preferred to go with the Germans instead of being left to the Soviets - among them, the primus motor of Holocaust today - Elie Wiesel, who although sick, decided to go),
the buildings were dynamited. In the explosion, the roof of the "gas chambers - or cellars - which were solid slabs of iron enforced concrete, sank into the cellars, like unsuccessful soufflé.
On the left side the whole slab is in perfect condition. There is of course some earth, sand and dirt here and there, but - what is most important - when the guards are gone, one can crawl under the slab and look at the concrete from below.
Which I did. The concrete roof´s pattern of wood (used for pouring the concrete into) is perfectly visible.
And..............there are absolutely no holes (apart from two, very crude and irregular, certainly made purposefully much later - very Soviet style work). So, here is one important problem: As the revisionist say: "No holes - no Holocaust".
I have been looking in the literature - nothing. There is no possibility that the holes were closedwith gypsum or something: everywkere there is continuous, solid concrete. These cellars could not have been used as "gas chambers" as described by many.

This is this sort of thing I think, that should be impartially researched, to find truth. We know the bottom line. But we are not allowed to speculate any more HOW it happened. Gagged....

 

I agree that there are great inconsistances and untruthes purpatrated by all sides to support and deny each others claims.

IMHO I feel that the biggest problem is that the only people investigating the holocaust to any great depth are jews. As such theirs claims are taited by their connection either through their own exaggeration or other peoples claims that the matter is exaggerated.

It is clear that vast swathes of the european population were killed by the germans and this is not restricted to just jews. I think the claims and facts should be thoroughly investigated by independant bodies to provide a clear and accuate history to be held for future generations.

However such an investigation has been difficult within the past 60 years as a lot of locations and witnesses have been inaccesable to the west and obviously it's still a painfull topic to those involved. However a full and free anminsty should be declared to bring forth all the remaining witnesses to document the matter.

Prosecutions now are pointlesss. All those involved are 80 plus and conviction and jail for the rest of their life would probably be only months.

FNG

 

For some reasons this topic is too hot. Powers that be are too sensitive and there are also money involved. Big money. So, no wonder that young (and old) historians either eschew the subject all they can or they "sell their souls" and perpetuate the "party line" ad infinitum.

 

I drafted a very long post, which basically summed up to:

1) not wishing to offend

2) not wishing to make the second holocaust* seem less horrific than people believe

3) because many people will ask: does it matter that those particular chambers were for storage not for gassing?

As somebody who is educated to be a historian, I would say that the whole thing should be looked at. But quietly & 'sensitively', no huge media circus, because then it will turn into a 'Holocaust denied by historians' media hysteria event. :angry:

* First holocaust was the Crusades. Crusaders kiled more Jews whilst travelling to the Holy Land than Muslims while in the Holy Land.

 

How can you say you are being gagged after you've discussed the topic?

I don't think it's a problem to discuss details like these, since I for one don't really care how it happened; the Nazis killed off 12 million people in death camps, that information suffices to condemn the regime. Therefore as long as you accept that, and as long as that stands above doubt, you can argue all you want about whether they used gas or clubs to do the killing.

 

I agree with Roel, the facts matter as much as the principal.

It makes no difference if they killed 2 or 20 million or how they did it.

It should be fully investigated, documented and the facts laid down with credable evidence.

FNG

 

I am inclined to agree with Roel, that the fact that millions were killed for no reason other than their religion, ancestry, sexuality etc is more important than the precise method used. On the other hand if the Holocaust did not happen in the manner we were brought up to believe it did it is something that should be investigated, but something that must be with great sensitivity.
To explain my interest in this thread a little better than last night, I have very strong views on those who deny the holocaust. While I am neither Jewish nor Gypsy one of my brothers is Gay and the knowledge that had we been born in Germany in the twenties he would have been gassed for it is an extremely unpleasant feeling.

 

I agree with you above.
The problem is that the whole subject has become such an icon that a serious discussion is not well received (what our little forum means? A few people...). The denial to investigate facts by unbiased historians and their very fear of the subject is problematic.
I told you in the beginning: WE KNOW THE BOTTOM LINE. Nobody´s going to get hurt (if he has a good case) if things happened some other way than the official.
It is the Establishmental refusal to investigate seriously some very pertinent facts that feeds the revisionists and neo-nazis. They find a little thing and, in their eyes the whole edifice is gone. Like the non-existent holes in the most important sanctuary of Holocaust. I WANTED to find them, but they weren´t there.....

Again - the numbers. It really doesn´t matter how many. But the fact that the official number in Auschwitz was reduced by 3 millions (without reducing the overall toll) is very suspicious for the revisionists. HOW COME???

And who in the first place began to cry about the 6 millions? The same rabid dog Ilya Ehrenburg, without having a shread of evidence. Since, the whole world was repeating after him: six millions....... Who knows how many?

Why didn´t Soviets allow any foreign investigators and journalists in Auschwitz for many years after 1944? Maybe just because they were using the camp as concentration camp for their political adversaries and Germans....
Then, they opened the camp with festivitas and showed a "gas chamber".
Many years later, they have been forced to admit that it was just "a reconstruction" and in reality the building had been a lazarett during the years of war. Such things alo please revisionists. (This is the "gas chamber" they are showing in TV all the time).

And last but not least: the tendency to make Holocaust something very special and unique in the history of Jewry and World, in itself works opposite the alleged purposes: makes people tired of the whole thing and shows very starkly the, otherwise well hidden Jewish racism.
Believe me, for once, what I´m saying - the above sentence is more true than you´d like to believe.

 

details

there are creditable reports of gas chambers that cannot be ignored. ditto ovens, mass graves, firing squads, and everything we assocate the the whole commonly held history. where some people make a mistake is thinking that lack of a detail in one camp automaticly proves it was missing in all. each camp was built to its own plan and had its own oddities. the mislabeling of one item fails to prove that such an item never existed. the fact that the germans felt it necessary to try to cover up the evidence is in itself ample proof of what went on there. it is quite common for buildings to be misidentfied in latter years so it should suprise no one that we would see it at some death camp.