"best case for the Holocaust" essay question and metacommentary

[bombsaway]

Just post the testimony where he denies "any gassings". You're going to get shredded here. Morgen was not a friend or defender of the regime. At best you can just say he was forced or cajoled into saying things by 'powers', just like all the rest. Denial. no way.

[Stubble]

Don't recall if he did or not. Do recall getting taken to school by Nick about him saying there was a gas chamber at Buchenwald. He didn't. I thought he did, but, he didn't.

New thread dropped;

viewtopic.php?t=761

[Gallius]

Give me a single transcript from a perpetrator who worked in so called extermination areas but claims to not have known people were being killed there.

Hi. Speaking of quirks, can you provide/cite any autopsy reports confirming the death of Jews caused by gassing during World War 2? Please help because

When I first asked AI it evaded the question. Then when pressed it appeared to concede that there are none. How is that possible when the alleged claims are so astronomical? Thanking you in advance.

[Gallius]

I think that if you can't source a quote, you shouldn't use it.

'No level playing field' is just a possible explanation for why there aren't any contradictory testimonies, but yeah there aren't. Baer said mass gassings happened in Auschwitz II. Morgen gave extensive information on gassings at the Reinhardt camps.

Fuchs testified to Jews getting gassed.

I'll leave it at this I guess. Good luck.

Hi. I read the other thread about Morgan’s testimony. Most persuasive to me were his initial statements sternly denying the existence of gas chambers. Why? a) there is little in the way of other forensic evidence (e.g. like any autopsy reports of Jewish prisoners to confirm death by gassing) to contradict this initial testimony, b) the subsequent statements are disjointed from the initial testimony suggesting an attitude adjustment had been performed… Meanwhile How in good faith can his initial statements be brutally deleted from the record by “objective scholars” who then refer to his later statements as if they meet some gold standard of eye witness testimony? Is that not a form of historical gerrymandering?

FYI, the gold standard of eye witness testimony is to give revelatory evidence that the prosecution could not have known, like the location of a missing body or weapon. Did Morgan’s testimony about gas chambers ever have that sort of physical corroboration? That is what made Ariel Toaff’s first edition of Bloody Passover so incendiary. He located and described confessions from the accused that imparted information the prosecution did not understand but did indeed confirm these were cases of ritual Jewish murder.

In terms of solid and undeniable evidence of a mass murder I recommend the use of the Katyn forest massacre as a kind of gold standard. Never minding the push and shove blame game* that followed the discovery and announcement of the mass graves. I am referring simply to the physical evidence of mass murder. According to Wikipedia today 21,768 Polish intelligentsia are confirmed to have been killed and a total of 22,000 are estimated to have been killed. These numbers differ by about one percent. How does that compare to the actual number of (confirmed Jewish) bodies/remains recovered v. the total estimated/declared number of Jews killed under German occupation? Is there even a 1:10 ratio? If not, what kind of supporting physical evidence is there to fill this gap of evidence? If lacking this, why is it such a heresy to harbor doubts, whether innocuous or even strident, about the alleged six million victims?

*Of course who committed the mass murder is all important. I am just saying, because of the politics and propaganda, the certainty of this is less – according to some -- than the mere fact of a huge number of Polish men were found murdered and buried in the Katyn forest. That fact everyone agrees on. But an interesting parallel should be noted here when comparing this case to the Nazi “confessions” of gassing and cremating Jews. That being the "confession" of Arno Durre:

"One of them, Arno Dürre, who was charged with murdering numerous civilians using machine-guns in Soviet villages, confessed to having taken part in the burial (though not the execution) of 15,000 to 20,000 Polish POWs in Katyn. For this he was spared execution and was given 15 years of hard labor. His confession was full of absurdities, and thus he was not used as a Soviet prosecution witness during the Nuremberg trials. He later recanted his confession, claiming the investigators forced him to confess through torture."

In here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_mas ... ecision-10

[Wahrheitssucher]

Hi. I read the other thread about Morgan’s testimony.
Most persuasive to me were his initial statements sternly denying the existence of gas chambers.
Why?
a) there is little in the way of other forensic evidence (e.g. like any autopsy reports of Jewish prisoners to confirm death by gassing) to contradict this initial testimony,
b) the subsequent statements are disjointed from the initial testimony suggesting an attitude adjustment had been performed…
Meanwhile How in good faith can his initial statements be brutally deleted from the record by “objective scholars” who then refer to his later statements as if they meet some gold standard of eye witness testimony? Is that not a form of historical gerrymandering?

I’m very pleased to read this post by you Gallius, as Stubbles, Archie and Bombsaway seemed not to be able to grasp this rather simple point.

[Gallius]

Hi. I read the other thread about Morgan’s testimony.
Most persuasive to me were his initial statements sternly denying the existence of gas chambers.
Why?
a) there is little in the way of other forensic evidence (e.g. like any autopsy reports of Jewish prisoners to confirm death by gassing) to contradict this initial testimony,
b) the subsequent statements are disjointed from the initial testimony suggesting an attitude adjustment had been performed…
Meanwhile How in good faith can his initial statements be brutally deleted from the record by “objective scholars” who then refer to his later statements as if they meet some gold standard of eye witness testimony? Is that not a form of historical gerrymandering?

I’m very pleased to read this post by you Gallius, as Stubbles, Archie and Bombsaway seemed not to be able to grasp this rather simple point.

Hi. Thanks. I am a newbie to this “most intensively studied and rigorously documented” slice of human history. I invite edification, this time regarding quirks in Nazi Concentration Camps, the 1945 film by George Stevens. Anyone who has watched this film, especially for a child as I did decades ago, will have etched into their minds the countless thousands of naked dead bodies, their sunken eyes staring into the void, being tossed or shoved by bulldozer into mass graves.

That does leave an impression. But is the narrative accurate and do the images really constitute evidence to support the narrative? Or is it more in the way of propaganda? i.e. Was anything important being left out? Something in the context, say, that might completely alter the take away conclusions after viewing the film?

For example, the bombing, bombing and the bombing. the film does not explain how Germany had been flattened by years of bombing by Allied forces. It does not explain the vast destruction and collapse of infrastructure where often there was no running water, no electricity... and no food! Given this context, how would viewers tend answer this multiple choice question:

Based on the appearance of the dead bodies in this film, the primary cause of death was:

a) machine gun fire
b) pushed off of cliffs
c) poison gassing of relative healthy camp arrivals
d) dog attack
e) starvation

Actually context is hardly necessary when most of the bodies are only skin and bones. The multiple choice question itself reveals a huge crack in the narrative. The context gives the aha, a better explanation. It was not a “plan”. The dissidents’ explanation about the condition of the camps is far more plausible. It also explains why the Allies were keen to cover up and shift the blame for what amounts to a huge case of… friendly famine.

Continued

In the discussion of the gas chambers, the film shows a close up of one single shower head and one small can of Zyklon B. Yep, one and one. Okay, they include a couple pipes and turn wheel used “to control pressure”. But that is it. Is this seriously meant to serve as proof for posterity of a high tech murder weapon that effectively killed millions of people? Perhaps the footage and claim the lamp shade was made of human skin, and the two shrunken heads are “of Nazi origin” are real. Perhaps they are not, and it was just an innocent mistake. In either case, there is no excuse for failing to provide better evidence to support the claim of gas chambers.

Now consider this. Earlier in the film (~14:00 minutes in) we are shown the Hadaman Concentration Camp where viewers are told. “Under the guise of an insane asylum, this has been the headquarters for the systematic murder of 35,000 Poles, Germans and Russians…”

Okay, maybe. Go on.

“Meanwhile at the graveyard attached to the [Hadaman mental] institution, bodies are exhumed for autopsy. Twenty thousand are buried here. Fifteen thousand who died in a lethal gas chamber, were cremated and their ashed interred.”

STOP. Back up. Questions:

1. How did they know the ashes they recovered were the remains of 15,000 (fifteen thousand) people? Counting teeth, death reports, or by what means is this number corroborated?
2. How did they know those alleged 15,000 bodies had been killed by lethal gassing?
3. Where or where did all the autopsy reports go?

Clearly, this film does not suffice to resolve these sorts of questions. They do not even bother to show the gas chamber alleged at this site. Just more dead bodies. Many more dead bodies. Were gas chambers in the raw footage and edited out? Why or why not? What gives? Show the murder weapon.

Again, I welcome and expect edification because there must be ready answers to such simple questions.

[Gallius]

Just post the testimony where he denies "any gassings". You're going to get shredded here. Morgen was not a friend or defender of the regime. At best you can just say he was forced or cajoled into saying things by 'powers', just like all the rest. Denial. no way.

Preamble: I knew a USAF pilot that flew bombing missions during the Korean War. Very upright fellow, very honest and forthcoming. Good husband and father. No reason to doubt his moral compass was impaired or missing. Even though I can imagine, while following orders, he was responsible for killing hundreds or thousands of Korean civilians by blowing up dams and causing floods. Still, I doubt he’d be so flippant as to go by the nickname “Bombs Away”. That takes a special kind of humor.

Synopsis: The official Holocaust story is problematic due to a plethora of extraordinarily dubious claims and a highly frustrating dearth of physical evidence. A new meta-narrative is imperative.

Key historical revisions deserving broadcast to the general public and posterity include:

1. The appalling conditions of the concentration camps at the end of World War 2 were primarily the result of “friendly famine”, i.e. mass starvation and infectious disease as a result of the Allied forces bombing away upon German infrastructure and population centers. Post war propaganda by the Allies sought to shift blame for the grotesque debacle of causing famine in the camps.

2. The legend of the homicidal gas chambers rests too much on “eye-witness” testimony while other hard evidence to corroborate their actual existence, lethality/operational safety, logistical capacity, and managerial organization at scale, remains skimpy and contradictory. Having no autopsies confirming poison gas as the cause of death is no small missing piece of evidence. Furthermore, Stories of diesel engine exhaust, which has very low levels of carbon monoxide, killing lots of people in barely 30 minutes cannot be taken seriously except as proof the official story is contaminated to some degree with falsehoods.

3. The alleged numbers of Jews killed by Nazi Germany in the official story is not based on an actual skull count, a tooth count or any hard physical evidence of that sort as was used to estimate the number of Polish intelligentsia murdered by Soviet forces in the Katyn Forest Massacre. The estimates of Jews killed and cremated in WW2 depend on claims which do not hold up especially well under various angles of scrutiny. In fact the claim of six million Jews killed was erected before such totals could have been properly confirmed. The biography of Abba Kovner illustrates this when his obsession to murder six million Germans was cemented in his vengeance-filled mind early in the summer of 1945, some six months before the first Nuremberg trial even began. Clearly he believed 6 million was the number to kill in kind, but who told him and how did they know barely a month after Germany was defeated?



4. The outlawing of Holocaust doubt and dissent across numerous countries is an egregious assault on free speech and free inquiry. Imprisoning people for such “thought crime” is the crime that needs to be stopped. Having doubts about a slice of history for which the evidence is in fact rather tenuous is not a big deal, let alone a dangerous heresy that threatens the social order. This silly non sequitur is the result of a sort of militant Judeo lese majeste law now in effect in what could be considered a Pax Judaica. This affront on common sense and liberty should be rejected with satire and moral outrage and everything in between.

5. The Holocaust narrative is like a canon behind that old harpoon “anti-semitism”. It has been used as weapon, shield and shake down device for all manner of crime, mischief and malfeasance. As when Alejandro Mayorkas invoked his family being victims of the Holocaust when being questioned too aggressively in Congress about his treasonous open borders policy during the Biden Administration. The Holocaust card gets played by Jews all the time, especially when they are caught with their hand in the cookie jar. Now that Israel has taken its genocidal mask off with the daily mass murder of Palestinians over the past two years, with Palestinian children violently killed now numbering in the tens of thousands, it is time to reject the Holocaust survivor claim as privilege for malevolent conduct and license to routinely commit assassinations and mass murder.

Veritas filia temporis

[Wahrheitssucher]

Just post the… blah, blah, blah, blah

Preamble: I knew a USAF pilot that flew bombing missions during the Korean War. Very upright fellow, very honest and forthcoming. Good husband and father. No reason to doubt his moral compass was impaired or missing. Even though I can imagine, while following orders, he was responsible for killing hundreds or thousands of Korean civilians by blowing up dams and causing floods. Still, I doubt he’d be so flippant as to go by the nickname “Bombs Away”. That takes a special kind of humor.

Synopsis: The official Holocaust story is problematic due to a plethora of extraordinarily dubious claims and a highly frustrating dearth of physical evidence. A new meta-narrative is imperative.

Key historical revisions deserving broadcast to the general public and posterity include:

1. The appalling conditions of the concentration camps at the end of World War 2 were primarily the result of “friendly famine”, i.e. mass starvation and infectious disease as a result of the Allied forces bombing away upon German infrastructure and population centers. Post war propaganda by the Allies sought to shift blame for the grotesque debacle of causing famine in the camps.

2. The legend of the homicidal gas chambers rests too much on “eye-witness” testimony while other hard evidence to corroborate their actual existence, lethality/operational safety, logistical capacity, and managerial organization at scale, remains skimpy and contradictory. Having no autopsies confirming poison gas as the cause of death is no small missing piece of evidence. Furthermore, Stories of diesel engine exhaust, which has very low levels of carbon monoxide, killing lots of people in barely 30 minutes cannot be taken seriously except as proof the official story is contaminated to some degree with falsehoods.

3. The alleged numbers of Jews killed by Nazi Germany in the official story is not based on an actual skull count, a tooth count or any hard physical evidence of that sort as was used to estimate the number of Polish intelligentsia murdered by Soviet forces in the Katyn Forest Massacre. The estimates of Jews killed and cremated in WW2 depend on claims which do not hold up especially well under various angles of scrutiny. In fact the claim of six million Jews killed was erected before such totals could have been properly confirmed. The biography of Abba Kovner illustrates this when his obsession to murder six million Germans was cemented in his vengeance-filled mind early in the summer of 1945, some six months before the first Nuremberg trial even began. Clearly he believed 6 million was the number to kill in kind, but who told him and how did they know barely a month after Germany was defeated?



4. The outlawing of Holocaust doubt and dissent across numerous countries is an egregious assault on free speech and free inquiry. Imprisoning people for such “thought crime” is the crime that needs to be stopped. Having doubts about a slice of history for which the evidence is in fact rather tenuous is not a big deal, let alone a dangerous heresy that threatens the social order. This silly non sequitur is the result of a sort of militant Judeo lese majeste law now in effect in what could be considered a Pax Judaica. This affront on common sense and liberty should be rejected with satire and moral outrage and everything in between.

5. The Holocaust narrative is like a canon behind that old harpoon “anti-semitism”. It has been used as weapon, shield and shake down device for all manner of crime, mischief and malfeasance. As when Alejandro Mayorkas invoked his family being victims of the Holocaust when being questioned too aggressively in Congress about his treasonous open borders policy during the Biden Administration. The Holocaust card gets played by Jews all the time, especially when they are caught with their hand in the cookie jar. Now that Israel has taken its genocidal mask off with the daily mass murder of Palestinians over the past two years, with Palestinian children violently killed now numbering in the tens of thousands, it is time to reject the Holocaust survivor claim as privilege for malevolent conduct and license to routinely commit assassinations and mass murder.

Veritas filia temporis

This post was a pleasure to read.
Well said Gallius!

It is a summarisation that deserves to be read repeatedly, IMO.

Is there a way to pin posts like this so that they are flagged somehow and can be viewed by first-time visitors?

It is an excellent, concise-and-yet-detailed overview of the monstrous misinformation campaign foisted upon humanity under the vague and imprecise rubric ‘holocaust’.

Point 1 in particular, is a fairly obvious truth that doesn’t get repeated enough.

The traumatising film of the victims of Allied destruction of infrastructure at Bergen Belsen was presented post-war as one of the primary evidences for there really having been a beastly, calculated and planned mass-murder. Gullible dupes invariably refer to it when I inform them that the mass-gassing mythology does not withstand close scrutiny: “but, but, I’ve seen film of it!” they reply, in shock and horror that anyone would dare to contest the compulsory credo.
And yet the film of skeletal, naked, typhus victims is so OBVIOUSLY not film of recently arrived civilians who’ve been stripped then gassed.
And yet the brain-washed bozos still believe.