Comments on other threads.

[Keen]

SS staff admitted camps such as TII were used for gassings... blah, blah, blah...

Look at the mentally ill pathologically lying POS HC cult member attemt to steer the conversation away from all the "huge mass grave" lies it's been caught in.

Why are you running from this:

viewtopic.php?p=24577#p24577

and this:

viewtopic.php?p=24578#p24578

you coward?

[Nessie]

Stubble

viewtopic.php?p=24934#p24934

Can someone explain to me like I am 5 years old why a pair of shoes are 'proof of genocide'?

Shoes on their own, are not proof of mass murder. No one who understands anything about large and major crime investigations, such as mass murder, will think that one piece of evidence on its own can act as proof. The piles of shoes found at various camps, is one piece of circumstantial evidence of mass murder.

The shoes and other personal property, corroborate the claims of witnesses that everything was seized from those who were gassed, in undressing rooms next to the chambers. The circumstances fit, as in if many people are killed, they do not need their shoes any more, so somewhere expect to find lots of shoes. There is a chronology of people are told to bring personal effects with them on the transports, they arrive and are told to hand over all of the personal effects before showering. They are not showered, so they do not get their effects back, instead they are killed. That leaves their personal effects to be sorted and sold by the Nazis. Each part of that chronology of events is evidence, by witnesses, documents recording the seized property and piles of that property left behind at the camps.

The piles of shoes also do not fit with the revisionist narrative of relocation and resettlement. If that had happened, then why was the personal effects of the prisoners left behind at A-B? What were those prisoners wearing when they were resettled? Revisionists cannot produce an evidenced chronology of events that explains piles of shoes at A-B. The circumstances do not fit the resettlement narrative.

[HansHill]

You are a fool, simple as.

https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/objec ... rtees/832/

[Stubble]

She goes on about the shoes for 20 minutes. Surely she found something at Treblinka, something, anything.

Why go on about Wiernik's handler at the Eichmann trial for 20 minutes?

She also mentions 3 names, but, she carefully couches it as 'we know they went, but, I don't know that they died there, so, they may turn up some place else'.

How the fuck can you not know the names of any people who died there short of a guy from an orphanage, and apparently, also the children. Like, not know any of the names, at all.

It is mind boggling.

Then she talks about how there must be grave spaces outside the extermination area. She doesn't straight up say 'the population of Seattle won't fit as a liquid', but the implication is there.

We are left with shoes, always, shoes...

[Nessie]

She goes on about the shoes for 20 minutes. Surely she found something at Treblinka, something, anything.

Why go on about Wiernik's handler at the Eichmann trial for 20 minutes?

She also mentions 3 names, but, she carefully couches it as 'we know they went, but, I don't know that they died there, so, they may turn up some place else'.

How the fuck can you not know the names of any people who died there short of a guy from an orphanage, and apparently, also the children. Like, not know any of the names, at all.

It is mind boggling.

Then she talks about how there must be grave spaces outside the extermination area. She doesn't straight up say 'the population of Seattle won't fit as a liquid', but the implication is there.

We are left with shoes, always, shoes...

Do you understand my explanation of how shoes are part of the circumstantial evidence and not on their own proof?

[Stubble]

I understand you point of view Nessie, to be sure, I don't think shoes are evidence of mass murder when on intake personal property, including shoes, was surrendered and sets of uniforms, including shoes, were issued. The focus on shoes is to me very, very odd. Especially in this presentation from Colls where a single pair is a focus.

I am left gobsmacked that the 'best evidence' for mass murder is shoes everybody agrees were collected.

[Nessie]

I understand you point of view Nessie, to be sure, I don't think shoes are evidence of mass murder.../

Your thread was asking if shoes are PROOF of mass murder, which they are not. They are part of the EVIDENCE of mass murder. Learn the difference.

... when on intake personal property, including shoes, was surrendered and sets of uniforms, including shoes, were issued. The focus on shoes is to me very, very odd. Especially in this presentation from Colls where a single pair is a focus.

I am left gobsmacked that the 'best evidence' for mass murder is shoes everybody agrees were collected.

It is not the best evidence, you are confused.

[HansHill]

I understand you point of view Nessie, to be sure, I don't think shoes are evidence of mass murder.../

Your thread was asking if shoes are PROOF of mass murder, which they are not. They are part of the EVIDENCE of mass murder. Learn the difference.

... when on intake personal property, including shoes, was surrendered and sets of uniforms, including shoes, were issued. The focus on shoes is to me very, very odd. Especially in this presentation from Colls where a single pair is a focus.

I am left gobsmacked that the 'best evidence' for mass murder is shoes everybody agrees were collected.

It is not the best evidence, you are confused.

Reported. Bad faith argument. Missing the point. Disingenuous.

Stubble obviously knows it isn't proof of anything, he is asking contextually in light of the video presented that you must not have watched, where indeed it is discussed about using shoes as the "best evidence", as opposed to, say, "scattered skulls" that were left behind by Bermann according to his own quote. Why chose a shoe over a skull?

Stop being disingenuous. Stop your incessant stream of slop.

[Stubble]

Maybe the shoes weighed less and fit in his luggage better than a picture of corpses spread over a 2 hectare area, up to 7 meters deep, equivalent to 56 swimming pools?

I wonder why Colls chose to talk about air photo evidence of graves between the work camp and the murder mill instead of talking about the swimming pools.

[Nessie]

I understand you point of view Nessie, to be sure, I don't think shoes are evidence of mass murder.../

Your thread was asking if shoes are PROOF of mass murder, which they are not. They are part of the EVIDENCE of mass murder. Learn the difference.

... when on intake personal property, including shoes, was surrendered and sets of uniforms, including shoes, were issued. The focus on shoes is to me very, very odd. Especially in this presentation from Colls where a single pair is a focus.

I am left gobsmacked that the 'best evidence' for mass murder is shoes everybody agrees were collected.

It is not the best evidence, you are confused.

Reported. Bad faith argument. Missing the point. Disingenuous.

Stubble obviously knows it isn't proof of anything, he is asking contextually in light of the video presented that you must not have watched, where indeed it is discussed about using shoes as the "best evidence", as opposed to, say, "scattered skulls" that were left behind by Bermann according to his own quote. Why chose a shoe over a skull?

Stop being disingenuous. Stop your incessant stream of slop.

He is mixing up the terms evidence and proof and using them inappropriately. The video is not viewable for me, hence I have not commented on it.

[HansHill]

Why in God's name are you commenting then? Keep your idiotic nonsense to yourself.

[Nessie]

Borjastick

viewtopic.php?p=25048#p25048

I've seen the pile of shoes display many times on the internet and the idiots who comment on this and similar displays and how they think it is absolute proof of mass murder and gas chambers.

I think the issue is people getting the terms proof and evidence mixed up. Proof comes from evidence. Evidence is eyewitnesses, documents etc and includes physical items such as shoes. Proof is when there is sufficient, verified, credible, corroborating evidence to show that a claim is confirmed as correct.

We know that the camp system went through clothing and personal belongings and sent much of it back to Germany for re-use. It does not prove anything more than just that.

The piles of shoes and other property, is physical evidence corroborating the claims of seizure of the personal property of those who arrived at the camps. It is also circumstantial evidence of mass killing, since killing someone means that their personal property is now available for re-use. It is inconsistent with the revisionist claims of mass resettlement, as it means people were supposedly resettled with no shoes, clothing or other personal possessions.

[Stubble]

Why in God's name are you commenting then? Keep your idiotic nonsense to yourself.

I would hate for anyone to see this meme and not get it. Here is a video from Xurious;

[Nessie]

I met Enoch Powell when he came to my university to present a lecture on monetarism. He was asked about the Rivers of Blood speech afterwards and he gave it a very strong defence, saying he used strong wording to get the point over, that uncontrolled immigration and a lack of integration is a danger. I think he was right.

[Keen]

The piles of shoes is also circumstantial evidence of mass killing

At Treblinka II alone the physical evidence that would be in the fraudulently alleged "huge mass graves" (IF the orthodox story was true) would be 6.75 million pounds of bone fragments / comeplete skeletons, including about 29 million teeth - and the retard is talking about shoes.