Nessie wrote:Living in camps and ghettos. The logistics accommodating, clothing, feeding and guarding millions of Jews in 1944 would have left a lot of documentary and eyewitness evidence.
All we know is that they were put into "quarantine" and that this was part of postwar resettlement plans and also that this entire process was kept very secret due to the controversy it entailed. You have this assumption that documentation of such a top-secret facility (or set thereof) would leave documentation like Auschwitz or other facilities
which were not near the Eastern front and were under entirely different administrative structure. But there is no reason to assume either that:
- Documentation was kept to a similar standard
- Documentation was maintained in the same locations
- Documentation should have survived post-war in Soviet hands
What we do have is
official plans to resettle Jews, bizarre weaponized propaganda making it necessary to conceal perceived atrocities or the location of potential partisan recruits and subversives, and statements which we have every reason to consider authoritative and genuine (e.g. Goebbels' diary) stating plainly that these specific Jews were not genocided but, instead, "in quarantine" in the East.
Nessie wrote:There is evidence of huge areas of disturbed ground containing cremated remains and the disposal of cremains in rivers at A-B. You just chose not to believe that evidence, so you have to speculate. I don't speculate, I follow the evidence.
It is you who has to speculate, Nessie. Revisionists have taken the only attempts in earnest to ascertain any reasonable estimate of the
actual quantity of human remains at any of these sites. By all accounts, when analysis is
proportionate to the evidence reported on in the physical investigations, the number of corpses at these sites
fall short by orders of magnitude to what they should be, if your narrative were true. This is critical because, if the 'Holocaust' is true, there absolutely
must be upwards of millions of Jews buried at these precise locations. Finding a
tiny fraction of this figure is far more supportive of these sites having been used as mass cremation facilities on occasion but primarily for property sorting and transit, which is exactly what the documentation indicates 'Aktion Reinhardt' was all about.
Nessie wrote:There is evidence of what happened to Jews who ended up on the Soviet side of the front line. Many got sent to gulags, as the Soviets did not trust them. The issue is the Jews who were arrested by the Nazis. They are the ones for whom evidence trails run out, primarily inside only 5 camps.
There is scant evidence of what happened to
some Jews on the Soviet side, and yes, the Soviets didn't trust them. This means expulsion or mass murder was by no means off the list, or at least targeting their Jewish identity to press for assimilation. But the question is also whether the Soviets saw value in postwar 'denazification' efforts (this is certainly the case). Either way, the Soviet attitude and position toward Jews at this time is deeply problematic for your position.
Nessie wrote:Callafangers wrote:We can assume Jews and their communist networks were disconnected from postwar 'denazification' efforts and awareness of the role of a supposed 'millions of missing Jews' in that narrative and would prefer instead to be documented as "found" rather than "gassed".
We can speculate that someone should/would have been looking for a particular set of displaced Jews postwar and documenting their timelines and travels. We can assume there were no Jews who might have contradicted your narrative, had they been asked 60 years ago while they were still alive.
You are admitting the use of assumption and speculation, rather than evidence. The bottom line is, you cannot evidence what happened.
My statements were written tongue-in-cheek, clearly. The point is: Jews
were overwhelmingly involved in communist networks hell-bent on sowing anti-German atrocity narratives. This is indisputable. The stark and inexplicable, highly-unusual pattern of lies within anti-German testimony
counts as compelling evidence that such efforts were prevalent in key claims of the 'Holocaust'. There are hundreds if not thousands of such examples, compared to your mere dozens of witnesses who tell anything resembling a viable and evidence-based genocide narrative.
Nessie wrote:We can pretend your pool of witnesses is honest (or at least mostly so) and that wartime liars suddenly became interested in universal truth and that their having literally conquered the world is totally inconsequential in being able to shape its narratives thereafter.
It is terrible for you, when you admit to having to pretend.
We can pretend to believe that despite all of the liars we know exist, not a single one of them ever made it into the historical or postwar trial archives to meddle with the record, for better or worse.
We can do all of this assumption, speculation, etc. and maybe then do you have a point.
I follow the evidence, to establish what happened. You assume, speculate and pretend.
Or let's just keep it real: you can say nothing of the 'people who would have left a lot of evidence', given that you haven't found them -- and not finding them much better reflects movement than 'extermination'.
Not being able to find people, fits better with extermination, than movement.
You
need them to be buried under Treblinka, though...
because how else can you face your son at his bar mitzvah and tell him it'll be easy to keep swindling the goyim?
That comment explains your motive and why you believe in a hoax so impossible, that it is akin to believing the earth is flat.
You are really struggling to understand sarcasm, ridicule, etc. You receive it so often that you can't tell the difference anymore.
