No Holocaust victims have been actually identified

[AreYouSirius]

The reason why you want to reject eyewitness claims, is because you know it is 100% in my favour.

100%? Really?

100% of the “eyewitness” claims? One Hundred Percent?

Even the fantastical anecdotes peddled in mainstream media that are contradictory with each other, or physically impossible, or found to have been faked?

100%!

Your past college elective class related to detective work sure is proving to be invaluable to this discourse.

[borjastick]

The reason why you want to reject eyewitness claims, is because you know it is 100% in my favour.

100%? Really?

100% of the “eyewitness” claims? One Hundred Percent?

Even the fantastical anecdotes peddled in mainstream media that are contradictory with each other, or physically impossible, or found to have been faked?

100%!

Your past college elective class related to detective work sure is proving to be invaluable to this discourse.

I move to have 'contributors' like Mrs Nessie Pants removed from commenting on this site. They add nothing, have no intention of learning anything or possibly even changing their position and come here ad nauseam simply to lie, frustrate, convolute, obstruct and be a pain in the arse. What's the benefit of these people being able to comment here? In my view this forum should be for Revisionists only so we can associate and gather and share information which we would generally, though perhaps not always, agree with.

[TlsMS93]

I move to have 'contributors' like Mrs Nessie Pants removed from commenting on this site. They add nothing, have no intention of learning anything or possibly even changing their position and come here ad nauseam simply to lie, frustrate, convolute, obstruct and be a pain in the arse. What's the benefit of these people being able to comment here? In my view this forum should be for Revisionists only so we can associate and gather and share information which we would generally, though perhaps not always, agree with.

But that would be making him a martyr. “See?” “They are intolerant and don’t like to debate.”

The best thing would be to ignore comments that are empty of verifiable content until he gets tired of it, either changing his stance or going to talk to himself.

I think we are the ones who give too much weight to what he says, the problem lies more with ourselves when we lower ourselves to his pamphleteering.

[borjastick]

I move to have 'contributors' like Mrs Nessie Pants removed from commenting on this site. They add nothing, have no intention of learning anything or possibly even changing their position and come here ad nauseam simply to lie, frustrate, convolute, obstruct and be a pain in the arse. What's the benefit of these people being able to comment here? In my view this forum should be for Revisionists only so we can associate and gather and share information which we would generally, though perhaps not always, agree with.

But that would be making him a martyr. “See?” “They are intolerant and don’t like to debate.”

The best thing would be to ignore comments that are empty of verifiable content until he gets tired of it, either changing his stance or going to talk to himself.

I think we are the ones who give too much weight to what he says, the problem lies more with ourselves when we lower ourselves to his pamphleteering.

Maybe, perhaps, sort of, as well as and all that. I don't care if he and they see themselves as martyrs, I really don't care. They bring nothing, add nothing and will never give up because they are a)paid to do this and b)too dumb to work it all out. Truth is not important to them, quite the opposite in fact.

[HansHill]

I think Nessie posting here gives some value, in that he gives revisionists extremely easy lay ups. Its wrong to think a casual browser to CODOH from the wild will spend much time combing through every thread. When they see a revisionist easily dunking on Nessie's nonsense, that is a net-positive for revisionism.

The fact that it's repetitious is irrelevant when a newcomer only sees it once. If on the other hand that newcomer does hang around and then Nessie's nonsense becomes repetitious, well then that's also a net positive for revisionism because it makes him look silly and desperate (the orthodox position in a nutshell really)

[Nessie]

The reason why you want to reject eyewitness claims, is because you know it is 100% in my favour.

100%? Really?

100% of the “eyewitness” claims? One Hundred Percent?

Even the fantastical anecdotes peddled in mainstream media that are contradictory with each other, or physically impossible, or found to have been faked?

100%!

Your past college elective class related to detective work sure is proving to be invaluable to this discourse.

Yes, 100% of those who worked inside an AR camp, Chelmno or an A-B Krema, states it was used for gassings. There is no witness who states there was a different process to gassings.

There is no contradiction about mass murder inside chambers. There is minimal disagreement as to how people died inside the chambers, but that is explained by hearsay and not all AR camp witnesses worked at the gas chambers. What revisionists call contradictions are just expected differences in how witnesses describe the gassing process. The physical impossibility claim is merely the argument from incredulity. None of the witnesses who gave testimony at the numerous trials, or by historians, have been proved to be faked.

[HansHill]

Yes, 100% of those who worked inside an AR camp, Chelmno or an A-B Krema, states it was used for gassings. There is no witness who states there was a different process to gassings.

There is no contradiction about mass murder inside chambers. There is minimal disagreement as to how people died inside the chambers, but that is explained by hearsay and not all AR camp witnesses worked at the gas chambers. What revisionists call contradictions are just expected differences in how witnesses describe the gassing process. The physical impossibility claim is merely the argument from incredulity. None of the witnesses who gave testimony at the numerous trials, or by historians, have been proved to be faked.

Absolute slop. All of this slop has been thoroughly addressed elsewhere.

[Nessie]

Yes, 100% of those who worked inside an AR camp, Chelmno or an A-B Krema, states it was used for gassings. There is no witness who states there was a different process to gassings.

There is no contradiction about mass murder inside chambers. There is minimal disagreement as to how people died inside the chambers, but that is explained by hearsay and not all AR camp witnesses worked at the gas chambers. What revisionists call contradictions are just expected differences in how witnesses describe the gassing process. The physical impossibility claim is merely the argument from incredulity. None of the witnesses who gave testimony at the numerous trials, or by historians, have been proved to be faked.

Absolute slop. All of this slop has been thoroughly addressed elsewhere.

Wrong. It is a fact

- 100% of the witnesses who worked at a death camp say it was used for gassings
- they all describe deaths inside chambers
- any disagreement is explained by hearsay
- revisionists exaggerate the differences between the testimonies and ignore explanations like hearsay
- they rely on the argument from incredulity
- no trial witness has been proven to have lied and they were not at the camp.

[Nazgul]

- any disagreement is explained by hearsay

- they rely on the argument from incredulity

I do not think gassings were the issues for trials. Marian Olszuk at Treblinka was not hearsay, he saw nothing, that is not incredulity except in your cognition. Interesting he was never asked to testify at the Treblinka trials.

[TlsMS93]

Jesus rose again because the tomb is empty and all the witnesses said so, and what is worse, they died sustaining this despite persecution. That is not why the Jews believe this, so what are we Gentiles going to believe their story in exchange for?

[Stubble]

Some food for thought;

https://odysee.com/@januszkowalskii1979 ... undel%29:b

In the above link you will hear described the process of adding a name to the yad vashim database in an interview with Ernst Zundel. He recalls a friend adding his dog to the yad vashim database.

My question is, is that dog still on the record as a holocaust victim?