"No Nazis Denied"

[TlsMS93]

It is normal for an accused, who is innocent, to deny the crime they are falsely accused of, especially when that crime did not even take place. Yet, no SS camp staff, who worked at the Kremas, in the AR camps or at Chelmno, denied that gassings had taken place and said what did instead.

Bring their testimony and we will analyze it. In the media we only see Jewish voices talking about what was happening inside, so bring their testimony.

[Hektor]

So why can not find a single eyewitness to nothing sinister happening inside the Kremas?

Have you ever heard of the saying: “Even parrots can talk?” So, people within a common context where they are forced to do something end up gaining a collective, a common sympathy, so if some support something even if it is absurd, others will not oppose it even if this other person can denounce some arbitrariness of the others and there was no reason to humanize their captors since they were doing something abominable in their religion, which is to cremate the bodies of their own compatriots.

The problem is that people that said nothing sinister happened at the Krema (except cremation of course, which some people may find macabre) would not be registered as witnesses. Simply because those looking for witnesses were interested in hearing sinister stories, since they wanted to have something they could use at trials against camp stuff. You will however notice that the vast majority of witnesses does not claim to have witnessed anything sinister there themselves. In fact most potential witnesses did not witness any Holocaust whatsoever. They heard it after the war was over.


Concerning prior SS-staff at Auschwitz. If one isn't a dimwit one can actually imagine why they would not have said publicly that 'nothing sinister happened there'.... Although there are indeed some that did say so. To them it was obvious that there were cremations taking place, but that there wasn't something like an extermination program. Plenty of contemporary witnesses disputed to have had any knowledge of an extermination program. And this included people that would have known, if the extermination program was for real....

[Nessie]

It is normal for an accused, who is innocent, to deny the crime they are falsely accused of, especially when that crime did not even take place. Yet, no SS camp staff, who worked at the Kremas, in the AR camps or at Chelmno, denied that gassings had taken place and said what did instead.

Bring their testimony and we will analyze it. In the media we only see Jewish voices talking about what was happening inside, so bring their testimony.

Is it so hard for you to do some basic research?

https://www.auschwitz-prozess.de/

[Nessie]

So why can not find a single eyewitness to nothing sinister happening inside the Kremas?

Have you ever heard of the saying: “Even parrots can talk?” So, people within a common context where they are forced to do something end up gaining a collective, a common sympathy, so if some support something even if it is absurd, others will not oppose it even if this other person can denounce some arbitrariness of the others and there was no reason to humanize their captors since they were doing something abominable in their religion, which is to cremate the bodies of their own compatriots.

The problem is that people that said nothing sinister happened at the Krema (except cremation of course, which some people may find macabre) would not be registered as witnesses.

You are reduced to suggesting, with no evidence, that eyewitness who worked at the Kremas, would have their testimony hidden away, or ignored. Yet West German prosecutors were able to access camp staff records and trace and arrest many of the staff.

Simply because those looking for witnesses were interested in hearing sinister stories, since they wanted to have something they could use at trials against camp stuff. You will however notice that the vast majority of witnesses does not claim to have witnessed anything sinister there themselves. In fact most potential witnesses did not witness any Holocaust whatsoever. They heard it after the war was over.


Concerning prior SS-staff at Auschwitz. If one isn't a dimwit one can actually imagine why they would not have said publicly that 'nothing sinister happened there'.... Although there are indeed some that did say so. To them it was obvious that there were cremations taking place, but that there wasn't something like an extermination program. Plenty of contemporary witnesses disputed to have had any knowledge of an extermination program. And this included people that would have known, if the extermination program was for real....

Care to name and quote any of them?

[TlsMS93]

Is it so hard for you to do some basic research?

https://www.auschwitz-prozess.de/

This is the whole trial, even of people involved in trivial things and the way of analyzing this data is not very didactic. I want you to select your main SS witnesses about gassing and we will scrutinize them right here.

[TlsMS93]

The problem is that people that said nothing sinister happened at the Krema (except cremation of course, which some people may find macabre) would not be registered as witnesses. Simply because those looking for witnesses were interested in hearing sinister stories, since they wanted to have something they could use at trials against camp stuff. You will however notice that the vast majority of witnesses does not claim to have witnessed anything sinister there themselves. In fact most potential witnesses did not witness any Holocaust whatsoever. They heard it after the war was over.


Concerning prior SS-staff at Auschwitz. If one isn't a dimwit one can actually imagine why they would not have said publicly that 'nothing sinister happened there'.... Although there are indeed some that did say so. To them it was obvious that there were cremations taking place, but that there wasn't something like an extermination program. Plenty of contemporary witnesses disputed to have had any knowledge of an extermination program. And this included people that would have known, if the extermination program was for real....

Exactly, first they determined that something sinister happened and then they looked for people willing to corroborate, none of them would go there and say what they said if they were given a choice or there was no trial at all, that is, the witnesses were already pre-stimulated to support what they said and there was an entire legal and security framework for them to feel comfortable in supporting all of that, after all, their captors were defeated in the war and were humiliated by the public, so everything attributed to the Nazis was acceptable no matter how insane the allegation was.

[Callafangers]

Thank you for again highlighting that not one single Nazi who worked inside an AR camp, Chelmno or at an A-B Krema, denied they were used for gassings, or provided any evidence as to what they were used for.

I just need to point out just how far Nessie and other exterminationists have had to move their goalposts. We once heard "No Nazis denied". Now it's, "no Nazis at obscure, isolated AR camps or literally stationed inside the Crematoria at Auschwitz denied."

[TlsMS93]

I just need to point out just how far Nessie and other exterminationists have had to move their goalposts. We once heard "No Nazis denied". Now it's, "no Nazis at obscure, isolated AR camps or literally stationed inside the Crematoria at Auschwitz denied."

I was going to say this but I forgot. Their trench is shorter, the concessions over the years have greatly limited them, Nuremberg is no longer used as an argument, but rather trials in West Germany.

[HansHill]

Thank you for again highlighting that not one single Nazi who worked inside an AR camp, Chelmno or at an A-B Krema, denied they were used for gassings, or provided any evidence as to what they were used for.

I just need to point out just how far Nessie and other exterminationists have had to move their goalposts. We once heard "No Nazis denied". Now it's, "no Nazis at obscure, isolated AR camps or literally stationed inside the Crematoria at Auschwitz denied."

"No gassing witnesses denied gassings!"

Talk about a completely self-defined, closed loop, circular referential population set, artificially designed to defeat its own purpose.

The absolute state of anti-revisionists!

[Hektor]

....

Exactly, first they determined that something sinister happened and then they looked for people willing to corroborate, none of them would go there and say what they said if they were given a choice or there was no trial at all, that is, the witnesses were already pre-stimulated to support what they said and there was an entire legal and security framework for them to feel comfortable in supporting all of that, after all, their captors were defeated in the war and were humiliated by the public, so everything attributed to the Nazis was acceptable no matter how insane the allegation was.

An exercise in question begging and clearly was there an interest on the Allied side to frame Germans with war crimes. That wasn't a new tactic btw. Atrocity propaganda during WW1 worked the same way. And of course will you find people that way willing to make accusations. Whether founded or not is irrelevant. Hence the gas libel and slander campaign against (NS) Germany was born.

[TlsMS93]

An exercise in question begging and clearly was there an interest on the Allied side to frame Germans with war crimes. That wasn't a new tactic btw. Atrocity propaganda during WW1 worked the same way. And of course will you find people that way willing to make accusations. Whether founded or not is irrelevant. Hence the gas libel and slander campaign against (NS) Germany was born.

Were there no witnesses of German soldiers raping Red Cross nurses or cutting off the hands of Belgian babies? If the Allies dismissed these allegations, then they were all lying? Why can't we do the same with the so-called eyewitnesses to the gassings?

This explains why everyone gives conflicting details about the gassing and cremation process, because none of this happened and there was no literature indicating what happened to people exposed to hydrogen cyanide to provide a narrative basis, so everyone was claiming, only that there was gassing. It's the same as if all swans are white, if someone says they saw a black one they have to show one, but what we have is a sonderkommando claiming absurdities such as different colors of bodies exposed to Zyklon B, or that this gas had a color or rose from the floor to the ceiling, that the bodies piled up, giving the impression that they were escaping from the floor, and others that they remained still like statues in their places.

But for exterminationists none of this matters, and disagreement is even expected.

[Nessie]

Is it so hard for you to do some basic research?

https://www.auschwitz-prozess.de/

This is the whole trial, even of people involved in trivial things and the way of analyzing this data is not very didactic. I want you to select your main SS witnesses about gassing and we will scrutinize them right here.

You want to go off topic, to avoid having to explain why not one single Nazi, ever, spoke about what really happened, and supported any of the revisionist claims about the real usage of the AR camps, or Kremas.

[Nessie]

Thank you for again highlighting that not one single Nazi who worked inside an AR camp, Chelmno or at an A-B Krema, denied they were used for gassings, or provided any evidence as to what they were used for.

I just need to point out just how far Nessie and other exterminationists have had to move their goalposts. We once heard "No Nazis denied". Now it's, "no Nazis at obscure, isolated AR camps or literally stationed inside the Crematoria at Auschwitz denied."

The goalposts were always about Nazis who worked inside the AR camps, Chelmno, or the Kremas. That is because they are eyewitnesses. Revisionists constantly need reminding that someone who did not work inside those places, is not an eyewitness, their evidence is hearsay. It speaks to how ignorant revisionists are about investigations, that they have tried to introduce witnesses who were never in those places, who say they saw nothing. Of course they saw nothing, they were never there!

[Nessie]

I just need to point out just how far Nessie and other exterminationists have had to move their goalposts. We once heard "No Nazis denied". Now it's, "no Nazis at obscure, isolated AR camps or literally stationed inside the Crematoria at Auschwitz denied."

I was going to say this but I forgot. Their trench is shorter, the concessions over the years have greatly limited them, Nuremberg is no longer used as an argument, but rather trials in West Germany.

No senior Nazi at Nuremberg stated what the actual function of those places were, instead, they denied knowledge or involvement. Not being able to produce exculpatory evidence, to support any of their various theories, severely damages revisionist claims.

The West German trials are of the eyewitnesses, making them more relevant.

[Nessie]

Thank you for again highlighting that not one single Nazi who worked inside an AR camp, Chelmno or at an A-B Krema, denied they were used for gassings, or provided any evidence as to what they were used for.

I just need to point out just how far Nessie and other exterminationists have had to move their goalposts. We once heard "No Nazis denied". Now it's, "no Nazis at obscure, isolated AR camps or literally stationed inside the Crematoria at Auschwitz denied."

"No gassing witnesses denied gassings!"

Talk about a completely self-defined, closed loop, circular referential population set, artificially designed to defeat its own purpose.

The absolute state of anti-revisionists!

No eyewitness who worked inside the AR camps, Chelmno or the Kremas, which is what makes them an eyewitness, denies gassings and states what actually took place. Between those camps there are over 300 eyewitnesses and your claim is that 100% of them colluded and lied.