Eye of Zyclone wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2026 1:15 pm
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2026 10:51 am
Read the Holocaust Handbooks, and all you will find is evidence for mass murder, that the likes of Mattogno, Graf, Kues and Rudolf try to interpret in different ways, or they dispute. Disputed and debated evidence is different from their being no evidence.
For example, throughout the Handbooks, eyewitnesses who worked inside the AR camps and A-B Kremas, are discussed, at length. They all say that gassings took place. The authors come up with various reasons to discredit them. They all fail to find alternative eyewitnesses who provide a different narrative.
I agree that Holocaust revisionists spent too much time dissecting Holocaust testimonies, as if testimonies were anything more than strings of words devoid of any intrinsic probative value in the first place. Boring and superfluous since the burden of proof is not on them but on the accusers like it is in all criminal cases.
You are ignoring all the documents, photos, archaeological reports that Holocaust Histories refer to, which is the corroborating evidence for the witnesses. So, I am not wrong as you suggest, when I say they are corroborated. Your suggestion is part of the big lie, that is a major reason why denial is illegal, as it is a succession of lies and misrepresentations.
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2026 10:51 am
Those witnesses are then corroborated. For example, they all claim mass arrivals on transport trains at the camps. That is corroborated by multiple documents recording mass transports and arrivals.
What shows that the Nazis were not trying to hide something sinister and top secret as despaired Holohoaxers claim in order to explain the documentary emptiness of their criminal case.
It shows that despite their best attempts, documents and other evidence was missed and that evidence corroborates the witnesses.
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2026 10:51 am
Interestingly, the final solution was always a mass evacuation of Europe's jews. That's why the term "final solution of the jewish problem/question" was coined by some Zionists in the 19th century. The rest is a WW2 Zionist distortion of that term for atrocity propaganda & postwar statehood purposes. No sinister, coded, secretly murderous meaning behind that name.
If that was the case, then where is the evidence of millions of Jews arrested by the Nazis and their allies, 1939-44, and sent to camps and ghettos, still being in those camps and ghettos in 1944? Where is the evidence of millions of Jews being liberated in 1945? Prove the Final Solution was purely about evacuation.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
"The only statistics you can trust are the ones you falsified yourself." (Winston Churchill)
Prove that 6 million ethnic Germans expelled from Eastern Europe in 1945-46 have not "vanished from the earth" as the 1st chancellor of postwar Germany (Konrad Adenauer) claimed in his memoirs, or 6 million Germans were killed during the de-Germanization of Soviet-captured Europe. See how this fallacious 'argument' works now?
No argument is being made by the historians, instead they evidence what happened, to Germans expelled from Eastern Europe and the Jews arrested by the Nazis. You keep on trying to turn everything into an argument, because you cannot evidence your claims.
Do you really believe that the Nazis were unable to come up with a new name for their alleged Grand Plan Against The Tribe of Judah and that they were therefore reduced to just picking up an old Zionist name that referred to a mass evacuation of Europe's Jews ?!? Wow !! The Holohoax conspiracy theory is getting more and more insane and far-fetched !
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2026 6:23 am
You are referring to atrocity stories, that are evidenced to be false. The proven history of mass murder during the Holocaust, is not a false atrocity story. Part of your problem is that you do not know how to evidence a claim is false.
Nope. The story of Belgian kids' hands cut off by German soldiers was not evidenced to be false. It was rather not evidenced to be true. It's now regarded as false because an atrocity story is false until proven, not the other way round as you claim on and on for very obvious reasons.
The story was evidenced to be false, by the lack of Belgian children with missing hands. The burden of proof was on the claimant that children had their hands cut off and that claim failed, because they could not produce evidence to prove the claim.
You twist the burden of proof, because you want to make claims that you do not need to evidence. You claim the Holocaust was an atrocity story like the story about Belgian children and that you do not need to produce evidence an atrocity story is false. You are wrong.
Nessie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 30, 2026 6:23 am
On the other hand, Netanyahu is patently the best disseminator of antisemitism all over the world nowadays.
Those antirevisionist gag laws are an obvious attempt to shield an untenable lie from the light of free inquiry and adversarial debate.
You forget, or are ignorant of, the fact that every European country, from one extent to another, cooperated with the Nazis, in identifying, round up, arresting, transporting and even killing Jews. Even the UK was complicit by preventing Jews from escaping. You also forget that not all European countries have made denial illegal. Holocaust denial is blatantly anti-Semitic, as it relies on various tropes and it is spreading lies and hate.
Unrelated. There's no connection between European countries yielding to Nazi demands regarding the treatment of Jews 85 years ago and European countries passing laws against free inquiry and free speech in the 21st century. That's clearly a politically-motivated censorship devised to save an untenable lie that cannot withstand free investigation and debate.
And Britain didn't prevent Jews from escaping an imaginary peril of imminent death during WW2. Curtailing the number of jewish invaders allowed to enter the homeland of Palestinians was not a murderous policy. Do you really believe that the docile Jew-loving leaders of Britstein wouldn't have found safe havens for escaping jews accross their global empire if an antisemitic policy of giant mass slaughter had actually been implemented during WW2 ?!? With an ardent Zionist and philosemite like Winston Churchill in charge at that time ??? Makes no sense !!
You need to evidence and prove your claim that the Allies hoaxed a mass murder claim against the Nazis, that also involved them. You cannot do that, so you run away from your burden of proof.
Holocaust revisionism is of course not antisemitic, just like the debunking of the incubator-babies lie is not anti-Kuwaiti hate. Pathetic attempt to justify censorship, a censorship crucially needed to perpetuate a fragile propaganda lie and the geopolitical scam linked to it.
So-called revisionists merely assert that the Jews were liars, who forced the West, Soviets and the Nazis to accept a hoax and then claimed billions in compensation and got a Homeland as part of the deal. That appeals to the anti-Semitic tropes of Jews are dishonest, highly organised, all powerful and only really interested in wealth.
