Impromptu Holocaust Debate -- Piers Morgan, Jake Shields, Ben Ferguson, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

[Wetzelrad]

Piers Morgan's show is not the best place to go for intelligible debate. Even so, what was said is remarkable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rk0nRJMSbE

After Ferguson and Boteach repeatedly brought up skepticism toward the Holocaust Narrative as the reason for which a person should be marginizalized, cancelled, rejected, repudiated, and so on, Shields was given a chance to respond. He brought up cremation time as an obvious example of the Narrative's falseness. At this the panel erupted. He eventually succeeded in making his point.

Jake Shields: Do you think they were burning bodies in 10 minutes?
Piers Morgan: Yeah.
Ben Ferguson: I think they were burning bodies in gas chambers and then mass graves. If you've ever been to where this happened then you would know that.
Jake Shields: So you think it was ten times faster than today's furnaces? Okay.
Piers Morgan: How fast would be acceptable to you?

What Morgan said shows how credulous the public is about the Holocaust Narrative. If you ask them if something which is physically impossible is possible, they will simply respond in the affirmative.

What Fergsuon said shows how uninformed the public is about the Holocaust Narrative. When pressed, they will confidently reveal their own ignorance -- that they don't even know the difference between a gas chamber and a cremation oven.

This is just a reminder that for as often as Holocaust skeptics are attacked for not having all the facts, the situation is much worse on the other side.

[pilgrimofdark]

The believers on that panel are insufferably aggressive in their adherence.

"You can't disagree with any aspect of the Holocaust if you don't go visit the pile of shoes."

The debate illustrates that even mild skepticism of the official dogma will be met with strong expressions of religious faith of the Holocaust creed. Plus biblical wailing and gnashing of teeth combined with pejoratives.

Pier Morgan's question of "How fast would be acceptable to you?" is hilariously incoherent.

We'll know the world is truly healing when Pope Pius XII and Queen Isabella are canonized.

[Eye of Zyclone]

"Tell the truth and run." (old Croatian proverb)

Burning bodies in gas chambers and then mass graves ???

What Morgan said shows how credulous the public is about the Holocaust Narrative. If you ask them if something which is physically impossible is possible, they will simply respond in the affirmative.

What Fergsuon said shows how uninformed the public is about the Holocaust Narrative. When pressed, they will confidently reveal their own ignorance -- that they don't even know the difference between a gas chamber and a cremation oven.

Hence the oft-repeated "gas ovens" thing...



The smaller the knowledge & understanding, the bigger the belief & bigotry...

[Cowboy]

Credit to Jake Shields for talking about that. The fact that this is being brought up on a program like Piers Morgan Uncensored shows how far the window has shifted in quite a short amount of time. I know Dan Bilzerian talked a little about it when he went on the show last year, but that was more "out there" compared to today's climate.

Also, how anybody listens to Shmuley for more than 5 seconds without wanting to be blessed with deafness is beyond my comprehension.

[fireofice]

It's funny because I could probably formulate a better argument against what Jake said as devil's advocate for a position I don't even believe in. But that comes with having some knowledge of what both sides actually argue in regards to cremation. As someone who just assumes it's true, he thinks it's settled and doesn't even need to engage with arguments for the other side so he was caught off guard and didn't even know how to respond.

[Hektor]

"Tell the truth and run." (old Croatian proverb)

Burning bodies in gas chambers and then mass graves ???

What Morgan said shows how credulous the public is about the Holocaust Narrative. If you ask them if something which is physically impossible is possible, they will simply respond in the affirmative.

What Fergsuon said shows how uninformed the public is about the Holocaust Narrative. When pressed, they will confidently reveal their own ignorance -- that they don't even know the difference between a gas chamber and a cremation oven.

Hence the oft-repeated "gas ovens" thing...



The smaller the knowledge & understanding, the bigger the belief & bigotry...

That's plausibly the origin of the rumor. People saw/remembered corpses, crematoria, zyklon B, showers, gas chambers, etc. And from that a narrative was crafted. That's why it sounds like typical army base rumor (Those that served will probably know what I mean). Also the element of scaring the newbies is in it.

[Eye of Zyclone]

That's plausibly the origin of the rumor. People saw/remembered corpses, crematoria, zyklon B, showers, gas chambers, etc. And from that a narrative was crafted. That's why it sounds like typical army base rumor (Those that served will probably know what I mean). Also the element of scaring the newbies is in it.

Regarding Dachau, the deception was deliberate because the propagandists of the U.S. army deceitfully portrayed the clothes of inmates being aired outdoor as the clothes of victims allegedly killed in a gas chamber, the KL inmates killed or debilitated by typhus as victims of mass murder, the crematory ovens as sinister weapons of mass murder, and the airtight door of a delousing gas chamber for the life-saving anti-typhus fumigation of lice-infested clothes as the entrance to an alleged homicidal gas chamber disguised as a shower room (the fake gas chamber "never used as a gas chamber").










https://postimg.cc/TLmWMc5B

Ironically, the delousing gas chambers (now called "fumigation cubicles") of German concentration camps and elsewhere were modelled on the disinfecting plants built and used by U.S. authorities to combat typhus along the American-Mexican border during WW1, facilities now used to demonize anti-immigration Americans through some kind of racist crime by association with the evil natzees.

[Wetzelrad]

Another segment.

Shmuley Boteach: The utter lies and ignorance of people like Jake Shields. Jake Shields doesn't know anything.
Jake Shields: With their magic furnaces?
Shmuley Boteach: If I asked him the names of Treblinka, Majdanek, Gross-Rosen, Bergen Belsen. They're -- stop! Stop with the furnaces!
Jake Shields: Yeah, I know all those. And on every single one they keep jumping the numbers down.
Shmuley Boteach: By the way, by the way, Jake Jake Jake Jake Jake Jake Jake Jake Jake.

Obviously Boteach was just trying to filibuster, but the point by Shields would have been a salient one if he could speak it clearly and back it up.

Treblinka was originally 2-3M victims, now 700,000.
Majdanek was originally 1.5-2M victims, now 78,000.
Gross-Rosen was claimed to be the site of 150,000 gassing victims, now said to be 40,000 deaths, none by gassing.
Bergen Belsen was originally 50-100,000 "gassed" or "exterminated", now perhaps ~51,000 dead from starvation and disease, if including those who died post-liberation.

Therefore all four camps have been dramatically revised, all in a downward direction, which leads to obvious questions about overall truthfulness and total numbers. However, the average person is not going to memorize or keep notes on the above figures, so they should instead try to have an accurate generalization of them -- i.e. "The supposed death totals have been drastically reduced, in some camps by over a million."

For quick reference, the Holocaust Encyclopedia also has a page on this specific topic with a table listing the figures for some of the camps.
https://holocaustencyclopedia.com/absur ... ath-tolls/

[HansHill]

Fascinating segment.

Nobody here comes out of this looking particularly well unfortunately. I want to like Jake Shields, and i guess its easy to analyze debate performances from the comfort of a keyboard but… how he missed them most obvious layup of all time i will never understand:

>Shmuley: You don't know anything!

>Shields: I know I had the world’s leading forensic chemical engineer on my podcast to explain the lack of cyanide residues in the walls at Auschwitz.

>shmuley: b-b-but

>Shields: In fact, i called a Professor of genocide studies to debunk him live in studio, face to face. and the Professor was at an utter loss to address anything. The episode is on my podcast I urge everyone to come watch it.


This is an information war and the sooner it gets recognized as such, the better.

[Eye of Zyclone]

As always, that "debate" was all outraged theatrics vs. ignored arguments.

If disbelief in the gas chambers of WW2 is antisemitism, why is disbelief in the gas chambers of WW1 (i.e. the original story, of which the Holocaust is plagiarism) not Serbophobia?



And what is free speech if not the right to be offensive to others anyway? The public expression of those who offend no one doesn't need to be protected because it's of course not threatened by anyone. The whole point of free speech is the right to tell others what some don't want to hear without becoming a prisoner or a pariah for doing so.

[Wetzelrad]

It came up again in today's broadcast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_KXvjOJ7YA&t=4371s

Piers Morgan: Do you think if half your family had been wiped out by very fucking cool Hitler, you'd still think he was very fucking cool? Or would you think that actually he was a despicable monster who murdered 12 million people, who targeted people because they were disabled, or Jewish, or Romani Gypsy, or whatever it may be, and that he systematically destroyed people, incinerated them in gas chambers?

So that's Morgan also mixing up crematory ovens with gas chambers. He is totally uninformed on what he's preaching about.

As for the claim of 12 million victims, this is becoming an increasingly common talking point from people across the political spectrum. I will refrain from a long-winded response here. It's enough just to quote this infamous article which says, "An oft-cited statistic of 5 million non-Jewish Holocaust deaths has no basis in fact," and also to point to this thread about the stink Jews made earlier this year when they found out the National Education Association was not prioritizing Jewish victimhood over the supposed 12 million.

[Eye of Zyclone]

It came up again in today's broadcast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_KXvjOJ7YA&t=4371s

Piers Morgan: Do you think if half your family had been wiped out by very fucking cool Hitler, you'd still think he was very fucking cool? Or would you think that actually he was a despicable monster who murdered 12 million people, who targeted people because they were disabled, or Jewish, or Romani Gypsy, or whatever it may be, and that he systematically destroyed people, incinerated them in gas chambers?

So that's Morgan also mixing up crematory ovens with gas chambers. He is totally uninformed on what he's preaching about.

Faith in the Holocaust is always based on ignorance and/or ridiculously-low evidentiary standards. Confusing crematory ovens (i.e. life-saving sanitary devices for a safe disposal of contagious bodies) with a weapon of mass murder makes any solid tangible evidence for homicidal gas chambers superfluous. As a consequence of this widespread misconception, the sight of mere KL crematory ovens (real & massively used by Allied propagandists for deceptive purposes) made the Holocaust case closed before it had even been opened, and it still does today.

[Archie]

From the clips, it looks like Fuentes declined to get into detailed revisionist points. Probably wise. It would not be easy to try to develop serious revisionist points on a TV program with a hostile interviewer. Especially since revisionism is not his specialty. In one clip, Piers made some vague point about how we can be sure of the six million because the Nazis themselves admitted it at Nuremberg (something along these lines). Piers of course has no clue what he's talking about. When you are talking to someone like this, you have to try to figure out which argument they are garbling and then try to ungarble it on the fly. Is he talking about the Hoettl affidavit? The Hoess confession? The Korherr report? Piers doesn't know what any of that means. If you're talking about this stuff with the general public, I think it takes quite a bit of thought and practice to find the right level of detail.

In the beginner's guide on this site, I've assumed that by the time people have found their way to CODOH they are probably not rank beginners. And I assume people will look into the sources on their own time over several weeks or months. For a TV audience, you need to simplify things considerably. Getting your points across really quickly despite the frequent interruptions takes talent (and practice). From back in the 90s when revisionists were briefly getting some media attention the revisionists of that era actually did pretty well. David Cole was pretty good at it. He's very comfortable on camera. Weber was also pretty good (more professorial and less animated than Cole). Bradley Smith came off and very reasonable and avuncular. Smith tended to focus more on points about free speech and open inquiry. That's always a good starting point because it's very hard to argue against and you don't have to get into the weeds.

[Wetzelrad]

From the clips, it looks like Fuentes declined to get into detailed revisionist points. Probably wise. It would not be easy to try to develop serious revisionist points on a TV program with a hostile interviewer. Especially since revisionism is not his specialty.

Agreed. I liked that Morgan in one breath said, "There is no debate to be had about the number," and in the next he found it totally acceptable that Fuentes questioned whether it was 6, 7, 8 million, or even "100 times more". It wasn't even a subtle joke but it went completely over Morgan's head, and it neatly showed how disingenuous he is in defending the certainty of the number 6.

Fuentes's approach was very good, and I don't want to get into a big discussion about him specifically, however, in recent times he's made it apparent that he's actually amenable to antirevisionism. You may know there are dedicated posters on X who do nothing other than defend the narrative by using stuff from the HC blog or from whichever primary sources they can misrepresent to naive audiences. Some of those posters have gained an audience with Fuentes or are in that sphere of influence. We may have to confront them in the future. Fuentes even referenced "blogs" in discussing his uncertainty on this, once.

In one clip, Piers made some vague point about how we can be sure of the six million because the Nazis themselves admitted it at Nuremberg (something along these lines).

If someone reading this was put into the position of an impromptu debate, and they wanted to face down this argument, I would consider the following possible options:

1. Compare Morgan's acceptance of Nazi confessions to other false confessions. Solid choices are witch trials or Jewish sacrificial murder trials, both of which the public tends to believe were false.
2. Ask if he believes Kurt Gerstein who confessed to 25 million camp deaths or whichever false confession you prefer to use.
3. Ask who Piers Morgan thinks confessed to 6 million. He won't know. However, his producers will quickly feed him more material, so you would effectively have to argue against the collective internet. This would be hard to win even with encyclopedic knowledge, but you could still turn it to your advantage if you can show that this is what Morgan is doing by continuously questioning him on basic facts that you know he doesn't know.

[Stubble]

I'll take answer (b), then I'd follow up with Hoess confessing to 3,000,000...

Answer (c) gets messy, as you say.

Answer (a) may or may not be convincing, (b) is better bang for your buck. 2 birds with one rock kind of deal, and undeniable.

Regardless, great take Wetzelrad!