Mark Felton says “open air cremations are inefficient”

[TlsMS93]

That's an appeal to one's own credentials, which isn't a valid argument. I recall there were problems with those photos. But then even if they were real, they don't prove what they would have to prove. That there were cremations (attempts?) in Auschwitz isn't really in dispute.

So what would a photo from this prove? It would be still perfectly in line with the Revisionist thesis, but not really help the Exterminationist thesis. Just that it wouldn't contradict this neither.

In other words, there is no silver bullet for either side of the argument, only circumstantial evidence that apparently converges to a conclusion and that is what both sides offer. Both sides appeal to a conspiracy, Aktion 1005 or the Allies kept a document that would unmask the hoax.

It's a more complex issue. But the HOlocaustians should have some silver bullet, instead they resort to copouts all the time. The silver bullet would be at least a fraction of what proves their point. But concerning to intention to commit genocide, they point to NS-leadership making statements against Jews. For proving homicidal gas chambers they point to outlandish, contradictory testimony. For the six million figure, you get a 'where did they go'.


The burden of proof would have been on their side. But all we get is narrative pushing. Clearly a campaign. In order to ignore that, they call you conspiracy theorist pointing that out. Revisionists of course can't proof the negative. Since one can come up with another version, whenever the older version is shown to be false or without substance. But Exterminationists had 80 years to prove their case, they failed miserably and have to resort to talking points and court room theatrics, which apparently they are quite good at.

With these arguments, can the Palestinian genocide of today be established with statements by the heads of the Israeli high command regarding the Palestinians, calling them animals and proclaiming a total siege, or their intelligence proposing to send them to Sinai, would that be a euphemism for special treatment?

They don't want to prove anything, they want an attitude of faith, it was technically possible because it happened.

[Hektor]

The burden of proof would have been on their side. But all we get is narrative pushing. Clearly a campaign. In order to ignore that, they call you conspiracy theorist pointing that out. Revisionists of course can't proof the negative. Since one can come up with another version, whenever the older version is shown to be false or without substance. But Exterminationists had 80 years to prove their case, they failed miserably and have to resort to talking points and court room theatrics, which apparently they are quite good at.

Hektor

Totally agree. Seems to me very odd that if the revisionist position is only partly true it would prove that 6m jews were not murdered as claimed and that would be good news for jews overall. But they refuse to consider this possibility and take it seriously so one has to work backwards from that intransigence and ask why? What is so bad for israel and jews around the world if the truth came out that instead of gas chambers we had disinfection rooms to make life better, instead of mass murder we had deportation and a new life, instead of huge death tolls we had millions of 'survivors'.

The problem they have is the truth, they hate it because it doesn't suit their agenda and in 2024 or indeed at any time since the auschwitz death toll was reduced from 4m to 2.5m it would be too late and injurious to world jewry if the truth came out. There was a time or a period of time when honesty would have been welcomed and stood the jews in good odour but not now. It would be like my ex wife, who caused such damage and pain in our divorce, now coming forward twenty years later and saying she was wrong and would like us to be at least friendly. My answer to her would be a polite but firm 'f--- off'.

Auschwitz death toll was reduced from 4 million to 1.5 Million and they will now say that is something excess of a couple of 100.000s.
Once they had established the horror fantasies in people, they didn't mind about the details any longer. And Auschwitz pilgrims essentially have the narrative displayed in the Holocaust series of the late 1970s in mind. So just halving the numbers doesn't really change the horror they are obsessed with. They don't mind the figures, what they mind is the 'unique quality' of the event. Bear in mind they are trying to replace the crucifixion with this. As "Auschwitz is the refutation" of Christ, it got a religious vibe to it. And I noticed this pretty early so did other folks. It is however astonishing that many Christians do not notice that and simply embrace the Holocaust Narrative even try to integrate this into their ideology. Many have swallowed postmodernist ideologies hook line and sinker.

The issue is less what the general public thinks. The whole Holocaust thing doesn't rank too high on their agenda. But it ranks high with people that are engaged in cultural production. They will 'unfriend' you, when you say you don't believe in the Holocaust. Joe average the plumber at the bar simply won't. At worst think you are a bit odd on this one.... There is of course fanatics distributed through the whole population. But for your Humanities mayor with a masters degree having some appointment in a cultural field the matter is far more serious.

And the issue is authoritative for questions of political morality. On the one hand immigration is not to be criticized, because only Nazis would do that. On the other hand Israel can restrict it, because they have privileges as histories eternal victims invoking the Holocaust as primary evidence there.

As for them admitting the Holocaust as a lie, not helping them, that is indeed a problem. Simply because so much BS was justified with the Holocaust Narrative during the past 80 years. It starts with butchering Germany politically and in the beginning economically. That had negative consequences for more people than just Germans. Lot's of hardship and poverty was caused by this in a larger number of European countries. The 'cultural revolution' was fueled by the 'antifaschist narrative' as well. Then the whole globalism agenda, after all the Nazis were Nationalist. And that's why we must be for mass immigration, to. And of course against happy families with lots of children, since that was the NAZI-ideal...

And since we must prevent another Holocaust, we must persecute dissent to the uttermost. When people find out they did do all this, because they were taken for a ride they may not take this so lightly. So even admission of error and mistake, won't help folks then. Even if that would be a good start. So in the end we learn why lying may be convenient in the beginning, but becomes a nightmare in the long run including for the liars itself.

@ TlsMS93

I don't call it genocide. The general aim of Israelis seems to be to get rid of Palestinians, since they are - not without reason - seen as a threat to them. They don't really care if the Palestinians are dying or moving elsewhere as long as they don't live in areas that the Zionist state claims for Jews.


This illustrates the issue to me as well. I got no problem with any nation wanting to establish their own institutions in their own territory. But the Israelis went out of their way to come into conflict with other groups in the region. I do think that they could have gotten an autonomous region already prior to WW1, but only if that won't have involved conflict any of the groups present. Conflict is however a vital element in Judaism as this allows them to maintain cohesion they won't have, if they'd live in harmony.

I get that Judaism, as any other religion or ideology, operates on a spectrum. Not all Judaists will agree with the approach present Zionist hardliners do. Well, the initial Zionists would neither. They took 19th century European Nationalisms as an example and applied it to the Jewish people with a bit more of Idealism. I'm talking here about the front men of course. That there were more sinister folks involved I won't dispute.

[borjastick]

Yes I should correct my post. I meant to say reduced from 4m by 2.5m as the official figure hovers somewhere between 1.1m and 1.5m. You are right the real world figure at Auschwitz would of course be in the region of maybe, perhaps, possibly 200k.

[TlsMS93]

The burden of proof would have been on their side. But all we get is narrative pushing. Clearly a campaign. In order to ignore that, they call you conspiracy theorist pointing that out. Revisionists of course can't proof the negative. Since one can come up with another version, whenever the older version is shown to be false or without substance. But Exterminationists had 80 years to prove their case, they failed miserably and have to resort to talking points and court room theatrics, which apparently they are quite good at.

Hektor

Totally agree. Seems to me very odd that if the revisionist position is only partly true it would prove that 6m jews were not murdered as claimed and that would be good news for jews overall. But they refuse to consider this possibility and take it seriously so one has to work backwards from that intransigence and ask why? What is so bad for israel and jews around the world if the truth came out that instead of gas chambers we had disinfection rooms to make life better, instead of mass murder we had deportation and a new life, instead of huge death tolls we had millions of 'survivors'.

The problem they have is the truth, they hate it because it doesn't suit their agenda and in 2024 or indeed at any time since the auschwitz death toll was reduced from 4m to 2.5m it would be too late and injurious to world jewry if the truth came out. There was a time or a period of time when honesty would have been welcomed and stood the jews in good odour but not now. It would be like my ex wife, who caused such damage and pain in our divorce, now coming forward twenty years later and saying she was wrong and would like us to be at least friendly. My answer to her would be a polite but firm 'f--- off'.

Auschwitz death toll was reduced from 4 million to 1.5 Million and they will now say that is something excess of a couple of 100.000s.
Once they had established the horror fantasies in people, they didn't mind about the details any longer. And Auschwitz pilgrims essentially have the narrative displayed in the Holocaust series of the late 1970s in mind. So just halving the numbers doesn't really change the horror they are obsessed with. They don't mind the figures, what they mind is the 'unique quality' of the event. Bear in mind they are trying to replace the crucifixion with this. As "Auschwitz is the refutation" of Christ, it got a religious vibe to it. And I noticed this pretty early so did other folks. It is however astonishing that many Christians do not notice that and simply embrace the Holocaust Narrative even try to integrate this into their ideology. Many have swallowed postmodernist ideologies hook line and sinker.

The issue is less what the general public thinks. The whole Holocaust thing doesn't rank too high on their agenda. But it ranks high with people that are engaged in cultural production. They will 'unfriend' you, when you say you don't believe in the Holocaust. Joe average the plumber at the bar simply won't. At worst think you are a bit odd on this one.... There is of course fanatics distributed through the whole population. But for your Humanities mayor with a masters degree having some appointment in a cultural field the matter is far more serious.

And the issue is authoritative for questions of political morality. On the one hand immigration is not to be criticized, because only Nazis would do that. On the other hand Israel can restrict it, because they have privileges as histories eternal victims invoking the Holocaust as primary evidence there.

As for them admitting the Holocaust as a lie, not helping them, that is indeed a problem. Simply because so much BS was justified with the Holocaust Narrative during the past 80 years. It starts with butchering Germany politically and in the beginning economically. That had negative consequences for more people than just Germans. Lot's of hardship and poverty was caused by this in a larger number of European countries. The 'cultural revolution' was fueled by the 'antifaschist narrative' as well. Then the whole globalism agenda, after all the Nazis were Nationalist. And that's why we must be for mass immigration, to. And of course against happy families with lots of children, since that was the NAZI-ideal...

And since we must prevent another Holocaust, we must persecute dissent to the uttermost. When people find out they did do all this, because they were taken for a ride they may not take this so lightly. So even admission of error and mistake, won't help folks then. Even if that would be a good start. So in the end we learn why lying may be convenient in the beginning, but becomes a nightmare in the long run including for the liars itself.

@ TlsMS93

I don't call it genocide. The general aim of Israelis seems to be to get rid of Palestinians, since they are - not without reason - seen as a threat to them. They don't really care if the Palestinians are dying or moving elsewhere as long as they don't live in areas that the Zionist state claims for Jews.


This illustrates the issue to me as well. I got no problem with any nation wanting to establish their own institutions in their own territory. But the Israelis went out of their way to come into conflict with other groups in the region. I do think that they could have gotten an autonomous region already prior to WW1, but only if that won't have involved conflict any of the groups present. Conflict is however a vital element in Judaism as this allows them to maintain cohesion they won't have, if they'd live in harmony.

I get that Judaism, as any other religion or ideology, operates on a spectrum. Not all Judaists will agree with the approach present Zionist hardliners do. Well, the initial Zionists would neither. They took 19th century European Nationalisms as an example and applied it to the Jewish people with a bit more of Idealism. I'm talking here about the front men of course. That there were more sinister folks involved I won't dispute.

Hitler's order was oral, just like Herod, who ordered the killing of everyone under the age of two. The Holocaust is full of these analogies.

They made many calculated concessions to clean up the most incredible aspects, as if there were credible aspects of this narrative. The Holocaust is like the Exodus, there are no traces.