Evidence and Implementation

[Wahrheitssucher]

Let's just cut the crap, ConfusedJew. Your username itself is a lie. You came onto this forum pretending to be curious, totally open-minded, yet just "shocked and confused" at the ideas you found here. Then you immediately began using ChatGPT to defend a position in a debate you admittedly knew nothing about, proving 100% your dishonesty and motivations. Nobody is buying your shtick. You are not here for "productive conversation". You are here to defend your interests, likely Jewish interests, at all costs, truth be damned.

You are as transparent as a squeaky-clean window in a Windex commercial. No one believes you are sincere.

For anyone new (regarding ConfusedJew's behavior):

'Pilpul Activities on the CODOH Forum'
https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=339

I'm not going to defend my intentions to you again so you too will be muted if you continue with this.

I am very clear about why I am here. I obviously believe that the Holocaust happened. I lost many family members to it, I have visited the sites, it is extremely well recorded across many different historians and forms of evidence.

I am Confused Jew because I am truly puzzled as to how somebody in 2025 can still believe that the Holocaust didn't happen.

…I am not a Holocaust expert but I do strongly believe it happened more or less like the mainstream narrative.

…I do believe that you are basically similar to a Flat Earther…

This person is S T I L L using the strawman argument that all revisionists are “denying the holocaust happened”. Even after it has been repeatedly explained why that is incorrect.

He hasn’t demonstrated he has LEARNT anything. Not anything at all.

And the irony is that it is he who is repeatedly displaying signs of being in denial.

When he has the chutzpah to accuse others with much more knowledge and years of research into the topic of being “similar to a Flat Earther” maybe it is time for moderators to discourage such obvious argument-from-wilful-ignorance?

[Callafangers]

I'm not going to defend my intentions to you again so you too will be muted if you continue with this.

I am very clear about why I am here. I obviously believe that the Holocaust happened. I lost many family members to it, I have visited the sites, it is extremely well recorded across many different historians and forms of evidence.

I am Confused Jew because I am truly puzzled as to how somebody in 2025 can still believe that the Holocaust didn't happen.

You aren't a threat to my interests, I am genuinely curious how you believe what you do and how you support those claims. I am not a Holocaust expert but I do strongly believe it happened more or less like the mainstream narrative. I am willing to engage with you if you are serious about this but I do believe that you are basically similar to a Flat Earther. By researching this subject to debate it out with you guys, I am learning a ton about the history, politics, forensics of this whole tragic historical incident. I use AI to help me research, even if I didn't use AI, I would just be much slower and still make mistakes.

Now if you want to make your case in good faith, I am legitimately curious to hear why you believe what you do, but if not then I'll just mute you. I am also fascinated to learn why people hold religious or political beliefs that I think are very unrealistic. So I will leave it up to you if you want to continue or not, but if not then I'll just engage with the other more serious and civil people on this forum.

I am not interested in attacking your character at all, it's just boring to me.

Thanks.

That's a wonderful speech, ConfusedJew. However, as my last reply has already outlined, you are not sincere. You are dishonest and subversive, as has been proven. There is no character to attack. You are motivated in serving Jewish interests, as many Jews are, without regard for the well-being of any other people or nation -- let alone for truth in general.

I understand you will keep up the act, which is hilarious given the degree to which your steaming garbage has been exposed. But I quite enjoy clowns, they are very amusing.

You can keep pretending... and I will enjoy calling it out each and every time. Cheers, Bozo.

puzzled.jpg (70.67 KiB) Viewed 156 times

[Callafangers]

This person is S T I L L using the strawman argument that all revisionists are “denying the holocaust happened”. Even after it has been repeatedly explained why that is incorrect.

He hasn’t demonstrated he has LEARNT anything. Not anything at all.

And the irony is that it is he who is repeatedly displaying signs of being in denial.

When he has the chutzpah to accuse others with much more knowledge and years of research into the topic of being “similar to a Flat Earther” maybe it is time for moderators to discourage such obvious argument-from-wilful-ignorance?

I think you're absolutely correct regarding CJ but just imagine someone who is actually neutral arriving on this forum and seeing for themselves that not only is revisionism clearly logical and consistent where "Flat Earth" is not, but revisionists are the ones using sound (non-fallacious) logic and quality evidence, while exterminationists flail about with shallow nonsense over and over again. All of this is good for us, whereas censorship gives way to those who would claim we are fearful or cautious toward certain ideas. I think it's better to leave no room for that (just my two cents).

[Nessie]

... not only is revisionism clearly logical and consistent...

So-called revisionists are not logical. They constantly use logical fallacies, such as arguments from incredulity, straw man, cherry-picking and ad nauseam. They repeatedly get caught lying about and misrepresenting the level of evidence, and their main argument is that because they cannot work out how gassings were possible, as described, or find the gassings claims to be believable, therefore gassings did not happen.

They are absolutely not consistent, as they disagree about the actual usage of the AR camps and A-B Kremas. TII was allegedly a transit camp, hygiene station, customs post, property sorting centre or stop to change trains for the wider gauge Soviet railways. Or, it is claimed hardly anyone went to the camp. The A-B Kremas are variously claimed to be delousing chambers, showers, bomb shelters or corpse stores, or it is argued they were hardly exposed to any gas, contradicting the claims they were used for delousing.

[Callafangers]

They are absolutely not consistent, as they disagree about the actual usage of the AR camps and A-B Kremas.

It's just strange at this point that you keep peddling the above argument like it carries any power. My neighbors cannot recreate the history of what happened in my downstairs restroom. That doesn't mean I used it for 'gassing' (at least, not the kind we're debating here ).

People will disagree when called upon to discuss and interpret events about a facility or room that was largely insignificant, inconsequential, etc. There are likely dozens or even hundreds of such rooms at Auschwitz and other camps that lack a detailed or seamless chronology of events. You prove nothing insofar as 'gassing' by pointing out others' inability to recreate such a chronology with precision. What is known is that these rooms had documented, non-homicidal purposes, including as a morgue, possibly with some dual or multi-purpose roles (air raid, delousing), which is supported by the documented deliveries for this facility and the surrounding context of the camp and its documented events and priorities.

[Nessie]

They are absolutely not consistent, as they disagree about the actual usage of the AR camps and A-B Kremas.

It's just strange at this point that you keep peddling the above argument like it carries any power. My neighbors cannot recreate the history of what happened in my downstairs restroom. That doesn't mean I used it for 'gassing' (at least, not the kind we're debating here ).

People will disagree when called upon to discuss and interpret events about a facility or room that was largely insignificant, inconsequential, etc. There are likely dozens or even hundreds of such rooms at Auschwitz and other camps that lack a detailed or seamless chronology of events. You prove nothing insofar as 'gassing' by pointing out others' inability to recreate such a chronology with precision. What is known is that these rooms had documented, non-homicidal purposes, including as a morgue, possibly with some dual or multi-purpose roles (air raid, delousing), which is supported by the documented deliveries for this facility and the surrounding context of the camp and its documented events and priorities.

You just claimed so-called revisionists are consistent. I have proven they are not. Historians on the other hand are consistent, the AR camps and A-B Kremas were used for gassings.

The inability to create a precise, or even a vague chronology, as to the usage of those places, is evidence of failure as investigators. It is why I refer to you as so-called revisionists.

The suggestion that a lot of the camp cannot be evidenced as to its usage, is false. Watchtowers, delousing chambers, barracks, staff quarters, administration offices, the Commanders house etc can all be provided with a chronology from 1941 to 1945. The only buildings where there is evidence of a change in usage during the war, were the Kremas and two farm houses next to Birkenau.

The chronology of Krema I is that it was used as a crematorium, then the Leichenkeller was converted for use as a gas chambers and then it was converted again to be used as a bomb shelter, with the chimney demolished and additional internal walls and a new door constructed. We know that, because of the evidence. So-called revisionists cannot evidence its usage 1941-3, leaving a gap, since you claim it was not used for gassings.

[Wahrheitssucher]

I am Confused Jew because I am truly puzzled

…I am genuinely curious how you believe what you do and how you support those claims.

…I am not a Holocaust expert but …I do believe that you are basically similar to a Flat Earther.

…I am learning a ton about the history, politics, forensics of this whole tragic historical incident.

…I am legitimately curious to hear why you believe what you do,

That's a wonderful speech, ConfusedJew. However, as my last reply has already outlined, you are not sincere. You are dishonest and subversive, as has been proven. There is no character to attack. You are motivated in serving Jewish interests, as many Jews are, without regard for the well-being of any other people or nation — let alone for truth in general.

I understand you will keep up the act, which is hilarious given the degree to which your steaming garbage has been exposed. But I quite enjoy clowns, they are very amusing.

You can keep pretending... and I will enjoy calling it out each and every time. Cheers, Bozo.

Brilliant!

[Wahrheitssucher]

I obviously believe that the Holocaust happened. I lost many family members to it, I have visited the sites, it is extremely well recorded across many different historians and forms of evidence.

I am Confused Jew because I am truly puzzled as to how somebody in 2025 can still believe that the Holocaust didn't happen.

…I am not a Holocaust expert but I do strongly believe it happened more or less like the mainstream narrative.

…I do believe that you are basically similar to a Flat Earther…

This person is S T I L L using the strawman argument that all revisionists are “denying the holocaust happened”. Even after it has been repeatedly explained why that is incorrect.

He hasn’t demonstrated he has LEARNT anything. Not anything at all.

And the irony is that it is he who is repeatedly displaying signs of being in denial.

When he has the chutzpah to accuse others with much more knowledge and years of research into the topic of being “similar to a Flat Earther” maybe it is time for moderators to discourage such obvious argument-from-wilful-ignorance?

First of all, because of misrepresentations by the media, it is necessary that we first clarify what Holocaust revisionism does not maintain:

– it does not deny that Jews were persecuted by the Third Reich;

– it does not deny that Jews were deprived of civil rights;

– it does not deny that Jews were deported;

– it does not deny the existence of Jewish ghettos;

– it does not deny the existence of concentration camps;

– it does not deny the existence of crematoria in concentration camps;

– it does not deny that Jews died for a great number of reasons;

– it does not deny that other minorities were also persecuted such as gypsies, Jehovah’s Witnesses, homosexuals, and political dissidents;

– and finally, it does not deny that all the above mentioned things were unjust.

None of these crimes of the National Socialist regime is doubted by Holocaust revisionists. Revisionists maintain, however, that all these injustices have nothing to do with the Holocaust, which is defined as planned and organized mass murder, carried out specifically in homicidal gas chambers.

Holocaust revisionists believe the following to be correct:

1. There was no National Socialist order or plan for the physical extermination of Jews;

2. There was no German organization and no budget for carrying out the alleged extermination plan. Consider the statement by Professor Dr. Raul Hilberg:

“But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures [of the Jews]. They [the measures] were taken step by step. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus mind-reading by a far-flung [German] bureaucracy.”

3. In detailed investigations of former German concentration camps, expert researchers have established: No documentation or physical evidence for the existence of homicidal gas chambers or other methods of mass murder exists, and material traces of the victims are lacking as well.

Furthermore, the reports of mass shootings were greatly exaggerated and taken out of context, and the infamous “gas van,” the so-called mobile gas chambers, are a product of wartime propaganda.

4. There were neither adequate industrial facilities nor sufficient fuel to cremate such a huge number of corpses. In fact, the capacity of the crematoria was barely enough to cremate the bodies of those who died from starvation and epidemics.

5. Mass-murder claims rely almost exclusively on eyewitness accounts, whose unreliability is legendary and widely acknowledged.

6. Despite massive surveillance by spies and resistance groups active in the vicinity of, and inside German labour, concentration and alleged extermination camps, all of Germany’s wartime enemies and adversaries conducted themselves as if no exterminations of Jews were taking place.

The charges of genocide were not seriously raised until after Germany’s defeat, when there was no German government to dispute them.

7. Statistical investigations of living Jews worldwide show clearly that the losses of this ethnic group during the Second World War were nowhere near six million. Although attempts were made to establish a somewhat more accurate figure, the truth is that we simply don’t know for certain, as a comparison of revisionist and mainstream research has shown. In fact, the six-million figure, together with extermination and Holocaust claims, has been bandied about mainly by Jewish media outlets since the late 1800s!’

~ Germar Rudolf, ‘Holocaust Skepticism: 20 Questions and Answers about Holocaust Revisionism’,
1st Edition, Castle Hill: Uckfield, p. 3. (2018).

[ConfusedJew]

That's a wonderful speech, ConfusedJew. However, as my last reply has already outlined, you are not sincere. You are dishonest and subversive, as has been proven. There is no character to attack. You are motivated in serving Jewish interests, as many Jews are, without regard for the well-being of any other people or nation -- let alone for truth in general.

I understand you will keep up the act, which is hilarious given the degree to which your steaming garbage has been exposed. But I quite enjoy clowns, they are very amusing.

You can keep pretending... and I will enjoy calling it out each and every time. Cheers, Bozo.


puzzled.jpg

Thanks for that meme but I warned you that you would be muted if you failed to respond with logic and arguments and resorted to personal attacks so you too are now muted.

EDIT: I can't mute you because you are a moderator but don't expect responses.

[ConfusedJew]

Holocaust revisionists believe the following to be correct:

1. There was no National Socialist order or plan for the physical extermination of Jews;

2. There was no German organization and no budget for carrying out the alleged extermination plan. Consider the statement by Professor Dr. Raul Hilberg:

“But what began in 1941 was a process of destruction not planned in advance, not organized centrally by any agency. There was no blueprint and there was no budget for destructive measures [of the Jews]. They [the measures] were taken step by step. Thus came about not so much a plan being carried out but an incredible meeting of minds, a consensus mind-reading by a far-flung [German] bureaucracy.”

3. In detailed investigations of former German concentration camps, expert researchers have established: No documentation or physical evidence for the existence of homicidal gas chambers or other methods of mass murder exists, and material traces of the victims are lacking as well.

Furthermore, the reports of mass shootings were greatly exaggerated and taken out of context, and the infamous “gas van,” the so-called mobile gas chambers, are a product of wartime propaganda.

4. There were neither adequate industrial facilities nor sufficient fuel to cremate such a huge number of corpses. In fact, the capacity of the crematoria was barely enough to cremate the bodies of those who died from starvation and epidemics.

5. Mass-murder claims rely almost exclusively on eyewitness accounts, whose unreliability is legendary and widely acknowledged.

6. Despite massive surveillance by spies and resistance groups active in the vicinity of, and inside German labour, concentration and alleged extermination camps, all of Germany’s wartime enemies and adversaries conducted themselves as if no exterminations of Jews were taking place.

The charges of genocide were not seriously raised until after Germany’s defeat, when there was no German government to dispute them.

7. Statistical investigations of living Jews worldwide show clearly that the losses of this ethnic group during the Second World War were nowhere near six million. Although attempts were made to establish a somewhat more accurate figure, the truth is that we simply don’t know for certain, as a comparison of revisionist and mainstream research has shown. In fact, the six-million figure, together with extermination and Holocaust claims, has been bandied about mainly by Jewish media outlets since the late 1800s!’

~ Germar Rudolf, ‘Holocaust Skepticism: 20 Questions and Answers about Holocaust Revisionism’,
1st Edition, Castle Hill: Uckfield, p. 3. (2018).

Since these are actually arguments that I can actually address, I will look into this and respond later. But these all come from Germar Rudolf so I have some basic questions.

1. Do you believe everything that German Rudolf has said?

2. You clearly believe that he's an authority, or at least authoritative, as a source. Why do you believe that he is credible and is he credible in everything that he says?

3. Has he ever changed his mind over time?

4. If you do disagree with him on anything, why do you disagree?

I've removed you from my Foe list so that you are unmuted and you can stay that way as long as you engage like this past message.

Thanks.

[Callafangers]

Thanks for that meme but I warned you that you would be muted if you failed to respond with logic and arguments and resorted to personal attacks so you too are now muted.

EDIT: I can't mute you because you are a moderator but don't expect responses.

[Wahrheitssucher]

Holocaust revisionists believe the following to be correct:

1. There was no National Socialist order or plan for the physical extermination of Jews;

2. There was no German organization and no budget for carrying out the alleged extermination plan.

… [snip]…

~ Germar Rudolf, ‘Holocaust Skepticism: 20 Questions and Answers about Holocaust Revisionism’, 1st Edition, Castle Hill: Uckfield, p. 3. (2018).

Since these are actually arguments that I can actually address, I will look into this and respond later. But these all come from Germar Rudolf so I have some basic questions.

1. Do you… [blah, blah, blah]…

I've removed you from my Foe list so that you are unmuted and you can stay that way as long as you engage like this past message.

Thanks.

Wow! This person is not only a dishonest, time-wasting, arrogant and pompous ignoramus.
But they just hopped over the fact that they have been repeatedly making a strawman argument from ignorance.
Ignorance that could have been dispelled if they’d bothered to read a beginner book on revisionist viewpoints.

Plus now he’s pretending my previous replies asking him reasonable questions and requiring evidence to support his claims were not “actual arguments that he could address”.

What an amazingly pompous, arrogant, dishonest (or delusional?) person.

He arrogantly assumes he’s doing others here a favour if he reads and responds to their rebuttals of his arrogant posturing. Wow!

APPROACHING EVIDENCE DISHONESTLY IN DEBATE
This is why people dislike holocaust defenders and its deceitful promoters:
1. they lie!
2. They DENY the empirical evidence, but falsely call those presenting it ‘holocaust deniers’.
3. They DENY the often absurd statements and assertions of supposed eye-witness testimony of people claiming to be ‘holocaust survivors’ and they STILL promote their racist, anti-German lies.
4. they criminalise dissent,
5. they criminalise reasonable, logical, empirical research that exposes clear lies in the ‘holocaust’ narrative.
6. they use the flawed ‘holocaust’ narrative to justify an ongoing 7-decades long genocide in occupied Palestine,
7. they get all upset and indignant if you expose their dishonesty,
8a. they lie and accuse you of ‘anti-semitism’ if you present factual info that causes them to experience cognitive dissonance,
8b. if you turn out to be jewish they accuse you of being a self-hating jew and try to destroy your career, your livelihood, your reputation and on occassion may even try to harm or kill you.
9. They NEVER admit to being wrong on anything.
10. they never admit to using fallacious logic to debate the E V I D E N C E!!
11. they make false claims and when they are asked to provide supporting EVIDENCE, they try to change the subject of debate,

[ConfusedJew]

Wow! This person is not only a dishonest, time-wasting, arrogant and pompous ignoramus.
But they just hopped over the fact that they have been repeatedly making a strawman argument from ignorance.
Ignorance that could have been dispelled if they’d bothered to read a beginner book on revisionist viewpoints.

Plus now he’s pretending my previous replies asking him reasonable questions and requiring evidence to support his claims were not “actual arguments that he could address”.

What an amazingly pompous, arrogant, dishonest (or delusional?) person.

OK back to mute lol

[Archie]

Allow me to respond to this post since Archie did not.

Yes, I don't have the patience to continue to reply to CJ's brazen plagiarisms.

The first sentence for example:

The electric floor claim was first reported in the New York Times in 1942 and quoted sources from the Polish government-in-exile [...]

It irks me to listen to this clown make these authoritative (and usually garbled) pronouncements about sources that he has never read. And which he refuses to read.

[ConfusedJew]

It irks me to listen to this clown make these authoritative (and usually garbled) pronouncements about sources that he has never read. And which he refuses to read.

I don't refuse to read sources but if you need me to read a source it should be relevant to the disagreement at hand. I will invest the time to do research on this subject, but I won't read very long books without much relevance.

If you have a problem with a specific statement, make the argument and point me to the source where I might be wrong. That is how dialectical argumentation works. But the debates need to stay on topic.