"Neutral courtroom"? No such thing exists. An average jury -- that is, one made up of average Americans -- would likely disregard the law and choose to convict. This is because the average American is heavily biased in favor of Jews -- a fact proven in survey data, but also easily demonstrated by observing how their reaction to any event changes dramatically when some other ethnicity or religion is swapped out for "Jewish".
How would a jury made up of rational extraterrestrials react? Probably it would be difficult to give an extraterrestrial jury the necessary understanding of human law and affairs without exposing them to some partiality. Still, I think they would strongly acquit.
Alternatively, one can imagine an extraterrestrial court charging and convicting all the parties involved in WWII with many millions of counts of crimes, including many mitigating factors like necessity but also many aggravating factors like intent and racial/religious animus. When considering all that, those murders that are attributed to the Holocaust, or at least the ones that are provable, would be only a fraction of the criminal balance sheet, and not one of particular noteworthiness or specialness.
A jury, faced with accused who accept the crime alleged, cannot then find the accused not guilty because no crime was committed. At most they can accept other defences and find not guilty, which did happen, at the Belzec trial and in Austria.
Sanity Check - "Thus, currently revisionists can console themselves by affirming their incredulity..."
Nessie wrote: ↑Wed Sep 23, 2026 6:25 am
A jury, faced with accused who accept the crime alleged, cannot then find the accused not guilty because no crime was committed.
Yes it can.
There is a fundamental truth in this scenario here that cannot be denied, and that is:
NO mass graves = NO mass murder.
Simple as that.
And there is another fundamental truth that cannot be denied: no matter what a defendent has "confessed" to:
If the physical evidence for an alleged crime that - HAS TO EXIST - for the crime to have
actually happened - DOES NOT EXIST - then the alleged crime obviously - DID NOT HAPPEN.
As well, the ball is in the prosecution's court as far as rebuttable presumptions are concerned:
BELZEC, CHELMNO, PONARY, SOBIBOR and TREBLINKA II
Are the remains of 2.145 million Jews really buried in the 100 alleged “scientifically proven” mass graves?
(The labeling of asking this legitimate adjudicable question as “hate / antisemitic” is your first clue that they do not want you to know what the answer is.)
OPENING / FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACT: It is alleged in orthodox historiography that; during WW II, the bodies and burnt remains of hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of Jews were buried in numerous “huge mass graves” at Belzec, Chelmno, Ponary, Sobibor and Treblinka II. However, despite all the deceptive, unsubstantiated allegations to the contrary, the truth is, the largest (in terms of quantity of remains) of the 100 graves in question that are fraudulently alleged to have been “scientifically proven” to currently exist at these five sites, in which verified human remains have been uncovered / tangibly located via bona fide, verifiably honest and conclusively documented archaeology, contained the remains of - ONLY SIX PEOPLE.
Note: Using the information presented on this website and applying legal standards used in U.S. courts, the above opening / fundamental statement of fact, which is written as, and can be defined as - a rebuttable presumption - can be - LEGALLY - ACCEPTED - AS - TRUE - in a U.S. court.
Poor nessie, no matter what kind of scenario is presented, he cannot overcome the above fundamental truths. All he is left with is to cravenly deny said fundamental truths and continue to lie and run away from real debate.
nessie is a cornered rat.
If the physical evidence for a claim that - HAS TO EXIST - in order for the claim to be true - DOES NOT EXIST - then that claim is false.
Nessie wrote: ↑Wed Sep 23, 2026 6:25 am
Wetzelred ignores that the SS camp staff did not deny that mass murder had taken place.
No one ignores this narrow carve out you've attempted to make. It just doesn't matter in light of all the other denials, all the other false confessions, and all the physical and documentary evidence. You've lost on this argument over and over again.
To even make this post you ignored what the OP wrote which is that the hypothetical jury would "hear[] counterarguments from holocaust revisionists". You also ignore, for example, that Rudolf Höss's false confessions are a strong proof against the Holocaust.
