Chronology of the Holocaust

[Stubble]

Why do you fail to show us all how it is done, and produce an evidenced chronology of what happened to the Jews of Kiev, after the Nazis occupied it and ordered all Jews to go to Babi Yar?

Do you know how to evidence a historical event?

Who gave the order? The poster they offer as proof does not have the name of the issuing authority, nor the rank of the issuing officer, nor the date of issue. And the street names are wrong and they were not supposed to go to Babi Yar but to a nearby corner. No occupation authority is that sloppy, but I have no doubt that Jewish partisans are.

You are going off topic. The thread is a chronology of the Holocaust, starting with Babi Yar and Rumbula as early mass murders. Now, if you say they did not happen, then your chronology is not that they did not happen, it was what did happen to the Jews from Kiev and Riga? If you cannot produce a chronology of events, you should just drop out, as you are not up to the basic task of establishing any history.

Previously addressed by Bombsaway. This thread is also for exploration of the events. See page 1.

[TlsMS93]

You are going off topic. The thread is a chronology of the Holocaust, starting with Babi Yar and Rumbula as early mass murders. Now, if you say they did not happen, then your chronology is not that they did not happen, it was what did happen to the Jews from Kiev and Riga? If you cannot produce a chronology of events, you should just drop out, as you are not up to the basic task of establishing any history.

Wait, the topic is determining the beginning of the Holocaust. Who determined that the Holocaust began in 1941, and specifically in Babi Yar, to begin with? Not even historians can agree on the year and the inaugural event of this genocide. Do you want that?

What I see in 1941 regarding Eastern Jews in the USSR is that they were part of the same persecution as other nationalities, with responsibilities for pacifying the land. I can trust that. Now, I do not accept deliberate genocide without a pre-established chain of command by the regime, nor do I accept Hilberg's explanation that the order of the commissars was Hitler's written order for the extermination of the Jews. Therefore, defining the beginning of the Holocaust in 1941 is impossible, in my opinion, based on what they offer as evidence. Widespread persecution or the number of deaths does not in itself classify it as genocide. The intentional component needs to be established, and I do not see that.

[Nessie]

....

You are going off topic. The thread is a chronology of the Holocaust, starting with Babi Yar and Rumbula as early mass murders. Now, if you say they did not happen, then your chronology is not that they did not happen, it was what did happen to the Jews from Kiev and Riga? If you cannot produce a chronology of events, you should just drop out, as you are not up to the basic task of establishing any history.

Previously addressed by Bombsaway. This thread is also for exploration of the events. See page 1.

You are saying that, because you cannot produce a chronology, which is a total fail on your part, as it is the most basic task for any historian.

[Stubble]

....

You are going off topic. The thread is a chronology of the Holocaust, starting with Babi Yar and Rumbula as early mass murders. Now, if you say they did not happen, then your chronology is not that they did not happen, it was what did happen to the Jews from Kiev and Riga? If you cannot produce a chronology of events, you should just drop out, as you are not up to the basic task of establishing any history.

Previously addressed by Bombsaway. This thread is also for exploration of the events. See page 1.

You are saying that, because you cannot produce a chronology, which is a total fail on your part, as it is the most basic task for any historian.

No jackass, I'm saying it because it was addressed on page one of this thread by the op, and oddly I, who initially took your position.

Learn how to read, and stop just pissing on people, like a jackass.

[Nessie]

You are going off topic. The thread is a chronology of the Holocaust, starting with Babi Yar and Rumbula as early mass murders. Now, if you say they did not happen, then your chronology is not that they did not happen, it was what did happen to the Jews from Kiev and Riga? If you cannot produce a chronology of events, you should just drop out, as you are not up to the basic task of establishing any history.

Wait, the topic is determining the beginning of the Holocaust. Who determined that the Holocaust began in 1941, and specifically in Babi Yar, to begin with? Not even historians can agree on the year and the inaugural event of this genocide. Do you want that?

A reminder.

"The focus will be on laying out relevant data related to the Holocaust in a more or less chronological and assessing from different viewpoints. The idea right now is to start at the beginning, which would be 1941, though maybe some things could be said before."

What I see in 1941 regarding Eastern Jews in the USSR is that they were part of the same persecution as other nationalities, with responsibilities for pacifying the land. I can trust that. Now, I do not accept deliberate genocide without a pre-established chain of command by the regime, nor do I accept Hilberg's explanation that the order of the commissars was Hitler's written order for the extermination of the Jews. Therefore, defining the beginning of the Holocaust in 1941 is impossible, in my opinion, based on what they offer as evidence. Widespread persecution or the number of deaths does not in itself classify it as genocide. The intentional component needs to be established, and I do not see that.

So, 1941 is when the mass killings revisionists deny, start. Now, a chronology is where revisionists produce evidence as to what happened, not their opinion on what did not happen. As soon as mass killings, such as Babi Yar start, revisionists stop. They stop evidencing what happened and start to give their reasons as what did not happen. Their failure to produce an evidenced chronology means that they fail at history.

This whole thread proves revisionism is faulty history, it is bogus, a hoax.

[Nessie]

Previously addressed by Bombsaway. This thread is also for exploration of the events. See page 1.

You are saying that, because you cannot produce a chronology, which is a total fail on your part, as it is the most basic task for any historian.

No jackass, I'm saying it because it was addressed on page one of this thread by the op, and oddly I, who initially took your position.

Learn how to read, and stop just pissing on people, like a jackass.

"The focus will be on laying out relevant data related to the Holocaust in a more or less chronological...." way. Please start doing that and rather than claiming what did not happen, evidence what did.

[Numar Patru]

Who gave the order? The poster they offer as proof does not have the name of the issuing authority, nor the rank of the issuing officer, nor the date of issue. And the street names are wrong and they were not supposed to go to Babi Yar but to a nearby corner. No occupation authority is that sloppy, but I have no doubt that Jewish partisans are.

Does it matter who issued the order? The city was clearly under German occupation. And how are the street names wrong?

[TlsMS93]

So, 1941 is when the mass killings revisionists deny, start. Now, a chronology is where revisionists produce evidence as to what happened, not their opinion on what did not happen. As soon as mass killings, such as Babi Yar start, revisionists stop. They stop evidencing what happened and start to give their reasons as what did not happen. Their failure to produce an evidenced chronology means that they fail at history.

This whole thread proves revisionism is faulty history, it is bogus, a hoax.

My boy, in history there is no authority whatsoever, what exists are perspectives and interpretations, some more well-founded and others not.

You can't even determine the alleged executions on the Eastern Front, I questioned the poster here regarding several things and you went off on a tangent, the identities of the victims in Babi Yar by Yad Vashem are 10% of what is alleged, the insane details of these events, none of that matters to you because you assume that a trial established what happened in an event, when a trial captures the moment and not a continuity, history is continuity.

We don't have to prove what happened, but rather determine what allegedly happened really happened or not and why.

It wasn't the revisionists who declared that it is not necessary to explain how such a genocide technically happened, it was technically possible because it happened and that's it.

All that's left is for you to one day demand how many minutes Hitler spent in the bathroom on D-Day and if we don't answer it's because we don't know.

[Nessie]

So, 1941 is when the mass killings revisionists deny, start. Now, a chronology is where revisionists produce evidence as to what happened, not their opinion on what did not happen. As soon as mass killings, such as Babi Yar start, revisionists stop. They stop evidencing what happened and start to give their reasons as what did not happen. Their failure to produce an evidenced chronology means that they fail at history.

This whole thread proves revisionism is faulty history, it is bogus, a hoax.

My boy, in history there is no authority whatsoever, what exists are perspectives and interpretations, some more well-founded and others not.

What is evidenced to have happened has authority over what is not evidenced. Therefore, mass shootings have authority over supposed mass resettlement.

You can't even determine the alleged executions on the Eastern Front, I questioned the poster here regarding several things and you went off on a tangent, the identities of the victims in Babi Yar by Yad Vashem are 10% of what is alleged, the insane details of these events, none of that matters to you because you assume that a trial established what happened in an event, when a trial captures the moment and not a continuity, history is continuity.

Babi Yar is evidenced to have happened. There are missing details and unknowns, but that is to be expected.

We don't have to prove what happened, but rather determine what allegedly happened really happened or not and why.

Proving what happened has authority over determining what allegedly happened.

It wasn't the revisionists who declared that it is not necessary to explain how such a genocide technically happened, it was technically possible because it happened and that's it.

Not knowing all of the technical details and not being able to work out some technicalities, is not evidence to prove an event did not happen.

All that's left is for you to one day demand how many minutes Hitler spent in the bathroom on D-Day and if we don't answer it's because we don't know.

No, I just want some evidence of tens of thousand of Kiev Jews still alive in 1942. When you fail to provide such, I am correct to conclude your allegations are a hoax.

[Stubble]

So, 1941 is when the mass killings revisionists deny, start. Now, a chronology is where revisionists produce evidence as to what happened, not their opinion on what did not happen. As soon as mass killings, such as Babi Yar start, revisionists stop. They stop evidencing what happened and start to give their reasons as what did not happen. Their failure to produce an evidenced chronology means that they fail at history.

This whole thread proves revisionism is faulty history, it is bogus, a hoax.

My boy, in history there is no authority whatsoever, what exists are perspectives and interpretations, some more well-founded and others not.

What is evidenced to have happened has authority over what is not evidenced. Therefore, mass shootings have authority over supposed mass resettlement.

You can't even determine the alleged executions on the Eastern Front, I questioned the poster here regarding several things and you went off on a tangent, the identities of the victims in Babi Yar by Yad Vashem are 10% of what is alleged, the insane details of these events, none of that matters to you because you assume that a trial established what happened in an event, when a trial captures the moment and not a continuity, history is continuity.

Babi Yar is evidenced to have happened. There are missing details and unknowns, but that is to be expected.

We don't have to prove what happened, but rather determine what allegedly happened really happened or not and why.

Proving what happened has authority over determining what allegedly happened.

It wasn't the revisionists who declared that it is not necessary to explain how such a genocide technically happened, it was technically possible because it happened and that's it.

Not knowing all of the technical details and not being able to work out some technicalities, is not evidence to prove an event did not happen.

All that's left is for you to one day demand how many minutes Hitler spent in the bathroom on D-Day and if we don't answer it's because we don't know.

No, I just want some evidence of tens of thousand of Kiev Jews still alive in 1942. When you fail to provide such, I am correct to conclude your allegations are a hoax.

All of this to say he summed up your response already in his post to which you reply.

'It happened and we know it happened because it happened.'

Or rather, as not to twist words;

it is not necessary to explain how such a genocide technically happened, it was technically possible because it happened and that's it.

[Nessie]

....

All of this to say he summed up your response already in his post to which you reply.

'It happened and we know it happened because it happened.'

Or rather, as not to twist words;

it is not necessary to explain how such a genocide technically happened, it was technically possible because it happened and that's it.

You still do not understand that all historical enquiries involve the gathering of evidence, presented in chronological order, to prove what happened. There may be cases where the evidence is not clear-cut, or evidence is clearly missing, leaving knowledge gaps. If an event is proven to have happened, then it is not a major issue that how it happened may not be explainable, it is a knowledge gap.

The best example of evidence that is not clear-cut regarding the Holocaust, is how it was planned. That is partly due to a knowledge gap, as there are few specific written orders and there are orders that used euphemisms. The best example of a knowledge gap is how Krema I functioned as a gas chambers and how many people were gassed there.

Historical enquiry is not arguing that an event was not possible, therefore it did not happen, end of enquiry.

[TlsMS93]

So, 1941 is when the mass killings revisionists deny, start. Now, a chronology is where revisionists produce evidence as to what happened, not their opinion on what did not happen. As soon as mass killings, such as Babi Yar start, revisionists stop. They stop evidencing what happened and start to give their reasons as what did not happen. Their failure to produce an evidenced chronology means that they fail at history.

This whole thread proves revisionism is faulty history, it is bogus, a hoax.

My boy, in history there is no authority whatsoever, what exists are perspectives and interpretations, some more well-founded and others not.

What is evidenced to have happened has authority over what is not evidenced. Therefore, mass shootings have authority over supposed mass resettlement.

You can't even determine the alleged executions on the Eastern Front, I questioned the poster here regarding several things and you went off on a tangent, the identities of the victims in Babi Yar by Yad Vashem are 10% of what is alleged, the insane details of these events, none of that matters to you because you assume that a trial established what happened in an event, when a trial captures the moment and not a continuity, history is continuity.

Babi Yar is evidenced to have happened. There are missing details and unknowns, but that is to be expected.

We don't have to prove what happened, but rather determine what allegedly happened really happened or not and why.

Proving what happened has authority over determining what allegedly happened.

It wasn't the revisionists who declared that it is not necessary to explain how such a genocide technically happened, it was technically possible because it happened and that's it.

Not knowing all of the technical details and not being able to work out some technicalities, is not evidence to prove an event did not happen.

All that's left is for you to one day demand how many minutes Hitler spent in the bathroom on D-Day and if we don't answer it's because we don't know.

No, I just want some evidence of tens of thousand of Kiev Jews still alive in 1942. When you fail to provide such, I am correct to conclude your allegations are a hoax.

Here, on Toninhas beach, in the city of Ubatuba, in the state of São Paulo, in 1957, witnesses claim to have seen a UFO explode, where the debris fell into the sea and onto the sand. Many managed to collect the pieces of this object, including the Navy. They were taken for mass spectrometry tests, which returned that the samples had a proportion of pure magnesium of 99%. There was no technology at the time to manufacture that, and few asteroids have this level of purity. Was it inferred that it was an object made by an advanced civilization?

Many ufologists reach this conclusion based on this circumstantial evidence, but even that is not enough to be taken seriously.

Why should I accept their level of evidence, which is equally fragile according to the scientific status quo? Just because the victims were a special, chosen people?

[Nessie]

....

No, I just want some evidence of tens of thousand of Kiev Jews still alive in 1942. When you fail to provide such, I am correct to conclude your allegations are a hoax.

Here, on Toninhas beach, in the city of Ubatuba, in the state of São Paulo, in 1957, witnesses claim to have seen a UFO explode, where the debris fell into the sea and onto the sand. Many managed to collect the pieces of this object, including the Navy. They were taken for mass spectrometry tests, which returned that the samples had a proportion of pure magnesium of 99%. There was no technology at the time to manufacture that, and few asteroids have this level of purity. Was it inferred that it was an object made by an advanced civilization?

Many ufologists reach this conclusion based on this circumstantial evidence, but even that is not enough to be taken seriously.

Why should I accept their level of evidence, which is equally fragile according to the scientific status quo? Just because the victims were a special, chosen people?

The majority of the direct evidence of mass murders comes from Nazi sources. There is no direct evidence of mass resettlement. There are some Nazi plans for resettlement and suggestions in documents Jews were being resettled, but there is nothing to show large scale resettlement of millions of Jews. Revisionists suggestions that mass murders did not happen are contrary to the Nazis leaving evidence that did happen, and not leaving evidence of resettlement.

[borjastick]

The majority of the direct evidence of mass murders comes from Nazi sources. There is no direct evidence of mass resettlement. There are some Nazi plans for resettlement and suggestions in documents Jews were being resettled, but there is nothing to show large scale resettlement of millions of Jews. Revisionists suggestions that mass murders did not happen are contrary to the Nazis leaving evidence that did happen, and not leaving evidence of resettlement. - Nessie

Here we go with the fake news and untruths by Mrs Nessie and her children.

There were never millions matey that's simply a made up number. Secondly mass resettlement would be something planned for and done in small episodes of large numbers with a structured programme. That was never part of the plan. The plan was to tell the jews they were on thin ice, then tell them they should leave (many did) then expel as many as possible and then to put the few hundred thousand left over to work on concentration/work camps or send them piecemeal into the hinterland during a war. You really should be a lot better than to continually repeat the shit argument that no evidence of mass resettlement has been provided thus they all died in the non existent gas chambers and were magicked away into the air by cremating ten thousand an hour for fifteen days. Really Mrs Nessie you are better than this. Just stop this shit please or fuck off and die, either will do for me. Must be really taxing on you every morning to wake up and think 'how can I be a bigger cunt today than I was yesterday'.

[Numar Patru]

What a wholly unpleasant person you are.