Pilpul Activities on the CODOH Forum

[ConfusedJew]

It has often been remarked that Jews are like their own underground nation spread out among all the other nations. "International Jewry."

Am I part of International Jewry? I used to live in London for a bit but I moved back to the US.

Depends. How do you feel about gefilte fish?

Pretty gross.

[Nessie]

The historian and criminal investigators, along with the journalists at the BBC and the Guardian as per the snippets I showed you, did absolutely nothing to prevent the spread of the Dachau gas chamber myth and in fact perpetuated it.

Does this confuse you?

No, there are lazy investigators who will repeat myths. However, the articles you showed, the second one makes it clear there were no gas chambers and the first is not specific about gas chambers.

Do you know what historians, journalists and criminal investigators do, to determine eyewitness truthfulness and accuracy?

"the second one makes it clear there were no gas chambers"

That's David Irving - David Irving clarified the lies and myths perpetuated at Nuremberg. He's exposing the sloppiness and the atrocity propaganda common in the Holocaust.

"first is not specific about gas chambers"

What is there to be specific about? There were no gas chambers at Dachau - nobody was gassed there. "The Dachau gas chambers are a myth" is all that needs to be said, anything else is perpetuating the myth.

"Do you know what historians, journalists and criminal investigators do, to determine eyewitness truthfulness and accuracy?"

Yes - for example at Dachau what the did was ignore all common sense and perpetuated a completely unrealistic set of atrocity propaganda claims as initiated by the eyewitnesses.

Do you have any more questions?

I only had one question, which you dodged till now and then answered incorrectly.

[Nessie]

...

Pretty much all of the witnesses are from war-crimes trials administered by Germany's conquerors. You ignore that context.

That is not true, as you now go on to admit;

You pretend these testimonies just fell out of the sky. You say they made these confessions against their self-interest but that is far from obvious. Speer went along with the extermination story and he got a relatively lighter sentence. At the Belzec trial, all of the defendants went along with the Holocaust story and they all had their charges dropped except for one guy who got 4 years. Your spin on that will be that it proves that the German government was still pro-Nazi or whatever but the other way to read it is that they were had incentivize to be cooperative.

Not just Belzec, but Chelmno, Sobibor, TII, Majdanek and A-B. The majority of the camp staff were tried in West, East and since unified Germany. Next, were the trials in Poland and Israel, who cannot be considered to be amongst Germany's conquers.

As for being incentivised to cooperate, you have no evidence of that. You ignore that the mass murders were evidenced, which explains why no defendant denied them.

You have created a false context to support your false beliefs.

Lol, West Germany was what got conquered. It was under the American thumb after the war.

Postwar Poland was Communist and was under the Soviet sphere.

Israel as a state did not exist during the war, but International Jewry most definitely was among Germany's conquerors.

You don't understand geopolitics.

You are wrong about who administered the majority of war crimes trials. You have ignored that the SS camp staff did not challenge the gassing claims, due to the evidence of gassings. By doing that, you have created a false base on which you prop your erroneous beliefs.

[HansHill]

Wait hang on - that's odd.

Why would you trust an LLM over David Irving given you don't mistrust his credibility or integrity? The citation was right there for you as well, not as if it were obfuscated.

I looked up his book and found the citation but when I googled it, nothing came up.

I trust an LLM because I can easily fact check it myself. If something is wrong, I can figure it out in short order. With somebody like David Irving, who was found guilty of Holocaust denial by a court process, I have to audit everything he says in much more granular detail.

Being convicted by a court itself is not enough because I have to audit the details and judgment of that court case. It is much faster to do that with LLMs.

The relevant affidavit is here:

https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/docum ... PS-2430%22

Click "convert to PDF". Page 10 is the relevant page attesting to "lethal gas chambers". I understand that this stuff can be extremely niche to find, and we can help assist with finding obscure documents, remember what has been said to you many times now - there are people here who are very familiar with this material and have been doing this for decades.

Re Irving: I think your mistrust of Irving isn't necessarily because of his Holocaust denial charge, but rather his Holocaust denial full stop. For example, one of the names that gets discussed here alot is Germar Rudolf, and he has a similarly chequered past with Holocaust Denial laws, as that is a crime in his native Germany. I assume you also would mistrust him. However an arguably evenmore prevalent Holocaust revisionist is Carlo Mattogno who has a completely clean slate legally speaking, so would you be mistrustful of him?

If the answer is yes, then your mistrust of Irving has nothing to do with the guilty verdict, and everything to do with his position.

[ConfusedJew]

Re Irving: I think your mistrust of Irving isn't necessarily because of his Holocaust denial charge, but rather his Holocaust denial full stop. For example, one of the names that gets discussed here alot is Germar Rudolf, and he has a similarly chequered past with Holocaust Denial laws, as that is a crime in his native Germany. I assume you also would mistrust him. However an arguably evenmore prevalent Holocaust revisionist is Carlo Mattogno who has a completely clean slate legally speaking, so would you be mistrustful of him?

If the answer is yes, then your mistrust of Irving has nothing to do with the guilty verdict, and everything to do with his position.

I don't trust anybody at face value but I will look at the sources to independently verify if he is saying is true and how relevant it is. I will be at a conference for the next few days and will have to come back to some of these items later but I have written down what I need to respond to.