The CODOH Revisionist Forum

PangaeaProxima wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2026 5:45 pm

Nessie wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2026 12:36 pm

PangaeaProxima wrote: ↑Thu Sep 03, 2026 11:13 am
It is of course ridiculous to claim that the Polish Government in Exile in London was in any way less unscrupulous than the Communist one when it came to blatant propaganda lies and forgeries. An example is the testimony of Alfred Naujocks, which it certified as "true" despite such howlers like setting the date of the Gleiwitz raid more than 2 weeks before the start of the war!
https://www.codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=7100#p7100

The reason why revisionists want to downplay the role the Poles played, is that even they cannot bring themselves to believe that the Polish were responsible for hoaxing the Holocaust. It is far more believable, for them to claim it was the Jews and/or the Soviets.

Getting a date wrong, is not a significant howler. People get dates wrong all the time.

Stop babbling nonsense, of course Poles were and are eager pushers of WW2 Anti-German atrocity propaganda lies, even though it is often for their own chauvinistic purposes.

And if you proclaim that wrong dates don't matter, well I guess then you have given up any rational defense of your position. Anyway, here is not so much the fact that Naujocks made extremely blatant errors (Can you find the others besides the timeline issue? There is one medium sized and another whopper in the few lines) in creating his fictional story important, but that the Polish Exile Government gave this story its stamp of approval. This invalidates of course all the other stuff that they have peddled.

Subsequent evidence gathering, post war, has confirmed the mas murder claims made by the Polish Government in Exile. The errors made by intelligence gatherers during the war have been identified. A more detailed and accurate history has been determined.

Revisionists can bleat all they want, as they are not really revisionists at all, as they cannot produce a revised history. That is why they are usually deferred to as deniers.

HansHill;

viewtopic.php?p=26506#p26506

He has repeatedly shown that revisionists do not need or even tend to invoke muh-forgery, and it is rarely if ever, invoked. A much more satisfactory rebuttal to any given claim is invoking it's own internal weakness via impossibility, improbability, contradiction or inconsistency.

That is a rebuttal based on opinion and argument, rather than evidence. If you want to rebut claims the Kremas were used for gassings, then use evidence to prove what they were used for.

Another example to add to the inflated volume phenomenon is Hoess's affidavit. Revisionists can simultaneously acknowledge the document as "authentic" in its origin while being overinflated 4x (by extension having little accuracy)

Nazis over reporting how many Jews they had killed, is not the win you think it is. There is an obvious reason why they would over report, to impress the most senior of the Nazis, and they are clear that they are mass murdering Jews.

Has it never dawned on so-called revisionists, that after so many years, they still can find only one inconclusive report of someone possibly being transported through an AR camp to be resettled in the east, and what that means to their theory of millions being resettled?

viewtopic.php?p=26514#p26514

For the resettlement thesis, it has been challenged to find one person transited through the Reinhardt camps to the east. A while back, it was claimed that one was indeed found, Siegmund Rothstein.

As for evidence of mass resettlement in the east, there is none, so so-called revisionists concentrate on doubting the evidence mass murders were taking place there.

viewtopic.php?p=26493#p26493

But let's say, hypothetically, that you were able to show truly overwhelming evidence for your 2,000,000 number. What then? Most revisionists would presumably concede those killings. However even that extreme scenario would not automatically resolve the questions over the gas chambers and death camps and that is frankly what most people are interested in. Those areas could still be contested. That's why I see your Einsatzgruppen focus as somewhat irrelevant. To be clear, it's fine to discuss it but it's weird for you to continue avoiding all other areas. Given the current state of evidence we don't have to concede your 2,000,000 shootings.

There is overwhelming documentary, eyewitness, circumstantial and other evidence to prove multiple mass shootings were taking place across Eastern Europe. That some of the numbers are likely to be estimates, exaggerations and wrong, does not negate the evidence of the mass shootings.

We know that the Nazi motive was to rid Europe of Jews and the majority lived in the East. Anti-Semitism was also strong in the east, and so the Nazis found they had a lot of support and assistance for their policy. Revisionists accept the Jews were an enemy force, often operating as or with partisans and so they would be subject to execution. I am not sure how far revisionists accept that there was a policy of Lebensraum and the Nazis wanted the east to be Jew free for German settlers to move and farm there. How could Germans live and work safely, with a constant Jewish threat? Of course, the threat had to be removed and documents confirm that.

Within that backdrop, it is inconceivable as well as unevidenced, that millions of Jews were being resettled as opposed to being executed.