Challenge for Believers

[fireofice]

I have a challenge for holocaust believers, especially those who think the "where did they go" argument is a particularly good argument. Here is a list of expulsions throughout history:

https://www.emilkirkegaard.com/p/large- ... s-possible

My challenge is simply this: demonstrate with evidence where all these groups expelled went. In short, where did they go? The evidence of course has to surpass the evidence revisionists like Thomas Kues have provided for the resettlements of Jews by the Reich to the east since you don't accept that as being sufficient. If you think this is an overly burdensome task, I completely understand. But then in that case don't make the "where did they go" argument ever again. I think that's fair.

If you want to continue to make the "where did they go" argument as a slam dunk argument, then you must carry out this task for every expulsion listed here. However, if you want to make it a probabilistic argument instead, then carrying out this task for every one of them isn't necessary. Just do the task on as many as you can and then use this probability argument in conjunction with other evidence of the holocaust and explain your reasoning.

Maybe this can actually be done. Good luck!

[bombsaway]

So like one witness testimony for each item? For example for the first item

(Jews out of Muslim lands 1900-present)

Would a single witness account of a Jew expelled from "Muslim lands" suffice? This is more than revisionists have for resettlement btw.

And continue on down the list, witness testimony or eg documentary evidence of transit for each expulsion?

[fireofice]

So like one witness testimony for each item? For example for the first item

(Jews out of Muslim lands 1900-present)

Would a single witness account of a Jew expelled from "Muslim lands" suffice? This is more than revisionists have for resettlement btw.

And continue on down the list, witness testimony or eg documentary evidence of transit for each expulsion?

An account of "I saw this ethnic group arrive in this area" isn't really going to cut it since we also have examples of that from the resettlement of Jews. Documentary evidence of "we deported this group to this place" isn't going to cut it either since we have documentation of Nazis saying they are sending Jews to the east. Granted, you think it means they were killed. But it's still documentation that they were deported east nonetheless. Basically, if it surpasses the evidence we have for Jewish resettlements, then yes it counts.

Btw, I am not coming into this with a certainty that your side will fail. Maybe you will succeed! That is what I am trying to figure out with this. I really am curious if the kind of evidence you claim should exist for Jewish resettlements also exists with these other expulsions.

[Nessie]

I have a challenge for holocaust believers, especially those who think the "where did they go" argument is a particularly good argument. Here is a list of expulsions throughout history:

https://www.emilkirkegaard.com/p/large- ... s-possible

My challenge is simply this: demonstrate with evidence where all these groups expelled went. In short, where did they go? The evidence of course has to surpass the evidence revisionists like Thomas Kues have provided for the resettlements of Jews by the Reich to the east since you don't accept that as being sufficient. If you think this is an overly burdensome task, I completely understand. But then in that case don't make the "where did they go" argument ever again. I think that's fair.

If you want to continue to make the "where did they go" argument as a slam dunk argument, then you must carry out this task for every expulsion listed here. However, if you want to make it a probabilistic argument instead, then carrying out this task for every one of them isn't necessary. Just do the task on as many as you can and then use this probability argument in conjunction with other evidence of the holocaust and explain your reasoning.

Maybe this can actually be done. Good luck!

It already has been done. Click on the links to Wikipedia and then click on the section for references and there is the evidence on which each claim is based. For example;

"Czechoslovak–Hungarian population exchange"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czechoslo ... n_exchange

"Citations

"Non-paper...". Archived from the original on 2016-03-03. Retrieved 2010-05-16.
Kaplan 1987, p. 29
Prof. PaedDr. Štefan Šutaj, DrSc. (2007). "The Czechoslovak government policy and population exchange (A csehszlovák kormánypolitika és a lakosságcsere)". Slovak Academy of Sciences. Retrieved 2010-01-10.
Károly Kocsis, Eszter Kocsisné Hodosi, Ethnic Geography of the Hungarian Minorities in the Carpathian Basin, Simon Publications LLC, 1998, p. 23 [1][permanent dead link]
Pertti Ahonen, People on the move: forced population movements in Europe in the Second World War and its aftermath, Berg Publishers, 2008, p. 83
Cas, Bratislava, vol. 2, no 19, May 12, 1945
Jablonicky 1965, p. 401
Kaplan 1987, p. 26
Otáhoalová, op. cit., pp. 199–200, 294–296; J.W. Brügel, Tschechen und Deutsche, vol. II, Munich 1974; E. Benes, Demokracie dnes zítra, London 1946, pp. 176–177; J. Kŕen, "Odsun Némcú ve světle nových dokumentů" in Vídeňské svobodné listy, Vienna, vol. 34; Klimeš et al., op. cit., p. 56
Kamusella 2009, p. 774
Rieber 2000, pp. 84–85
Kaplan 1987, p. 26
Rieber 2000, p. 83
Chapters VIII and IX of the "Statute issued in Košice", Slovakia, April 5, 1945 (Program of the new Czechoslovak Government, the National Front of Czechs and Slovaks, adopted by the cabinet council on April 5, 1945)
The Constitution of the Czechoslovak Republic; Constitutional Act ofMay 9th, 1948. Prague, Czechoslovak Ministry of Information, 1948.
Lastovicka 1960, pp. 449–471
G Husak "Poucenia z jesene 1938," Nove Slovo, vol. 2, no 20, October 12, 1945, 1–3
Kamusella 2009, pp. 774–775
Country Study 1987
Kaplan 1987, p. 27
Ther & Siljak 2001, p. 57
Mandelbaum 2000, p. 40
Šutaj 2005, pp. 20–29
Breuning, Lewis & Pritchard 2005, pp. 140–143
Kertesz 1985, p. 33
SNA, ÚV KSS, 789. d., Záznam o zasad nu tí roz ší re né ho Pred sed níc tva KSS, kona nomdňa 16. 6. 1945.
"Human Rights For Minorities In Central Europe: Ethnic Cleansing In Post World War II Czechoslovakia: The Presidential Decrees Of Edvard Beneš, 1945–1948". Archived from the original on 2009-04-23. Retrieved 2010-05-14.
History Archived 2008-03-01 at the Wayback Machine
Bobák 1996
Zvara 1969
Index – A magyarok kitelepítése: mézesmadzag a szlovákoknak
Bernd 2009, p. 201

MAR 2006

Bibliography

Bernd, Rechel (2009). Minority rights in Central and Eastern Europe. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-203-88365-5.
Bobák, Ján (1996). Mad̕arská otázka v Česko–Slovensku, 1944–1948 [Hungarian Question in Czechoslovakia] (in Slovak). Matica slovenská. ISBN 978-80-7090-354-4.
Breuning, Eleonore C.M.; Lewis, Jill; Pritchard, Gareth (2005). Power and the people: a social history of Central European politics, 1945–56. Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-0-7190-7069-3.
Bumm.sk (2008-03-05). "Sínen a školský zákon. Duray: ravasz módszerekkel próbálkoznak". Bumm (in Hungarian). www.bumm.sk.
Country Study (1987). Library of Congress Country Studies; Czechoslovakia; Minorities and Population Transfers; The War Years, 1939–45. Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress.
Duray, Miklós (1996). "Hungarian Nation in Slovakia". Slovakia.org Slovakia.org. Archived from the original on 2013-02-03. Retrieved 2010-03-29.
Engemann, Iris (2008). The Slovakization of Bratislava 1918–1948. Processes of national appropriation in the interwar-period. CEU.
Cienski, Jan (August 16, 2009). "Slovakia and Hungary just won't get along". GlobalPost.
Felvidék Ma (2008-11-21). "Slota: Meghátráltunk, kétnyelvűek lesznek a településnevek". Felvidék Ma (in Hungarian). www.felvidek.ma.
Hobsbawm, Eric J. (1990). Nations and nationalism since 1780: programme, myth, reality. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-33507-8. "...The most immediate demand of Slovak nationalism in 1990 was to 'make Slovak the only official language and force the population of 600,000 ethnic Hungarians to use only Slovak in dealing with authorities'..."
Jablonicky, Jozef (1965). Slovensko na prelome; Zapas o vitazstvo narodnej a demokratickej revolucie na Slovensku (in Slovak). Bratislava: Vydavatel'stvo politickej literatury.
Kamusella, Tomasz (2009). The Politics of Language and Nationalism in Modern Central Europe. Basingstoke, UK (Foreword by Professor Peter Burke): Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-55070-4.
Kaplan, Karel (1987). The short march: the Communist takeover in Czechoslovakia, 1945–1948. C.Hurst & Co. Publishers. ISBN 978-0-905838-96-0.
Kertesz, Stephen (1985). The Last European Peace Conference: Paris 1946 – Conflict of Values. Lanham: University Press of America. ISBN 978-0-8191-4420-1.
Kocsis, Károly; Kocsisné Hodosi, Eszter (1998). Ethnic Geography of the Hungarian Minorities in the Carpathian Basin. Simon Publications LLC. ISBN 978-1-931313-75-9.
Kovács, Éva (2004). "IV: A politikai attitűdök mint a nemzeti azonosságtudat mutatói" (PDF). Felemás asszimiláció A kassai zsidóság a két világháború között (1918–1938) (PDF). Nostra tempora;, 9 (in Hungarian). Šamorín: Forum Minority Research Institute; Lilium Aurum Slovakia. ISBN 978-80-8062-222-0. LCCN 2005443137.
Krekovič, Eduard; Mannová, Elena; Krekovičová, Eva (2005). Mýty naše slovenské [Our Slovak Myths] (in Slovak). Bratislava: AEPress. ISBN 978-80-88880-61-5.
Lastovicka, Cf. Bohuslav (1960). "Vznik a vyznam Kosickeho vladniho programu". Ceskoslovensky Casopis Historicky [Czechoslovakia Historical Magazine] (in Slovak). 8 (4): 449–471.
Macartney, C.A. (2001) [1st. Pub. 1937]. "Chapter 1: Introduction". Hungary and her successors – The Treaty of Trianon and Its Consequences 1919–1937. 1st. Pub. Oxford University Press 2nd. Pub. Simon Publications. ISBN 978-1-931313-86-5.
Magocsi, Paul R.; Pop, Ivan (2002). Encyclopedia of Rusyn History and Culture. University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-8020-3566-0.
Mandelbaum, Michael (2000). The New European Diasporas: National Minorities and Conflict in Eastern Europe. Council on Foreign Relations. ISBN 978-0-87609-257-6.
MAR (2006). "Assessment for Hungarians in Slovakia". University of Maryland, College Park. Archived from the original on 2010-06-02. Retrieved 2010-03-29.
Marko, Augustín; Martinický, Pavol (1995). Slovensko-maďarské vzťahy : história a súčasnost̕ vo faktoch [Slovak–Hungarian relations : history and present day in figures] (in Slovak). Bratislava: Signum : Slovenská spoločnosť na obranu demokracie a humanity [Slovak Society for Protection of Democracy and Humanity]. ISBN 978-80-967333-2-3.
Martin, Butora; Skalodny, Thomas W. (1998). Slovakia 1996–1997: A Global Report on the State and Society. Institute for Public Affairs.
Mináč, Vladimír (1993). Odkial' a kam Slováci? (in Slovak). Bratislava: Remedium. ISBN 978-80-85352-15-3.
Ramet, Sabrina P. (1997). Whose democracy?: nationalism, religion, and the doctrine of collective rights in post-1989 Eastern Europe. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 131–134. ISBN 978-0-8476-8324-6. "[Meciar]...gerrymandered electoral districts in order to reduce ethnic Hungarian strength in parliament..."
Rieber, Alfred J. (2000). Forced Migration in Central and Eastern Europe, 1939–1950. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-7146-5132-3.
Rubicon (2005). "Rubicon, történelmi folyóirat" [Rubicon Hungarian History Magazine] (in Hungarian). 6. Rubicon-Ház Bt. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
Smith, Adrian (2000). "Ethnicity, Economic Polarization and Regional Inequality in Southern Slovakia, Growth and Change". Growth and Change. 31 (2). University of Sussex: 151. doi:10.1111/0017-4815.00124.
Šutaj, Štefan (2005). Nútené presídlenie Maďarov zo Slovenska do Čiech [Deportation of population of Hungarian nationality out of Slovakia to Bohemia after the World War II] (in Slovak). Prešov: Universum. ISBN 978-80-89046-29-4.
Szegő, Iván Miklós (2007-09-29). "A magyarok kitelepítése: mézesmadzag a szlovákoknak" (in Hungarian). Index. Retrieved 2010-02-21.
Ther, Philipp; Siljak, Ana (2001). Redrawing nations: ethnic cleansing in East–Central Europe, 1944–1948. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-1094-4.
Tisliar, Pavol. Prve slovenske scitanie l'udu z roku 1919 (PDF) (in Slovak). Katedra archivnctva a pomocnych vied historickych Filozoficka fakulta UK.
Ward, Josh (2009-08-25). "Slovakia and Hungary 'Dangerously Close to Playing with Fire'". Spiegel. SpiegelOnline International.
Yehudah, Don; Karády, Viktor (1989). A Social and Economic History of Central European Jewry. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-0-88738-211-6.
Yeshayahu A., Jelinek (1983). The Lust for Power: Nationalism, Slovakia, and the Communists, 1918–1948. East European Monographs. ISBN 978-0-88033-019-0.
Zvara, Juraj (1969). Madárská menšina na Slovensku po roku 1945 [Hungarian minority in Slovakia after 1945] (in Slovak). Bratislava: Epocha, t. Pravda.

Further reading
Fisher, Sharon (2006). Political Change in Post-Communist Slovakia and Croatia: From Nationalist to Europeanist. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-4039-7286-6.
Van Duin, Pieter; Polá, Zuzana (2000). Democratic Renewal and the Hungarian Minority Question in Slovakia. European Societies. Vol. 2. pp. 335–360. doi:10.1080/146166900750036303. S2CID 154788930."

[bombsaway]

So like one witness testimony for each item? For example for the first item

(Jews out of Muslim lands 1900-present)

Would a single witness account of a Jew expelled from "Muslim lands" suffice? This is more than revisionists have for resettlement btw.

And continue on down the list, witness testimony or eg documentary evidence of transit for each expulsion?

An account of "I saw this ethnic group arrive in this area" isn't really going to cut it since we also have examples of that from the resettlement of Jews. Documentary evidence of "we deported this group to this place" isn't going to cut it either since we have documentation of Nazis saying they are sending Jews to the east. Granted, you think it means they were killed. But it's still documentation that they were deported east nonetheless. Basically, if it surpasses the evidence we have for Jewish resettlements, then yes it counts.

Btw, I am not coming into this with a certainty that your side will fail. Maybe you will succeed! That is what I am trying to figure out with this. I really am curious if the kind of evidence you claim should exist for Jewish resettlements also exists with these other expulsions.

In 1942 Himmler announced the "resettlement" of the non-working Jews of the GG. https://www.yadvashem.org/docs/himmler- ... ution.html

By the end of 1942, according to Korherr, 1.4 million Jews had been deported and apparently resettled in the Russian East.

Do you have a single witness testimony from one of these 1.5 million Jews that accords with the revisionist narrative here, that the resettlement was real.

[fireofice]

It already has been done. Click on the links to Wikipedia and then click on the section for references and there is the evidence on which each claim is based...

Nessie, I am not claiming that none of these have the required evidence. I am trying to figure out if this is the case for all of them and if not, how many. Also the big list you are referring to means nothing to me. I don't know what any of that is. Show me the primary documents themselves.

[fireofice]

So like one witness testimony for each item? For example for the first item

(Jews out of Muslim lands 1900-present)

Would a single witness account of a Jew expelled from "Muslim lands" suffice? This is more than revisionists have for resettlement btw.

And continue on down the list, witness testimony or eg documentary evidence of transit for each expulsion?

An account of "I saw this ethnic group arrive in this area" isn't really going to cut it since we also have examples of that from the resettlement of Jews. Documentary evidence of "we deported this group to this place" isn't going to cut it either since we have documentation of Nazis saying they are sending Jews to the east. Granted, you think it means they were killed. But it's still documentation that they were deported east nonetheless. Basically, if it surpasses the evidence we have for Jewish resettlements, then yes it counts.

Btw, I am not coming into this with a certainty that your side will fail. Maybe you will succeed! That is what I am trying to figure out with this. I really am curious if the kind of evidence you claim should exist for Jewish resettlements also exists with these other expulsions.

In 1942 Himmler announced the "resettlement" of the non-working Jews of the GG. https://www.yadvashem.org/docs/himmler- ... ution.html

By the end of 1942, according to Korherr, 1.4 million Jews had been deported and apparently resettled in the Russian East.

Do you have a single witness testimony from one of these 1.5 million Jews that accords with the revisionist narrative here, that the resettlement was real.

This is off topic.

[bombsaway]

You're saying witness testimonies don't apply because " we also have examples of that from the resettlement of Jews."

I challenged you to provide this because you are disallowing evidence for suspect reasons. 1.4 million isn't a small number, this is an enormous population movement that should leave lots of evidence.

[fireofice]

Tell you what bombsaway. You give us whatever you think is better evidence. Use your own judgement and disregard my opinion on this entirely. Others can then make the comparisons themselves and make up their own mind.

[TlsMS93]

To resettle would leave a lot of evidence but to exterminate wouldn't?

[Nessie]

It already has been done. Click on the links to Wikipedia and then click on the section for references and there is the evidence on which each claim is based...

Nessie, I am not claiming that none of these have the required evidence. I am trying to figure out if this is the case for all of them and if not, how many. Also the big list you are referring to means nothing to me. I don't know what any of that is. Show me the primary documents themselves.

This was the challenge;

My challenge is simply this: demonstrate with evidence where all these groups expelled went. In short, where did they go?

I looked at the links and they demonstrate with evidence where all those displaced and expelled people went.

The evidence of course has to surpass the evidence revisionists like Thomas Kues have provided for the resettlements of Jews by the Reich to the east since you don't accept that as being sufficient.

Kues attempt to evidence mass resettlement in the east failed because all he could do was evidence that some Jews, such as from Germany in 1941, did go east to Latvia. But they did not go via an AR camp and there is no evidence they were still alive in 1944. The evidence is that they were shot. Much of what he relies on are secondary reports, rather than Nazi records and he cannot find millions of Jews resettled in the east in 1944.

If you think this is an overly burdensome task, I completely understand. But then in that case don't make the "where did they go" argument ever again. I think that's fair.

Then it is fair to say that revisionists should not make the "resettlement" argument ever again. Or, it is up to both sides to evidence their claims, and revisionists should be able to answer, with evidence, where did they go?

[Nessie]

To resettle would leave a lot of evidence but to exterminate wouldn't?

If the Nazis had been falsely accused of mass murder and they had evidence of resettlement, you can be sure they would have ensured that evidence was widely available. If the Nazis were being accused of extermination and they had been mass murdering, typically for an accuse guilty person, they will hide and destroy evidence. So, yes, I would expect to find a lot of evidence for resettlement and less for mass murder.

[HansHill]

To resettle would leave a lot of evidence but to exterminate wouldn't?

If the Nazis had been falsely accused of mass murder and they had evidence of resettlement, you can be sure they would have ensured that evidence was widely available. If the Nazis were being accused of extermination and they had been mass murdering, typically for an accuse guilty person, they will hide and destroy evidence. So, yes, I would expect to find a lot of evidence for resettlement and less for mass murder.

False dichotomy. And very flimsy. I could equally argue:

The Nazis were an advanced technological civilisation with a thorough understanding of law and engineering. Therefore, in the clear absence of a viable murder weapon, no court in the world would even consider such wild claims as valid, therefore them attempting to pre-emptively evidence against what never happened is not only very silly but completely baffling as to why they should even attempt.

[HansHill]

I have a another challenge, which is somewhat similar and which I prefer because it always leaves them completely stumped:

I challenge exterminationists to not only geo-locate, but to quantify every North Korean defector since the State's inception. Clearly this is not possible, and some of the the reasons are:

1) It is politically imperative for the relevant parties (notably China and S Korea) to manage this quietly and delicately.

2) The exposure of known defectors poses severe risks to these states' reputatione, especially as it comes to managing the narratives around known humanitarian crises, such as the N Korean famine in the 90s where we believe millions perished.

3) The N Koreans themselves are a famously isolationist people, and integrating into their host societies will not be convenient for them, if even desirable or possible

For all of these reasons and more, no exterminationist will be able to put a number on it, let alone tell you where they are or where they went, or where they died. At best they will give you a range, at worst they will be completely honest and tell you its impossible.

[Nessie]

To resettle would leave a lot of evidence but to exterminate wouldn't?

If the Nazis had been falsely accused of mass murder and they had evidence of resettlement, you can be sure they would have ensured that evidence was widely available. If the Nazis were being accused of extermination and they had been mass murdering, typically for an accuse guilty person, they will hide and destroy evidence. So, yes, I would expect to find a lot of evidence for resettlement and less for mass murder.

False dichotomy. And very flimsy. I could equally argue:

The Nazis were an advanced technological civilisation with a thorough understanding of law and engineering. Therefore, in the clear absence of a viable murder weapon, no court in the world would even consider such wild claims as valid, therefore them attempting to pre-emptively evidence against what never happened is not only very silly but completely baffling as to why they should even attempt.

A person accused of murder, who knows the person they are accused of murdering is still alive, would normally provide evidence that person is still alive. It is baffling you think otherwise.