Reply to "List of Holocaust Topics ..." [retitled]
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2025 7:25 am
This thread proves how reliant so-called revisionists are, on the argument from incredulity;
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=400
"List of Holocaust topics the Believer Brigades won't touch.
I have noticed since the re-launch of this web site that the Nessie types have a clever knack of changing the subject and swerving certain questions and areas that presumably they feel uncertain of their position on or realise that these will get them roasted and exposed should they get involved."
There then follows lists and suggestions for the topics supposedly avoided. Of course, none of them are avoided, all have been dealt with. What the suggestions prove, is that so-called revisionists prop up their believe, or should I say disbelief, with events that they cannot work out how they happened, or cannot believe happened. For example;
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=10852#p10852
"The cremation fuel problem.
The cremation time problem.
The refractory brickwork problem.
The open-air incineration pits problem.
The Sonderkommando/Aktion 1005 logistics absurdity.
The Operation Reinhard extermination of workable Jews problem."
Just because it is not possible to work out, to someone's satisfaction, how the cremations were fuelled etc, is not evidence to prove no cremations.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=10857#p10857
"1) They really do not like having to defend any of the classic eyewitnesses like Hoess, Gerstein, Nyiszli, etc. As these have all been thoroughly debunked, they will just try to shift to something else. They tend to get upset when revisionists bring these up."
That is not true. Those eyewitnesses area very easy to defend. It is proven they worked at A-B. They are corroborated. Any issues so-called revisionists find with their testimony can be easily explained by known witness behaviour, memory and recall. They make mistakes, some of the testimony was coerced, they forget etc. The suggestion that they have all been debunked is not true, as all that has been done, is to cast aspersions about their evidence. No evidence has been produced to prove they all, 100% of them, lied.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=10994#p10994
"It is that they don’t like discussing testimony of ‘eye-witnesses’ who refute the mythology of there being a planned genocide via ‘extermination camps’. E.g. Paul Rassanier and Dr. Russel Barton are excellent examples of that."
They were not eyewitnesses to what happened inside the AR camps, Chelmno or the A-B Kremas, and they provide no evidence that instead of millions of Jews being killed, millions of Jews were still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944, and were liberated in 1945.
"They also don’t like discussing camps that were presented as ‘death camps’ or ‘extermination camps’ at the war’s end but are now acknowledged not to have been. In other words they can’t acknowledge the Allies LIED (your point 2).
They can’t admit the Allies lied to the world, to the defeated Germans, to their own populations and to their own soldiers."
It was not a lie, in 1945, for soldiers who liberated camps full of dead people, mainly Jewish, to call it a death camp. That is an issue of terminology, whereby over time, death camp has come to refer to the camps specifically run to kill people, such as Chelmno. In 1945, Chelmno was still little known or understood. There was nothing there to see. Bergen-Belsen had a lot to see and its liberation was filmed and broadcast live on the radio, so of course it got all the attention. It was known in 1945, that the Nazis had been mass murdering Jews and others, so to find camps with so many dead, it was not unreasonable to think that all the camps were being used to murder.
It is a so-called revisionist deception that there are problems with the evidence and that certain topics are avoided. Instead, nothing is avoided and everything is easily explained.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=400
"List of Holocaust topics the Believer Brigades won't touch.
I have noticed since the re-launch of this web site that the Nessie types have a clever knack of changing the subject and swerving certain questions and areas that presumably they feel uncertain of their position on or realise that these will get them roasted and exposed should they get involved."
There then follows lists and suggestions for the topics supposedly avoided. Of course, none of them are avoided, all have been dealt with. What the suggestions prove, is that so-called revisionists prop up their believe, or should I say disbelief, with events that they cannot work out how they happened, or cannot believe happened. For example;
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=10852#p10852
"The cremation fuel problem.
The cremation time problem.
The refractory brickwork problem.
The open-air incineration pits problem.
The Sonderkommando/Aktion 1005 logistics absurdity.
The Operation Reinhard extermination of workable Jews problem."
Just because it is not possible to work out, to someone's satisfaction, how the cremations were fuelled etc, is not evidence to prove no cremations.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=10857#p10857
"1) They really do not like having to defend any of the classic eyewitnesses like Hoess, Gerstein, Nyiszli, etc. As these have all been thoroughly debunked, they will just try to shift to something else. They tend to get upset when revisionists bring these up."
That is not true. Those eyewitnesses area very easy to defend. It is proven they worked at A-B. They are corroborated. Any issues so-called revisionists find with their testimony can be easily explained by known witness behaviour, memory and recall. They make mistakes, some of the testimony was coerced, they forget etc. The suggestion that they have all been debunked is not true, as all that has been done, is to cast aspersions about their evidence. No evidence has been produced to prove they all, 100% of them, lied.
https://codohforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=10994#p10994
"It is that they don’t like discussing testimony of ‘eye-witnesses’ who refute the mythology of there being a planned genocide via ‘extermination camps’. E.g. Paul Rassanier and Dr. Russel Barton are excellent examples of that."
They were not eyewitnesses to what happened inside the AR camps, Chelmno or the A-B Kremas, and they provide no evidence that instead of millions of Jews being killed, millions of Jews were still alive in camps and ghettos in 1944, and were liberated in 1945.
"They also don’t like discussing camps that were presented as ‘death camps’ or ‘extermination camps’ at the war’s end but are now acknowledged not to have been. In other words they can’t acknowledge the Allies LIED (your point 2).
They can’t admit the Allies lied to the world, to the defeated Germans, to their own populations and to their own soldiers."
It was not a lie, in 1945, for soldiers who liberated camps full of dead people, mainly Jewish, to call it a death camp. That is an issue of terminology, whereby over time, death camp has come to refer to the camps specifically run to kill people, such as Chelmno. In 1945, Chelmno was still little known or understood. There was nothing there to see. Bergen-Belsen had a lot to see and its liberation was filmed and broadcast live on the radio, so of course it got all the attention. It was known in 1945, that the Nazis had been mass murdering Jews and others, so to find camps with so many dead, it was not unreasonable to think that all the camps were being used to murder.
It is a so-called revisionist deception that there are problems with the evidence and that certain topics are avoided. Instead, nothing is avoided and everything is easily explained.