The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / By Alexander Cockburn
 All Comments / By Alexander Cockburn
    A couple of weeks ago Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate and self-appointed moral conscience for Holocaust survivors, praised the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes to make way for yet more illegal settlements in Jerusalem. His chilling statement ran in an ad placed inHa’aretz. Here are Wiesel’s appalling words: Though Wiesel offers himself as a paragon...
  • @hdc
    As one sage would have it: "Extraordinary allegations require extraordinary proof."

    As stated earlier, my interest lies with holocaustianity, that is why I chimed in earlier in this thread.

    It is you that tried to muddy the waters of discussion by introducing some "mass grave" in Ukraine. Agreed that 500 + bodies constitutes a mass grave but not in the context of holocaustianity. My reply would then be "OK, you found 500+ bodies, where are the remaining alleged 10,000,500 bodies or their remains? (6 mil. Jews plus 5 mil. Gentiles as alleged).

    Back to our original contention: Where is the forensic evidence to support your allegations of 11 million gassed and cremated???????? hdc

    It is you that tried to muddy the waters of discussion by introducing some “mass grave” in Ukraine. Agreed that 500 + bodies constitutes a mass grave but not in the context of holocaustianity. My reply would then be “OK, you found 500+ bodies, where are the remaining alleged 10,000,500 bodies or their remains? (6 mil. Jews plus 5 mil. Gentiles as alleged).

    I think not.

    “Proving” the Holocaust would require a lot of time to run it all the way up to 11 million (or six million, for that matter). Therefore, some short cuts are required. Let me ask you this question: How many mass graves and/or what total number of shooting victims would I have to prove to you for you to accept that the Nazis conducted a concerted campaign to murder Jews on the Eastern Front? Ten percent? Twenty-five percent? More? Less? If your answer is that only by proving 100% of the mass graves, then I think we can wrap things up. Otherwise, we can move on to another grave. If and when you accept the existence of mass graves, we can move onto gas chambers, first by way of T4 and then to camps.

    Your move.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis

    Well, I’ve bee wracking my brains to discover the relevancy of this mass grave with holocaustianity which is my primary interest of those times.
     
    Well, you'd have to define what that terms means, to start with. If your contention now is that you don't particularly care about specific war crimes but rather care about the beliefs about the Holocaust that have emerged over time, then that's both not what I'm interested in discussion (since I don't particularly care) and an attempt (it seems) by you to move the goalposts.

    If the question is what the relevance of this grave is with the Holocaust, it's part of a larger picture, as I imagine you already figured.


    Granted that there were reprisal executions on all sides…
     
    The shooting of women and children in a reprisal would be highly unusual. Once you find a pattern of this happening, then you get the sense that it was quite deliberate. Moreover, the absence of actions that would warrant a reprisal in such places as Serniki makes the idea that these were reprisals fairly ridiculous.

    I’ve read the transcript of one of the Zuendel trials which occurred in the 1980′s in Toronto; my son brought it home from his school library. I was absolutely appalled at what passed for evidence on the part of the prosecutor, yet the jury still found Zuendel guilty. And there is no evidence that this has changed in any western country.
     
    Well, then we disagree. But I'm hard pressed to see how this is relevant to the mass grave at Serniki.

    What I would like to see is the original forensic report issued by a certified pathologist. I’m afraid that an archeologist, no matter how many of his peers man the hallelujah chorus, does not qualify.
     
    Lucky for you, the original forensic report was filed with the Queen's prosecutor's office in Adelaide, South Australia. See, the report was done as part of the prosecution of an accused war criminal back in the 1990s. Even better news for you -- despite the evidence, the accused was not convicted, which by the way says nothing about the value of the report itself.

    I suppose you could write to the prosecutor's office in Adelaide for the report. But it seems as if you might be willing to concede that this is a mass grave of Jews shot during World War I by Ukrainians acting under German orders. Are you willing to concede that?

    As one sage would have it: “Extraordinary allegations require extraordinary proof.”

    As stated earlier, my interest lies with holocaustianity, that is why I chimed in earlier in this thread.

    It is you that tried to muddy the waters of discussion by introducing some “mass grave” in Ukraine. Agreed that 500 + bodies constitutes a mass grave but not in the context of holocaustianity. My reply would then be “OK, you found 500+ bodies, where are the remaining alleged 10,000,500 bodies or their remains? (6 mil. Jews plus 5 mil. Gentiles as alleged).

    Back to our original contention: Where is the forensic evidence to support your allegations of 11 million gassed and cremated???????? hdc

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis

    It is you that tried to muddy the waters of discussion by introducing some “mass grave” in Ukraine. Agreed that 500 + bodies constitutes a mass grave but not in the context of holocaustianity. My reply would then be “OK, you found 500+ bodies, where are the remaining alleged 10,000,500 bodies or their remains? (6 mil. Jews plus 5 mil. Gentiles as alleged).
     
    I think not.

    "Proving" the Holocaust would require a lot of time to run it all the way up to 11 million (or six million, for that matter). Therefore, some short cuts are required. Let me ask you this question: How many mass graves and/or what total number of shooting victims would I have to prove to you for you to accept that the Nazis conducted a concerted campaign to murder Jews on the Eastern Front? Ten percent? Twenty-five percent? More? Less? If your answer is that only by proving 100% of the mass graves, then I think we can wrap things up. Otherwise, we can move on to another grave. If and when you accept the existence of mass graves, we can move onto gas chambers, first by way of T4 and then to camps.

    Your move.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anon
    Keith says:


    "Without the gas chambers, the NAZIS were totally swell".

    With the gas chambers..... Zionist ethnic cleansing and Genocide of the Palestinians
    is justified and supported. With this story, the Jews are totally swell.

    Andrew .... think this through carefully. Who benefits from the Gas Chamber story?

    What happens to people who denie the gas chamber story?

    Why is the gas chamber story relevant to today. " Guilt Support" for Zionism and Israel.

    This is why we have a Zio History Channel and Oscar nominated movies. Keep the guilt going into the next generation. Some day in the distant future, the Gas Chamber story will be ancient history. The Zionists better achieve a Greater Israel before the guilt wears off. Maybe WW 3, like the two previous World Wars, will facilitate the Greater Israel Plan. Are the Jewish Zionists Neo Cons pushing for WW3?


    Please don't claim Holocaust history is important because it has, and will prevent future Genocides. It may prevent another pogrom against Jews, but the Palestinians, and any of Israel's enemies are fair game.


    IS THIS WHY AMERICA MEN ARE FIGHTING AND DYING IN THE MIDDLE EAST?

    Wake up America!

    “Please don’t claim Holocaust history is important because it has, and will prevent future Genocides.”

    Yeah, like Pol Pot’s Cambodian “Killing Fields” thirty years later. Over 1 million dead. Not quite 6 million (or whatever) but, hey, who’s counting?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Well, I’ve bee wracking my brains to discover the relevancy of this mass grave with holocaustianity which is my primary interest of those times.

    Well, you’d have to define what that terms means, to start with. If your contention now is that you don’t particularly care about specific war crimes but rather care about the beliefs about the Holocaust that have emerged over time, then that’s both not what I’m interested in discussion (since I don’t particularly care) and an attempt (it seems) by you to move the goalposts.

    If the question is what the relevance of this grave is with the Holocaust, it’s part of a larger picture, as I imagine you already figured.

    Granted that there were reprisal executions on all sides…

    The shooting of women and children in a reprisal would be highly unusual. Once you find a pattern of this happening, then you get the sense that it was quite deliberate. Moreover, the absence of actions that would warrant a reprisal in such places as Serniki makes the idea that these were reprisals fairly ridiculous.

    I’ve read the transcript of one of the Zuendel trials which occurred in the 1980′s in Toronto; my son brought it home from his school library. I was absolutely appalled at what passed for evidence on the part of the prosecutor, yet the jury still found Zuendel guilty. And there is no evidence that this has changed in any western country.

    Well, then we disagree. But I’m hard pressed to see how this is relevant to the mass grave at Serniki.

    What I would like to see is the original forensic report issued by a certified pathologist. I’m afraid that an archeologist, no matter how many of his peers man the hallelujah chorus, does not qualify.

    Lucky for you, the original forensic report was filed with the Queen’s prosecutor’s office in Adelaide, South Australia. See, the report was done as part of the prosecution of an accused war criminal back in the 1990s. Even better news for you — despite the evidence, the accused was not convicted, which by the way says nothing about the value of the report itself.

    I suppose you could write to the prosecutor’s office in Adelaide for the report. But it seems as if you might be willing to concede that this is a mass grave of Jews shot during World War I by Ukrainians acting under German orders. Are you willing to concede that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    As one sage would have it: "Extraordinary allegations require extraordinary proof."

    As stated earlier, my interest lies with holocaustianity, that is why I chimed in earlier in this thread.

    It is you that tried to muddy the waters of discussion by introducing some "mass grave" in Ukraine. Agreed that 500 + bodies constitutes a mass grave but not in the context of holocaustianity. My reply would then be "OK, you found 500+ bodies, where are the remaining alleged 10,000,500 bodies or their remains? (6 mil. Jews plus 5 mil. Gentiles as alleged).

    Back to our original contention: Where is the forensic evidence to support your allegations of 11 million gassed and cremated???????? hdc
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • hdc says:
    @Andrew E. Mathis
    Well, this is a bit disappointing, I must say. It's been a week since I began presenting evidence on the mass grave at Serniki, and you've yet to respond. Cat got your tongue?

    Well, I’ve bee wracking my brains to discover the relevancy of this mass grave with holocaustianity which is my primary interest of those times.

    Granted that there were reprisal executions on all sides…

    I’ve read the transcript of one of the Zuendel trials which occurred in the 1980′s in Toronto; my son brought it home from his school library. I was absolutely appalled at what passed for evidence on the part of the prosecutor, yet the jury still found Zuendel guilty. And there is no evidence that this has changed in any western country.

    What I would like to see is the original forensic report issued by a certified pathologist. I’m afraid that an archeologist, no matter how many of his peers man the hallelujah chorus, does not qualify.

    Apart from that I’ve been busy planning our late winter holiday “down south”, and I’ve begun a new project in my work shop.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    OK, you've written your opinion piece.

    Where is the independently verified forensic and / or other scientific evidence? Notice that the latter is a continuous, but unfulfilled, request in many of my posts.

    Well, this is a bit disappointing, I must say. It’s been a week since I began presenting evidence on the mass grave at Serniki, and you’ve yet to respond. Cat got your tongue?

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    Well, I've bee wracking my brains to discover the relevancy of this mass grave with holocaustianity which is my primary interest of those times.

    Granted that there were reprisal executions on all sides...

    I've read the transcript of one of the Zuendel trials which occurred in the 1980's in Toronto; my son brought it home from his school library. I was absolutely appalled at what passed for evidence on the part of the prosecutor, yet the jury still found Zuendel guilty. And there is no evidence that this has changed in any western country.

    What I would like to see is the original forensic report issued by a certified pathologist. I'm afraid that an archeologist, no matter how many of his peers man the hallelujah chorus, does not qualify.

    Apart from that I've been busy planning our late winter holiday "down south", and I've begun a new project in my work shop.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    OK, you've written your opinion piece.

    Where is the independently verified forensic and / or other scientific evidence? Notice that the latter is a continuous, but unfulfilled, request in many of my posts.

    I can see I’m going to have to hold your hand the whole way through this one…

    Let’s start here:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jgl1ECgvZJxAM3hshSd_xT8TvgXE0ZBR/view?usp=sharing

    Bear a few points in mind in reading this article:

    * The article is not a standalone article — rather, it cites an earlier article by Wright, which I also have but would prefer to use to argue over a different mass grave. I don’t want to put the cart before the horse.

    * Both the article provided and the one I have but have not yet shared were subjected to peer review by other archaeologists before being published, which should provide the “independent verification” that you’re asking for, as well as the scientific verification.

    * There is also some video footage of the dig here: https://search.alexanderstreet.com/view/work/bibliographic_entity%7Cvideo_work%7C2243559

    * A final point to consider is that this dig and its findings were submitted as physical evidence in the war crimes trial of a Ukrainian immigrant to Australia, so it’s “forensic” as far as any reasonable person would define the term.

    Your next move is an important one: do you concede that there was a mass grave of 553 people found in Serniki, Ukraine?

    If your answer is yes, then I’ll have some follow-up questions for you. If your answer is no, then I’m afraid you’re going to have to tell me what proof would satisfy you. You haven’t answered that question — none of you people ever do — but I’m losing my patience with you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis

    Who did the killing?
     
    Ukrainians under the command of the SS. We know this for a number of reasons.

    * The bullets from the grave were German-manufactured bullets all of which were produced between 1939 and 1941.
    * The hair in the graves was subjected to testing for radiation -- specifically for evidence that the grave dated from before or after the first hydrogen bomb by the USSR, in 1955. The hair showed no evidence; therefore, it could be conclusively proved that the bodies were in the grave between 1941 and 1955.
    * We also know that Ukrainians did the killing because eyewitnesses said so. In fact, that's how the grave location was identified in the first place. What they didn't claim was that there was a mass shooting at that site after the Nazis were pushed out in 1944.

    Ergo, as far as the physical evidence is concerned and where it agrees with eyewitness testimony, the only possible perpetrators of this particular mass shooting are Ukrainians under SS command.

    Who was killed?
     
    Jews. Again, we know this primarily from the eyewitnesses. The bodies found in the grave numbered 553, 63 of which were the bodies of girls younger than 9 years old. So Jews of all ages and both genders.

    Why were they killed?
     
    We have to assume that they were killed for being Jewish, because seven-year-old Jewish girls aren't generally "partisans."

    Who gave the actual order for the killing?
     
    The order cane from the regional office of the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), which ordered the existing ghettoes in Ukraine liquidated. This was an ongoing process between late 1941 and mid-1943.

    From where did these orders originate in the NSDAP hierarchy?
     
    By the time of this liquidation (September 1942), the orders would have come via the SD leadership. Topmost in that chain of command at that time was Himmler, since Heydrich had been assassinated.

    I can provide detailed sourcing for all of the above, but a good place to start is Richard Wright's report on the excavation.

    OK, you’ve written your opinion piece.

    Where is the independently verified forensic and / or other scientific evidence? Notice that the latter is a continuous, but unfulfilled, request in many of my posts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    I can see I'm going to have to hold your hand the whole way through this one...

    Let's start here:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jgl1ECgvZJxAM3hshSd_xT8TvgXE0ZBR/view?usp=sharing

    Bear a few points in mind in reading this article:

    * The article is not a standalone article -- rather, it cites an earlier article by Wright, which I also have but would prefer to use to argue over a different mass grave. I don't want to put the cart before the horse.

    * Both the article provided and the one I have but have not yet shared were subjected to peer review by other archaeologists before being published, which should provide the "independent verification" that you're asking for, as well as the scientific verification.

    * There is also some video footage of the dig here: https://search.alexanderstreet.com/view/work/bibliographic_entity%7Cvideo_work%7C2243559

    * A final point to consider is that this dig and its findings were submitted as physical evidence in the war crimes trial of a Ukrainian immigrant to Australia, so it's "forensic" as far as any reasonable person would define the term.

    Your next move is an important one: do you concede that there was a mass grave of 553 people found in Serniki, Ukraine?

    If your answer is yes, then I'll have some follow-up questions for you. If your answer is no, then I'm afraid you're going to have to tell me what proof would satisfy you. You haven't answered that question -- none of you people ever do -- but I'm losing my patience with you.

    , @Andrew E. Mathis
    Well, this is a bit disappointing, I must say. It's been a week since I began presenting evidence on the mass grave at Serniki, and you've yet to respond. Cat got your tongue?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    "...Thus, the standards of evidence are different..."

    The STANDARDS are different??? Where do you get that hare-brained idea? Forensic evidence is forensic evidence!

    Here are some specific questions regarding Serniki:

    Who did the killing?
    Who was killed?
    Why were they killed?
    Who gave the actual order for the killing?
    From where did these orders originate in the NSDAP hierarchy?

    That'll do for a start.

    Remember, verified forensic or other scientific evidence.

    Who did the killing?

    Ukrainians under the command of the SS. We know this for a number of reasons.

    * The bullets from the grave were German-manufactured bullets all of which were produced between 1939 and 1941.
    * The hair in the graves was subjected to testing for radiation — specifically for evidence that the grave dated from before or after the first hydrogen bomb by the USSR, in 1955. The hair showed no evidence; therefore, it could be conclusively proved that the bodies were in the grave between 1941 and 1955.
    * We also know that Ukrainians did the killing because eyewitnesses said so. In fact, that’s how the grave location was identified in the first place. What they didn’t claim was that there was a mass shooting at that site after the Nazis were pushed out in 1944.

    Ergo, as far as the physical evidence is concerned and where it agrees with eyewitness testimony, the only possible perpetrators of this particular mass shooting are Ukrainians under SS command.

    Who was killed?

    Jews. Again, we know this primarily from the eyewitnesses. The bodies found in the grave numbered 553, 63 of which were the bodies of girls younger than 9 years old. So Jews of all ages and both genders.

    Why were they killed?

    We have to assume that they were killed for being Jewish, because seven-year-old Jewish girls aren’t generally “partisans.”

    Who gave the actual order for the killing?

    The order cane from the regional office of the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), which ordered the existing ghettoes in Ukraine liquidated. This was an ongoing process between late 1941 and mid-1943.

    From where did these orders originate in the NSDAP hierarchy?

    By the time of this liquidation (September 1942), the orders would have come via the SD leadership. Topmost in that chain of command at that time was Himmler, since Heydrich had been assassinated.

    I can provide detailed sourcing for all of the above, but a good place to start is Richard Wright’s report on the excavation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    OK, you've written your opinion piece.

    Where is the independently verified forensic and / or other scientific evidence? Notice that the latter is a continuous, but unfulfilled, request in many of my posts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis

    All the questions I asked about Auschwitz as to proof and evidence, certainly applies to the digs at Serniki.
     
    No, they don't. At Birkenau, the vast majority of bodies were cremated. At Serniki, they were buried and never disinterred and burned. Thus, the standards of evidence are different. But nice try.

    “…Thus, the standards of evidence are different…”

    The STANDARDS are different??? Where do you get that hare-brained idea? Forensic evidence is forensic evidence!

    Here are some specific questions regarding Serniki:

    Who did the killing?
    Who was killed?
    Why were they killed?
    Who gave the actual order for the killing?
    From where did these orders originate in the NSDAP hierarchy?

    That’ll do for a start.

    Remember, verified forensic or other scientific evidence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis

    Who did the killing?
     
    Ukrainians under the command of the SS. We know this for a number of reasons.

    * The bullets from the grave were German-manufactured bullets all of which were produced between 1939 and 1941.
    * The hair in the graves was subjected to testing for radiation -- specifically for evidence that the grave dated from before or after the first hydrogen bomb by the USSR, in 1955. The hair showed no evidence; therefore, it could be conclusively proved that the bodies were in the grave between 1941 and 1955.
    * We also know that Ukrainians did the killing because eyewitnesses said so. In fact, that's how the grave location was identified in the first place. What they didn't claim was that there was a mass shooting at that site after the Nazis were pushed out in 1944.

    Ergo, as far as the physical evidence is concerned and where it agrees with eyewitness testimony, the only possible perpetrators of this particular mass shooting are Ukrainians under SS command.

    Who was killed?
     
    Jews. Again, we know this primarily from the eyewitnesses. The bodies found in the grave numbered 553, 63 of which were the bodies of girls younger than 9 years old. So Jews of all ages and both genders.

    Why were they killed?
     
    We have to assume that they were killed for being Jewish, because seven-year-old Jewish girls aren't generally "partisans."

    Who gave the actual order for the killing?
     
    The order cane from the regional office of the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), which ordered the existing ghettoes in Ukraine liquidated. This was an ongoing process between late 1941 and mid-1943.

    From where did these orders originate in the NSDAP hierarchy?
     
    By the time of this liquidation (September 1942), the orders would have come via the SD leadership. Topmost in that chain of command at that time was Himmler, since Heydrich had been assassinated.

    I can provide detailed sourcing for all of the above, but a good place to start is Richard Wright's report on the excavation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    All the questions I asked about Auschwitz as to proof and evidence, certainly applies to the digs at Serniki.

    All the questions I asked about Auschwitz as to proof and evidence, certainly applies to the digs at Serniki.

    No, they don’t. At Birkenau, the vast majority of bodies were cremated. At Serniki, they were buried and never disinterred and burned. Thus, the standards of evidence are different. But nice try.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    "...Thus, the standards of evidence are different..."

    The STANDARDS are different??? Where do you get that hare-brained idea? Forensic evidence is forensic evidence!

    Here are some specific questions regarding Serniki:

    Who did the killing?
    Who was killed?
    Why were they killed?
    Who gave the actual order for the killing?
    From where did these orders originate in the NSDAP hierarchy?

    That'll do for a start.

    Remember, verified forensic or other scientific evidence.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • All the questions I asked about Auschwitz as to proof and evidence, certainly applies to the digs at Serniki.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis

    All the questions I asked about Auschwitz as to proof and evidence, certainly applies to the digs at Serniki.
     
    No, they don't. At Birkenau, the vast majority of bodies were cremated. At Serniki, they were buried and never disinterred and burned. Thus, the standards of evidence are different. But nice try.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    Can you do no better than proffing personal attacks? Admit it, you lost the debate, all your obfuscation notwithstanding.

    If you have difficulties with definitions, wiki is your friend. To the best of my knowledge only expert testimony is considered a part of forensic evidence; consequently eye witness testimony is usually excluded. Especially if the witness is likely to benefit from his testimony. Sound familiar???

    As a minimal standard of evidence one might consider that what was obtained / recorded during the Katyn Forest mass grave excavations, including all the witnesses present. The Serniki digs do not even meet that minimal standard. And today we can do much better.

    First and foremost, if you don’t respond directly to my posts, then I don’t know that you’ve responded unless I search under your name.

    Second, you came for me — not vice versa. So maybe don’t deflect on the issue of who won and who lost?

    Third, forensic: “relating to or denoting the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of crime.” Is it your contention that this definition does not include eyewitness testimony? If not, then why have people testify at trial who are not witnesses? What about documents? I think they’re probably forensic evidence as well.

    Fourth, that a witness might benefit from his/her testimony does not mean you ignore that testimony. It means you take it with that fact in mind — which brings us directly to…

    Fifth, the German excavation conducted at Katyn was very much done to benefit the Nazis by painting the Soviets and particularly the NKVD (rightly) as criminals. You and I will probably agree, however, that this fact does not render the excavations done there as “worthless.”

    Sixth and finally, your statement about Serniki suggests you don’t know much about the excavation conducted there. So maybe read the thread here at your favorite denier forum: f=2&t=6763

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Can you do no better than proffing personal attacks? Admit it, you lost the debate, all your obfuscation notwithstanding.

    If you have difficulties with definitions, wiki is your friend. To the best of my knowledge only expert testimony is considered a part of forensic evidence; consequently eye witness testimony is usually excluded. Especially if the witness is likely to benefit from his testimony. Sound familiar???

    As a minimal standard of evidence one might consider that what was obtained / recorded during the Katyn Forest mass grave excavations, including all the witnesses present. The Serniki digs do not even meet that minimal standard. And today we can do much better.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    First and foremost, if you don't respond directly to my posts, then I don't know that you've responded unless I search under your name.

    Second, you came for me -- not vice versa. So maybe don't deflect on the issue of who won and who lost?

    Third, forensic: "relating to or denoting the application of scientific methods and techniques to the investigation of crime." Is it your contention that this definition does not include eyewitness testimony? If not, then why have people testify at trial who are not witnesses? What about documents? I think they're probably forensic evidence as well.

    Fourth, that a witness might benefit from his/her testimony does not mean you ignore that testimony. It means you take it with that fact in mind -- which brings us directly to...

    Fifth, the German excavation conducted at Katyn was very much done to benefit the Nazis by painting the Soviets and particularly the NKVD (rightly) as criminals. You and I will probably agree, however, that this fact does not render the excavations done there as "worthless."

    Sixth and finally, your statement about Serniki suggests you don't know much about the excavation conducted there. So maybe read the thread here at your favorite denier forum: f=2&t=6763
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    You are right for once; I want to see forensic and/or other scientific evidence to substantiate the assertions you and other holocaustians are making practically every day. And I have absolutely no interest in debating this because either the evidence is there or it isn't.

    Based on your responses I conclude that there is no such evidence and ergo, no holocaust ie. no gassing and burning of the hallowed 6 million. Or is it 11 million? Its hard to keep track.

    Let me see if I get this straight. You come into this forum specifically to respond to a post made by me, and when I ask you to define your terms before giving you what you ask for, you cop an attitude with me? What the hell is wrong with you?

    Here’s what I suspect:
    * That you won’t define “forensic” either because you can’t or because you know that it would include testimony, documents, etc.
    * That you won’t discuss the mass grave of Jewish victims killed by the Nazis at Serniki, Ukraine, because you know that the grave is actually what I’m saying it is, and once you have to concede that point, you’re already on the road to having to admit…
    * … that you’re perfectly aware that there was a Holocaust.

    You’re a coward.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis

    Since you are wrong on all the specifics pertaining to the issue at hand, I am pleased to confirm that you are also wrong on my personal background as I have posted here.
     
    Oh goody.

    Google and the internet must be used cautiouslyand intelligently, and many individuals fail in this regard.:-)).

    hdc or haadeecee is my nom de guerre for non-PC discussions such as we have here, since in Canada it could get me into trouble, and in Germany a prison sentence. I may be simple in my thoughts but no one that knows me calls me stupid.
     
    Well, not to your face, anyway.

    Sorry to disappoint you but I have no instagram account nor have I ever posted any photos using hdc or similar.
     
    And I believe you!

    On the issue at hand, what kind of brain would think of shipping corpses from Auschwitz or similar, to the Ukraine??? Especially when the Germans were in retreat from there? Your assertions are getting a little bizarre, don’t you think?
     
    I did not assert that, I can assure you. You're misunderstanding me.

    You also have no responded to any of the points I made in my post or agreed to take up discussion of the mass grave of Jews murdered by the Nazis in Serniki, Ukraine. Your unwillingness to do suggests that you know the grave is there and that you know the Nazis are responsible for the bodies therein. Having to admit this would mean having to admit the Nazis deliberately killed Jewish women, children, and elderly people. Then, you'd ultimately have to concede the rest. So you stall.

    So start debating or go away, OK? I'm a busy person with a lot to do. Debate Serniki with me, suggest an alternative topic for debate, or just say you have no intention of debating at all. I strongly suspect the third point is the truth.

    You are right for once; I want to see forensic and/or other scientific evidence to substantiate the assertions you and other holocaustians are making practically every day. And I have absolutely no interest in debating this because either the evidence is there or it isn’t.

    Based on your responses I conclude that there is no such evidence and ergo, no holocaust ie. no gassing and burning of the hallowed 6 million. Or is it 11 million? Its hard to keep track.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Let me see if I get this straight. You come into this forum specifically to respond to a post made by me, and when I ask you to define your terms before giving you what you ask for, you cop an attitude with me? What the hell is wrong with you?

    Here's what I suspect:
    * That you won't define "forensic" either because you can't or because you know that it would include testimony, documents, etc.
    * That you won't discuss the mass grave of Jewish victims killed by the Nazis at Serniki, Ukraine, because you know that the grave is actually what I'm saying it is, and once you have to concede that point, you're already on the road to having to admit...
    * ... that you're perfectly aware that there was a Holocaust.

    You're a coward.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Since you are wrong on all the specifics pertaining to the issue at hand, I am pleased to confirm that you are also wrong on my personal background as I have posted here.

    Oh goody.

    Google and the internet must be used cautiouslyand intelligently, and many individuals fail in this regard.:-)).

    hdc or haadeecee is my nom de guerre for non-PC discussions such as we have here, since in Canada it could get me into trouble, and in Germany a prison sentence. I may be simple in my thoughts but no one that knows me calls me stupid.

    Well, not to your face, anyway.

    Sorry to disappoint you but I have no instagram account nor have I ever posted any photos using hdc or similar.

    And I believe you!

    On the issue at hand, what kind of brain would think of shipping corpses from Auschwitz or similar, to the Ukraine??? Especially when the Germans were in retreat from there? Your assertions are getting a little bizarre, don’t you think?

    I did not assert that, I can assure you. You’re misunderstanding me.

    You also have no responded to any of the points I made in my post or agreed to take up discussion of the mass grave of Jews murdered by the Nazis in Serniki, Ukraine. Your unwillingness to do suggests that you know the grave is there and that you know the Nazis are responsible for the bodies therein. Having to admit this would mean having to admit the Nazis deliberately killed Jewish women, children, and elderly people. Then, you’d ultimately have to concede the rest. So you stall.

    So start debating or go away, OK? I’m a busy person with a lot to do. Debate Serniki with me, suggest an alternative topic for debate, or just say you have no intention of debating at all. I strongly suspect the third point is the truth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    You are right for once; I want to see forensic and/or other scientific evidence to substantiate the assertions you and other holocaustians are making practically every day. And I have absolutely no interest in debating this because either the evidence is there or it isn't.

    Based on your responses I conclude that there is no such evidence and ergo, no holocaust ie. no gassing and burning of the hallowed 6 million. Or is it 11 million? Its hard to keep track.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Since you are wrong on all the specifics pertaining to the issue at hand, I am pleased to confirm that you are also wrong on my personal background as I have posted here.

    Google and the internet must be used cautiouslyand intelligently, and many individuals fail in this regard.:-)).

    hdc or haadeecee is my nom de guerre for non-PC discussions such as we have here, since in Canada it could get me into trouble, and in Germany a prison sentence. I may be simple in my thoughts but no one that knows me calls me stupid.

    Sorry to disappoint you but I have no instagram account nor have I ever posted any photos using hdc or similar.

    On the issue at hand, what kind of brain would think of shipping corpses from Auschwitz or similar, to the Ukraine??? Especially when the Germans were in retreat from there? Your assertions are getting a little bizarre, don’t you think?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    There is so much wrong with your narrative that I am not going to bother, but will stick to the salient point here.

    "...Not all were cremated and not all were disposed of in the same way..."

    Fair enough. Would you care to estimate the percentage that was cremated, and the percentage that was not?

    That last percentage, of course, raises the question as to what happened to all those corpses. Were they buried??? If so, were? Forensic evidence?

    As to my qualifications, I'm a Professional Engineer, mechanical discipline, have earned my livelihood using numbers for over 40 years now. And no one ever came to grief or was sued because of my work.

    First of all, your wingeing about what’s wrong with my narrative neither refutes that narrative nor even confirms that you actually know what that narrative is. As we’ve already seen, your grasp of Hilberg’s narrative is tenuous at best.

    Second, I think it’s probably a fair estimate that half of roughly 5.5 million victims were created, so 2.75 million as a very rough estimate. I’m not sure what you’re driving at here. It’s not like, in any case, you’d be piling up the bodies and stretching them in a straight line from Lodz to Kyiv or even half that distance. Rather, as I suspect you know, the bodies were cremated or buried (or both) in large groups in dozens of places.

    Third, yes, the corpses were buried. If you want to begin discussing the evidence, we can do that. I’d recommend starting with Serniki, in Ukraine, since it’s an example with which I’m fairly familiar. Again, if you want “forensic” evidence, then please first define what you mean by “forensic” and what is included and not included in that definition, lest we end up disputing this point once I bring evidence to bear.

    Fourth and finally, let’s not bullshit each other here, OK? You have an Instagram account set up under the name you use at CODOH. The pics there are of someone in his 20s or 30s — early 40s at the oldest. So clearly this matter about making your livelihood with numbers for over 40 years isn’t true.

    Relax — I’ve no intention of taking this topic beyond the Internet. Wally von Hannover earned that particular treatment on the basis of his particularly obnoxious behavior. That’s a longer story but one that need not concern us here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There is so much wrong with your narrative that I am not going to bother, but will stick to the salient point here.

    “…Not all were cremated and not all were disposed of in the same way…”

    Fair enough. Would you care to estimate the percentage that was cremated, and the percentage that was not?

    That last percentage, of course, raises the question as to what happened to all those corpses. Were they buried??? If so, were? Forensic evidence?

    As to my qualifications, I’m a Professional Engineer, mechanical discipline, have earned my livelihood using numbers for over 40 years now. And no one ever came to grief or was sued because of my work.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    First of all, your wingeing about what’s wrong with my narrative neither refutes that narrative nor even confirms that you actually know what that narrative is. As we’ve already seen, your grasp of Hilberg’s narrative is tenuous at best.

    Second, I think it’s probably a fair estimate that half of roughly 5.5 million victims were created, so 2.75 million as a very rough estimate. I'm not sure what you're driving at here. It's not like, in any case, you'd be piling up the bodies and stretching them in a straight line from Lodz to Kyiv or even half that distance. Rather, as I suspect you know, the bodies were cremated or buried (or both) in large groups in dozens of places.

    Third, yes, the corpses were buried. If you want to begin discussing the evidence, we can do that. I’d recommend starting with Serniki, in Ukraine, since it's an example with which I'm fairly familiar. Again, if you want "forensic" evidence, then please first define what you mean by "forensic" and what is included and not included in that definition, lest we end up disputing this point once I bring evidence to bear.

    Fourth and finally, let's not bullshit each other here, OK? You have an Instagram account set up under the name you use at CODOH. The pics there are of someone in his 20s or 30s -- early 40s at the oldest. So clearly this matter about making your livelihood with numbers for over 40 years isn't true.

    Relax -- I've no intention of taking this topic beyond the Internet. Wally von Hannover earned that particular treatment on the basis of his particularly obnoxious behavior. That's a longer story but one that need not concern us here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    What am I waiting for???

    Simply the FREAKING forensic or other scientific evidence that backs up the claims of holocaustians, that's what.

    And since this is not forthcoming, I believe I've won that round.

    Next question: 6 million bodies would form a row 100Km long when stacked 10 bodies wide and 10 bodies high and aligned end to end.

    Please provide the evidence, acceptable to an impartial USA criminal court, of the supply of coal, coke, wood, or other energy source, to fully cremate 6 million human bodies.

    What am I waiting for???

    Simply the FREAKING forensic or other scientific evidence that backs up the claims of holocaustians, that’s what.

    And since this is not forthcoming, I believe I’ve won that round.

    Not so fast, hot rod.

    First, maybe you could define what you mean when you say “forensic.” What do include among forensic evidence? What don’t you?

    Second, in terms of scientific evidence, you’d have to demonstrate to me that you’re in any position to judge the value of a scientific argument — an afternoon watching YouTube videos doesn’t count.

    Finally, you’re going to have to go case by case. It doesn’t make a hell of a lot of sense to try to prove a combination of dozens or hundreds of events over a four year period in one fell swoop, either historically or juridically.

    Next question: 6 million bodies would form a row 100Km long when stacked 10 bodies wide and 10 bodies high and aligned end to end.

    Ok, sure. Is there a question in there?

    Please provide the evidence, acceptable to an impartial USA criminal court, of the supply of coal, coke, wood, or other energy source, to fully cremate 6 million human bodies.

    Your first problem is going to be that number. Not all were cremated and not all were disposed of in the same way. More importantly, I have no reason at this point to believe that you’re qualified to judge the evidence or would accept it if you could. I.e., your own impartiality is what’s in question here. Moreover, I’m unsure why the US criminal standard of evidence is important here. Historians don’t use it. Nor for that matter do a lot of US courts, which both routinely convict clearly innocent people and also acquit people who are clearly guilty. So if you want that standard, you’ll need to argue convincingly for why it’s appropriate.

    Finally, again, RODOH is a better forum for this so please consider taking this there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    And I’ve responded. C’mon, big guy. This is your big chance to make a name for yourself. What are you waiting for?

    What am I waiting for???

    Simply the FREAKING forensic or other scientific evidence that backs up the claims of holocaustians, that’s what.

    And since this is not forthcoming, I believe I’ve won that round.

    Next question: 6 million bodies would form a row 100Km long when stacked 10 bodies wide and 10 bodies high and aligned end to end.

    Please provide the evidence, acceptable to an impartial USA criminal court, of the supply of coal, coke, wood, or other energy source, to fully cremate 6 million human bodies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis

    What am I waiting for???

    Simply the FREAKING forensic or other scientific evidence that backs up the claims of holocaustians, that’s what.

    And since this is not forthcoming, I believe I’ve won that round.
     
    Not so fast, hot rod.

    First, maybe you could define what you mean when you say “forensic.” What do include among forensic evidence? What don’t you?

    Second, in terms of scientific evidence, you’d have to demonstrate to me that you’re in any position to judge the value of a scientific argument — an afternoon watching YouTube videos doesn’t count.

    Finally, you’re going to have to go case by case. It doesn’t make a hell of a lot of sense to try to prove a combination of dozens or hundreds of events over a four year period in one fell swoop, either historically or juridically.

    Next question: 6 million bodies would form a row 100Km long when stacked 10 bodies wide and 10 bodies high and aligned end to end.
     
    Ok, sure. Is there a question in there?

    Please provide the evidence, acceptable to an impartial USA criminal court, of the supply of coal, coke, wood, or other energy source, to fully cremate 6 million human bodies.
     
    Your first problem is going to be that number. Not all were cremated and not all were disposed of in the same way. More importantly, I have no reason at this point to believe that you’re qualified to judge the evidence or would accept it if you could. I.e., your own impartiality is what’s in question here. Moreover, I’m unsure why the US criminal standard of evidence is important here. Historians don’t use it. Nor for that matter do a lot of US courts, which both routinely convict clearly innocent people and also acquit people who are clearly guilty. So if you want that standard, you’ll need to argue convincingly for why it’s appropriate.

    Finally, again, RODOH is a better forum for this so please consider taking this there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    reiner Tor, my apologies but my post #118 was meant for Andrew and his post #117.

    And I’ve responded. C’mon, big guy. This is your big chance to make a name for yourself. What are you waiting for?

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    What am I waiting for???

    Simply the FREAKING forensic or other scientific evidence that backs up the claims of holocaustians, that's what.

    And since this is not forthcoming, I believe I've won that round.

    Next question: 6 million bodies would form a row 100Km long when stacked 10 bodies wide and 10 bodies high and aligned end to end.

    Please provide the evidence, acceptable to an impartial USA criminal court, of the supply of coal, coke, wood, or other energy source, to fully cremate 6 million human bodies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    You're running true to form... Several times now I have asked for verified forensic and other scientific evidence to support your assertions.

    Since you are unable to do so you are forced to fall back onto the old stand-by so favoured by the holocaustians: Ad hominem attacks.

    It would be so easy for you and your co-claimants to simply furnish the physical evidence to substantite your assertions.

    But then, even your high priest of holocaustianity cannot supply such evidence in his tome of what? About 1700 pages of jumbled verbiosity with not a single, solitary, physical, verified fact in that mountain of wasted ink and paper.

    You want to talk evidence? Fine. Go over to RODOH and we can debate it there. Here there’s too much limitation on posts in terms of waiting time, and CODOH is off limits.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    I didn’t write anything in my comment, except that your URL worked for me and that I’ll answer once I have more time. The rest was just quoting from van Pelt, and the formatting somehow lost the italics for the second paragraph of the quote.

    reiner Tor, my apologies but my post #118 was meant for Andrew and his post #117.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    And I’ve responded. C’mon, big guy. This is your big chance to make a name for yourself. What are you waiting for?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge."

    Try and take that into an impartial court as evidence of, say, a murder.

    If you have a lawyer friend run this by him and see what he says.

    There is no physical evidence that 10 million people starved to death in the USSR. Even less physical evidence of the fact that they were starved to death more or less intentionally. You cannot demand much physical evidence, because you cannot really tell why and how people died eighty years ago. The dead are buried next to other dead people, it’d be virtually impossible to exhume all the graves and unambiguously assign to each one of them the cause of death as “starved to death by the Bolsheviks.” Yet we accept what has been uncovered by historians combing through the archives.

    Which is kind of the point of van Pelt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    You're running true to form... Several times now I have asked for verified forensic and other scientific evidence to support your assertions.

    Since you are unable to do so you are forced to fall back onto the old stand-by so favoured by the holocaustians: Ad hominem attacks.

    It would be so easy for you and your co-claimants to simply furnish the physical evidence to substantite your assertions.

    But then, even your high priest of holocaustianity cannot supply such evidence in his tome of what? About 1700 pages of jumbled verbiosity with not a single, solitary, physical, verified fact in that mountain of wasted ink and paper.

    I didn’t write anything in my comment, except that your URL worked for me and that I’ll answer once I have more time. The rest was just quoting from van Pelt, and the formatting somehow lost the italics for the second paragraph of the quote.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    reiner Tor, my apologies but my post #118 was meant for Andrew and his post #117.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    You're running true to form... Several times now I have asked for verified forensic and other scientific evidence to support your assertions.

    Since you are unable to do so you are forced to fall back onto the old stand-by so favoured by the holocaustians: Ad hominem attacks.

    It would be so easy for you and your co-claimants to simply furnish the physical evidence to substantite your assertions.

    But then, even your high priest of holocaustianity cannot supply such evidence in his tome of what? About 1700 pages of jumbled verbiosity with not a single, solitary, physical, verified fact in that mountain of wasted ink and paper.

    Before dismissing Hilberg’s book, you should, like, read it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge."

    Try and take that into an impartial court as evidence of, say, a murder.

    If you have a lawyer friend run this by him and see what he says.

    Do you think that’s what the prosecutors brought into court in the dozens of trials conducted over decades in Germany?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    Actually the URL works for me. I will reply later at length when I have time.

    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

    I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.”
     

    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.”

    Try and take that into an impartial court as evidence of, say, a murder.

    If you have a lawyer friend run this by him and see what he says.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Do you think that’s what the prosecutors brought into court in the dozens of trials conducted over decades in Germany?
    , @reiner Tor
    There is no physical evidence that 10 million people starved to death in the USSR. Even less physical evidence of the fact that they were starved to death more or less intentionally. You cannot demand much physical evidence, because you cannot really tell why and how people died eighty years ago. The dead are buried next to other dead people, it’d be virtually impossible to exhume all the graves and unambiguously assign to each one of them the cause of death as “starved to death by the Bolsheviks.” Yet we accept what has been uncovered by historians combing through the archives.

    Which is kind of the point of van Pelt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    Actually the URL works for me. I will reply later at length when I have time.

    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

    I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.”
     

    You’re running true to form… Several times now I have asked for verified forensic and other scientific evidence to support your assertions.

    Since you are unable to do so you are forced to fall back onto the old stand-by so favoured by the holocaustians: Ad hominem attacks.

    It would be so easy for you and your co-claimants to simply furnish the physical evidence to substantite your assertions.

    But then, even your high priest of holocaustianity cannot supply such evidence in his tome of what? About 1700 pages of jumbled verbiosity with not a single, solitary, physical, verified fact in that mountain of wasted ink and paper.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Before dismissing Hilberg’s book, you should, like, read it.
    , @reiner Tor
    I didn’t write anything in my comment, except that your URL worked for me and that I’ll answer once I have more time. The rest was just quoting from van Pelt, and the formatting somehow lost the italics for the second paragraph of the quote.
    , @Andrew E. Mathis
    You want to talk evidence? Fine. Go over to RODOH and we can debate it there. Here there’s too much limitation on posts in terms of waiting time, and CODOH is off limits.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    Actually the URL works for me. I will reply later at length when I have time.

    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

    I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.”
     

    This point has already been exhaustively debated here:

    http://www.unz.com/ldinh/flagless-germany/#comment-1192807

    Including personal links to RJvP, etc.

    Our friend HDC is not the sharpest tool in the shed, apparently.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/742965--a-case-for-letting-nature-take-back-auschwitz

    The forgoing URL worked a few years ago, but no longer. I even checked on the Toronto Star newspaper archive web site for the quotation but, alas, it was not forthcoming. Not surprising, really.

    Van Pelt misspoke??? He is the Canadian high priest after all, and he wouldn't even furnish the evidence for 1% of the "knowledge".

    As for the rest of the stuff, you would need to read the transcripts of the Zuendel trials in Toronto, and the subsequent changes that were made in later editions of Destruction of European Jews. The "meeting of the minds" is from that later edition.

    This is the last of my comments on this topic unless someone can point me towards verified forensic or other scientific evidence. HdC

    Actually the URL works for me. I will reply later at length when I have time.

    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

    I don’t think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That’s how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    This point has already been exhaustively debated here:

    http://www.unz.com/ldinh/flagless-germany/#comment-1192807

    Including personal links to RJvP, etc.

    Our friend HDC is not the sharpest tool in the shed, apparently.
    , @hdc
    You're running true to form... Several times now I have asked for verified forensic and other scientific evidence to support your assertions.

    Since you are unable to do so you are forced to fall back onto the old stand-by so favoured by the holocaustians: Ad hominem attacks.

    It would be so easy for you and your co-claimants to simply furnish the physical evidence to substantite your assertions.

    But then, even your high priest of holocaustianity cannot supply such evidence in his tome of what? About 1700 pages of jumbled verbiosity with not a single, solitary, physical, verified fact in that mountain of wasted ink and paper.
    , @hdc
    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge."

    Try and take that into an impartial court as evidence of, say, a murder.

    If you have a lawyer friend run this by him and see what he says.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/742965–a-case-for-letting-nature-take-back-auschwitz

    The forgoing URL worked a few years ago, but no longer. I even checked on the Toronto Star newspaper archive web site for the quotation but, alas, it was not forthcoming. Not surprising, really.

    Van Pelt misspoke??? He is the Canadian high priest after all, and he wouldn’t even furnish the evidence for 1% of the “knowledge”.

    As for the rest of the stuff, you would need to read the transcripts of the Zuendel trials in Toronto, and the subsequent changes that were made in later editions of Destruction of European Jews. The “meeting of the minds” is from that later edition.

    This is the last of my comments on this topic unless someone can point me towards verified forensic or other scientific evidence. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Actually the URL works for me. I will reply later at length when I have time.

    “Ninety-nine per cent of what we know we do not actually have the physical evidence to prove . . . it has become part of our inherited knowledge.

    I don't think that the Holocaust is an exceptional case in that sense. We in the future – remembering the Holocaust – will operate in the same way that we remember most things from the past. We will know about it from literature and eyewitness testimony. . . . We are very successful in remembering the past in that manner. That's how we know that Cesar was killed on the Ides of March. To put the holocaust in some separate category and to demand that it be there – to demand that we have more material evidence – is actually us somehow giving in to the Holocaust deniers by providing some sort of special evidence.”
     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    All I'm querying is the allegation of the German "meeting of the minds", which is used to "explain" the absence of documentary evidence to support the holocaustian's assertions.

    And where one may find neutral court-proven forensic or other scientific evidence to support same claims.

    Seems easy to me, and all I get is verbosity ad infinitum yet nary a direct answer. Not really surprising considering that the Canadian high priest of holocaustianity, van Pelt, is quoted in one Toronto newspaper that "for 99% of what we know of the Holocaust no evidence exists".

    Try that argument in a non-partial court.

    the allegation of the German “meeting of the minds”, which is used to “explain” the absence of documentary evidence to support the holocaustian’s assertions

    Used by whom and where? I certainly never used that argument, nor did Hilberg.

    And where one may find neutral court-proven forensic or other scientific evidence to support same claims.

    Which claims? It’s very vague what you’re asking for. You need to ask concrete questions, if you expect concrete pieces of evidence.

    the Canadian high priest of holocaustianity, van Pelt, is quoted in one Toronto newspaper

    Which Toronto newspaper? I haven’t found the quote with a simple online query, and I guess you have the source of your statement.

    In any event, if van Pelt really said that, he probably misspoke. The statement sounds like an oxymoron, what we know does have evidence – or else we don’t know it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    If you wanted to take down the standard history of the holocaust, you'd first need to read what it contains. That's how the study of history has always worked. Many things have changed, and indeed, it's possible things are yet to change about our understanding of past events, including the holocaust.

    Whenever any previous belief was challenged, it was done by professionals who had read and understood the previous theses. So if the standard holocaust history is to be changed (by the way some details have already changed), it will be changed by people who have read the standard works and understood them and took issue with them.

    What you are doing here debating an opinion you don't even know is similar to how pigeons play chess - knocking the pieces over, crapping on the board, and then flying back to the flock to claim victory.

    All I’m querying is the allegation of the German “meeting of the minds”, which is used to “explain” the absence of documentary evidence to support the holocaustian’s assertions.

    And where one may find neutral court-proven forensic or other scientific evidence to support same claims.

    Seems easy to me, and all I get is verbosity ad infinitum yet nary a direct answer. Not really surprising considering that the Canadian high priest of holocaustianity, van Pelt, is quoted in one Toronto newspaper that “for 99% of what we know of the Holocaust no evidence exists”.

    Try that argument in a non-partial court.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    the allegation of the German “meeting of the minds”, which is used to “explain” the absence of documentary evidence to support the holocaustian’s assertions
     
    Used by whom and where? I certainly never used that argument, nor did Hilberg.

    And where one may find neutral court-proven forensic or other scientific evidence to support same claims.
     
    Which claims? It's very vague what you're asking for. You need to ask concrete questions, if you expect concrete pieces of evidence.

    the Canadian high priest of holocaustianity, van Pelt, is quoted in one Toronto newspaper
     
    Which Toronto newspaper? I haven't found the quote with a simple online query, and I guess you have the source of your statement.

    In any event, if van Pelt really said that, he probably misspoke. The statement sounds like an oxymoron, what we know does have evidence - or else we don't know it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    Correct me if I am wrong but, is not the central thesis of Hilberg's tome exactly what its title proclaims?
    Unless of course the book was meant as a work of fiction, in which case any title that captures the potential customer's eye and interest would suffice.

    If you wanted to take down the standard history of the holocaust, you’d first need to read what it contains. That’s how the study of history has always worked. Many things have changed, and indeed, it’s possible things are yet to change about our understanding of past events, including the holocaust.

    Whenever any previous belief was challenged, it was done by professionals who had read and understood the previous theses. So if the standard holocaust history is to be changed (by the way some details have already changed), it will be changed by people who have read the standard works and understood them and took issue with them.

    What you are doing here debating an opinion you don’t even know is similar to how pigeons play chess – knocking the pieces over, crapping on the board, and then flying back to the flock to claim victory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hdc
    All I'm querying is the allegation of the German "meeting of the minds", which is used to "explain" the absence of documentary evidence to support the holocaustian's assertions.

    And where one may find neutral court-proven forensic or other scientific evidence to support same claims.

    Seems easy to me, and all I get is verbosity ad infinitum yet nary a direct answer. Not really surprising considering that the Canadian high priest of holocaustianity, van Pelt, is quoted in one Toronto newspaper that "for 99% of what we know of the Holocaust no evidence exists".

    Try that argument in a non-partial court.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @hdc
    Correct me if I am wrong but, is not the central thesis of Hilberg's tome exactly what its title proclaims?
    Unless of course the book was meant as a work of fiction, in which case any title that captures the potential customer's eye and interest would suffice.

    It would seem you don’t know the difference between a topic and a thesis.

    No surprise there, I guess, nor that, like most “revisionists,” you don’t have the slightest idea what you’re criticizing.

    C’mon, friend. Can’t you please make this interesting for me?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Correct me if I am wrong but, is not the central thesis of Hilberg’s tome exactly what its title proclaims?
    Unless of course the book was meant as a work of fiction, in which case any title that captures the potential customer’s eye and interest would suffice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    It would seem you don’t know the difference between a topic and a thesis.

    No surprise there, I guess, nor that, like most “revisionists,” you don’t have the slightest idea what you’re criticizing.

    C’mon, friend. Can’t you please make this interesting for me?
    , @reiner Tor
    If you wanted to take down the standard history of the holocaust, you'd first need to read what it contains. That's how the study of history has always worked. Many things have changed, and indeed, it's possible things are yet to change about our understanding of past events, including the holocaust.

    Whenever any previous belief was challenged, it was done by professionals who had read and understood the previous theses. So if the standard holocaust history is to be changed (by the way some details have already changed), it will be changed by people who have read the standard works and understood them and took issue with them.

    What you are doing here debating an opinion you don't even know is similar to how pigeons play chess - knocking the pieces over, crapping on the board, and then flying back to the flock to claim victory.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @HdC
    "...Rather than quoting Hilberg directly — “meeting of the minds”..."

    Methinks this quote succinctly sums up the issue of the Holocaust claims. Via transference I would say, since there are no forensic nor scientific facts to substantiate any such assertions of Holocaustiany.

    Here is another gem, straight from the Canadian High Priest of Holocaustianity: "For 99% of what we know of the Holocaust, no proof exists." Straight from the Toronto Globe and Mail I believe.

    I wrote in the commentary section at that time that I would like to see the evidence for the remaining 1% but, as is usual in this type of debate, nothing was offered in response.

    I’m just going to conclude you haven’t read Hilberg. Therefore, what you think about his work is entirely irrelevant.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @HdC
    "...Rather than quoting Hilberg directly — “meeting of the minds”..."

    Methinks this quote succinctly sums up the issue of the Holocaust claims. Via transference I would say, since there are no forensic nor scientific facts to substantiate any such assertions of Holocaustiany.

    Here is another gem, straight from the Canadian High Priest of Holocaustianity: "For 99% of what we know of the Holocaust, no proof exists." Straight from the Toronto Globe and Mail I believe.

    I wrote in the commentary section at that time that I would like to see the evidence for the remaining 1% but, as is usual in this type of debate, nothing was offered in response.

    You know, I’d asked you earlier whether you’ve actually read Hilberg. It would be helpful for you to answer that question, even indirectly.

    So perhaps you could state, in your own words, what the central thesis of Hilberg’s Destruction of the European Jews is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    I gotta say, this is a little disappointing. It’s almost like you guys would rather fling insults than have a real debate...

    @hdc

    “…Rather than quoting Hilberg directly — “meeting of the minds”…”

    Methinks this quote succinctly sums up the issue of the Holocaust claims. Via transference I would say, since there are no forensic nor scientific facts to substantiate any such assertions of Holocaustiany.

    Here is another gem, straight from the Canadian High Priest of Holocaustianity: “For 99% of what we know of the Holocaust, no proof exists.” Straight from the Toronto Globe and Mail I believe.

    I wrote in the commentary section at that time that I would like to see the evidence for the remaining 1% but, as is usual in this type of debate, nothing was offered in response.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    You know, I'd asked you earlier whether you've actually read Hilberg. It would be helpful for you to answer that question, even indirectly.

    So perhaps you could state, in your own words, what the central thesis of Hilberg's Destruction of the European Jews is.
    , @Andrew E. Mathis
    I'm just going to conclude you haven't read Hilberg. Therefore, what you think about his work is entirely irrelevant.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Late To The Party
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    You're wrong about most of your accounts, despite your protestations and half-baked references. The following link, which provides an amazing expose, is a transcript of a court case involving a cross examination of Raul Hilberg who was engaged as a prosecution's witness against a Holocaust revisionist: http://www.ihr.org/books/kulaszka/09hilberg.html

    Professor Hilberg was someone I, for many years, reflexively and unquestioningly granted total credibility and academic respect. However, when confronted with deep, invasive questioning on the stand about his Holocaust methodology and its resultant conclusions, I was surprised to understand how the underpinnings of his research are precarious, subjective, and assumption riddled. Hilberg spent most of his time on the stand parring with his questioner, evading hard question, obfuscating and deflecting, and, in the end, offering very little assurance that he, the eminent authority on the subject, could offer either verifiable evidence or at the very least a convincing defense of the Holocaust as it is commonly understood in history.

    Based on my reading of the court transcript, I had no choice but to revise my opinion of Mr. Hilberg to that of a man who likely started with a conclusion and sought to organize, interpret and fashion facts to support it. Worse still, reading the transcript shook my long held assumption, faith and unquestioned belief that the textbooks and talking-head "experts" spoke unvarnished truth from a place of total integrity and authority.

    The transcript is long and expansive, covering the course of at least two days on the witness stand, but the end of the cross examination summarizes the situation succinctly and effectively:

    What German sources do you have describing what happened [in the Holocaust]?, asked Griffiths.

    "German documents pertaining to operations in the death camps are numerous, and they include various railway materials indicating the one-way traffic to these camps," said Hilberg. "... In addition, there is correspondence pertaining to the construction of gas chambers. Furthermore - and again I speak of documentation -- there is an extensive correspondence about the delivery of gas, sometimes labelled 'materials for handling the Jewish problem', and this is just a sample of the materials on which one relies on forming the total picture of what happened."

    There isn't a single piece of concrete evidence a man of such intellectual stature as Raul Hilberg could produce aside from his assigning subjective context and evil doing around incomplete facts, fuzzy details and interpretive, unrelated items of documentation. Its not that the Holocaust is refuted per se, it's that the Original Sin aspect of the gas chambers and ovens, which constitute the horrific figment in the minds of all society, are rendered illogical, unrealistic and suddenly highly questionable. No smoking gun is identified by Hilberg. No body is produced. Just the painstaking collection and connecting of shards of evidentiary pieces that might be assembled to come to different conclusions. That is no way to prove the legitimacy and veracity of the most evil systematic human genocide perpetrated in history. I'm convinced millions of innocents were killed in WWII through a variety of violent acts (including incidents of gassing or chemical asphyxiation), inhuman treatment, starvation and virulent disease, but humanity, truth and history (and the Jewish victims, above all) are owed a full accounting of what happened in the concentration camps.

    I gotta say, this is a little disappointing. It’s almost like you guys would rather fling insults than have a real debate…

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    "...Rather than quoting Hilberg directly — “meeting of the minds”..."

    Methinks this quote succinctly sums up the issue of the Holocaust claims. Via transference I would say, since there are no forensic nor scientific facts to substantiate any such assertions of Holocaustiany.

    Here is another gem, straight from the Canadian High Priest of Holocaustianity: "For 99% of what we know of the Holocaust, no proof exists." Straight from the Toronto Globe and Mail I believe.

    I wrote in the commentary section at that time that I would like to see the evidence for the remaining 1% but, as is usual in this type of debate, nothing was offered in response.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    Thanks, that was interesting.

    Gern geschehen!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    I've had a consistent problem w/my responses showing up beneath the wrong posts. That's the key reason why I'm reluctant to debate here.

    Hilberg pretty much wrote the book on the Holocaust as we currently understand it. His three-volume work, last updated in 2003, is still the text most scholars would recommend for the serious historian looking for a general overview.

    "Late to the Party" indicates he's read the transcript. I have no reason to believe he read the whole thing -- he's linked only to excerpts edited by a woman who was partial to Zündel. Moreover, that he was unsatisfied with Hilberg's response, even as presented in the transcript, says only that he doesn't understand how history works. On that topic, I'd suggest reading my "Treatise on Evidence," authored pseudonymously, here:

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=9241&p=70301#p70301

    Not a lot more to say unless "LTTP" decides he wants to respond.

    Thanks, that was interesting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Gern geschehen!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Rather than quoting Hilberg directly — “meeting of the minds” — why not put in your own words your description of how Hilberg believed the Holocaust happened.

    I mean, you’ve read Hilberg, right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    I've had a consistent problem w/my responses showing up beneath the wrong posts. That's the key reason why I'm reluctant to debate here.

    Hilberg pretty much wrote the book on the Holocaust as we currently understand it. His three-volume work, last updated in 2003, is still the text most scholars would recommend for the serious historian looking for a general overview.

    "Late to the Party" indicates he's read the transcript. I have no reason to believe he read the whole thing -- he's linked only to excerpts edited by a woman who was partial to Zündel. Moreover, that he was unsatisfied with Hilberg's response, even as presented in the transcript, says only that he doesn't understand how history works. On that topic, I'd suggest reading my "Treatise on Evidence," authored pseudonymously, here:

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=9241&p=70301#p70301

    Not a lot more to say unless "LTTP" decides he wants to respond.

    Personally I cannot take anyone seriously who advocates, as does Hilberg, that the holocaust was organized without supporting documentation by means of a “German Mind Meld”, ie. a meeting of the minds.

    Anyone with serious project management experience will appreciate the idiocy of such an assertion. HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’ve had a consistent problem w/my responses showing up beneath the wrong posts. That’s the key reason why I’m reluctant to debate here.

    Hilberg pretty much wrote the book on the Holocaust as we currently understand it. His three-volume work, last updated in 2003, is still the text most scholars would recommend for the serious historian looking for a general overview.

    “Late to the Party” indicates he’s read the transcript. I have no reason to believe he read the whole thing — he’s linked only to excerpts edited by a woman who was partial to Zündel. Moreover, that he was unsatisfied with Hilberg’s response, even as presented in the transcript, says only that he doesn’t understand how history works. On that topic, I’d suggest reading my “Treatise on Evidence,” authored pseudonymously, here:

    https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=9241&p=70301#p70301

    Not a lot more to say unless “LTTP” decides he wants to respond.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Personally I cannot take anyone seriously who advocates, as does Hilberg, that the holocaust was organized without supporting documentation by means of a "German Mind Meld", ie. a meeting of the minds.

    Anyone with serious project management experience will appreciate the idiocy of such an assertion. HdC
    , @reiner Tor
    Thanks, that was interesting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis
    You are indeed late to the party: The post to which you’re responding is more than two years old.

    Unz is not really conducive to a proper debate. Go to RODOH and I’ll be debate you there. Let me know here what your handle there is.

    Nothing wrong with Unz, I like the commenting system here. I don’t know what commenter Late To The Party wishes, but it’d be better to keep the discussion going here. For example now the comment section ends with his unanswered allegations about Raul Hilberg being unable to provide evidence for the holocaust.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @HdC
    Better yet, go to the CODOH website; much more civilized and no ad hominem attacks. HdC

    Alas, I am permanently blocked from CODOH. But HdC, you can always debate me at RODOH too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Late To The Party
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    You're wrong about most of your accounts, despite your protestations and half-baked references. The following link, which provides an amazing expose, is a transcript of a court case involving a cross examination of Raul Hilberg who was engaged as a prosecution's witness against a Holocaust revisionist: http://www.ihr.org/books/kulaszka/09hilberg.html

    Professor Hilberg was someone I, for many years, reflexively and unquestioningly granted total credibility and academic respect. However, when confronted with deep, invasive questioning on the stand about his Holocaust methodology and its resultant conclusions, I was surprised to understand how the underpinnings of his research are precarious, subjective, and assumption riddled. Hilberg spent most of his time on the stand parring with his questioner, evading hard question, obfuscating and deflecting, and, in the end, offering very little assurance that he, the eminent authority on the subject, could offer either verifiable evidence or at the very least a convincing defense of the Holocaust as it is commonly understood in history.

    Based on my reading of the court transcript, I had no choice but to revise my opinion of Mr. Hilberg to that of a man who likely started with a conclusion and sought to organize, interpret and fashion facts to support it. Worse still, reading the transcript shook my long held assumption, faith and unquestioned belief that the textbooks and talking-head "experts" spoke unvarnished truth from a place of total integrity and authority.

    The transcript is long and expansive, covering the course of at least two days on the witness stand, but the end of the cross examination summarizes the situation succinctly and effectively:

    What German sources do you have describing what happened [in the Holocaust]?, asked Griffiths.

    "German documents pertaining to operations in the death camps are numerous, and they include various railway materials indicating the one-way traffic to these camps," said Hilberg. "... In addition, there is correspondence pertaining to the construction of gas chambers. Furthermore - and again I speak of documentation -- there is an extensive correspondence about the delivery of gas, sometimes labelled 'materials for handling the Jewish problem', and this is just a sample of the materials on which one relies on forming the total picture of what happened."

    There isn't a single piece of concrete evidence a man of such intellectual stature as Raul Hilberg could produce aside from his assigning subjective context and evil doing around incomplete facts, fuzzy details and interpretive, unrelated items of documentation. Its not that the Holocaust is refuted per se, it's that the Original Sin aspect of the gas chambers and ovens, which constitute the horrific figment in the minds of all society, are rendered illogical, unrealistic and suddenly highly questionable. No smoking gun is identified by Hilberg. No body is produced. Just the painstaking collection and connecting of shards of evidentiary pieces that might be assembled to come to different conclusions. That is no way to prove the legitimacy and veracity of the most evil systematic human genocide perpetrated in history. I'm convinced millions of innocents were killed in WWII through a variety of violent acts (including incidents of gassing or chemical asphyxiation), inhuman treatment, starvation and virulent disease, but humanity, truth and history (and the Jewish victims, above all) are owed a full accounting of what happened in the concentration camps.

    Better yet, go to the CODOH website; much more civilized and no ad hominem attacks. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    Alas, I am permanently blocked from CODOH. But HdC, you can always debate me at RODOH too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Late To The Party
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    You're wrong about most of your accounts, despite your protestations and half-baked references. The following link, which provides an amazing expose, is a transcript of a court case involving a cross examination of Raul Hilberg who was engaged as a prosecution's witness against a Holocaust revisionist: http://www.ihr.org/books/kulaszka/09hilberg.html

    Professor Hilberg was someone I, for many years, reflexively and unquestioningly granted total credibility and academic respect. However, when confronted with deep, invasive questioning on the stand about his Holocaust methodology and its resultant conclusions, I was surprised to understand how the underpinnings of his research are precarious, subjective, and assumption riddled. Hilberg spent most of his time on the stand parring with his questioner, evading hard question, obfuscating and deflecting, and, in the end, offering very little assurance that he, the eminent authority on the subject, could offer either verifiable evidence or at the very least a convincing defense of the Holocaust as it is commonly understood in history.

    Based on my reading of the court transcript, I had no choice but to revise my opinion of Mr. Hilberg to that of a man who likely started with a conclusion and sought to organize, interpret and fashion facts to support it. Worse still, reading the transcript shook my long held assumption, faith and unquestioned belief that the textbooks and talking-head "experts" spoke unvarnished truth from a place of total integrity and authority.

    The transcript is long and expansive, covering the course of at least two days on the witness stand, but the end of the cross examination summarizes the situation succinctly and effectively:

    What German sources do you have describing what happened [in the Holocaust]?, asked Griffiths.

    "German documents pertaining to operations in the death camps are numerous, and they include various railway materials indicating the one-way traffic to these camps," said Hilberg. "... In addition, there is correspondence pertaining to the construction of gas chambers. Furthermore - and again I speak of documentation -- there is an extensive correspondence about the delivery of gas, sometimes labelled 'materials for handling the Jewish problem', and this is just a sample of the materials on which one relies on forming the total picture of what happened."

    There isn't a single piece of concrete evidence a man of such intellectual stature as Raul Hilberg could produce aside from his assigning subjective context and evil doing around incomplete facts, fuzzy details and interpretive, unrelated items of documentation. Its not that the Holocaust is refuted per se, it's that the Original Sin aspect of the gas chambers and ovens, which constitute the horrific figment in the minds of all society, are rendered illogical, unrealistic and suddenly highly questionable. No smoking gun is identified by Hilberg. No body is produced. Just the painstaking collection and connecting of shards of evidentiary pieces that might be assembled to come to different conclusions. That is no way to prove the legitimacy and veracity of the most evil systematic human genocide perpetrated in history. I'm convinced millions of innocents were killed in WWII through a variety of violent acts (including incidents of gassing or chemical asphyxiation), inhuman treatment, starvation and virulent disease, but humanity, truth and history (and the Jewish victims, above all) are owed a full accounting of what happened in the concentration camps.

    You are indeed late to the party: The post to which you’re responding is more than two years old.

    Unz is not really conducive to a proper debate. Go to RODOH and I’ll be debate you there. Let me know here what your handle there is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Nothing wrong with Unz, I like the commenting system here. I don't know what commenter Late To The Party wishes, but it'd be better to keep the discussion going here. For example now the comment section ends with his unanswered allegations about Raul Hilberg being unable to provide evidence for the holocaust.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrew E. Mathis

    Read what 2 judges of the US supreme court had to say about the Nuernberg trials. Kangeroo court and Lynching Party were the language they used.
     
    Really? You're aware that the chief prosecutor f0r the United States was Robert Jackson, right? Know what his job was?

    They also verified that various accused had been tortured, with their testicles crushed irreparably.
     
    No, they didn't. You're going to need to begin proving your assertions.

    That said, on the basis of what you're writing, I suspect you are mistaking a judge referring to the specific case of the Malmedy perpetrators vs. the SCOTUS.

    The British torturers even bragged in a book about their torturing activities.
     
    And Höss was in U.S. custody when he swore his affidavit.

    Nitzkor assertions defy logic and uses verbosity to hide behind.
     
    Please indicate a single instance of defied logic.

    In jurisprudence it is well understood that evidence obtained under duress is not reliable and cannot be considered evidence. Hence the person forced to confess is not a witness in the definition of the word. This has nothing to do with moving goal posts.
     
    If you ask for a "single person" to refer to the correct color of gassing victims and I give one, and then you say that you weren't referring to that type of person, that's moving the goalposts.

    You’re wrong about most of your accounts, despite your protestations and half-baked references. The following link, which provides an amazing expose, is a transcript of a court case involving a cross examination of Raul Hilberg who was engaged as a prosecution’s witness against a Holocaust revisionist: http://www.ihr.org/books/kulaszka/09hilberg.html

    Professor Hilberg was someone I, for many years, reflexively and unquestioningly granted total credibility and academic respect. However, when confronted with deep, invasive questioning on the stand about his Holocaust methodology and its resultant conclusions, I was surprised to understand how the underpinnings of his research are precarious, subjective, and assumption riddled. Hilberg spent most of his time on the stand parring with his questioner, evading hard question, obfuscating and deflecting, and, in the end, offering very little assurance that he, the eminent authority on the subject, could offer either verifiable evidence or at the very least a convincing defense of the Holocaust as it is commonly understood in history.

    Based on my reading of the court transcript, I had no choice but to revise my opinion of Mr. Hilberg to that of a man who likely started with a conclusion and sought to organize, interpret and fashion facts to support it. Worse still, reading the transcript shook my long held assumption, faith and unquestioned belief that the textbooks and talking-head “experts” spoke unvarnished truth from a place of total integrity and authority.

    The transcript is long and expansive, covering the course of at least two days on the witness stand, but the end of the cross examination summarizes the situation succinctly and effectively:

    What German sources do you have describing what happened [in the Holocaust]?, asked Griffiths.

    “German documents pertaining to operations in the death camps are numerous, and they include various railway materials indicating the one-way traffic to these camps,” said Hilberg. “… In addition, there is correspondence pertaining to the construction of gas chambers. Furthermore – and again I speak of documentation — there is an extensive correspondence about the delivery of gas, sometimes labelled ‘materials for handling the Jewish problem’, and this is just a sample of the materials on which one relies on forming the total picture of what happened.”

    There isn’t a single piece of concrete evidence a man of such intellectual stature as Raul Hilberg could produce aside from his assigning subjective context and evil doing around incomplete facts, fuzzy details and interpretive, unrelated items of documentation. Its not that the Holocaust is refuted per se, it’s that the Original Sin aspect of the gas chambers and ovens, which constitute the horrific figment in the minds of all society, are rendered illogical, unrealistic and suddenly highly questionable. No smoking gun is identified by Hilberg. No body is produced. Just the painstaking collection and connecting of shards of evidentiary pieces that might be assembled to come to different conclusions. That is no way to prove the legitimacy and veracity of the most evil systematic human genocide perpetrated in history. I’m convinced millions of innocents were killed in WWII through a variety of violent acts (including incidents of gassing or chemical asphyxiation), inhuman treatment, starvation and virulent disease, but humanity, truth and history (and the Jewish victims, above all) are owed a full accounting of what happened in the concentration camps.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
    You are indeed late to the party: The post to which you’re responding is more than two years old.

    Unz is not really conducive to a proper debate. Go to RODOH and I’ll be debate you there. Let me know here what your handle there is.
    , @HdC
    Better yet, go to the CODOH website; much more civilized and no ad hominem attacks. HdC
    , @Andrew E. Mathis
    I gotta say, this is a little disappointing. It’s almost like you guys would rather fling insults than have a real debate...

    @hdc

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @eah
    I think it's pretty clear that it's mostly fiction. And that he has no Auschwitz tattoo, although he has consistently claimed that he has one: Where's the tattoo?

    I heard he had a heart on his left butt cheek.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Rehmat
    On October 19, 2017, Jennifer Listman, PhD (Yale University School of Medicine) claimed on her blog that in 1989, Elie Wiesel grabbed her ass during a Jewish charity event in New York.

    “During a family photo Elie Wiesel’s right hand had reached my right ass cheek, which he squeezed. The photo was over, the photographer leaned back from crouching over his camera, the group separated, smiling at each other, and Elie Wiesel immediately RAN, disappearing straight into the crowd of over 1000 people who were nearly all standing up. Already gray-haired at that time, Wiesel’s agility impressed me as he fled the scene of the crime,” Ms. Listman said.

    https://rehmat1.com/2017/10/23/jew-academic-when-elie-wiesel-grabbed-my-ass/

    Dr Listman’s article describes her many years subsequently combatting suicidal depression and panic attacks. . . .
    Dr Listman said: “What happens when someone so objectively good that they received a Nobel Peace Prize, so good that they are qualified to tell people all over the world how to be good … what happens when that’s the person who does something really really bad to you when you’re nineteen?

    “You are sad beyond measure because, you believe, there are no good people. You mourn for humanity and for yourself.”

    She added: “If you are sad and in mourning for your lost icon, I am not to blame for taking him away from you. I am not to blame for robbing the Jewish community of a leader, the world of a symbol, or his family of their memories.

    “I did not do it. He did. He is the only one responsible for his evil act.”

    https://www.thejc.com/news/world/elie-wiesel-molested-me-new-york-geneticist-says-1.446445

    A holocaust, I tells ya!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • On October 19, 2017, Jennifer Listman, PhD (Yale University School of Medicine) claimed on her blog that in 1989, Elie Wiesel grabbed her ass during a Jewish charity event in New York.

    “During a family photo Elie Wiesel’s right hand had reached my right ass cheek, which he squeezed. The photo was over, the photographer leaned back from crouching over his camera, the group separated, smiling at each other, and Elie Wiesel immediately RAN, disappearing straight into the crowd of over 1000 people who were nearly all standing up. Already gray-haired at that time, Wiesel’s agility impressed me as he fled the scene of the crime,” Ms. Listman said.

    https://rehmat1.com/2017/10/23/jew-academic-when-elie-wiesel-grabbed-my-ass/

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous

    Dr Listman’s article describes her many years subsequently combatting suicidal depression and panic attacks. . . .
    Dr Listman said: “What happens when someone so objectively good that they received a Nobel Peace Prize, so good that they are qualified to tell people all over the world how to be good … what happens when that’s the person who does something really really bad to you when you’re nineteen?

    “You are sad beyond measure because, you believe, there are no good people. You mourn for humanity and for yourself.”

    She added: “If you are sad and in mourning for your lost icon, I am not to blame for taking him away from you. I am not to blame for robbing the Jewish community of a leader, the world of a symbol, or his family of their memories.

    “I did not do it. He did. He is the only one responsible for his evil act.”
    https://www.thejc.com/news/world/elie-wiesel-molested-me-new-york-geneticist-says-1.446445
     
    A holocaust, I tells ya!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dan23
    The most telling recent event is not the revision of the 6 million to 5 million, but the outright printed admission that the 10+ million number, which supposedly included gypsies and others, was a lie to increase empathy for the Jews.

    The printed admission of this lie has not been repudiated nor retracted as far as I know

    This number had been touted since at least the seventies, and presented as truth across Holocaust museums, in books, in movies, and in other forms of print since that time. It was unabashedly presented as truth and defended, as the six million is.

    When the Trump administration only recognized a general loss during Holocaust Day, Jews flipped out and admitted that the 10 million is a lie so that, in the future, all recognition of suffering will be directed almost solely to Jews.

    Though, I fail to see how an admission that the 10+ million number was a lie does not wholly impugn the other number and the event in general, given the barely suppressed raging doubt that surrounds it worldwide.

    Anyone here ever hear of the stricture “Falsehood in one, falsehood in all”?

    This is used in a court of law when a witness is caught in a lie and the questioning lawyer tries to get all that witness’ testimony stricken from the record.

    Methinks it is a marvellous policy to follow! HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anton Chigurrrh
    6 million lies. The jews even had to revise that number down. They even said the 5 million number for non-jews is also a lie. Does anyone see a pattern here?

    The most telling recent event is not the revision of the 6 million to 5 million, but the outright printed admission that the 10+ million number, which supposedly included gypsies and others, was a lie to increase empathy for the Jews.

    The printed admission of this lie has not been repudiated nor retracted as far as I know

    This number had been touted since at least the seventies, and presented as truth across Holocaust museums, in books, in movies, and in other forms of print since that time. It was unabashedly presented as truth and defended, as the six million is.

    When the Trump administration only recognized a general loss during Holocaust Day, Jews flipped out and admitted that the 10 million is a lie so that, in the future, all recognition of suffering will be directed almost solely to Jews.

    Though, I fail to see how an admission that the 10+ million number was a lie does not wholly impugn the other number and the event in general, given the barely suppressed raging doubt that surrounds it worldwide.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Anyone here ever hear of the stricture "Falsehood in one, falsehood in all"?

    This is used in a court of law when a witness is caught in a lie and the questioning lawyer tries to get all that witness' testimony stricken from the record.

    Methinks it is a marvellous policy to follow! HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I know someone who wrote an account of their time as an allied soldier in Europe in the final months of WWII.

    It is a personal book, with wartime commentary and history coming second to this person’s life both in Europe and at home. This man’s relationships with his fellow soldiers and his girlfriend were the primary focus of the book.

    This person sent a book to a Jewish man that he knew, who is the son of a world-famous Jewish man.

    The Jewish man’s feedback was: “Good book, but where is your account of the suffering of the Jews”?

    100% true story. If the author realized the gravity of the exchange with the Jewish man, he didn’t tell me. He relayed the anecdote without further commentary. I think that he was just a bit flabbergasted.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    The entire account of Wiesel is suspect.

    But the holocaust is based not on Wiesel's account, but as I wrote on many separate pieces of evidence, which are very robust. I personally have met historians who work on the period (but not on the holocaust), and they would notice if the whole thing would be a hoax. For example a Hungarian historian recently found a document compiled by the Hungarian military intelligence in 1943 for Hungarian regent Admiral Horthy which is about the pressure the Germans put on Hungary to deport its Jews. They casually mention that Hungary's 800,000 Jews (this number included I think 100,000 half-Jews) were then the largest remaining Jewish community in Axis-controlled Europe. Anybody with access to pre-war encyclopedia or other sources can confirm that Poland alone had over 3 million Jews in the 1930s, so unless you posit that something happened to them you cannot explain why the 800,000 Hungarian Jews would be the largest European Jewish community in 1943. Also this historian would have noticed if Hungarian military intelligence had wrote "Hungarian Jewry is the second largest Jewish community after Poland", which would contradict other sources which claim that the majority of Polish Jews were murdered in 1942. If there were just one such document, it could be explained away (like the Hungarian intelligence officer didn't know that Polish Jews were already murdered), but the fact that not much contradicting but much corroborating evidence is found is enough for me.

    So many historians are working on the Second World War, that it's impossible for the whole story to be a hoax.

    You can perhaps argue that the numbers are exaggerated, maybe not 6 million, but only 5 million (Raul Hilberg calculated 5.1 million using two different methods, but most holocaust histories use higher numbers of about 5.5-5.8 or 5.5-6 million or something), or maybe only 4 million (even Raul Hilberg is Jewish and so maybe he is also exaggerating), but to claim that there was no systematic murder of Jews by Germans during the Second World War is like claiming there was no systematic bombing campaign against German cities.

    Thanks for putting together some sober and thought-out explanations.

    As stated, the fact that Wiesel may be a mountebank and a literary liar in no way detracts from the overwhelming broad and deep evidence for the reality of the Holocaust.

    Similarly, it is obvious that reports relating to the Holocaust – a multi-year series of numerous Europe-wide initiatives involving millions of individuals – will inevitably contain some inaccuracies. This in no way detracts from the reality of the total picture. The fact that Columbus grossly underestimated the circumference of the earth does not detract from (and is in fact irrelevant to) the reality that he discovered an unknown continent.

    The entire account of Wiesel is suspect.

    It certainly seems that his work was mostly treated as fiction rather than fact by sophisticated contemporary observers.

    Another – apparently overlooked – aspect seriously undermining Wiesel’s account is the fact that the alleged original version of his work (“And the World was Silent.”) was written – allegedly by him – in Yiddish and published in an abridged version in South America. Although Wiesel does seem to have spoken some Yiddish, Yiddish was NEVER considered a language suitable for any serious writing by educated Jews.

    Rumanian is related to French and there is a long history of Rumanians studying in Paris (as Wiesel himself did), so Wiesel could certainly have written in French to reach a wider audience.

    Similarly, Wiesel seems to have learned Hebrew from an early age and later wrote for an Israeli newspaper, so he would probably have been able to write his book in Hebrew.

    Lastly, educated Jewish families in the former Austria-Hungary often spoke German at home (rather than the national languages or Yiddish). However, even if this was the case with Wiesel – who later married a woman from Austria – it is perhaps understandable that Wiesel – whatever his actual personal fate – felt disinclined to publish his first book in what may have been his native German.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • What can we expect from a Mormon man in the White House? All the Mormon men I know are good at justifying anything with the doctrine of the Church. Take my uncle, former Mormon bishop, a chemist and head of what used to be called Morton Thiokol. He’s a sweet guy, and would call himself...
  • from the article:
    “but if you ask most Mormon men about being gay, they see it as a disease gay people want to spread.”

    Not from what I have seen in the world of males in engineering jobs. Married mormen men, with wife and kids, are well known for hitting on guys at work. Its called “hypocriticy”.

    And for those that were not provably homosexual or bisexual.. engaging in marriage, merely to mask their real selves, they drank booze and purchased hookers at any opportunity when on “business trips”.

    Demography speaking.. more sinful than Catholics by a long shot.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A couple of weeks ago Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate and self-appointed moral conscience for Holocaust survivors, praised the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes to make way for yet more illegal settlements in Jerusalem. His chilling statement ran in an ad placed inHa’aretz. Here are Wiesel’s appalling words: Though Wiesel offers himself as a paragon...
  • 6 million lies. The jews even had to revise that number down. They even said the 5 million number for non-jews is also a lie. Does anyone see a pattern here?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan23
    The most telling recent event is not the revision of the 6 million to 5 million, but the outright printed admission that the 10+ million number, which supposedly included gypsies and others, was a lie to increase empathy for the Jews.

    The printed admission of this lie has not been repudiated nor retracted as far as I know

    This number had been touted since at least the seventies, and presented as truth across Holocaust museums, in books, in movies, and in other forms of print since that time. It was unabashedly presented as truth and defended, as the six million is.

    When the Trump administration only recognized a general loss during Holocaust Day, Jews flipped out and admitted that the 10 million is a lie so that, in the future, all recognition of suffering will be directed almost solely to Jews.

    Though, I fail to see how an admission that the 10+ million number was a lie does not wholly impugn the other number and the event in general, given the barely suppressed raging doubt that surrounds it worldwide.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Keith says:

    “Without the gas chambers, the NAZIS were totally swell”.

    With the gas chambers….. Zionist ethnic cleansing and Genocide of the Palestinians
    is justified and supported. With this story, the Jews are totally swell.

    Andrew …. think this through carefully. Who benefits from the Gas Chamber story?

    What happens to people who denie the gas chamber story?

    Why is the gas chamber story relevant to today. ” Guilt Support” for Zionism and Israel.

    This is why we have a Zio History Channel and Oscar nominated movies. Keep the guilt going into the next generation. Some day in the distant future, the Gas Chamber story will be ancient history. The Zionists better achieve a Greater Israel before the guilt wears off. Maybe WW 3, like the two previous World Wars, will facilitate the Greater Israel Plan. Are the Jewish Zionists Neo Cons pushing for WW3?

    Please don’t claim Holocaust history is important because it has, and will prevent future Genocides. It may prevent another pogrom against Jews, but the Palestinians, and any of Israel’s enemies are fair game.

    IS THIS WHY AMERICA MEN ARE FIGHTING AND DYING IN THE MIDDLE EAST?

    Wake up America!

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    "Please don’t claim Holocaust history is important because it has, and will prevent future Genocides."

    Yeah, like Pol Pot's Cambodian "Killing Fields" thirty years later. Over 1 million dead. Not quite 6 million (or whatever) but, hey, who's counting?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The present author was offered it in the summer of 2004 by a young relative, presumably to assist in his moral regeneration, but after glancing through a few pages returned it, on the grounds that it wasn’t his kind of thing.

    Who knew it did turn out to be your kind of thing :) Jokes aside appreciate the well researched well-flowing article. Articles like this are what is missing in contemporary journalism

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I read this long ago so I’m going from memory, but the article is really a whitewash of the book, finding minor inconsistencies that don’t amount to much.

    In fact the book is a great text for holocaust deniers. First, it is over the top absurd, and gets to it right at the start, on page 6 where we read …

    ‘Babies were thrown in the air and the machine gunners used them as targets’

    This is absurd for several reasons, physical impossibility being one, but of course with the holocaust impossibility precludes nothing.

    But that is just a random lie. More significant are some of the truths in the book. Wiesel was a prisoner at Auschwitz when the Nazis were killing 10,000 Jews per day in gas chambers disguised as shower rooms (24,000 in one day in Aug. 44 according to Primo Levi). But Wiesel never mentions gas chambers, and reports taking a shower in six separate places in the book, the first time for the express purpose of disinfection.

    But most significant is the central lie, the night of the title refers to the night Wiesel arrived at Auschwitz to witness the Nazis killing Jews. How did they do it according to Wiesel? By tossing them alive into two burning pits, one for children, one for adults. This too is physically impossible, as anyone tossed into a burning pit would climb out, and it contradicts the standard narrative.

    Wiesel won the Nobel Peace Prize for his absurd lies, he became the first director of the US Holocaust Museum.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @gepay
    what the Germans did - the creation of work camps, ghettos, and systematic ethnic cleansing of the Jews in which a million or 2 died as a result (especially from disease and malnutrition) although there were probably several hundred thousand shot during the war in captured Soviet territories. Slave labor is abhorrent on its own. There was no need to invent showers that were gas chambers. As far as the death vans go, there is no way millions were killed with them, thousands maybe if they were used extensively at all. I have read Primo Levi on deaths outright by the Germans that he witnessed himself while at Aushwitz. There were 13 hangings. the gas chamber deaths were hearsay. I do believe him when he says of the 90 or so Italian Jews from his area that were sent to the camps only a few others returned to his Italian area after the war. So the mortality rate was very high - It is quite likely that some survivors wouldn't have returned and that some would have died soon after the war was over. One thing that sounds outright impossible to me is the burning of millions of bodies from Treblinka, Sobibor, Chelmo, Majdanek, and Belzec. Some of them supposedly dug up after initially burying them - all without leaving forensically acknowledged remains like those validated at the Soviet massacre at Katyn. The Babi Yar and Majdanek massacres seem false to me also. It has been pretty well proven that there were no human gas chambers at Majdanek. Why aren't the, one figure says, 10 million Polish who died in German camps survivors or families getting benefits like the Jewish survivors. I read a book by the wife of the son of Martin Buber who was in both Russian and German prison camps - until the end of the war the Russian ones were worse in her opinion. Also at the end of the war - prisoners from her camp who were useless or very sick were sent to another camp to die -newly created for them - they weren't outright killed - just given even poorer treatment. One must remember that Anne Frank although sent to Auschwitz didn't die there - she died of disease at another camp in Germany. Research shows the Nuremberg trials were jokes as far as evidence and justice is concerned. Just about all of the soviet accusations of German death camps at the end of the war have been shown to be exaggerations or outright lies. As have much of the survivors testimony.

    What is really interesting is that in the original book Night nothing was said about any gas chambers. An oversight perhaps??? HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Just another proof of being a victim does not make you automatically moral.

    I am disgusted by Wiesel’s lack of appreciation of real heros who actually saved him, and would probably also fight (Marek Edelman comes to one’s mind) for saving the palestinians that the Israelis are butchering. Apparently, it is OK for him if the victims are lowly Palestinians

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • what the Germans did – the creation of work camps, ghettos, and systematic ethnic cleansing of the Jews in which a million or 2 died as a result (especially from disease and malnutrition) although there were probably several hundred thousand shot during the war in captured Soviet territories. Slave labor is abhorrent on its own. There was no need to invent showers that were gas chambers. As far as the death vans go, there is no way millions were killed with them, thousands maybe if they were used extensively at all. I have read Primo Levi on deaths outright by the Germans that he witnessed himself while at Aushwitz. There were 13 hangings. the gas chamber deaths were hearsay. I do believe him when he says of the 90 or so Italian Jews from his area that were sent to the camps only a few others returned to his Italian area after the war. So the mortality rate was very high – It is quite likely that some survivors wouldn’t have returned and that some would have died soon after the war was over. One thing that sounds outright impossible to me is the burning of millions of bodies from Treblinka, Sobibor, Chelmo, Majdanek, and Belzec. Some of them supposedly dug up after initially burying them – all without leaving forensically acknowledged remains like those validated at the Soviet massacre at Katyn. The Babi Yar and Majdanek massacres seem false to me also. It has been pretty well proven that there were no human gas chambers at Majdanek. Why aren’t the, one figure says, 10 million Polish who died in German camps survivors or families getting benefits like the Jewish survivors. I read a book by the wife of the son of Martin Buber who was in both Russian and German prison camps – until the end of the war the Russian ones were worse in her opinion. Also at the end of the war – prisoners from her camp who were useless or very sick were sent to another camp to die -newly created for them – they weren’t outright killed – just given even poorer treatment. One must remember that Anne Frank although sent to Auschwitz didn’t die there – she died of disease at another camp in Germany. Research shows the Nuremberg trials were jokes as far as evidence and justice is concerned. Just about all of the soviet accusations of German death camps at the end of the war have been shown to be exaggerations or outright lies. As have much of the survivors testimony.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    What is really interesting is that in the original book Night nothing was said about any gas chambers. An oversight perhaps??? HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The ghosts that haunt Senator John McCain are about 600 in number and right now they are mustering for an onslaught. McCain, one of America's foremost Republicans and President Barack Obama's opponent in 2008, is currently locked in a desperate bid for political survival in his home state of Arizona. After 20 years of immunity...
  • C J says:

    My quest is to attempt, in some small way, to rid this nation of bureaucrats who serve the desires of their own bellies and have ling abandoned the basic premise that they are servants of the people. It behooves me to proclaim that the wilful ignorance and petty ideologies of many American voters makes this task nearly impossible.

    To think that people like John McCain , John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Jeff Elliot, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obamanation, Elijah Cummings, Elizabeth Warren, Maxine Waters, and so many other treasonous jackals retain their positions of power, like little gods, or still draw such broad support to the extent that they escape the rule of law is shameful and a direct indictment against those who are or hsve been entrusted to prosecute the true enemies of our constitutional republic.

    These people, along with all those not listed herein, have no shame, no conscience, no not compass! They have betrayed the people of this nation, trampled under foot those brave patriots who sacrificed everything to protect these worthless jackals and a complacent society and for what reason?

    So that these carpetbaggers, these vultures, these parasitic vermin, these purveyors of evil can enrich themselves? So that they can sit upon their little thrones like god’s while they promote the spread of this malignant cancer that infects them…greed, power, and their ultimate personal destruction!

    Their legacy is the ultimate destruction of the original American Dream that was set before all those who stood against those who would subjugate and ultimately destroy us all. Not by violence but by those whom we so blindly trusted to serve our interests instead of their own.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A couple of weeks ago Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate and self-appointed moral conscience for Holocaust survivors, praised the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes to make way for yet more illegal settlements in Jerusalem. His chilling statement ran in an ad placed inHa’aretz. Here are Wiesel’s appalling words: Though Wiesel offers himself as a paragon...
  • @reiner Tor
    It's patently obvious to anyone studying the issue of "holocaust-denial" that laws against holocaust denial never actually stop there. They eventually encompass outlawing all kinds of opinions as "hate speech", such as

    - criticizing or saying any bad things about Jews (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about any nonwhite races (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about Islam, a religion (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about any religion other than Christianity (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about homosexuals (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about women (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about transsexuals or people with somewhat similar (LGTBQ...) mental illnesses (whether true or not)

    The list goes on and on. Holocaust denial is a Trojan horse to introduce all these things.

    In other words, the existence of holocaust denial laws is not a very strong argument against the veracity of the official holocaust story. (Which, if you actually read some specialist books about it, is actually way more nuanced than usually acknowledged - for example, according to the official account, the Germans started gassing Jews because they couldn't stomach shooting so many people, especially women and children. If it's a lie, why lie in a way that makes the Germans actually look better than Hutu mass murderers?)

    Holocaust denial laws are of course monstrosities that need to be abolished, not only because they penalize opinions (even if - in my view - foolish opinions), but also because they are then expanded into those complex hate speech laws.

    Holocaust laws not only forbid (under penalty of imprisonment!) differing opinions, they also forbid the public examination of scientific facts.

    The so-called Offenkundigkeit (publicly accepted knowledge) of the courts regarding Holocaust “knowledge” prevails over ANY scientific facts offered in defense.

    Hence my assertion that Germany is a judicial and political cess pool.

    You seem to be sold on the veracity of Holocaustianity; can you offer ANY scientific facts that support your beliefs, along with the references? Hdc

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Gemjunior
    Well, it would be a great idea for there to be held "A Symposium on the Holocaust," a meeting for scholars and interested parties to hold discussion groups and for researchers to present new relevant information or have question and answer sessions. Why can't we do that? The answer is IT'S PUNISHABLE BY JAIL TIME. Why? Don't ask me why something that has had so much world influence should be off-limits to public discussion. Thomas Jefferson once said "There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world."

    It’s patently obvious to anyone studying the issue of “holocaust-denial” that laws against holocaust denial never actually stop there. They eventually encompass outlawing all kinds of opinions as “hate speech”, such as

    - criticizing or saying any bad things about Jews (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about any nonwhite races (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about Islam, a religion (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about any religion other than Christianity (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about homosexuals (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about women (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about transsexuals or people with somewhat similar (LGTBQ…) mental illnesses (whether true or not)

    The list goes on and on. Holocaust denial is a Trojan horse to introduce all these things.

    In other words, the existence of holocaust denial laws is not a very strong argument against the veracity of the official holocaust story. (Which, if you actually read some specialist books about it, is actually way more nuanced than usually acknowledged – for example, according to the official account, the Germans started gassing Jews because they couldn’t stomach shooting so many people, especially women and children. If it’s a lie, why lie in a way that makes the Germans actually look better than Hutu mass murderers?)

    Holocaust denial laws are of course monstrosities that need to be abolished, not only because they penalize opinions (even if – in my view – foolish opinions), but also because they are then expanded into those complex hate speech laws.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Holocaust laws not only forbid (under penalty of imprisonment!) differing opinions, they also forbid the public examination of scientific facts.

    The so-called Offenkundigkeit (publicly accepted knowledge) of the courts regarding Holocaust "knowledge" prevails over ANY scientific facts offered in defense.

    Hence my assertion that Germany is a judicial and political cess pool.

    You seem to be sold on the veracity of Holocaustianity; can you offer ANY scientific facts that support your beliefs, along with the references? Hdc
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Father O'Hara
    Six million Jews wiped out. Sad.

    Can you provide any scientific, technical, or forensic evidence to back up your assertion repeated ad infinitum from MSM, Hollywood, and comic books?

    Thought not.

    According to a United States attorney in Ferguson: “Eye witness testimony is worthless without supporting physical evidence.” HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Six million Jews wiped out. Sad.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Can you provide any scientific, technical, or forensic evidence to back up your assertion repeated ad infinitum from MSM, Hollywood, and comic books?

    Thought not.

    According to a United States attorney in Ferguson: "Eye witness testimony is worthless without supporting physical evidence." HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Stan D Mute
    The HolocaustTM is like any other religion. If you ask too many questions the whole mythology begins to unravel. Why did the Germans, legendary for efficiency, leave so many SurvivorsTM from their Death CampsTM? How were they so staggeringly inefficient in rounding up the Jews that large numbers of Jews openly operated businesses in Germany throughout the war? How did so many SurvivorsTM manage to survive multiple Death CampsTM? Why are there so many news reports of 6MillionTM killed from even before WWI and continuing up to mid-WWII then quieting until around a decade after the end of WWII? Why did the legendarily efficient Germans compile no substantial documentation of their (startlingly incompetent) genocide? Etc...

    Ultimately, for me at least, the question is: Why the gross exaggerations? Wasn't the German behavior bad enough in rounding up so many Jews, Gypsies, mental defectives, and communists then forcing them into slave labor? What does the prevarication serve? Was the intent to distract attention from outrageous Allied war crimes? Firebombing civilians? Russian mass murders? Allowing the slave work camps to starve by cutting off supply lines? Distract attention from mind boggling scale of Communist population eradication efforts? Or was it simply fulfilling Jewish superstitious prophecy?

    Finally, as Propaganda, the HolocaustTM would succeed better if the puppetmasters didn't make just the questioning of it illegal. One doesn't outlaw the questioning of Truths. Making HolocaustTM skepticism illegal is akin to waving a giant red flag that says "Here is a massive and truly epic fantasy that will crumble under the mildest scrutiny!" Truths do not require Government protection.

    Cuz its fake?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Where was the American left in the campaign that ended in recapture of both houses of Congress by the Democrats on November 7, 2006? Was it in the streets, fomenting opposition to the war in Iraq? Not at all. The antiwar movement has been inert for months. When I was asked to give the keynote...
  • Oh. Another one. AC and Noam. And I suppose countless other leftists. It is essential to their ideology, apparently, to disregard an absolute mountain of absurdities, in order to continue their narrative about the heroic struggle of the hapless Arabs or whatever against the Evil Empire. Therefore it would diminish this narrative for them to admit the obvious. Better to quote endless apologists than deal with the ugly truths. Like First Responders dying of diseases unique to certain types of WMD not generally found on commercial airliners or in normal office buildings. And so on. I don’t have to list all the anomalies, do I. We know, even if these canned Leftists have all hooked up with the perps to continue the traitorous lies. But we are ones infected with “fundamental idiocy.” No wonder Americans generally turn away from the left in large numbers.

    In the words of a famous American representative in an earlier period of huge lies: “Have you no shame, sir?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • A couple of weeks ago Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate and self-appointed moral conscience for Holocaust survivors, praised the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes to make way for yet more illegal settlements in Jerusalem. His chilling statement ran in an ad placed inHa’aretz. Here are Wiesel’s appalling words: Though Wiesel offers himself as a paragon...
  • @anarchyst
    ...the "gas vans" are another hoax. Anyone with engineering knowledge KNOWS that diesel exhaust contains almost NO carbon monoxide...

    Perhaps then they used gasoline engines? Exhaust fumes have dangerously high carbon monoxide levels.

    But again, this was at first a Soviet communist invention of mass murder, not a Nazi invention, and not impossible that the idea came from the USSR, because the Nazis started to use it when they were cozying up to the commies after the Stalin-Hitler Pact in August 1939.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor

    I’m only half German
     
    Then your German quotient is similar to mine, although my half German genes come from Austrians (25%) and Donauschwaben (25%), I'm not sure if you count either of them as full Germans. (My personal opinion is that Austrians are the people who managed to convince the world that Beethoven was an Austrian but Hitler was a German.)

    But cramming hundreds of people so tightly into a room that they’re lodged in upright, gassing that room, then removing bodies one at a time without completely ventilating the room or decontaminating the (now very deadly) cyanide coated bodies, carting each one out individually through a single doorway then up an elevator holding just one body into an incredibly expensive furnace that takes six hours (or more – each) to dispose of them, this seems to me all very … improbable.
     
    I'm not sure how much mainstream holocaust historiography you ever read.

    First, the Germans started out the mass murder using good old proven methods. For example they crammed Jews into ghettos (finally in 1941), sent them very little food, and shot the ones trying to escape. (Smuggling was obviously impossible to prevent, but it wasn't enough to prevent maybe a fifth of Jews in the large ghettoes from dying of diseases like typhus or of outright starvation in the crowded and hungry conditions of the ghettoes.) Then Germans captured huge swaths of Soviet territory with a lot of Jews living there, and started shooting them. This is quite an old and conventional method of killing people, and at least a third of the holocaust's victims perished this old and predictable way. This was something that German shooters originally found psychologically difficult to cope with, many SS shooters committed suicide, and those who enjoyed the task (in any population some people are more psychopathic than others) were not necessarily considered to be desirable human material for the SS.

    Second, the Germans had been experimenting with gassings since 1939. It must be noted that it was originally invented in the USSR, so there's nothing uniquely German evil about it. It's not even a particularly evil or cruel way of killing someone, certainly not more cruel than the then also novel electric chair, although I would personally prefer being shot in the back of the neck or beheaded by a guillotine (an earlier invention). The gas van is just an improvised invention to execute people without injuring the bodies, because they were originally used to kill the mentally ill in Germany. The Action T4 was actually run mostly by doctors and not by policemen or soldiers or paramilitaries, and the doctors had neither the stomach nor the expertise needed for mass shootings. They also needed to return the bodies of the patients to the families, so it was best if they found a method that didn't cause any visually noticeable sign of murder on them.

    Third, the SS leadership and Himmler were searching for more effective methods of killing people, and one of the reasons for that was that Himmler personally didn't have the stomach to watch many people being shot: he fainted on his first occasion of watching 500 people being shot into a mass grave. Well, obviously he wasn't a psychopath, and probably had to constantly think of his final goal of racial utopia to avoid thinking of the millions of corpses he was producing to achieve said utopia. Gas vans seemed to be less personal than mass shootings.

    An interesting discussion of German mass shootings is in Christopher Browning's Ordinary Men, where he discusses mass shootings, and how they were often outsourced to Ukrainian or Baltic militias (who in turn needed to be given vast quantities of vodka). Still, eventually most people get used to mass murder, just like to any other unpleasant job, like cleaning toilets.

    Now once the German leadership found the gas vans, and started utilizing them for mass murder, they constantly worked to improve this method, Auschwitz being a still imperfect improvement over the original gas van method.

    I'm not an expert of crematoria, but it is well known that crematoria were probably the weakest part of the Auschwitz death camp, often breaking down. They also often dug mass graves, which were later excavated and the bodies burned, or just burnt the bodies in the open. (Mass graves and/or open burnings were the preferred method in I think all of the other death camps.)

    I don't quite understand what is exactly unbelievable in this story. There is no exceptional or unnecessary cruelty (Nazi Germans rather seem to be less cruel and less psychopathic than some other mass murderers), and even the method doesn't seem to be exceedingly awkward, since gas vans were used in the USSR in the 1930s and gas chambers in the US since the 1920s.

    …the “gas vans” are another hoax. Anyone with engineering knowledge KNOWS that diesel exhaust contains almost NO carbon monoxide…

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Perhaps then they used gasoline engines? Exhaust fumes have dangerously high carbon monoxide levels.

    But again, this was at first a Soviet communist invention of mass murder, not a Nazi invention, and not impossible that the idea came from the USSR, because the Nazis started to use it when they were cozying up to the commies after the Stalin-Hitler Pact in August 1939.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous Smith
    I tried to press the "Agree" button but it wouldn't let me...can only do it once per hour. I wasted it on another, inferior comment.

    Thank you, Stan, for studying the truth; knowing it; and disseminating it.

    The holocaust mythology is collapsing. The lies of the supposed "survivors" have been exposed as the complete fabrications that they are...some of them are so over-the-top ridiculous that one can only laugh at their absurdity! I've seen many videos demonstrating the impossibility of the claims made by Jews, but I haven't read any books yet...I have the following books as PDF files:

    Dissecting the Holocuast by Germar Rudolf
    The Leuchter Report: End of a Myth by Fred Leuchter
    The Hoax of The Twentieth Century by Arthur Butz

    I plan on buying a book entitled "Breaking the Spell: The Holocaust, Myth and Reality" by Nicholas Kollerstrom.

    Can you recommend any other titles? How about David Irving? I've seen some videos of his lectures but I'm unsure which of his works to focus on. My problem is time...I don't have enough of it! So, I'd like to keep my studies on the holocaust mythology to include a maximum of 5 volumes. Any must have books in your mind?

    Three books I read recently and think worthwhile:

    1) Churchill and Hitler, the Unnecessary War.
    2) The Myth of German Culpability.
    3) The Pity of War.

    The latter deals mostly with WWI and what might have been had Germany won. #1 and #2 are definitely required reading on WWII. HdC

    P.S.: Another book I have heard about but not yet read: Witness to History by Michael Walsh. This book is available on-line I believe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @josh
    the holocaust is fake as we all know.

    Indeed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    You didn't answer my point about the Soviet Russian gas van, which was used before the German gas vans. Do you also doubt the existence of the Soviet Russian gas vans? (I've already provided a Wikipedia link in my previous comment.) Also, do you also doubt the existence of the euthanasia program against inhabitants of insane asylums in Germany? Do you doubt that they were operated by medical personnel (who had neither the stomachs nor the soldiers required to kill by the more conventional method of firing squads), and who also got into trouble when occasionally tried to shoot the insane, and the relatives found a bullet among the ashes of the deceased? Do you doubt that as a solution they used gas vans?

    Do you doubt the Germans (including Himmler) actually didn't have the stomach to shoot so many civilians? Why? Why would standard holocaust historiography invent such facts about Himmler that he didn't like people being shot? Why would they invent such facts about other Nazi murderers that they didn't like the 'job' of killing civilians?

    According to standard holocaust historiography, the Auschwitz gas chambers (around which your whole argument is run) were only the latest development in a long line of evolution, and actually only a minority of holocaust victims were killed that way.

    Do you doubt the other stages? Do you doubt that the Germans only started systematic mass shootings of Jews in the summer of 1941? That it originally (in June and July of 1941) only targeted adult Jewish males (not even all of them) in the areas captured from the USSR, and that it only extended to women, children, and the elderly after around August 1941? That they slowly started experimenting with other methods (mostly gas vans) because the mass shootings were difficult to stomach for the soldiers and their commanders alike? And that they started using stationary gas chambers (far simpler, using exhaust fumes instead of cyanide) in camps like Treblinka only in 1942? I mean, do you also doubt the earlier stages of the evolution? Or do you think those are lies, too?

    Where is the point, where it starts to become implausible to you, and why? Your arguments so far can only be used against the existence of gas chambers in the Auschwitz death camps, but probably less than 20% of the victims were killed in Auschwitz. What about the exhaust fume gas chambers in Treblinka or the gas vans in Kulmhof? What about the mass shootings?

    Well, it would be a great idea for there to be held “A Symposium on the Holocaust,” a meeting for scholars and interested parties to hold discussion groups and for researchers to present new relevant information or have question and answer sessions. Why can’t we do that? The answer is IT’S PUNISHABLE BY JAIL TIME. Why? Don’t ask me why something that has had so much world influence should be off-limits to public discussion. Thomas Jefferson once said “There is not a truth existing which I fear or would wish unknown to the whole world.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    It's patently obvious to anyone studying the issue of "holocaust-denial" that laws against holocaust denial never actually stop there. They eventually encompass outlawing all kinds of opinions as "hate speech", such as

    - criticizing or saying any bad things about Jews (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about any nonwhite races (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about Islam, a religion (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about any religion other than Christianity (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about homosexuals (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about women (whether true or not)
    - criticizing or saying any bad things about transsexuals or people with somewhat similar (LGTBQ...) mental illnesses (whether true or not)

    The list goes on and on. Holocaust denial is a Trojan horse to introduce all these things.

    In other words, the existence of holocaust denial laws is not a very strong argument against the veracity of the official holocaust story. (Which, if you actually read some specialist books about it, is actually way more nuanced than usually acknowledged - for example, according to the official account, the Germans started gassing Jews because they couldn't stomach shooting so many people, especially women and children. If it's a lie, why lie in a way that makes the Germans actually look better than Hutu mass murderers?)

    Holocaust denial laws are of course monstrosities that need to be abolished, not only because they penalize opinions (even if - in my view - foolish opinions), but also because they are then expanded into those complex hate speech laws.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Stan D Mute
    The HolocaustTM is like any other religion. If you ask too many questions the whole mythology begins to unravel. Why did the Germans, legendary for efficiency, leave so many SurvivorsTM from their Death CampsTM? How were they so staggeringly inefficient in rounding up the Jews that large numbers of Jews openly operated businesses in Germany throughout the war? How did so many SurvivorsTM manage to survive multiple Death CampsTM? Why are there so many news reports of 6MillionTM killed from even before WWI and continuing up to mid-WWII then quieting until around a decade after the end of WWII? Why did the legendarily efficient Germans compile no substantial documentation of their (startlingly incompetent) genocide? Etc...

    Ultimately, for me at least, the question is: Why the gross exaggerations? Wasn't the German behavior bad enough in rounding up so many Jews, Gypsies, mental defectives, and communists then forcing them into slave labor? What does the prevarication serve? Was the intent to distract attention from outrageous Allied war crimes? Firebombing civilians? Russian mass murders? Allowing the slave work camps to starve by cutting off supply lines? Distract attention from mind boggling scale of Communist population eradication efforts? Or was it simply fulfilling Jewish superstitious prophecy?

    Finally, as Propaganda, the HolocaustTM would succeed better if the puppetmasters didn't make just the questioning of it illegal. One doesn't outlaw the questioning of Truths. Making HolocaustTM skepticism illegal is akin to waving a giant red flag that says "Here is a massive and truly epic fantasy that will crumble under the mildest scrutiny!" Truths do not require Government protection.

    I tried to press the “Agree” button but it wouldn’t let me…can only do it once per hour. I wasted it on another, inferior comment.

    Thank you, Stan, for studying the truth; knowing it; and disseminating it.

    The holocaust mythology is collapsing. The lies of the supposed “survivors” have been exposed as the complete fabrications that they are…some of them are so over-the-top ridiculous that one can only laugh at their absurdity! I’ve seen many videos demonstrating the impossibility of the claims made by Jews, but I haven’t read any books yet…I have the following books as PDF files:

    Dissecting the Holocuast by Germar Rudolf
    The Leuchter Report: End of a Myth by Fred Leuchter
    The Hoax of The Twentieth Century by Arthur Butz

    I plan on buying a book entitled “Breaking the Spell: The Holocaust, Myth and Reality” by Nicholas Kollerstrom.

    Can you recommend any other titles? How about David Irving? I’ve seen some videos of his lectures but I’m unsure which of his works to focus on. My problem is time…I don’t have enough of it! So, I’d like to keep my studies on the holocaust mythology to include a maximum of 5 volumes. Any must have books in your mind?

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Three books I read recently and think worthwhile:

    1) Churchill and Hitler, the Unnecessary War.
    2) The Myth of German Culpability.
    3) The Pity of War.

    The latter deals mostly with WWI and what might have been had Germany won. #1 and #2 are definitely required reading on WWII. HdC

    P.S.: Another book I have heard about but not yet read: Witness to History by Michael Walsh. This book is available on-line I believe.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • […] The Unz Review: Truth and Fiction in Elie Wiesel’s “Night”. A Moral Fabulist By Alexander Coc… […]

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Jacques Sheete
    Speaking of number revision, I find this info interesting. Note the source and the year.

    “Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000.”

    AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 664

    http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf
     

    Here is the Really interesting part:

    In 2005 or so the Israeli media proclaimed that 1,000,000 million big H survivors were still alive. Some actuarial calculation determined that this survivor rate means that 3.2 million Jews were alive in Europe at the end of WWII! HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @HdC
    Before one accepts the testimony of any witness, it is best to ask, and answer the question: "Who benefits."

    The book you refer to was written just after the WWII ceasefire at the behest of the US military.

    Towards the end of the war the US and British air force bombed and shot at everything that moved, including children at play.

    Consequently supplies for concentration camps were severely curtailed and not very high in the order of priorities.

    To then blame the Germans for failing to supply necessities to the camps is the height of hypocrisy. HdC

    Towards the end of the war the US and British air force bombed and shot at everything that moved, including children at play.

    Consequently supplies for concentration camps were severely curtailed and not very high in the order of priorities.

    The Brits , in their usual fashion, imposed a starvation blockade on Germany as well.

    Then there’s this:

    “Now revisionism teaches us that this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth.

    If people should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler’s Germany, then they will begin to ask questions, and searching questions…”

    Murray Rothbard, Revisionism for Our Times, 1966. Note: This gentleman was Jewish.

    http://mises.org/daily/2592

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    This user has made this claim several times in the comments here - that the 5.1 million figure is more realistic. The original poster may very well never see this post, but I hope to at least educate the few that may have stumbled upon his claim and taken it seriously.

    Here's the thing: this figure was calculated with the "cold war" numbers, which have since been heavily revised.

    Most notably, the Auschwitz death toll went from 4 million "mostly Jews" to 1.1 to 1.5 million "mostly Jews" (the current plaque uses the higher number). Majdanek and Dachau, which always had much smaller numbers than Auschwitz, went through similarly drastic reductions.

    To be fair though, even these numbers may very well be grossly inaccurate - the people behind these figures have never to my knowledge given a very clear explanation on how they got them. It seems that they simply agreed that the Soviet figures were way too high, the product of propaganda and victor's justice, and adjusted them to what they felt was more realistic.

    And yet...the six million claim that the media has pounded into our heads did not change with them. Of course, if someone like reiner tor wants to defend the original figures as accurate, I would be interested in hearing their argument, but it will be a tough sell.

    Considering the absolute ridiculousness of the gas chambers claim, and the fact that all three independent chemical analyses of the alleged gas chambers have shown that they could not be what they are claimed to be, I'm more inclined to believe that the toll is much less than even the revised figures. The Red Cross's original calculation, in the few hundred thousands, seems much more likely to me.

    Speaking of number revision, I find this info interesting. Note the source and the year.

    “Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000.”

    AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 664

    http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Here is the Really interesting part:

    In 2005 or so the Israeli media proclaimed that 1,000,000 million big H survivors were still alive. Some actuarial calculation determined that this survivor rate means that 3.2 million Jews were alive in Europe at the end of WWII! HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Very eloquently put, I think?

    But there is a great big fly in your ointment: Where is the forensic, pathological, physical, and other scientific evidence to support your assertions?

    Yes I know and read much of the so-called eye witness testimony of the “survivors”, all of which is treated as gospel truth by the media and court historians.

    Recall though, that in a real court of law eye witness testimony is worthless unless supported by physical evidence, according to the state attorney who investigated the shooting of the so-called teenager in Ferguson.

    The “big H” eye witnesses couldn’t even get the colour of the corpses right, nor correctly point out the locations of any mass graves with claimed tens of thousands of buried bodies, or the ashes of hundreds of thousands of cremated victims.

    Btw, where did all the fuel come from for all those cremations, to say nothing of the logistics required to procure same? HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    This user has made this claim several times in the comments here - that the 5.1 million figure is more realistic. The original poster may very well never see this post, but I hope to at least educate the few that may have stumbled upon his claim and taken it seriously.

    Here's the thing: this figure was calculated with the "cold war" numbers, which have since been heavily revised.

    Most notably, the Auschwitz death toll went from 4 million "mostly Jews" to 1.1 to 1.5 million "mostly Jews" (the current plaque uses the higher number). Majdanek and Dachau, which always had much smaller numbers than Auschwitz, went through similarly drastic reductions.

    To be fair though, even these numbers may very well be grossly inaccurate - the people behind these figures have never to my knowledge given a very clear explanation on how they got them. It seems that they simply agreed that the Soviet figures were way too high, the product of propaganda and victor's justice, and adjusted them to what they felt was more realistic.

    And yet...the six million claim that the media has pounded into our heads did not change with them. Of course, if someone like reiner tor wants to defend the original figures as accurate, I would be interested in hearing their argument, but it will be a tough sell.

    Considering the absolute ridiculousness of the gas chambers claim, and the fact that all three independent chemical analyses of the alleged gas chambers have shown that they could not be what they are claimed to be, I'm more inclined to believe that the toll is much less than even the revised figures. The Red Cross's original calculation, in the few hundred thousands, seems much more likely to me.

    Here’s the thing: this figure was calculated with the “cold war” numbers, which have since been heavily revised.

    Most notably, the Auschwitz death toll went from 4 million “mostly Jews” to 1.1 to 1.5 million “mostly Jews” (the current plaque uses the higher number). Majdanek and Dachau, which always had much smaller numbers than Auschwitz, went through similarly drastic reductions.

    No, read the frigging book of Raul Hilberg, his 5.1 million number was based on roughly 1 million Jews killed in Auschwitz. Moreover, there are two ways to calculate the number killed, first you can count the losses of the populations (or gains, if people were fleeing one country and settling another), and add the numbers, or you can count the places and methods of killing (e.g. 1M in Auschwitz, 800k in Treblinka, 1.5M by Einsatzgruppen in the East, etc.). In the case of Hilberg, he does both calculations, and the numbers roughly match.

    It doesn’t mean his numbers are perfect, or that it’s impossible to criticize them, but your criticism is uninformed. The 4 million number was used in communist propaganda as the number of “Jews and communists” killed there, and serious historians in the West never took the number seriously. Moreover, it was also a case of not knowing where the killing took place: for example a lot of Greek Jews were deported to death camps in Poland, and because Auschwitz was the most well-known of these, it was often assumed they were killed in Auschwitz. It turned out, many of them were transported to Treblinka. Auschwitz was also a huge prisoner hub, a lot of people arrived there, only to be transported into other camps later on. For example most Hungarian Jews were transported there, and very few came back, but not all that were killed were killed there, since a lot were taken to other camps from there. These all had the effects of inflating the Auschwitz numbers without affecting the overall number.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Fox News says Glenn Beck's daily program will "transition" off the network show some time before the end of this year. Beck cosigned the statement and confirmed this on his show on Wednesday, speaking vaguely of sustaining the two-year relationship with Fox by "developing things". He sounded shell-shocked, like a man who'd been shown the...
  • A couple of weeks ago Elie Wiesel, Nobel laureate and self-appointed moral conscience for Holocaust survivors, praised the expulsion of Palestinians from their homes to make way for yet more illegal settlements in Jerusalem. His chilling statement ran in an ad placed inHa’aretz. Here are Wiesel’s appalling words: Though Wiesel offers himself as a paragon...
  • Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @reiner Tor
    I think the official story is more or less true (with a few caveats, like Raul Hilberg actually arrives at the somewhat lower number of 5.1 million with two different methods, so technically speaking it probably wasn't exactly '6 million'), it's more a question of narrative.

    Jew-hatred is always presented as the epitome of irrationality, a kind of mental illness. For example that irrational mentally ill Hitler erroneously believed that it did matter that some of Roosevelt's closest advisors were either Jewish or had Jewish spouses. When in fact of course these advisors of Roosevelt unanimously were anti-German, but - according to mainstream opinion - this would have been all the same if they had - for example - Norwegian or Irish ancestry or spouses... or... would it for sure have been all the same? According to the Narrative, we're not supposed to question that.

    This user has made this claim several times in the comments here – that the 5.1 million figure is more realistic. The original poster may very well never see this post, but I hope to at least educate the few that may have stumbled upon his claim and taken it seriously.

    Here’s the thing: this figure was calculated with the “cold war” numbers, which have since been heavily revised.

    Most notably, the Auschwitz death toll went from 4 million “mostly Jews” to 1.1 to 1.5 million “mostly Jews” (the current plaque uses the higher number). Majdanek and Dachau, which always had much smaller numbers than Auschwitz, went through similarly drastic reductions.

    To be fair though, even these numbers may very well be grossly inaccurate – the people behind these figures have never to my knowledge given a very clear explanation on how they got them. It seems that they simply agreed that the Soviet figures were way too high, the product of propaganda and victor’s justice, and adjusted them to what they felt was more realistic.

    And yet…the six million claim that the media has pounded into our heads did not change with them. Of course, if someone like reiner tor wants to defend the original figures as accurate, I would be interested in hearing their argument, but it will be a tough sell.

    Considering the absolute ridiculousness of the gas chambers claim, and the fact that all three independent chemical analyses of the alleged gas chambers have shown that they could not be what they are claimed to be, I’m more inclined to believe that the toll is much less than even the revised figures. The Red Cross’s original calculation, in the few hundred thousands, seems much more likely to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Here’s the thing: this figure was calculated with the “cold war” numbers, which have since been heavily revised.

    Most notably, the Auschwitz death toll went from 4 million “mostly Jews” to 1.1 to 1.5 million “mostly Jews” (the current plaque uses the higher number). Majdanek and Dachau, which always had much smaller numbers than Auschwitz, went through similarly drastic reductions.
     

    No, read the frigging book of Raul Hilberg, his 5.1 million number was based on roughly 1 million Jews killed in Auschwitz. Moreover, there are two ways to calculate the number killed, first you can count the losses of the populations (or gains, if people were fleeing one country and settling another), and add the numbers, or you can count the places and methods of killing (e.g. 1M in Auschwitz, 800k in Treblinka, 1.5M by Einsatzgruppen in the East, etc.). In the case of Hilberg, he does both calculations, and the numbers roughly match.

    It doesn't mean his numbers are perfect, or that it's impossible to criticize them, but your criticism is uninformed. The 4 million number was used in communist propaganda as the number of "Jews and communists" killed there, and serious historians in the West never took the number seriously. Moreover, it was also a case of not knowing where the killing took place: for example a lot of Greek Jews were deported to death camps in Poland, and because Auschwitz was the most well-known of these, it was often assumed they were killed in Auschwitz. It turned out, many of them were transported to Treblinka. Auschwitz was also a huge prisoner hub, a lot of people arrived there, only to be transported into other camps later on. For example most Hungarian Jews were transported there, and very few came back, but not all that were killed were killed there, since a lot were taken to other camps from there. These all had the effects of inflating the Auschwitz numbers without affecting the overall number.

    , @Jacques Sheete
    Speaking of number revision, I find this info interesting. Note the source and the year.

    “Allowing for a maximum of 100,000 who succeeded in emigrating from Europe, this would bring the total number of Jews under the direct rule of Nazi Germany to about 3,200,000.”

    AMERICAN JEWISH YEAR BOOK 1941-1942, page 664

    http://www.ajcarchives.org/AJC_DATA/Files/1941_1942_9_Statistics.pdf
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dearieme
    When I was a boy in the fifties, the figure bandied about was eight million. I dare say that referred to someone's estimate of those, both Jewish and gentile, murdered in the camps, both extermination camps and concentration camps, and elsewhere. The distinction of type of camp was unknown to me as a boy but the horror was not; my father saw Belsen and could bring himself to talk about it only once.

    Please read my comment #57, especially the last three (short) paragraphs. HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dearieme
    When I was a boy in the fifties, the figure bandied about was eight million. I dare say that referred to someone's estimate of those, both Jewish and gentile, murdered in the camps, both extermination camps and concentration camps, and elsewhere. The distinction of type of camp was unknown to me as a boy but the horror was not; my father saw Belsen and could bring himself to talk about it only once.

    In the 1930s, when Stalin established an autonomous Jewish state in Russia – the total Jewish population in Europe was less than nine million. However, according to new Jewish religion (Holocaust) six million of them were killed by Nazis while TWO MILLION escaped to Palestine to establish a “Jewish state”.

    The Holocaust ESTIMATE has long been lowered to 2.5 million as posted at the Auschwitz Holocaust Museum.

    David Cole, a Zionist Jew, claimed last year at TAKI’s Magazine: “Holocaust is based on fakes, frauds, and forgeries.”

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/02/19/david-cole-holocaust-is-based-on-fakes-frauds-and-forgeries/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    The entire account of Wiesel is suspect.

    But the holocaust is based not on Wiesel's account, but as I wrote on many separate pieces of evidence, which are very robust. I personally have met historians who work on the period (but not on the holocaust), and they would notice if the whole thing would be a hoax. For example a Hungarian historian recently found a document compiled by the Hungarian military intelligence in 1943 for Hungarian regent Admiral Horthy which is about the pressure the Germans put on Hungary to deport its Jews. They casually mention that Hungary's 800,000 Jews (this number included I think 100,000 half-Jews) were then the largest remaining Jewish community in Axis-controlled Europe. Anybody with access to pre-war encyclopedia or other sources can confirm that Poland alone had over 3 million Jews in the 1930s, so unless you posit that something happened to them you cannot explain why the 800,000 Hungarian Jews would be the largest European Jewish community in 1943. Also this historian would have noticed if Hungarian military intelligence had wrote "Hungarian Jewry is the second largest Jewish community after Poland", which would contradict other sources which claim that the majority of Polish Jews were murdered in 1942. If there were just one such document, it could be explained away (like the Hungarian intelligence officer didn't know that Polish Jews were already murdered), but the fact that not much contradicting but much corroborating evidence is found is enough for me.

    So many historians are working on the Second World War, that it's impossible for the whole story to be a hoax.

    You can perhaps argue that the numbers are exaggerated, maybe not 6 million, but only 5 million (Raul Hilberg calculated 5.1 million using two different methods, but most holocaust histories use higher numbers of about 5.5-5.8 or 5.5-6 million or something), or maybe only 4 million (even Raul Hilberg is Jewish and so maybe he is also exaggerating), but to claim that there was no systematic murder of Jews by Germans during the Second World War is like claiming there was no systematic bombing campaign against German cities.

    When I was a boy in the fifties, the figure bandied about was eight million. I dare say that referred to someone’s estimate of those, both Jewish and gentile, murdered in the camps, both extermination camps and concentration camps, and elsewhere. The distinction of type of camp was unknown to me as a boy but the horror was not; my father saw Belsen and could bring himself to talk about it only once.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    In the 1930s, when Stalin established an autonomous Jewish state in Russia - the total Jewish population in Europe was less than nine million. However, according to new Jewish religion (Holocaust) six million of them were killed by Nazis while TWO MILLION escaped to Palestine to establish a "Jewish state".

    The Holocaust ESTIMATE has long been lowered to 2.5 million as posted at the Auschwitz Holocaust Museum.

    David Cole, a Zionist Jew, claimed last year at TAKI's Magazine: "Holocaust is based on fakes, frauds, and forgeries."

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/02/19/david-cole-holocaust-is-based-on-fakes-frauds-and-forgeries/
    , @HdC
    Please read my comment #57, especially the last three (short) paragraphs. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @anonymous
    dead

    2 Jul 2016


    RIH


    http://bnonews.com/news/index.php/news/id4732

    Yup, he’s here. :D

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Read More
    • Replies: @Yo Trump
    Yup, he's here. :D
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Since I read Rabbi Michael Lerner’s views of the Holohoaxer Elie Wiesel, I never wasted my time listening to his whining for Israel, Organized Jewry and Holocaust.

    “Elie Wiesel, the Master propagandist – Any political movement would give its eye teeth to have him on its side,” Tikun Olam magazine.

    In an interview with Israeli daily Ha’aretz’s Ofer Aderet, published on November 2, 2012 Weisel proposed that Israeli Mossad should kidnap Iran’s President Ahmadinejad as it kidnapped the famous Zionist Nazi leader Adolf Eichmann.

    “For the past three years, I have been waging a struggle against Ahmadinejad around the world, demanding that he be arrested and placed on trial as was done to Eichmann. He should be charged with a desire to commit genocide. I hope the Mossad, which caught a man like Eichmann, will be able to catch him and get him tried in an international court. Someone like him must not be allowed to sleep quietly,” whined Wiesel.

    Elie Wiesel had been called “Liar” and “Fraud” by two of his fellow Jews, Dr. Norman Finkelstein and Dr. Noam Chomsky ….

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/11/06/elie-wiesel-mossad-should-kidnap-ahmadinejad/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • HdC says:
    @Anonymous
    I have read several other books that seemed more accurate to me, such as"The Theory and Practice of Hell." I have always wondered why Wiesel's version seemed tame and less horrendous than the other first hand survivor accounts.

    Before one accepts the testimony of any witness, it is best to ask, and answer the question: “Who benefits.”

    The book you refer to was written just after the WWII ceasefire at the behest of the US military.

    Towards the end of the war the US and British air force bombed and shot at everything that moved, including children at play.

    Consequently supplies for concentration camps were severely curtailed and not very high in the order of priorities.

    To then blame the Germans for failing to supply necessities to the camps is the height of hypocrisy. HdC

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete

    Towards the end of the war the US and British air force bombed and shot at everything that moved, including children at play.

    Consequently supplies for concentration camps were severely curtailed and not very high in the order of priorities.
     
    The Brits , in their usual fashion, imposed a starvation blockade on Germany as well.

    Then there's this:



    "Now revisionism teaches us that this entire myth, so prevalent then and even now about Hitler, and about the Japanese, is a tissue of fallacies from beginning to end. Every plank in this nightmare evidence is either completely untrue or not entirely the truth.

    If people should learn this intellectual fraud about Hitler's Germany, then they will begin to ask questions, and searching questions…”

    Murray Rothbard, Revisionism for Our Times, 1966. Note: This gentleman was Jewish.
    http://mises.org/daily/2592

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I have read several other books that seemed more accurate to me, such as”The Theory and Practice of Hell.” I have always wondered why Wiesel’s version seemed tame and less horrendous than the other first hand survivor accounts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HdC
    Before one accepts the testimony of any witness, it is best to ask, and answer the question: "Who benefits."

    The book you refer to was written just after the WWII ceasefire at the behest of the US military.

    Towards the end of the war the US and British air force bombed and shot at everything that moved, including children at play.

    Consequently supplies for concentration camps were severely curtailed and not very high in the order of priorities.

    To then blame the Germans for failing to supply necessities to the camps is the height of hypocrisy. HdC
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Gerry1211 says:
    @Anonymous
    So where's your tattoo, Wiesel?

    Elie Wiesel is a fraud….He was not in Auschwitz nor in Buchenwald…..There WAS a Lazar Wiesel who was in Auschwitz and subsequently in Buchenwald. It is Lazar Wiesel who wrote “Night” in Hungarian. Elie Wiesel neither speaks Hungarian NOR Yiddish….He speaks English with a French accent. And indeed, he has no tattoo

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • You don’t have to take my word for my assertions; a modicum of googling would have disclosed the thoughts of:

    Harlan Fiske Stone, William O. Douglas, Edward Leroy Van Van Roden, Charles H Wennerstrum.

    You can also read what John F. Kennedy had to say about IMT at Nuremberg

    HdC

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @HdC
    Read what 2 judges of the US supreme court had to say about the Nuernberg trials. Kangeroo court and Lynching Party were the language they used.

    They also verified that various accused had been tortured, with their testicles crushed irreparably.

    The British torturers even bragged in a book about their torturing activities.

    Nitzkor assertions defy logic and uses verbosity to hide behind.

    In jurisprudence it is well understood that evidence obtained under duress is not reliable and cannot be considered evidence. Hence the person forced to confess is not a witness in the definition of the word. This has nothing to do with moving goal posts.

    HdC

    Read what 2 judges of the US supreme court had to say about the Nuernberg trials. Kangeroo court and Lynching Party were the language they used.

    Really? You’re aware that the chief prosecutor f0r the United States was Robert Jackson, right? Know what his job was?

    They also verified that various accused had been tortured, with their testicles crushed irreparably.

    No, they didn’t. You’re going to need to begin proving your assertions.

    That said, on the basis of what you’re writing, I suspect you are mistaking a judge referring to the specific case of the Malmedy perpetrators vs. the SCOTUS.

    The British torturers even bragged in a book about their torturing activities.

    And Höss was in U.S. custody when he swore his affidavit.

    Nitzkor assertions defy logic and uses verbosity to hide behind.

    Please indicate a single instance of defied logic.

    In jurisprudence it is well understood that evidence obtained under duress is not reliable and cannot be considered evidence. Hence the person forced to confess is not a witness in the definition of the word. This has nothing to do with moving goal posts.

    If you ask for a “single person” to refer to the correct color of gassing victims and I give one, and then you say that you weren’t referring to that type of person, that’s moving the goalposts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Late To The Party
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    You're wrong about most of your accounts, despite your protestations and half-baked references. The following link, which provides an amazing expose, is a transcript of a court case involving a cross examination of Raul Hilberg who was engaged as a prosecution's witness against a Holocaust revisionist: http://www.ihr.org/books/kulaszka/09hilberg.html

    Professor Hilberg was someone I, for many years, reflexively and unquestioningly granted total credibility and academic respect. However, when confronted with deep, invasive questioning on the stand about his Holocaust methodology and its resultant conclusions, I was surprised to understand how the underpinnings of his research are precarious, subjective, and assumption riddled. Hilberg spent most of his time on the stand parring with his questioner, evading hard question, obfuscating and deflecting, and, in the end, offering very little assurance that he, the eminent authority on the subject, could offer either verifiable evidence or at the very least a convincing defense of the Holocaust as it is commonly understood in history.

    Based on my reading of the court transcript, I had no choice but to revise my opinion of Mr. Hilberg to that of a man who likely started with a conclusion and sought to organize, interpret and fashion facts to support it. Worse still, reading the transcript shook my long held assumption, faith and unquestioned belief that the textbooks and talking-head "experts" spoke unvarnished truth from a place of total integrity and authority.

    The transcript is long and expansive, covering the course of at least two days on the witness stand, but the end of the cross examination summarizes the situation succinctly and effectively:

    What German sources do you have describing what happened [in the Holocaust]?, asked Griffiths.

    "German documents pertaining to operations in the death camps are numerous, and they include various railway materials indicating the one-way traffic to these camps," said Hilberg. "... In addition, there is correspondence pertaining to the construction of gas chambers. Furthermore - and again I speak of documentation -- there is an extensive correspondence about the delivery of gas, sometimes labelled 'materials for handling the Jewish problem', and this is just a sample of the materials on which one relies on forming the total picture of what happened."

    There isn't a single piece of concrete evidence a man of such intellectual stature as Raul Hilberg could produce aside from his assigning subjective context and evil doing around incomplete facts, fuzzy details and interpretive, unrelated items of documentation. Its not that the Holocaust is refuted per se, it's that the Original Sin aspect of the gas chambers and ovens, which constitute the horrific figment in the minds of all society, are rendered illogical, unrealistic and suddenly highly questionable. No smoking gun is identified by Hilberg. No body is produced. Just the painstaking collection and connecting of shards of evidentiary pieces that might be assembled to come to different conclusions. That is no way to prove the legitimacy and veracity of the most evil systematic human genocide perpetrated in history. I'm convinced millions of innocents were killed in WWII through a variety of violent acts (including incidents of gassing or chemical asphyxiation), inhuman treatment, starvation and virulent disease, but humanity, truth and history (and the Jewish victims, above all) are owed a full accounting of what happened in the concentration camps.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.