Holocaust fact finding thread

Valentine

Kingfisher
Gold Member
There's been two other (closed) threads on this from years ago (1, 2) with one even resulting in a week-long ban but I think the culture here has changed.

At least in my opinion the forum has evolved sufficiently in the interim that we're able to calmly and logically analyse the evidence here and come to some kind of consensus, especially as there's been a number of recent posts denying the official narrative lately. But of course as always Roosh it's your forum.

Starting off with a few cross-posts:


scorpion said:
There are a lot of problems with the official Holocaust story, from the logical (why would the Germans murder millions of prison laborers in the middle of a war for survival when they had a manpower shortage?) to the logistical (how were six million people murdered and cremated in facilities that mathematically could not support anything close to this number and which were clearly not well-designed for extermination purposes?). Another huge red flag is the fact that questioning the Holocaust is literally a crime in many European countries. There is no other historical event in human history that requires this sort of legal protection, including dozens of past genocides. What is it about this specific "Holocaust" that warrants locking up people who question it as modern day heretics? Why does the truth need to be protected from investigation?

A thought experiment: Regardless of your opinion toward the "9/11 Truth" movement, imagine if suddenly the U.S. government passed a law that made questioning the official story of 9/11 a crime. Would that make you more or less suspicious of what actually happened on 9/11? Personally, this would make me much more suspicious. I have the same reaction to the Holocaust narrative simply due to the fact that questioning it is illegal in so many countries. If something is true it does not need the protection of the government to make it so.

Is it criminal to deny the moon landing? No.
Is it criminal to deny the official story of 9/11? No.
Is it criminal to deny that Oswald acted alone? No.
Is it criminal to deny the occurrence of any other historic genocide? No.
Is it criminal to deny the Holocaust? Yes.

Why is that?


MikeCF said:
LOL. You wanna say Jews milk their holocaust when others (gypsies, communists, poles, Turks) were slaughtered and act like there was only THE Holocaust?

Sure.

But denying that shit? GTFO with that bullshit.


Meister Eckhart said:
Lizard King said:
Meister Eckhart said:
Lizard King said:
Meister Eckhart said:
My biggest problem with the 1488 crowd is they're a tiny, vocal minority that historically has ridden on the backs on Reactionaries and Conservatives and then stabs them in the back. I don't care if they get thrown under the bus, because Fascists do that as soon as they can to the rest of their so call "allies".

Case in point being Hitler himself. Hitler and the Nazis never had the majority, but they did have a power-base and managed to rope in a bunch of Reactionaries who were pissed off about the Weimar Republic and "Conservatives" scared about Communism. Most "pro-Nazis" weren't really convinced Nazis, but they did think the Weimar state was a massive screw up and wanted to return to the better days of the Zweites Reich. The German officer corps is a major example, these guys wanted a restored Germany, and often being Junkers wanted the Kaiser back. Boulanger is another great example being the Proto-Fascist, his whole rise to power was him promising to return France to the Bourbon monarchy but in the end really only cared about his own dictatorial power (which he failed to achieve).

So the Nazis then push a lot of stuff that nobody wanted, like the Holocaust. The Holocaust was completely unnecessary and doomed the invasion of the Soviet Union from the start. If Hitler was really the "Anti-communist warlord" the 1488 crowd likes to pretend and revise to make themselves palatable, then he wouldn't have been interested in genocide for millions of Slavs that would have risen up and helped them topple Stalin. There was simply no reason, other than a bunch of sociopaths didn't like them. Germany could have simply made Eastern Europe a bunch of client-states (like they planned at Brest-Litovsk) and nobody would have probably cared now that Communism was dead.

In the end anything remotely resembling them was tarred for almost a century. Hitler is the go-to for "Far-right", not Bismarck, Metternich or any sane reputable figure. I don't have anything to do with them for the same reason the CIA stopped trying to take on Fascists as assets during the Cold War, they have their own agenda and will screw you over the very first moment they can.

Sorry, but that is a lot of feelings based garbage.

The holocaust doomed Barbarossa? :huh:

Yes, Hitler was anti-Communist, most historians agree that there was an ideological battle taking place between Fascism and Communism in the inter-war period and during WW2.

The German officers/generals were mutinous at 2 significant junctures, after the Battle of Britain, and after Barbarossa. I think we can deduce why, it's because they were both costly military ventures.

The Holocaust is wider than people make it out to be because it has become obsessive over the Jews, and minimal attention on the genocidal policy in general towards Slavs and other groups.

Barbarossa failed in part because of the genocidal mentality the Nazis had. If Hitler was this Anticommunist generic reactionary warlord revisionists say, then an invasion of the Soviet Union could have gone a lot better. If say, the Imperial German government was in control, then it'd be highly likely that the average Soviet would be inclined to see this as a genuine chance to topple Stalin who had been oppressing them. Some did historically, there was the Russian Liberation army and other collaborators. However, this failed for that exact reason, most people aren't going to collaborate with an occupying power whose clear intentions is the extermination of your people.

That's not emotional, that's hard facts. The people playing fast and loose with them are the 1488 crowd who want to whitewash themselves.

LOL! Barbarossa failed because it was an enormous front, and because Hitler made stupid decisions and wouldn't let a single German retreat. And because America was giving the Soviet Union a colossal amount of assistance, but lets not tarnish a good holocaust myth with facts.

"Genocidal mentality", what have you been reading? Can you dial up the "Evil Nazi" narrative a bit more.

All this WW2 debate is unrelated to Israel having a racially pure ethno-state while Europe is flooded with Third World people. When are you going to address that hypocrisy?

OK, you clearly aren't familiar with Generalplan Ost. I hate to break it to you, but the Nazis policy was to exterminate primarily, and expel/assimilate secondarily all Slavic peoples from Poland to the Urals. This is what the whole Lebensraum concept was about. This isn't revisionism, it was a core Nazi policy which is why they're called genocidal maniacs, because they were. Which is why the hardcore 1488 crowd still likes to say Slavic people aren't White, even though they have some of the fairest features out of all Europeans.

Compare Generalplan Ost to the Kaiserreich's "Mitteleuropa" plan with Brest-Litovsk. They planned on having the Baltic states, Finland, Ukraine all become independent states, but economically linked to Germany and with German nobles as monarchs primarily. It's something actually sane, and a normal German nationalist would probably have been proud of.

I'm sorry, I was at one point being deluded by the revisionist crowd myself, but the Nazis were as bad as their reputation.


tiggaling said:
As soon as we talk about "the holocaust" as this thing that happened or not, or that "holocaust deniers" believe the holocaust did not happen, is a really hoodwinked way of looking at this issue as an "either/or" situation, which is grossly simplistic. This perspective is designed to make the presumed holocaust deniers look stupid.

Because "the holocaust" in the public mind is the deliberate extermination of millions of jews. Holocaust revisionists do not dispute the fact that there were a very large amount of concentration camps where jews and others worked during WWII for the German war effort. They say that the majority of Jews died due to Typhus and hunger at the end of the war due to wartime deprivation and that there is no evidence, scientific or otherwise that the Nazi's used gas chambers to kill Jews.

This is from a revisionist forum about this man Oskar Groening and his history.

"Back to the 21st century and the latest Jack-in-the-Holocaust-box, Oskar
Groening.

So they simply edited the words into poor Groening's mouth in the
official distributed text, as Rees now seems to be confessing in his
correspondence with your blog here:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/04/when-deniers-are-right.html

That same text, of course, was the one used for the foreign dubbings,
and that's that. Anything goes in the happy-go-free world of serious
"Holocaust" publishing & broadcasting...

Unfortunately for Rees, in the original English version both the
superposed English comment and the German words that can be heard
beneath it (if you rewind and pay close attention) give the game away:
the "gas chambers" words are definitely not there.

Now, Rees didn't get away with it, and therefore, neither did Groening
for long. He probably is singing the right tune now and will do all that
is required of him, but the question remains: since both Groening's
voice and the superposed English comment agree in the soundtrack and
leave the gas chambers out, what do you call the transcript deemed to
have miraculously created those words backwards in time?...

Don't be afraid of the words: it's called a FALSIFICATION."

https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3197


tiggaling said:
We are supposed to believe that the Nazi's killed all those unsuitable for work. But if you watch this video deconstructing the implausible anecdotal evidence of those who claim to have witnessed "gas chambers", you will see that the conditions in the camps were often not too bad for many in the early part of the war.


And "the holocaust" is typically used as an example of how barbaric man can be; German's being the vanquished enemy, were demonised and German national pride conveniently crushed.

As David Irving points out, there is no order from Hitler to exterminate the Jews, and there is no documentation to the effect this event ever occurred. And no plausible physical evidence which makes any sense.

In that case, I think it is perfectly reasonable to doubt the version of history we are presented with.

It is not implausible that the Germans did kill Jews en masse in gas chambers, which the Eisatzgruppen certain did through shooting, but they kept meticulous records.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einsatzgruppen

The issue that revisionists have, is that there is no evidence of gas chambers, which represent the brutal, systematic genocide and for most people represent the horror of "the holocaust"

A little bit of digging reveals that much of what we call "the holocaust" was manufactured by the allies, including the soviets.

http://www.thechristiansolution.com/doc2012/509_Denial.html
 

weambulance

Hummingbird
Gold Member
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

What part of it is supposed to be a hoax? That it happened at all, or the number of people killed and how?
 

Mercenary

Hummingbird
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

The Holocaust is real.

The number of people actually killed on the other hand, is probably exaggerated.



There are a few organisations that for decades have been meticulously creating lists and databases of every single person's name & personal data of those who died. Even they can't come close to the the "official" number of those killed.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

My guess is it's a mix of everything.

After the war smashing German nationalism was always going to be a massive end-goal. Nobody was interested in a strong Germany ever rising up again and therefore various undertakings were tended to by various players for various reasons with the common outcome of neutering Germany into the decades to come.

Understandable in a sense.

So in that regard every exaggeration, no matter how bold, was trotted out. Why not? Who would counter it? Who in post-war Germany would stand up and say "I only shot one Jew, not ten!"

Imagine if the Japs had turned the tables on the US, American famines ensued and the interned Japanese Americans starved to death before the survivors could be "liberated" by the Japanese military. The story would be the same. "The Americans engaged in systematic extermination of the Japanese Americans".

But this is the problem. Too many people have a dog in the fight and if you don't then who can be fucked getting shot from both sides?
 

kamoz

Kingfisher
Gold Member
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

Agreed. I have a family member (non Jewish) who survived auschwitz. I never spoke to him directly but I have spoken to his son.

In general it was pretty horrible and a lot of the killing methods described were used there. Groups who tried to escape were mowed down by machine guns. I was only told a handful of stories a long time ago but in general it was so bad that his father rarely talked about it.

The only peculiar thing that he mentioned, as do many Poles, is that from a qualitative standpoint there didn't seem to be that many Jews there (at least not like how Spielberg depicted in Schindlers List). And this leads to one noticing multiple peculiarities. The one OP mentioned is criminalizing holocaust denial. Another is lumping in the exaggeration of deaths (especially of Jews) with outright holocaust denial, we see this tactic constantly used by the mainstream (i.e. associating the reptilian overlord conspiracy with the 9/11 conspiracy).

The biggest one perhaps is the enshrinement of "The Holocaust", its Jewish identity, and the value and coverage it gets in education and history. Back in high school a teacher of mine deducted points on a paper I wrote because I referenced it as World War II. Well no apparently that's wrong because it gets its own special place in history above anyone else that was killed. The more one looks at WWII in Europe the more one sees that it was really just a regional war where Hitler wanted to eliminate Slavs to make living space. In east Asia it was another regional war with the Japanese trying to eliminate everyone else, but especially the Chinese. But we never learn it from this point of view. Instead it's just another example of how the Jews are the most oppressed victims yet again and that any accusations of wrongdoing on their part are baseless (and never examined). With so many atrocities and deaths committed to non Jews all over the world during WWII alone, as well as genocides and massacres such as the Holdomor or Katyn following WWII, it doesn't take a lot of brainpower to wonder if there's something odd about the emphasis of "the Jewish Holocaust."
 

Sooth

Pelican
Gold Member
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

The holocaust is just another mass murder in history. If you look at it (history) the holocaust was minor even on the (((official recorded numbers))).

There is no doubt that a certain religious group has milked it to their advantage. But when you're familiar with history you're less likely to get bogged down in hate and look toward solutions.
 

sterling_archer

Hummingbird
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

Real but exaggerated numbers and focusing mainly on the Jews sorrow.

Related to conspiracy theories about fake holocaust, here is one author (historian) who is extremely well read, educated and informed and has his own angle at the whole thing. David Irving. Extremely controversial figure that was even imprisoned in Switzerland for having said his opinions.

P.S. Videos have interesting content but are very low in visual quality. Doesn't matter if you are interested.




 

Parzival

Ostrich
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

Rudolf Höss, leader of Auschwitz made some remarks about the numbers of people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Höss
I commanded Auschwitz until 1 December 1943, and estimate that at least 2,500,000 victims were executed and exterminated there by gassing and burning, and at least another half million succumbed to starvation and disease, making a total of about 3,000,000 dead. This figure represents about 70% or 80% of all persons sent to Auschwitz as prisoners, the remainder having been selected and used for slave labor in the concentration camp industries. Included among the executed and burnt were approximately 20,000 Russian prisoners of war (previously screened out of Prisoner of War cages by the Gestapo) who were delivered at Auschwitz in Wehrmacht transports operated by regular Wehrmacht officers and men. The remainder of the total number of victims included about 100,000 German Jews, and great numbers of citizens (mostly Jewish) from Holland, France, Belgium, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Greece, or other countries. We executed about 400,000 Hungarian Jews alone at Auschwitz in the summer of 1944.[35]


As a German, this all is a slippy topic.
 

britchard

Pelican
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

If you are suggesting that the Holocaust was a hoax, then you are suggesting that thousands of American, Canadian and British soldiers from the war are all liars.

I'd be interested to know if any of the deniers on this forum have ever met a holocaust survivor? Well I have, and he told me he believed that the 6 million figure was for the total number of holocaust victims, NOT the total number of Jews. He estimated it was around 3-4 million Jews and the rest were mostly just Slavs. The disabled and gypsies only made up a small number of the murders.

Is it really that crazy to think that over 6 years (2192 days) that they killed 6 million people? That's around 2740 people killed a day. Is that so unimaginable now?
 

The Beast1

Peacock
Gold Member
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

Even if we take the official narrative at face value, the cold hard facts are that 8 to 11 million russians died in WW2.

If anything, it was a Russian Holocaust more than anything.

A lot of people died and its a shameful joke they let a small minority get over represented.

Tell this to any school teacher and watch their wheels spin.

Seriously, war is bad, lots of people die. It's time certain (((groups))) and countries (cough England cough) get over this portion of history and move on.
 

britchard

Pelican
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

The Beast1 said:
Even if we take the official narrative at face value, the cold hard facts are that 8 to 11 million russians died in WW2.

If anything, it was a Russian Holocaust more than anything.

A lot of people died and its a shameful joke they let a small minority get over represented.

Tell this to any school teacher and watch their wheels spin.

Seriously, war is bad, lots of people die. It's time certain (((groups))) and countries (cough England cough) get over this portion of history and move on.

How is England not over the second world war? If it wasn't for us, Europe would have fallen completely to Hitler. In 1940, people forget that the US had no interest in fighting, and Russia was actually allied with Hitler (although Hitler would have invaded eventually, as he secretly hated communism).

sterling_archer said:
Just try to imagine this pile of dead bodies each day. Truly disgusting.

Yes, disgusting, but over a whole continent it isn't that much. There were at least 5 death camps, so 2740 Jews killed a day is not 'impossible' as some in this thread have suggested.
 

aardwolf

Pigeon
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

kamoz said:
The only peculiar thing that he mentioned, as do many Poles, is that from a qualitative standpoint there didn't seem to be that many Jews there (at least not like how Spielberg depicted in Schindlers List).
This one is very easy to explain: Auschwitz was both a death camp and a concentration camp.
For Poles etc. it was mainly a concentration camp, for Jews it was mainly a death camp, which means that most of Jews arriving there lived only for a few hours, while most of Poles lived there for a few weeks or months.

Also most of victims of Holocaust (especially in the East) have never seen a death camp or a concentration camp.
The first chapter of https://www.amazon.com/Bloodlands-Europe-Between-Hitler-Stalin/dp/0465031471 explains that very well.
 

not-a-pua

Woodpecker
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

The biggest problem for deniers with no German knowledge is, that they can't speak the language. So they fall into the trap of deniers of dubious background. Give me one example, this a TV interview with three German SS men that were in Auschwitz and tell everything. Shootings, gassings everything.
They are simple guys. One guy actually says in regard to deniers, he thinks these people are not normal.


If you want more written material, go there:
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.de/
 

YossariansRight

Ostrich
Gold Member
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

Sooth said:
The holocaust is just another mass murder in history. If you look at it (history) the holocaust was minor even on the (((official recorded numbers))).

There is no doubt that a certain religious group has milked it to their advantage. But when you're familiar with history you're less likely to get bogged down in hate and look toward solutions.

^^Ask the American Indians their opinion. :(
 
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

You need to watch the Nuremberg trials, particularly the so called camp survivor testimonies, they are full of blatant lies. I will look for a good vid and post it here.
 
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

Let us also get the definitions right:

Holocaust denial: To deny that the Holocaust was a deliberate plan and action to exterminate all of Europe's jews. It is not to deny that jews and others were rounded up and put in camps similar to Japanese in the US. It is not to deny that many jews died in those camps. It is not to deny that the camp conditions were horrible.
 
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

britchard said:
Well I have, and he told me he believed that the 6 million figure was for the total number of holocaust victims, NOT the total number of Jews.

Co_S1RiUIAQnw7j.jpg:large
 

Parzival

Ostrich
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

not-a-pua said:
The biggest problem for deniers with no German knowledge is, that they can't speak the language. So they fall into the trap of deniers of dubious background.

There is plenty of stuff in the German language that never got a translation. I have a book: "Ganz normale Männer" (Ordinary Men. Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland) from Christopher R. Browning. Its about a police unit (Einsatzgruppe) that did shootings behind the front lines and how those men did change. How rules, a system and group thinking mixed with the sense of duty let those men shoot men, women and children.
Also the testimonial of Rudolf Höss the leader of Auschwitz. The killings did happen. For sure the numbers you can doubt but its not impossible. See it from that point, when Germans do a mass killing they do it as professional as possible. I have books that did talk about 2 to 3 million jews. Now the 6 million jews is out there in the room.

For understand the Holocaust you have to did very deep psychological. It did happen not out of be cruel and horrible. The orders came from a far more spiritual meaning. The purge and cleaning for a greater sacrifice. The saving of the German nation, of Europe. Hitler, Himmler and all those men in charge had seen it as their duty to purge Europe for a better purpose. Then you have men like Adolf Eichmann and Rudolf Höss that do those things not with joy. But with a call for duty. They seen it as their necessary to be good soldiers, good citizens to follow the orders of the system. For the better of a future generation that will come. Of course in war and such an environment you have your slaughters, your cruel people as well. A Klaus Barbie or Amon Goeht. In such times those people can release their sick fantasies.

What made the holocaust so special compare to other mass murders in history, not that it was made more professional. In communism of Stalin you had the theoretical possibility to give away all your wealth and become a communist. In most systems you had the theoretical possibility to change your points of view to escape the killing. Also the native indians could settle in special territories and it was never the final intention to wipe them all out. But for the slavs and jews? There was no escape. No matter how much they would adapt to be German, for this system their guild was genetic. Just be a slav or a jew was enough to get killed. Even for kids. At least that is what they made out of the Holocaust today.

What they made out of this after the war is another story. It was finally the start for the jews to get a piece of land. It is a way to get money out of Germany. It is a way to hold Germany down. It is a never ending cash cow. Without the Holocoust there would be no Israel. Tragic and funny at the same. Israel would not exist without out the Holocaust. Those you hate the most is also that what made you who you are today.

From a personal experience, the first time in my life when I meet jews it was a super strange feeling. I'm not into the cult of shame and guilt. I'm a very proud German but when I meet those people there was a sense be part of something larger. This get lost today with all the individualism. We are not just we. We are a step in the line of our ancestors that made it in the survival of the fittest. We are part of our culture, or societies, our countries. This bounding got lost these days. With individualism in the extreme and the mentality to make everything relative there is a betrayal of life itself. People and cultures are not exchangeable like an I Phone. We have to remember that. Our responsibility is not only our life. Its our families and the way how we want to live as well.
 

The Beast1

Peacock
Gold Member
RE: The Holocaust (Holohoax?) Thread

britchard said:
How is England not over the second world war? If it wasn't for us, Europe would have fallen completely to Hitler. In 1940, people forget that the US had no interest in fighting, and Russia was actually allied with Hitler (although Hitler would have invaded eventually, as he secretly hated communism).

Oh I remember alright and good for the men who fought those battles! However, there aren't that many survivng members of that generation who fought that war because it happened 71 years ago. Need I say more?

Not to mention, England was a world wide empire prior to the war ending. It gave up its territories afterwards. Yes, I know it was America that financed the war for England and ultimately told them to give it all up in the end. But England for all of its worth could have easily said no. That to me is a sign of giving up.

From my angle, England clearly lost alongside Germany.

The only winners in WW2 were America and Russia.
 
Top