The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29964
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Nessie »

Huntinger wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 6:24 pm
Nessie wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 9:54 am
we would expect that to be thousands and for there to be many more witnesses.
Perhaps but hard to find when the majority ended up in Siberia.
How did the 1.274 million whom the Nazis had sent to the AR camps by the end of 1942 end up in Siberia? Show your evidence.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

SUPPORT RODOH!
Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!


User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8195
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh.Österreichisches Deutsch
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 7:12 pm
How did the 1.274 million whom the Nazis had sent to the AR camps by the end of 1942 end up in Siberia? Show your evidence.
Most were sent across the Bug and Sans river prior to 1942; there is huge evidence of people being marched in columns as well as Ciechanow juden being kicked out into Soviet territory. The cities in east Poland Swelled to breaking point forcing the Russians to take pre emptive action through mass deportations. Enough evidence has been given on this to date.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝖀𝖒𝖆𝖗𝖒𝖊 𝖉𝖆𝖘 𝕷𝖊𝖇𝖊𝖓, 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝖆𝖚𝖘𝖇𝖊𝖚𝖙𝖊𝖓.
Amt IV

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29964
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Nessie »

Huntinger wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 7:37 pm
Nessie wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 7:12 pm
How did the 1.274 million whom the Nazis had sent to the AR camps by the end of 1942 end up in Siberia? Show your evidence.
Most were sent across the Bug and Sans river prior to 1942; there is huge evidence of people being marched in columns as well as Ciechanow juden being kicked out into Soviet territory. The cities in east Poland Swelled to breaking point forcing the Russians to take pre emptive action through mass deportations. Enough evidence has been given on this to date.
You are dodging and this is now way off topic.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8195
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh.Österreichisches Deutsch
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 8:21 pm
You are dodging and this is now way off topic.
This is not dodging. Korherr said these people were processed in the camps, which implies that once processed they passed through. This is stated in the rest of his report. The processing took place in one form or another from 1937 until Dec 1942.
The only recourse the poster has is witnesses or people who talk of totally unscientific mysteries which to religious working class people 80 years ago might have had credibility; they believed in mystical religious nonsense (many still do). These days the talk of burning blood, endothermic reactions suddenly becoming exothermic shows the myths and the lies for what they are. All of these witnesses attesting to genocide are liars, pure and simple.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝖀𝖒𝖆𝖗𝖒𝖊 𝖉𝖆𝖘 𝕷𝖊𝖇𝖊𝖓, 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝖆𝖚𝖘𝖇𝖊𝖚𝖙𝖊𝖓.
Amt IV

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29964
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Nessie »

Huntinger wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 3:04 am
Nessie wrote:
Fri Oct 16, 2020 8:21 pm
You are dodging and this is now way off topic.
This is not dodging. Korherr said these people were processed in the camps, which implies that once processed they passed through. This is stated in the rest of his report. The processing took place in one form or another from 1937 until Dec 1942.
From witnesses at the AR camps, the processing consisted of stealing all the prisoner's property, a few being selected to work and the rest being gassed.
The only recourse the poster has is witnesses or people who talk of totally unscientific mysteries which to religious working class people 80 years ago might have had credibility; they believed in mystical religious nonsense (many still do). These days the talk of burning blood, endothermic reactions suddenly becoming exothermic shows the myths and the lies for what they are. All of these witnesses attesting to genocide are liars, pure and simple.
It is to be expected that witnesses will exaggerate, use hyperbole, make mistakes, describe in ways we do not fully understand, mix hearsay with what they saw. That is how witnesses behave.

It is notable that the Jewish witnesses are far more prone to hyperbole than the Nazis, who instead are more matter of fact. It is because of that, deniers switch from decrying the Nazi's testimony as too ridiculous to believe, to they were coerced.

Denial has a unique way of dealing with witness evidence, based on the use of logical fallacies and a predetermined conclusion.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8195
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh.Österreichisches Deutsch
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Huntinger »

Nessie wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 9:50 am
Denial has a unique way of dealing with witness evidence, based on the use of logical fallacies and a predetermined conclusion.
It is not unique to say that people are wrong when they talk absolute nonsense, non scientific mystical fantasies.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝖀𝖒𝖆𝖗𝖒𝖊 𝖉𝖆𝖘 𝕷𝖊𝖇𝖊𝖓, 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙 𝖆𝖚𝖘𝖇𝖊𝖚𝖙𝖊𝖓.
Amt IV

Turnagain
Posts: 8857
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
Denial has a unique way of dealing with witness evidence, based on the use of logical fallacies and a predetermined conclusion.
LOL! That's a good 'un, Nessie. You've spent umpteen pages explaining in detail why the lies of your witnesses weren't lies. Just some "exaggerations" or "hyperbole" or some other such bullshit and now you accuse revisionists of have a "unique" way of dealing with witnesses. You betcha', the tales of burning blood, self cremating cadavers and a German woman and her two children being killed for security reasons are just a few of the outright lies told by your so-called eyewitnesses. Revisionists who question the truthfulness of these witnesses have a "unique" method of dealing with them while your method of going through a myriad of mental contortions and gyrations to make excuses for their lies is a normal response. That is indeed a good 'un. A real knee-slapper.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29964
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 11:10 am
Nessie wrote:
Denial has a unique way of dealing with witness evidence, based on the use of logical fallacies and a predetermined conclusion.
LOL! That's a good 'un, Nessie. You've spent umpteen pages explaining in detail why the lies of your witnesses weren't lies. Just some "exaggerations" or "hyperbole" or some other such bullshit and now you accuse revisionists of have a "unique" way of dealing with witnesses. You betcha', the tales of burning blood, self cremating cadavers and a German woman and her two children being killed for security reasons are just a few of the outright lies told by your so-called eyewitnesses. Revisionists who question the truthfulness of these witnesses have a "unique" method of dealing with them while your method of going through a myriad of mental contortions and gyrations to make excuses for their lies is a normal response. That is indeed a good 'un. A real knee-slapper.
There are reasonable explanations for the witnesses statements. Burning blood is mere descriptive not meant to be taken literally and it was confusion over what was making the bodies burn, which was fat, not blood. The bodies were not self cremating, they required the heat generated under the pyre and fat in the bodies provided much of the fuel. The German killed for security reasons is because the Nazis did worry that a credible witness may be believed.

Denials method of questioning the "truthfulness" of witnesses is unique.

No lawyer would use arguments from incredulity and ignorance and then ignore or play down corroborating evidence. If a lawyer announced during a trial that the bodies cremated without any fuel, as you have done repeatedly, the Judge would warn them that that is not true, the pyres were fuelled by wood, set alight with petrol and that the 10-20% body fat acts as fuel. All the lawyer would be allowed to do is say they doubt that a pyre could work that way, but that is not evidence it did not happen.

A Judge may allow a witness who claims blood burned to be disregarded, but what about all the witnesses who did not say that happened? You cannot use one witness to discredit the rest. A Judge would not allow hearsay to be mixed with eye witness evidence as if it is the same thing. Judges understand that witnesses make mistakes, especially when giving evidence many years after the event. The German trials were 15 to 20 years after what had happened.

It is denial that has to go through contortions and gyrations to make out all the witnesses lied, when they have only ever read a few of those witnesses and not even all of what they said.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Turnagain
Posts: 8857
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Turnagain »

Nessie wrote:
It is denial that has to go through contortions and gyrations to make out all the witnesses lied, when they have only ever read a few of those witnesses and not even all of what they said.
If that's the case, all you have to do is come up two or three witnesses who give a reasonable account of how the gas/vacuum chamber operated, how the graves were dug, how the bodies were exhumed and then cremated. Fuchs shouldn't count since he misidentified the Soviet 200 hp V-8 engine but I'll give you a mulligan on him. That leaves you to find only two (2) witnesses who can tell a straight story with no "hyperbole" or "exaggerations" or real clangers of "mistakes". At least one has to be a Jew. Let's see who you can come up with, Nessie.

User avatar
Nessie
Posts: 29964
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The 'Achilles heel' of 'THE holocaust' - witnesses!

Post by Nessie »

Turnagain wrote:
Sat Oct 17, 2020 4:18 pm
Nessie wrote:
It is denial that has to go through contortions and gyrations to make out all the witnesses lied, when they have only ever read a few of those witnesses and not even all of what they said.
If that's the case, all you have to do is come up two or three witnesses who give a reasonable account of how the gas/vacuum chamber operated, how the graves were dug, how the bodies were exhumed and then cremated. Fuchs shouldn't count since he misidentified the Soviet 200 hp V-8 engine but I'll give you a mulligan on him. That leaves you to find only two (2) witnesses who can tell a straight story with no "hyperbole" or "exaggerations" or real clangers of "mistakes". At least one has to be a Jew. Let's see who you can come up with, Nessie.
That Fuchs possibly misidentified an engine, when giving testimony in 1966 during the Sobibor trial, about a camp he was at in 1942, when he was also at more than one of the AR camps, is not reason enough to dismiss all of his evidence.

You cannot dismiss witness evidence because of their hyperbole, exaggerations or mistakes, especially when asking them to recall what happened years before, about traumatic events. If you did that, most witness evidence would be dismissed, not just about what happened at the AR camps, but in most serious crimes.

From a compilation of what the various witnesses said, we know how the gas chambers operated. Some witnesses gave more detail that others. For example, some said the chamber was hermetically sealed and others went into more detail to say it was the doors and roof cap that had hermetic seals. Some witnesses thought a vacuum was used at some point, but then they agree most of the killings was by exhaust fumes. All the Nazis say exhaust fumes were used.

A captured Soviet petrol engine was connected via a system of pipes and valves to a chamber that was made to look like a shower and built from brick, concrete, tiles and wood. The doors and roof cap were hermetically sealed. Fumes were pumped in and after about 30 minutes, those inside were dead. Doors were opened and the bodies were removed. That would work, it would kill people. The only thing missing from testimony is a valve or vent to stop any pressure issues, but Wiernik may have spotted such when he mentions a cap, he just did not know its actual function.

No court demands that witnesses know precisely how something works. Witnesses are not tested by asking them to describe in minute detail precisely how the gas chambers functioned. Most of the surviving Jewish witnesses worked elsewhere in the camp and not at the gas chambers, so they could not know for certain how they worked.

You are happy with the witnesses who say they left TII to work at other camps. But some say they were at TII for up to 8 days, others got off and then back onto the trains. Those who describe staying at TII do not mention its most distinctive feature, the train station inside the camp. Those witnesses vary in how many they left with and what camps they went to. There are numerous inconsistencies and doubts about their evidence. But you happily accept it.

Your double standard is clearly driven by your agenda to promote your desired version of events. No academic or investigatory method uses the denial method of examining witness evidence.
Consistency and standards in evidencing viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2721#p87772
My actual argument viewtopic.php?f=13&t=2834

Scott - On a side note, this forum is turning into a joke with the vicious attacks--and completely unnecessary vitriol--that everybody is making upon each other.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 35 guests