A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

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
Huntinger
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by Huntinger »

Norm wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:06 pm
Let me give it a try: Πισωγλέντης
piswglέnths??? Pisoglendis, its all just Greek to me.
Kleon XYZ Contagion wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:20 pm
why WHOLE FAMILIES were taken from Greece, Hungary, Denmark, France and many other countries and transferred to the camps.
Let's say OK with the adults, work slaves, but what about kids and babies and elders 90 years old?

WHY should they be rounded up and taken thousand of miles away, during open war fronts and the Germans losing the war?
WHY should they devote trains, units, food, men, sources to such a strange decision.

You first, explain in a narrative that makes sense first, and then we'll talk.

Why the babies?
First of all Juden declared war on the Reich, the International Juden did, demanding all Juden worldwide become 5th columnists. Prior to this, attempts were made at appeasement for peaceful settlement in other lands, just as Juden wanted.
Image
This coin is proof of the cooperation between Zionism and the NSDAP, which which is now deliberately silenced and denied.
The Reich was well aware of the jüdisch actions in Russia which toppled the Tsar; the actions of communists in Berlin had been an issue which was hard fought and won. Juden were behind this.
People were to be evicted, mother would not go without their families; in many cases it was safer for the people to end up in Reich hands than put up with heinous pogroms in their own lands.

Juden were placed into "Protective Custody" by the nice policeman known as the Geheime Staats Polizei, which resulted in those people getting transport (some Hungarians paid for their train), paid for their labour; yes they were paid a small wage, free food, board, clothing and for many a chance to enjoy the beauty of the Polish country side. Peter Lantos a Hungarian jüdisch boy mentions all of this in his memoir "Parallel Lines"; he enjoyed working with his family in the forests and farms, treated well by the SS. Sadly for Peter they ended up at a camp, where food was short due to black market activities; his father traded food for cigarettes which resulted in his early death. Peter reports that most people died of typhus and other diseases. He had heard rumours of gassing at Birkenau, the stories were obvious rife. What is clear from the Lantos story is that the Soviets held all of the Hungarian and other people, including Greek prisoners and would not let them return home; they were needed in mother Russia. He and his mother were forced to escape.

If it were not for the Germans the Greeks would now be calling each other Komrade and drinking vodka; forget the olives and figs.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

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
Nessie
Posts: 29694
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by Nessie »

been-there wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:54 pm
........

If you genuinely want an answer to your new rather stupid and ignorant question then read the Wannsee protocol and don't distort it's meaning with self-serving 'euphemism' interpretations.
Just read it and understand the actual words.
Your question will be answered.

The plan was to make Europe 'judenrein' by forced exile.
The Wannsee protocol stated;

"In the meantime the Reichsführer-SS and Chief of the German Police had prohibited emigration of Jews due to the dangers of an emigration in wartime and due to the possibilities of the East."

...and...

"Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.
The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)"

So, as of the start of 1942, no more Jews were allowed to emigrate out of Nazi controlled territory and those who were under Nazi control were to be allocated for labour till they died and those who did not die of natural causes should be treated accordingly and cannot be allowed to survive.
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
been-there
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9537
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by been-there »

blake121666 wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:12 pm
been-there wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:54 pm
Kleon XYZ Contagion wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:20 pm
...YOU have to explain why WHOLE FAMILIES were taken from Greece, Hungary, Denmark, France and many other countries and transferred to the camps.
Let's say OK with the adults, work slaves, but what about kids and babies and elders 90 years old?

WHY should they be rounded up and taken thousand of miles away, during open war fronts and the Germans losing the war?
WHY should they devote trains, units, food, men, sources to such a strange decision.

You first, explain in a narrative that makes sense first, and then we'll talk.

Why the babies?
Wow! You people not only can't understand simple words, you don't even know the basics of WW2 history!! :o

Why did the Allies target and kill women, kids, babies and elders 90 years old?
Why did the Allies start mass-murdering the Germans and Japanese civilians?
Why did Britain decide to let over two million Bengalis die horrific, cruel slow deaths of starvation in 1942?

Q: Why do you only want to know about Jewish suffering during WW2?
A: because you have been misinformed and indoctrinated with a deceitful atrocity-propaganda narrative.


If you genuinely want an answer to your new rather stupid and ignorant question then read the Wannsee protocol and don't distort it's meaning with self-serving 'euphemism' interpretations.
Just read it and understand the actual words.
Your question will be answered.

The plan was to make Europe 'judenrein' by forced exile. Originally Madagascar was to be the destination, then they were to be rounded up and held in camps so no fifth-column danger, some to be made to work and all to be incarcerated till after the war. Then some were to be expelled over the border into the Soviet 'East' to be left to fend for themselves.

During the war there was a war going on. An extremely brutal war. One that Hitler never wanted. A war that Jewish interests were the main instigators of and wanted started. One that the Churchill and his Jewish adviser Lord Lindemann escalated after 1941 — when the Polish, French and British had lost — into deliberately targeting and terrorising civilian non-combatants.
You dodge direct questions. What are your speculations for these Kleon mentions if you deny their being slaughtered?

It is you who distorts the meaning of the Wansee protocol.
Wannsee protocol wrote:The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)
You have a screwy way of interpreting that part.
Blake, please finally learn something from this new exchange:
You keep making accusations against me based on your own false understanding.
You just did it assigning the ridiculous arguments of Nessie and Jeff to Turnagain and me.
You have done it many times in the past. Most notably making statements based on your confusing Malkinia, T2 and Treblinka station. Then on an unknown non-existent soviet tank engine specification at Sobibor. And then probably your worst on your denial that Hydrogen cyanide gas (HCN) is invisible.

Please learn from this and stop embarrassing yourself.

This new false understanding of yours has been explained here at RODOH and elsewhere multiple times.

I will now explain it again for you.
The part of the Wannsee protocol you just falsely quoted was deceitfully translated into English by the lying ALLIES to cover their deceitful 'holy-cost' atrocity propaganda.
The vernacular German did NOT say "if released". You have been deceived.
Please now finally learn this and correct your false understanding.
It actually states "Bei Freilassung" which translates as "upon release".

Do you understand now? "Upon release".

Even Raul Hilberg agrees with this translation!!!

And this has been previously explained here and here and here and here.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Turnagain
Posts: 8708
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 11:44 pm
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by Turnagain »

been-there wrote:
It actually states "Bei Freilassung" which translates as "upon release".
The fact that hoaxers have to lie to prove their case should tell you something about the validity of the holyhoax fable.

User avatar
andrushas
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:05 am
Location: Norwich, U.K.
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by andrushas »

This thread has been derailed by both revisionists and believers. Please, stop focusing on nonsense!

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by Huntinger »

andrushas wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:14 pm
This thread has been derailed by both revisionists and believers. Please, stop focusing on nonsense!
The issue is that the thread is perhaps too wide with a deliberate lack of integrity in the threads purpose. The admission made at Klowns that it only intended to troll the trolls means that it has no intention of discussion; the negative snide remarks attests to (((its))) intentions; that aside in the initial post it said:
what was the process in proving the Holocaust? How do we know about it?
This brings up the issue of:
  • The real meaning of (((holocaust))): was it real or a construct
  • Process to prove this meaning
  • How people know about this process
The online dictionary puts the word holocaust as meaning two things:
  1. destruction or slaughter on a mass scale, especially caused by fire or nuclear war
  2. a Jewish sacrificial offering which was burnt completely on an altar
From this meaning emerges the fusion of the two definitions to form the word Holocaust with an upper H, the word Shoah is synonymous to some extent but was coined much later in public usage. The entire “Holocaust” narrative – 6 million Juden persecuted, abused, and systematically exterminated by “those evil Nazis” during WWII – endlessly promoted and perpetuated by the Jüdisch-owned and controlled mass media, Hollywood, and educational and political establishment is completely bogus in virtually all respects. This is how people know about the process..all smoke in the air really.

Apart from the media nonsense there is very little evidence in the way supporting death camps, gaskammers etc; the only thing close to atrocity is the Einsatz groups who had a task to relieve the rear army of terrorist activities by Partizani. On this basis there is no process to prove this meaning; to the hoaxers this is a fact of nature and one must disprove it otherwise it stands.

There is simply no evidence for a holocaust, Holocaust, Shoah or anything closely resembling this nonsense.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3409
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by blake121666 »

been-there wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:50 pm
blake121666 wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 4:12 pm
been-there wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:54 pm
Kleon XYZ Contagion wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:20 pm
...YOU have to explain why WHOLE FAMILIES were taken from Greece, Hungary, Denmark, France and many other countries and transferred to the camps.
Let's say OK with the adults, work slaves, but what about kids and babies and elders 90 years old?

WHY should they be rounded up and taken thousand of miles away, during open war fronts and the Germans losing the war?
WHY should they devote trains, units, food, men, sources to such a strange decision.

You first, explain in a narrative that makes sense first, and then we'll talk.

Why the babies?
Wow! You people not only can't understand simple words, you don't even know the basics of WW2 history!! :o

Why did the Allies target and kill women, kids, babies and elders 90 years old?
Why did the Allies start mass-murdering the Germans and Japanese civilians?
Why did Britain decide to let over two million Bengalis die horrific, cruel slow deaths of starvation in 1942?

Q: Why do you only want to know about Jewish suffering during WW2?
A: because you have been misinformed and indoctrinated with a deceitful atrocity-propaganda narrative.


If you genuinely want an answer to your new rather stupid and ignorant question then read the Wannsee protocol and don't distort it's meaning with self-serving 'euphemism' interpretations.
Just read it and understand the actual words.
Your question will be answered.

The plan was to make Europe 'judenrein' by forced exile. Originally Madagascar was to be the destination, then they were to be rounded up and held in camps so no fifth-column danger, some to be made to work and all to be incarcerated till after the war. Then some were to be expelled over the border into the Soviet 'East' to be left to fend for themselves.

During the war there was a war going on. An extremely brutal war. One that Hitler never wanted. A war that Jewish interests were the main instigators of and wanted started. One that the Churchill and his Jewish adviser Lord Lindemann escalated after 1941 — when the Polish, French and British had lost — into deliberately targeting and terrorising civilian non-combatants.
You dodge direct questions. What are your speculations for these Kleon mentions if you deny their being slaughtered?

It is you who distorts the meaning of the Wansee protocol.
Wannsee protocol wrote:The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, if released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.)
You have a screwy way of interpreting that part.
Blake, please finally learn something from this new exchange:
You keep making accusations against me based on your own false understanding.
You just did it assigning the ridiculous arguments of Nessie and Jeff to Turnagain and me.
You have done it many times in the past. Most notably making statements based on your confusing Malkinia, T2 and Treblinka station. Then on an unknown non-existent soviet tank engine specification at Sobibor. And then probably your worst on your denial that Hydrogen cyanide gas (HCN) is invisible.

Please learn from this and stop embarrassing yourself.

This new false understanding of yours has been explained here at RODOH and elsewhere multiple times.

I will now explain it again for you.
The part of the Wannsee protocol you just falsely quoted was deceitfully translated into English by the lying ALLIES to cover their deceitful 'holy-cost' atrocity propaganda.
The vernacular German did NOT say "if released". You have been deceived.
Please now finally learn this and correct your false understanding.
It actually states "Bei Freilassung" which translates as "upon release".

Do you understand now? "Upon release".

Even Raul Hilberg agrees with this translation!!!

And this has been previously explained here and here and here and here.
ROFLMAO!

Yeah, that makes a LOT of difference to the understanding of the sentence. :roll:

BT lost in those debates about that screwy interpretation of his by any sane person's standard.

This is not a "false understanding" of mine. You should "learn from this and stop embarrassing yourself" with your screwy interpretation of that sentence.

Werd
Posts: 10307
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:38 am
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by Werd »

"If" means there is uncertainty about something. "X and Y may happen, IF he is released." In other words, he may NOT be released AT ALL.

But to say "upon release" means that a release WILL HAPPEN for sure. Just a little later.

"If" and "upon" are not synonymous. The difference matters.

User avatar
blake121666
Posts: 3409
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:26 am
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by blake121666 »

Werd wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:05 pm
"If" means there is uncertainty about something. "X and Y may happen, IF he is released." In other words, he may NOT be released AT ALL.

But to say "upon release" means that a release WILL HAPPEN for sure. Just a little later.

"If" and "upon" are not synonymous. The difference matters.
Take the second part out altogether:
WP wrote:The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly
At any rate, the Jews Kleon is referring to were not sent to transit ghettos as described in the WP to be sent further east (which there was nowhere east to send them that one can come up with). Kleon believes them to have been sorted out with most having been sent to "death camps" to be slaughtered. BT has not cleared up that understanding of Kleon's with his WP gamut.

User avatar
Huntinger
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:56 am
Location: Gasthaus Waldesruh. Swabia
Contact:

Re: A challenge to Holocaust 'revisionists': Here's your chance to join academia

Post by Huntinger »

Yeah, that makes a LOT of difference to the understanding of the sentence. :roll:
In legal terms the subtle distinction makes a huge difference such as in a sentence for legal procedure "will" and "may" if caught say urinating in a public place.
Law.
If caught a person will be detained. this is an order
If caught a person may be detained. this gives discretion

That aside the protocols state:
The evacuated Jews will first be sent, group by group, to so-called transit ghettos, from which they will be transported to the East.
It is not intended to evacuate Jews over 65 years old, but to send them to an old-age ghetto - Theresienstadt is being considered for this purpose.

In addition to these age groups - of the approximately 280,000 Jews in Germany proper and Austria on 31 October 1941, approximately 30% are over 65 years old - severely wounded veterans and Jews with war decorations (Iron Cross I) will be accepted in the old-age ghettos. With this expedient solution, in one fell swoop many interventions will be prevented.
Furthermore, to simplify the problem of mixed marriages possibilities must be considered with the goal of the legislator saying something like: "These marriages have been dissolved."

It is quite clear that the law is being defined to go to legislators.
The possible final remnant will, since it will undoubtedly consist of the most resistant portion, have to be treated accordingly, because it is the product of natural selection and would, when released, act as a the seed of a new Jewish revival (see the experience of history.
A remnant is a minor part of the greater body, it also refers to leftovers, 6 million are not remnants.
The only factual aspect of the program of evacuation to the East which is generally consistent with the extermination claims is that many Jews sent to the camps in Poland did not return, at least not to their former homes. This, apparently, had been the reason why many people with more or less first hand information about certain individuals have accepted the extermination claims. However, the situation is basically simple. These camps were obviously serving as transit camps for the program of evacuation to the East. We have observed that at Birkenau there was a special compound that served as a transit camp for Theresienstadt Jews, and that Dutch Jews also passed through Auschwitz . The concentration camp at Lublin also played this incidental role on occasion. Treblinka, which was a labor camp but does not appear to have been administered by the WVHA, clearly served also as a transit camp, especially for Warsaw Jews. As with Auschwitz, Reitlinger finds the alleged facts put forward concerning gassings at Treblinka difficult to reconcile with one another. Sobibor was explicitly called a transit camp.

The evacuation and eviction process was already in progress when the Wannsee meeting took place.
Grayzel says:
"They followed this up with wholesale deportations. They set aside a number of places in Eastern Europe in which they concentrated Jews from other lands, in line with the avowed Nazi policy of 'freeing' all of Europe from Jewish influence."
While the evidence indicated that the German authorities did not carry out large scale liquidations of Jews while in retreat, common sense and a feel for the conditions that existed should cause us to assume that there were numerous massacres of Jews carried out by individuals and small groups acting on their own. Some German, Hungarian, or Romanian troops, and some East European civilians, their anti-Jewish feelings amplified by the disastrous course of the war, no doubt made attacks on Jews at the time of the German retreats. I am sure the Germans were not concerned with pogroms in the fog of war.

Many perished on account of conditions in the camps or ghettos. This is a most serious possibility. We have seen that health conditions can be very unstable in camps and that the situation can be very sensitive to any sort of chaos or shortage of necessities. Moreover, we have observed that the ghetto conditions, whether the Germans were at fault or (as the Germans claimed) the Jews were responsible, were favorable to epidemics even early in the war when the Germans had the general situation under control in other respects. Therefore, there is a good possibility that many Jews in ghettos perished in the chaotic conditions that accompanied the German retreats. Also, Korzen believes that many of the 1940 exiles to Russia died in the Russian camps they were sent to, so it is possible that many ghetto Jews perished on account of Soviet ways of administering the ghettos after they fell into Russian hands.

Many were also dispersed throughout the Soviet empire, behind the Iron curtain.

Die soziale Heimatpartei
𝕴𝖈𝖍 𝖇𝖊𝖗𝖊𝖚𝖊 𝖓𝖎𝖈𝖍𝖙𝖘...𝕾𝖔𝖟𝖎𝖆𝖑 𝖌𝖊𝖍𝖙 𝖓𝖚𝖗 𝕹𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓𝖆𝖑

Amt IV

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 15 guests