Why didn't accused Nazis ensure the truth would be heard?

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
Posts: 27639
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2014 5:00 pm

Re: Why didn't accused Nazis ensure the truth would be heard?

Post by Nessie » Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:34 am

rollo the ganger wrote:
Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:21 am
I highlighted that quote again and right clicked for Search google for "I never made a secret of my having been at Auschwitz."

Nothing. Ten pages of "hits" but not one mentions Thies Christophersen.

I copy/pasted the phrase directly into Google and same thing. Hmmm?
If you search just the quote, you get this;

https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... +Auschwitz.

If you search the quote including the quotation marks, you get this;

https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... chwitz.%22

Including the quotation marks gets lots of hits on Christophersen.
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
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2019 6:07 pm
Location: Ocean floor

Re: Why didn't accused Nazis ensure the truth would be heard?

Post by Sandhurst » Tue Aug 20, 2019 5:54 pm

Mattogno, Kues & Graf put it this way in their book "Extermination Camps" (The “Extermination Camps” of “Aktion Reinhardt”
An Analysis and Refutation of Factitious “Evidence,” Deceptions and Flawed Argumentation of the “Holocaust Controversies” Bloggers
Orthodox Holocaust historians face a dire dilemma: Either they choose not to respond to the revisionists, which is tantamount to unconditional surrender, or they try to refute them, thus initiating a debate which they are bound to lose.
It seems that orthodox holocaust historians are mortally afraid of debating the situation with a qualified revisionist.
Claims by such people as Roberto Muehlenkamp who apparently believes that 703 persons, or more, can fit into an area of 25m2 were alive back then. Such claims were the order of the day at the trials. One should not bring up the soap, the shrunken heads, the lampshades, Jew Kababs and flammable blood, as I was told they were not responsible for the mass executions.
Likewise, the pedal powered head knocker had to be discounted along with the tree climbing as that was not responsible for enough "production line" executions.
an other wrote: Flammable blood? Is that a killing method?
To the Nazis accused they were caught off guard with no adequate legal defense. Eichmann was probably laughing as he gasped his last breath and so were all the others. Probably fatty died laughing and so did Himmler;( hidden from the public as suicide as the cause of death was laughing?)
"Never argue with the data." - Sheen, Jimmy Neutron

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 10 guests