|
Post by been_there on Apr 26, 2022 9:33:37 GMT
That is just your reading, I think most people would not read his claim as one of actually witnessing gassings. ...he did not see the gassing part of the process... Nessie claims this: “I think most people would not read his claim as one of actually witnessing gassings”.
Yet the Guardian article and the BBC programme both present Frank Bright as an eye-witness giving first hand testimony (i.e. not hearsay). That is clearly a deception by all three of them (Mr. Bright and the two main-stream media channels). So, Mr. Bright was clearly talking about his own personal experiences as he says “it has affected me!” Q: What has affected him? A: having his parents murdered, and seeing a gas chamber in action, of course. What else? So this clear denial from this ’holocaust true believer’ is further proof that to call revisionists, skeptics and doubters ‘deniers’ is their own psychological projection! 🙂
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Apr 26, 2022 10:30:39 GMT
They present him as an eyewitness to the process around gassings, but not the gassings themselves. For Bright, the action of gassings started with the selection process and finished with him never seeing his parents again. There is no deception. You have misinterpreted what Bright said and what the articles are presenting. Bright has not said he saw people being gassed. He has said that he saw his mother being taken away, never to seen again, when they arrived at A-B. That is the first part of the gassing process. He is an eyewitness to that, the first step of selections before people not selected for work were taken to the gas chambers, where they were ordered to undress before they were then gassed. You have misinterpreted him and the articles and then projected your mistake onto others.
|
|
|
Post by been_there on Apr 26, 2022 12:00:40 GMT
I did an online search for any person presented as an eye witness, to make a point about so many ‘survivors’ being presented to us as eye-witnesses of things they actually did NOT see, and do not KNOW from personal experience.
This was to support the point of how perverse that is that we as a society allow that. Not only that but how perverse that is to force such misleading visitors upon impressionable school children.
Mietek Grocher was just one example of that racist pervisity. An example that our resident believer didn’t appreciate so tried to move-the-goalposts. But Mietek is just one example among thousands. Kitty Hart is another. Eva Moses Korr is another. Tobias Rawet is another. Etc., etc. There are so many. All encouraged in their old age to tell emotionally shocking stories to the masses, who would never dream to question their authenticity or check. And that is the WHOLE POINT: compelling personal stories, so that everyone obediently “believes”! PLUS feels disgust for anyone who applies just a little bit of reason, skepticism, logic and critical thinking. THAT is the agenda.
It is one of emotion over reason! Blind belief over intelligent investigation.
Yet, these people’s testimony of things they never saw it is admitted is the least credible evidence.
.. .. .. .. ..
So anyway, I did an online search and the first link I came upon had that quote from Frank Bright.
The fact that the first link had a false claim of seeing a “gas chamber in action” is clearly proof for anyone not blinded by an obstinate need to ‘believe’ that the promoters of this holocaust ”mass-gassing” narrative have no qualms in lying to us to garner more believers.
And that is not peculiar to only this belief. In my experience that is the same in many religions! Emotionally compelling, sensation stories are routinely promoted. The believers need it to keep their faith and commitment to the belief-system alive.
So wevstarted with the clearly fraudulent claims of Mietek Grocher. The point was obfuscated and denied. Now we have moved on to Frank Bright as another example proving the same point. Again the point is denied.
Er... so, remind me, who are supposed to be the deniers in this discussion? 🤔🙂
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Apr 26, 2022 13:45:32 GMT
Been-there, you have a point that the history of the Holocaust as presented by those who were at the camps giving personal talks or writing memoires, is the least rigorous, most problematic form of history. Those witnesses are not advised to ensure they differentiate between what they saw and what they were told about. Their memories are likely tainted by time and what they have learned about since the end of the war. Anyone who wants to learn about what did happen, would be best advised to read an evidenced history by a trained academic, rather than go to survivor talks or reading their books.
That does not mean those survivors do not have any credibility, since they speak to major events that are very well evidenced and most people will understand not to take them too literally and that their memories are very personal to them. Those people are eyewitnesses to much of the circumstantial evidence that combines with other evidence to prove gassings.
Regarding "seeing a "gas chamber in action"", Bright did not say he saw a gassing take place. The gassing action was not just the actual gassing. It was a process, starting with selections. It is not unreasonable for a witness to a part of the process, such as a selection, to say they have seen they have seen a gassing action. The circumstantial evidence of the selection process is part of the evidence that proves gassings. Obviously, no one has felt the need to clarify with Bright that he did not see the actual gassing, because to the vast majority of people, that is obvious from what was said.
|
|
|
Post by Hüntinger on Apr 26, 2022 19:38:37 GMT
Anyone who wants to learn about what did happen, would be best advised to read an evidenced history by a trained academic, rather than go to survivor talks or reading their books. It appears that the whole holocaust scenario, at least the gassing part relies on "witness" testimony. there is little else. Now this poster has advised people to "read an evidenced history by a trained acadamic" only, stuff the stupid untrained survivors. It appears that "trained academics" have esoteric, ethereal powers invoking a priori knowledge; grasping the truth out of thin air. Not only is this an appeal to authority, but most of these "trained" academic of holocaust literature are the alleged victims themselves by nature of their ethnoreligious status. Many of the survivors do speak the truth; they saw nothing untowards, just fear of the unknown and rumours.
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Apr 27, 2022 7:45:46 GMT
Anyone who wants to learn about what did happen, would be best advised to read an evidenced history by a trained academic, rather than go to survivor talks or reading their books. It appears that the whole holocaust scenario, at least the gassing part relies on "witness" testimony. there is little else. Not true. At A-B there is documentary evidence of gas chambers being constructed, physical evidence of holes in the roof and traces of Zyklon B in the walls and the circumstantial evidence of mass arrivals, selections, mass cremations and the mass theft of property. You are confused over what appeal to authority means. It does not mean blind subservience to authority. You do the opposite and reject all authority, which is equally wrong.
|
|
𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸
🕵️
𝕲𝖊𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖕𝖔𝖑𝖎𝖟𝖊𝖎
Posts: 1,457
|
Post by 𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸 on Apr 27, 2022 7:53:13 GMT
Not true. At A-B there is documentary evidence of gas chambers being constructed, physical evidence of holes in the roof and traces of Zyklon B in the walls and the circumstantial evidence of mass arrivals, selections, mass cremations and the mass theft of property. The gas chambers were allegedly morgues, there is no evidence of anything else except outgassing of fumes from corpses as would occur in all morgues. As others have mentioned frequently there are no holes in the remains, that is a fabrication. As Zb was used as a general disinfestation agent it is likely to have residues. However, as Germar stated the residues are no where near the concentration to ensure death within 3 mins as claimed. Mass arrivals in a a huge camp are nothing when all the witnesses state there were mass departures. The selections were male and female and no doubt a few euthanized. The property would be worth stuff all. Perhaps you are focusing on the location of Irene Zisblatts diamonds again.?
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Apr 27, 2022 8:15:32 GMT
Not true. At A-B there is documentary evidence of gas chambers being constructed, physical evidence of holes in the roof and traces of Zyklon B in the walls and the circumstantial evidence of mass arrivals, selections, mass cremations and the mass theft of property. The gas chambers were allegedly morgues,... They were originally planned as morgues and then converted for use as gas chambers. That is not true. There is documentary and witness evidence from the Topf & Sins engineers who did the conversion work. You are only fooling yourself claiming there is no evidence. There are contemporary photos that show marks on the roof and wooden covers. A document refers to the device the Zyklon B was dropped into. A modern day survey of the roof has identified traces of the holes. Which is his opinion, not backed by any experimentation and contradicted by other evidence. You just made that up. Name one witness who was not selected to work and left in a mass departure. How and where were they euthanised? No, the section of the camp called "Canada", where all the property was sorted. Stealing everything is consistent with gassings.
|
|
𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸
🕵️
𝕲𝖊𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖕𝖔𝖑𝖎𝖟𝖊𝖎
Posts: 1,457
|
Post by 𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸 on Apr 27, 2022 8:25:27 GMT
Name one witness who was not selected to work and left in a mass departure. It has been mentioned countless times that Aktion 14f13 the euthanasia program was in operation, for all inmates and not just jews. This was mentioned in the testiminy of Hungarian jüdin Gertrud Deak, she said her invalid mother was separated and never seen again, she showered with thousands of other people from her transport. It is unlikely euthanized people would leave to work elsewhere considering what happened to them.
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Apr 27, 2022 8:29:11 GMT
Name one witness who was not selected to work and left in a mass departure. It has been mentioned countless times that Aktion 14f13 the euthanasia program was in operation, for all inmates and not just jews. This was mentioned in the testiminy of Hungarian jüdin Gertrud Deak, she said her invalid mother was separated and never seen again, she showered with thousands of other people from her transport. It is unlikely euthanized people would leave to work elsewhere considering what happened to them. How many were euthanised, how were they euthanised and where did that take place?
|
|
𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸
🕵️
𝕲𝖊𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖕𝖔𝖑𝖎𝖟𝖊𝖎
Posts: 1,457
|
Post by 𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸 on Apr 27, 2022 8:39:14 GMT
How many were euthanised, how were they euthanised and where did that take place? Asking for repeats of information. Here is the information from wiki: This I believe is the source information for your holocaust.
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Apr 27, 2022 12:39:24 GMT
How many were euthanised, how were they euthanised and where did that take place? Asking for repeats of information. Here is the information from wiki: This I believe is the source information for your holocaust. We were discussing A-B and the witness evidence there. There is no evidence of euthanasia of people deported to A-B, especially during the main Hungarian action in 1944.
|
|
|
Post by been_there on Apr 27, 2022 13:27:06 GMT
This thread is about eye-witnesses and their testimony. We just had info about H-survivors who schools allowed to lie to their pupils, even after their reliability and credibility has been exposed. True-believers don’t want to talk about this. Its an ironic form of genuine denial. Although I personally feel sympathy for the ’survivor’ most recently discussed, it must surely have been terrible to lose your parents at such a young age. Yet, we are discussing history here! So any misleading, removed-from-context, racist stories told, repeated and publicised need to be recognised as such. 1. Frank DID give ”testimony” about things that were NOT ’ first-hand’. That is therefore deceptive. That needs to be recognised and not glossed over out of sympathy. Nor should ” horrors” be allowed to be exaggerated and emphasised to create a gripping story.   That is another lie, straight away in the first few seconds. First because not all those jewish people were ”killed”. Obviously many died from other, unintended causes, e.g. typhus epidemics that guards, kommandants and their family members also died from. Second, it is a calculated deceit because 6 million ’jews’ did not even die. Raul Hilberg estimated a total of deaths from ALL causes of 5.1 million, and that is also a suspected inflated total. People who survived are included in the total due to being counted multiple times, or because of changing name and/or emigrating, etc., etc.  He doesn’t KNOW that. So again that is NOT first-hand testimony of seeing someone go to be murdered by gas. And it is deceitful to have people who lost their parents as children, repeating unfounded rumours AS IF they actually knew and saw something that in reality we KNOW they did not. But this is exactly how the holocaust mass-gassing narrative has been presented as truth to millions of people since the 1960s. And it is a deception that any person who values truth and justice should want stopped. Not because they are anti-semites or neo-nazis, but because they value truth and justice! No you couldn’t. He is repeating a discredited trope. Crematoria DO NOT belch fire. Anyone who knows the history knows this is an anti-German, racist, hate-trope. Yet the BBC (and the Guardian are promoting it!)  Another deceit.
|
|
|
Post by mrolonzo on Apr 27, 2022 16:11:10 GMT
It appears that the whole holocaust scenario, at least the gassing part relies on "witness" testimony. there is little else. Not true. At A-B there is documentary evidence of gas chambers being constructed, physical evidence of holes in the roof and traces of Zyklon B in the walls and the circumstantial evidence of mass arrivals, selections, mass cremations and the mass theft of property. You are confused over what appeal to authority means. It does not mean blind subservience to authority. You do the opposite and reject all authority, which is equally wrong. There is no evidence of gas chambers being constructed. That's Pressac's take which was taken apart decisively by Mattogno. Nor are there any original holes. See Rudolf et al. You stated that "trained historians" are the superior source while repeatedly stating that you prefer to argue on the basis of the original evidence pieces. You don't even specify what that means. It's simply a rhetorical tactic to fool the reader. Am I being unfair to you here?
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on Apr 27, 2022 16:29:24 GMT
This thread is about eye-witnesses and their testimony. We just had info about H-survivors who schools allowed to lie to their pupils, even after their reliability and credibility has been exposed. True-believers don’t want to talk about this. Its an ironic form of genuine denial. .... It is not true that there is no discussion about Holocaust survivors and their role in teaching about the Holocaust; www.holocaustremembrance.com/resources/educational-materials/teaching-about-holocaust-without-survivors"Of course, survivor testimony is only one aspect of learning about the Holocaust. Knowledge of the history comes from a wide variety of sources, survivor testimony being one, albeit a crucial component of the process. When used appropriately, the USC Shoah Foundation Institute suggests that such testimony can: Provide a face to history. Help students learn history from an individual perspective. Help students and teachers appreciate the invalidity of stereotypes, misconceptions, and/or generalizations. Help students discount misconceptions they might have had about the period/topic of study, and the events and/or people involved in the topic. Help students identify different type of information available in primary sources. Sensitize students to the distinction between fact and opinion, and essential and non-essential information. Provide students with an effective understanding of history. Help students understand the long-term ramifications of extreme persecution and trauma. Introduce students to new-and various-perspectives, themes, discrete events or concepts of an historical event and/or period." Students are being taught about witness evidence, its weaknesses, and that they should also use other forms of evidence and sources to learn about history. Since eyewitness evidence is the weakest form of evidence, especially relating to the Holocaust, as survivors are now elderly and are relating events from decades ago, again, it is made clear that their evidence is only about a part of what happened. today.uconn.edu/2022/02/holocaust-education-evolves-as-number-of-survivors-declines/" Holocaust education does need to be based on more than just survivor testimony – whether it be live or virtual. “ If you only study the Holocaust from the perspective of the survivors, you are missing out on a lot of context,” says Marcus. “As I am training teachers, one of the first things I do is talk them about the different perspectives of the Holocaust. We tend to hear about survivors and victims and also the perpetrators. But, then we talk about the rescuers and the resistors. We explore about eight or nine different roles. There is a lot of curiosity about the perception that survivors didn’t fight back or run away. Survivors really represent a small percent of the people involved in the Holocaust, and are not necessarily representative of everything that happened during these events.”
|
|