|
Post by Turnagain on May 24, 2022 21:43:31 GMT
Jeff(numbers) wrote:
Jeff once again puts his psychic powers on display. Jeff and his good buddy Hilberg are a real pair to draw to. How about posting an "explicit document"? Go for Hitler's order to commence the holyhoax and begin mass murdering the Jews.
|
|
𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸
🕵️
𝕲𝖊𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖕𝖔𝖑𝖎𝖟𝖊𝖎
Posts: 1,457
|
Post by 𝝥𝝰𝘇𝗴𝝻𝝸 on May 24, 2022 21:46:19 GMT
Hoess said he got the number from the conveniently absent Eichmann meaning he didn’t come up with it on his own. He was the Commandant of the camp while Eichmann was hundreds of miles away being the uncool administrator he was. It is Höß that would have the knowledge of his own camp not some mindless bureaucrat who was only concerned with transportation. It is ridiculous to suggest that the Gestapo and railway staff would know the numbers in the transports but not the destination commander. Höß also made it clear that those killed were "unfit to work" not just because they were juden. This sounds very much like Aktion 14f13 to me; the extermination of the invalids not the jews.
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 24, 2022 22:39:15 GMT
Jeff(numbers) wrote: Jeff once again puts his psychic powers on display. Jeff and his good buddy Hilberg are a real pair to draw to. How about posting an "explicit document"? Go for Hitler's order to commence the holyhoax and begin mass murdering the Jews. You seriously have nothing to offer, Turnagain. You say the same things over and over again.
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 24, 2022 22:40:42 GMT
Jeff(numbers) wrote: Why didn't I think of that? Of course that makes the torture of Hoess and his so-called confession admissible evidence. Well, at least in a show trial. In a legal court? Not so much. Turnagain, did Hoess testify? Yes or no?
|
|
|
Post by jeff8675309 on May 24, 2022 23:04:48 GMT
He was the Commandant of the camp while Eichmann was hundreds of miles away being the uncool administrator he was. An administrator with intimate knowledge of deportations, particularly in the case of Hungary. Eichmann had an overall view that Hoess lacked. Or Hoess simply decided to throw more responsibility for what happened at the conveniently absent Eichmann. Even when Hoess lowered the numbers in his memoirs he still said that these were numbers relayed to him by Eichmann. But at no point did Hoess ever give the exaggerated number put out by the Soviets. Eichmann was hardly mindless. That also doesn’t make any sense. Transportation is vitally important, particularly when the SS needed to coordinate these transports with military and civilian traffic. But they would definitely know, so Eichmann did have a great deal of access to those numbers. The Gestapo wasn’t the primary driver behind deportations. There weren’t that many of them. Depending on the country the Germans used native police departments to handle collection and transport with the Order Police guarding transports in places like Poland. The Security Police helped in Hungary, etc. The Reich Ministry of Transport handled schedules and coordination. No, he made it clear they were Jews.
|
|
|
Post by Turnagain on May 24, 2022 23:10:46 GMT
Jeff(numbers) wrote:
And you, Jeffy, are seriously not ready for prime time. Juvenile put-downs aren't going to serve you here on RODOH like they do at the Klown's forum.
Of course Hoess testified at the IMT. The question is whether or not he included any information from his confession in that testimony.
|
|
|
Post by been_there on May 25, 2022 6:17:49 GMT
Jeff(numbers) wrote: Jeff once again puts his psychic powers on display. Jeff and his good buddy Hilberg are a real pair to draw to. How about posting an "explicit document"? Go for Hitler's order to commence the holyhoax and begin mass murdering the Jews. ...Turnagain ... you say the same things over and over again. Yes, Turnagain is repeatedly refuting the flaws in your non-historical, quasi-religious/cultish holocaust+mass-gassing belief-system. And Turnagain is also demonstrating the fact that it is ironically you yourself Jeff, who thinks he can read people’s minds. 🙂
|
|
|
Post by been_there on May 25, 2022 6:33:59 GMT
Another reply of mine refuting Nessie’s misrepresentation due to him not being able to comprehend simple words and sentences has been deleted! Why? And who is doing that? Why is a person being allowed to skew the actual discussion, and to misrepresent factual statements? When you were asked if you thought the Holocaust relies on just one witness, you replied, yes it did in 1946, and then you said who that witness was and why you were making that claim.
I have shown that you are wrong. Just accept your mistake and move on.
Here is the complete quote of what I initially wrote concerning Höß’s trial testimony: “... I was relating what I was discovering about the obviously non-credible contradictions and inconsistencies — and now acknowledged falsities — in Höß’s Nuremberg testimony and interviews. He recognised the truth of what I was relating but defensively dismissed it by asking: “so what? You don’t think the Holocaust relies on just one witness testimony do you?” I replied that YES it DID back then in 1946. I explained that those in the dock at Nuremburg had initially been doubting the allegations. Their doubt was destroyed by Höß’s appearance as a defence witness for Kaltenbrunner. And that forever after, Höß’s coerced confession was referred to, to convince any other doubters both there at Nuremberg and worldwide.”
.. .. .. .. And here is my subsequent reply, clarifying and confirming the same point: “Concerning the Jew-genocide-by-mass-gassing allegation: Höß was THE crucial witness in 1946 for convincing those of the top Third Reich heirarchy on trial for their lives at Nürnberg. It was not until AFTER Höß’s ridiculous, physically impossible and coerced ‘confession’ agreeing that there really had been a plan and its implementation to mass-murder Jews because they were Jews using gas — and admitting that he personally had managed the murder of three million of them — that those on trial started to believe it was an accurate allegation.”
.. .. .. .. So there was no moving of the goalposts, nor did I make any ”wrong” claims. The words ”relies” and ”crucial” are pointing to the same importance given by the promulgators of the holocaust mass-gassing narrative to the illegal, coerced confession of Rudolf Höß. It is quite a simple point. That it can not be understood, I suggest points to some serious sort of mental incapability by this H-believer. Whoever has been deleting my previous replies I request that you please don’t delete this last sentence. It is not an ad hominem argument, but is referring to a demonstrable, objective reality that is apparent in nearly all this person’s replies, and does rather explain the consistent flaws of his illogical arguments.
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on May 25, 2022 12:22:14 GMT
When you were asked if you thought the Holocaust relies on just one witness, you replied, yes it did in 1946, and then you said who that witness was and why you were making that claim.
I have shown that you are wrong. Just accept your mistake and move on.
Here is the complete quote of what I initially wrote concerning Höß’s trial testimony: “... I was relating what I was discovering about the obviously non-credible contradictions and inconsistencies — and now acknowledged falsities — in Höß’s Nuremberg testimony and interviews. He recognised the truth of what I was relating but defensively dismissed it by asking: “so what? You don’t think the Holocaust relies on just one witness testimony do you?” I replied that YES it DID back then in 1946. I explained that those in the dock at Nuremburg had initially been doubting the allegations. Their doubt was destroyed by Höß’s appearance as a defence witness for Kaltenbrunner. And that forever after, Höß’s coerced confession was referred to, to convince any other doubters both there at Nuremberg and worldwide.”
.. .. .. .. And here is my subsequent reply, clarifying and confirming the same point: “Concerning the Jew-genocide-by-mass-gassing allegation: Höß was THE crucial witness in 1946 for convincing those of the top Third Reich heirarchy on trial for their lives at Nürnberg. It was not until AFTER Höß’s ridiculous, physically impossible and coerced ‘confession’ agreeing that there really had been a plan and its implementation to mass-murder Jews because they were Jews using gas — and admitting that he personally had managed the murder of three million of them — that those on trial started to believe it was an accurate allegation.”
.. .. .. .. So there was no moving of the goalposts, nor did I make any ”wrong” claims. The words ”relies” and ”crucial” are pointing to the same importance given by the promulgators of the holocaust mass-gassing narrative to the illegal, coerced confession of Rudolf Höß. It is quite a simple point. That it can not be understood, I suggest points to some serious sort of mental incapability by this H-believer. Whoever has been deleting my previous replies I request that you please don’t delete this last sentence. It is not an ad hominem argument, but is referring to a demonstrable, objective reality that is apparent in nearly all this person’s replies, and does rather explain the consistent flaws of his illogical arguments. Hoess was not the one crucial witness on which the mass gassing narrative relied upon in 1946. You are doing what many revisionists do and you are trying to make out there is far less evidence to prove mass gassings, than there really is. I have repeatedly picked up on revisionists claims that there is no evidence and indeed have a thread on that topic. It is a revisionist tactic to suggest a lack of evidence, when in fact there is an abundance of evidence. In relation to A-B, by 1946, there was evidence from numerous escaped and liberated prisons, such as Henryk Tauber who gave his statement in May 1945 and numerous A-B camp staff. The physical evidence of the demolished and blown up Kremas and Bunker gas chambers was also known about, with the logical conclusion of the Nazis had been trying to destroy as much evidence as possible. Camp documents had been seized and Topf & Sons admitted to their role in the construction of gas chambers. You should be honest and admit to your workmate that in 1946, there were multiple witnesses and other evidence to mass gassings at A-B.
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on May 25, 2022 12:37:47 GMT
Nessie wrote: No links, no documents. Just more weasel dodging from Nessie. Geez, whoda' thunk it? Maybe the links do not work for you, but I can assure you the below, in blue, when I click on it, links to a list of documents pertaining to the construction of undressing rooms, gas chambers and mass cremations for a special action at the A-B Kremas.
Just as an example, one of the documents listed is
- Work time sheet of 2 March 1943 on “concrete in gas chamber” in crematorium 4 [Pressac, Technique, p. 446]
The p. 446 is also in blue and click on that link and the source is here; Scroll down the page and there are two photos of the original document, including an enlargement shown here; I thought Turnagain understood what links are and how to click on them and go to the originals. Obviously, he does not understand. Click on anything that shows up as blue text and that will cause another tab to open up with the link.
|
|
|
Post by been_there on May 25, 2022 14:12:54 GMT
Here is the complete quote of what I initially wrote concerning Höß’s trial testimony: “... I was relating what I was discovering about the obviously non-credible contradictions and inconsistencies — and now acknowledged falsities — in Höß’s Nuremberg testimony and interviews. He recognised the truth of what I was relating but defensively dismissed it by asking: “so what? You don’t think the Holocaust relies on just one witness testimony do you?” I replied that YES it DID back then in 1946. I explained that those in the dock at Nuremburg had initially been doubting the allegations. Their doubt was destroyed by Höß’s appearance as a defence witness for Kaltenbrunner. And that forever after, Höß’s coerced confession was referred to, to convince any other doubters both there at Nuremberg and worldwide.”
.. .. .. .. And here is my subsequent reply, clarifying and confirming the same point: “Concerning the Jew-genocide-by-mass-gassing allegation: Höß was THE crucial witness in 1946 for convincing those of the top Third Reich heirarchy on trial for their lives at Nürnberg. It was not until AFTER Höß’s ridiculous, physically impossible and coerced ‘confession’ agreeing that there really had been a plan and its implementation to mass-murder Jews because they were Jews using gas — and admitting that he personally had managed the murder of three million of them — that those on trial started to believe it was an accurate allegation.”
.. .. .. .. So there was no moving of the goalposts, nor did I make any ”wrong” claims. The words ”relies” and ”crucial” are pointing to the same importance given by the promulgators of the holocaust mass-gassing narrative to the illegal, coerced confession of Rudolf Höß. It is quite a simple point. That it can not be understood, I suggest points to some serious sort of mental incapability by this H-believer. Whoever has been deleting my previous replies I request that you please don’t delete this last sentence. It is not an ad hominem argument, but is referring to a demonstrable, objective reality that is apparent in nearly all this person’s replies, and does rather explain the consistent flaws of his illogical arguments. ... in 1946, there were multiple witnesses and other evidence to mass gassings at A-B. Another literally moronic miscomprehension, as I have NEVER contested the existence of other witnesses besides Höß.🙄
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on May 25, 2022 14:45:11 GMT
... in 1946, there were multiple witnesses and other evidence to mass gassings at A-B. Another literally moronic miscomprehension, as I have NEVER contested the existence of other witnesses besides Höß.🙄 In reply to this;
"...so what? You don’t think the Holocaust relies on just one witness testimony do you?”
you replied;
"YES it DID back then in 1946"
Will you accept that response to your work colleague was wrong and that you should make sure he knows that you accept there were multiple witnesses to mass gassings even in 1946?
When you said "I was relating what I was discovering about the obviously non-credible contradictions and inconsistencies — and now acknowledged falsities — in Höß’s Nuremberg testimony and interviews" your workmate correctly pointed out that Hoess was not the only witness evidence for mass gassings, so your workmate must understand corroboration, and he will have understood that Hoess's evidence must have been backed by corroborative evidence. You then suggest that was not the case, which is wrong. Just admit your mistake.
For as much as Hoess's evidence is flawed and problematic, his main claims are all corroborated, so he was being truthful about mass gassings.
|
|
|
Post by been_there on May 25, 2022 15:12:06 GMT
Another literally moronic miscomprehension, as I have NEVER contested the existence of other witnesses besides Höß.🙄 In reply to this: "...so what? You don’t think the Holocaust relies on just one witness testimony do you?” you replied... [blah, blah, blah]. I know what I wrote. I have actually re-quoted it numerous times. And I stand by every word. I also know what I said at the time. I also know what my intended meaning was. That this person can not understand it — nor simple words like ”relies” and ”crucial” — demonstrates how so many deeply ignorant and literally stupid people are the ones in genuine denial who spend there time desperately trying to obfuscate and deny the wealth of EVIDENCE refuting the deeply flawed mass-gassing H-narrative. Höß’s testimony actually refutes much of the narrative we are all forced to believe or be silently subservient to. And yet his tortured ’confession’ was the crucial testimony that finally convinced the accused at the kangaroo-court of Nuremberg in 1946. Of course there were other witnesses. Only a deeply stupid person would psychologically project such ignorance onto others. Of course other people gave testimony to mass-gassing in the numerous post-war show-trials. Obviously! 🤦♂️ But the testimony of Rudolf Höß was regarded differently by both the accused AND the ignorant public, as he had been the Auschwitz camp kommandant. And the reality is that even others around the world doubted the emerging genocide-of-6-million-Jews-by-mass-gassing fable UNTIL the press related Höß’s coerced testimony. Oswald Mosely and Lady Diana Mosely are just two examples of that. But I have already explained this fact numerous times now, all to no avail. The irony being demonstrated yet again is that it is the H-believers who are genuinely in denial. 🤪
|
|
Nessie
✍️
𝐕𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐬 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿
Posts: 5,207
|
Post by Nessie on May 25, 2022 16:25:22 GMT
In reply to this: "...so what? You don’t think the Holocaust relies on just one witness testimony do you?” you replied... [blah, blah, blah]. I know what I wrote. I have actually re-quoted it numerous times. And I stand by every word. I also know what I said at the time. I also know what my intended meaning was. Your original post about your disagreement with your workmate has gone from the thread. How so? Please evidence the extent to which people doubted the mass gassing of Jews until Hoess gave his evidence, and how that evidence changed the number of doubters.
|
|
|
Post by Turnagain on May 25, 2022 21:53:04 GMT
Here's Nessie's laundry list from: holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2012/10/index-of-published-evidence-on.html In rebuttal to his laundry list, here's my laundry list: codoh.com/library/Just do a proper search and click on it and Bob's your uncle.
|
|