|
|
Post by been_there on Oct 9, 2022 10:26:59 GMT
๐ฎWow! This reply from you is further proof you are of seriously low intelligence. Concentrate now: when Jews arrived at concentration camps their possessions were taken from them, including their clothes. They were showered and shaved, their clothes were disinfected and/or steamed and in many cases they were given prison clothes. At Auschwitz their clothes and other possessions were stored and sorted at a location in the camp called โKanadaโ. THE QUESTION POSED TO YOU: What happened to the possessions of Allied prisoners who were ALSO treated as potential fifth columnists for their โenemyโ ethnic origins? What happened to their possessions when they arrived at the ALLIED CONCENTRATION CAMPS. Provide verifiable, authoritative references. You HAVE NOT provided any answer to this question yet. That you STILL havenโt understood this extremely simple question demonstrates the severe comprehension disability that has been pointed out to you numerous times and which you are in denial of. With this conclusive proof of it in this conversation, do you finally acknowledge it now? As I said before, there is no evidence that the British government stole the property of internees. Ruddy heck! You are less capable of rational, intelligent thought than I suspected! ๐ฎ You werenโt asked that! [Ay caramba!๐คฆโโ๏ธ]
Here is what you have been asked to answer: โข Provide evidence of the procedure for handling possessions of Allied prisoners upon arrival at American and British concentration camps.If you canโt do it just admit that. A website URL with photos is obviously NOT verifiable evidence that answers the question, you idiot. ๐ Otherwise, here is equivalent evidence that Jews inside camps could ALSO keep ALL their clothes and possessions:  Jewish internees with their own clothes and possessions at Auschwitz. 
Jewish internees posing happily while working in the wood-workshop in the Novaky concentration camp. 1944.
 Jewish mothers posing happily with their new-born โJewishโ babies at Dachau concentration camp. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206 
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 9, 2022 14:13:55 GMT
As I said before, there is no evidence that the British government stole the property of internees. Ruddy heck! You are less capable of rational, intelligent thought than I suspected! ๐ฎ You werenโt asked that! [Ay caramba!๐คฆโโ๏ธ]
Initially you said "find out what happened to the possessions of all or any of the people arrested, transported and then incarcerated in British and American concentration camps" and then "YOU were challenged to provide some โevidenceโ. YOU were invited to do some research about the treatment of the possessions of those prisoners of Britain and America." I encounter so many deniers wanting me to do work for them, that I tend to ignore such requests. I also regarded your requests as an attempt to dodge my points about Nazi thievery and regarded what you were up to as framing a tu quoque argument, as you yet again rely on logical fallacies. You asked again "You were asked to research what happened to their property when they were admitted to camps" and knowing how poor you are at research and that the answer was going to burst your bubble, I responded here; rodoh.freeforums.net/post/11961/threadI took a general view of "property" and included everything owned by the internees, including their homes. I pointed out that there was no evidence anything was stolen from them and they got everything back on release in 1942, to return home. You then said "You were asked to research what happened to their property when they were admitted to camps." Property can mean anything from someone's clothes to their house. You said "Yeah, you were asked to research and reference what happened to their property WHEN THEY WERE ADMITTED TO THE CAMPS!!" but the answer remains the same, they kept everything until release to go back home. There is no evidence the British took anything. You then repeated your earliest request to "do research and find out what happened to the possessions of all or any of the people arrested, transported and then incarcerated in British and American concentration camps." You repeated that, as a question "What happened to the possessions of Allied prisoners who were ALSO treated as potential fifth columnists for their โenemyโ ethnic origins? What happened to their possessions when they arrived at the ALLIED CONCENTRATION CAMPS." You flipped between property and possessions and it was not clear you meant the personal items that the prisoners arrived with. But in any case, the answer remains the same, there is no evidence the British took anything from the internees, from the gold in their teeth, to their underwear, to their homes. Every single photo of an internee at the IOM has them in their own clothing. There is no photo of internees wearing any form of uniform. They were accommodated in houses that had been seized from the IOM locals and photos show them with lots of personal possessions. There are no photos of them in barracks, with no personal possessions. There is no evidence from any source, that internees arriving at the IOM had their possessions and clothing taken from them, given uniform and put into barracks with nothing. That means the procedure was to let the internees keep their personal possessions and clothes. The photos you show of Jewish prisoners in their own clothes with personal possessions, are cherry picked. You have ignored all the photos of them in prisoner clothing with no personal possessions, in bare barracks. There are no equivalent photos of internees. You have yet again fallen for a fallacy. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 9, 2022 14:18:31 GMT
Been-there, describe the procedure for Jewish prisoner property on their arrival at the AR camps.
|
|
|
|
Post by been_there on Oct 9, 2022 18:49:19 GMT
Ruddy heck! You are less capable of rational, intelligent thought than I suspected! ๐ฎ
Initially you said "find out what happened to the possessions of all or any of the people arrested, transported and then incarcerated in British and American concentration camps". And then "YOU were challenged to provide some โevidenceโ. YOU were invited to do some research about the treatment of the possessions of those prisoners of Britain and America."...I tend to ignore such requests... You asked again "You were asked to research what happened to their property when they were admitted to camps".. You then said "You were asked to research what happened to their property when they were admitted to camps." Property can mean anything ...You said "Yeah, you were asked to research and reference what happened to their property WHEN THEY WERE ADMITTED TO THE CAMPS!!"You then repeated your earliest request to " do research and find out what happened to the possessions of all or any of the people arrested, transported and then incarcerated in British and American concentration camps." You repeated that, as a question " What happened to the possessions of Allied prisoners who were ALSO treated as potential fifth columnists for their โenemyโ ethnic origins? What happened to their possessions when they arrived at the ALLIED CONCENTRATION CAMPS."...it was not clear you meant the personal items that the prisoners arrived with. Ha ha ha! ๐คฃ Mad, quite mad! Initially, you said there were hundreds of โcredibleโ eye-witnesses to mass-gassings. And then you couldnโt/wouldnโt name a single โcredibleโ one. Then under pressure, you ludicrously chose the preposterous lies of โears-nailed-to-the-wallโ Wierdnik as your top-most โcredible eye-witnessโ! ๐ Then according to you, Rachman did not claim he saw the blood of thousands of buried Joos burning for a day and a night. Then you claimed he did but was just being โemotionalโ, or using a figure of speech, or some such nonsense. Now you canโt even answer the simple question of what was the procedure for handling possessions of Allied victims of racial persecution in the Alliesโ concentration camps in order to put what happened to the JOOS during the global war that Joos started into some sort of historical context. Youโre such a deceiver. And your lies and self-delusions are becoming increasingly more deranged. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 9, 2022 19:11:47 GMT
Initially you said "find out what happened to the possessions of all or any of the people arrested, transported and then incarcerated in British and American concentration camps". And then "YOU were challenged to provide some โevidenceโ. YOU were invited to do some research about the treatment of the possessions of those prisoners of Britain and America."...I tend to ignore such requests... You asked again "You were asked to research what happened to their property when they were admitted to camps".. You then said "You were asked to research what happened to their property when they were admitted to camps." Property can mean anything ...You said "Yeah, you were asked to research and reference what happened to their property WHEN THEY WERE ADMITTED TO THE CAMPS!!"You then repeated your earliest request to " do research and find out what happened to the possessions of all or any of the people arrested, transported and then incarcerated in British and American concentration camps." You repeated that, as a question " What happened to the possessions of Allied prisoners who were ALSO treated as potential fifth columnists for their โenemyโ ethnic origins? What happened to their possessions when they arrived at the ALLIED CONCENTRATION CAMPS."...it was not clear you meant the personal items that the prisoners arrived with. Ha ha ha! ๐คฃ Mad, quite mad! Initially, you said there were hundreds of โcredibleโ eye-witnesses to mass-gassings. And then you couldnโt/wouldnโt name a single โcredibleโ one. Then under pressure, you ludicrously chose the preposterous lies of โears-nailed-to-the-wallโ Wierdnik as your top-most โcredible eye-witnessโ! ๐ I repeatedly pointed out that there were many credible witnesses, and in response to obsessive requests for only one of those witnesses, I named Wiernik, as his book is readily available online. Nail ears to the wall is very similar to the expression, boxing someone's ears. It is clearly a figure of speech. It must be down to schooling, that deniers are unable to recognise figures of speech, emotive language and to understand that is how many people express themselves. I have answered the question, here, again, the procedure was to allow internees keep their own clothes and personal possessions, as shown in numerous photos of internees at the IOM and the lack of any evidence that the British government was stealing their property. What was the procedure for Jews entering the AR camps regarding their personal possessions? |
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 9, 2022 20:05:12 GMT
Nail ears to the wall is very similar to the expression, boxing someone's ears. It is clearly a figure of speech. Here is the precise text from his book. That is not a figure of speech. Now as for the burning blood. It must be down to schooling, that deniers are unable to recognise figures of speech, emotive language and to understand that is how many people express themselves. Once again here is the exact quote. Camp administration do not come to look at emotive language. This was meant to be taken as a fact. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 10, 2022 8:12:07 GMT
This thread is about theft of property. So far, the only evidence presented is of the Nazis stealing property, primarily Jewish. All the deniers here can do is try to deflect from that. Suggestions the British were stealing the property of those who they interred, have failed due to a lack of evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 10, 2022 8:34:28 GMT
This thread is about theft of property. So far, the only evidence presented is of the Nazis stealing property, primarily Jewish. All the deniers here can do is try to deflect from that. Suggestions the British were stealing the property of those who they interred, have failed due to a lack of evidence. Undies and hair clips. Moth eaten clothes. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 10, 2022 8:40:42 GMT
This thread is about theft of property. So far, the only evidence presented is of the Nazis stealing property, primarily Jewish. All the deniers here can do is try to deflect from that. Suggestions the British were stealing the property of those who they interred, have failed due to a lack of evidence. Undies and hair clips. Moth eaten clothes. There is evidence the Nazis burnt the property they did not think they could reuse. Why not return it to its owners?
That the Nazis stole the property of the Jews is circumstantial evidence that logically fits with the gassing claims. Gas the people, they do not need their clothes etc, so reuse and sell it. The British did not steal the property of those they interred, because they had no intentions of killing them. Indeed, most had been released by 1942. The Germans, Austrians and Italians who were living in the UK in 1939 were mostly trusted to return home.
During their internment, in houses on the IOM, they were allowed to keep the possessions they arrived with. They were not issued prison uniform. No wonder no one here wants to answer my question about what happened to the Jews when they arrived at the AR camps, or indeed any camp.
|
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 10, 2022 8:46:54 GMT
Undies and hair clips. Moth eaten clothes. There is evidence the Nazis burnt the property they did not think they could reuse. Why not return it to its owners?
That the Nazis stole the property of the Jews is circumstantial evidence that logically fits with the gassing claims. Gas the people, they do not need their clothes etc, so reuse and sell it. The British did not steal the property of those they interred, because they had no intentions of killing them. Indeed, most had been released by 1942. The Germans, Austrians and Italians who were living in the UK in 1939 were mostly trusted to return home.
During their internment, in houses on the IOM, they were allowed to keep the possessions they arrived with. They were not issued prison uniform. No wonder no one here wants to answer my question about what happened to the Jews when they arrived at the AR camps, or indeed any camp.
Talk about the property not gassing ffs. You are running around all over the place. Start with all the properties you claimed were burned so we know what the fuck you are talking about. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 10, 2022 9:06:15 GMT
There is evidence the Nazis burnt the property they did not think they could reuse. Why not return it to its owners?
That the Nazis stole the property of the Jews is circumstantial evidence that logically fits with the gassing claims. Gas the people, they do not need their clothes etc, so reuse and sell it. The British did not steal the property of those they interred, because they had no intentions of killing them. Indeed, most had been released by 1942. The Germans, Austrians and Italians who were living in the UK in 1939 were mostly trusted to return home.
During their internment, in houses on the IOM, they were allowed to keep the possessions they arrived with. They were not issued prison uniform. No wonder no one here wants to answer my question about what happened to the Jews when they arrived at the AR camps, or indeed any camp.
Talk about the property not gassing ffs. You are running around all over the place. Start with all the properties you claimed were burned so we know what the [fornicate] you are talking about. I am explaining why the theft of property is an issue for the Nazis, not just in terms of it proves they were thieves, but also how that theft fits into their other crimes.
The local Pole to TII, Marian Olszuk was reported by Faurisson to have seen "a mound of old clothing, about four metres high, in flames."
You are still dodging describing the process for Jews on their arrival at camps, regarding their property.
|
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 10, 2022 9:11:25 GMT
Talk about the property not gassing ffs. You are running around all over the place. Start with all the properties you claimed were burned so we know what the [fornicate] you are talking about. I am explaining why the theft of property is an issue for the Nazis, not just in terms of it proves they were thieves, but also how that theft fits into their other crimes.
The local Pole to TII, Marian Olszuk was reported by Faurisson to have seen "a mound of old clothing, about four metres high, in flames." You are still dodging describing the process for Jews on their arrival at camps, regarding their property.
I am not dodging anything. Clothing is worth stuff all really, except when new in shops. Jews were told what to bring with them on the transports anything excess would be confiscated. Surely even you have been through customs. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 10, 2022 10:10:31 GMT
I am explaining why the theft of property is an issue for the Nazis, not just in terms of it proves they were thieves, but also how that theft fits into their other crimes.
The local Pole to TII, Marian Olszuk was reported by Faurisson to have seen "a mound of old clothing, about four metres high, in flames." You are still dodging describing the process for Jews on their arrival at camps, regarding their property.
I am not dodging anything. Clothing is worth stuff all really, except when new in shops. Jews were told what to bring with them on the transports anything excess would be confiscated. Surely even you have been through customs. Name a witness to the process you suggest, whereby a Jew arrived at a camp, had only their "excess" property removed, and then they were transported onwards. That witness can be Jewish, or a Nazi who worked at one of those places.
Consider the August Frank report of September 1942, which listed underwear, spectacles, walking sticks and gold from teeth having been taken from the Jews and how that evidences everything was taken from them, not just "excess" property.
|
|
|
|
Post by ๐ฅ๐ฐ๐๐ด๐ป๐ธ on Oct 10, 2022 10:15:22 GMT
Name a witness to the process you suggest, whereby a Jew arrived at a camp, had only their "excess" property removed, and then they were transported onwards. That witness can be Jewish, or a Nazi who worked at one of those places. Consider the August Frank report of September 1942, which listed underwear, spectacles, walking sticks and gold from teeth having been taken from the Jews and how that evidences everything was taken from them, not just "excess" property. Every prisoner world wide has their property removed and replaced with prison garb. I should imagine most of this stuff from the Jews would have been burned. Those with walking sticks would have been aktioned. |
|
Nessie
โ๏ธ
๐๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ท๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ
Posts: 5,206
|
Post by Nessie on Oct 10, 2022 10:41:13 GMT
Name a witness to the process you suggest, whereby a Jew arrived at a camp, had only their "excess" property removed, and then they were transported onwards. That witness can be Jewish, or a Nazi who worked at one of those places. Consider the August Frank report of September 1942, which listed underwear, spectacles, walking sticks and gold from teeth having been taken from the Jews and how that evidences everything was taken from them, not just "excess" property. Every prisoner world wide has their property removed and replaced with prison garb. I should imagine most of this stuff from the Jews would have been burned. Those with walking sticks would have been aktioned. Which makes been-there's attempt to equate Germans interred by the British with Jews imprisoned by the Nazis even more of a failure.
I see you can provide no evidence only "excess" property was taken from the Jews. Fact is, the Nazis stole everything because they never expected to see the Jews again. The only Jews left with any property, were those who managed to flee with what they could carry.
|
|
