Definition of and evidence for the holocaust

[A_Nony_Mouse]

What a disgusting thread.

My evidence for the Holocaust depends on the thousands of photos and documentary films that exist and the thousands of eye witnesses which include the victims, the perpetrators and the liberators, some of whom are still living to tell the tale. I've known several camp survivors and WWII veterans (including my father and uncle) who served in Europe and confirmed the atrocities, but I've never talked to any that say it didn't happen.

No one says the losers had it easy and certainly there are problems all around but the issue here is extermination in camps. Unless those relatives of yours were in the Red Army they never got near any extermination camp. So unless all the above you talk about relates to the supposed extermination camps you are not talking about anything material to the subject. So in fact you have not seen anything which would constitute specific evidence of this claim of mass murder.

You discount out of hand any evidence you don't happen to like, so there's no real point in arguing it, except to say this: placing the Holocaust on the same level as the existence of God or alien abduction is ridiculous.

If you do not wish your holocaust to be the Darkstar definition then you will need to provide your own so I know what you are talking about. When one takes story telling without physical evidence it is the same as alien abductions for all the same reasons we discount those stories. In the grand scheme of things the issue of a god is immeasurably more important.

Even if the Darkstar definition is true. It is over. Nothing is going to change it. It is no more relevant to today's world than Charlemagne or the battle of Lepanto. It really does not matter in the least if it happened or not. It is dead history.

One is supernatural, the other is scientifically and statistically unlikely; in other words, they're both highly improbable. Unfortunately, heinous behavior on the behalf of vicious scumbags like the Nazis isn't improbable at all. Your analogy doesn't hold up.

Again, so what? By some estimates murdered more women as witches than the claims for Jews by Jews. Like the Nazis the witch hunters are gone. And their own "threat" to the world was because the Brits and French decided to use defense of Poland as an excuse for war. Without that they would likely have destroyed communism which would have been a blessing to the world and spared all of China from it.

It's like my saying Mount Everest doesn't exist because I've never personally seen it. But I've seen pictures and read accounts of it, and have personally seen other mountains, and logic dictates that one of them must be the tallest. You didn't witness the Holocaust, but logic dictates that like the tallest mountains, there are also pinnacles of human depravity.

As above it is dead history and the witch hunters were likely worse. No gets excited like you do over witch hunters. How about Ghengis Khan? Attila the Hun. Alexander the Great? What is the difference between Adolph Hitler and Julius Caesar? Caesar conquered France and kept it.

And while you try to push buttons by saying believers in the Holocaust are akin to believers in God and that denial is more in keeping with atheism, you've got it precisely backward. There's plenty of evidence for the Holocaust, just as there's plenty of evidence for a Universe without design. Denying the facts because they don't happen to suit your prejudices is a theist trait.

Again you are going to have to define whatever you mean by holocaust as so far no one has presented anything to support the Darkstar definition. You are not. In fact to be honest I sincerely doubt you have ever looked into anything beyond History Channel WWII stuff. The real documentation is rather obscure, it helps to read some German and is mostly dull, tedious and boring.

With historical revisionism like this going on---within the lifespans of those who were actually there---it's hardly surprising that Bush 2 got away with saying that the invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with WMD only a few days after he said it did, or that a washed-up athlete can flee from the law on live television after virtually hacking off his ex-wife's head and be found Not Guilty of murder, or that politically-motivated cretins can deny physical phenomenon as fundamental as the Greenhouse Effect while the east coast is submerged in water and the west bursts into flame. This kind of thinking adds to the sum total of sorrow and pain in the world, and taken far enough, endangers lives.

People who believe the east coast is being submerged are in great need of a reality check. If I realized you were so detached from reality in the beginning I would not have wasted your time with this response.

---

(*) Anyone who cares to look into the matter themselves is invited to Google this crank's name and form your own opinion.

No further comment is needed

Please do but keep in mind all the hours someone must have wasted forging all those posts attributed to me.

---

A good friend of mine's father was in a forced labor camp in Germany during WWII. They aren't Jewish. I've seen his tattoo, though I haven't inquired as to why he was sent to the work camp, but I believe him.
Denying the Holocaust is total bullshit. Do you deny other genocides, such as the Rowandan genocide or the Bosnian genocide?
Where's The Germans Are Coming when you need him?

If by holocaust you mean work camps then Japanese Americans had a holocaust because they were sent to camps and required to work. As to tattoos, how many digits? This is important as the highest number could only have been all nines.

---

A_Nony_Mouse is an obvious troll who more than likely spends too much of his free time on neonazi chat sites...his brain has turned to silly putty...he's going to reject any and all evidence of the holocaust of six million Jews anyway...so what's the point in entertaining this Jew hating neonazi bigot any longer?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial

No definition and no physical evidence. It must be frustrating for you.

---

Is this one of those "carefully-worded" thingies? Where you say "prove the holocaust, defined as the execution of six million Jews by the Nazis in the 30s and 40s" and if it turns out to be three million or four million or three-hundred thousand, then there was no holocaust because the number is incorrect? Or is it "there was no holocaust, some Jews just got unlucky" or somewhere in between?

That cannot possibly be true as I am SOLICITING definitions from others as to what they are 1) talking about and then 2) evidence for what they are talking about.

I could offer a defintion which is what the folks at Yad Vashem talk about but then that would lead to accusations they have a trick definition.

But there were camps. I know that. If holocaust means camps, fine with me.

If I am remembering correctly, some holocaust deniers focus on the number of dead and produce much lower numbers or at least dispute the six million dead claim. By focusing on the numbers, they can divert attention from their belief that it didn't happen without explicitly saying so. So what I am wondering is, is this topic borne of the belief that the claim of six million cannot be verified, or is it borne of the belief that there was no attempt at a mass-extermination of Jews by the Nazis in the 30s and 40s?

I am not playing games. If you want to talk about only 3 million instead of 6 million I can produce pre and post WWII world pop figures that appear to support that reduction. I can also not the Yad Vashem project to collect all the names of the holocausted started in 1998 or so still has only about 3 million names even though self-reported and there is no review for duplicates. No problem.

But I find that people start screaming denier if the number is not 6 million a number first produced in October 1945 before any post war census was conducted.

So right up front I am asking for a definition first. But of course I want to go further into the evidence as to the cause of death of the missing and of course it is legitimate to ask if they are really missing instead of the 'damned if I am going to tell anyone I a Jew after that' response.

I have spent a lot of time on this ancillary to other subjects and if in fact the entire extermination by gas chambers and cremation (This is the FIRST mention of gas and cremation in this thread) and traditional number are all correct this is the most poorly documented event in modern times. In fact the documentation can be described as criminally negligent.

Almost all of it has relied upon story telling. And that is not just my opinion. The professional holocaust types bemoan the fact the the survivors are dying and there will be no one to tell the story and it will be forgotten.

I guess that means the US Civil War and the Roman Empire have been forgotten.

---

Hmmmm...this is interesting...if we're actually dealing with matt giwer...I know from other threads that mr. Jew hating mouse doesn't like to answer direct questions...Was there a Holocaust of six million Jews by the nazis mr. mouse, or not...Was halten Sie?...

Are you in fact now defining this holocaust of yours as six million Jews and will you present physical evidence of it? Please declare your position. I'll take 5-7 million. This is not a trick question. The issue is your physical evidence to proper legal standards. Start with cause of death.

Afraid to answer direct questions

The guys who forged all that material and phoned my son and threatened to kill him. You sure hang out in strange company.

---

I had a next door neighbour was a jew who was rescued from Auchwitz.....will that do.

I saw the tatoo and the haunted look she always had.

She was not exterminated. No evidence there.

Nothing personal against your neighbor but all the books published by survivors of Auschwitz in the last 20 some years have turned out to be frauds. Careful what you believe. You never know where it came from.

---

My Godmother's father was one of the troops who liberated Bergen-Belsen in 1945. What he saw drove him mad. He spent the rest of his life mentally ill, before finally gassing himself in 1963.

WHAT is your definition of holocaust? The Darkstar claim is extermination of six million. NO ONE ever claimed Bergen-Belsen was an extermination camp. Therefore it does not support that definition. WHAT is your definition such that his post war acts constitute evidence?

Did no one ever tell you the Germans prohibited the inmates from drinking the water because it was contaminate because of lack of electricity for the pumps to purify it because the allies bombed the power plant?

And did no one tell you after liberation the Brits recognized the evil Germans were causing the inmates to die of thirst and allowed them all to drink the water?

Did no one tell you the ensuing typhoid epidemic killed off more after liberation than died there during the war?

Perhaps he knew about that. Perhaps he authorized drinking the water. Unpleasant things happen in war.

You won't find the story spelled out as above. You can find the dying of thirst and the date of liberation and the inmates drinking the water and the mass die off being later and so forth. It is simply not strung together explicitly. Granted camps in the first place were all the fault of the Germans but then the US had camps too.

You can't point fingers when you are equally guilty.

---

Actually, I quite agree with the sentiment that Israel seems to get a free pass from the west when it comes to the atrocities they commit, and I think it is a legitimate subject to discuss.. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict, however, is messy and the blame does not go one way. His obsessive focus on only the Jews to blame not only comes across as anti-Semitic, it invalidates any legitimate point he may have had by causing people to dismiss every word he has to say. Skepticism is great, but this is revisionism masquerading as skepticism. Every thread he creates on the Jews reeks of a hidden agenda.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back.

I simply do not lose focus from the only fact of interest in the entire conflict.

As to revisionism, history is ALWAYS being revised. What is your problem with the way the study of history is conducted? Or are you still partial to the white man being attacked by the red skinned savages?

---

Actually, I quite agree with the sentiment that Israel seems to get a free pass from the west when it comes to the atrocities they commit, and I think it is a legitimate subject to discuss.. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict, however, is messy and the blame does not go one way. His obsessive focus on only the Jews to blame not only comes across as anti-Semitic, it invalidates any legitimate point he may have had by causing people to dismiss every word he has to say. Skepticism is great, but this is revisionism masquerading as skepticism. Every thread he creates on the Jews reeks of a hidden agenda.

What might you suggest in being hidden?

---

Why does any particular reason need a special reason? It is not as though there is any particular value to the existence of this religion.

I see that you have a problem differentiating the people from the religion, and that is what makes you a bitter racist.

As the only Jews are followers of Judaism, what distinction do you think I am missing?

How do you think religions go extinct? Friendly persuasion?

Again JEWS ARE NOT A RACE. How can you be so stupid as to accuse me of racism when there are no races being discussed? Are you doing anything but lying about me when you use that word? Do you enjoy lying?