Holocaust deniers

[Coyote]

You guys keep on saying the Nazi's. Is this some PC nonsense? THEY WERE AND ARE GERMANS. They are one in the same. WTF??????????

Are Democrats and Americans one and the same?
Are Republicans and Americans one and the same?

WTF?

I need a sammich

Yes, they are. Are you saying German aggression and attempted genocide was not a concerted effort among the German people? If it weren't a concerted effort, why was Germany so successful with their warring bloodlust?

I'm saying it was much more complicated than you put it. Germany was in serious economic crisis as a result of WW1 punishments levied on it. That made it easy for someone like Hitler, with his nationalism and populist platform to be voted into power. People "supported" the agenda for a number of reasons - some hated/blamed Jews for their problems, some believed in eugenics, some because it was dangerous to not be a member of the Nazi party, some had no idea that genocide was occurring or looked the other way - a concerted effort, yes - but not exactly united. Once a movement becomes powerful enough and has control of the media, economy and military, popular support isn't always necessary. We see that all the time.

 

[Coyote]

In order to have a legitimate debate on the Holocaust, you need to seperate out Conspiracy Theory type revisions that aren't supported by documented facts.

All history is open to debate, but it should be based on facts.

The problem is that even the slightest deviation from the "official" holocaust narrative is meet with screams of "your anti-semitic" and "your a nazi". .....

I agree, and that's where I have issues as well. Once you start the name calling - something shuts off the intelligence centers of the brain

 

[Coyote]

Its not off topic is someone brings it up, Heres Churchill, maybe Hitler got the idea from him.

Churchill and Eugenics


"The improvement of the British breed is my aim in life," Winston Churchill wrote to his cousin Ivor Guest on 19 January 1899, shortly after his twenty-fifth birthday. Churchill's view was reinforced by his experiences as a young British officer serving, and fighting, in Arab and Muslim lands, and in South Africa. Like most of his contemporaries, family and friends, he regarded races as different, racial characteristics as signs of the maturity of a society, and racial purity as endangered not only by other races but by mental weaknesses within a race. As a young politician in Britain entering Parliament in 1901, Churchill saw what were then known as the "feeble-minded" and the "insane" as a threat to the prosperity, vigour and virility of British society.


Churchill and Eugenics

You are squirming but there is no escape.

Not at all. Just stating some more facts that show this was not only Hitlers view, even the US had eugenics. Digging is good, keep it up ,you may not like what you find.

True - eugenics was a popular movement at the time though I think Hitler was the only one who tried to carry it out through a campaign of genocide.

 

[dilloduck]

You are squirming but there is no escape.

Not at all. Just stating some more facts that show this was not only Hitlers view, even the US had eugenics. Digging is good, keep it up ,you may not like what you find.

True - eugenics was a popular movement at the time though I think Hitler was the only one who tried to carry it out through a campaign of genocide.

What the Nazi's practiced wasn't technically eugenics.

The Aktion T4 programme used the term 'euthanasia' as bureaucratic cover and in the minimal public relations efforts (see poster above) to invest what was essentially an outgrowth of eugenics with greater medical legitimacy.[14] It is clear that little, if any of the killing, however, was done to alleviate pain or suffering on the part of the victims. Rather the bulk of the evidence, including faked death certificates, deception to the victims and to the victims families and widespread use of cremation indicates the killing was done solely according to the socio-political aims and beliefs of the victimizers.

Action T4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Penelope]

Off topic. As you must know this thread is about Holocaust deniers but your lame attempt to excuse or mitigate the barbarity of your Nazi forebears is noted.

I'm merely responding to a claim made about Hitler which has nothing to do with the holocaust, to show that its recently happening in Israel, never said it was a good thing.

Penelope: outrages and atrocities do not just "happen", as you put it. They are perpetrated by individuals and groups.

In the case of Nazis conducting 'medical experiments', the individuals and groups who perpetrated the evil were acting in their official capacities as representatives authorized by the government.

In the case of the Israelis per the Guardian article: they were acting with OUT any such 'authorization'.

And indeed, one could have cited the US conducting forced sterilization and the infamous 'Tuskeegee study'..... Forced sterilization is irreversible and final (as done at that time, yes): quite a big and permanent effect as compare to any clinical trials (where people can still suffer irreversible damage - BUT that is not likely or a drug wouldn't get to that point. It appears that some of these 'trials' were for 'off specs' use of meds already existing and in use.....)

Now, if one examines the CONTENT of the three different nations cited so far - it appears that the Israeli "experimentation" involved actual drugs and procedures which *might* even be useful. So this APPEARS to be on the order of 'unauthorized clinical trials' - NOT ethical.

In the American situations, there is clear violation of human rights by the medical personnel - as well as a major perversion of ethics (AND I believe LAW as well!) in not treating the 'control' group in the syphilis study (which itself was redundant).

It is true that the German 'experiments' - SOME of them - were 'practical': seeing how many times a leg bone could be broken before it just wouldn't heal, finding out just how long a person could survive immersion in 35 degree water, recording how many times a man's body would impel him to have sex with the girl who was ordered to 'warm him up' from such immersion.......

But was forcing human beings into those situations a violation of human rights? I think so.

Was it unethical? I think so.

Was it a war crime to perform such actions upon civilians? I think so.

Did it meet the criteria for 'war crimes'? For 'crimes against humanity? I think so.

And was all of that sanctioned and overseen by the official government of Germany at the time?

YES: it was 'official policy' directed against Jews, Roma, Sinta, Poles, Greeks and any other 'non-Aryans' the Nazis crossed any number of international borders in their tanks to capture.

Now perhaps you can understand the differences and similarities in a bit more depth.

Yes its horrible of course, we all know that now. But it didn't begin with Hitler, The US and Churchill before him, and the OT was into purity of race. Its unfair to say Hitler made this up and was the first to do it, as the US or Britain was, heck all the battles of old did the same.

Don't forget this book Germany Must Perish in 1941, that talks about sterilizing all the German people. I wondered where he got it from and it had started in the US , then Hitler did it, then Hitler was blamed for it, and the US quit doing it so it goes.

 

[Penelope]

Not at all. Just stating some more facts that show this was not only Hitlers view, even the US had eugenics. Digging is good, keep it up ,you may not like what you find.

True - eugenics was a popular movement at the time though I think Hitler was the only one who tried to carry it out through a campaign of genocide.

What the Nazi's practiced wasn't technically eugenics.

The Aktion T4 programme used the term 'euthanasia' as bureaucratic cover and in the minimal public relations efforts (see poster above) to invest what was essentially an outgrowth of eugenics with greater medical legitimacy.[14] It is clear that little, if any of the killing, however, was done to alleviate pain or suffering on the part of the victims. Rather the bulk of the evidence, including faked death certificates, deception to the victims and to the victims families and widespread use of cremation indicates the killing was done solely according to the socio-political aims and beliefs of the victimizers.

Action T4 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

from the same article:

The T4 programme is thought to have developed from the Nazi Party's policy of "racial hygiene", the belief that the German people needed to be "cleansed" of "racially unsound" elements, which included people with disabilities. Historians[weasel words] consider the euthanasia programme as related to the evolution in policy that ordered the extermination of the Jews of Europe.[citation needed]

This is utter hogwash, no citation nothing, Most of the footnotes on this whole article can't be verified. I am seeing this all the time it seems.

If anything the Hebrews of the OT started it , not Hitler. I find it horrible what has been done to the German people with all of this hyperbole propaganda.

Not saying there was no euthanasia but to the add to it with unfounded statements is just spreading lies and hatred.

 

[Nutz]

Are Democrats and Americans one and the same?
Are Republicans and Americans one and the same?

WTF?

I need a sammich

Yes, they are. Are you saying German aggression and attempted genocide was not a concerted effort among the German people? If it weren't a concerted effort, why was Germany so successful with their warring bloodlust?

I'm saying it was much more complicated than you put it. Germany was in serious economic crisis as a result of WW1 punishments levied on it. That made it easy for someone like Hitler, with his nationalism and populist platform to be voted into power. People "supported" the agenda for a number of reasons - some hated/blamed Jews for their problems, some believed in eugenics, some because it was dangerous to not be a member of the Nazi party, some had no idea that genocide was occurring or looked the other way - a concerted effort, yes - but not exactly united. Once a movement becomes powerful enough and has control of the media, economy and military, popular support isn't always necessary. We see that all the time.

We see gas chambers all of the time? We see world wars all of the time?

It doesn't matter how you cut it. It doesn't matter how you rationalize or justify it. The German people are responsible for the greatest atrocities throughout human history. Period. It isn't complicated...the Nazi's weren't some magical race of people that can be separated from Germany as a whole. They WERE Germany.

And you have to remember, Germany's history of bloodlust and violence go well before the great wars.

Denying German aggression, hate and bloodlust is equally as bad as denying the holocaust. If you combine the holocaust denier with people who won't recognize Germany for what it is, you are creating a recipe for history to repeat itself.

 

[dilloduck]

Yes, they are. Are you saying German aggression and attempted genocide was not a concerted effort among the German people? If it weren't a concerted effort, why was Germany so successful with their warring bloodlust?

I'm saying it was much more complicated than you put it. Germany was in serious economic crisis as a result of WW1 punishments levied on it. That made it easy for someone like Hitler, with his nationalism and populist platform to be voted into power. People "supported" the agenda for a number of reasons - some hated/blamed Jews for their problems, some believed in eugenics, some because it was dangerous to not be a member of the Nazi party, some had no idea that genocide was occurring or looked the other way - a concerted effort, yes - but not exactly united. Once a movement becomes powerful enough and has control of the media, economy and military, popular support isn't always necessary. We see that all the time.

We see gas chambers all of the time? We see world wars all of the time?

It doesn't matter how you cut it. It doesn't matter how you rationalize or justify it. The German people are responsible for the greatest atrocities throughout human history. Period. It isn't complicated...the Nazi's weren't some magical race of people that can be separated from Germany as a whole. They WERE Germany.

And you have to remember, Germany's history of bloodlust and violence go well before the great wars.

Denying German aggression, hate and bloodlust is equally as bad as denying the holocaust. If you combine the holocaust denier with people who won't recognize Germany for what it is, you are creating a recipe for history to repeat itself.

Stalin killed more. Mao didn't do so badly himself.

 

[Nutz]

I'm saying it was much more complicated than you put it. Germany was in serious economic crisis as a result of WW1 punishments levied on it. That made it easy for someone like Hitler, with his nationalism and populist platform to be voted into power. People "supported" the agenda for a number of reasons - some hated/blamed Jews for their problems, some believed in eugenics, some because it was dangerous to not be a member of the Nazi party, some had no idea that genocide was occurring or looked the other way - a concerted effort, yes - but not exactly united. Once a movement becomes powerful enough and has control of the media, economy and military, popular support isn't always necessary. We see that all the time.

We see gas chambers all of the time? We see world wars all of the time?

It doesn't matter how you cut it. It doesn't matter how you rationalize or justify it. The German people are responsible for the greatest atrocities throughout human history. Period. It isn't complicated...the Nazi's weren't some magical race of people that can be separated from Germany as a whole. They WERE Germany.

And you have to remember, Germany's history of bloodlust and violence go well before the great wars.

Denying German aggression, hate and bloodlust is equally as bad as denying the holocaust. If you combine the holocaust denier with people who won't recognize Germany for what it is, you are creating a recipe for history to repeat itself.

Stalin killed more. Mao didn't do so badly himself.

Not if you include the deaths from the two wars caused by German aggression, hate and bloodlust.

And, you need to look at the history of Germany as a whole. They are the most dangerous people known to the human race.

 

[dilloduck]

We see gas chambers all of the time? We see world wars all of the time?

It doesn't matter how you cut it. It doesn't matter how you rationalize or justify it. The German people are responsible for the greatest atrocities throughout human history. Period. It isn't complicated...the Nazi's weren't some magical race of people that can be separated from Germany as a whole. They WERE Germany.

And you have to remember, Germany's history of bloodlust and violence go well before the great wars.

Denying German aggression, hate and bloodlust is equally as bad as denying the holocaust. If you combine the holocaust denier with people who won't recognize Germany for what it is, you are creating a recipe for history to repeat itself.

Stalin killed more. Mao didn't do so badly himself.

Not if you include the deaths from the two wars caused by German aggression, hate and bloodlust.

And, you need to look at the history of Germany as a whole. They are the most dangerous people known to the human race.

Well then take the history of Russia or China as a whole. Who has been involved in the most wars since WWII ?

 

[Penelope]

We see gas chambers all of the time? We see world wars all of the time?

It doesn't matter how you cut it. It doesn't matter how you rationalize or justify it. The German people are responsible for the greatest atrocities throughout human history. Period. It isn't complicated...the Nazi's weren't some magical race of people that can be separated from Germany as a whole. They WERE Germany.

And you have to remember, Germany's history of bloodlust and violence go well before the great wars.

Denying German aggression, hate and bloodlust is equally as bad as denying the holocaust. If you combine the holocaust denier with people who won't recognize Germany for what it is, you are creating a recipe for history to repeat itself.

Stalin killed more. Mao didn't do so badly himself.

Not if you include the deaths from the two wars caused by German aggression, hate and bloodlust.

And, you need to look at the history of Germany as a whole. They are the most dangerous people known to the human race.

You have got to be kidding me.

 

[Penelope]

You are squirming but there is no escape.

Not at all. Just stating some more facts that show this was not only Hitlers view, even the US had eugenics. Digging is good, keep it up ,you may not like what you find.

True - eugenics was a popular movement at the time though I think Hitler was the only one who tried to carry it out through a campaign of genocide.

Well the way I take it it was eugenics and euthanasia when everyone else did it but genocide when the German doctors did it.

 

[bendog]

How does a human address them? Is ignoring them immoral? Shouldn't they be confronted?

The Holocaust is one of the best documented atrocities in human history. When people deny it...it's usually fairly easy to attack them with facts.

As far as the morality of it? It's an individual choice - where do you draw the line? There are all kinds of atrocities that are covered over - Holocaust, Armenian genocide, Bosnian genocide - etc.

After WWII, Gen. Eisenhower, Churchiil, and Charles de Gaulle, all wrote multi-volumed books about their experiences in the war.

And yet there was not a single mention of the so called Holocaust or gas chambers in their exhaustive memoirs. ..

A quote from Eisenhower's "Crusade in Europe"




The same day[19] I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never been able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain however, that I have never at any time experienced an equal sense of shock.


I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that "the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda". Some members of the visiting party were unable to go through with the ordeal. I not only did so but as soon as I returned to Patton's headquarters that evening I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and the British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for cynical doubt.[20]

I think he foresaw people like you.

 

[Nutz]

Stalin killed more. Mao didn't do so badly himself.

Not if you include the deaths from the two wars caused by German aggression, hate and bloodlust.

And, you need to look at the history of Germany as a whole. They are the most dangerous people known to the human race.

You have got to be kidding me.

You deny Germany started 2 world wars?

 

[Nutz]

Stalin killed more. Mao didn't do so badly himself.

Not if you include the deaths from the two wars caused by German aggression, hate and bloodlust.

And, you need to look at the history of Germany as a whole. They are the most dangerous people known to the human race.

Well then take the history of Russia or China as a whole. Who has been involved in the most wars since WWII ?

There hasn't been a world war since WWII! You will never get the numbers to come close to the number of deaths caused by German hate and bloodlust. It is history, I don't know why you deny it or rationalize it by pointing your fingers at dictators. Why is it so hard to admit that Germany is responsible for the greatest atrocities in the 20th century? It is simple fact.

 

[bendog]

"started" is perhaps an oversimplification. The two most influential popular scholars of the last century to write on this issue saw it more as continuation of world events, in which all of the world powers took actions, and none of the powers had the information necessary to understand why the other powers were taking the actions they were taking.

That is an oversimplification itself, but in nutshell, it's why there's the UN. For example, the vast majority of Russians believe "atrocities" were taking place in the Ukraine against Russian speaking people. The vast majority of Israelis think the Pales "deserve" the 1800 of so dead. The UN is a place for debate. Russia and Israel's ability to control the content of what its citizens hear from outside their borders differ.

 

[Sunni Man]

The Holocaust is one of the best documented atrocities in human history. When people deny it...it's usually fairly easy to attack them with facts.

As far as the morality of it? It's an individual choice - where do you draw the line? There are all kinds of atrocities that are covered over - Holocaust, Armenian genocide, Bosnian genocide - etc.

After WWII, Gen. Eisenhower, Churchiil, and Charles de Gaulle, all wrote multi-volumed books about their experiences in the war.

And yet there was not a single mention of the so called Holocaust or gas chambers in their exhaustive memoirs. ..

A quote from Eisenhower's "Crusade in Europe"




The same day[19] I saw my first horror camp. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never been able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain however, that I have never at any time experienced an equal sense of shock.


I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that "the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda". Some members of the visiting party were unable to go through with the ordeal. I not only did so but as soon as I returned to Patton's headquarters that evening I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and the British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for cynical doubt.[20]

I think he foresaw people like you.

If you will read what you just posted.

Gen. Eisenhower didn't say a single word about "gas chambers" or anything about a so call "holocaust".


Yes, there were terrible work camps and many prisoners died of disease, starvation, and over work.

But no, there wasn't a systematic killing of prisoners on an industrial scale. ....

 

[bendog]

Of course the gas chambers never existed because he didn't explicitly say they were there in his book.

Give it rest, denier.

 

[irosie91]

How does a human address them? Is ignoring them immoral? Shouldn't they be confronted?[/QUOTE


Peach----long ago I came to understand that no matter how untenable is a "delusion"----
attempts to use logic to "talk it out of the patient" ----is utterly futile. If a "psychotic"---
with a psychosis from any cause-----whether schizophrenia----or syphilis of the brain
"sees" things or 'hears" voices-----there is no sense in demonstrating "logically" that
that which he sees or hears is----simply not there. Penicillan works----but not logic..

Religious belief is another issue not approachable with logic and "holocaust denial"---is very
much like religious belief and syphilis of the brain

 

[Penelope]

Not if you include the deaths from the two wars caused by German aggression, hate and bloodlust.

And, you need to look at the history of Germany as a whole. They are the most dangerous people known to the human race.

You have got to be kidding me.

You deny Germany started 2 world wars?

Here ever hear of this guy or Leon Trotsky?

Yagoda is widely known to be a brutal and ruthless killer in what is called the Holodomor in the Ukraine. It should also be noted that Yagoda was responsible for the deaths of an estimated 7 to 10 million Ukrainians of all faiths, including at least one hundred thousand Jews.[4]
Genrikh Yagoda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Two sweet jewish men, and read about the Holodomor.