Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CycleofSpin)
    Sprocket and thingamybob may be simply terminology but gas showers versus Zyklon B cans throw down hatches is not a terminology thing. It's a reference to two different murder weapons.

    In a court case of a witness referred to a gun as "a piece" the inference is clearly that the item in question is a gun. If there is doubt however about whether the murder weapon is a gun or a land-mine, it raises a need for the prosecution to clarify the issue. If the prosecution witnesses were in contradiction about this, it would raise some serious questions.


    There is a lot of doubt about the authenticity of the newly discovered Auschwitz blueprints. See:

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...-camp-1.256943

    It's not illegal to research the Holocaust in Germany or Austria unless you find a significant variation of the story which substantially reduces the nature and scale in which case it's illegal.

    With regards to the question you ask about where people went, what is the objective basis for claims that there are missing people?

    The allied powers make a lot of things up especially with regards to war propaganda. The allied powers recently claimed that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

    I do not support a system of concentration camps, or the torture or killing of civilians. However I said this given the rabid ideological face offs in the 20th century I understand the motivation for countries having to resort to a system of mass incarceration.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Zyklon b and gas chambers aren't terminology issues. They're the same thing. For those death camps using zyklon b, the crystals were poured down a shaft into a gas chamber as the crystals created gas.

    Other camps pumped in carbon monoxide gas.

    Other camps worked people to death through starvation diets and hard work.

    Others were just shot.

    Where did the missing millions go?

    Who benefits from keeping this 'myth' going?

    Why do you agree with the nazi holocaust? After all that's the reason d'être for holocaust deniers.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CycleofSpin)

    x

    There is a lot of doubt about the authenticity of the newly discovered Auschwitz blueprints. See:

    http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...-camp-1.256943

    x

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Massive, massive fail on your part, I am afraid.

    Firstly, the documents to which you apparently refer are not 'newly discovered'. The linked article is dated 2008.

    Secondly, and much more importantly, the 'doubts' expressed in the article were from Professor Robert Jan van Pelt. He is probably the world's leading expert on how Auschwitz was built and developed. He was one of the main advisers to the TV documentary series Auschwitz: The Nazis and the 'Final Solution' which most certainly does not pour doubts on the generally accepted view of what happened at Auschwitz. He has also rubbished the claims of Fred Leuchter, whose flawed chemical analysis is often cited uncritically by deniers.

    Van Pelt was also one of the expert witnesses who helped destroy David Irving's reputation as a historian.

    To conclude, you tried to suggest there were 'doubts' about Auschwitz. A deliberately vague statement without any substance, meant to sow doubt among the inexperienced and confirm the prejudices of other deniers. Yet all you have done is point to one of the leading experts who has described Auschwitz as (among other things) "a selection and extermination site for Jews" and who believes the modern estimates of more than a million deaths there.

    Do you actually read the articles to which you link, or is it that you simply don't understand anything beyond the headline?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ageshallnot)
    Massive, massive fail on your part, I am afraid.

    Firstly, the documents to which you apparently refer are not 'newly discovered'. The linked article is dated 2008.

    Secondly, and much more importantly, the 'doubts' expressed in the article were from Professor Robert Jan van Pelt. He is probably the world's leading expert on how Auschwitz was built and developed. He was one of the main advisers to the TV documentary series Auschwitz: The Nazis and the 'Final Solution' which most certainly does not pour doubts on the generally accepted view of what happened at Auschwitz. He has also rubbished the claims of Fred Leuchter, whose flawed chemical analysis is often cited uncritically by deniers.

    Van Pelt was also one of the expert witnesses who helped destroy David Irving's reputation as a historian.

    To conclude, you tried to suggest there were 'doubts' about Auschwitz. A deliberately vague statement without any substance, meant to sow doubt among the inexperienced and confirm the prejudices of other deniers. Yet all you have done is point to one of the leading experts who has described Auschwitz as (among other things) "a selection and extermination site for Jews" and who believes the modern estimates of more than a million deaths there.

    Do you actually read the articles to which you link, or is it that you simply don't understand anything beyond the headline?
    Not 'the' Fred Leuchter?

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_A._Leuchter

    The same Fred Leuchter who produced this pile of pump?

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leuchter_Report

    I liked pelts comment.

    If Leuchter had gone to the archives, if he had spent time in the archives, he would've found evidence about ventilation systems, evidence about ways to introduce Zyklon B into these buildings, evidence of gas chambers, undressing rooms.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    For those interested, here's a documentary from some time ago with Cycle of Spins expert. I still remember watching it when it was first broadcast and being gobsmacked.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=47jeOYLauxw

    As you can see, he's hidden his tin foil hat quite well but the craziness still shines through. I like the section where he says there is no evidence of gas being used in the shower room and the letter to the door manufacturer explaining that the door has to be gas proof.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Not 'the' Fred Leuchter?

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_A._Leuchter

    The same Fred Leuchter who produced this pile of pump?

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leuchter_Report
    The one and only!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ageshallnot)
    The one and only!
    He's a proper full on loon.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)

    Where did the missing millions go?
    .
    Where can they go ? Below the ground.... covered by soil and grass.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by beinlondon)
    Where can they go ? Below the ground.... covered by soil and grass.
    Or in the air as ash
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Here's a really good summary of cycle of spins strategy.

    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/mobile/en/a...uleId=10008003

    It's like he's a cliche.

    Where's he gone?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Here's an interesting first hand account.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Cornides

    And another.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Gerstein

    And another.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Pfannenstiel
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It wouldn't surprise me if the numbers were wrong but I'm almost certain it happened to some uncertain degree.

    I just wish the jewish narrative wasn't so predominant. So many other groups suffered and barely get talked about, relatively.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by G8D)
    It wouldn't surprise me if the numbers were wrong but I'm almost certain it happened to some uncertain degree.

    I just wish the jewish narrative wasn't so predominant. So many other groups suffered and barely get talked about, relatively.
    Historically and academically the other groups do get entailed about and acknowledged.

    However the Jewish casualty rate was by and fat the largest and the most heavily targeted.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    There were five members of my family who lived in France at the start of the second world war. Four of them died in the Holocaust, probably starving to death in the camps they were at, and one survived. It was only around fifteen years ago that anything was said by the survivor from that part of my family, and now at the Memorial in Berlin there are the records of the four who died.

    So in answer to the original question, yes it did happen. The largest group of people who were killed by the Nazis were Jewish people, as were my four ancestors. I do not claim it as solely Hitler seeking to kill Jewish people, recognising the gypsies, disabled people and other groups were a large number of those who died. We should remember the events as if we do not, there is more chance of other genocides happening.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    I can't stand studying the holocaust and generally avoid it because it is so horrific. But holocaust denial is bizarre. Many of the claims such as the red cross examining camps can easily be explained, they admitted to be fooled and shown a fake camp. Some of claims.in this thread are odd too. A guard says there were nozzles in a shower room and they thew zkyon b through hatches, well yeah no doubt the nozzles were fake.

    The obsession with holocaust denial to my mind simply boils down to antisemitism.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    So suddenly a collective amnesia occurred in parts of the world
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by quentinhamilton)
    So suddenly a collective amnesia occurred in parts of the world
    Can you explain what you mean?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    There have been claims by Holocaust deniers that the gas chambers which mainstream historians believe were for the massacre of civilians never existed, but rather that the structures identified as gas chambers actually served other purposes. These other purposes include cadaver storage, delousing, and disinfection. A similar argument is sometimes used that claims gas was not used to murder Jews and other victims,and that many gas chambers were also built after the war just for show. A document advancing this theory is the Leuchter report by Fred A. Leuchter, a paper stating that only traces of cyanide were found when he examined samples taken from one of the Auschwitz gas chambers in 1988. This is often cited as evidence that gas was not used in the chambers, as no trace amounts remain. Despite the difficulty of finding traces of this material 50 years later, in February, 1990, Professor Jan Markiewicz, Director of the Institute of Forensic Research in Kraków, redid the analysis. Markiewicz and his team used microdiffusion techniques to test for cyanide in samples from the suspected gas chambers, from delousing chambers, and from control areas elsewhere within Auschwitz. The control samples tested negative, while cyanide residue was found in high concentrations in the delousing chambers, and lower concentrations in the homicidal gas chambers. This is consistent with the amounts required to kill lice and humans.

    The search for cyanide in the bricks of buildings said to be gas chambers was important, because the pesticide Zyklon B would generate such a residue. This was the gas most often cited as the instrument of death for prisoners in the gas chambers, supported by both testimony and evidence collected of Nazi policy.

    Another claim made by Holocaust deniers is that there were no specially-constructed vents in the gas chambers through which Zyklon B could be released. The BBC offers a response showing that this requires disregard of much documentation:

    Deniers have said for years that physical evidence is lacking because they have seen no holes in the roof of the Birkenau gas chamber where the Zyklon was poured in. (In some of the gas chambers the Zyklon B was poured in through the roof, while in others it was thrown in through the windows.) The roof was dynamited at war's end, and today lies broken in pieces, but three of the four original holes were positively identified in a recent paper. Their location in the concrete matches with eyewitness testimony, aerial photos from 1944, and a ground photo from 1943. The physical evidence shows unmistakably that the Zyklon holes were cast into the concrete when the building was constructed.


    The ruins of the Crematorium II gas chamber at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
    Leuchter's comment that the camp was "untouched" has been dismissed as nonsense by the Holocaust scholar Robert Jan van Pelt, who explains that the absence of most of the would-be rubble from the crematoria is because the local Polish population returning to the area after the war rebuilt farmhouses to the west with bricks salvaged from rubble in the camp area including from the Birkenau crematoria. Near those crematoria is a pile of broken bricks thrown aside in the search for usable intact bricks.

    Another piece of evidence Holocaust deniers frequently question is what happened to the ash after the bodies were cremated. The amount of ash produced in the cremation of a person is about a shoebox full, if done in a proper crematorium. However, eyewitness testimonies documented by Hilberg's The Destruction of the European Jews describe the burning process used in Treblinka, Sobibor, and Belzec to have carried out in multiple open-air grills where stacks of bodies were burned on top of metal bars. These grills were operated by burning piles of wood underneath. It has been questioned by Holocaust deniers[43] if it would have been possible to burn hundreds of thousands of corpses using the method as documented by Hilberg, especially when the low efficiency of such burning process, the high amounts of wood required and the often windy weather conditions of the camps are taken into account.

    Cremation in the open at the Reinhard death camps (Treblinka, Sobibor and Belzec) was discussed at Nuremberg on the 7th April 1946 by Georg Konrad Morgen, SS judge and lawyer who investigated crimes committed in Nazi concentration camps. He stated: "The whole thing was like an assembly line. At the last stop they reached a big room, and were told that this was the bath. When the last one was in, the doors were shut and the gas was let into the room. As soon as death taken place in (sic), the ventilators were started. When the air was breathable, the doors were opened, and the Jewish workers removed the bodies. By means of a special process which Wirth had invented, they were burned in the open air without the use of fuel."

    Aerial photographs of Auschwitz indicate that what appears to be ash produced in Auschwitz was piled into the nearby river and marsh, and there is well-documented evidence that other ash was used as fertilizer in nearby fields. Photographs of Treblinka taken by the camp commandant show what looks to be ash piles being distributed by steam shovels.

    Another argument used by Holocaust deniers is that testimony on the gas chambers is unreliable. The Institute for Historical Review is one of the organizations which make this assertion. In the words of the IHR:

    "Hoss [Hoess] said in his confession that his men would smoke cigarettes as they pulled the dead Jews out of the gas chambers ten minutes after gassing. Isn't Zyklon-B explosive? Highly so. The Hoss confession is obviously false."

    The Nizkor Project and other sources have pointed out that the minimal concentration of Zyklon-B to be explosive is 56,000 parts per million, while the amount used to kill a human is 300 parts per million, as is evidenced in "The Merck Index" and the "CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics". In fact, the Nazis' own documentation stated "Danger of explosion: 75 grams of HCN in 1 cubic meter of air. Normal application approx. 8–10 grams per cubic meter, therefore not explosive." (Nuremberg document NI-9912)

    The Institute for Historical Review publicly offered a reward of $50,000 for verifiable "proof that gas chambers for the purpose of killing human beings existed at or in Auschwitz." Mel Mermelstein, a survivor of Auschwitz, submitted his own testimony as proof but it was ignored. He then sued IHR in the United States and the case was subsequently settled for $50,000, plus $40,000 in damages for personal suffering. The court declared the statement that "Jews were gassed to death at the Auschwitz Concentration Camp in Poland during the summer of 1944" was a fact.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Discussing things like this on forums is stupid. Why not look at the facts? Each post here is biased to one side or another, and what's more, they are not written by historians. This is not a discussable topic - it is objective fact whether it happened or not. It's down to any questioners to do their own research, using objective sources, and for goodness' sake don't trust a random forum user who happens to write persuasive posts.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Can you explain what you mean?
    Seems people forgot the holocaust
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by quentinhamilton)
    Seems people forgot the holocaust
    Yes. We have the usual suspect of anti Semites and extreme right wing nutters, but we're seeing an increase in Muslim denial it happened and extreme left wing nutters.

    I'm trying to find out what category cycle of spin falls into. Extreme left or right wing nutter, general anti Semite, Islamic activist or just general troll.
 
 
 

1,505

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.