Meh, you are just using the equivalent to creationists talking about Piltdown man, a clear embarrassing fraud and mistake but that the very same experts did debunk with evidence that was found and presented a century ago. (Like in the current example, it was the experts the ones that found the fraud, not the creationists or the ones that deny evidence)
Chen019 is just pointing at a very old tactic that Holocaust deniers, creationists and other deniers of science use. Telling others of implying very hard that no one has corrected the past mistakes, when in reality experts have done so already, and found even more evidence for the gassing taking place in specific concentration camps.
As I pointed in an early thread the taint you are talking about is like deniers of history claiming that experts still think that the rock that is being pointed as the one the pilgrims landed in America, Plymouth rock, is the real deal (they do not). If there were extreme deniers of the history of the pilgrims (like the Holocaust deniers are) then the historical deniers would not only report that the error has not been corrected, but also add the sick idea that the Pilgrims never came to America. :rolleyes:
As shown already Chen019 also used intelligence reports claiming that it discredited the gassing of the Jews and other enemies of the Nazis. The reports did not do that, they actually did point out that it was not credible that the Polish people (not including Jews) were being gassed, while the report still pointed out that the Jews were being exterminated anyhow.
‘Unfairly characterized’ is not the claim. The claim is that people have been fed lies, exaggerations and distortions about the events of the holocaust. Maybe even to the extent that there was no real holocaust.
The allies, of course.
De-nazification of europe.
Don’t forget that, despite the term ‘liberation of Europe’ being strewn around lavishly, command knew that a large portion of the population had been sympathetic to the Germans. Of course, espescially the Germans themselves needed to be shown how evil their regime had been.
Another propaganda tack for this purpose was to elevate the importance and numbers of the resistance movements. Plus criminalising collaboration.
Despite all this, as Gigobuster says, there is no denying a lot of awfull shit did happen that was absolutely criminal.
Indeed, but it has to be pointed out that years of experience on many subjects (I dealt with the moon hoax too) tells me that it is the deniers of history the ones that do exaggerate and distort not only the evidence but also distort the ways on how experts did deal with propaganda (the most typical tactic? Deny that errors were not corrected ever or to claim that contradictory evidence was never replied to by the experts), even when it was designed to make things worse.
I don’t doubt it, personally. That is the claim of the deniers.
I can understand the appeal of the idea, to some extent, as I can understand the appeal of the moon hoax theory and other conspiracy theories.
Just imagine if this was really true. It would be earth shattering. Imagine the consequences.
And that is exactly it, imagination. A giant ‘what if’.
I’ve been reading up on early America, and I’ve come to some shattering realizations:
-Thomas Jefferson said, “I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.” This is pretty clear evidence that he did not own slaves, contrary to the propagandists’ claims about him.
-He claimed that “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” This is clearly poor agricultural practice, as watering trees with blood would likely kill the tree. The propagandists who claim that he was a farmer are lying to you for their own ends.
-I visited Mount Vernon, and there were no slaves working there. Moreover, I asked one of the workers how much she was paid, and she told me she received $15/hour for her work. She strongly denied that there were any slaves within a hundred miles of her. Obviously the propagandists are trying to sell you a load of goods: slavery was not something that the founders of our nation practiced.
You do realize that the Holocaust denier in this thread is also a prominent advocate of the “black people are inherently intellectually inferior” argument on this board, right? Do you think that’s just a coincidence?
Actually as noted above the one doesn’t necessarily follow the other. A number of “scientific racialists/racists” argue that both Asians and Jews are genetically superior to WASPs in the brains department. It’s one argument some of them use to try to buttress their claims that they’re not actually racist.
Of course some of them are just flat-out white supremacists or otherwise anti-Semitic. But I think we’ve had some from both camps around here.
Can we please just pretend that I post a half-dozen sketchy cites about sodium levels in blood, the amount of blood in an average traitor’s body, the nitrogen uptake potential of tree roots, and some rando who believes the word for “blood” in Hungarian is the same as the word for “herbicide,” and therefore you’re wrong?
Because a lower death toll weakens the impact of the Holocaust or its historical legacy. I’m not saying this in a cynical or anti-Semitic way at all - quite to the contrary, in fact - but it is often in the interest of survivors or their descendants, after the fact, for an atrocity to have been worse rather than better, to gain more attention and impact (i.e., in a certain sense, it would weaken pro-American support by the world after 9/11 if only 300 were killed on 9/11, rather than 3,000.)
For the record, both Koch and Florstedt were executed for theft/embezzlement/corruption. Koch had been executed for killing two prisoners who had treated him for syphilis (to cover up the fact that he had syphilis) and for embezzlement, and Florstedt had been executed for stealing from Majdanek. Prisoners’ valuables were gathered and stored at Majdanek before being sent to the Reich.
*"No “Zionists” were killed in the World Trade Center, according to Ahmadinejad, because “one day earlier they were told not go to their workplace.”
“They announced that 3,000 people were killed in this incident, but there were no reports that reveal their names. Maybe you saw that, but I did not,” he told a gathering of the Iranian news media."*
*My Dearest Jew
Please do not go to the WTC in New York on Tuesday 9/11/2001
We are going to blow it up, because it obstructs our view of the moon.
Your Pal
Well, this has been an educational, however disheartening, thread. The main tactic for Holocaust Deniers seems to be vomiting up the same worthless factoids over and over as if they had not just been thoroughly debunked. Fascinating.
As opposed to the Holocaust Believers? What worthless factoids did you have in mind?
Hey Peter,
Sorry, I hadn’t come back to you.
In terms of the number of jewish prisoners who died in the camps I would go with option a) less than a million - probably around 300,000. I note that Wolfgang Sofsky, reported that about 450,000 concentration camp victims in total are registered by name (in some camps Poles were the majority of victims). Die Ordnung des Terrors, Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt 1993, p. 331.
The International Tracing Service (ITS) of Arolsen, Germany could open up their records and that would help resolve these types of questions.
The six million figure seems a very loose number that has become symbolic. It has been cited as the risk from beginning of the 20th century with Rabbi Stephen S. Wise at a Zionist conference in 1900.
Some other examples:
There over a hundred similar claims citing the 6 million figure. So the figure was regularly used by Zionist groups for some time before Hitler emerged.
In looking back at these claims, it’s interesting to note familiar atrocity propaganda appearing during WWI published in the Daily Telegraph:
More recently there have been WMD’s in Iraq of course. As they say, the truth is always the first victim of every war
What worthless factoids did you have in mind?