That is testimony, which we will get to. The article documents that 35,000 died at Belsen at the end of the war due to typhus. From the article …
“She (Anne Frank - g) was on one of the last trains to Germany before the Nazi occupation of Holland crumbled. Six months later, aged 15, she died an anonymous death, one of some 35,000 casualties of typhus that ravaged the Bergen-Belsen camp.”
How many Jews were killed in the holocaust? It seems me reasonable to examine the evidence before reaching a conclusion. So, I’ll examine the photographic, the physical, the documentary, and testimonial evidence.
We are starting with photographic evidence. just like Oprah did. If you know of any, let’s see it. Tomorrow I’ll try to summarize the photographic evidence and move on to physical evidence.
This is not accurate. Many murder cases begin with the disappearance of a person or more than one person. Certainly, it is easier to prosecute a murder case when one has a dead body with evidence of a hostile cause of death. However, one need not have the body available to begin the investigation, nor is the body required for a trial. Multiple investigations by separate, independent groups in 1945 and 1946 found that between 5.65 and 5.85 million Jews had “disappeared” from Europe between 1940 and 1945. (The number has been rounded, in popular culture, to 6 million, but the original estimates exceeding 5.5 millions were firmly established.)
That was sufficient cause to begin an investigation into their murders.
There was ample evidence from eyewitnesses, records kept by the Nazis, and human remains to establish that large numbers of Jews were murdered by Einsatzgruppen in the early years of the war and the various extermination camps established beginning in 1942.
Now, while I am sure that you will try to play games with the other evidence as this thread proceeds, your initial claim is starkly wrong and we are free to dismiss the rest of your silliness based on your initial error.
By which statement you seem to be saying that you really do not care about the actual discussion. That, in turn, would lead me to believe that you are simply trolling.
If you want to continue, you would be well advised to not give any of the staff a reason to believe that you are just posting to yank chains.
I was ready to dismiss this for what it really is – anti-semitic trolling masquerading as pseudo-intellectual glurge. But since Oprah will be presenting photographic evidence, well, this I gotta see.
It would be informative to know the provenance of each of the photos you posted. Who took them, where, when, who is pictured. I realize that precise information is most likely not available to you, but, it would be interesting to know.
For purposes of discussion why not pick 1 or 2 photos and discuss their significance?
So are you saying the same thing was going on in Germany? Are you saying that Germany was in a war with the Jews? And that what was happening in Auschwitz and other camps were essentially a form of combat between two sides in a war?
That would be documentary evidence, which you said you don’t want to deal with yet. Deal with the photos, or accept discussion about documents, your choice.
Why is everyone letting Gack derail the thread and dictate what sorts of evidence in what order should be considered? Gack, layout your answers to the below in one post, or link to websites that explain your views in one post.
In the interest of saving everybody a lot of time and before you are banned by the board moderators for this particularly vile poison you appear to enjoy drooling out by your plodding lecturing style, can you summarize in a few concise sentences what you hope to gain by this. Because you must know by now that you have not a prayer in hell of convincing a single person with a functioning brain that the Holocaust was something other than what it was - a systematic murder of Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals and others deemed inferior by Hitler & Co.
For that matter, Japan held 27,465 U.S. soldiers as prisoners of war. The Japanese were not known for humane treatment of prisoners, and11,107 died while in captivity. That’s about 40%.
Now let’s look at official German figures (not any of those apologist estimates!)
Dachau held about 206,000 prisoners during 1933-1945 and had 31,000 registered deaths. For Auschwitz the figures (1940-1944) are 334,785 prisoners and 109,215 recorded deaths. That’s about 26% – closer to the Japanese percentage than the Americans.
My question is, if the Nazis weren’t *trying *to kill their prisoners, how could they possibly have tolerated a death rate more than 17x the Americans?
I agree that the issue of photographic evidence seems like a sidetrack. Any lack of photographs can show either that crimes didn’t occur or that crimes weren’t photographed. So the number of photographs seems like a moot point.
Same thing with a typhus epidemic that may have killed 35,000 people at Belsen. It doesn’t really say anything about the overall question of genocide.
To me, the most damning evidence against the Nazis is that in a twelve year period approximately twelve million people died in the Nazi camps. The fact that they were alive in 1933 and dead in 1945 is pretty hard to refute - twelve million people don’t just get misplaced even in the middle of a war. And that many people don’t die in that amount of time just from general neglect - there has to be an intentional program of killing people.
I haven’t said anything about the photos. I have not examined them closely. I have asked you to discuss what you know about 1 or 2 of them and then I will examine them and give them some thought.
Also, to answer the the question - why examine the photographic evidence first?, it is the first evidence that I saw of the holocaust. It is the evidence that most persons are familiar with.
