What gives Holocaust denial such an appeal?

[Ham]

I can see it now..

"Well, we have the formost specialist in death technology, and he's willing to testify as an expert, for mere peanuts, mine Fuhrer.."

I wonder how they felt when they found out he didn't have a degree in engineering..

[Ham]

Maybe they made him work it off by schlepping rocks back from europe..

[What The Hey]

So you wanted a straight meaning of the word Holocaust? OK.

The English word holocaust is a borrowing from Late Latin holocaustum "a burnt offering," which was borrowed in its turn from Greek holócauston "something wholly bumt." In addition to these meanings, it has acquired in English the further senses of "complete consumption by fire; complete destruction, esp. of a large number of persons ... (From: Desceptive Linguistic Structures in the Phrase 'The Holocaust').

I guess we can all agree that the word Holocaust therefore means: "something burnt - more specifically, something wholly burnt". I don't have any problem with that definition if you also agree with that definition. But this is where we also disagree - because it is here where the Holocaust exterminiation story actually falls apart according to that defintion, as it is claimed (by Holocaust survivor testimony) that the Nazi's cremated the Jews on outdoor grates after they were gassed. Is that even remotely possible? OK then. Why don't we take a closer look at an outdoor cremation process?

We're going to cremate a leg of lamb to help everyone better understand that outdoor cremation process. (This video helps explain and show just how physically impossible it would have been for the Nazi's to have cremated the Jews on outdoor grates using wood as the fuel to start the cremation.) We'll start out with a 12-1/2 lb leg of lamb and use 45 lbs of wood - that's close to 3 times the weight of the leg of lamb. It is also claimed the Nazi's poured an inflammable liquid over the bodies to help them burn. We've also poured gasoline over the leg of lamb to help it start burning.

The Holocaust eyewitness survivor account says, "The spring winds brought with them the smell of burning bodies from the nearby extermination camps. We breathed in the stench of smoldering corpses ... We heard the clatter of the excavators for days and nights on end ... At night we gazed at skies red from the flames. Sometimes you could also see tounges of flame rising into the night ...." (From: The Extermination Machine. p.177 - by: Yitzhak Arad).

Arad also writes on p.174 of the same book, "the concrete pillars were 70 centimeters high". Now we're trying to cremate just a 12-1/2 lb. leg of lamb (not a human body which would weigh much more) at a distance of only 39 cm - which is about half that distance - so cremating a 12-1/2 lb leg of lamb should be fairly easy to do - (if it is possible). Again, we're attempting to cremate a 12-1/2 lb leg of lamb, where they (the Holocaust survivors) claim the Nazi's stacked bodies to a height of 2 meters - that's quite a considerable distance - (which Arad claims) "Between 2,000 and 2,500 bodies - sometimes up to 3,000 - would be piled on the roaster." (Ibid p.175)

Arad goes on to say, "The entire construction, with the bodies, was quickly engulfed in fire. ... At first a inflammable liquid was poured on the bodies to help them burn, but later this was considered unnecessary..." (Ibid p175)

Is cremation in this manner even remotely possible? Is what Arad saying true? Remember, he also said "the spring winds were blowing." Watch the video, then decide for yourself if cremating thousands of Jews was really possible for the Nazi's to have done the way Ytzhak Arad claims.

Cremating a leg of Lamb to Understand the Cremation Process

Edited October 23, 2007 by What The Hey

[WordWolf]

One of the more consistent things here is you can always count on WTH not retaining

any knowledge posted here on the GSC.

We discussed how the specific-HOW the people were killed by the Nazis

is secondary to THAT they were killed by the Nazis,

and that even WHO was wiped out was secondary to

THAT many people were wiped out,

but WTH's fixated.

Either it's a discussion of crematoriums or he might as well not be in it.

So, with lots of different definitions of "Holocaust" in use-

even on websites he quoted,

he deliberately goes for an archaism, one that no longer conveys the meaning

used in discussions. He uses the only one fixated on crematoriums.

"I guess we can all agree that Holocaust means 'something burnt.'"

No, that would make every backyard barbecue a "Holocaust", which perverts

the plain English discussion the rest of us are capable of having.

With WTH unable or unwilling to even communicate fairly on what the

Holocaust WAS, or means in regular use, what's the point in trying to

follow his tortured "logic"?

[Ham]

What I wonder is..

The Zundel trial. Faurisson contacted leuchter, and leuchter was paid something like $35,000 to testify as an "expert"..

Didn't they check his credentials? Or did they put him on the stand, with full knowledge that he only had a bachellor's in HISTORY?

$35,000 for an "expert" expert would be rather cheap..

maybe they thought if they could just put an oaf on the stand, and the other side beat him up over his credentials.. the judge and jury would pity the poor fools..

"your honor, I object"

"on what grounds?"

"well, it maligns the defense."

"you mean, it makes you look like morons?"

"well, yes..."

[Ham]

It's like.. you put a guy on the stand.. an "expert(?)"..

either way you look at it..

if they didn't know his qualifications..

or if they did, and put him on anyway..

the only word that I can find to describe this..

morons..

"your honor, we demand a mistrial.."

"on what grounds?"

"because we just can't put on a rational defense.."

Interesting strategy though. Shift the blame. Suggest that it's just, the rest of the whole world that's wrong..

[doojable]

So you wanted a straight meaning of the word Holocaust? OK.

The English word holocaust is a borrowing from Late Latin holocaustum "a burnt offering," which was borrowed in its turn from Greek holócauston "something wholly bumt." In addition to these meanings, it has acquired in English the further senses of "complete consumption by fire; complete destruction, esp. of a large number of persons ... (From: Desceptive Linguistic Structures in the Phrase 'The Holocaust').

I guess we can all agree that the word Holocaust therefore means: "something burnt - more specifically, something wholly burnt". I don't have any problem with that definition if you also agree with that definition. But this is where we also disagree - because it is here where the Holocaust exterminiation story actually falls apart according to that defintion, as it is claimed (by Holocaust survivor testimony) Is that even remotely possible? OK then. Why don't we take a closer look at an outdoor cremation process?

So I guess the Bible is lying when it refers to burnt offerings as welll.

Your literal approach to this is where your argument falls apart.

"Holocaust" can refer figuratively to "total destruction and annihilation."

To address that clip:

So a fresh, moist, leg of lamb won't burn. So what? These bodies were ematiated from starvation and most likely not "fresh."

Oh and I saw in the book that the bodies were burned in ditches and not out on an open beach. The set-up was not honest with this fact, either.

Just ask anyone that ever lived in Emporia for any length of time, the stench is awful.

Still - you chose to ignore THAT millions of people were killed.

Edited October 23, 2007 by doojable

[What The Hey]

...

To address that clip:

So a fresh, moist, leg of lamb won't burn. So what? These bodies were ematiated from starvation and most likely not "fresh." Oh and I saw in the book that the bodies were burned in ditches and not out on an open beach. The set-up was not honest with this fact, either. Just ask anyone that ever lived in Emporia for any length of time, the stench is awful. Still - you chose to ignore THAT millions of people were killed.

Rewind and review that clip again. That leg of lamb initially weighed only 12-1/2 pounds. It ultimately took 135 lbs. of wood to "cremate" that 12-1/2 lb. leg of lamb - and that was, when there was no wind blowing. (However, Arad's book claims there was a "spring breeze" blowing when the Nazi's were cremating the Jews. Again, that's his claim, not mine.)

But let's do a little math. Let's say an ematiated human body weighs 10 times what that leg of lamb weighed, around 125 lbs. for example. A 125 lb. human is fairly close to what an ematiated human might possibly weigh, they could possibly weigh less. But one would likewise have to increase the amount of wood to cremate that 125 lb. body, to also ten times the amount of wood - to be fair. Mathmatically then, it would take 1,2500 lbs. of wood to creamate just one 125 lb. ematiated body, or nearly 1000 lbs. of wood if the body weighed only 100 lbs. Either way, that's almost a half a ton of wood for just one body.

Question: If it would take nearly a half a ton to cremate just one ematiated human being, where did the Nazi's find enough wood to cremate 6 million Jews? The black forest perhaps? (Remember, this is the testimony of a holocaust survivor - that the Nazi's used wood for the fuel to cremate those bodies - and then also used an inflammable liquid to start the burning.)

Question: Where did they store all that wood? Did they have enough space to store nearly 3+ million tons of wood to cremate 6 million Jews - or not?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see you also failed to answer half the questions from post# 341 in regards to the Zyklon gas we've been told the Nazi's used to gas the Jews.

But -

1. How could they smoke in a place with vapors from a flammable and explosive gas?

2. How could all of that be done near the doors of the crematory ovens in which they were burning thousands of bodies?

3. How could they enter into a gas chamber still full of gas to handle those bodies that were also full of gas, and that immediately after the opening of the door and not kill themselves in the process?

4. How could the Nazi's devote themselves to such a gigantic job for some hours - when specialists, equipped with masks, can only remain in such an atmosphere for several minutes and on condition that they only devote themselves to efforts that do not go beyond the effort required to open windows that are easy to open?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The more one knows about the Zyklon gas (the Nazis would have exterminated and killed themselves in the process of gassing the Jews using the methods people claim they did) and the cremation process (millions of tons of wood would also likewise be needed to cremate those millions of Jews later on) the more one realizes the Holocaust legend is (regardless what people claim it is) is just that - a myth.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a picture of a door to a "Nazi gas chamber". It is a "Nazi gas chamber door" the US Holocaust Museum claims and tells people who vist the museum it is. (It is actually an air-raid, bomb shelter door. They are banking on people's ignorance and hoping people will except it as fact and not ask any questions.)

Here is picture of a real gas chamber door:

But people aren't expected or supposed to know the difference between these doors (remain and stay ignorant) and simpy accept their Holocaust story as historical fact. And by all means, - don't bother asking them any REAL questions about the Holocaust!

Edited October 24, 2007 by What The Hey

[WordWolf]

One of the more consistent things here is you can always count on WTH not retaining

any knowledge posted here on the GSC.

We discussed how the specific-HOW the people were killed by the Nazis

is secondary to THAT they were killed by the Nazis,

and that even WHO was wiped out was secondary to

THAT many people were wiped out,

but WTH's fixated.

Either it's a discussion of crematoriums or he might as well not be in it.

[doojable]

So a fresh, moist, leg of lamb won't burn. So what? These bodies were ematiated from starvation and most likely not "fresh."

MOIST - therefore there is MORE water in the leg of lamb than there would be in a ematiated body. DUH!

Oh and I saw in the book that the bodies were burned in ditchesand not out on an open beach. The set-up was not honest with this fact, either. Just ask anyone that ever lived in Emporia for any length of time, the stench is awful. Still - you chose to ignore THAT millions of people were killed.

A DITCH! NOT under pylons in on flat land so that wind could blow the heat out. Smell could carry on any slight breeze.

I'm not qualified to discuss the Zylon. I'm honest enough to not try.

Edited October 24, 2007 by doojable

[Ham]

I'm not qualified to discuss the Zylon. I'm honest enough to not try.

That's what the history major amateur "engineer" should have said too..

soo.. we have these BIG BIG buildings.. and evidence they had sufficient poison to do the job..the manpower.. the railways and public transportation to move enough people..

a burning HATRED for the "enemy"..

Motive, opportunity, MEANS..

setting all that aside for just one moment.

What happened to all of those people? Yeah.. the MILLIONS of people shuffled off from one ghetto to another..

The ghettos were EMPTIED. The people.. GONE. Where'd they go? England? No.. The U.S.? Nope.. where are their graves?

I know, I know.. they sent them to the moon... naw, can't be.. the first moon mission was started in the sixties. maybe the inside of the earth... naw. Last I checked, it wasn't hollow..

hmm. I'm running out of ideas here..

"Wherever" they went, apparently they didn't exactly need shoes or gold teeth.. or hair, or clothes.. or money..

[What The Hey]

MOIST - therefore there is MORE water in the leg of lamb than there would be in a ematiated body. DUH!

You're claiming the bodies were ematiated - not dehydrated. There is no cause or reason to believe the bodies were dehydrated before they were cremated - unless you are making the claim the Nazi's also had dehydrators, and that they dehydrated the bodies before they cremated them!

A DITCH! NOT under pylons in on flat land so that wind could blow the heat out. Smell could carry on any slight breeze.

Arad writes that the concrete pillars were 70 centimeters high, and the bodies were arranged in layers to a height of 2 meters - anywhere from 2,000 to 3,000 bodies would be piled high on the roaster. (Also, there was only one 12-1/2 lb. leg of lamb on the grill in this video. They did not layer 2,000-3,000 legs of lamb on the grill to replicate what Arad claims in his book. Again, a single leg of lamb would have been much easier to cremate rather than layers of lamb.)

In the video we saw even a slight wind would make the majority of the heat escape, regardless if the bodies were burned in ditches or out in the open. According to Arad, they still had wind therefore the heat would still escape. Also, if the Nazi's really wanted to cremate the bodies effectively, then they wouldn't have used grates or grills as Arad claims they did, but they would have laid the bodies directly on the wood so as the wood sank the bodies would likewise sink - with the body staying close to the heat.

Of course, Arad is going on the premise that the bodies themselves burned like wood. In the video, if you were to take the wood away, the lamb itself would quit burning. According to the eyewitnesses in Arad's book, you just light the fire and the fire takes care of itself after that. Also on page 111 of Arad's book, he mentions a list of occupations in the death part of the camp, ranging from people who pulled the gold teeth out of the mouths of the dead, to gas chamber, to tube cleaners, to kitchen and service workers. But they don't mention anyone who hauled the wood or tended the fire. (Or did they just simply fail to mention this particular occupation? That's hardly believable.)

Also on the maps there isn't even a warehouse for storing the wood. There is minute detail shown on the maps, even showing the latrines and the SS ironing room, but nowhere on the maps is there a storehouse for all the wood. (Was this fact also overlooked? Again, that's hardly believable given the amount of detail that is on the maps.) There isn't even a wood shed listed on any of the maps.

The video says that 1.5 million people were cremated (at all three camps) times 300 lbs. of wood (a low estimate of wood per person) which would equal .45 billion lbs. of wood. Maybe the maps were made before the cremation operations began? Again that's hard to believe, as all the maps show and include the grills.

The reason the leg of lamb was cremated in this video was to gain further insight into cremating a human body, and also to show just how difficult that would be according to the claims made in Arad's book. Were those conditions perfectly replicated? Hardly, given the fact the lamb was burned on a beach out in the open instead of a ditch. It seems you are trying to make a case resting solely on that fact, and that the results from burning bodies in a ditch would be different than burning bodies out in the open. Again, Arad claims that a wind was blowing, and regardless if the bodies were cremated in a ditch or in the open, a blowing wind would still cause the heat to escape. If your trying to make a claim the results would be somehow different, then this is not a very strong argument you are making at best.

I'm not qualified to discuss the Zylon. I'm honest enough to not try.

At least I appreciate your honesty on this point.

[Ham]

Hmm. Maybe they were abducted by aliens..

naw.. ususally the abductees are "returned".. "they" don't want to keep you. Then they have to feed you, stop the saucer for potty breaks.. gets tiring. "Can't you just wait for a couple more hunderd million miles? Sheesh.."

running out of options here..

MILLIONS of people just don't disappear, without ordinarily leaving some kind of artifacts or something..

[doojable]

WTH - when they take a look at the book - there is a line that is ignored....and ithe word "ditch" is there. I don't know how to get a still of it and I have to watch it again to get the precise wording.

I'll get it later.

[What The Hey]

That's what the history major amateur "engineer" should have said too..

.....

Oh so we're still trying to discredit Fred A. Luechter's degree? I wonder why you haven't bothered to bring up and mention (and likewise discredit) Simon Wiesenthal's (ahem) engineering degree? In his 1948 interrogation, Wiesenthal declared that "between 1939 and 1941" he was a "Soviet chief engineer working in Lvov and Odessa." (Interrogation of S. Wiesenthal, May 27, 1948, pp. 1-2).

Consistent with that, he stated in his 1949 declaration that from December 1939 to April 1940 he worked as an architect in the Black Sea port of Odessa. But according to his autobiography, he spent the period between mid-September 1939 and June 1941 in Soviet-ruled Lvov, where he: worked "as a mechanic in a factory that produced bedsprings." (The Murderers Among Us, p. 27.)

Wiesenthal's reputation as a moral authority is undeserved. The man whom The Washington Post has called the "Holocaust's Avenging Angel" (Quoted in: M. Weber, "'Nazi Hunter' Caught Lying," The Spotlight (Washington, DC), Oct. 26, 1981, p. 9.) has a little known but well-documented record of reckless disregard for truth.

He (Simon Wiesenthal) has lied about his own wartime experiences, misrepresented his postwar "Nazi-hunting" achievements, and has spread vile falsehoods about alleged German atrocities.

But let's not bring up and discuss or discredit the "engineering degree" of this "Holocaust Angel" - Simon Wiesenthal. We would rater discuss (parrott the Holocaust Promotion Lobby) in an attempt to discredit the engineering degree of Fred A. Leuchter whose findings have been verified over and over by numerous engineers with impeccable degrees. Unfortuantely, the same can't be said for Simon Wiesenthal in regard to his "engineering degree".

[Ham]

Oh so we're still trying to discredit Fred A. Luechter's degree?

umm.. he didn't have one to discredit. One in engineering, that is.

Ironic that he has one in history..

but still.. "where did the people go.."?

It's a straw man argument to claim that the "opposition" claims they were all gassed, and then try to refute it..

No.. they were shot, suffocated.. worked to death, starved.. etc. etc.

A lot of them died in route to the camps..

and yes, MANY were gassed..

The report from Russia from Himmler simply stated that some 363,211 were "executed". Only took them three months of savagery..

I recall seeing a television program on revisionism a few years ago which closed with Deborah Lipstadt making some statement to the effect that: the real purpose of Holocaust revisionism is to make National Socialism an acceptable political alternative again. I normally don't agree with anything a Jew says, but I recall exclaiming, 'Bingo! Got it in one! Give that lady a cigar!'" -- "On Revisionism" by Harold Covington (writing under the pseudonym Winston Smith), NSNet Bulletin #5, July 24, 1996

Ya know.. some people think that we play out this scenario, one lifetime after another..

I wonder how one would feel on the "wrong end" of the political agenda they promoted the lifetime before..

Edited October 25, 2007 by Mr. Hammeroni

[doojable]

Okay - I'm not sure if I read that page correctly, so I'm looking for a better look at the quote. I may have misread how the ditches were used - but I have no context to judge - so I'm still researching.

I did find this quote: The Final Solution

These camps were made to break the prisoners down psychically and physically. The food and the sanitation was useless and the forced labour inhuman.

The methods of extermination in the death camps varied: Mass extermination with machine guns, gassing with(I corrected spelling here) diesel exhaust and, from 1942 and until the end of the war, gassing in gas chambers.

In the gas chambers thousands of inmates could be killed every day, and at the end of the war the number of exterminations per day was set up - to complete "the final solution" before the allied armies would reach the camps.

Like I said, there were a lot of ways used to kill the prisoners. And this still begs the question as to WHY it is acceptable to anyone that all these people were rounded up like cattle, imprisoned, and killed.

Treblinka

Apparently the diesel fumes were popular:

The killing process was very similar to the ones in Belzec and Sobibor. The prisoner arrived by train and were told they were taken to other work camps, but first they had to take a shower. They were told to get undressed and to get in the shower. When everyone was inside the doors were locked from the outside and out of the showerheads came fumes from a diesel-engine. They all died within a short period of time. In September 1942 there were built several of new and bigger gas-chambers to increase the effectiveness.

Diesel fumes are...umm... GAS. It doesn't have to be cyanide gas.

Edited October 25, 2007 by doojable

[doojable]

I found my quote from the book Here

I was wrong about the ditches from that quote in the film (on page 177,) but there is another reference not used in the film:

An incinerator from the burning of bodies was situated about 10 meters beyond the large gas chamber building. It had the shape of a cement pit about one meter deep and 20 meters long. A series of furnaces covered on the top with four rows of rails extended along the entire length of one of the walls of the pit. The bodies were laid on the rails, caught fire from the flames burning in the furnaces and burned. About 1000 bodies were burned simultaneously. The burning process lasted up to five hours.

The quote from the book is there along with other points.

It's a bit more gruesome than I want to post.

BTW - If you've ever been to a bonfire, you know how hot a big pile of wood can get.

Oh - one more thing WTH:

The already decomposed corpses were dragged out of the pits with an excavator and burned on huge roasters in an already dug, but still empty pit. The roasters consisted of old railway rails, which were lain over concrete foundations.

There's more at the link to refute the claims of that film. I suggest reading it thoroughly.

Edited October 25, 2007 by doojable

[What The Hey]

.....

Apparently the diesel fumes were popular:

Diesel fumes are...umm... GAS. It doesn't have to be cyanide gas.

The "diesel gas" story has also been debunked - and with a lot more ease then the Zyklon gas stories I might add. Many Holocaust claims have been abandoned, the diesel gas story being one of many. For example: At one time it was alleged that the Germans gassed Jews at Dachau, Buchenwald and other concentration camps in Germany proper. That part of the extermination story proved so untenable that it was abandoned more than 20 years ago.

No serious historian now supports the once supposedly proven story of "extermination camps" in the territory of the old German Reich. Even famed "Nazi hunter" Simon Wiesenthal has acknowledged that "there were no extermination camps on German soil." (Books and Bookmen, London, April 1975, p. 5, and in Stars and Stripes (Europe), Jan. 24, 1993, p. 14.)

The results published in the Leuchter Report are the important thing. Categorically, none of the facilities examined at Auschwitz, Birkenau or Lublin (Majdanek) could have supported, or in fact did support, multiple executions utilizing hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide or any other allegedly or factually lethal gas. Based upon very generous maximum usage rates for all the alleged gas chambers, totalling 1,693 persons per week, and assuming these facilities could support gas executions, it would have required sixty-eight (68) years to execute the alleged number of six million persons.

This must mean the Third Reich was in existence for some seventy-five (75) years. Promoting these facilities as being capable of effecting mass, multiple or even singular executions is both ludicrous and insulting to every individual on this planet. Further, those who do promote this mistruth are negligent and irresponsible for not investigating these facilities earlier and ascertaining the truth before indoctrinating the world with what may have become the greatest propaganda ploy in history.

[doojable]

You insist on cherry picking the facts...

[Ham]

brought to the top for recent enquiry.

[chockfull]

thx Ham - it ties right in to the anti semitic questions.

[Ham]

Maybe this is a question the way *disciples* in Ann Arbor can answer..

you guys just KNOW the questions are coming..

[Ham]

how are you going to answer them..