Holocaust denial

[mofo2]

This is a topic I have been looking into a little. The very term denial would indicate that you are saying something didn't happen, that you refute something existed, but most revisionists openly accept that the holocaust existed. It is just that they dispute certain aspects of the traditional claims and in some respects have been proven correct. Initial claims of 4 million Jews killed at Aushwitz were revised down to 1.1 million. Not a small number and it makes you wonder.

I have also been following the story of David Cole, an intelligent young man who raised some interesting questions about traditional historical claims about the holocaust. Money was offered by the Jewish Defense League for informationy about where Cole lived and seemingly Cole went into hiding. A few years later he retracted all of his former views apparently of his own volition.

Clearly in some nations it is a crime to deny the holocaust. Well, actually it is a crime to even question the extent of the holocaust. Nobody is denying the holocaust, but merely questioning the lack of evidence concerning numbers and documents supporting key elements. This should not be a crime and to classify it as such is Orwellian in nature.

It seems that a holocaust denier is anyone who questions official accounts of the holcaust. Obviously revisionist is a far more apt term. Just as you critizise the terrorism of Israel and become an anti-semite, you criticize the lack of evidence on the holocaust and become a denier.

It just sounds more extreme than the so called deniers themselves. Thoughts?

There are clearly people who believe that Holocaust never happened or have views that the Jews brought it upon themselves, the Numbers of people exterminated at Auschwitz isn't as important as the overall figure given by SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Hoettl in evidence to the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946 somewhere in the range 5.7 milllion to 6.0 million or even slightly higher.

[Gandalf]

This is a topic I have been looking into a little. The very term denial would indicate that you are saying something didn't happen, that you refute something existed, but most revisionists openly accept that the holocaust existed. It is just that they dispute certain aspects of the traditional claims and in some respects have been proven correct. Initial claims of 4 million Jews killed at Aushwitz were revised down to 1.1 million. Not a small number and it makes you wonder.

I have also been following the story of David Cole, an intelligent young man who raised some interesting questions about traditional historical claims about the holocaust. Money was offered by the Jewish Defense League for informationy about where Cole lived and seemingly Cole went into hiding. A few years later he retracted all of his former views apparently of his own volition.

Clearly in some nations it is a crime to deny the holocaust. Well, actually it is a crime to even question the extent of the holocaust. Nobody is denying the holocaust, but merely questioning the lack of evidence concerning numbers and documents supporting key elements. This should not be a crime and to classify it as such is Orwellian in nature.

It seems that a holocaust denier is anyone who questions official accounts of the holcaust. Obviously revisionist is a far more apt term. Just as you critizise the terrorism of Israel and become an anti-semite, you criticize the lack of evidence on the holocaust and become a denier.

It just sounds more extreme than the so called deniers themselves. Thoughts?

There are clearly people who believe that Holocaust never happened or have views that the Jews brought it upon themselves, the Numbers of people exterminated at Auschwitz isn't as important as the overall figure given by SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Hoettl in evidence to the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946 somewhere in the range 5.7 milllion to 6.0 million or even slightly higher.

Those numbers have been heavily revised over ensuing decades, even by accredited historians. Evidence obtained by a witness under duress is just one factor. One should also consider the other evidence available which is what many other historians have done.

Anyone who believes the initial points you made is a nutter, but some of the more extreme estimate do also appear to extremely questionable. The truth is likely much more conservative.

[mofo2]

This is a topic I have been looking into a little. The very term denial would indicate that you are saying something didn't happen, that you refute something existed, but most revisionists openly accept that the holocaust existed. It is just that they dispute certain aspects of the traditional claims and in some respects have been proven correct. Initial claims of 4 million Jews killed at Aushwitz were revised down to 1.1 million. Not a small number and it makes you wonder.

I have also been following the story of David Cole, an intelligent young man who raised some interesting questions about traditional historical claims about the holocaust. Money was offered by the Jewish Defense League for informationy about where Cole lived and seemingly Cole went into hiding. A few years later he retracted all of his former views apparently of his own volition.

Clearly in some nations it is a crime to deny the holocaust. Well, actually it is a crime to even question the extent of the holocaust. Nobody is denying the holocaust, but merely questioning the lack of evidence concerning numbers and documents supporting key elements. This should not be a crime and to classify it as such is Orwellian in nature.

It seems that a holocaust denier is anyone who questions official accounts of the holcaust. Obviously revisionist is a far more apt term. Just as you critizise the terrorism of Israel and become an anti-semite, you criticize the lack of evidence on the holocaust and become a denier.

It just sounds more extreme than the so called deniers themselves. Thoughts?

There are clearly people who believe that Holocaust never happened or have views that the Jews brought it upon themselves, the Numbers of people exterminated at Auschwitz isn't as important as the overall figure given by SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Hoettl in evidence to the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946 somewhere in the range 5.7 milllion to 6.0 million or even slightly higher.

Those numbers have been heavily revised over ensuing decades, even by accredited historians. Evidence obtained by a witness under duress is just one factor. One should also consider the other evidence available which is what many other historians have done.

Anyone who believes the initial points you made is a nutter, but some of the more extreme estimate do also appear to extremely questionable. The truth is likely much more conservative.

Heavily revised by who?

*Country
*Pre-war Jewish Population
**Estimated Murdered

Austria 185,000 50,000
Belgium 66,000 25,000
Bohemia/Moravia 118,000 78,000
Bulgaria 50,000 0
Denmark 8,000 60
Estonia 4,500 2,000
Finland 2,000 7
France 350,000 77,000
Germany 565,000 142,000
Greece 75,000 65,000
Hungary 825,000 550,000
Italy 44,500 7,500
Latvia 91,500 70,000
Lithuania 168,000 140,000
Luxembourg 3,500 1,000
Netherlands 140,000 100,000
Norway 1,700 762
Poland 3,300,000 3,000,000
Romania 609,000 270,000
Slovakia 89,000 71,000
Soviet Union 3,020,000 1,000,000
Yugoslavia 78,000 60,000

Totals

Population 9,793,700
Murdered 5,709,329

[Gandalf]

This is a topic I have been looking into a little. The very term denial would indicate that you are saying something didn't happen, that you refute something existed, but most revisionists openly accept that the holocaust existed. It is just that they dispute certain aspects of the traditional claims and in some respects have been proven correct. Initial claims of 4 million Jews killed at Aushwitz were revised down to 1.1 million. Not a small number and it makes you wonder.

I have also been following the story of David Cole, an intelligent young man who raised some interesting questions about traditional historical claims about the holocaust. Money was offered by the Jewish Defense League for informationy about where Cole lived and seemingly Cole went into hiding. A few years later he retracted all of his former views apparently of his own volition.

Clearly in some nations it is a crime to deny the holocaust. Well, actually it is a crime to even question the extent of the holocaust. Nobody is denying the holocaust, but merely questioning the lack of evidence concerning numbers and documents supporting key elements. This should not be a crime and to classify it as such is Orwellian in nature.

It seems that a holocaust denier is anyone who questions official accounts of the holcaust. Obviously revisionist is a far more apt term. Just as you critizise the terrorism of Israel and become an anti-semite, you criticize the lack of evidence on the holocaust and become a denier.

It just sounds more extreme than the so called deniers themselves. Thoughts?

There are clearly people who believe that Holocaust never happened or have views that the Jews brought it upon themselves, the Numbers of people exterminated at Auschwitz isn't as important as the overall figure given by SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Hoettl in evidence to the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946 somewhere in the range 5.7 milllion to 6.0 million or even slightly higher.

Those numbers have been heavily revised over ensuing decades, even by accredited historians. Evidence obtained by a witness under duress is just one factor. One should also consider the other evidence available which is what many other historians have done.

Anyone who believes the initial points you made is a nutter, but some of the more extreme estimate do also appear to extremely questionable. The truth is likely much more conservative.

Heavily revised by who?

*Country
*Pre-war Jewish Population
**Estimated Murdered

Austria 185,000 50,000
Belgium 66,000 25,000
Bohemia/Moravia 118,000 78,000
Bulgaria 50,000 0
Denmark 8,000 60
Estonia 4,500 2,000
Finland 2,000 7
France 350,000 77,000
Germany 565,000 142,000
Greece 75,000 65,000
Hungary 825,000 550,000
Italy 44,500 7,500
Latvia 91,500 70,000
Lithuania 168,000 140,000
Luxembourg 3,500 1,000
Netherlands 140,000 100,000
Norway 1,700 762
Poland 3,300,000 3,000,000
Romania 609,000 270,000
Slovakia 89,000 71,000
Soviet Union 3,020,000 1,000,000
Yugoslavia 78,000 60,000

Totals

Population 9,793,700
Murdered 5,709,329

Well, to cite just one, Raul Hilberg would disagree with you. Furthermore, you are claiming that they were murdered, when in fact disease and hunger were the main factors. Gas chambers were only a part of the process, as were arbitrary executions.

In the case of one holocaust the winners tell us to downplay the deaths by hunger and disease. In the later we are told to tally the numbers all up together as it helps to justify our own cause.

Greenbeanz, I am not displaying hypocrisy in the slightest. I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy in the history winners camp. I argued this point, but we could also argue about mass murder being carried out by the Stalinist Soviet Union, Mao period China, the Khymer Rouge. As I say, holocaust means mass slaughter and there hasn't been a singular slaughter in world history. The Nazi experience was deplorable, but it wasn't a Jewish event. Multiple millions of others died at the hands of the Nazis and deserve equal respect. It is in that respect that I am not being selective in the slightest. I am well aware of other things going on around the world, but in truth if you were to speak of Armenian genocide on here very few would respond. They get on with things, yet every week Netanyahu compares his neighbors to Hitler whilst actually doing what Hitler did himself. We cannot move on from the holocaust because it is forced on everyone constantly.

[mofo2]

This is a topic I have been looking into a little. The very term denial would indicate that you are saying something didn't happen, that you refute something existed, but most revisionists openly accept that the holocaust existed. It is just that they dispute certain aspects of the traditional claims and in some respects have been proven correct. Initial claims of 4 million Jews killed at Aushwitz were revised down to 1.1 million. Not a small number and it makes you wonder.

I have also been following the story of David Cole, an intelligent young man who raised some interesting questions about traditional historical claims about the holocaust. Money was offered by the Jewish Defense League for informationy about where Cole lived and seemingly Cole went into hiding. A few years later he retracted all of his former views apparently of his own volition.

Clearly in some nations it is a crime to deny the holocaust. Well, actually it is a crime to even question the extent of the holocaust. Nobody is denying the holocaust, but merely questioning the lack of evidence concerning numbers and documents supporting key elements. This should not be a crime and to classify it as such is Orwellian in nature.

It seems that a holocaust denier is anyone who questions official accounts of the holcaust. Obviously revisionist is a far more apt term. Just as you critizise the terrorism of Israel and become an anti-semite, you criticize the lack of evidence on the holocaust and become a denier.

It just sounds more extreme than the so called deniers themselves. Thoughts?

There are clearly people who believe that Holocaust never happened or have views that the Jews brought it upon themselves, the Numbers of people exterminated at Auschwitz isn't as important as the overall figure given by SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Hoettl in evidence to the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1946 somewhere in the range 5.7 milllion to 6.0 million or even slightly higher.

Those numbers have been heavily revised over ensuing decades, even by accredited historians. Evidence obtained by a witness under duress is just one factor. One should also consider the other evidence available which is what many other historians have done.

Anyone who believes the initial points you made is a nutter, but some of the more extreme estimate do also appear to extremely questionable. The truth is likely much more conservative.

Heavily revised by who?

*Country
*Pre-war Jewish Population
**Estimated Murdered

Austria 185,000 50,000
Belgium 66,000 25,000
Bohemia/Moravia 118,000 78,000
Bulgaria 50,000 0
Denmark 8,000 60
Estonia 4,500 2,000
Finland 2,000 7
France 350,000 77,000
Germany 565,000 142,000
Greece 75,000 65,000
Hungary 825,000 550,000
Italy 44,500 7,500
Latvia 91,500 70,000
Lithuania 168,000 140,000
Luxembourg 3,500 1,000
Netherlands 140,000 100,000
Norway 1,700 762
Poland 3,300,000 3,000,000
Romania 609,000 270,000
Slovakia 89,000 71,000
Soviet Union 3,020,000 1,000,000
Yugoslavia 78,000 60,000

Totals

Population 9,793,700
Murdered 5,709,329

Well, to cite just one, Raul Hilberg would disagree with you. Furthermore, you are claiming that they were murdered, when in fact disease and hunger were the main factors. Gas chambers were only a part of the process, as were arbitrary executions.

In the case of one holocaust the winners tell us to downplay the deaths by hunger and disease. In the later we are told to tally the numbers all up together as it helps to justify our own cause.

Greenbeanz, I am not displaying hypocrisy in the slightest. I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy in the history winners camp. I argued this point, but we could also argue about mass murder being carried out by the Stalinist Soviet Union, Mao period China, the Khymer Rouge. As I say, holocaust means mass slaughter and there hasn't been a singular slaughter in world history. The Nazi experience was deplorable, but it wasn't a Jewish event. Multiple millions of others died at the hands of the Nazis and deserve equal respect. It is in that respect that I am not being selective in the slightest. I am well aware of other things going on around the world, but in truth if you were to speak of Armenian genocide on here very few would respond. They get on with things, yet every week Netanyahu compares his neighbors to Hitler whilst actually doing what Hitler did himself. We cannot move on from the holocaust because it is forced on everyone constantly.

Disease and Hunger were major factors....you starve someone long enough, then work them into the ground, place them in conditions unsuitable for human habitat whilst denying them even the most basic of medicines and if the disease doesn't kill them the lack of nutrition and medication will!! However neither were as effective as 'Zyklon B' for the mass Extermination of the Jews, although many more thousands of children were killed in medical experiments!!

You have it all wrong...being told that we should never forget is not Having it forced upon us, it is a constant reminder of what true evil is capable of and it is a very important chapter of History...your views my friend are extremely fucked up!

[TitoFan]

Atrocities against humankind should be viewed as just that... atrocities against humankind. When you start saying... oh but it was 1 million, not 6 million... or... oh but your side also committed atrocious acts too... or... oh but it wasn't just Jews, it was other people too... you're purposely trying to downplay just how horrible the events of that time were, and doing a huge disservice to the memory of what actually happened.

[El Kabong]

Miles, lots of Indians died of disease too....another double standard of yours