The Holocaust: The Forbidden History.

Everyone knows she died of typhus. so what?

 

Why were there so many jewish survivors? Seriously? your argument now is there were too many jewish survivors for the holocaust to be real?
Boy that one is rates all star in the halls of intellectual bankruptcy.

One of the SS members was in Einsatzgruppen C and the other was an adjunct at HQ in Berlin. quite proud of their roles and "achievements" before the dirty jews, commies, murderous allies and traitors brought down der furher.
Both conversations happened over a long weekend with "family" and I gotta say I was disgusted. Made quite the fuss about it actually and much shouting ensued. They and their wives left at 6 am the next morning. I was happy.

The other three were apparently simple german patriots fighting in the wehrmacht and not surprisingly didn't like their own nazi relatives all that much.

Needless to say no more "family" reunions of that type have or will take place.

 

Anne Frank and most of her family were allowed to hang out in Auschwitz for several months. Weaklings like herself were supposed to have been taken right off the train and killed that day (so the story goes). But she was later taken to another camp where she died of typhus.

Her dad, who was caught cheating the Nazis, was allowed as a sick middle-aged Jew to hang out at the camp hospital and stay there in the camp from Sept 1944 until the liberation by Soviets in January 1945.

How could the SS be so stupid, so incopetent as to let the family of Jew who cheated the Nazis live while they were all in "Death Camps?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Frank

http://www.sunray22b.net/jews_helped_nazis.htm

 

You just destroyed your credibility again. You'd already done it in post #170 when you tried to play down the sigificance of the fact that the government gives us an upside-down version of what it does in other countries.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/american-imperialism.371897/

There's a point at which things are so clear that sophistry simply becomes ineffective. If the sophists try to obfuscate something that's super-clear, they have to say some pretty lame things. You've done that several times now. Your credibility is shot. You can pretend all you want.

 

That's right, run away with tail firmly between legs. My credibility?

You couldn't be more clownish or amateurish in your "set up" and as for the "swing", looks like you got a mean slice there.

anytime you can pull out an actual fact that remotely supports your outlandish claims, I'll be happy to acknowlege it, but I only expect to live for the next 25 or so years, so please hurry.

 

Acccchhhh, once again, the sophistic nonsense about survivors proving there was no holocaust. Nothing like obfuscation.

Anne was not ill when she was transported with her family. ALL children under the age of 15 were exterminated from her transport lot. But she was already 15 and therefore selected for labor. She contracted typhus IN THE FRIGGIN CAMP. Even logic is defied in denialist nonsense.


Boy its amazing how you can't actually do anything more that offer up superficial, uninformed excuses and rationales. check that, its not amazing, its typical denialist jew hating, nazi loving behavior.

 

So she died at the actions of the Nazi's. I agree.

 

So she was forced into a crowed camp with other sick people and died. Who put her in that camp?

 

It was a great injustice. The revisionists don't dispute this. They say there were no gas chambers in the camps. They don't say the camps weren't there or the inmates deserved to be there. You're misrepresenting the revisionists' position to mislead the viewers.

 

Yes the Nazis were horrible. You can quibble about the other very important issues but on that we agree. They were a horrible regime that was rightfully destroyed. Yes?

 

What good does it do you to play dumb* when all the viewers can see the proof?
http://www.flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=12196&start=0
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-moon-missions-were-faked-in-a-studio.347662/
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...orted-9-11-terrorists.456423/#post-1066183060


*
http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
(excerpt)
---------------------------------
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

 

No worse than the American government.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/american-imperialism.371897/

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/US_Interventions_WBlumZ.html

 

Ok. Now we are done.

 

Oh dear. Well, considering the crap you post as "objective truth" I defer to your in depth expertise in dumb.

You do seem to fit #9 to a tee, considering you have yet to present any evidence that there were no gassings and that there was no holocaust. While systematically ignoring actual evidence, not to mention the direct debunking of much of your sophistic bullshit.

 

Come on man, you can't possibly think that there are holocaust deniers who aren't nazi apologists?

 

Foolish me I know. They are more than just apologists though. They are active supporters

 

(from post #235)

(from post #238 )

You seem to be playing dumb about the revisionist version of what the Germans did and why they did it. You can check it out here.
http://www.flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=12196&start=0

I haven't formed a firm opinion yet as it's all second-hand info but it does make sense. We can at least be sure that it didn't happen the way the official story says it happened as some government lies are very apparent.

If you're going to be against something, you should know what it is that you're against. If you're not playing dumb and you're really just not familiar with with the revisionist version, you should get familiar with it so you can talk about it intelligently.

Getting familiar with it won't make you a fascist.

 

Of course it's a lie to think that the SS had a policy of sending those children under 15 almost immediately to death at Auschwitz. Like Anne Frank there many cases of young children spared and even moved to other camps. Two kids just in the below example were allowed to be born in Auschwitz.


http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/auschwitz-survivors/
Over a dozen young Jewish kids and babies allowed to survive as supposed death camp.

Your Holocaust tales have more holes in them than Swiss Cheese.

 

It wasn't a lie, it was a POLICY. I was incorrect tho, the cut off age wasn't 15 it was 13.

Over a dozen young jewish kids (all over 13) and babies were found alive?????? Oh my god of course that means the sorting criteria was another lie. How much lamer can you get in your arguments.

Your holocaust "tales" look and smell like big piles of bullshit, so I'll take the cheese everytime.

 

What bullshit. "i haven't formed a firm opinion yet". The classic ploy, but unfortunately Scott, your posting history give "lie" to your posturing.

I am even more familiar with the "revisionist" version of events than you are. But you haven't done any homework other than lap up the crap. You haven't thoroughly investigated the revisionist claims, you refuse to even acknowledge any kind of response that shows the revisionist version to be lies and garbage. Actual facts seem to whizz right by you as you pathetically return time and again to the same lame debunked sources.

I will commend you however for being a prototypical revisionist, from the content to the tactics. Consistent in your intellectual intransigence.
A poster boy if you will.

 

Please link to some specific examples that we can analyze.

 

I have repeatedly provided you with evidence.

You have repeatedly ignored such evidence.

You claim you haven't read mein kampf, yet you have all kinds of distorted ideas about Hilter's vision and the actions he took in his insatiable desire to establish the 1,000 year reich.
You claim you haven't read or viewed the Eichmann testimony, yet dismiss it out of hand.
You repeatedly ignore devasting rebuttal evidence of the usual revisionist bullshit claims.
You consistently employ the obvious revisionist rhetorical tactics that all of us familiar with jew hating nazi apologist can readily identify.

I do understand the impenetrable wall of delusion, lies, hatred, and political ideology that you and yours have built to defend intellectually dishonesty and deep seated hatred.

for your reading enjoyment, from their own mouths:

http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/denial/testimony.txt

 

Read this post from another thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...t-didnt-happen.336026/page-19#post-1067435313

 

Keep posting the same ol' crap, and when provided with actual evidence, you ignore it and regurgitated the same crap again. Bounces right of the ol' noggin everytime.

this behavior couldn't be more clownish if you tried.

 

Testimony is not actual evidence. I provide physical evidence and you respond with testimony. As I said before, physical evidence trumps testimony as the people giving he testimony can lie because they're being threatened, blackmailed, bribed, or tortured. Let's hear you analyze some of the physical evidence.

(post #2)
http://www.flinttalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=12196&start=0