Germar Rudolf's Trial at Mannheim:

[delete]

For the ones who are interested, here is a link describing Germar Rudolf's trial.

It is from the Adelaide institute.
http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/Rudolf/Rudolf.htm

[cerberus]

deleteFor the ones who are interested, here is a link describing Germar Rudolf's trial.
It is from the Adelaide institute.
An "impartial" and "well respected" source of "information".:rolleyes: :nuts: :rolleyes:
Go to BBC News site - at least there you will get information , not propaganda.:whip:

[delete]

delete
An "impartial" and "well respected" source of "information".:rolleyes: :nuts: :rolleyes:
Go to BBC News site - at least there you will get information , not propaganda.:whip:

I have not seen that the BBC follows the case on a daily basis, but if you provide a link, I will read it.

The more people who writes about the trial, the better.

[calvin]

Attorney Stolz then objected that Germar had once again been placed in leg irons. Judge Schwab remarked that during the previous session he had ordered the leg irons removed while the prisoner was inside the courthouse. He said he would see to it that in future, Germar would not be transported from Heidelberg Prison in irons

Leg irons? This isn’t an example of political terrorism via judicial intimidation of course.

[cerberus]

It is not as if he is going to run anywhere fast.
I found covergae of hi appearnce on BBc but didn't cpopy or save it.

I would not however regard Toben's Institute as being aliable source of information on anything.

[delete]

It is not as if he is going to run anywhere fast.
I found covergae of hi appearnce on BBc but didn't cpopy or save it.


I have read the BBc story myself, and it basically states the facts about the case, and it is pretty neutral.

Here it is, but it brings nothing new to the discussion.
Germany tries 'Holocaust denier' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6147400.stm)

[cerberus]

You can rely on Toben's propaganda to be anything but neutral.

[delete]

You can rely on Toben's propaganda to be anything but neutral.

Of course it is not neutral, but it is the only deep coverage I have seen.

The main stream media have dropped deep coverage of the case.

[delete]

The Germar Rudolf trial moves on, and we are on day 4.
If it is neutral or not, read for yourself and find out.

The Trial of Germar Rudolf in Mannheim District Court
Day 4: 6 December 2006
Reported by Günter Deckert - Translated by J. M. Damon (http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/Rudolf/6December2006.htm)

Judge Schwab invited Germar to continue stating his case whereupon G. briefly summarized the last part of his presentation, on the subject of the inviolability of scientific research. He then moved on to the problems connected with eyewitness testimony. In this regard he referred to a lengthy article in the news magazine Der Spiegel that appeared in Internet version on 28 October 2006. It dealt primarily with “Holocaust” research findings in the US. In a play on words referring to Goethe’s Dichtung und Wahrheit (Poetry and Truth) the article concluded that “Die Dichtung überwiege die Wahrheit” (The poetry outweighs the truth), meaning that where eyewitness accounts of “Holocaust” are concerned, they are mostly fiction. Specifically the article concerned the fictitious story of a purported Swiss “Holocaust” victim named Benjamin Wilkomirski whose heartrending account of suffering was celebrated worldwide and received numerous Jewish literary prizes. The story was fabricated from beginning to end, which is to say that it was all a lie. Germar’s point was that criticism of such eyewitness testimony cannot logically be construed as insulting victims of “Holocaust.”

The link to all the court summaries (http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/Rudolf/Rudolf.htm)

[cerberus]

deleteOf course it is not neutral
So therefor it cannot be objective , ie - trusted.
Tell me just how news worthy is this , I know if I asked at my plave of work "Who is Gemar Rudolf ?"
No one would know , and no one would care.

[delete]

delete
So therefor it cannot be objective , ie - trusted.
Tell me just how news worthy is this , I know if I asked at my plave of work "Who is Gemar Rudolf ?"
No one would know , and no one would care.

The way you check out wether somebody speaks the truth is that you check the sources and redo the experiments.

In science it is replikabilty of experiments that determines truth in the long run, not who you can trust.

[Globus]

The way you check out wether somebody speaks the truth is that you check the sources and redo the experiments.

No, that is not the way you check on truth. That is the way you make scientific discoveries. It's not the way we know bullets and poison gas kill.

[delete]

No, that is not the way you check on truth. That is the way you make scientific discoveries. It's not the way we know bullets and poison gas kill.

Forensic Ballistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_ballistics#Forensic_Ballistics)
In the field of forensic science, forensic ballistics is the science of analyzing firearm usage in crimes. It involves analysis of bullets and bullet impacts to determine the type and caliber of the firearm fired.

Rifling, which first made an appearance in the 15th century, is the process of making grooves in gun barrels that imparts a spin to the projectile for increased accuracy and range. Bullets fired from rifled weapons acquire a distinct signature of grooves, scratches, and indentations which are somewhat unique to the weapon used.

This is how they perfect the art of bulletmaking based on contious experiments.
Terminal ballistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_ballistics)

We also need to do experiments to find out how poison gas kills, and which resudues and traces that is left behind during gassing.
Toxicity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicity)
Poison (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poison)

[Globus]

Forensic Ballistics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_ballistics#Forensic_Ballistics)

More stupidity and irrelevance. One doesn't need balllistics to know that bullets kill.

We also need to do experiments to find out how poison gas kills,

We already know how HCN kills, and that it kills. It is not an open scientific question.

and which resudues and traces that is left behind during gassing.

Also, already known with "experiments". You're confusing experiments with scientific testing.

[delete]

This is the Rudolf Report (http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/).

It is the main reason Germar Rudolf is prosecuted.

In stead of using the normal scientific way to refute the arguments and concluson contained in the Rudolf Report, they put the author in jail.

Read about the trial (http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/Rudolf/Rudolf.htm), and please explain how a trial like this is a good way to end scientific dispute.

[Dances with Wolves]

delete
An "impartial" and "well respected" source of "information".:rolleyes: :nuts: :rolleyes:
Go to BBC News site - at least there you will get information , not propaganda.:whip:

yeah, or something like the NYT, you know? :rofl:

[Dances with Wolves]

We already know how HCN kills, and that it kills. It is not an open scientific question

Tell us how Zyklon B kills, holohoax scholar.

[cerberus]

It is utter tripe delete , that is why Irving withdrew it when faced with a complete and utter rebuttal .
Worth the cover price , I would ask for my money back - this is fiction presented as fact.

DWWTell us how Zyklon B kills, holohoax scholar.
And repeat something done todeath a thousand times , why is it always "the same old same old" from you folks , have you not got one thought which is your own to present ?
DWWyeah, or something like the NYT, you know?
or you could try CNN if you want.

[Dances with Wolves]

You can rely on Toben's propaganda to be anything but neutral.

And you rely on "mainstream" news sources whose editors would be fired and blacklisted for being impartial to this subject? In this light, toben's facts are very impartial.

[Dances with Wolves]

It is utter tripe delete , that is why Irving withdrew it when faced with a complete and utter rebuttal .
Worth the cover price , I would ask for my money back - this is fiction presented as fact.

DWW
And repeat something done todeath a thousand times , why is it always "the same old same old" from you folks , have you not got one thought which is your own to present ?
DWW
or you could try CNN if you want.

Or Fox news, another cheerleader for all things jewish :rolleyes:

[delete]

It is utter tripe delete , that is why Irving withdrew it when faced with a complete and utter rebuttal .
Worth the cover price , I would ask for my money back - this is fiction presented as fact.


Irving and the courts have nothing to do with ordinary science.

Ordinary science is supposed to be anarchistic and free, and objectivity and replikabibilty is used to judge the value of the conclusions uttered by some scientist.

You don't put people in jail for deviating from the official truth.

[cerberus]

deleteIrving and the courts have nothing to do with ordinary science.

Ordinary science is supposed to be anarchistic and free, and objectivity and replikabibilty is used to judge the value of the conclusions uttered by some scientist.

delete - science is supposed to reflect fact - not be a fiction bend to serve a pre determined set of outcomes.
I sincerely hope that rudolf's report is tested to the full , but heck what would that prove you would still believe it anyway - I refer you back to my openning remark.

[Dances with Wolves]

Why would it matter? Lechters test reports were changed after the jews pressured the labs to change it. You deny this?

[Trojan]

Tell us how Zyklon B kills, holohoax scholar.

Do you need us to spoon feed you an answer.

Google HCN and OSHA.
:deadhorse:

[Trojan]

Why would it matter? Lechters test reports were changed after the jews pressured the labs to change it. You deny this?

Leuchter did not know that HCN was leathal to humans at levels far below those needed to kill lice - are you sure you want to call him your best expert?

[cerberus]

If this is the best..... the same old same old.
Even irving didn't have the face on him even to consider F.L.and his so called report , and still fools are buying it .
:deadhorse: is a cash cow for someone , perhaps its another jewish hoax.:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Globus]

This is the Rudolf Report (http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/).

It is the main reason Germar Rudolf is prosecuted.

In stead of using the normal scientific way to refute the arguments and concluson contained in the Rudolf Report, they put the author in jail.


The report is years old and was refuted by competent science long ago.

[Globus]

Tell us how Zyklon B kills, holohoax scholar.

The gaseous component of Zyklon B is hydrocyanic acid, the gas used in US gas chambers.

You really need to know more?

[Globus]

And you rely on "mainstream" news sources whose editors would be fired and blacklisted for being impartial to this subject?

No they can't. Pure denier bullshit. You live in a fantasy world.

[delete]

delete
delete - science is supposed to reflect fact - not be a fiction bend to serve a pre determined set of outcomes.

If historical truth is defended and upheld by legal repression of alternative representations, it starts geting rational to doubt the official dogma.

When dogma is protected and propaganated as unquestionable true, how can people rationally assume that the 'experts' speaks the truth?
The 'experts' could be victimes of the propaganda, speak the truth as they know it, and still tell a lie.


I sincerely hope that rudolf's report is tested to the full , but heck what would that prove you would still believe it anyway - I refer you back to my openning remark.

The testing of Rudolf's report in the full is something that should be done. People should be able to do it without fear of prosecution and social stigma. :)

[Globus]

If historical truth is defended and upheld by legal repression of alternative representations, it starts geting rational to doubt the official dogma.

It is in fact highly irrational. Historians prove history, not courts. Courts routinely take judicial notice of commonly accepted facts. They don't make it anyone's responsibility, for example, to prove during a trial that WWII occurred.

[Dances with Wolves]

Then why the fuck do you keep harping on Irving's trial? :confused: You need to keep better track of your lies, glowpus.

[Globus]

Then why the fuck do you keep harping on Irving's trial? :confused: You need to keep better track of your lies, glowpus.

I've told no lie.

And the Irving trial had nothing to do with proving history, stupid, it was about proving the charges of lying by Irving. They did.

[delete]

I've told no lie.

And the Irving trial had nothing to do with proving history, stupid, it was about proving the charges of lying by Irving. They did.

All you say here is irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about Germar Rudolf's is prosecution by the German goverment.

The main reason Germar Rudolf is prosecuted is the Rudolf Report (http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/).

In stead of using the normal scientific way to refute the arguments and concluson contained in the Rudolf Report, they put the author in jail.

Read about the trial (http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/Rudolf/Rudolf.htm), and please explain how a trial like this is a good way to end scientific dispute.

[Globus]

All you say here is irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about Germar Rudolf's is prosecution by the German goverment.

Tell your idiot friends who post whatever nonsense comes into their head.

In stead of using the normal scientific way to refute the arguments and concluson contained in the Rudolf Report, they put the author in jail.

You just keep repeating the same stupidity. The report was written over a decade ago and was long ago debunked as scientifically worthless crap.

[Dances with Wolves]

I've told no lie.

And the Irving trial had nothing to do with proving history, stupid, it was about proving the charges of lying by Irving. They did.

Then why do you jews keep harping on the fact that Irvings defeat vindicates your version of history? By the way glowpus, Irving beat you jews without even having a lawyer while the lying hateful bitch lipshitz had a full team of shysters bout and paid for by world jewry.

This is all I'm going to say on this thread about Irving, since it is off topic, as delete points out, stupid. :rofl:

[Globus]

Then why do you jews keep harping on the fact that Irvings defeat vindicates your version of history?

Because the history he was proven to have lied about is the Holocaust, stupid.

By the way glowpus, Irving beat you jews without even having a lawyer while the lying hateful bitch lipshitz had a full team of shysters bout and paid for by world jewry.

No he didn't. He made a fool of himself, and Holocaust denial generally.

This is all I'm going to say on this thread about Irving, since it is off topic,

Then complain to the people who brought it up, stupid.

[WFHermans]

Note how the two mental jews Glonus and cerberus refuse to condemn that Germar Rudolf is on trial for telling the truth?

In the age of jewry, telling the truth is considered a crime.

[Globus]

Note how the two mental jews Glonus and cerberus refuse to condemn that Germar Rudolf is on trial for telling the truth?

He's not on trial for telling the truth, since his writings about the Holocaust are lies.

His trial for his writings occurred long ago and he was convicted. He fled the jurisidiction, as they say, hardly being an exponent of civil disobedience.

The laws against denial only give idiots something to bleat about. But that has nothing to do with the history.

[cerberus]

WFHNote how the two mental jews Glonus and cerberus refuse to condemn that Germar Rudolf is on trial for telling the truth?
Whilst you are not free to examine , and whilst i have NO , repeat NO intention of providing material proof that my forskin is still attached to my penis - i am going to tell you WFH that this is a true fact and ask you to believe me .
I am not , repeat not a jew , nor have I been nor am I likely to convert.
Now WFH I do trust that this clears up your misconception that I am in someway a Jew.


Now as far as Germar is concerned - he is not on trial for telling te truth.
If he had been telling the truth , David Irving would not be the hero of the revisionist cause and you would be sick to death of him reminding you that.

[Dances with Wolves]

He's not on trial for telling the truth, since his writings about the Holocaust are lies.

His trial for his writings occurred long ago and he was convicted. He fled the jurisidiction, as they say, hardly being an exponent of civil disobedience.

The laws against denial only give idiots something to bleat about. But that has nothing to do with the history.

He is on trial for writing about the holocaust that displeased you jews. That speaks volumes about your people, glowpus.

As someone else said on this forum, you make the best case for historical revisionism ever.

[Globus]

He is on trial for writing about the holocaust that displeased you jews.

No, he was convicted for lying about history.

As someone else said on this forum, you make the best case for historical revisionism ever.

Someone no doubt as stupid as you, and as desperate to think so!

[delete]

You're the liar. And your stupidity is no excuse. You seem to understand that, at your elementary level of cognition, which is why you never attempt to say much of anything anymore.

All you say here is irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about Germar Rudolf's is prosecution by the German goverment.

The main reason Germar Rudolf is prosecuted is the Rudolf Report (http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/).

In stead of using the normal argumentative posting technique, you refuse to speak issue, and bores the reader by endless blabber.

Read about the trial (http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/Dissenters1/Rudolf/Rudolf.htm), and please explain how a trial like this is a good way to end scientific dispute.

[Dances with Wolves]

No, he was convicted for lying about history.





There you have it folks, straight from the horses mouth. Convicted of so-called lying about history. Has anyone ever heard of something more preposterous?!

[Globus]

All you say here is irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about Germar Rudolf's is prosecution by the German goverment.

Then tell your idiot friends.

The main reason Germar Rudolf is prosecuted is the Rudolf Report (http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/).

Which is a dishonest scientific charade meant to bolster his denial of history.

In stead of using the normal argumentative posting technique, you refuse to speak issue, and bores the reader by endless blabber.

Oh bullshit. All you and your allies ever do is blather.

[Globus]

There you have it folks, straight from the horses mouth. Convicted of so-called lying about history.

No, lying about history. Your claim that he was convicted for telling the truth is itself a lie. Seems like that is all you deniers have going for you!

[Dances with Wolves]

Let's play pretend for a second that your claim that the revisonists are lying. Why do you advocate imprisoning someone for lying? If that were the case, the jews would fill the prisons!

[delete]

No, lying about history. Your claim that he was convicted for telling the truth is itself a lie. Seems like that is all you deniers have going for you!

How can we know that Germar Rudolf are lying if you guys are putting people who would defend him in jail?
If the defence attorney should believe in the innocence of his client, he too, faces jail.
Why should we trust you and the governments?

[Globus]

How can we know that Germar Rudolf are lying if you guys are putting people who would defend him in jail?

He was convicted long ago. And the lies in his reports and other writers have been shown to be abundant. Why don't you learn just a little about the subject under discussion?

[Burrhus]

He was convicted long ago. And the lies in his reports and other writers have been shown to be abundant. Why don't you learn just a little about the subject under discussion?

Assuming for the sake of argument that Rudolf's scientific report was faulty, are you saying that when a scientist makes a mistake that he is lying and should be subject to incarceration?

To anticipate your highly probable, inane response (good lord, I do know my Globus too well), you're going to say that he knew that his findings were false and that he was therefore lying. Well, that would be perjury. Then the burden would be on the court to prove that they were false and that he knew that they were false. No such act was taken by the court. They declared his report to be false by judicial notice and in violation of the law without regard to its scientific accuracy.

My periodic substantive response to Globus in the vain and feckless hope that he is educable.

[Globus]

Assuming for the sake of argument that Rudolf's scientific report was faulty, are you saying that when a scientist makes a mistake that he is lying and should be subject to incarceration?

I said quite clearly he lied. Lying is not a mistake.

It is quite typical of you that this is about as close as you can get to demonstrating an intelligent grasp of the issues at hand. Then you lapse into stupidity and ignorance about the court case, the charge, the findings and judicial notice.

[cerberus]

BurrhusAssuming for the sake of argument that Rudolf's scientific report was faulty, are you saying that when a scientist makes a mistake that he is lying and should be subject to incarceration?
For the sake of arguement consider a report which is flawed , known to be flawed and is presented as it does - what would that say about the suthor and those who use it as such ?

Rudolf's report is used to try and distort the historical record , it is used to mislead people and it is used to promote a political message.
To pretend otherwise is a little silly , to pretend that the message does not have race overtones is equally silly.

[Burrhus]

Globus: It is quite typical of you that this is about as close as you can get to demonstrating an intelligent grasp of the issues at hand.

No, Globus, it is just one of my futile, periodic efforts to reply seriously to your ignorance and/or mendacity.

The fact is, Globus, that you are rarely if ever worthy of a serious response. You are a buffoon. I am sorry to have to say that but you need to know it.

Go to "user cp" and click on "read other posts by Globus". Spend an hour or two with yourself and see just how silly your posts are. Pay attention to the abusive language and ad hominem attacks. Notice the absence of logic and rationality. Read a few responses to your posts and feel the contempt and disdain that so many have for you. Even some of those who agree with you.

I am not a mean person and I say this not out of malice but to help you see yourself for who you are in hope that you will recognize what you have become and, maybe, change?

[Kolchab]

I sincerely hope that rudolf's report is tested to the full , but heck what would that prove you would still believe it anyway - I refer you back to my openning remark.
The chemist Dr. Green of THHP did review the Rudolf Report.
He did not find anything wrong with the chemical explanations, but added the following assumption:

That the Zyklon-B pellets were withdrawn after 20 minutes and that most of the gassed Jews died after the de-aeration started and not during the initial 20 minutes gassing.

This would of course result in considerable less exposure of the walls to the HCN gas and could explain the lack of the formation of prussic the blue and blueish staining of the walls.

There is unfortunately no documentation or witness testimony of such an early withdrawal of the partially discharged pellets. On the contrary, both Tauber and Kula testified that the pellets were withdrawn after complete de-gassing.

[Globus]

No, Globus, it is just one of my futile, periodic efforts to reply seriously to your ignorance and/or mendacity.

That you consider your reply serious is what exposes your ignorance and dishonesty.

The fact is, Globus, that you are rarely if ever worthy of a serious response..

A piece of your usual nonsense easily refuted by what happens when any denier on this board attempts a serious response. That doesn't include you, because you've never made one. In fact, looking at your posts all over the phora, you never seem to have anything intelligent to say.

But with the topic of the Holocaust you are completely ignorant. You pose questions which reveal this and then call them "periodic attempts" at a serious response. They aren't.

When you've actually acquired a rudimentary understanding of the history and display a sufficient desire to learn, you'll be treated like all other beginning learners, even if you if you're only able to pose the usual denier canards. As it is, you're not even there yet.

It seems from your output that you'd rather pretend to be a thoughtful and studious sort rather than put in the time to actually be one.

[Dances with Wolves]

Also, don't forget. After the gassing, jews were forced, without any protection from the Cyanide, to enter the scene of the crime and remove the bodies minutes after they had expired. :rolleyes:

[cerberus]

KolchabThis would of course result in considerable less exposure of the walls to the HCN gas and could explain the lack of the formation of prussic the blue and blueish staining of the walls.


Funny I have just spent 20 minutes liestening to David Irving being interviewed after his libel case ( on You-Tube) , seems that he is convinced that "prussian blue" should have been present and how the lack of it totally proves the revisionist case.

BurrhusAlso, don't forget. After the gassing, jews were forced, without any protection from the Cyanide, to enter the scene of the crime and remove the bodies minutes after they had expired.
And don't forget Burrhus that the buildings were aired by use of extractor fans and the concentration level dropped acordingly , you will also be awre that specail clothing was not required, so roll your eyes at your own risk.
Your remarks are in error .

[Globus]

The chemist Dr. Green of THHP did review the Rudolf Report.
He did not find anything wrong with the chemical explanations,

That's not true. He found considerable problems with Rudolf's chemistry.

but added the following assumption:

That the Zyklon-B pellets were withdrawn after 20 minutes and that most of the gassed Jews died after the de-aeration started and not during the initial 20 minutes gassing.

The first is an assumption for KII and KIII. The second is stated incorrectly. He does not propose that most of the gassed Jews died after the ventilation began. He only suggests that for the length of time it took for the ventilation system to reduce the concentrations of gas below the lethal limit, any victims surviving the initial lethal dose would have continued to be exposed to deadly amounts for a short time.

This would of course result in considerable less exposure of the walls to the HCN gas and could explain the lack of the formation of prussic the blue and blueish staining of the walls.

This is also simplistic. There are a number of factors explaining why prussian blue did not form in the homicidal gas chambers - exposure time being only one of them.

There is unfortunately no documentation or witness testimony of such an early withdrawal of the partially discharged pellets. On the contrary, both Tauber and Kula testified that the pellets were withdrawn after complete de-gassing.

No. Kula testified to the intent of the system as he built it. Tauber saw the pellets removed and assumed they waited until the gas had completely outgassed. He had no way of knowing. The fact that the evidence indicates the ventilation went on after 15 or so minutes makes it clear the pellets would have been withdrawn at that time. It would be stupid to ventilate a room and leave discharging gas pellets when the means of extracting them existed.

[Globus]

Also, don't forget. After the gassing, jews were forced, without any protection from the Cyanide, to enter the scene of the crime and remove the bodies minutes after they had expired.:

This is a lie. The two most frequently used gas chambers had powerful ventilation systems which removed the gas before the Jewish Sonderkommandos entered, and they were provided with gas masks when needed.

[Burrhus]

Burrhus (false attribution--Burrhus)
Quote:
Also, don't forget. After the gassing, jews were forced, without any protection from the Cyanide, to enter the scene of the crime and remove the bodies minutes after they had expired.


Burrhus
And don't forget Burrhus that the buildings were aired by use of extractor fans and the concentration level dropped acordingly , you will also be awre that specail clothing was not required, so roll your eyes at your own risk.
Your remarks are in error .

Please don't respond to me in regard to a post that is not mine and falsely attribute a quote to me. Even if I agree with it.

[Burrhus]

Assuming for the sake of argument that Rudolf's scientific report was faulty, are you saying that when a scientist makes a mistake that he is lying and should be subject to incarceration?

To anticipate your highly probable, inane response (good lord, I do know my Globus too well), you're going to say that he knew that his findings were false and that he was therefore lying. Well, that would be perjury. Then the burden would be on the court to prove that they were false and that he knew that they were false. No such act was taken by the court. They declared his report to be false by judicial notice and in violation of the law without regard to its scientific accuracy.

My periodic substantive response to Globus in the vain and feckless hope that he is educable.

RSVP, Globus.

[Dances with Wolves]

Burrhus
And don't forget Burrhus that the buildings were aired by use of extractor fans and the concentration level dropped acordingly , you will also be awre that specail clothing was not required, so roll your eyes at your own risk.
Your remarks are in error .

No, it seems your remarks are. Here's the procedure after just 1 prisoner is gassed:

A study of the execution records of 113 prisoners executed at San Quentin showed that the average time taken to kill them was 9.3 minutes. The prisoner will usually lose consciousness between one and three minutes after the gas hits their face and the doctor will pronounce them dead in around 10 to 12 minutes. An exhaust fan then sucks the gas out of the chamber. Next, the corpse is sprayed with ammonia, which neutralises traces of the cyanide that may remain. After about half an hour, orderlies enter the chamber, wearing gas masks and rubber gloves. Their training manual advises them to ruffle the victim's hair to release and trapped cyanide gas before removing him.

http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/gascham.html

Tell us Cerberus, in all that eyewitness testimony you so fondly point to as evidence, did the Germans or the Kapos ever do anything like that?

[Globus]

No, it seems your remarks are. Here's the procedure after just 1 prisoner is gassed:

No, that is the procedure in a legally sanctioned public execution of a criminal, not the procedures used in mass murder when the people doing the cleaning up were also the people being exterminated.

Your comparision is worthless.

[Kolchab]

Rudolf's report is used to try and distort the historical record , it is used to mislead people and it is used to promote a political message.
To pretend otherwise is a little silly , to pretend that the message does not have race overtones is equally silly.
Rudolf attempted with his report to show that the alleged homicidal gassings of Jews in Auschwitz/Birkenau could not have occurred as reported by the witnesses.

To follow this up should have really been the job of the courts during the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt in 1965. But they were not interested.

Rudolf did this neither for fame, money nor political power. He attempted to give some dignity back to the Germans

For this the man was deported by the USA back to Germany, where he was promptly put in jail.

[Globus]

Rudolf attempted with his report to show that the alleged homicidal gassings of Jews in Auschwitz/Birkenau could not have occurred as reported by the witnesses.

And failed miserably.

To follow this up should have really been the job of the courts during the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt in 1965. But they were not interested.

No, the job of the Frankfurt court was to determine culpability of individuals. The history was already proven.

Rudolf did this neither for fame, money nor political power. He attempted to give some dignity back to the Germans

He did it to serve his prejudices, as all fanatics do.

For this the man was deported by the USA back to Germany, where he was promptly put in jail.

He was put in jail because he fled a prior conviction, and he was deported for immigration violations.

As it is they should release him and let him keep making a fool of himself while living his life with the rather distasteful band of crackpots who are the only people who will have him.

[Kolchab]

The fact that the evidence indicates the ventilation went on after 15 or so minutes makes it clear the pellets would have been withdrawn at that time. It would be stupid to ventilate a room and leave discharging gas pellets when the means of extracting them existed.
What “evidence” indicates that the ventilation was switched on after 15 minutes gassing?
Any sources?

[cerberus]

BurrhusPlease don't respond to me in regard to a post that is not mine and falsely attribute a quote to me. Even if I agree with it.

Human error , pure and simple , whilst I apologise I do ask you to recognise the different between "falsely" attributing and a simple human error.
A simple pm and I would have corrected the error "asap" and with no ill will.

kolchabRudolf attempted with his report to show that the alleged homicidal gassings of Jews in Auschwitz/Birkenau could not have occurred as reported by the witnesses.
And he failed in this attempt.

To follow this up should have really been the job of the courts during the Auschwitz trial in Frankfurt in 1965. But they were not interested.
And who would blame them.

Rudolf did this neither for fame, money nor political power. He attempted to give some dignity back to the Germans

I have a feeling he has made money , and I have to agree with Globus on his motives.
I think the German people were robbed of their dignity by a man called Adolf Hitler , they have made a remarkable job of dealing with the legacy of Hitler and have done so with dignity and hummility.
The German people deserved better than Adolf Hitler , the German people were his first victims. ( Would you not agree that they were his victims as much as any other nation , I would !)

BurrhusTell us Cerberus, in all that eyewitness testimony you so fondly point to as evidence, did the Germans or the Kapos ever do anything like that?
Your answer - T4 - the first mass murders by way of gas , amongest other methods.

[Dances with Wolves]

Your answer - T4 - the first mass murders by way of gas , amongest other methods.

I'm not sure what that means. Let me rephase the question. Is it possible for anyone to enter a mass gassing chamber right after an event, without gas masks or gloves as the eyewitness testimony suggests, and have the cleanup crew survive?

Why aren't there any accounts of gassed inmates being hosed down or any of the procedures stated in that link followed?

[Dances with Wolves]

And failed miserably.



No, the job of the Frankfurt court was to determine culpability of individuals. The history was already proven.



He did it to serve his prejudices, as all fanatics do.



He was put in jail because he fled a prior conviction, and he was deported for immigration violations.

As it is they should release him and let him keep making a fool of himself while living his life with the rather distasteful band of crackpots who are the only people who will have him.

Glowpusk, your snide answers might impress someone like Star or Captain Marvel, but not to us.

Why was Rudolph convicted in the first place? Come on, give us another one of your pat answers :rofl:

[Globus]

What “evidence” indicates that the ventilation was switched on after 15 minutes gassing?
Any sources?

Lots.

Testimony from the people who were there.

You already know this, so one wonders why you ask.

[Globus]

LOL keep 'em coming Glowpus, your posts are just hilarious!

Meaning like most deniers you think substituting feigned humor for knowledge protects you from even more ridicule.

[Globus]

I'm not sure what that means. Let me rephase the question. Is it possible for anyone to enter a mass gassing chamber right after an event, without gas masks or gloves as the eyewitness testimony suggests,

The testimony suggests no such thing.

You don't even know the testimonial evidence, do you?

[Burrhus]

I did, stupid.

Please provide link to post.

[Commander]

You know, Globustein, for a "non-Jew" [;) ] you sure are showing a Jewish mean streak. Your posts are now largely all insults, you seem to be abondoning your intellectual persona.

[Trojan]

I'm not sure what that means. Let me rephase the question. Is it possible for anyone to enter a mass gassing chamber right after an event, without gas masks or gloves as the eyewitness testimony suggests, and have the cleanup crew survive?

Why aren't there any accounts of gassed inmates being hosed down or any of the procedures stated in that link followed?


Got any testimony to back that up or are you just farting in the wind again?

[Dances with Wolves]

Got any testimony to back that up or are you just farting in the wind again?

But trojie, there's plenty of that around. Don't make me look it up for you.

The question is, do you have any testimony that follows with that article? Kapos entering the death room with gas masks and such?

[Trojan]

But trojie, there's plenty of that around. Don't make me look it up for you.

The question is, do you have any testimony that follows with that article? Kapos entering the death room with gas masks and such?

If there is plenty then please provide it ... its your claim.

[Burrhus]

You know, Globustein, for a "non-Jew" [;) ] you sure are showing a Jewish mean streak. Your posts are now largely all insults, you seem to be abondoning your intellectual persona.

It abandoned him long ago.

[Burrhus]

You're not doing anything intelligent. Look for it.

I did, couldn't find. Please help me.

[cerberus]

D.W.W.Tell us Cerberus, in all that eyewitness testimony you so fondly point to as evidence, did the Germans or the Kapos ever do anything like that?
Do you honestly think that the SS wer governed by any body similar to the "Health and Safety exc." , do you think that anyone might ever have taken a legal action against them at any time ?
I see nothing which would make me wonder as to the kiings having taken place.
perhas you might wish to comment on Fred Ls. declaration tat using the cyrstals was dangerous to the SS who deployedn them and that it was impossible .
When a Judge asked what if the SS wore gas masks as eye witnesses said they did , Fred had to admit that it would be possible.
You think doubt is a one way ticket , think again.
Do you honestly think the Ss would be troubled if any side effect of the substances harmed Jews , after all the SS did not do the clean up, only the killing.

[Dances with Wolves]

If there is plenty then please provide it ... its your claim.

Actually, little insect, I asked you to provide proof, It was a question, do you know what that is? Anyway, I did look, and even though I found some jewish sources that cited gas masks and some with "special clothing", I couldn't come across any that had both. I did find this though:


From the eyewitness reports, one can gather what the spectacle in the gas chamber was after the doors were opened. In their hideous suffering, the condemned had tried to crawl on top of one another. During their agonies some had dug their fingernails into the flesh of their neighbors. As a rule, the corpses were so compressed and entangled that it was impossible to separate them. The German technicians invented special hook-tipped poles which were thrust deep into the flesh of the corpses to pull them out..

No gas masks or "special clothing" in that one. She continues, however:

The Nordic Supermen knew how to profit from everything. Immense casks were used to gather the human grease which had melted down at high temperatures. It was not surprising that the camp soap had such a peculiar odor. Nor was it astonishing that the internees became suspicious at the sight of certain pieces of fat sausage! :rofl: :rofl:

Please, read Olga's entire account here. I'm sure every school kid in the west has :rolleyes:
http://www.datasync.com/~davidg59/lengyel.html

[Trojan]

Actually, little insect, I asked you to provide proof, It was a question, do you know what that is?


Dick Head - this was your exact statement "Is it possible for anyone to enter a mass gassing chamber right after an event, without gas masks or gloves as the eyewitness testimony suggests, and have the cleanup crew survive?"

You made a statement, I asked you to back it up - so grow up and provide a responsive answer or shut up and go away. So we have lie #1.


Anyway, I did look, and even though I found some jewish sources that cited gas masks and some with "special clothing", I couldn't come across any that had both.


Yet you lied and told us there were many statements that supported your claim that neither was used - that's your second lie in this exchange dick head.


I did find this though:



Which was completely unresponsive to your statement of purported fact - should we call that a lie as well, or just write it off to that you are too stupid to know the diffrence?



No gas masks or "special clothing" in that one. She continues, however:



You are an imbecile aren't you?


:rofl: :rofl:

Please, read Olga's entire account here. I'm sure every school kid in the west has :rolleyes:
http://www.datasync.com/~davidg59/lengyel.html
[/quote]

Now go and find a witness that backs up your statement or leave the thread as the liar you are dick head.

[Trojan]

Somehow I picture you wearing nylon pantyhose when you post Trojie, because you are one sick individual, and not very smart either. THAT WAS A QUESTION YOU STUPID FUCK!
Now, can you answer it, or not?

"Is it possible for anyone to enter a mass gassing chamber right after an event, without gas masks or gloves as the eyewitness testimony suggests, and have the cleanup crew survive?"

The bolded portions is a statement or representation of fact as part of an interrogatory.

So in essence, your answer is - "Any time I make a representation of fact, I am in fact just writing what I wish was true, since I am unable to back up my own assertions"

I thought Revisionists help themselves to that high ethical standard that only demonstrable facts should be asserted as truth.

[Globus]

From the eyewitness reports, one can gather what the spectacle in the gas chamber was after the doors were opened. In their hideous suffering, the condemned had tried to crawl on top of one another. During their agonies some had dug their fingernails into the flesh of their neighbors. As a rule, the corpses were so compressed and entangled that it was impossible to separate them. The German technicians invented special hook-tipped poles which were thrust deep into the flesh of the corpses to pull them out..

No gas masks or "special clothing" in that one. She continues, however:

Special clothing was not needed. And she didn't mention opening the door either. Does that mean they pulled them through a keyhole?

Really, you are quite the pathetic fool.

Please, read Olga's entire account here.

Why? Olga Lengyel was not an eyewitnesses to what happened in the gas chambers.

You don't even know who the witnesses are, do you!

[Trojan]

You don't even know who the witnesses are, do you!

He doesn't - absolutely none - just his beliefs. Very pathetic

[Kolchab]

You don't even know who the witnesses are, do you!
How can there be eyewitnesses to homicidal gas chambers if there were no gas chambers to begin with?

Beats me!

[Captain Marinesko]

How can there be eyewitnesses to homicidal gas chambers if there were no gas chambers to begin with?

Beats me!

Well since there is evidence that the gas chambers were there, as well as photos of the chambers when they were intact, you need to prove how those photos and eyewitness statements were lies.

[WFHermans]

There is a photo of a building with the caption "gaschamber".

[Globus]

There is a photo of a building with the caption "gaschamber".

And in your infantile brain that means it is not a gas chamber?

[Captain Marinesko]

There is a photo of a building with the caption "gaschamber".

Yes and strangely enough numerous eyewitnesses including the perpetrators identified that building as a gas chamber. What a coinicidence!

[cerberus]

Captain M.Yes and strangely enough numerous eyewitnesses including the perpetrators identified that building as a gas chamber. What a coinicidence!


And the plans as well , I wonder if perhaps some agnet of ZOG wnet around telling them what to say , did this agent of ZOG talk to the guy who drew the plans and did they also manage to talk the Ex SS guys and gals into telling lies as well ?
the same people who planted papers throughout the archives of the world.

Best of all these agents of ZOG have managed to make 5.3 million people say very quiet.
How did they manage to do all this ?
Apart from which they have managed to frame Germar , Irving , Zundel and a host of others.

[cerberus]

The CommanderOnly the date is wrong the "gas chambers" were built in 1947 by the Soviets, likely under the order of Jewish Commissars, or possibly the Jewish Red Army Commander in charge there.
:rofl:
No further comment is required.

[Commander]

Your satire is lacking. Stick to lies, they suit you better.

Answer me this, why was there no "gas chambers" found in the areas the Jew's western proxy armies [U.S.A./England/Canuckistan] overran?

I mean the Germans were so gas happy, gassing jews here & there, not a care in the world, yet the only "gas chambers" ever found were in Joseph Stalin's territory. I know Joseph Stalin never told a lie, but isn't this a little strange?

[Trojan]

Answer me this, why was there no "gas chambers" found in the areas the Jew's western proxy armies [U.S.A./England/Canuckistan] overran?

I mean the Germans were so gas happy, gassing jews here & there, not a care in the world, yet the only "gas chambers" ever found were in Joseph Stalin's territory. I know Joseph Stalin never told a lie, but isn't this a little strange?

Because the extermination program was focused in the East, just as the heaviest concentrations of Jews was in the East.

You are having problems grasping this whole historical concept aren't you?

[Dances with Wolves]

Because the extermination program was focused in the East, just as the heaviest concentrations of Jews was in the East.

You are having problems grasping this whole historical concept aren't you?

Hey Trojie, how convenient! All the gassing occurred behind the jewish iron curtain. Can't get any better than that, huh.

[Commander]

Because the extermination program was focused in the East, just as the heaviest concentrations of Jews was in the East.

You are having problems grasping this whole historical concept aren't you?
O.K. One more I'd like to run by you.

I've seen these "gas chambers" on the internet & in films. They don't look like they are all that monumental to build. I mean, they are not the Great Wall of China.

Now the Germans, these Germans who were very methodical, & efficient, why would they lug these Jews from France & Holland, all the way to the far Eastern areas of Europe? The Germans in all their technical ability, you would think they would put together at least one or two of these "gas chambers" in a more convenient place to deal with the western Europe Jews.

In America, the U.S. Post Office has mail sorting places all over they don't send the Calif mail to be processed in New York? Same thing, No?

[Captain Marinesko]

Answer me this, why was there no "gas chambers" found in the areas the Jew's western proxy armies [U.S.A./England/Canuckistan] overran?

I mean the Germans were so gas happy, gassing jews here & there, not a care in the world, yet the only "gas chambers" ever found were in Joseph Stalin's territory. I know Joseph Stalin never told a lie, but isn't this a little strange?


The Germans noticed how pissed their own people got after the T-4 program, and realized that the extermination of others would best be done away from the eyes of the German public.

Now so you are claiming, without any shred of proof of course, that all the evidence from camps like Treblinka, Auschwitz, Majdanek, etc- was fabricated by the Soviets. Ok then....

Maybe you would like to explain then why the Soviets would do such a thing for the Jews, but CONSTANTLY refer to Jewish victims in their own records, literature, and films, as simply citizens of their respective nations? That means if they were talking about Polish Jews for example, they would say something like 6 million Poles died during the war. That means Polish Jews were simply labelled as Polish, and so on for the other nationalities. Even in 1945, the official records of various armies that liberated the camps did not identify the inmates as "Jews" most of the time.

In addition to this, the DDR NEVER PAID REPARATIONS to Israel, while the Western Bonn government did. Do you mind explaining that?

[Commander]

Now so you are claiming, without any shred of proof of course, that all the evidence from camps like Treblinka, Auschwitz, Majdanek, etc- was fabricated by the Soviets. Ok then....

Now, now Capt., there you go, off in a different direction getting away from the real question. All those camps named by you did they have "gas chambers"?


In addition to this, the DDR NEVER PAID REPARATIONS to Israel, while the Western Bonn government did. Do you mind explaining that?

Do you really want me to answer that Capt.?

[cerberus]

The CommanderAnswer me this, why was there no "gas chambers" found in the areas the Jew's western proxy armies [U.S.A./England/Canuckistan] overran?

I mean the Germans were so gas happy, gassing jews here & there, not a care in the world, yet the only "gas chambers" ever found were in Joseph Stalin's territory. I know Joseph Stalin never told a lie, but isn't this a little strange?
__________________

As Trojan has pointed out the obvious regarding the concentration of Europes Jewish population may I refer you to Hitlers killing of the "threat" to German Blood - the people he murdered under T4 and the expansion of T4 into the concentration camp system by order "13f14" .
Having found that these killings could not be made secret it was unlikely that he was going to make the same mistake again.
The German people might have found it difficult to deal with mass murder happening around them - tell me do you think the German people would have stood for this happening in their midst ?
I don't think they would.

The Commander - I have just seen captain M. has already answered saying much the same as I do - I note that you did not answer his question - perhaps you would be so kind as to address the answers given by Trojan ,Captain M. and myself before you embark on yet more.
You seem full of questions that you don't really want to hear the answers to , do you have a problem dealing with the truth ?
And please , don't answer by going on about "Jewish lies" and such tripe - T4 is a well documented mass murder - the number killed being in the order of 70,000.
A sure sign that mass murder was possible and as Kershaw reflects it shows the signs of a " genocidal personality".

So address these issues first - then we can move on.

[Commander]

WTF are you babbling about now, the Germans handed out Tylenol #4's to the Jews before they rushed them into the "gas chambers"?

http://www.luhs.org/health/kbase/media/medical/mdx-drugimage/t100512f.jpg

[Vasily Zaitsev]

WTF are you babbling about now, the Germans handed out Tylenol #4's to the Jews before they rushed them into the "gas chambers"?

http://www.luhs.org/health/kbase/media/medical/mdx-drugimage/t100512f.jpg

Do you really not know what the T-4 program was?

Are you sure you're a national socialist?

[cerberus]

Vasily Zaitsev
Do you really not know what the T-4 program was?

If the Commander does not know then he is only nailing his own bottom to the door if he seeks to define and defend the Nazi propaganda line based on "the party line".
Use Mr. Google if you are stuck Commander.

[Captain Marinesko]

Now, now Capt., there you go, off in a different direction getting away from the real question. All those camps named by you did they have "gas chambers"?

How is this going in another direction. You implied that there is something fishy about where the extermination gas chambers were found.



Do you really want me to answer that Capt.?

YES! I would like you to tell me why the Soviets were instrumental in fabricating this whole Holocaust, on behalf of the Jews, because the Soviet Union was allegedly "Jewish" somehow. And yet then they don't even BOTHER to highlight or even mention the Jewishness of the victims, nor do they force DDR to pay any reparations because they claimed that "Germany already paid the price for Hitler". Then they later become the leading anti-Zionist force in the world. If they had proof that the Holocaust was a hoax, that would be the time to release it.

[Commander]

Vasily Zaitsev


If the Commander does not know then he is only nailing his own bottom to the door if he seeks to define and defend the Nazi propaganda line based on "the party line".
Use Mr. Google if you are stuck Commander.

I looked, according to Jewypedia it is some euthanasia program. Jesus Christ, I don't care about every little tidbit of Jewish nonsense. What's this got to do with slapping together a phoney gas chamber in 1947?


YES! I would like you to tell me why the Soviets were instrumental in fabricating this whole Holocaust, on behalf of the Jews, because the Soviet Union was allegedly "Jewish" somehow. And yet then they don't even BOTHER to highlight or even mention the Jewishness of the victims, nor do they force DDR to pay any reparations...

The Jewish run Soviet Union, also ran the DDR. Of course the Israeli's, the ultimate boss of the Jew crime counsel is not going to shake down their own people in the DDR.

[cerberus]

The CommanderI looked, according to Jewypedia it is some euthanasia program. Jesus Christ, I don't care about every little tidbit of Jewish nonsense. What's this got to do with slapping together a phoney gas chamber in 1947?
What you imply and what actually was built is reflected in your less than serious reply to an asnwer , to a question which you asked to begin with.
Are you trying to be serious or do you just not know what you are trying to say ?

[Captain Marinesko]

I looked, according to Jewypedia it is some euthanasia program. Jesus Christ, I don't care about every little tidbit of Jewish nonsense. What's this got to do with slapping together a phoney gas chamber in 1947?

Ignoring the fact that you are arguing about a historical event while having a massive deficit of basic knowledge related to it- It seems clear that your tactic here is to dismiss all facts or sources you don't like as "Jewish", and ergo invalid. That doesn't fly here.

We're not talking about 1947. You asked why were all the death camps found in the Eastern territories and not France. The answer was to keep it secret from the world, the occupied populations, and even the Germans.


The Jewish run Soviet Union, also ran the DDR.

Pleae present proof that the Soviet Union and DDR were run by Jews.



Of course the Israeli's, the ultimate boss of the Jew crime counsel is not going to shake down their own people in the DDR.

Reparations come from tax money, West German reparations were paid via taxes from the people. Are you trying to say that the DDR was almost all Jews? Do you not attribute the fact that West Germany paid reparations to the Jews that controlled that country? What the hell are you trying to say here?

[Vasily Zaitsev]

A Commander vs. MrAngry thread would be epic.

[Globus]

Hey Trojie, how convenient! All the gassing occurred behind the jewish iron curtain. Can't get any better than that, huh.

There was no iron curtain during the war, stupid. The terroritory was controlled by the Nazis.

[Globus]

O.K. One more I'd like to run by you.

I've seen these "gas chambers" on the internet & in films. They don't look like they are all that monumental to build. I mean, they are not the Great Wall of China.

Now the Germans, these Germans who were very methodical, & efficient, why would they lug these Jews from France & Holland, all the way to the far Eastern areas of Europe? The Germans in all their technical ability, you would think they would put together at least one or two of these "gas chambers" in a more convenient place to deal with the western Europe Jews.

Sorry, what you think someone "would" have done is not evidence of anything other than your excuse making. The fact is the Jews of France and the Netherlands were sent to Auschwitz, as the evidence shows.

Don't you think it's strange that you discuss a history without knowing anything about it?

[Globus]

Yeah, imagine!

You shouldn't any trouble doing that. You think the Iron Curtain existed during WWII!

[Trojan]

O.K. One more I'd like to run by you.

I've seen these "gas chambers" on the internet & in films. They don't look like they are all that monumental to build. I mean, they are not the Great Wall of China.

Now the Germans, these Germans who were very methodical, & efficient, why would they lug these Jews from France & Holland, all the way to the far Eastern areas of Europe? The Germans in all their technical ability, you would think they would put together at least one or two of these "gas chambers" in a more convenient place to deal with the western Europe Jews.

In America, the U.S. Post Office has mail sorting places all over they don't send the Calif mail to be processed in New York? Same thing, No?

You can rephrase the questions as many ways as you want - the historical
answer is the historical answer.

The extermination program was also, in some respects, about labor as well. The need for the labor also existed in the East, in the plants that many Jews and others would be forced to work.

[Trojan]

LOL! :rofl:

The question should be, do you? You are the one that depends so much on witness testimony.

The depths to which the jew will go to distort, obfuscate and lie is just breathtaking.

Still having problems about this whole debate concept aren't you?

I'll give you a hint, don't start a debate on something you know nothing about - makes you look foolish.

[delete]

Still having problems about this whole debate concept aren't you?

I'll give you a hint, don't start a debate on something you know nothing about - makes you look foolish.

What does this have to do with Germar Rudolfs trial in Mannheim.

You guys are just parrots parroting black propaganda. The only thing you are good at is obfuscating and ad hominem attacks.

Germar Rudolf is in jail because he did chemical test for preussian blue in the alledged gas chambers in Auschwitz, and then published his negative findings.
This is how he came to believe that the HOLOCAUST is both religion and anti-german propaganda.

Instead of refuting him the scientific way, the western goverments help Germany put him in jail. FMPOV jewish crybabies are the main culprit for corrupting the right to free speech in Europe anf the USA.

[Kolchab]

Rudolf attempted with his report to show that the alleged homicidal gassings of Jews in Auschwitz/Birkenau could not have occurred as reported by the witnesses.
And he failed in this attempt.
Not really.

Rudolf convinced a lot of people that the alleged homicidal gassings of 500,000 Jews in morghue 1 of Krema II within 18 months with up to 2000 a load could not have occurred as described by the eye witnesses.

The German courts are not permitted to question the judgements of the Allied trials (IMT, NMT, Cracow) according to the “Verträge zur Verbindlichkeit der Urteile des Nürnberger Prozesses” (German) (Treaties for the Obligational Binding of the Judgements of the Nuremberg Trials)
http://www.swg-hamburg.de/Im_Blickpunkt/Vertrage_zur_Verbindlichkeit_d/vertrage_zur_verbindlichkeit_d.html

All German post war trials about Nazi crimes (about 2000) were political trials in nature, designed to ease political poker games by German politicians.

[delete]

Rudolf convinced a lot of people that the alleged homicidal gassings of 500,000 Jews in morghue 1 of Krema II within 18 months with up to 2000 a load could not have occurred as described by the eye witnesses.

The German courts are not permitted to question the judgements of the Allied trials (IMT, NMT, Cracow) according to the “Verträge zur Verbindlichkeit der Urteile des Nürnberger Prozesses” (German) (Treaties for the Obligational Binding of the Judgements of the Nuremberg Trials)
http://www.swg-hamburg.de/Im_Blickpunkt/Vertrage_zur_Verbindlichkeit_d/vertrage_zur_verbindlichkeit_d.html


The one thing that convinced me after reading the Rudolf report, was the 'dead agenting' the main stream media and jewsih support groups did to the author in stead of refuting his arguments.

Dead Agenting (http://www.madvillelaw.net/da.htm)

From policy letters written by L. Ron Hubbard, he has directed his followers to conform to and abide by his own personal beliefs about those who oppose his new age religious inventions for profit and personal gain.

2/25/66 HCO PL Attacks on Scientology, it is mandated to, "Never Defend Scientology, Always attack, feed blood, lurid sex, crimes to the press, and make it rough all the way."

5/30/74 HCO PL "It is my specific intention that by the use of professional PR (Black PR) tactics, my opposition not only be dulled, but permanently irradicated."

Such directives cause much ALARM for those who are not believers of this group. Also, Scientology's OSA division (Office of Special Affairs,) can NOT deviate from the enforcement of these Hubbard directives.

Dead Agenting is a name given to smear campaign concepts designed by Hubbard to "handle" his defectors and detractors. In laymens' terms it's to dig up dirt on others to bring them to their knees to make them silent. A very dark side of obstruction of justice in the U.S. Courts' judicial due process of law.

Cults in general, are very antagonistic and vindictive toward's their perceived enemies. Scientology is at the very top of these aberrative group reactive concerns.


All German post war trials about Nazi crimes (about 2000) were political trials in nature, designed to ease political poker games by German politicians.

I don't agree fully here. They were political trials, but the people who are prosecuting, mostly do believe in the stuff, and are more like victimes of manipulation.

[Globus]

What does this have to do with Germar Rudolfs trial in Mannheim.

You guys are just parrots parroting black propaganda. The only thing you are good at is obfuscating and ad hominem attacks.

Bullshit. The only thing you guys are good at is lying about history to serve your hateful ends.

Germar Rudolf is in jail because he did chemical test for preussian blue in the alledged gas chambers in Auschwitz, and then published his negative findings.

Well, since Prussian Blue is not a necessary consequence of exposure to HCN that was a pretty stupid test, and a dishonest basis on which to deny history and ignore all the evidence, now isn't it.

[Globus]

Not really.

Rudolf convinced a lot of people that the alleged homicidal gassings of 500,000 Jews in morghue 1 of Krema II within 18 months with up to 2000 a load could not have occurred as described by the eye witnesses.

No he didn't. The only people who swallow his nonsense are people who were already deniers, and for the usual reasons.

The German courts are not permitted to question the judgements of the Allied trials (IMT, NMT, Cracow) according to the “Verträge zur Verbindlichkeit der Urteile des Nürnberger Prozesses” (German) (Treaties for the Obligational Binding of the Judgements of the Nuremberg Trials)
http://www.swg-hamburg.de/Im_Blickpunkt/Vertrage_zur_Verbindlichkeit_d/vertrage_zur_verbindlichkeit_d.html

Rubbish. The treaty says no such thing.

Furthermore, the German courts, like all courts, don't take it upon themselves to prove history, but only whether the defendent in question broke the law. There is no question that Rudolf broke the law.

All German post war trials about Nazi crimes (about 2000) were political trials in nature, designed to ease political poker games by German politicians.

Utter, stupid, nonsense.

The post war trials in many countries produced tons of evidence of the crimes for which many hundreds of Nazis were convicted.

You don't know anything about those trials.

[Globus]

The one thing that convinced me after reading the Rudolf report, was the 'dead agenting' the main stream media and jewsih support groups did to the author in stead of refuting his arguments.

Then you ought to rent a brain, because Rudolf was never mainstream media news and his report was refuted long ago.

Why do you delude when you clearly don't know what you're talking about?

[Kolchab]

I'm not sure what that means. Let me rephase the question. Is it possible for anyone to enter a mass gassing chamber right after an event, without gas masks or gloves as the eyewitness testimony suggests,

The testimony suggests no such thing.
Auschwitz commandant Hoess stated in his autobiograph that the Sonderkommando dragged the bodies out of the gas chambers, smoking cigaretts and eating.

The Sonderkommando was therefore obviously not wearing gasmasks. And they also did not have protective suits and gloves on, which was mandatory in fumigation rooms after the fumigation gassings.

[Commander]

You guys, you holocaust fairytale crew, you all say, "German civilians had to be kept in the dark about what was going on, so all the "gas chambers" were in the east." :rolleyes:

Only problem is, have you ever looked at a map? Auschwitz is not very far from Germany, in fact it is much closer than Holland or many parts of France. There was also a large German population living in Poland.

Your theory is just another lie out of desperation, nobody, I mean nobody, outside of the clinically insane Christian Zionists believe your b.s. story any more.

[cerberus]

The CommanderOnly problem is, have you ever looked at a map? Auschwitz is not very far from Germany, in fact it is much closer than Holland or many parts of France. There was also a large German population living in Poland.

Your theory is just another lie out of desperation, nobody, I mean nobody, outside of the clinically insane Christian Zionists believe your b.s. story any more.
Again your own knowledge fails you Commander.
No use me asking you a question as
1. You won't know
and
2.You more than likely won't answer.

Auschwitz evolved into a centre which don't extracted a slave labour force from a population deported to the camp (which became Auschwitz-Birkenau ) and which also exterminated ( largely upon arrival) those who could not be made to work . ( the young , the elderly , the sick and the lame).
"The usless eaters".

Auschwitz openned its doors first to accomadate Polish political prisoners , it was expanded to take Soviet POW's and then Jews and other "undesirables".
Industrial resources and the needs of IG Farden were prime considerations - the killing came later.

I trust this will explain how the camp came to be - gassing was not the reason it was where it was.

So Commander - sorry to disappoint , no lie from a desperation and no BS tale.
:rolleyes:

[Commander]

I know all about the history of Auschwitz, how it evolved. Going over that does not change the point I'm making, your "Upset German civilians" rational is complete nonsense. Just admit it, attack me from some other, more practical logic.

[Dances with Wolves]

I know all about the history of Auschwitz, how it evolved. Going over that does not change the point I'm making, your "Upset German civilians" rational is complete nonsense. Just admit it, attack me from some other, more practical logic.

He is unable to refute, only spew out his hateful jewish venom and nonsense.

[Dances with Wolves]

= and which also exterminated ( largely upon arrival) those who could not be made to work . ( the young , the elderly , the sick and the lame).


spin a lie around a kernel of truth, another known jewish MO. You have no prove whatsoever that the above statement is true. NONE.

[Trojan]

Auschwitz commandant Hoess stated in his autobiograph that the Sonderkommando dragged the bodies out of the gas chambers, smoking cigaretts and eating.


Please give us the exact quote ... or are you like Dances with Wolves and unable to support your allegations of truth?

[Trojan]

spin a lie around a kernel of truth, another known jewish MO. You have no prove whatsoever that the above statement is true. NONE.

Not sure what you would consider "prove" - but this would be considered evidence by anyone with half a brain.

" In a report entitled "Resettlement of Jews," SS Sturmbannfu"hrer
Gricksch briefly described the selection process for SS-Col. von
Herff and Reichsfu"hrer-SS Himmler, after an inspection of Auschwitz
on 14-16 May 1943. (Fleming, 142)

The Auschwitz camp plays a special role in the resolution of the
Jewish question. The most advance methods permit the execution
of the Fuehrer-order in the shortest possible time and without
arousing much attention. The so-called "resettlement action"
runs the following course: The Jews arrive in special trains
(freight cars) toward evening and are driven on special tracks
to areas of the camp specifically set aside for this purpose.
There the Jews are unloaded and examined for their fitness to
work by a team of doctors, in the presence of the camp
commandant and several SS officers. At this point anyone who
can somehow be incorporated into the work program is put in a
special camp. The curably ill are sent straight to a medical
camp and are restored to health through a special diet. The
basic principle behind everything is: conserve all manpower for
work. The previous type of "resettlement action" has been
thoroughly rejected, since it is too costly to destroy precious
work energy on a continual basis.

The unfit go to cellars in a large house which are entered from
outside. They go down five or six steps into a fairly long,
well-constructed and well-ventilated cellar area, which is lined
with benches to the left and right. It is brightly lit, and the
benches are numbered. The prisoners are told that they are to
be cleansed and disinfected for their new assignments. They
must therefore completely undress to be bathed. To avoid panic
and to prevent disturbances of any kind, they are instructed to
arrange their clothing neatly under their respective numbers, so
that they will be able to find their things again after their
bath. Everything proceeds in a perfectly orderly fashion. Then
they pass through a small corridor and enter a large cellar room
which resembles a shower bath. In this room are three large
pillars, into which certain materials can be lowered from
outside the cellar room. When three- to four-hundred people
have been herded into this room, the doors are shut, and
containers filled with the substances are dropped down into the
pillars. As soon as the containers touch the base of the
pillars, they release particular substances that put the people
to sleep in one minute. A few minutes later, the door opens on
the other side, where the elevator is located. The hair of the
corpses is cut off, and their teeth are extracted (gold-filled
teeth) by specialists (Jews). It has been discovered that Jews
were hiding pieces of Jewelry, gold, platinum etc., in hollow
teeth. Then the corpses are loaded into elevators and brought
up to the first floor, where ten large crematoria are located.
(Because fresh corpses burn particularly well, only 50-100 lbs.
of coke are needed for the whole process.) The job itself is
performed by Jewish prisoners, who never step outside this camp
again.

The results of this "resettlement action" to date: 500,000 Jews.
Current capacity of the "resettlement action" ovens: 10,000 in
24 hours."

[Dances with Wolves]

Not sure what you would consider "prove" - but this would be considered evidence by anyone with half a brain.

" In a report entitled "Resettlement of Jews," SS Sturmbannfu"hrer
Gricksch briefly described the selection process for SS-Col. von
Herff and Reichsfu"hrer-SS Himmler, after an inspection of Auschwitz
on 14-16 May 1943. (Fleming, 142)

The Auschwitz camp plays a special role in the resolution of the
Jewish question. The most advance methods permit the execution
of the Fuehrer-order in the shortest possible time and without
arousing much attention. The so-called "resettlement action"
runs the following course: The Jews arrive in special trains
(freight cars) toward evening and are driven on special tracks
to areas of the camp specifically set aside for this purpose.
There the Jews are unloaded and examined for their fitness to
work by a team of doctors, in the presence of the camp
commandant and several SS officers. At this point anyone who
can somehow be incorporated into the work program is put in a
special camp. The curably ill are sent straight to a medical
camp and are restored to health through a special diet. The
basic principle behind everything is: conserve all manpower for
work. The previous type of "resettlement action" has been
thoroughly rejected, since it is too costly to destroy precious
work energy on a continual basis.

The unfit go to cellars in a large house which are entered from
outside. They go down five or six steps into a fairly long,
well-constructed and well-ventilated cellar area, which is lined
with benches to the left and right. It is brightly lit, and the
benches are numbered. The prisoners are told that they are to
be cleansed and disinfected for their new assignments. They
must therefore completely undress to be bathed. To avoid panic
and to prevent disturbances of any kind, they are instructed to
arrange their clothing neatly under their respective numbers, so
that they will be able to find their things again after their
bath. Everything proceeds in a perfectly orderly fashion. Then
they pass through a small corridor and enter a large cellar room
which resembles a shower bath. In this room are three large
pillars, into which certain materials can be lowered from
outside the cellar room. When three- to four-hundred people
have been herded into this room, the doors are shut, and
containers filled with the substances are dropped down into the
pillars. As soon as the containers touch the base of the
pillars, they release particular substances that put the people
to sleep in one minute. A few minutes later, the door opens on
the other side, where the elevator is located. The hair of the
corpses is cut off, and their teeth are extracted (gold-filled
teeth) by specialists (Jews). It has been discovered that Jews
were hiding pieces of Jewelry, gold, platinum etc., in hollow
teeth. Then the corpses are loaded into elevators and brought
up to the first floor, where ten large crematoria are located.
(Because fresh corpses burn particularly well, only 50-100 lbs.
of coke are needed for the whole process.) The job itself is
performed by Jewish prisoners, who never step outside this camp
again.

The results of this "resettlement action" to date: 500,000 Jews.
Current capacity of the "resettlement action" ovens: 10,000 in
24 hours."

Yep, that may be prove, but it's not proof of anything.

When three- to four-hundred people
have been herded into this room, the doors are shut, and
containers filled with the substances are dropped down into the
pillars. As soon as the containers touch the base of the
pillars, they release particular substances that put the people
to sleep in one minute. A few minutes later, the door opens on
the other side, where the elevator is located.

What substance might that be, Trojie?

[Dances with Wolves]

By the way, where is this supposed to be happening? I thought there were holes in the roof? Or fake showers? Which is it?

[OVERWATCH]

About thirty five flame posts were deleted, mostly from Globus and Dances with Wolves, but also at least one other member. I am not going to go thru the rest of them and edit out all the times you :bitchfight: and called each other 'stupid', in posts that had at least some other value.

The next person who makes a flame post on this thread is responsible for getting the thread closed!

[Kolchab]

Please give us the exact quote ... or are you like Dances with Wolves and unable to support your allegations of truth?
Here is the exact quote as you requested. I hope you can read German:

Rudolf Höss: “Kommandant in Auschwitz”
Edited by Martin Broszat
P. 130, line 25 from the top:

“Und doch waren sie [die Juden vom Sonderkommand] mit einem Eifer dabei, der mich immer verwunderte.
[…]
Dann das Herausziehen der Leichen aus den Kammern, das Entfernen der Goldzähne, das Abschneiden der Haare, das Hinschleppen zu den Gruben oder an die Öfen.Das Unterhalten des Feuers bei den Gruben, das Übergießen des angesammelten Fettes, das Herumstochern in den brennenden Leichenbergen, um Luft zuzuführen. All diese Arbeiten machten sie mit einer stumpfen Gleihmütigkeit, als wenn es irgendetwas Alltägliches wäre. Beim Leichenschleppen aßen sie oder rauchten. Selbst bei der grausigen Arbeit des Verbrennens der schon längere Zeit in den Massengräben liegenden ließen sie sich nicht vom Essen abhalten.”

Concerning the ‘Holocaust’ I share many thoughts and ideas with Dances with Wolves.

[cerberus]

DWWHe is unable to refute, only spew out his hateful jewish venom and nonsense.
I think this has already been explained int ewrms that only the blind could not understand, or the complete denier.
The T4 experience was still fresh in the minds of the planners , the location of the main Jewish population masses were in the east so why "import" when you are in the business of "deporting" , people would be bound to ask , why are you brining them all in here and where are they going to ?
Germany being somewhat more densely populated would produce problems when it came to covering mass murder.
Poland , less problems with the logistscs of movement , less population problems , and the added extra - an occupied nation does what it is told - apart from which we come back to the needs of industry , which started it all to begin with.

For one who knows , you ask some basic questions , and why do so when your mind is made up and you have no interst in what answer may be given.
Kind of a waste of time don't you think ?

DWWspin a lie around a kernel of truth, another known jewish MO. You have no prove whatsoever that the above statement is true. NONE.
BS DWW, what is your "kernel of truth" , the proof is overwhelming.
It seems that we are again doing the "same old same old" - done to death so many times - done formally here and lost formally by the revisionists chosen few , done to death in the courts both in the UK and in Canada , done to death again , and gain and agin and still you guys cling to your delusions.
So be it , that is your choice , only people you foll are yourselves and there is no foll like an old fool.
Be my guests - if you think I am going to do this all again , forget it .
You say otherwise , you prove it - I have no arguement with what is a very reliable historical record - one proven time and time again.
The ball is still in your court , at least have the good grace to take the racket in your hand if you attempt to return the serve.

DWWBy the way, where is this supposed to be happening? I thought there were holes in the roof? Or fake showers? Which is it?
I see you are into the Fred Toben scholl of soundbites , "No Holes , No Holocaust".
Holes in the roof have indeed been found - you may recall Ball was debunked and he refused to pay up on his reward, just as IHR had to be dragged through the courts to be made to pay on their broken promise.

You know the ones don't you DWW ?
Same old same old , time and time again - one thing I will say - the revisionist bottom is as sound as it is large - and you never tire of having it kicked.:rofl:
Well , its your arse after all !!:rofl:
DSIThe next person who makes a flame post on this thread is responsible for getting the thread closed!
And who would blame the man ?
God knows this endless rubbish is a waste of bandwidth and time -m unless DDW can provide solid proof that this did not take place - tere is no gain in going on.
The ball is in his court , play it or give it up.
Jusr remember.
The leading lights ofyour cause cannot explain where 5.3 millions went , they have no idea and have said so - they won't admit that they are dead.
They refute the execution process - in the face of all accounts and suriving written evidence.
They cherry pick sources to ignore the truth - as faurission was caught doing.
They all have different ideas , one cotradicts the other .
Their science has been totally disproven .
One man was exposed in court as being totally unreliable and his explainations as being totally bogus and his research methodolgy poor to say the least .
The other had his papers withdrawn in a libel action at the last minute rather than see them exposed as the lies they were by expert witnesses.

So DWW if you can do better the floor is your , just remember all your experts have failed totally so are you going to bring new evidence , and if so why are you not guset speaker at the council of cranks in Iran ? :hitler: :crazy: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Globus]

Here is the exact quote as you requested. I hope you can read German:

Rudolf Höss: “Kommandant in Auschwitz”
Edited by Martin Broszat
P. 130, line 25 from the top:

“Und doch waren sie [die Juden vom Sonderkommand] mit einem Eifer dabei, der mich immer verwunderte.
[…]
Dann das Herausziehen der Leichen aus den Kammern, das Entfernen der Goldzähne, das Abschneiden der Haare, das Hinschleppen zu den Gruben oder an die Öfen.Das Unterhalten des Feuers bei den Gruben, das Übergießen des angesammelten Fettes, das Herumstochern in den brennenden Leichenbergen, um Luft zuzuführen. All diese Arbeiten machten sie mit einer stumpfen Gleihmütigkeit, als wenn es irgendetwas Alltägliches wäre. Beim Leichenschleppen aßen sie oder rauchten. Selbst bei der grausigen Arbeit des Verbrennens der schon längere Zeit in den Massengräben liegenden ließen sie sich nicht vom Essen abhalten.”

...They dragged the bodies from the gas chambers, removed the gold teeth,
cut off the hair, then dragged the bodies to the pits or to the ovens. On
top of that, they had to maintain the fires in the pits, pour off the
accumulated fat, and poke holes intot he burning mountains of bodies, so
that more oxygen could enter. All these jobs they performed with an
indifferent coolness, just as if this was an everyday affair. While
dragging the bodies, they ate or smoked. Even the grusome job of burning
the bodies dug up after being in mass graves for a long time did not
prevent them from eating....

Source: Ho"ss, _Death Dealer_, p.160.

As can be readily seen, Hoess does not say anyone was smoking in the gas chambers. They ate or smoked while dragging the bodies to the pits.

This is a typical, long standing denier lie.

[Globus]

Auschwitz commandant Hoess stated in his autobiograph that the Sonderkommando dragged the bodies out of the gas chambers, smoking cigaretts and eating.

Hoess said no such thing. The quote in question has now been posted. Please do not tell this lie again.

[Globus]

I know all about the history of Auschwitz, how it evolved. Going over that does not change the point I'm making, your "Upset German civilians" rational is complete nonsense. Just admit it, attack me from some other, more practical logic.

Logic is not your strong suit. You simply ignore the evidence that Jews from Western Europe, Greece, Italy and eastern Europe were sent to Auschwitz. Your reason for denying this is nothing other than your desire to disbelieve, and your rationale, that Auschwitz wasn't very far east, betrays an ignorance of all the death camps, and the special history of Auschwitz.

[Globus]

spin a lie around a kernel of truth, another known jewish MO. You have no prove whatsoever that the above statement is true. NONE.

Historians proved it long ago. Your wilful ignorance of the history is your problem.

[Globus]

Yep, that may be prove, but it's not proof of anything.

It's one of numerous pieces of evidence that prove the history. And it is hardly refuted by such an empty reply.

What substance might that be, Trojie?

Gas.

[Globus]

By the way, where is this supposed to be happening? I thought there were holes in the roof? Or fake showers? Which is it?

Both. Try reading some history.

[Kolchab]

Hoess: “While dragging the bodies, they ate or smoked.”
As can be readily seen, Hoess does not say anyone was smoking in the gas chambers.

They ate or smoked while dragging the bodies to the pits.
Your interpretation of Hoess' writing is false.

Hoess wrote clearly “while dragging the bodies, they ate or smoked.”

And the bodies were allegedly dragged from the morgue, the alleged gas chamber, to the ovens and pits, according to Hoess.

Please do not tell this lie again
Please refrain from misinterpretations, falsifications and spinning the writings of others to suit your peculiar points of view.

And let us see what your friend Mr. Trojan has to say.

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus

...They dragged the bodies from the gas chambers, removed the gold teeth,
cut off the hair, then dragged the bodies to the pits or to the ovens. On
top of that, they had to maintain the fires in the pits, pour off the
accumulated fat, and poke holes intot he burning mountains of bodies, so
that more oxygen could enter. All these jobs they performed with an
indifferent coolness, just as if this was an everyday affair. While
dragging the bodies, they ate or smoked. Even the grusome job of burning
the bodies dug up after being in mass graves for a long time did not
prevent them from eating....
Hoess: “While dragging the bodies, they ate or smoked.”
As can be readily seen, Hoess does not say anyone was smoking in the gas chambers.

They ate or smoked while dragging the bodies to the pits.

Your interpretation of Hoess' writing is false.

No it isn't. The writing is quite clear.

Hoess wrote clearly “while dragging the bodies, they ate or smoked.”

While dragging the bodies to the pits. The pits were outdoors.

And the bodies were allegedly dragged from the morgue, the alleged gas chamber, to the ovens and pits, according to Hoess.

But the action described was not in the gas chamber, but while dragging the bodies to pits, that is, outside.



Originally Posted by Globus
Please do not tell this lie again

Please refrain from misinterpretations, falsifications and spinning the writings of others to suit your peculiar points of view.

The misinterpretations, falsifications and spinnings of obvious words are yours.

Please do not tell this lie again.

[Kolchab]

You can rephrase the questions as many ways as you want - the historical answer is the historical answer.
The extermination program was also, in some respects, about labor as well. The need for the labor also existed in the East, in the plants that many Jews and others would be forced to work.
The English language is not my mother’s tongue.
Can you explain what a “historical answer” is?

And what is the connection between the alleged extermination program and labor?

[Kolchab]

The question should be, do you? You are the one that depends so much on witness testimony.The depths to which the jew will go to distort, obfuscate and lie is just breathtaking.

Still having problems about this whole debate concept aren't you?
I am kind of curios, Trojan

What is your concept of this whole debate?

Are you attempting to convince others of your particular beliefs? Or that your beliefs are the only ones correct and that people should be imprisoned who don’t share your beliefs?

Are you a bigot, a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from your own?

[Captain Marinesko]

Look, the whole "You think people should be jailed"/Hate laws argument for the Holocaust doesn't cut it. Take a look at some other "anti-Free speech laws" in the world for a change.

It's illegal to preach other religious views in public in Saudi Arabia- does that make the Bible true?

How about this guy:

However, praise of Nicolae Ceauşescu in the media is forbidden by law. Dinel Staicu received a 250 million lei (approx. 9,000 United States dollars) fine for praising Ceauşescu and displaying his pictures on his private television channel (3TV Oltenia).[8]

I guess that means every good thing about Nicolae Ceausescu is automatically good because of these laws.

[Globus]

Are you a bigot, a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from your own?

The facts of history are not a matter of opinion, although bigoted, intolerant Jew haters like to pretend they are.

[Dances with Wolves]

Both. Try reading some history.

You'd do well to try the same. Of course, you're genetically unable to grasp the truth, so the exercise would be futile in your case.

Here's the deal folks, for all of you that can't think critically:

1.The jews claim that the Germans were so efficient at killing that they used a very inefficient method of gassing in areas clearly not meant to be used for gassing and were able to use code words and telepathy, even though the allies were reading all coded traffic from the camps to berlin and vis versa, to carry out a systematic extermination of the jews. I ask you;Why would the Germans use code words for extermination in cable traffic they thought secure?

2. The eyewitness accounts describe glaring impossibilities with both gassing and removing the bodies afterward. Yet lying jews like globus would have you believe that gassed bodies were immediately pulled from the chambers with no disinfectant and thrown into pits.

3. There has NEVER been a single autopsy report indicating death by gassing. NONE.

I could go on and on but the jews on this forum will continue to offer ridiculous answers to an event that NEVER HAPPENED. Why? Because it's all they can offer, that and jail time for anyone that questions their hoax.

[Dances with Wolves]

Look, the whole "You think people should be jailed"/Hate laws argument for the Holocaust doesn't cut it. Take a look at some other "anti-Free speech laws" in the world for a change.

It's illegal to preach other religious views in public in Saudi Arabia- does that make the Bible true?

How about this guy:

However, praise of Nicolae Ceauşescu in the media is forbidden by law. Dinel Staicu received a 250 million lei (approx. 9,000 United States dollars) fine for praising Ceauşescu and displaying his pictures on his private television channel (3TV Oltenia).[8]

I guess that means every good thing about Nicolae Ceausescu is automatically good because of these laws.

Comparing religion to an fairy tale event is pretty good, Captain Marvel. Thanks for the comparison.

The question to our young commie is, do YOU think people should be jailed for asking questions about the holohoax? I'm curious as to what your answer will be.

[Captain Marinesko]

Comparing religion to an fairy tale event is pretty good, Captain Marvel. Thanks for the comparison.

Thanks for the logical fallacy.


The question to our young commie is, do YOU think people should be jailed for asking questions about the holohoax? I'm curious as to what your answer will be.

No actually I don't. So what are you going to whine about now?

[OVERWATCH]

Both. Try reading some history.

Good job :nono: Thread is closed until further notice, as per warning above.

[OVERWATCH]

We now have a desperately needed new moderator to help stymie the flood of personal insults and one-liner shite posts which have been infesting this subforum since it's inception. Welcome Cerberus!

Thread will now be re-opened. Keep it reasonably clean and on-topic, folks. Thanks.

[Globus]

When the facts of an historical event are made up out of whole cloth, then it is duty of historians to find out the truth. Of course, bigoted, intolerant, hateful jews like you seek to deny the truth, and thus YOU are the real deniers.

I'm assuming this is the type of comment which will no longer be allowed?

[OVERWATCH]

I'm assuming this is the type of comment which will no longer be allowed?
THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED. Deleting the post.

Please report things like this rather than respond to them, thanks.

[Trojan]

You'd do well to try the same. Of course, you're genetically unable to grasp the truth, so the exercise would be futile in your case.

Here's the deal folks, for all of you that can't think critically:

1.The jews claim that the Germans were so efficient at killing that they used a very inefficient method of gassing in areas clearly not meant to be used for gassing and were able to use code words and telepathy, even though the allies were reading all coded traffic from the camps to berlin and vis versa, to carry out a systematic extermination of the jews. I ask you;Why would the Germans use code words for extermination in cable traffic they thought secure?

2. The eyewitness accounts describe glaring impossibilities with both gassing and removing the bodies afterward. Yet lying jews like globus would have you believe that gassed bodies were immediately pulled from the chambers with no disinfectant and thrown into pits.

3. There has NEVER been a single autopsy report indicating death by gassing. NONE.

I could go on and on but the jews on this forum will continue to offer ridiculous answers to an event that NEVER HAPPENED. Why? Because it's all they can offer, that and jail time for anyone that questions their hoax.


Getting a little desperate? Trying to get attention without having to form an actualy argument or statement of fact?

:deadhorse:

[delete]

Getting a little desperate? Trying to get attention without having to form an actualy argument or statement of fact?

:deadhorse:
The difference between us, is that when we see something that don't fit scientific procedure we think somebody is trying to suppress information, and a revised, more correct scientific view of a subject. You on the other hand, are so wound up in the holocaust dogma that 'every minor' inconsistency explained away.

I think it is wrong that Germar Rudolf must go to jail for doing science, instead of beeing able to continue his scientific experimentations, and try to find out what happened at Auschwitz.

The holocaust defenders should do their own analysis for preussian blue instead of crying foul play, and cry for punishment.

[Globus]

The difference between us, is that when we see something that don't fit scientific procedure we think somebody is trying to suppress information, and a revised, more correct scientific view of a subject. You on the other hand, are so wound up in the holocaust dogma that 'every minor' inconsistency explained away.

Your problem is you haven't shown anything that doesn't fit scientific procedure, and the notion that all historians, scholars, academics and others for 6 decades haven't happened on your scientific epiphany is, frankly, laughable.

I think it is wrong that Germar Rudolf must go to jail for doing science, instead of beeing able to continue his scientific experimentations, and try to find out what happened at Auschwitz.

Rudolf is going to jail for lying about proven history and bending and distorting science to convey his lies. There aren't any major questions about what happened at Auschwitz.

The holocaust defenders should do their own analysis for preussian blue instead of crying foul play, and cry for punishment.

Prussian blue is scientifically irrelevant to the issue, and people who expose those who deny history are not defenders of history, but defenders of rationalism against intellectual nihilists who believe they can merely ignore the historical method in pursuit of some nefarious agenda.

[Commander]

Globus, when are we going to see the list with the 12 million names on it? The Germans kept meticulous records, it has to be there.

[Trojan]

The difference between us, is that when we see something that don't fit scientific procedure we think somebody is trying to suppress information, and a revised, more correct scientific view of a subject.


Is that the royal "we" or are the voices in your head also elaborating on this one?


You on the other hand, are so wound up in the holocaust dogma that 'every minor' inconsistency explained away.


What the hell are you talking about? Is English a second language for you or what?


I think it is wrong that Germar Rudolf must go to jail for doing science, instead of beeing able to continue his scientific experimentations, and try to find out what happened at Auschwitz.


I also feel it is wrong Germar is in jail - he should be free to make a complete ass of himself with immunity from prosecution.


The holocaust defenders should do their own analysis for preussian blue instead of crying foul play, and cry for punishment.

Why is prussian blue so important to you?

[Globus]

Globus, when are we going to see the list with the 12 million names on it? The Germans kept meticulous records, it has to be there.

Since they destroyed tons of records your supposition is incorrect.

Where is the list of names for Stalins murders? For Pol Pot's? For the Armenian genocide?

The notion that history can't establish the facts of a genocide without a list of the victims is silly.

[Dances with Wolves]

Globus, when are we going to see the list with the 12 million names on it? The Germans kept meticulous records, it has to be there.
When the jews finish doctoring the documents. Then and only then, you see.

[Globus]

When the jews finish doctoring the documents. Then and only then, you see.

More antisemitism presented as historical discussion.

Not that you have any evidence of anyone doctoring documents. But then denial doesn't need evidence, does it DWW?

[Commander]

Since they destroyed tons of records your supposition is incorrect.

Where is the list of names for Stalins murders? For Pol Pot's? For the Armenian genocide?

The notion that history can't establish the facts of a genocide without a list of the victims is silly.
On the 60 minutes show, they showed;

- a list of people who were not gassed [schindler's]
- a list of people sent to do rocket work
- some names in guest books

Help me here Globus, I want to believe. They kept saying the Germans kept all these massive records, they documented everything. [their words not mine]

The German killed 12 million people, I want to believe, but can you show me a list of any kind, with confirmed dead, it doesn't have to be all 12 million, I'll be satisfied with a list of 1 or 2 million, you will have me convinced!

[Globus]

On the 60 minutes show, they showed;

- a list of people who were not gassed [schindler's]

Obviously not a list the Nazis had or would need to destroy.

- a list of people sent to do rocket work

Obviously not an incriminating list that would need to be destroyed.

- some names in guest books

Obviously not a list that would need to be destroyed.

Help me here Globus, I want to believe. They kept saying the Germans kept all these massive records, they documented everything. [their words not mine]

No, it is not their words. They are your words. And what they documented and what they destroyed are two different things.

The German killed 12 million people, I want to believe,

What you believe doesn't matter, and you've demonstrated by your inability to show the lists of those killed by Stalin, Pol Pot and the Turks that the existence of such lists is irrelevant to proving genocide and history.

Or didn't you notice that!

[Commander]

No, it is not their words. They are your words. And what they documented and what they destroyed are two different things.

Globus, did you see 60 Minutes last night? If you did, you would not have made that statement.



What you believe doesn't matter, and you've demonstrated by your inability to show the lists of those killed by Stalin, Pol Pot and the Turks that the existence of such lists is irrelevant to proving genocide and history.

Or didn't you notice that!

Nobody, well nobody in Hollywood or New York care about Stalin or Pol Pot's death tally. Steven Schpielberg has made no movies about that.

Pol Pot has not invaded a Middle East country, stolen their land, & driven out the occupants.

Globus, I think you are ducking the question, you are not being helpful. :(

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus
No, it is not their words. They are your words. And what they documented and what they destroyed are two different things.


Globus, did you see 60 Minutes last night? If you did, you would not have made that statement.

Only if one believes that your word means anything.



Originally Posted by Globus

What you believe doesn't matter, and you've demonstrated by your inability to show the lists of those killed by Stalin, Pol Pot and the Turks that the existence of such lists is irrelevant to proving genocide and history.

Or didn't you notice that!

Nobody, well nobody in Hollywood or New York care about Stalin or Pol Pot's death tally. Steven Schpielberg has made no movies about that.

Whether someone cares about it is irrelevant, as is your particular political prejudices. The fact remains that you are unable to address the evidence that a lack of a list of those killed in a genocide is not in the least significant.

Globus, I think you are ducking the question, you are not being helpful

Then you're rather odd, because I have not only answered it, I have shown it is irrelevant. And you're the one ducking the question which proves its irrelevance.

You don't really think such silly lines of argument make Holocaus denial appear very thoughtful, do you?

[Commander]

You don't really think such silly lines of argument make Holocaus denial appear very thoughtful, do you?
I am not denying I have seen the light ! I want to see the lists so I can spread the good word. :munch:

It is hard for me to promote something without any material to fall back on. If I had some lists with names, confirmed gas chamber deaths, I could be a real asset to our cause. :)

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus

You don't really think such silly lines of argument make Holocaus denial appear very thoughtful, do you?

I am not denying I have seen the light ! I want to see the lists so I can spread the good word.

Your list gambit died a horrible death.

Sometimes its good to actually know something about the history before discussing it!

[Commander]

Globus without any proof I am nothing more than a snake charmer. How can I help a fellow holocoster without something to work with? You are my mentor, I need your help, show me some proof. Please ! :( :link: :dance:

[Captain Marinesko]

Nobody, well nobody in Hollywood or New York care about Stalin or Pol Pot's death tally. Steven Schpielberg has made no movies about that.

So I guess The Killing Fields was never made then? And there are plenty of anti-Soviet movies to last a life-time.

[Globus]

Globus without any proof I am nothing more than a snake charmer.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

The antidote, of course, is knowledge. Would you like a bibliography?

[Kolchab]

For one who knows, you ask some basic questions , and why do so when your mind is made up and you have no interst in what answer may be given.
Kind of a waste of time don't you think ?
It seems to me that the minds of most Holocaust believers are also made up and closed to any different ideas.

BS DWW, what is your "kernel of truth" , the proof is overwhelming.
It seems that we are again doing the "same old same old" - done to death so many times - done formally here and lost formally by the revisionists chosen few , done to death in the courts both in the UK and in Canada , done to death again , and gain and agin and still you guys cling to your delusions.
As long as there are laws which prohibit under penalty of imprisonment the questioning of the Jewish Holocaust myth, as long as judges run for cover by proclaiming judicial notice because everything is “offenkundig” (self evident), the Jewish Holocaust myth will be questioned.
If you don’t like it, then don’t participate in a forum like this.

Kolchab

[Globus]

Originally Posted by cerberus
For one who knows, you ask some basic questions , and why do so when your mind is made up and you have no interst in what answer may be given.
Kind of a waste of time don't you think ?

It seems to me that the minds of most Holocaust believers are also made up and closed to any different ideas.

Denial of proven facts is not an "idea", but a political polemic with no basis in fact. The reason we study things is to know and understand them. If a bunch of strange people started denying that WWII occurred, or that the Gulag occurred, or that wars in the Middle East occurred, we wouldn't claim that people who dismissed such nonsense were closed to new ideas. We'd say they were closed to nonsense.


Originally Posted by cerberus
BS DWW, what is your "kernel of truth" , the proof is overwhelming.
It seems that we are again doing the "same old same old" - done to death so many times - done formally here and lost formally by the revisionists chosen few , done to death in the courts both in the UK and in Canada , done to death again , and gain and agin and still you guys cling to your delusions.

As long as there are laws which prohibit under penalty of imprisonment the questioning of the Jewish Holocaust myth, as long as judges run for cover by proclaiming judicial notice because everything is “offenkundig” (self evident), the Jewish Holocaust myth will be questioned.

But the laws in question have nothing to do with the historical facts, so what you're really saying is that you have no reason to deny the Holocaust, but will use an irrelevancy to justify doing so.

Judges always take judicial notice of well known facts, including all historical facts. Claiming this as an excuse for denial betrays an obvious double standard that you are applying to only this event, again, for purposes of justification.

If you don’t like it, then don’t participate in a forum like this.

Not when we can simply point out the emptiness of your position!

[Captain Marinesko]

It seems to me that the minds of most Holocaust believers are also made up and closed to any different ideas.


As long as there are laws which prohibit under penalty of imprisonment the questioning of the Jewish Holocaust myth, as long as judges run for cover by proclaiming judicial notice because everything is “offenkundig” (self evident), the Jewish Holocaust myth will be questioned.
If you don’t like it, then don’t participate in a forum like this.

Kolchab

As I pointed out before, there are similar laws against questioning other various ideologies or issues in other countries. This doesn't fly.

[cerberus]

KolchabAs long as there are laws which prohibit under penalty of imprisonment the questioning of the Jewish Holocaust myth, as long as judges run for cover by proclaiming judicial notice because everything is “offenkundig” (self evident), the Jewish Holocaust myth will be questioned.
If you don’t like it, then don’t participate in a forum like this.

Kolchab

I had asked you to say what the "kernel of truth" was , you gace a statement of opinion .
As far as my participation in as forum like this goes , I can only say that after a while it is a question of seing the "Auschwitz swimming pool" for about the 600th time - it is a case of "repeat when necessary" - I see little by way of new argument and even less by way of proof.
"the same old , same old" - if you catch my drift.
Now to return to your "kernel of proof" , what was it ?

[Kolchab]

I had asked you to say what the "kernel of truth" was , you gace a statement of opinion .
As far as my participation in as forum like this goes , I can only say that after a while it is a question of seing the "Auschwitz swimming pool" for about the 600th time - it is a case of "repeat when necessary" - I see little by way of new argument and even less by way of proof.
"the same old , same old" - if you catch my drift.
Now to return to your "kernel of proof" , what was it ?

This thread is about the trial of Germar Rudolf, who questioned the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz based on some research, which the man performed himself.
His findings are included in the so called “Rudolf Report” http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/index.html#toc

Instead of proving him wrong, Rudolf was deported by the Israel run USA to Germany, where he was promptly imprisoned and dragged in leg irons before the German courts.

No, I don’t catch your drift. What is “your drift” on this?

And what do you mean with “kernel of proof’? The man is in jail for writing his report, he thinks that he will get two full 5 year sentences in jail for writing his report. This is a fact, kernel or no kernel.

Again, what is your drift?

That crazed Holocaused believers are happy about the man’s bad fortune, this we all know already.

Kolchab

[Burrhus]

It seems to me that the minds of most Holocaust believers are also made up and closed to any different ideas.


As long as there are laws which prohibit under penalty of imprisonment the questioning of the Jewish Holocaust myth, as long as judges run for cover by proclaiming judicial notice because everything is “offenkundig” (self evident), the Jewish Holocaust myth will be questioned.
If you don’t like it, then don’t participate in a forum like this.

Kolchab

See my response here.
http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?p=265106#post265106

[Globus]

See my response here.
http://www.thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?p=265106#post265106

You mean the one in which you make the silly assertion that laws against the roots of denial somehow say something about a history who's broad outlines were well known before the laws were ever passed?!

[cerberus]

kolchabThis thread is about the trial of Germar Rudolf, who questioned the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz based on some research, which the man performed himself.
His findings are included in the so called “Rudolf Report” http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/index.html#toc

Instead of proving him wrong, Rudolf was deported by the Israel run USA to Germany, where he was promptly imprisoned and dragged in leg irons before the German courts.

No, I don’t catch your drift. What is “your drift” on this?

And what do you mean with “kernel of proof’? The man is in jail for writing his report, he thinks that he will get two full 5 year sentences in jail for writing his report. This is a fact, kernel or no kernel.

Again, what is your drift?

That crazed Holocaused believers are happy about the man’s bad fortune, this we all know already.

Kolchab

You are of the opinion that Rudolf's report is valid , which you have the right to be - I would not deny you this right.
As far as his report being valid - I think its withdrawl as evidence by david irving is as close as it has come to expert examination - (please correct me if I am wrong)- that it was withdrawn - without explaination - in the face of its impending examination by experts - and in the light of an extensive rebuttal being ready for presentation - do you not find this extraordinary in itself ?

I am all for Rudolf's report being exaimined by experts and in the full light of publicity - would you not agree that this would be a good thing ?
Evidently David Irving - did not - and Irving had only a mere £2.5 million pounds to lose.

Do you not find this to be extraordinary in itself ?

[de kludde]

As I pointed out before, there are similar laws against questioning other various ideologies or issues in other countries. This doesn't fly.
JP (assuming you are indeed JP from vnnforum), you quote the example of Saudi Arabia. Does this mean that you believe what the Saudi Arabian thought police tells you to believe? Or do you hold the view that the intellectual positions protected by these laws, which of course amount to more than just the rejection of Christianity, are mostly incredible?

For me, the fact that the authorities see fit to protect some particular theory by means of the penal law is still a pretty strong indicator that something might be wrong about these claims. There seem to be very few exceptions to this rule, mostly of the form that some religious sect outlaws the superstitions of competing sects, in addition to protecting its own particular kind of superstition.

The example of Romania is not of this kind, but I would still assume that the intellectual position protected by these laws, namely the rejection of Ceaucescu's way of running the country, would be widely challenged without such laws. And the rulers imposing these laws have lost much of their credibility in the sense that they cannot run the country better than Ceaucescu did.

This means that if we look at other penal laws to protect some particular theory against refutation, the following holds:

The theory protected by these laws has usually (but not always) turned out to be false.
Without such protection, it would not have a chance to win universal acceptance.
The rulers imposing such penal laws usually have lost credibility in one way or another.

So the fact penal laws are introduced in order to protect some particular theory is a relatively strong argument against that theory, even without further indications (like previous fraudulent claims by the supporters of that theory, etc.)

[Globus]

JP (assuming you are indeed JP from vnnforum), you quote the example of Saudi Arabia. Does this mean that you believe what the Saudi Arabian thought police tells you to believe?

The laws don't require that you believe. They only require that you not publically lie about historical facts. Not the same thing at all. And the facts are completely seperate from the law.

For me, the fact that the authorities see fit to protect some particular theory by means of the penal law is still a pretty strong indicator that something might be wrong about these claims.

We're not talking about theories. We're talking about historical facts, which most courts in most countries take judicial notice of, just as they do commonly known facts in all disciplines.

The laws don't protect the facts, they protect the society from the lies.

Trying to pretend that the settled conclusions on matters of fact from historical inquiry and analysis are "theories" dooms your argument from the outset.

[delete]

kolchab

You are of the opinion that Rudolf's report is valid , which you have the right to be - I would not deny you this right.
As far as his report being valid - I think its withdrawl as evidence by david irving is as close as it has come to expert examination - (please correct me if I am wrong)- that it was withdrawn - without explaination - in the face of its impending examination by experts - and in the light of an extensive rebuttal being ready for presentation - do you not find this extraordinary in itself ?

I am all for Rudolf's report being exaimined by experts and in the full light of publicity - would you not agree that this would be a good thing ?
Evidently David Irving - did not - and Irving had only a mere £2.5 million pounds to lose.

Do you not find this to be extraordinary in itself ?

It was a libel trial and not a scientific examination.

I am glad you agree that scientific examinations however preposterous from your view should not be punished. I will say the same with the people who FMPOV spread lies and distorts truth.

I know that they mostly do it because they believe in the 'Truth', and because they believe the 'experts' the propaganda machinery produces.

I guess the 'holohoaxers' could say the same against us, but this only goes to show how the courts is unable to determine what people is to regard as the truth.

Add to this that some courtsystems use lay judges and juries, and you have the posibility of me or cerberus influencing truth by viewing evidence completly different, if we were to be appointed.

[Globus]

It was a libel trial and not a scientific examination.

Irving claims to have based his denial on scientific evidence, and Irving introduced this evidence, which he then withdrew when a scientific rebuttal was entered by the defense.

[de kludde]

The laws don't require that you believe. They only require that you not publically lie about historical facts.

You are splitting hairs. You could as well claim that Giordano Bruno was burnt not for having heretical thoughts but for expressing them publicly. The same holds for all the examples we are talking about. Merely doubting something without uttering your thoughts never gets you punished, for obvious reasons.

And the facts are completely seperate from the law.

Of course they are. Passing a law against attempts to refute a certain theory does not mean that the theory is correct. In fact, assertions protected that way have usually turned out to be false.

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus
The laws don't require that you believe. They only require that you not publically lie about historical facts.

You are splitting hairs.

Oh no. Telling someone they cannot publically tell lies is not telling them what to believe. That is a material difference, one often blurred by deniers because they want to create the appearance that the laws have something to do with the facts, when they don't.

Originally Posted by Globus
And the facts are completely seperate from the law.

Of course they are. Passing a law against attempts to refute a certain theory

There is no law against attempts at true revision of historical facts. Lies are not refutation.

does not mean that the theory is correct.

You again distort. We are talking about matters of fact, not theory. Those facts do not depend on laws, but on the historical process which unearthed them.

In fact, assertions protected that way have usually turned out to be false.

Non sequitur. The facts are proven before and completely apart from any laws.

[Burrhus]

Assuming for the sake of argument that Rudolf's scientific report was faulty, are the true believers saying that when a scientist makes a mistake that he is lying and should be subject to incarceration?

To anticipate your highly probable response, you're going to say that he knew that his findings were false and that he was therefore lying. Well, that would be perjury. Then the burden would be on the court to prove that they were false and that he knew that they were false. No such act was taken by the court. They declared his report to be false by judicial notice and in violation of the law without regard to its scientific accuracy.

Herein lies the crux of the matter with respect to Germar Rudolf's incarceration. The burden should be on the prosecutor to prove both that the report is false and that Rudolf knew that it was false.

It didn't.

That's persecution, not prosecution.

Why?

[Globus]

Herein lies the crux of the matter with respect to Germar Rudolf's incarceration. The burden should be on the prosecutor to prove both that the report is false and that Rudolf knew that it was false.

Of course the court had only to prove that he broke the law. That he obviously did. His rationale is entirely irrelevant.

[Kolchab]

The facts of history are not a matter of opinion, although bigoted, intolerant Jew haters like to pretend they are.
“The facts of history are not a matter of opinion, …”. What does that mean, what are you talking about?

What are “the facts of history”? Are you talking about the Jewish Holocaust myth?

»The alleged Holocaust of the Jews is a myth. That is a belief maintained by credulity or ignorance. It does not mean that the people who believe it are liars. They are not liars, but they are believers.«

Source: Faurisson in “Holocaust is West’s last taboo”
http://www.mehrnews.com/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=423519

Kolchab

[Kolchab]

Rudolf is going to jail for lying about proven history and bending and distorting science to convey his lies. There aren't any major questions about what happened at Auschwitz.
Rudolf took samples from the walls of the alleged homicidal gas chamber in Auschwitz/Birkenau and had them chemically analyzed by the laboratories of the Fresenius Institute.

Subsequently he a wrote the “Rudolf Report” about the results.
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/index.html#toc

Where are his lies? Can you be a little more specific?

Kolchab

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus
The facts of history are not a matter of opinion, although bigoted, intolerant Jew haters like to pretend they are.

“The facts of history are not a matter of opinion, …”. What does that mean, what are you talking about?

That facts are objectively arrived at through evidence. Are you saying you don't understand the difference between that and opinion?

What are “the facts of history”? Are you talking about the Jewish Holocaust myth?

Obviously it depends on the history, and you know what history we're talking about. You futhermore know the facts you deny, so you have your answer.

»The alleged Holocaust of the Jews is a myth. That is a belief maintained by credulity or ignorance. It does not mean that the people who believe it are liars. They are not liars, but they are believers.«

Ah, a religous catechism!

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus
Rudolf is going to jail for lying about proven history and bending and distorting science to convey his lies. There aren't any major questions about what happened at Auschwitz.

Rudolf took samples from the walls of the alleged homicidal gas chamber in Auschwitz/Birkenau and had them chemically analyzed by the laboratories of the Fresenius Institute.

Subsequently he a wrote the “Rudolf Report” about the results.
http://www.vho.org/GB/Books/trr/index.html#toc

Where are his lies? Can you be a little more specific?

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/blue/

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/not-the-science/

http://www.holocaust-history.org/irving-david/rudolf/affweb.pdf

[Kolchab]

Prussian blue is scientifically irrelevant to the issue, and people who expose those who deny history are not defenders of history, but defenders of rationalism against intellectual nihilists who believe they can merely ignore the historical method in pursuit of some nefarious agenda.

Prussian blue is a cyanide compound which formed in the walls of the fumigation rooms in Auschwitz/Birkenau due to the high exposure to cyanide acid, discharged from Zyklon-B pellets.

Morgue 1 of Krema II, where 500,000 Jews were allegedly gassed with cyanide acid, do not show the formation of the Prussian blue compound, allthough the walls were exposed to a similar density and duration as the fumigation rooms.

Please elaborate why you think that the formation or non-formation of Prussian blue is irrelevant? And what is “scientifically irrelevant”? Is there also something like non-scientifically irrelevant?

Kolchab

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus
Prussian blue is scientifically irrelevant to the issue, and people who expose those who deny history are not defenders of history, but defenders of rationalism against intellectual nihilists who believe they can merely ignore the historical method in pursuit of some nefarious agenda.

Prussian blue is a cyanide compound which formed in the walls of the fumigation rooms in Auschwitz/Birkenau due to the high exposure to cyanide acid, discharged from Zyklon-B pellets.

No, Prussian Blue is a compound with iron which formed in some of the fumigation chambers, and which occasionally forms as a result of exposure to HCN under special circumstances. Since its formation is special, it is worthless as a test for HCN exposure since it does not always form as a result of such exposure. But there are compounds which do always form and are to be found after any significant exposure and these are to be found in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

The issue of "high exposure" is not necessarily a deciding factor in Prussian Blue formation.

Morgue 1 of Krema II, where 500,000 Jews were allegedly gassed with cyanide acid, do not show the formation of the Prussian blue compound, allthough the walls were exposed to a similar density and duration as the fumigation rooms.

Whether it does or not is irrelevant, as already explained. This morgue does show significant traces of HCN.

Please elaborate why you think that the formation or non-formation of Prussian blue is irrelevant?

I have.

Now you need to show why a single compound among all that could form from HCN exposure is a necessary test for such exposure.

[Burrhus]

While it is possible that Rudolf's scientific report on Auscwitz may have been in error, a mistake, that does not make it a lie. The German prosecutor never accused Rudolf of lying and certainly never demonstrated that he was nor has anyone else to my knowledge.

His crime was making the report public regardless of its accuracy, scientific, historic or otherwise.

To the poster who cannot tell the difference between a lie and (possibly) a mistake, what can I say. Look in a dictionary?

[Captain Marinesko]

But mistakes made in compiling various Nazi crimes are often claimed to be deliberate lies by WNs.

[Globus]

While it is possible that Rudolf's scientific report on Auscwitz may have been in error, a mistake, that does not make it a lie.

He wasn't tried for the report. He was tried about the claim he made about gassing at Auschwitz, which was a lie.

The German prosecutor never accused Rudolf of lying and certainly never demonstrated that he was nor has anyone else to my knowledge.

He violated a law when he denied established history. Implicit in the law is lying.

His crime was making the report public regardless of its accuracy, scientific, historic or otherwise.

His crime was in drawing false conclusions about history based on his report and stating them publically.

To the poster who cannot tell the difference between a lie and (possibly) a mistake, what can I say. Look in a dictionary?

Try looking at the law. That's what controls the discussion, not attempts to change the facts of the law or the case.

[Kolchab]

Why is prussian blue so important to you?
Prussian blue is not important to me.

Prussian blue is probably important to paint manufactures, who use that stuff to make paint.

The non-formation of prussian blue at the walls in morgue 1, Krema II, the alleged homicidal gas chamber of 500,000 Jews, is an indication that the walls and ceiling were not exposed to a substantial cyanide acid, as compared to the fumigation rooms which indicate clear blue staining and the formation of prussian blue.

The non-formation of prussian blue in the morgue is of only secondary importance that the morgue was not used as the alleged gas chamber.

There are tons of other indications (Holocaust hoaxer speak) that the morgue was not used as claimed by the “eye witnesses”.

Kolchab

[cerberus]

KolchabThe non-formation of prussian blue in the morgue is of only secondary importance that the morgue was not used as the alleged gas chamber.

There are tons of other indications (Holocaust hoaxer speak) that the morgue was not used as claimed by the “eye witnesses”.

Kolchab

So why go to the bother of having a morgue to accomadate bodies which would be going straight for destruction , especially when the cremation capacity existed to destroy the dead quickly - storage space would not be required.

The steps into the morgue - did the dead walk in themselves ?
Why the need for an extraction system to air the "morgue"

If this building was a simple morgue why go to the trouble of destroying it so completlely , and the other "morgues" in the same area.
Why so many people sitting around the "morgues" in the photographs which comprise "The Auschwitz Album" ?

Why was an agent used to kill lice used in a morgue as suggested by Faurission ?

Questions like these have been asked time and time again and this is a again becoming "the same old same old ".
Given the repeated failures both on line and under expert examination I just have to sak why are we doing this again and agian and again ....and again ?

[Kolchab]

Globus, when are we going to see the list with the 12 million names on it? The Germans kept meticulous records, it has to be there.
Since they destroyed tons of records your supposition is incorrect.
What proof do you have that “they” destroyed tons of records which listed the details of 12 million Holocaust victims?

And who are “they”?

Where is the list of names for Stalins murders? For Pol Pot's? For the Armenian genocide?
How do you know that these name lists don’t exist? Some one must have counted either the dead or the missing. Otherwise the stated numbers of victims are wild guesses taken out of thin air

The notion that history can't establish the facts of a genocide without a list of the victims is silly.
How then does history establish the facts of a genocide? Does history base it on hearsay, on black propaganda? Or is it established by the victors who sit on trial over the vanquished?

Kolchab

[Globus]

The non-formation of prussian blue at the walls in morgue 1, Krema II, the alleged homicidal gas chamber of 500,000 Jews, is an indication that the walls and ceiling were not exposed to a substantial cyanide acid, as compared to the fumigation rooms which indicate clear blue staining and the formation of prussian blue.

Not in the least. Prussian Blue is not merely the result of "substantial cyanide" exposure". Furthermore, the delousing chambers were exposed to HCN for far longer periods of time than the homicidal gas chambers.

The simple fact of the matter is that the HCN residues found on the homicidal gas chambers prove conclusively that they were exposed to HCN is fairly large quantities.

The non-formation of prussian blue in the morgue is of only secondary importance that the morgue was not used as the alleged gas chamber.

It is irrelevant to that fact. And buttressing the scientific proof that HCN was used in the homicidal gas chambers is a plethora of testimonial and documentary evidence.

[quoteThere are tons of other indications (Holocaust hoaxer speak) that the morgue was not used as claimed by the “eye witnesses”.[/quote]

In fact, none at all, of your could list a half dozen or so easily.

[Globus]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commander
Globus, when are we going to see the list with the 12 million names on it? The Germans kept meticulous records, it has to be there.

Since they destroyed tons of records your supposition is incorrect.

What proof do you have that “they” destroyed tons of records which listed the details of 12 million Holocaust victims?

The Nazis told us they destroyed records. This is not a controversial fact.



Where is the list of names for Stalins murders? For Pol Pot's? For the Armenian genocide?

How do you know that these name lists don’t exist? [/quote]

So you don't know whether they do or not, and your willingness to believe in those mass murders is on hold until you find out?


The notion that history can't establish the facts of a genocide without a list of the victims is silly.

How then does history establish the facts of a genocide?

Through evidence, obviously.

[Kolchab]

Denial of proven facts is not an "idea", but a political polemic with no basis in fact. The reason we study things is to know and understand them. If a bunch of strange people started denying that WWII occurred, or that the Gulag occurred, or that wars in the Middle East occurred, we wouldn't claim that people who dismissed such nonsense were closed to new ideas. We'd say they were closed to nonsense.
The problem here is, is for example the existence of the alleged homicidal gas chambers of the Jewish Holocaust story a “proven fact”, and what makes it a proven fact?

Kolchab

[Captain Marinesko]

The problem here is, is for example the existence of the alleged homicidal gas chambers of the Jewish Holocaust story a “proven fact”, and what makes it a proven fact?

Kolchab


Well let's see, the inventory documentation and blueprints, the reference to such buildings as Vergasungkeller in various documents, the photos, and the positive tests for cyanide.

[cerberus]

The Commander.Originally Posted by Commander
Globus, when are we going to see the list with the 12 million names on it? The Germans kept meticulous records, it has to be there.

Revisionist "historians" have made use of these records , which they claim are very exact- they also neglect to say that they are incomplete and are often worthless.
May i refer the Commander to the records of T4 - the death certificates - which form a goverment record - lets just say they hide murder.
Any comment Commander ?
Likewise the Auschwitz records - the death books are not a complete recrod in themselves and they do not acount for any prisoners not admitted into the camp records , selection on the arrival platform - those killed on arrival were never entered into any form of record nor were they counted - as long as none were left alive.
Any comment Commander ?

KolchabHow then does history establish the facts of a genocide? Does history base it on hearsay, on black propaganda? Or is it established by the victors who sit on trial over the vanquished?
None of these things. What youhave presented is propaganda.
Kolchab - perhaps you can explain where the 5.3 million missing people went ?
Faurission and Toben cannot do this - perhaps you can ?
Perhaps you can explain the records of the ez Gruppen in which they record what they did where they did it and to whom they did it to ?
Just to clarify what "it" was - "it" inolved shooting people to death , men , women and children - without regard for age.
Himmler in a pre barbarossa meeting noted that "Jews are to be shot as partisans"
Perhaps you might be able to explain where I am going wrong - it must be simple , but it does appear that genocide was taking place ?

[cerberus]

deleteIt was a libel trial and not a scientific examination.
In which Irving presented evidence to support his appeal.
The defendants had to produce at great expense expert evidence to refute papers given to Irving from Germar Rudolf which asserted that gassing could not have taken place and that there was no evidence to support it.
This rebuttal was prepared - Irving would ahve been aware of it via the legal process - Irving went to court and at the last minute when the whole thing was "ready to rock" he withdrew all his evidence , without explaination.
I trust you will now know what took place at Irvings appeal.
I trust that you will also understand that the Judge would not allow "The Leutcher Report" to be entered as evidence as it was a totally shoddy and flawed work by a man who was unqualified to produce it.
I trust that you are aware that this work is still misrepresented on revisionist sites as a serious scientific document and is sold as such.
Dick Turpin at least had the common courtesy to wear a mask when he took people's money.

FMPOV
I honestly don't who these people are , can you explain. (Thanks).
they believe the 'experts' the propaganda machinery produces.

If I may reflect to you the unproven and often discredited record of the revisionist movement in terms of their academic record and what they have so far "proven" about anything.
There is no propaganda beyond that which you believe yourself , let me introduce you to some.
"Court Historians" ("bought and paid for") , "Holohoax (trade mark) , "No Holes, No Holocaust" ,"we know from the records",
when I wake up I will add a few more - read any of the psots by the revisionts on Stormfront - it is packed with soundbites many of which you will find reproduced here as well - all are equally meaningless and totally hollow But ! they sound great - and that is all that counts.
I guess the 'holohoaxers' could say the same against us, but this only goes to show how the courts is unable to determine what people is to regard as the truth.
I see you have employed another soundbite -holohoaxers - sound good .
Tell me delete , why do people employ expert witnesses in a court room .
have you ever been to a medical tribunal - why does a doctor be there to interpret the evidence presented ?
Could it be that he might be an "expert" , could it be that he might have to explain quite complex issues and put them into terms which the "average joe" - (who does not have his expert knowledge) will be able to understand clearly ?
"Average Joe" I used this to illustrate how your sound bites come across - sounds good by it only means the average perosn - it does catch the eye and looks the part - does it add to the arguement - not in the least.
You see my point(s) ?
Add to this that some courtsystems use lay judges and juries, and you have the posibility of me or cerberus influencing truth by viewing evidence completly different, if we were to be appointed.
Which is why experts are employed to make things clear.

[Globus]

Originally Posted by Globus
Denial of proven facts is not an "idea", but a political polemic with no basis in fact. The reason we study things is to know and understand them. If a bunch of strange people started denying that WWII occurred, or that the Gulag occurred, or that wars in the Middle East occurred, we wouldn't claim that people who dismissed such nonsense were closed to new ideas. We'd say they were closed to nonsense.

The problem here is, is for example the existence of the alleged homicidal gas chambers of the Jewish Holocaust story a “proven fact”, and what makes it a proven fact?

The evidence makes it a proven fact. They are no more in question than that the Allies landed on D-Day.

[Kolchab]

But the laws in question have nothing to do with the historical facts, so what you're really saying is that you have no reason to deny the Holocaust, but will use an irrelevancy to justify doing so.

Judges always take judicial notice of well known facts, including all historical facts. Claiming this as an excuse for denial betrays an obvious double standard that you are applying to only this event, again, for purposes of justification.
But to take judicial notice certainly does not explain the existence of the alleged homicidal gas chambers.

»A famous example of the use of judicial notice was Abraham Lincoln's "Almanac Case", Illinois v. Armstrong (1858). When a witness claimed that the moon was directly overhead when he saw a murder, giving enough light to see clearly, Lincoln introduced an almanac into evidence to show that at the time in question, the moon was just above the horizon. The court accepted the information in the almanac despite evidence to the contrary from the witness.«
(Wiki)
With other words, taking judicial notice has to be backed up.

Jyst to say that a certain event is a “historical fact” is not sufficient.

»The danger of judicial notice is that, if abused, it can deprive the fact finder of the opportunity to decide a contestable fact in a case. In Walker v. Halliburton Services, 654 So. 2d 365 (La. App. 1995), Johnny Walker fell from a tank truck approximately ten feet to a concrete floor. Walker sought workers' compensation benefits for his injuries, and his claim was denied by the Office of Workers' Compensation.
At the application hearing, the hearing officer stated that it was her experience that a soft-tissue injury heals in six weeks. She then took judicial notice of the fact that a soft-tissue injury heals in six weeks—preventing Walker from contesting that proposition—and disallowed Walker's claim. On appeal the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, reversed the decision and ordered the payment of workers' compensation benefits. According to the court, it was a clear error of law for the hearing officer to take judicial notice of such intricate medical knowledge.«

But this thread is about the trial of Germar Rudolf.

Yesterday was the fifth day of the trial. It was short. Rudolf was at least brought into the court room without leg irons on.

It is sad for me to observe how little interest there is on this thread about this trial. All I hear are insults, “stupid”, “idiots”, Nazis, anti-Semitics, irrelevant etc.

I am therefore not really interested in continuing discussing the summaries of those five trial days of Germar Rudolf on this forum. It is a waste of time, and I have better things to do.

Kolchab

[Globus]

But the laws in question have nothing to do with the historical facts, so what you're really saying is that you have no reason to deny the Holocaust, but will use an irrelevancy to justify doing so.

Judges always take judicial notice of well known facts, including all historical facts. Claiming this as an excuse for denial betrays an obvious double standard that you are applying to only this event, again, for purposes of justification.

But to take judicial notice certainly does not explain the existence of the alleged homicidal gas chambers.

Taking judicial notice of anything doesn't explain it, nor does it need to.

»A famous example of the use of judicial notice was Abraham Lincoln's "Almanac Case", Illinois v. Armstrong (1858). When a witness claimed that the moon was directly overhead when he saw a murder, giving enough light to see clearly, Lincoln introduced an almanac into evidence to show that at the time in question, the moon was just above the horizon. The court accepted the information in the almanac despite evidence to the contrary from the witness.«
(Wiki)
With other words, taking judicial notice has to be backed up.

And commonly accepted facts under judicial notice are backed up. That's how they become commonly accepted facts.

Jyst to say that a certain event is a “historical fact” is not sufficient.

Yes in fact it is. Courts are well aware of commonly accepted facts, and Judicial notice is no different from any other court procedure, it must be applied carefully and properly. Judicial notice of proven facts of the Holocaust is properly applied.

[delete]

delete
In which Irving presented evidence to support his appeal.
The defendants had to produce at great expense expert evidence to refute papers given to Irving from Germar Rudolf which asserted that gassing could not have taken place and that there was no evidence to support it.
This rebuttal was prepared - Irving would ahve been aware of it via the legal process - Irving went to court and at the last minute when the whole thing was "ready to rock" he withdrew all his evidence , without explaination.
I trust you will now know what took place at Irvings appeal.

I don't care what took place at Irvings appeal. It is simple really. The courts are no place to determine scientific truth, and the only place it is applied is the Holocaust and racial realism.


I trust that you will also understand that the Judge would not allow "The Leutcher Report" to be entered as evidence as it was a totally shoddy and flawed work by a man who was unqualified to produce it.
I trust that you are aware that this work is still misrepresented on revisionist sites as a serious scientific document and is sold as such.
Dick Turpin at least had the common courtesy to wear a mask when he took people's money.

Are your scientific capablility in chemistry so low that you call Dr. Greens 'rebuttal' scientific? Please explain how this refutes Rudolfs report. Scientific arguments only if you can do them.


I honestly don't who these people are , can you explain. (Thanks).

If I may reflect to you the unproven and often discredited record of the revisionist movement in terms of their academic record and what they have so far "proven" about anything.
There is no propaganda beyond that which you believe yourself , let me introduce you to some.
"Court Historians" ("bought and paid for") , "Holohoax (trade mark) , "No Holes, No Holocaust" ,"we know from the records",
when I wake up I will add a few more - read any of the psots by the revisionts on Stormfront - it is packed with soundbites many of which you will find reproduced here as well - all are equally meaningless and totally hollow But ! they sound great - and that is all that counts.

There is no honesty in cheap retorics, but you know I speak of revisionists.

Who desides what is propaganda and what is the truth???


I see you have employed another soundbite -holohoaxers - sound good .
Tell me delete , why do people employ expert witnesses in a court room .
have you ever been to a medical tribunal - why does a doctor be there to interpret the evidence presented ?
Could it be that he might be an "expert" , could it be that he might have to explain quite complex issues and put them into terms which the "average joe" - (who does not have his expert knowledge) will be able to understand clearly ?
"Average Joe" I used this to illustrate how your sound bites come across - sounds good by it only means the average perosn - it does catch the eye and looks the part - does it add to the arguement - not in the least.
You see my point(s) ?

Which is why experts are employed to make things clear.

Do you claim Dr. Green as one of your experts, and do you have the capability to explain why this is a refutation of Germar Rudolf Report?

Chemistry don't need experts to determine truth!!! That is why we call it a real science, as you use experiments to determine truth.

You are from now on my ignore list, as I will get banned if I continue this discussion. Merry Chirstmass

[Trojan]

I don't care what took place at Irvings appeal. It is simple really. The courts are no place to determine scientific truth, and the only place it is applied is the Holocaust and racial realism.




You don't know much about the US judicial system do you?

The courts readily decide what evidence will be allowed and that which will not. In fact, the judges are specifically instructed to act as the gate keepers.

The Federal courts follow the Daubert standard for any alleged expert testimony - this is applied at every level of the federal court system, and applied every day.

The taking of judicial notice or its equivalent is also applied in every US court system, again, on every level, every day.

[delete]

You don't know much about the US judicial system do you?

The courts readily decide what evidence will be allowed and that which will not. In fact, the judges are specifically instructed to act as the gate keepers.

The Federal courts follow the Daubert standard for any alleged expert testimony - this is applied at every level of the federal court system, and applied every day.

The taking of judicial notice or its equivalent is also applied in every US court system, again, on every level, every day.

Let's all rejoice for the US law system that have made 'creational science' approved as science after trials.

Are these experts to be trusted aswell, or are lay people alawed to use their common sense?

Science don't belong in the courts, it is proved by experiments.

[Globus]

Are your scientific capablility in chemistry so low that you call Dr. Greens 'rebuttal' scientific? Please explain how this refutes Rudolfs report. Scientific arguments only if you can do them.

As soon as you recap Rudolf's lies in a manner which exhibits some scientific understanding of the subject, I will rebut it.

Got it!

[Trojan]

Let's all rejoice for the US law system that have made 'creational science' approved as science after trials.

Please show me which US legal precedant that has made creational science 'approved', to the exclusion of non-creational science.


Are these experts to be trusted aswell, or are lay people alawed to use their common sense?


Would this be the common sense of revisionists logic, the logic that excludes virtually all witness testimony as out right liars?


Science don't belong in the courts, it is proved by experiments.

The courts do not "prove" science - but the judges (as they should) will exclude proposed experts that to not survive an intellectual challenge.