LETTERS: Evidence for Holocaust indisputable
|
Print
E-mail
The Daily must surely be desperate for paid advertising to have published the ad on page 20 of the June 18th issue, which implied that the Holocaust didn’t happen because it was not discussed in Dwight Eisenhower’s book “Crusade In Europe.”
Just a quick Google search led me to a number of links that point to documented historical records such as an April 12, 1945 letter from Eisenhower to General George Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, in which he described his visit to the Ohrdruf camp that had been liberated by Patton’s army. Eisenhower wrote, “I have never felt able to describe my emotional reaction when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency … I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda.”
This web site (http://fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/people/liberato.htm ) also shows photos of Eisenhower at the Buchenwald concentration camp and a statement from one of Eisenhower’s staff officers that he saw both Eisenhower and Patton vomiting by the roadside at Ohrdruf. All of this has been documented by scholars and is accessible to future scholars. The fact of the Holocaust is indisputable and has been testified to by a huge cloud of witnesses over the last 65 years.
I have personally talked to people who helped liberate the camps and who lost family members in them. My high school German teacher, William Kauslauskas (known to us as “Herr K”) had studied in Germany before the war and was fluent in German. He was an intelligence officer with Patton’s Third Army and was present when they liberated at least one camp, possibly Ohrdruf. I don’t recall whether he said which one. Herr K just shook his head and said, “The smell was terrific.” Herr K also taught Latin and he meant that in the sense of terrible or terrifying, all of which derive from the Latin verb “terrere,” which means “to frighten.” There was no motivation whatever for Herr K to lie to us. He could not possibly have been part of some vast conspiracy. If anything, he probably avoided telling us too much about the horrors he had seen.
Herr K was an unforgettable teacher and, in honor of his memory, as well as several others, who personally shared their families’ experiences in the death camps with me, I am compelled to witness here to their testimony. The huge historical and testamentary record notwithstanding, the personal testimony I have received from eye witnesses is enough for me. The Holocaust is a historical fact and those who deny it are wackos.
- James Gaunt is manager of the Engineering Research Labs.
Just a quick Google search led me to a number of links that point to documented historical records such as an April 12, 1945 letter from Eisenhower to General George Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, in which he described his visit to the Ohrdruf camp that had been liberated by Patton’s army. Eisenhower wrote, “I have never felt able to describe my emotional reaction when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency … I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda.”
This web site (http://fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/people/liberato.htm ) also shows photos of Eisenhower at the Buchenwald concentration camp and a statement from one of Eisenhower’s staff officers that he saw both Eisenhower and Patton vomiting by the roadside at Ohrdruf. All of this has been documented by scholars and is accessible to future scholars. The fact of the Holocaust is indisputable and has been testified to by a huge cloud of witnesses over the last 65 years.
I have personally talked to people who helped liberate the camps and who lost family members in them. My high school German teacher, William Kauslauskas (known to us as “Herr K”) had studied in Germany before the war and was fluent in German. He was an intelligence officer with Patton’s Third Army and was present when they liberated at least one camp, possibly Ohrdruf. I don’t recall whether he said which one. Herr K just shook his head and said, “The smell was terrific.” Herr K also taught Latin and he meant that in the sense of terrible or terrifying, all of which derive from the Latin verb “terrere,” which means “to frighten.” There was no motivation whatever for Herr K to lie to us. He could not possibly have been part of some vast conspiracy. If anything, he probably avoided telling us too much about the horrors he had seen.
Herr K was an unforgettable teacher and, in honor of his memory, as well as several others, who personally shared their families’ experiences in the death camps with me, I am compelled to witness here to their testimony. The huge historical and testamentary record notwithstanding, the personal testimony I have received from eye witnesses is enough for me. The Holocaust is a historical fact and those who deny it are wackos.
- James Gaunt is manager of the Engineering Research Labs.
Comments
I noticed these ads as well, and though I'm a big supporter of free speech, I found them to be despicable. While I don't advocate for their removable based on my sensibilities, I do however, appreciate your willingness to show (fairly) conclusive evidence for the holocaust. To do otherwise would be a disservice to those who died in the camps and those who died to free them and the rest of Europe from Hitler and the Nazi party's hold.
Where is the evidence for the gas chambers?
Auschwitzs
Dachau
With all due respect, Harry,
I am not convinced. I don't see how a reconstruction is the same thing as evidence of a gas chamber. As for the Dachau link you gave me, all I see is a pile of bodies in a room, not a gas chamber.
Something tells me that nothing would convince you. Maybe a time machine, but certainly not pictures of a gas chamber (those Jews have a way with Photoshop).
So if six million Jews were killed in places other than gas chambers then the holocaust is a sham?
By the way "James," the moon landing was real and the Earth is round. I have no evidence that will convince you, but it's what I believe.
Gee Harry, didn't mean to piss you off so much. I was just trying to have a normal discussion, without you jumping into crazy conclusions that I am one of those tinfoil hat people who don't believe in the moon landing.
Did I say the Holocaust is a sham? No. But I do believe that some of the story was fabricated for Jewish gains, like.... Israel?
By the way, I watched a documentary one time where this old Jewish lady was recounting her experiences in the camps. One day she was being led with her group by the Nazi guards into the showers or whatever. Well, it was a hot day, according to her, and she proudly recounted how she made a daring dip into a pool reserved especially for the guards. She jumped right in, swam to the other side, and got out. Was she 'gassed' after that? Obviously not, for she was still alive to tell her story.
The Nazi camps were much more likely POW camps just like any other, where people were worked to death and starved and stuff. There is no evidence to suggest that the camp system was a premeditated killing machine designed just for Jews, sorry.
I wonder if you are outraged about other 'death camps' operating in the world today? Like the one that is Gaza?
While James Gaunt is willing to write about many things, including Buchenwald, Ohrdruf, bad smells, a high-school teacher, how Eisenhower and Patton (allegedly) vomited on a roadside, he is unwilling to address the question I asked. Why?
Re Eisenhower’s delicate stomach: did the General vomit when he toured Hamburg or Dresden where American and British air roasted and burned alive tens of thousands of innocent children, babies, their mothers and grand parents? Burning children alive is okay so long as they are German? Give me a break with the vomiting stories?
The gas chamber stories were institutionalized at Nuremberg primarily by the Americans using Soviet (Stalinist) evidence. If you doubt that the American Government would be willing to use manufactured evidence about weapons of mass destruction (gas chambers), think back a few short years when Colin Powel, representing the American Government, gave us his presentation before the UN General Assembly about the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Now there was something to turn the stomach.
You can learn something about revisionist arguments at www.codoh.com
James, you didn't piss me off but I provided photographic evidence that you dismissed. By the way, there are a lot of photos and films of gas chambers and dead bodies. There are/were thousands of eye witness reports. Etc. The Holocaust happened and people were killed in gas chambers.
Some people weren't killed. Obviously. Many got out alive. But that doesn't make the gas chambers a lie.
There is a mountain of evidence. Whether you accept it or not, doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist.
Proving the Gas Chambers & Crematoria"([Proving the Gas Chambers & Crematoria)
Holocaust Denial on Trial: Using History to Confront Distortions
The Ruins of the Gas Chambers: A Forensic Investigation of Crematoriums at Auschwitz I and Auschwitz-Birkenau
Aktion Reinhard Camps
Author tells of 'massive' proof for gas chambers
"There are multiple forms of evidence -- both material and documentry -- which prove the existence of gas chambers in Auschwitz. Crema 1, 2 and 3 had holes in the roof for the introduction of Zyklon-B into the gas chamber below. Both perpetrator and survivor eyewitness testimony document their existence and use."
HDOT : Learning Tools : Myth/Fact Sheets : "Gas Cha...
Of course.
The American government, like other governments, has a history of lying. That does not mean the government always lies.
1. I am fortysix years old, and have been a member of the NSDAPI since 1922; a member of the SS since 1934; a member of the WaffenSS since 1939. I was a member from 1 December 1934 of the SS Guard Unit, the socalled Deathshead Formation (Totenkopf Verband).
2. I have been constantly associated with the administration of concentration camps since 1934, serving at Dachau until 1938; then as Adjutant in Sachsenhausen from 1938 to 1 May, 1940, when I was appointed Commandant of Auschwitz. l commanded Auschwitz until 1 December,1943, and estimate that at least 2,500,000 victims were executed and exterminated there by gassing and burning, and at least another half million succumbed to starvation and disease, making a total dead of about 3,000,000. This figure represents about 70% or 80% of all persons sent to Auschwitz as prisoners, the remainder having been selected and used for slave labor in the concentration camp industries. Included among the executed and burnt were approximately 20,000 Russian prisoners of war (previously screened out of Prisoner of War cages by the Gestapo) who were delivered at Auschwitz in Wehrmacht transports operated by regular Wehrmacht officers and men. The remainder of the total number of victims included about 100,000 German Jews, and great numbers of citizens (mostly Jewish) from Holland, France, Belgium, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Greece, or other countries. We executed about 400,000 Hungarian Jews alone at Auschwitz in the summer of 1944.
4. Mass executions by gassing commenced during the summer 1941 and continued until fall 1944.1 personally supervised executions at Auschwitz until the first of December 1943 and know by reason of my continued duties in the Inspectorate of Concentration Camps WVHA2 that these mass executions continued as stated above. All mass executions by gassing took place under the direct order, supervision and responsibility of RSHA.31 received all orders for carrying out these mass executions directly from RSHA.
6. The "final solution" of the Jewish question meant the complete extermination of all Jews in Europe. l was ordered to establish extermination facilities at Auschwitz in June 1941. At that time there were already in the general govemment three other extermination camps; BELZEK, TREBLINKA and WOLZEK. These camps were under the Einsatzkommando of the Security Police and SD. I visited Treblinka to find out how they carried out their exterminations. The Camp Commandant at Treblinka told me that he had liquidated 80,000 in the course of onehalf year. He was principally concerned with liquidating all the Jews from the Warsaw Ghetto. He used monoxide gas and I did not think that his methods were very efficient. So when I set up the extermination building at Auschwitz, l used Cyclon B, which was a crystallized Prussic Acid which we dropped into the death chamber from a small opening. It took from 3 to 15 minutes to kill the people in the death chamber depending upon climatic conditions. We knew when the people were dead because their screaming stopped. We usually waited about onehalf hour before we opened the doors and removed the bodies. After the bodies were removed our special commandos took off the rings and extracted the gold from the teeth of the corpses.
7. Another improvement we made over Treblinka was that we built our gas chambers to accommodate 2,000 people at one time, whereas at Treblinka their 10 gas chambers only accommodated 200 people each. The way we selected our victims was as follows: we had two SS doctors on duty at Auschwitz to examine the incoming transports of prisoners. The prisoners would be marched by one of the doctors who would make spot decisions as they walked by. Those who were fit for work were sent into the Camp. Others were sent immediately to the extermination plants. Children of tender years were invariably exterminated since by reason of their youth they were unable to work. Still another improvement we made over Treblinka was that at Treblinka the victims almost always knew that they were to be exterminated and at Auschwitz we endeavored to fool the victims into thinking that they were to go through a delousing process. Of course, frequently they realized our true intentions and we sometimes had riots and difficulties due to that fact. Very frequently women would hide their children under the clothes but of course when we found them we would send the children in to be exterminated. We were required to carry out these exterminations in secrecy but of course the foul and nauseating stench from the continuous burning of bodies permeated the entire area and all of the people living in the surrounding communities knew that exterminations were going on at Auschwitz .
8. We received from time to time special prisoners from the local Gestapo office. The SS doctors killed such prisoners by injections of benzine. Doctors had orders to write ordinary death certificates and could put down any reason at all for the cause of death.
9. From time to time we conducted medical experiments on women inmates, including sterilization and experiments relating to cancer. Most of the people who died under these experiments had been already condemned to death by the Gestapo.
10. Rudolf Mildner was the chief of the Gestapo at Kattowicz and as such was head of the political department at Auschwitz which conducted third degree methods of interrogation from approximately March 1941 until September 1943. As such, he frequently sent prisoners to Auschwitz for incarceration or execution. He visited Auschwitz on several occasions. The Gestapo Court, the SS Standgericht, which tried persons accused of various crimes, such as escaping Prisoners of War, etc., frequently met within Auschwitz, and Mildner often attended the trial of such persons, who usually were executed in Auschwitz following their sentence. l showed Mildner throughout the extermination plant at Auschwitz and he was directly interested in it since he had to send the Jews from his territory for execution at Auschwitz.
Rudolf Hoess, Commandant of Auschwitz: Testimony at Nuremburg, 1946
Modern History Sourcebook: Rudolf Hoess: Testimony at Nuremb...
This argument need to be redirected back to an original point- why did the Daily run this ad? Who made this decision? From what I have gathered, possibly incorrectly, is that the decision to run this was based of a serious misconception of freedom of the press and freedom of speech. Any media outlet has the right to censor itself and not publish what it deems offensive or hurtful. Freedom of the press is to stop the government from censoring a media outlet. The daily could have not run this, and not violated any perceived rights. I know this little civics lesson is absolutely common sense to anyone with a brain...but apparently not to everyone.
While James Gaunt is willing to write about many things, including Buchenwald, Ohrdruf, bad smells, a high-school teacher, how Eisenhower and Patton (allegedly) vomited on a roadside, he is unwilling to address the question I asked. Why?
Re Eisenhower’s delicate stomach: did the General vomit when he toured Hamburg or Dresden where American and British air roasted and burned alive tens of thousands of innocent children, babies, their mothers and grand parents? Burning children alive is okay so long as they are German? Give me a break with the vomiting stories?
The gas chamber stories were institutionalized at Nuremberg primarily by the Americans using Soviet (Stalinist) evidence. If you doubt that the American Government would be willing to use manufactured evidence about weapons of mass destruction (gas chambers), think back a few short years when Colin Powel, representing the American Government, gave us his presentation before the UN General Assembly about the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Now there was something to turn the stomach.
www.codoh.com
Chris:
First: apologies to all for posting the same message twice, as per above. Careless, but no harm done I suppose.
But listen: why would the question be "why" would the Daily run the ad? Why not? The question the ad asks is interesting, straight-forward, and most like not a question that was ever posed by any professor to any class at Ohio State? Unless we are going to argue that no question must ever be asked of a General, the Government, or by a rather direct indirection, the professorial class in America. Rather than argue that the ad should not be run, why not try to find out why there is not one professor at Ohio State (I'm speculating, and I'm willing to be convinced that I am wrong) who is willing to weigh in on the question, or to address the issue of the name of one person, with proof, who was killed in a gas chamber at Auschwitz.
Harry Selby:
With re to quoting the Hoess material: it does not go to either of the two questions in the ad. Why not?
Yad Vashem in Israel claims to have 55-million documents re the Holocaust. The idea that quoting one of them from a trial that is understood to have been corrupt in many places (electric killed chambers, human soap, human skin lamp shades, gas chambers in half a dozen places where it is admitted today there were no gas chambers and so on and on) --and all the while overlooking the crimes against humanity perpetrated (and not denied anywhere by anyone) by the U.S., British, and Soviet States againsst German and Japanese civilians, leaves you a long way to go -- 54,999,999 documents, give or take a few million. Meanwhile, you there is every reason to doubt that when you have finished that you will have answered the two simple questions advanced by the ad.
Because I was addressing James's comments.
I don't care about your questions because they have nothing to do with the issue at hand; whether the Nazis use gas chambers to kill Jews. Your concerns about Dresden and government lies constitute a different topic altogether. Killing people in Dresden doesn't excuse the Holocaust does it? Colin Powell lying doesn't excuse the Holocaust does it?
What would constitute proof to you?
Is it possible for something to have happened even if it can't be proven?
Would an eye witness account constitute proof?
Okay: with regard to the "gas chambers."
James asks where the evidence is.
Evidence is everywhere, such as "eyewitness" evidence.
Yet "proof" is to be found no where.
With regard to your queston: "Would an eye witness account constitute proof?" Depends on what is claimed, and how the claim is proven. I should think that would be obvious.
While I believe skepticism is usually healthy, demanding definitive proof in a manner than cannot be provided and then basing a conclusion (the Nazi's didn't use gas chambers) on the inability to provide that proof is dishonest.
Genocide isn't about the killing of individuals but of a large group. The Nazis didn't set out to kill any single Jew, but all Jews. As far as I can tell, Nazis didn't gas individuals one at a time and document each death with photographs and detailed information.
It is difficult for a dead person to prove anything. Death certificates weren't issued at Auschwitz, Chelmno, Belzec, Majdanek, Sobibor, or Treblinka.
Yet the evidence which constitutes proof that gas chambers were used to kill:
1. photographs
2. films made between 1942 and the end of 1944 in KL Auschwitz.
3. German letters and documents,
4. original drawings concerned with the camp.
Auschwitz: Technique and Operation of the Gas Chambers)([403 Forbidden)
The Extermination Camps
Lot of documents (eye witnesses) and photos here:
The Holocause History Project](http://www.holocaust-history.org/
Documents, artifacts, testimonies, photos, etc.:
About The Holocaust
Testimony of survivors: About The Holocaust
Testimony of survivors of extermination camps:
Holocaust Survivors Stories www.HolocaustResearchProject.org
Including: "Whole families I saw walking to the gas chamber, many, many times, and I couldn’t say anything there was no way- there was nothing I could do."--Selma Engel
Now, you claim that the post-war trials were full of lies and the conclusions that the Nazis used gas chambers were never proven because of this.
You said, "The gas chamber stories were institutionalized at Nuremberg primarily by the Americans using Soviet (Stalinist) evidence."
1. Prove it. Where is your proof that the Americans falsified the gas chamber stories?
2. Even if the Soviets provided evidence, prove that evidence was false or unreliable.
Name one person, with proof, who participated in institutionalizing the gas chamber stories using falsified evidence.
OK, Harry:
55-million documents re the Holocaust and no one can provide, with proof, the name of one person killed in a gas chamber at Auschwitz. One out of a million (of course it used to be FOUR million killed in gas chambers at Auschwitz but we'll let that go--what's three million innocent unarmed civilians to folk like us?)
Look, I'm suggesting by my question re Eisenhower that he was the commanding general on the Western front against the Germans, he wrote about that adventure, and he did not mention the German WMD--gas chambers. To me, that suggests a question that the professors have been (purposefully) blind to for the last half century.
Just because the professorial class is blind to such questions, does not mean that every student has to follow along. There is nothing wrong in asking questions, no matter that merely asking such questions are considered "dispicable" or a "disservice" to those who died fighting the Germans.
Your last question is perfectly legitimate. I might, once you respond to the two questions specifically raised in the ad. First things first. But if you are going to continue to dance around and evade these two questions, I don't think so.
As pointed out, that isn't true. There were a few eye-witness accounts and I've provided links. But, as I've stated, there weren't many eye witnesses who survived, there were no cameras recording the actual executions, bodies were cremated after being gassed, and the Nazis didn't keep many records of their crimes against humanity.
Hans-Joachim Lang names 86 Jews who were gassed at Alsac in his book, The Names of the Numbers.
If an eye-witness account amounts to some kind of proof for you:
Auschwitz Survivor Eliezer Hauser Shimoni was eye-witness to the gassing of his mother, Bracha Hauser, and his sisters.
Oscar Strawczynski witnessed the gassing of his wife, Anka, and his two children, Guta and Abus, and his parents, Yoseph and Malke in Treblinka.
So because Eisenhower didn't mention gas chambers, that means he knew they didn't exist? That's quite the logical fallacy.
"Michael E. Siegel, chairman of the council's Holocaust Commission, reminded the crowd that when the Russian soldiers, followed by the Americans, arrived at Auschwitz and saw the horrors of the camp, "they could hardly believe their eyes." Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower came to the camp so he could bear witness should others later try to claim that places such as Auschwitz did not exist, Siegel said.
"Now in 2005, there are attempts to deny what happened, just as Eisenhower predicted," Siegel said. "But we know the truth. Auschwitz has become the symbol of terror and genocide. So we gather tonight to remind the world of the horror."
A Vow Not to Forget Auschwitz (washingtonpost.com)
"General Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, wrote a letter to the Chief of Staff George Marshall dated April 1945: " I have never felt able to describe my emotional reaction when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality and ruthless disregard of every shred of decency. I visited every nook and cranny of the camps because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify at first hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda.""
Rhoda G. Lewin, THE LAST DAYS OF THE WAR.
I don't know what questions you are referring to (I didn't see the ad). If you are referring to the questions you asked on this discussion board, they are red herrings, but if it will force you to answer my question then I'll address your questions.
"did the General vomit when he toured Hamburg or Dresden where American and British air roasted and burned alive tens of thousands of innocent children, babies, their mothers and grand parents?"
Apparently not.
"If you doubt that the American Government would be willing to use manufactured evidence about weapons of mass destruction (gas chambers), think back a few short years when Colin Powel, representing the American Government, gave us his presentation before the UN General Assembly about the existence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction."
I don't doubt that the American Governmnet would use manufactured evidence.
Yet neither the lack of vomit nor government lies discount Nazi gas chambers.
This is evidence. Where is the proof?
Regarding the Eisenhower question, you do not appear to understand that you have not even tried to explain why he did not mention the German WMD.
His testimony. I guess you didn't bother to look at the evidence with the links I provided.
I don't know why he didn't mention them. That's the answer. If I knew, I'd let you know.
You don't know either.
Now that I've addressed your questions, please answer mine.
1. Where is your proof that the Americans falsified the gas chamber stories?
2. Even if the Soviets provided evidence, prove that evidence was false or unreliable.
Bradley,
I've checked your website and it's clear that your agenda is to revise the accepted historical accounts that the Nazis committed genocide. I don't know if your motivation is anti-semitism, anti-Zionism, pro-Nazi or what. I suppose it doesn't matter because you have provided no proof that the holocaust is a grand lie. You have provided no proof that the gas chamber accounts are lies.
You disregard eye-witness testimony. Clearly, those who witnessed and ordered people to die in the gas chambers are part of the conspiracy. That would include anti-semitic Nazis.
That the holocaust is a fabrication would necessitate a conspiracy of millions of people. Millions who must have hid themselves somewhere because otherwise they just disappeared. Where did they go if not dead? Do you have evidence that these people conspired instead of dying? Do you have proof that the photos and films of masses of corpses are fakes?
That the Nazis did not kill anyone using gas chambers would also necessitate a conspiracy of thousands, if not millions. Do you know of anyone who has, with proof, revealed the conspiracy? Do you have proof that the gas chamber stories are all lies?
You like to pose loaded questions but you won't answer them.
I don't have any "proof" that the Ancient Greeks existed. I know there are buildings and writings and names, but no "proof." For all I know, the Persians--if they even existed--built all the buildings in Greece and used fake names to fool the rest of the world into believing that the Greeks existed.
I also don't have any "proof" that the Earth revolves around the sun. Yeah, I know what all the "scientists" say, but from my point of view, the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. I have never felt a sense of motion when on solid ground.
Eisenhower never mentioned anything about the Earth revolving around the sun. I wonder why?
Brad, Harry is absolutely right. The burden of proof is on YOU to prove it did not happen, not the other way around. You can not just pose a question about an issue that is considered historical fact, and act as if you are blowing the lid off something major. The holocaust did in fact happen, and if you think it did not - come up with something good, and then we will listen. AND AGAIN - Staff of The Iowa State Daily, what in the name of all that is holy were you thinking? You could have refused to run this ad - I truly hope you understand that. This is NOT a freedom of speech issue. I hope you know that.
Jews lie about everything.
They lied about the Dead Sea Scrolls (gasp). What a shocker! (Not really).
They lie about the torture of Palestinian children.
They lie about heavy tax levied by the British against the Palestinians who were then forced to sell their land to the Zionists.
They lie about the payments made to the British in return for the Balfour Declaration.
They lie about using white phosphorus against the Palestinains.
They lie and say "The Israeli army is the most moral army in the world. Riiiiiight.
They lie about their religion when asked during a discussion if their admitting it would reveal biases. I'm not Jewish, I'm... Russian! Hmm.
The Jews lie about EVERYTHING.
The Jews lied about the Holocaust. Pure and simple.
Harry:
It's difficult at first to keep in mind that what I founded was Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, not Committee to Prove the Holocaust never happened. Of course, one we look into the orthodox story, we find that there are a good number of questions that go to the heart of the story--the the homicidal gas chambers-- that have not been answered. We are not going to answer them here.
But for those who are new to this question, I would suggest that the consider the fact that the Holocaust/gas chamber question is the only historical question that men go to prison for asking. It is illegal in eleven European countries, and Israel, to question the existence of the gas chambers. Besides being fascist in the worst sense of that word, it is really rather stupid. The idea that you must protect a historical issue from a free exchange of ideas, in the light of day, with the threat of prosecuton and prison.
Revisionists are not always right about everything, no one is, but the idea that they should be sent to prison for expressing doubt about what they truly doubt is disgusting to anyone who wants to live in a free society.
Anyone here who wants to discuss the "eyewitness" evidence about gas chambers can go to the CODOH Forum at www.codoh.com and have a go at it.
Just sign in, name your eyewitness, provide the specific evidence for that specific eyewitness, and live with the cunundrum you create. If you need backup there are the 55-million documents at Yad Vashem, sites like nizkor.com and your ordinary professor on any campus in America.
I am arguing for a free exchange of ideas. GENERAL Eisenhower wrote about his part directing WWII and did not mention the German WMD. There is something deeply stupid about this, or deeply evasive.
The fact that some 3,000 American professors can be asked to provide the name, with proof, of one person killed in a gas chamber at Auschwitz and not one is willing to try, I find, at the very least, interesting. If you do not, you do not.
James:
Some Jews do, some don't. In that way, they're just folk. It's those of us who are not Jews, particularly in the academic community, who refuse to call a spade a spade when it comes to Holocaust fraud and falsehood, who must answer for our own weaknesses of character.
Chris:
Again, there is a mis-understanding here. I do not believe the burden of proof is on me to argue that a free exchange of ideas is to be preferred to the suppression of a free exchange of ideas. To question the gas-chamber stories is not to argue that the Jews of Europe did not suffer a catastrophe during WWII. They did. ALong with most other Europeans.
The Holocaust story, however you have got it defined in your head, is not about Jews. It's about Jews and Germans together. No Germans, no Holocaust. So far as what is to be proved is the accusation made against the Germans: that they used WMD to try to "exterminate" the Jews of Europe. That is the charge that needs to be proven. It has not been. It was stipulated at Nuremberg, it was not proven. Look into it. I do not understand how it can be forwarded on the American U campus for over half a century that it is some how in "poor taste" to question the incessant accusation against Germans that they used WMD to try to kill all the Jews. WMD that Eisenhower would not put his signature to? Doesn't that suggest anything to you.
I believe you are wrong, and the The Daily is right: this is a free press issue, one that is discouraged by the professoriat in nearly every circumstance, in every classroom, and in most every academic paper addressing the subject.
Ask your professor: is he willing to encouage a free exchange of ideas, in public, over the existence of German gas-chambers. Has he ever in the past? Where? Under what circumstances?
It isn't difficult at all. But it has become clear that you aren't interested in an open debate about gas chambers. You have your mind made up regardless of the countless pieces of evidence. You base your "doubts" on nothing but inference.
I agree with you. Freely exchanging ideas should never be illegalized.
Yes it has. I have already provided EVIDENCE from EYE WITNESSES that the Nazis used gas chambers to kill people.
Again, I've addressed your questions and you have not addressed mine.
1. Where is your proof that the Americans falsified the gas chamber stories?
2. Even if the Soviets provided evidence, prove that evidence was false or unreliable.
Harry:
At the beginning of this thread you were asked where there was proof for gas chambers. One half of your answer was: “Dachau.”
Twenty years ago when I was first getting into this material I published a book I called Confessions of a Holocaust Revisionist. Among other things I dealt with the Dachau gas chamber story, not as an academic, but has a simple writer.
On page 16 I noted Robert Faurisson quoting Article 21 of the Statutes of the International Mili-tary Tribunal at Nuremberg. It reads: “The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge, but shall take judicial notice thereof [….]” He also reported that “The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence (Article 19). I took these two propositions to be legal stupidities. Do you know of any professor at Ohio State teaching anything who has addressed the implications of these two articles?
I read Butz on The Hoax of the Twentieth Century and transcribed a few passages of it relating to Dachau. They are on pages 50-52. They report how Germans were tortured to extract information about gas chambers at Dachau. I had never heard that discussed before. Is there one professor at Ohio State who has discussed how the Americans tortured German prisoners to extact information from them about “gas chambers”? Which professor?
One short chapter in Confessions deals with Dachau from those years, pages 55 thru 65. In it I point out to a friend that Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said on radio that “There were no gas chambers at Dachau.” Martin Broszat, director of the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich wrote: “There were no gassings at Dachau. I quoted Simon Wiesenthal were he wrote “there were no extermination camps on German soil.” Do you know of one academic at Ohio State who has addressed these statements anywhere in class?
I wrote about how the U.S. Army was running tens of thousands of American soldiers through Dachau for decades telling them about the Dachau gas-chambers, lying through their teeth. Can you name one professor at Ohio State who has dealt with such statements in their classes? Is this a story that Ohio Students are introduced to by anyone?
You appear unable to distinguish between evidence for a crime and proof of a crime. What can I say?
It there are students at Ohio State who want to look into the Dachau story and/or some of the rest of it, here are a few places to begin.
Innocent in Dachau: The Trial and Punishment of Franz Kofler et al. Joseph Halow Innocent in Dachau -- Franz Kofler et al.
Fraudulent gas chamber at Dachau
Fraudulent gas chamber at Dachau
Arthur Butz, "A short introduction to the study of Holocaust revisionism".
Samuel Crowell, "The Gas Chamber of Sherlock Holmes"
Gauss (ed.), "Dissecting the 'holocaust'"
Carlos Porter, "Made in Russia - The Holocaust"
In any event, none of these writers depend much on “inference.”
I provided some evidence that Dachau had gas chambers but not that they were ever used.
Conversely, I provided lots of evidence that the gas chambers at Auschwitz were used. You have never refuted any of it and you still are avoiding the questions I asked about your claims. Why?
1. Where is your proof that the Americans falsified the gas chamber stories?
2. Even if the Soviets provided evidence, prove that evidence was false or unreliable.
The longer you avoid addressing supporting these claims of yours the clearer it is that you lack any credibility.
PS The Jews tried to claim they were the ones who built the Sphinx, and they were caught trying to plant false evidence in one of the feet.
Harry:
This thread began because of two questions I asked in a small ad in The Daily. One question asked why Eisenhower did not mention the German WMD in his history Crusade In Europe. You said you do not know. Fair enough. I don't either, but while the question interests me, it does not interest you. I am going to "infer" that I understand why it does not interest you and let it go at that.
The second question was to ask if there were any professor at Ohio State, or anyone else there, who could provide, with proof, the name of one person killed in a gas chamber at Auschwitz. No one has. To mention the name of some old geezer who says he saw a gas chamber doesn't work.
If we are talking about important "eyewitnesses" to gas chambers we would go to those who are quoted by mainline historians. They would include at the very lease such names as Abraham Bomba and Yankiel Wiernik, both demonstrable liars.
And then we have Simon Wiesenthal, the subject of a newly published book addressed in the London Times this past weekend. SIMON WIESENTHAL WAS A LIAR. Revisionists have written about Simon for years, demonstrating that he was a liar. The Simon Wiesenthal Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles was built by a rabbi Hier using this liar to morally justify an intolerant attitude toward those who ask legitimate questions about German WMD.
For Students who want a good look at how Nuremberg documents are used I suggest Carlos Porter's The Holocaust: Made in Russia.
For the best introduction to a revisionist look at the "delusion" of gas chambers -- not a "conspiricy" -- see The Gas Chambers of Sherlock Holmes by Samuel Crowell.
For students who want to ask questions and get some answers that are forbidden to give at Ohio State U (correct me if I'm wrong), see The Forum at www.codoh.com
James:
I don't want to be a bore, but while some Jews may have done what you claim above, "the" Jews did not do it.
Example: the Jew Simon Wiesenthal was an obsessive liar, a disgrace to the Jewish community, a liar who was protected by the American professorial class for decades with their cowardly and corrupt silence, but he was an indvidual.
The American professorial class, as a class, is largely made up of academics who are not Jews.
Ordinary Jews are about as ignorant of lying Jewish "eye-witnesses" to gas chambers as the rest of us are. The lying, which appears to be endless with regard to Germans, is supported by the professors at Ohio State. I have not looked into Ohio State culture specifically on this issue, but I would be glad to hear from any Ohio State professor, a Jew or any who is not a Jew, who would want to encourage a free exchange of ideas on why revisionist arguments are routinely suppressed and censored at Ohio State.
I got off the track here a bit. What I am saying is very simple. There are Jews who are liars, just as there are liars among those of us who are not Jews. The trick here is that known liars like Simon Wiesenthal are protected by a corrupt professorial class because they represent the Holocaust Marketing Industry, a global organization with so much influence in America that the career of any American professor, Gentile or Jew, who asks the most obvious questions about the Holocaust risk losing everything they have worked for.
James:
It will be interesting for you, for all of us, to follow the Simon-Wiesethal-is-a-liar story. We will find how the Rabbi Hiers of the SWC handle the story. Or how he does not handle it. Also, this would be a good story for Ohio State students to follow up with. The London Times story is only the tip of the iceberg.
So eye-witness accounts don't count as proof to you. So much for intelligent discussion.
And it wasn't just some old geezer, but many many people.
Now please answer my questions:
1. Where is your proof that the Americans falsified the gas chamber stories?
2. Even if the Soviets provided evidence, prove that evidence was false or unreliable.
The longer you avoid addressing supporting these claims of yours the clearer it is that you lack any credibility.
Why do you refuse to answer them?
YOu don't understand. Eyewitnesses mean a good deal to me with regard to the relevant question. Let's begin again. The primary question in my ad is made of two parts.
General Eisenhower was an eyewitness to homicidial gas chambers or he was not. If he was, I ask for the proof. Not some silly story about how he vomited on the side of the road. You have no proof that he saw what the question I ask asks for. Get real.
The second part of the question is to provide the name, with proof, of one person killed in a gas chamber at Auschwitz. Here we may have got our wires crossed. YOu did name a name, but I have no recollection of you having provided proof that that person's eyewitness testimony is back up with demonstrable proof for the accusation. Guve me your one favorite name once again, and I will go over it with you. Maybe I'll find out that I have been wrong about something here. I'm willing to have that happen.
The only problem is that like chris said previously, the burden of proof is upon you Brad. For example, if an eyewitness records that Eisenhower vomited on the road because he was disturbed by the presence of GAS CHAMBERS, then that is evidence. And by the fact that you so easily brush that off as hearsay leads me to believe that even if Eisenhower were to have written this down in a memo or something you would find a way to claim that it's a forgery or elaborate ploy to generate sympathy for whatever cause.... blah blah blah. So what if he didn't include it in his book. You cannot reason against an object simply by citing the omission of all the evidence you deem necessary to satisfy your quota for "truth". So I'm not sure what hard evidence you expect to be produced. Perhaps the remains of such structures? Or do you require a photograph of a standing structure with all of the devices for it's purpose clearly outlined and documented? If this is so, then it is quite convenient that the ravaging of the war and last minute "paper-shredding" by the germans destroyed the best possible evidence in all likelihood. So while asking the questions is fine, and should not be punishable, under nearly any circumstance, one must understand that when dealing with history, one can only speculate about things that have not been determined to be "absolute fact".
Lucas:
The burden of proof is on those who first make an accusation. The initial accusation is that Germans used WMD (gas-chanmbers) to intentionally kill hundreds of thousands of victims at Auschwitz. The burden of proof lies with those who make the original accusation, which is one of unqiue monstrosity.
I don't believe anyone here suggests that Eisenhower vomited because he "saw" gas chambers.
It is not for me to say what would be proof before I see what is claimed to be proof.
If we are only to speculate about a crime of mass murder, but use that speculation to morally justify real crimes against humanity -- the American incineration of hundreds of thousands of German and Japanese civilians for a "greater good" -- or to morally justify the conquest of Arab land in Palestine by European Jews because of what Germans did on another continent -- I would argue for fact over speculation. No one questions the mass killings carried out by the Americans and Brits (we'll let the Soviet issue go for the moment) using WMD (great fleets of heavy bombers and nuclear warheads), the facts of the matter appear to be apparent to one and all (are there any here who really want to question those "facts"?
Yet people through out European, North American, Muslim and hispanic cultures increasingly question the German WMD. I believe they should be questioned. Germans are human beings much like the rest of us. If we cannot demonstrate that they did what they are accused of having done, we should stop accusing them of it, and look to how the story has been exploited for the benefit of those who most benefit from the story.
I agree that asking questions is fine but I am taking the issue further than that. I am will to "speculate" that ther are not two, not one, professor at Ohio State who will stand up on campus, face the taboo that prohibits such questions, and argue that they should be asked and participate in asking them.
Maybe I'm mistaken.
YOu don't understand. Eyewitnesses mean a good deal to me with regard to the relevant question. Let's begin again. The primary question in my ad is made of two parts.
General Eisenhower was an eyewitness to homicidial gas chambers or he was not. If he was, I ask for the proof. Not some silly story about how he vomited on the side of the road.
You have no proof that he did not see what you ask for. That's real.
Just the eye-witness accounts of lots of others (as I've already provided).
You accused the Americans of falsifying the gas chamber stories.
Prove it.
You accused the Americans of using false/unreliable evidence provided by the Soviets.
Prove it.
Forget it.
It is very difficult to have a productive discussion when you demand others prove their claims but refuse to prove your own claims.