'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Hannover » 3 years 8 months ago (Mon Feb 22, 2016 11:39 pm)

Often the most ridiculous, illogical questions are best answered in the most direct manner:

If Jews are so sure that millions of Jews were murdered, then why do they ask such dumb questions like "what happened to them"?

After all, they have already told us that they 'went' to enormous mass graves which they claim to know the exact locations of.


- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Werd
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1093
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Werd » 3 years 8 months ago (Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:53 am)

They think aerial photographs, eyewitnesses to fast cremation times, and so called witnesses who saw detainees walking to the chambers never to be seen again are telling the truth. It's a rhetorical question they ask. Don't believe me that it's rhetorical for them? Just read anything by Nessie on this board or the other one.

User avatar
Free Speech
Member
Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Free Speech » 3 years 8 months ago (Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:57 am)

I get asked that all the time: If 6-million weren't killed, what happened to them? I tell them the 6-million is an exaggeration, many died of typhus or were evacuated into the Soviet Union.

It's NOT a dumb question: if there are train records of Jews being sent eastward by the Nazis and they weren't gassed, then what happened to them?

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Hannover » 3 years 8 months ago (Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:15 am)

Free Speech wrote:I get asked that all the time: If 6-million weren't killed, what happened to them? I tell them the 6-million is an exaggeration, many died of typhus or were evacuated into the Soviet Union.

It's NOT a dumb question: if there are train records of Jews being sent eastward by the Nazis and they weren't gassed, then what happened to them?

It's extremely DUMB considering The Purported Believers have already told us that they 'went' to enormous mass graves which they claim to know the exact locations of, but cannot show us a single excavated, verified enormous mass grave as alleged. Not one.

And behold, you've helped out.
Who destroyed / hid the outbound train records which every railroad system in history has kept and do keep? Who benefited?

No Free Speech, it's not just 6M, it's a claimed 6M Jews plus 5M others. So where are the remains of 11,000,000?

also see:
'WJC's Stephen Wise said 1,250,000 - 1,500,000 Polish Jews homeless in Europe, outside of Poland, & alive after WWII'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10191
and:
'J. Graf and the illogical canard: 'Where did Jews go then?' / & more'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8272

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Thames Darwin
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 193
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:55 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Thames Darwin » 3 years 8 months ago (Tue Feb 23, 2016 11:38 am)

Hannover wrote:Often the most ridiculous, illogical questions are best answered in the most direct manner:

If Jews are so sure that millions of Jews were murdered, then why do they ask such dumb questions like "what happened to them"?


Here's why we ask this "ridiculous, illogical question."

The father of modern history as a discipline was Leopold von Ranke. He pioneered source criticisms but he also had a distinct approach to writing history that pertains today -- i.e., he believed it was necessary for history to be written in narrative form. In other words, he argued it was necessary to tell a story. Virtually all history written since Ranke does this.

Except for revisionist history.

Our narrative says where the Jews went. They were murdered in many places over the course of several years, but we have established our narrative.

You have not established a narrative. Instead, revisionists dispute individual pieces of evidence as if they exist in total isolation. When asked to support their methodology by providing a narrative, they refuse.

When we ask you where they went, we're asking for a narrative. And we don't want "Jews went where Jews are." We want you to provide documents, eyewitnesses, etc., that support your version, tied together with a narrative.

E.g., you believe the Reinhard camps were transit camps. OK, fine. Provide a narrative of that scenario that ties together available evidence supporting that point of view.

We continue to wait.

That's why we ask.

Morrison
Member
Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 3:09 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Morrison » 3 years 8 months ago (Tue Feb 23, 2016 12:21 pm)

Hannover:

It's extremely DUMB considering The Purported Believers have already told us that they 'went' to enormous mass graves which they claim to know the exact locations of, but cannot show us a single excavated, verified enormous mass grave as alleged. Not one.


Yes, 75 alleged enormous mass graves allegedly found by archaeologists, of which, 4 have actually been shown to contain the complete skeletons of a total of only 10 people. (And thus contradicting the official storyline,)

So that leaves the alleged exact known locations of 71 alleged enormous mass graves, of which, not one has ever been proven to contain an iota of human remains, much less the untold millions of teeth and bone fragments each alleged enormous mass grave is alleged to contain.

And yet people who publicly express their skepticism about these fraudulently alleged enormous mass graves are persecuted and even locked up in cages for daring to not blindly accept the jews version of WW II history. IOW - free speech must die so jews can lie.

Holohoaxers are the most unconscionable "people" on the planet.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9892
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Hannover » 3 years 8 months ago (Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:37 pm)

Thames Darwin, you said:
Here's why we ask this "ridiculous, illogical question."
The father of modern history as a discipline was Leopold von Ranke. He pioneered source criticisms but he also had a distinct approach to writing history that pertains today -- i.e., he believed it was necessary for history to be written in narrative form. In other words, he argued it was necessary to tell a story. Virtually all history written since Ranke does this.
Except for revisionist history.
Our narrative says where the Jews went. They were murdered in many places over the course of several years, but we have established our narrative.
You have not established a narrative. Instead, revisionists dispute individual pieces of evidence as if they exist in total isolation. When asked to support their methodology by providing a narrative, they refuse.
When we ask you where they went, we're asking for a narrative. And we don't want "Jews went where Jews are." We want you to provide documents, eyewitnesses, etc., that support your version, tied together with a narrative.
E.g., you believe the Reinhard camps were transit camps. OK, fine. Provide a narrative of that scenario that ties together available evidence supporting that point of view.
We continue to wait.
That's why we ask.
Indeed, the 'holocau$t' storyline is quite the 'story', an impossible story at that. Hence it's falling apart faster than a cheap suit.
Your appeal to the authority via the "father of modern history" has turned against you. von Ranke would have not accepted a storyline that was utterly impossible.

Your impossible storyline says Jews "were murdered in many places over the course of several years ...".
The problem is that you cannot prove/demonstrate that they were murdered. As I said previously in this thread, and you ignored;
"The Purported Believers have already told us that they [alleged Jews and alleged others] 'went' to enormous mass graves which they claim to know the exact locations of, but cannot show us a single excavated, verified enormous mass grave as alleged. Not one."

Your story holds no water.

The Revisionist position is elegantly simple. You can't have murders of '11,000,000' people without enormous and verified, and I do mean enormous, physical evidence to show.
You cannot have alleged murder weapons, the alleged German 'gas chambers', which laughably defy laws of science, logic, & rational thought. Such conjured weapons could not have worked as is stated in your storyline. This forum is filled with threads on that very subject.

The specifics of the Reinhardt camps fall under the above, simple as that.

I mean hey, I haven't seen nor heard from countless old friends, acquaintances, schoolmates, distant relatives etc. for decades.
Using your logic they were all murdered.

Tell me, Thames Darwin, has there ever been a conviction of anyone since the post-war Show Trials for enormous mass murders in alleged centralized sites without the excavation, verification, & display of the claimed murder victims?

There is tons of information about Jews being transited out of camps/sites and 'where they went', see:
'J. Graf and the illogical canard: 'Where did Jews go then?' / & more'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8272
and:
'WJC's Stephen Wise said 1,250,000 - 1,500,000 Polish Jews homeless in Europe, outside of Poland, & alive after WWII'
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10191

- Hannover

The 'holocaust' storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that crushes the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

The tide is turning.
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

Atigun
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:13 am

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Atigun » 3 years 8 months ago (Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:39 pm)

Thames Darwin wrote:
Hannover wrote:Often the most ridiculous, illogical questions are best answered in the most direct manner:

If Jews are so sure that millions of Jews were murdered, then why do they ask such dumb questions like "what happened to them"?


Here's why we ask this "ridiculous, illogical question."

The father of modern history as a discipline was Leopold von Ranke. He pioneered source criticisms but he also had a distinct approach to writing history that pertains today -- i.e., he believed it was necessary for history to be written in narrative form. In other words, he argued it was necessary to tell a story. Virtually all history written since Ranke does this.

Except for revisionist history.

Our narrative says where the Jews went. They were murdered in many places over the course of several years, but we have established our narrative.

You have not established a narrative. Instead, revisionists dispute individual pieces of evidence as if they exist in total isolation. When asked to support their methodology by providing a narrative, they refuse.

When we ask you where they went, we're asking for a narrative. And we don't want "Jews went where Jews are." We want you to provide documents, eyewitnesses, etc., that support your version, tied together with a narrative.

E.g., you believe the Reinhard camps were transit camps. OK, fine. Provide a narrative of that scenario that ties together available evidence supporting that point of view.



We continue to wait.

That's why we ask.


You holyhoaxers haven't established a historical narrative. You have accused the National Socialist political regime and the German people of the deliberate mass murder of some 11 million people. Testimony by your eyewitnesses has been disproved, their credibility impeached. You have no physical evidence that mass murder on such a scale ever actually occurred yet here you are claiming that you have established a historical narrative. You've established bupkis. What you have is a disproved accusation. Where's your evidence?

We continue to wait.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2514
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby borjastick » 3 years 8 months ago (Wed Feb 24, 2016 2:33 am)

On my bookshelf, not two feet from my side, are Debating The Holocaust by Dalton, The Founding Myths of Modern Israel by Garoudy. Both full of narrative and source material. Then I can see Masters of Death by Rhodes which is best filed under Fantasy.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

EtienneSC
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 509
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby EtienneSC » 3 years 8 months ago (Wed Feb 24, 2016 9:11 am)

Thames Darwin wrote: The father of modern history as a discipline was Leopold von Ranke. He pioneered source criticisms but he also had a distinct approach to writing history that pertains today -- i.e., he believed it was necessary for history to be written in narrative form. In other words, he argued it was necessary to tell a story. Virtually all history written since Ranke does this.

Except for revisionist history.

It is not necessarily an advantage to history to be separated from general philosophy as Ranke wanted - in particular from the theory of testimony that is part of epistemology and probably also from moral philosophy. In that respect, Ranke was not a positive figure in German intellectual history. However, he lived at a time when the Hegelian school was collapsing and the need was felt to turn to the study of empirical facts.

In terms of source criticisms, revisionism surely has a good record, having uncovered many fraudulent claims, inappropriate use of footnotes, new sources and so on.

"Holocaust studies" is more akin to "Black studies", "Irish studies", etc than to history as a discipline. It dismisses sources such as state documents that Ranke and proponents of diplomatic history would have held authoritative and instead relies on confessions and supposed eye-witness stories. German documents of state are held to be written in a "coded language" for example. In this respect, it is actually more akin to national socialist theories of "history from below" in which the experience of the Volk is considered more significant than the official record of what was planned and done. I am not opposed to this, but it is well known that nationalist narratives of various sorts have political purposes and change over time. They are not neutral.

Thames Darwin wrote:Our narrative says where the Jews went. They were murdered in many places over the course of several years, but we have established our narrative.

You have not established a narrative. Instead, revisionists dispute individual pieces of evidence as if they exist in total isolation. When asked to support their methodology by providing a narrative, they refuse.

There is a clear general revisionist narrative that Jews were deported to Palestine before the war and later to the eastern territories under German control. There is certainly a gap in the record following the later deportations, but that applies both to revisionism and holocaust studies.

There are post war accounts of survivors being transited through displaced person camps and arriving in various countries, including Israel, Canada, the USA and Argentina. The numbers are problematic owing to gaps in the records, conflicting definitions of Jewishness, shifting borders and different authorities collecting information on different bases. But that does not mean there is no general narrative.

The narrative of the holocaust on the other hand is poorly supported by data and involves attributions of motives unique in history. Raul Hilberg's theory of antisemitism for example is that it was caused by Christianity. You would think then, that when this cause diminished or ceased with the Enlightenment, the effect would also cease or diminish. But it was not so, the effect continued without the cause, eventually intensifying. This is a narrative of sorts, but it makes little sense, as many of its proponents admit. Hence we are entitled to look at it and its corollary claims with heightened skepticism.

Lohengrin
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 7:34 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Lohengrin » 3 years 8 months ago (Wed Feb 24, 2016 8:06 pm)

Thames Darwin wrote:
The father of modern history as a discipline was Leopold von Ranke. He pioneered source criticisms but he also had a distinct approach to writing history that pertains today -- i.e., he believed it was necessary for history to be written in narrative form. In other words, he argued it was necessary to tell a story. Virtually all history written since Ranke does this.

Except for revisionist history.


Total nonsense from Thames again. He takes refuge for his rubbish by an obscure "historian" as Ranke, giving him undeserved apodictical value. Yes, some "historians" devaluate their profession from searching facts, to telling "narratives", especially Holocaust court "historians" do.

That's no science, that's story telling. Science is about facts and proof only.

And Thames submits that he too is a believer of "narrative" historiography, a kind of political correct deceiving.

Thames is also lying, writing that those Holycaust narrators "gave the places to were transported jews were going: to "Gas chambers" and instant death. It's a false, too simple narrative to be true. In this case: were are the proofs of any "gas chamber", where are the proof for mass graves? There aren't and there weren't.

After Thames' debunked stupid question about "1% of jews transferred to other camps", he now comes with another stupid question: "What is the narrative of revisionists", suggesting they have no narrative.

Well Thames, you are right. Revisionists don't have "narratives", on the contrary, they refuse in the name of science and honest historiography to tell any "narrative" They stick to FACTS and PROOFS and nothing else.


And their proven facts tells the truth and nothing but the truth, which is:

1. There never was an order, plan, organization, financial means or otherwise instructions to kill all Jews. On the contrary, any crime against Jews was merciless punished by Law and German authorities. (Also in the camps!). Proofs for this are aplenty, otherwise none.
2. There isn't any proof of "millions of Jews gassed or deliberately killed. On the contrary: look at the huge efforts of the Germans to fight and prevent typhus and the hospitals and medical care in the so-called "extermination camp" Auschwitz etc.(!)
3. Not one "gas chamber", not one (part of a) body has ever shown even 1 "gassed" Jew, not 1 name of even 1 proven "gassed" Jew. Not 0,001% of the Talmudic number "6 million murdered Jews" is ever found or showed.

And concerning the revisionist "narrative" (FACTS) about what happened to the Jews, this is not what revisionists "narrated" but what the facts shows:
A. There were never more than 4.5 million Jews under the Nazi regime (this can and is easily proven by multiple JEWISH sources too).
B. Retro-calculation of the official Israeli number of "surviving" Jews in 2004, shows that over 3.5 million Jews were alive in 1945. That brings the real number of MISSED Jews after 6 years of War in 1945 at 1 million, that is to say, inclusive all natural deaths, suicide, deaths by epidemics, death by War circumstances, deaths by executions, deaths by transports, in camps, etc.

You see, there wasn't the slightest need for "gas chambers" and this kind of mortality is hardly asking for "mass graves". So there were not and so there exists NOT ONE PROOF for it, see you Thames? To speak with Hannover: This is too easy.

Before you come with other stupid questions Thames, first study some serious revisionist works about your "Holocaust" narrative.

User avatar
Moderator
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1657
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2002 9:23 am

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Moderator » 3 years 8 months ago (Wed Feb 24, 2016 11:37 pm)

Lohengrin:
A little edginess is understandable, but please turn it down just a notch. We do not need to resort to the type of language that is always used against Revisionists.
Thanks for you cooperation, M1
Only lies need to be shielded from debate, truth welcomes it.

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2514
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby borjastick » 3 years 8 months ago (Thu Feb 25, 2016 5:28 am)

What we see time and time again is the repetition and spread of weasel words and wriggling by believers when it comes to talking detail and fact. They simply cannot do it, because if and when they do they fail.

See here the old 'where did they go then?' routine which implies that a) they existed to begin with and b) we cannot prove they went somewhere else which in turn means they were killed at Treblinka or wherever claimed. This may fool a newbie or 12 year old but it will not wash with anyone who has read sufficient material on both sides of the argument. This person would only ever come down on the side of resistance to the myth or at least a healthy dose of skepticism. Unless of course they hold a pre existing condition commonly known as judaism and its related problems.

The bottom line is that we must push all buttons necessary to crush once and for all the six million figure. It is simply not true. It couldn't be. Thus when one understand this and overlays the logical and practical considerations and the evidence we now have, the gas chambers and 6m figure falls apart totally.
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician

Morrison
Member
Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 3:09 pm

Re: 'holocaust' certainty? Then Why Do They Ask Dumb Questions Like "what happened to them?"

Postby Morrison » 3 years 8 months ago (Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:14 pm)

Thames Darwin:

The father of modern history as a discipline was Leopold von Ranke. He pioneered source criticisms but he also had a distinct approach to writing history that pertains today -- i.e., he believed it was necessary for history to be written in narrative form. In other words, he argued it was necessary to tell a story.


But it's not necessary to tell a story when pointing out the myriad outrageous lies and physical impossibilities of the holyco$t myth.

The only thing necessary when writing history is the truth.

Too bad your "narrative" is so lacking in that Thames.


Thames Darwin:

Our narrative says where the Jews went.


No, your narrative alleges where the jews went.

But your unsubstantiated narrative doesn't prove it.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

They were murdered in many places over the course of several years, but we have established our narrative.


alleged Thames, alleged. And you forgot to add:

and were allegedly buried in numerous huge mass graves that could easily be found today by a blind man with a plastic toy shovel.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

You have not established a narrative.


But we've established that your nonsensical narrative has never been proven.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

Instead, revisionists dispute individual pieces of evidence as if they exist in total isolation.


It's called skeptical inquiry Thames. You should look it up, you might learn something.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

When asked to support their methodology by providing a narrative, they refuse.


Our methodology is called skeptical inquiry Thames. Look it up, you might learn something.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

When we ask you where they went, we're asking for a narrative.


No, you're trying to get us to play a game, but instead, we destroy you with science and logic.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

And we don't want "Jews went where Jews are."


Why not thames? That's what you tell us: jews went where jews are - i.e. - into "huge mass graves."

All we ask is to see the proof of that allegation.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

We want you to provide documents, eyewitnesses, etc., that support your version, tied together with a narrative.


And we want you to provide proof of your unsubstantiated allegations.

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

E.g., you believe the Reinhard camps were transit camps. OK, fine. Provide a narrative of that scenario that ties together available evidence supporting that point of view.


Here's all the "narrative" you need Thames:

http://nafcash.com/

We continue to wait for the proof Thames.


Thames Darwin:

We continue to wait.


Like we're waiting for you to prove that 2 million jews are buried in 75 "huge mass graves" at Belzec, Chelmno, Sobibor and Treblinka?

Proof Thames.

That's why we ask.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests