1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

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
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 7:58 pm)

Not to go on with this for ever, but if I had to write a short comedy on this exchange, I might try something along these lines:

[A forum. Enter the Never Four Million guy (in blue) and the Skeptic guy (in green).]

:bounce: [N4M] -- It was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. Only the crazy commies ever mentioned such a figure in a totally different non-Jewish context.

:( [SKE] -- How about the examples on this list, including such figures as 9, 8, 7, 6, 5 and 4 million?

-- The 4 million figure in your list is the one chiseled in stone by the crazy commies, and they meant Slavs, hence no one ever claimed 4 million Jews.

-- But nothing about Slavs or communists or anyone else was specified in the old stone plaques, and the Jews have always been strident about their near monopoly of victimization in Auschwitz, while absolutely silent about the plaques themselves. Indeed the vast majority of Jewish victims of the "Holocaust" has always been alleged to have come from Poland and the USSR.

-- Naturally, since the plaques don't mention any nationalities, races or religions, but we know Slavs was what the crazy commies had in mind, hence no one ever claimed 4 million Jews.

-- Well, how about this learned movie, much quoted by the "Holocaust" lobby, where a 9 million figure is flashed over Auschwitz, while the narrator voice invokes the prodigious "factory of death" at Auschwitz, if I'm not mistaken? Doesn't that imply somewhat more than 4 million Jews?

-- No. That's just a movie flashing a figure over Auschwitz, while a voice says something irrelevant to the 4 million figure. It doesn't count, even if the movie advisers were Jewish historians. Besides you never proved that anyone claimed 4 million Jews.

-- I see. How about the other multi-million figures?

-- They don't count, since the French War Crime Research Office, the French War Crime Information Service, Raphaël Feigelson, Tibère Kremer, or Bernard Czardybon didn't claim 4 million Jews.

-- Well, since according to Jews, a large majority of the victims had to be Jewish, isn't the 4 million implicit in any of those?

-- Those authors don't count because they were not writing within the ivory halls of orthodox academia.

-- You didn't mention any ivory halls when you said: "it was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz."

-- Oh, that was an implication that you should have guessed, exactly as we correctly guess the Slavic identities behind the appalling 4 million lie by the crazy commies.

-- Okay. But don't you feel that throwing about the allegation that the 4 million figure was exclusively non-Jewish propaganda, while the Jewish ivory towers never even cooperated in anything that could smack of deranged lies, falls short of the truth?

-- You were not able to prove to me that anyone ever claimed 4 million Jews, and now you're changing the subject.

-- Let me propose a thought experiment: if I myself were to enter an ivory tower and claim that exactly 4 million Jews -- not one more, not one less -- perished at Auschwitz, would that satisfy your strict requisites for the 4 million claim?

-- No. I said no one had ever claimed 4 million Jews, not that no one ever would.

-- I give up. Let's change the subject.

[Fast curtain]

:toothy1:
Last edited by ASMarques on Sun Jul 05, 2009 11:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 8:38 pm)

PatrickSMcNally wrote:
ASMarques wrote:your "authors in the West" were delighted to propagate every bit as many lies and to promote as large a confusion as any "authors in the East" you can think of.


They obviously are not "my" authors, they just are authors who live in geo-politio-cultural domain which people have called "the west" as a shorthand for a long time.


I didn't say those authors were "your" authors.

I said «your "authors in the West"» as in (quoting you): "it is more in line with what authors in the west have traditionally maintained."

And of course both of us meant "the geo-politico-cultural domain which people have called 'the west' as a shorthand for a long time," though I prefer to uppercase the said domain.

I think I'm just begining to understand why you're such a strict sticker with the "Never 4 Million" issue.

Is that a syndrome acquired in early childhood? :binky:

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:02 pm)

ASMarques wrote:Not to go on with this for ever, but if I had to write a short comedy on this exchange, I might try something along these lines:

[A forum. Enter the Never Four Million guy (in blue) and the Skeptic guy (in green).]

:bounce: [N4M] -- It was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. Only the crazy commies ever mentioned such a figure in a totally different non-Jewish context.

Well already at the outset you've falsified the points I'd made. It certainly was never claimed that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. However the figure itself could be easily mentioned in newspaper articles and other types of sources which were not part of formal academia. But even these media and entertainment outlets, as far as I have been able to track anything down, never claimed 4 million Jews. When the number 4 million was tossed around it was not with any clear reference to Jews, and, yes, of course, Soviet propaganda clearly meant it as something predominantly Slavic in nature. And for these and similar related reasons, it is false for anyone to try to develop a demographic argument based upon the change in the Auschwitz plaque. You've simply twisted to avoid openly axknowledging that fact.

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:09 pm)

ASMarques wrote:Is that a syndrome acquired in early childhood?

As I've already stated elsewhere, until as late as 2002 I was under the impression that 4 million had been killed in Auschwitz. But I never took that to mean 4 million Jews. I always assumed that at least half of this total was Slavic. It was only when I began to have doubts about the general narrative of the fabled Holocaust that I began to actually read with some seriousness the authors who were most highly regarded in the orthodox school. I found many things which I didn't like, but I had to admit that I couldn't find anyone claiming 4 million Jews dead at Auschwitz. Neither have you so far.

User avatar
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:15 pm)

PatrickSMcNally wrote:
ASMarques wrote:Not to go on with this for ever, but if I had to write a short comedy on this exchange, I might try something along these lines:

[A forum. Enter the Never Four Million guy (in blue) and the Skeptic guy (in green).]

:bounce: [N4M] -- It was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. Only the crazy commies ever mentioned such a figure in a totally different non-Jewish context.



Well already at the outset you've falsified the points I'd made.


Precise quote from your first message on this thread:

"It was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. The old Soviet propaganda used to maintain that 4 million people of primarily Slavic extraction had been murdered at Auschwitz."

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:20 pm)

neugierig wrote:Other tales, lies, have been dropped without explanation and with this one we are told the 4 million was never accepted by serious historians (whose numbers are all over the place), and that it never mattered. Nice try and I am sure those who want to believe are satisfied. It does nothing for a skeptic, however, because it is too obviously just another spin attempt.

Perhaps you are not aware that the majority of this year's high school graduates are not skeptics on the matter of our legendary Holocaust. In fact, they've grown up in a world where the plaque at Auschwitz says 1.5 million, not 4 million. Try arguing to any reasonably bright well-read high school grad that, because the plaque at Auschwitz once said 4 million, and it doesn't say that any longer, that we can deduce that the famous 6 million must be reduced by a similar amount. Give that argument to any bright well-read high school grad and they'll go back to the books to check whether they said back then 4 million Jews dead at Auschwitz. Any such bright well-read high school grad will know that they should ignore statements which may have appeared in The New York Times or related outlets about 4 million. They will try to find out who were considered the best authors of this earlier time before 1991. They'll come across names like Christopher Browning and Raul Hilberg, and they'll read these authors' old books to determine if their case really depended on assuming 4 million Jews dead at Auschwitz. They'll realize that it clearly did not, and identify you as a hoaxer pulling their leg. End of story.

User avatar
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:26 pm)

PatrickSMcNally wrote:
ASMarques wrote:Is that a syndrome acquired in early childhood?


As I've already stated elsewhere, until as late as 2002 I was under the impression that 4 million had been killed in Auschwitz. But I never took that to mean 4 million Jews.


I didn't mean the specific "4 million" thing. Or rather, I meant the general style in arguing the thing, what one might call the :binky: part.

No hard feelings, I hope. And not to worry too much. Most of us have some sort of habits & memories from early childhood. With me it's opening mechanical things to see what makes them tick.
Last edited by ASMarques on Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:27 pm)

ASMarques wrote:Precise quote from your first message on this thread:

"It was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. The old Soviet propaganda used to maintain that 4 million people of primarily Slavic extraction had been murdered at Auschwitz."

And that staement is exactly correct. You can hunt around and find media article which blandly repeat the number 4 million when reporting on some event held in the Auschwitz area, but I've yet to find any which claim 4 million Jews dead at Auschwitz. Those which repeat the 4 million number, at least among those which I have been able to find thus far, always follow the broad generic form of the Soviet plaque itself without any special mention of Jews. When a mention of Jews as primary victims at Auschwitz comes up, the number given, if any is given at all, is at most 2.5 million (usually lower, more like 1.1 million). That's all that I've been able to find in print thus far, and apparently the same is true of yourself since you haven't produced any counter-examples.

PatrickSMcNally
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 186
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 4:47 am

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby PatrickSMcNally » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:43 pm)

ASMarques wrote:I meant the general style of the thing

The only style which I've followed here is what's called "exactitude":

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exactitude

Pronunciation: \ig-ˈzak-tə-ˌtüd, -ˌtyüd\
Function: noun
Date: 1734
: the quality or an instance of being exact : exactness

Knowing the difference between a scene in a film like 'Night and Fog' where the number 9 million is flashed across the screen and a picture of Auschwitz sits in the background without bothering to clarify that this 9 million is not meant to be concentrated solely in Auschwitz versus, say, Christopher Browning, an academic generally paraded as a leading specialist, is part of achieving exactness. One doesn't have to accept either the film or the academic, but being able to distinguish is part of being exact. Your entire argument from the time when you jumped onto this a few pages back could be summarized as "It's all part of the same thing and there's no purpose in ever trying to draw any distinctions between Steven Spielberg and Raul Hilberg because they're all just part of one big collective phenomenon." I can only repeat that the majority of thoughtful youth entering college this year will not agree with you on this point.

User avatar
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 9:47 pm)

PatrickSMcNally wrote:
ASMarques wrote:Precise quote from your first message on this thread:

"It was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. The old Soviet propaganda used to maintain that 4 million people of primarily Slavic extraction had been murdered at Auschwitz."


And that statement is exactly correct.


Not relevant.

Neither you nor I were arguing the correctness of the statement you had made, but whether or not I had misrepresented its meaning. Quoting your exact words: "Well already at the outset you've falsified the points I'd made."

Here is how I put an equivalent in the mouth of my imagined comedy character: "It was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz. Only the crazy commies ever mentioned such a figure in a totally different non-Jewish context."

In what way was I falsifying your points?

User avatar
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:38 pm)

PatrickSMcNally wrote:
ASMarques wrote:I meant the general style of the thing


The only style which I've followed here is what's called "exactitude":


No, it isn't.

Exactitude in human affairs requires taking due notice of ambiguities, implicits, innuendos, contexts, silences, contradictions etc.

For instance, if you say "The neocon scholars didn't lie when they made it clear they thought WMDs in the hands of mad people presented a danger; the crucial decisions were made by president Bush who was a well-known friend of several Islamic dictatorships; and people who opposed the invasion of Iraq could be found both in Israel and the Jewish lobby in the US" you're not strictly lying, but you're not being exact either.

Your claim that "it was never claimed by anyone that 4 million Jews had died at Auschwitz" is of the same kind. Perhaps not an outright lie, in the sense that the exact number of 4 million, like the exact number of 1,543,328, has never been claimed, but it's anything but an example of exactitude. It's called obfuscation, not exactitude.
Last edited by ASMarques on Sun Jul 05, 2009 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thesaint
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:34 pm
Location: England

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby Thesaint » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 10:43 pm)

PatrickSMcNally wrote:
Thesaint wrote:The constant harping on about the significance of the fact that only 1 million Jews are alleged to have been gassed at Auschwitz by Hilberg and his merry band of "elite" hoaxsters,thereby excusing said hoaxsters from ever having to account for the previously alleged(ooohhhh,but not by them Patrick,not by THEM!) extra 3 million saved souls by shrugging them off as never-existing,non-important,non-dead Jews,that in no way interfere with the orthodox "theory" of how the alleged Auschwitz extermination machinery operated.

With stupic caricatures like that drawn by people posing as revisionist advocates, it's no wonder that the Holocaust fable lasts as long as it does. Maybe we should call it Thesaint Stupidity.

This subthread has absolutely nothing to do with if or how the alleged "Auschwitz extermination machinery operated." It began when another ill-informed poster tried to make a demographic argument about Jews having perhaps emigrated, basing their argument upon the change in the plaque (which they got wrong anyway), and I had just casually pointed out that such an argument holds no water. Now you've taken umbrage over this simple true point to get riled up with charges that I'm allegedly protecting the orthodox history. You should change the "saint" part of your name to "idiot" and then it will fit better.


Yes,the holohoax perpetuation is all down to simple-minded folk like me who delight in telling everyone I safely can that it`s all a big fat dirty lie from beginning to end in as simple and striking fashion as possible while directing them to this place for confirmation.As for your childish name-calling,I`ve been visiting this site for 15-odd months and you are the only poster I`ve seen do such a provocative thing.Sure,there`s been "banter",and subtle "digs",but to fire off salvos of "moron" "dumb smart-Alec" "stupid" "idiot" must be seen by any reasonable revisionist on this forum as beyond the pale(I`m sure the forum rules must forbid such conduct,so the mods must be waiting to see just how low you`re prepared to go).

Patrick:
"This subthread has absolutely nothing to do with if or how the alleged "Auschwitz extermination machinery operated."

Really?

I thought the plaque was a documentation of the numbers allegedly processed at Auschwitz,albeit a rough and ready one.If 3/4 of the earlier death-toll has now been erased from history the overall Jewish holocaust death figures must be in question because no one is prepared to show us the mechanism by which the previously alleged Auschwitz shipments of Gentile Zyklon-breathers can be cleanly extracted from the grand Auschwitz death total while the alleged Jewish shipments totalling 1million are all to be found on the "real" side of the equation.
It`s not enough for the hoaxsters to say "our million dead Jews are the real deal and we never believed the others ever even existed,so our grand total of dead Jews is not affected by this admission of falsity on the part of the communists and their Western dupes".


I fully take on board what you`re saying about DIRECTLY subtracting 1-for-1 the disowned 3 million Auschwitz "non dead Jews" from the 6 million "dead" Jews,but without a realistic accounting being offered for either category at all the camps the matter must at least be considered to be in a totally fluid state.
You never know,the hoaxsters might be helping the Nazis to cover up the death of a million captured Eskimos at Auschwitz with their fictional 1 million Jewish deaths. :lol:
"We didn't call survivors," says Lipstadt, "because first of all we didn't want to subject them to cross-examination by this guy. He (Irving) would have destroyed them."
- Jerusalem Post 6/16/00

User avatar
ASMarques
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 624
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 12:47 pm

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby ASMarques » 1 decade 5 months ago (Sun Jul 05, 2009 11:34 pm)

Thesaint wrote:Sure, there`s been "banter", and subtle "digs", but to fire off salvos of "moron" "dumb smart-Alec" "stupid" "idiot" must be seen by any reasonable revisionist on this forum as beyond the pale (I'm sure the forum rules must forbid such conduct, so the mods must be waiting to see just how low you're prepared to go).


I always object to those restrictions. Though personally I never indulge in any name calling, I enjoy the vigor it can communicate to a debate and often the picturesque imagination of many name callers as well.

And above all I appreciate the real edge name calling concedes to the effective non-name calling calm analysis of the issues at hand in any discussion. Few things convey the superiority of reason further than cold good-humored reasoning under a non-stop gratuitous barrage of insults from the safe distance of electronic communications which, of course, doesn't make the name caller look any more intrepid than it makes him look clever. And it attracts bystanders too!

To my relative disappointment, given the repetitive character of the discussion, McNally's name calling was of the rare, very weak, practically innocuous, almost well-mannered, sort. Still, in my quality of object of the so-called name calling I must intercede with the mods in his (and my) favor. Please let it stand and let's hope much worse is forthcoming!

:cussing: :thefinger: :headbang:

gatedancer
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 11:56 am

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby gatedancer » 1 decade 4 months ago (Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:59 pm)

Back to the original topic, I sent a contribution to denierbud toay, and when I checked for the address I was disappointed to see that he said he had been getting very little financial support. He has spent years and a lot of effort with no chance of financial return for it except from supporters.

I think those like us with regular incomes should do a better job of supporting his efforts with financial help. I ended up doubling what I was going to send, and I'll send more if he needs it - a lot more if I have to.

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: 1/3 Holocaust: Auschwitz?

Postby nathan » 1 decade 3 months ago (Thu Aug 13, 2009 9:18 am)

Patrick Macnally writes:

--------------------------------
“The old Soviet propaganda used to claim that 4 million people of predominantly Slavic background had been killed in Auschwitz.”
---------------------------

Certainly in 1945 an assimilationist USSR wished to play down Jewish as against Soviet suffering. But the four million figure had an impact on Western interrogations and trials, where the four million were assumed and sometimes stated to be predominantly Jews. Did "old Soviet propaganda" anywhere make it clear that only a minority of the four million dead “citizens” were to be taken as of Jewish origin?


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest