Burden of Proof

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
Carolyn Yeager
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:55 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Carolyn Yeager » 1 decade 1 month ago (Sat Oct 02, 2010 1:28 pm)

Kingfisher wrote:
I see it totally differently than you do, so I cannot engage in a gentlemanly discussion taking your perceptions seriously.

Thank you Carolyn. This nicely encapsulates your approach to debate in general.

Alright, Kingfisher, please show me how you would carry out gentlemanly discussion with Balsamo in reply to his post of Oct. 2, 11:22 a.m. featuring the 6 points. I'd like to learn how you go about taking him seriously, and why anyone should. :) Thank you in advance.
In Jewish history there are no coincidences ... Elie Wiesel
Learn more at http://eliewieseltattoo.com

Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour http://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-unde ... uided-tour

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Balsamo » 1 decade 1 month ago (Sat Oct 02, 2010 2:47 pm)

Carolyn Yeager wrote:
Kingfisher wrote:
I see it totally differently than you do, so I cannot engage in a gentlemanly discussion taking your perceptions seriously.

Thank you Carolyn. This nicely encapsulates your approach to debate in general.

Alright, Kingfisher, please show me how you would carry out gentlemanly discussion with Balsamo in reply to his post of Oct. 2, 11:22 a.m. featuring the 6 points. I'd like to learn how you go about taking him seriously, and why anyone should. :) Thank you in advance.



Let me help you, Carolyn.

1./ provide a source or at least a internet link that states the allies serious accusations of 6.000.000 Jews killed by Imperial german forces.
2./ provide a proof that Jews had still sufficiant influences on the Anti-Semite polish goverment, especially in the organization of official census and surveys.
3./ Provide me with declarations of war to the Reich made by German and polish Jews. Or please provide documents that shows that Wiezman had the authority to be representative of all jewish nationals in the World.
4./ Show me proof of growth of the Jewish population after the war.
5./ I am opened to discuss the Haavara agreement



i deliberately let the points concerning the gaz chambers and the eyewitnesses because those subjects have been treated many times on this forum and others.

Carolyn Yeager
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:55 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Carolyn Yeager » 1 decade 1 month ago (Sat Oct 02, 2010 7:37 pm)

Balsamo wrote:
Carolyn Yeager wrote:Alright, Kingfisher, please show me how you would carry out gentlemanly discussion with Balsamo in reply to his post of Oct. 2, 11:22 a.m. featuring the 6 points. I'd like to learn how you go about taking him seriously, and why anyone should. :) Thank you in advance.

Let me help you, Carolyn.
1./ provide a source or at least a internet link that states the allies serious accusations of 6.000.000 Jews killed by Imperial german forces.
2./ provide a proof that Jews had still sufficiant influences on the Anti-Semite polish goverment, especially in the organization of official census and surveys.
3./ Provide me with declarations of war to the Reich made by German and polish Jews. Or please provide documents that shows that Wiezman had the authority to be representative of all jewish nationals in the World.
4./ Show me proof of growth of the Jewish population after the war.
5./ I am opened to discuss the Haavara agreement
i deliberately let the points concerning the gaz chambers and the eyewitnesses because those subjects have been treated many times on this forum and others.


I'm waiting for Kingfisher to show me how, so you'll have to wait too.
In Jewish history there are no coincidences ... Elie Wiesel
Learn more at http://eliewieseltattoo.com

Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour http://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-unde ... uided-tour

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Balsamo » 1 decade 1 month ago (Sat Oct 02, 2010 7:48 pm)

:D

Come on, Carolyn, i am not that sensitive...
Kingfisher has nothing to do with those arguments.
If you admire David Baker stuff. You should defend it with or without Kingfisher permission or knowhow.
By the way, i know very well that he does not share my points of view, but he, at least, is commited to debate!
I was waiting for David to reply, but feel free to take over his role as you more than share his statement.

:cheers:

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3624
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Hektor » 1 decade 1 month ago (Sun Oct 03, 2010 3:32 pm)

Balsamo wrote:....
Let me help you, Carolyn.

1./ provide a source or at least a internet link that states the allies serious accusations of 6.000.000 Jews killed by Imperial german forces.
2./ provide a proof that Jews had still sufficiant influences on the Anti-Semite polish goverment, especially in the organization of official census and surveys.
3./ Provide me with declarations of war to the Reich made by German and polish Jews. Or please provide documents that shows that Wiezman had the authority to be representative of all jewish nationals in the World.
4./ Show me proof of growth of the Jewish population after the war.
5./ I am opened to discuss the Haavara agreement

Let me help you, Balsamo.
Each of the points you raise is a subject of its own, hence should have a thread of its own were it can be discussed in thorough detail. Use the search function to see, whether such discussions aren't already in existence.

User avatar
Kingfisher
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1673
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Kingfisher » 1 decade 1 month ago (Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:53 pm)

Carolyn,
Alright, Kingfisher, please show me how you would carry out gentlemanly discussion with Balsamo...

Actually I mistakenly thought it had been aimed at me!. Sorry. I'll stay out of this one.

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Balsamo » 1 decade 1 month ago (Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:43 am)

Hektor wrote:
Balsamo wrote:....
Let me help you, Carolyn.

1./ provide a source or at least a internet link that states the allies serious accusations of 6.000.000 Jews killed by Imperial german forces.
2./ provide a proof that Jews had still sufficiant influences on the Anti-Semite polish goverment, especially in the organization of official census and surveys.
3./ Provide me with declarations of war to the Reich made by German and polish Jews. Or please provide documents that shows that Wiezman had the authority to be representative of all jewish nationals in the World.
4./ Show me proof of growth of the Jewish population after the war.
5./ I am opened to discuss the Haavara agreement

Let me help you, Balsamo.
Each of the points you raise is a subject of its own, hence should have a thread of its own were it can be discussed in thorough detail. Use the search function to see, whether such discussions aren't already in existence.



Hektor,

David Baker addressed all those issues in one single paragraph and of course without giving any kind of sources. Enough to spark off the admiration of Carolyn. Ironically, this topic deals with the "Burden of proof".
I was not asking for a debate, footnotes or references would have been enough.

Carolyn Yeager
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 355
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 11:55 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Carolyn Yeager » 1 decade 1 month ago (Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:36 pm)

[quote="Balsamo]
Hektor,

David Baker addressed all those issues in one single paragraph and of course without giving any kind of sources. Enough to spark off the admiration of Carolyn. Ironically, this topic deals with the "Burden of proof".
I was not asking for a debate, footnotes or references would have been enough.



Balsamo should be reminded that David Baker was addressing his comment to Jofo's original thread question. I think is was an appropriate response. If Jofo is not satisfied with it, he can reply. If Balsamo has a better answer for Jofo, he can give it.

Also, David Baker's statements of fact are well established, not difficult to discover in the literature, which most posters here are familiar with, including Balsamo. So really, it's up to Balsamo to refute with his sources what he disagrees with in what David Baker says. This is how the 'holocausters' work - they make bald statements and expect revisionists to prove them wrong, which is what Balsamo is doing.
In Jewish history there are no coincidences ... Elie Wiesel
Learn more at http://eliewieseltattoo.com

Auschwitz: The Underground Guided Tour http://carolynyeager.net/auschwitz-unde ... uided-tour

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Balsamo » 1 decade 1 month ago (Mon Oct 04, 2010 5:58 pm)

Also, David Baker's statements of fact are well established, not difficult to discover in the literature, which most posters here are familiar with, including Balsamo. So really, it's up to Balsamo to refute with his sources what he disagrees with in what David Baker says. This is how the 'holocausters' work - they make bald statements and expect revisionists to prove them wrong, which is what Balsamo is doing.


Carolyn, this topic is about the "bruden of proof" concept. Very good answers have been given to Jofo's. (The Warden, Kingfisher, etc) but you didn't react to those one.
David Baker's one is just a kind of ideological garbage you seem to like and for which he does not feel the need to support with facts. To refuse to give some sources that could give some strength to one's argumentation on a topic about the "Burden of proof" is beyond me. Dave declared that the Jews are and were controling the census before and after the war. That is something! All i ask now (let's forget the other points) is HOW did he come to this, as Poland was a very Anti-Semite country before WW2 - and even after.
I do accept the arguments that the holocaust is sold to the public without the need of proving, though there are very well researched work that make some good points.
What is your well established literature, Carolyn? Faurisson has it all right and Browning all wrong? Black and white ?

The Burden of proof lies on the accusation as far as justice is concerned. That is very clear.
But again, History is not Justice. So as far as history is concerned, the Burden of proof applies to every single theory, to every single statement. Historical proofs has nothing to do with Judicial proofs. History is supposed to be long term obervations.
I am aware of the confusions created by the IMT...I don't have much trust in how it took place right after the war...And i am among the ones who deplore the fact that all the "negationist"s laws" are precisely refering to the IMT truth.

And YES, Historians does not have the same definition of "legal proof" than the Justice. Did Nero burn the christians ? Is he responsable for the fire of Rome? Historians don't have many legal proofs to support it, but every one is free to believe what he wants in this matter. The same goes for a lot of Historical Event. Was Napoleon a french revolutionary hero or a war criminals? etc.
I also agree that the Holocaust still has political implications...

But those are judicial and political concerns.
If you want to put the debate on a politic stage. Well, ok...But Politic and honesty are quite different concepts.
If you want to revise the IMT, you need lawyers.
If you want to put the debate on a historical stage. Then, every participant should be bound to supporting their claims with sources and some logical thinking. And of course, everyone should be free to conclude whatever their want from it.
If you want to know or tell what happened to the Jews during WW2, you should adopt an historian attitude, not a lawyer's one.

AND David's statement was political, not historical.

Kageki
Member
Member
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 4:39 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Kageki » 1 decade 1 month ago (Mon Oct 04, 2010 7:32 pm)

Balsamo wrote:The Burden of proof lies on the accusation as far as justice is concerned. That is very clear.
But again, History is not Justice. So as far as history is concerned, the Burden of proof applies to every single theory, to every single statement. Historical proofs has nothing to do with Judicial proofs. History is supposed to be long term obervations.
I am aware of the confusions created by the IMT...I don't have much trust in how it took place right after the war...And i am among the ones who deplore the fact that all the "negationist"s laws" are precisely refering to the IMT truth.

And YES, Historians does not have the same definition of "legal proof" than the Justice. Did Nero burn the christians ? Is he responsable for the fire of Rome? Historians don't have many legal proofs to support it, but every one is free to believe what he wants in this matter. The same goes for a lot of Historical Event. Was Napoleon a french revolutionary hero or a war criminals? etc.
I also agree that the Holocaust still has political implications...

But those are judicial and political concerns.
If you want to put the debate on a politic stage. Well, ok...But Politic and honesty are quite different concepts.
If you want to revise the IMT, you need lawyers.
If you want to put the debate on a historical stage. Then, every participant should be bound to supporting their claims with sources and some logical thinking. And of course, everyone should be free to conclude whatever their want from it.
If you want to know or tell what happened to the Jews during WW2, you should adopt an historian attitude, not a lawyer's one.

AND David's statement was political, not historical.


But they did tell what happened through a lawyer. The IMT is still relevant. You are completely wrong about the so called differences.

You should be able prove something like the gas chamber in a court of law. It should be held up to that kind of standard when Germany has to pay billions in reparations and people executed or jailed for it.

What is the proof for gas chambers?

David Baker
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:37 am

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby David Baker » 1 decade 1 month ago (Tue Oct 05, 2010 3:24 pm)

I believe Mr. Balsamo's argument could be characterized as "If I didn't see your evidence, or if I don't acknowledge your evidence, then your evidence isn't valid". He takes it upon himself to discredit major publications, or to dismiss established fact as some sort of conspiracy effort. What should truly pique Mr. Balsamo's ire is the fact that the World Almanac not only published the figures which increased the Jewish population after WWII, but that NO JEWS SCREAMED BLOODY MURDER ABOUT THOSE FIGURES when they were published! There shouldv'e been a major rebuke by Jews against the publishers of the World Almanac. Jews did in fact Declare War on Germany, as published in the London Daily Express in 1933. It's right there in plain english. Of course, Mr. Balsamo will mitigate this declaration as merely a boycott of German goods, but he will never, in six million years, admit that Jewish Zionists were creating a fertile environment of antagonism against their tribe in Germany, and worked with the Nazis to force the emigration of European Jews to Palestine. For their part, Germany's leaders dispatched envoys to Madagascar to research the viability of that location as a new Jewish Homeland, in compliance with Herzl's original concept. Zionists wouldn't have it, and insisted upon the subjugation of Palestine. Where Hitler showed his colors was when he agreed to establish concentration camps collocated with manufacturing facilities in Poland, and employ Jewish POWs and refugees as laborers. I totally agree this was not a reasonable decision to make. Thousands of camp inmates, both Jewish and gentile, died as a result of this decision. However, they did not die as a result of any Nazi campaign to exterminate the Jews.

If you turn Mr. Balsamo's argument toward the exterminationists, then we could easily assert that we haven't seen any evidence of the Holocaust. That should be enough, using his criteria, to invalidate that claim.

JustTheTruth
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:53 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby JustTheTruth » 1 decade 1 month ago (Wed Oct 06, 2010 12:32 pm)

Do you want to hear the real joke of the matter?

Germany actually WON the war in Europe. Yes they were defeated militarily, but economically, they cozied up to France that was considered an outsider by the so-called victors and quickily recovered to now be back in control of Europe.

(So-called) Great Britain has only just finished paying off America for the Lend-Lease BS and was rendered a shell of it's former self after 'winning'.

User avatar
Balsamo
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Balsamo » 1 decade 1 month ago (Wed Oct 06, 2010 4:08 pm)

David Baker wrote:I believe Mr. Balsamo's argument could be characterized as "If I didn't see your evidence, or if I don't acknowledge your evidence, then your evidence isn't valid". He takes it upon himself to discredit major publications, or to dismiss established fact as some sort of conspiracy effort. What should truly pique Mr. Balsamo's ire is the fact that the World Almanac not only published the figures which increased the Jewish population after WWII, but that NO JEWS SCREAMED BLOODY MURDER ABOUT THOSE FIGURES when they were published! There shouldv'e been a major rebuke by Jews against the publishers of the World Almanac. Jews did in fact Declare War on Germany, as published in the London Daily Express in 1933. It's right there in plain english. Of course, Mr. Balsamo will mitigate this declaration as merely a boycott of German goods, but he will never, in six million years, admit that Jewish Zionists were creating a fertile environment of antagonism against their tribe in Germany, and worked with the Nazis to force the emigration of European Jews to Palestine. For their part, Germany's leaders dispatched envoys to Madagascar to research the viability of that location as a new Jewish Homeland, in compliance with Herzl's original concept. Zionists wouldn't have it, and insisted upon the subjugation of Palestine. Where Hitler showed his colors was when he agreed to establish concentration camps collocated with manufacturing facilities in Poland, and employ Jewish POWs and refugees as laborers. I totally agree this was not a reasonable decision to make. Thousands of camp inmates, both Jewish and gentile, died as a result of this decision. However, they did not die as a result of any Nazi campaign to exterminate the Jews.

If you turn Mr. Balsamo's argument toward the exterminationists, then we could easily assert that we haven't seen any evidence of the Holocaust. That should be enough, using his criteria, to invalidate that claim.


Well, Mr. Balsamo cannot aknowledge your evidence because as a matter of fact "He did not see it". So yes HE would be a fool to consider any "invisible evidence" as valid.

I thought you would come up with this old "World Almanac thing"...and i would be very interrested to learn HOW did those Almanac guys managed to count any european population between 1939 and 1945, and after when half the continent and national administrations were in ruins. As you believe their numbers for 1942 or 1944, you certainly know how they did it!

Concerning this declaration of war, which indeed consisted mainly in a boycott of German goods, i was not denying it, but only said that i was not aware of the participation of German nationals of jewish confession. Now, if you think that the American Jewish Commitee or the American Jewish Congress were representative of a kind of Jewish Nation State...hum...
And hum...do you see any reasons for this action by those Jewish Commitee ?

Anyway, my point was mainly that on a thread about the burden of proof, proofs should be provided.

User avatar
Cloud
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 7:27 pm
Location: The Land of Political Correctness

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby Cloud » 9 years 9 months ago (Thu Feb 10, 2011 2:27 pm)

jheitwler wrote:it is impossible to prove a negative.

I've thought about your statement a lot (and I've heard it all over the internet). This is my argument against it:

Proof: Suppose it is possible to prove the claim, "it is impossible to prove a negative" to be true (abbreviated now as Δ). Then it has been proven that Δ is true. But Δ is itself a negative, which contradicts the fact that it is impossible to prove a negative. Thus, it is impossible to prove Δ is true.

Now, let Σ be the statement, "it is impossible to prove Δ is true." Since I have established by the argument above that Σ is true, and since Σ is a negative, this shows Δ to be false. Therefore, it is possible to prove a negative. ♦

What do you all think? Does it work?

trevor
Member
Member
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: Burden of Proof

Postby trevor » 9 years 9 months ago (Sat Feb 12, 2011 8:02 am)

Demanding proof that the Holocaust didn’t happen is the same as demanding proof that God doesn’t exist.

It is (theoretically) possible to prove the existence of God.
It is not possible to prove in general the non-existence of God.
The only way to prove God doesn’t exist is to refute the evidence that he/she does exist. The credibility of that evidence has to be evaluated. That evidence is refutable or not.


It is theoretically possible to prove the Holocaust.
It is not possible to prove in general the non-existence of the Holocaust.
The only way to prove the Holocaust did not happen is to refute the evidence that it DID happen.

That is why the believers have to present their evidence that the Holocaust did happen. The credibility of this evidence has to be evaluated (just like it is done in any other event). That evidence is refutable or not.

Suggestion that totally different rules should apply when one person is killed or when allegedly 6 millions were killed is nothing but manipulation.

The first question asked when there is a suspicion a person was killed is “where is the body?” " How was is done?". When the body is found a forensic examination is performed to identify the body, to determine the cause of death, the time the murder was committed, the traces coming from the perpetrator etc.

The Nuremberg trial did not look for the remains of 4 million victims in Auschwitz (alleged at that time). Two commissions looked (in 1944 and 1945) for the remains of the alleged 850 thousand to 2 millions victims in Treblinka and did not find them.

No MASS graves have ever been found.

The Holocaust is a religion.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests