Levels 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!
Secret Anne X
Member
Member
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 11:12 pm

Levels of Proof

Postby Secret Anne X » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Nov 27, 2003 1:49 am)

Hi,

Something I wanted to add about the discussion of evidence or proof.

I think it has to be said that revisionists are all over the map on these things.

Some revisionists accept the shootings without question and also accept millions of Jewish deaths.

Other revisionists question both, and ask for evidence and proof.

Maybe you can say that some of this second group are being difficult, but look at it from the point of view of an American discussing American history.

In other words I am sure that everyone has had conversations with people where things like the following were said:

"Tens of millions" of native americans were genocided

"Tens of millions" of african americans were killed in slavery or in transit

The US slaughtered "millions" of Vietnamese in My Lai style massacres

The US used poison gas in Korea, or Vietnam

The US committed atrocities in Korea, example, No Gun Ri

There was no good reason to kill "millions" of Japanese in the 1945 firebombings and nuclear attacks

While a lot of Americans will let comments like that go, a lot more will get their dander up and ask for proof, proof, and more proof. And if the proof is not there, they will "deny" the truth of the statements.

In fact with almost all of the above statements, "denial" is appropriate because with only a couple of exceptions all of the above statements are false, either because they are hugely exaggerated or because the facts are wrong -- no believable evidence of using poison gas, for example.

While the above statements are strictly false that doesn't mean that wrongs and wrongful deaths were inflicted on native americans african americans Vietnamese and Japanese by the United States. It just means that the above statements are so wrong as to need to be fixed.

I know the above looks off topic but really it isn't. "Denying" the Nazi crimes is just the same kind of thing, only in this case by mostly non-Germans concerning the behaviour of the German Nazi government.

User avatar
Hannover
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 9839
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:53 pm

Postby Hannover » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:44 am)

One is 'denying' nothing when what's been alleged cannot be proven.

When allegations defy laws of science we then know the allegations cannot be true.

When there is no physical evidence for what is alleged to be crimes of a most physical nature we then know the allegations are false.

When huge mass graves are alleged but they do not exist, we know the allegations of what supposedly happened at that site are false.

The onus is upon the accuser to support the accusations, that is logic, that is legitimate jurisprudence.

Yes, atrocities happen in wars, all wars. What happened to the Jews in WWII was comparatively much less then what happened other groups. Think intentional targeting of German civilians by Allied bombing, think Japanese civilians similarily murdered, think Communist gulags, think American concentration camps for Japanese-Americans, on & on.

- Hannover
If it can't happen as alleged, then it didn't.

code yellow
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 8:07 am

Postby code yellow » 1 decade 5 years ago (Thu Nov 27, 2003 7:00 am)

Hannover wrote:One is 'denying' nothing when what's been alleged cannot be proven.

When allegations defy laws of science we then know the allegations cannot be true.

When there is no physical evidence for what is alleged to be crimes of a most physical nature we then know the allegations are false.

When huge mass graves are alleged but they do not exist, we know the allegations of what supposedly happened at that site are false.

The onus is upon the accuser to support the accusations, that is logic, that is legitimate jurisprudence.

Yes, atrocities happen in wars, all wars. What happened to the Jews in WWII was comparatively much less then what happened other groups. Think intentional targeting of German civilians by Allied bombing, think Japanese civilians similarily murdered, think Communist gulags, think American concentration camps for Japanese-Americans, on & on.

- Hannover
:D The problem with the jews is that they insist on laying claim to the worst atrocity inflicted upon anyone,not only in WW2,but in the history of mankind.It seams to me that they insist you pay attention to no one else who suffred.All attention is due to"THE" holocaust,and to doubt it would bring you punishment.I think the author of this post does not realize the psychological impact imposed on the western world by an elleged tragedy primarily based on propaganda taken at face value in order to gain sympathy,wich has in turn help put these people in positions of political and economic power.The holocaust was not an atrocity,it is a sham.A total insult to American inteligence.


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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests