The Holocaust Thread - The Great Debate Between Affirmers, Revisionists and Deniers

[JohnDoe]

What the hell happened to the energy/fuel discussion? It may be my poor reading comprehension, but it appears that a Chugger induced slide (back to resettlement) occurred. GGs buddy.

After completing a circuit of

"There are no bodies because they cremated them all to dust."
"Where did the fuel come from for that?"
"Well they don't need that much fuel, they had crematoriums."
"Well that doesn't seem possible and the evidence you're showing is burn pits, not even crematoriums."
"That is because they did most of the burning outside."
"THAT REQUIRES EVEN MORE FUEL SO WHERE DID THE FUEL COME FROM?"
"They don't need much, they had fat jews to fuel specially designed magic crematoriums!"
"What? You just said they used burn pits! Now magic crematoriums? This is implausible on its face! Where's the evidence?"
"Well here is a memo from a guy who knew a guy that heard in a bar that it happened, and a patent application from after the war!"
"What? That isn't evidence, just some statements we can't verify. Show some photographs or maybe-"
"All the evidence was destroyed so you can never prove me wrong, ever, just trust me on this bro!"

Now we have gone back to the old canard of them assigning a strawman position and trying to shift the burden of proof:
"There is no confirming evidence that positively demonstrates every detail of a position I assigned to you, therefore you are wrong and I am right."
"Uh, that's cool and all, but then where is your positive evidence proving your thesis?"
"There is no evidence, therefore you can't disprove my thesis."
"You just said a second ago that a lack of positive, detailed evidence demonstrates probable falsity, so how can you-"
"SHUT UP IDIOT, THERE WAS NEVER A MOON RESETTLEMENT AND YOU'LL NEVER PROVE YOUR CONSPIRACY THEORY, RETARD!"

Pretty much.

Although @JohnDoe never confirmed whether I'm understood him correctly or not in the following post:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but he's saying that it doesn't combust and thus the energy isn't released as heat.

I mean, you could theoretically take a fat human cadaver, butcher it to extract all the fats from the corpse in a gross manner, take those fatty deposits, render them with fine grinding and then liquify with heat until you have sterilization and good flow. From there you proceed with a transesterification reaction (on which there is very little research regarding human fats for the obvious reasons), but we can use the processing of beef tallow as a handy stand-in. Due to the high levels of free fatty acids in mammal tallow (tallow is purified and rendered fat) you need an initial esterification process with an acid like sulfuric acid for example (very common industrial acid) to decrease these proportions and then drain the resultant waste glycerol. Then you can move to the second stage, where the tallow can be mixed with whatever catalyst you have handy and methanol, (by the way this stage requires constant heating and stirring over a period of time) to allow for efficient transesterification. At the end of this process you have a liquid fuel that can be blended with more traditional diesel fuels to run diesel motors, heaters, etc. Also this process was only developed and industrialized recently, in the 1980s and is only really economic in areas where there is a ready source of animal fats (in livestock rearing areas that produce lots of fat waste) and where you also want to reduce reliance on traditional petroleum based fuels. So likely not the case, barring some magical secret German patent that somebody's brother's cousin's coworker's former roommate wrote about while under Soviet interrogation.

At a more reasonable point (and I use the term very loosely), we might task some of our theoretical Sonderkommandos to butcher out all the fat Jews from the Netherlands to harvest their fat (presuming that we have a steady supply of said Jews at the rates and obesity levels required) and then taken the raw fat and tried to use it as fuel. Pure tallow is not an easy fuel to work with, but presumably you could fill troughs or vessels at the base of the crematorium with fat, liquify it with heat from your coal/natural gas/diesel burners and attempt to ignite it once liquified. This presents a number of engineering issues, chief among them is that, unless rendered down, raw fat is highly variable in composition and behavior. This means that there can be some very unpredictable performance; first a problem because you want steady, controlled heating and secondly it could easily result in damaging the crematorium's primary burners or ruining the secondary fat burners. Any possible gains in efficiency could be very easily lost in maintenance trouble and of course the capital costs of designing and retrofitting the crematoriums to work with animal fat.

Alternatively you could simply try to combust the human fat without processing at all, which means that it is still distributed throughout the corpse after loading in the crematorium - which presents similar issues of unpredictability, inefficiency and possible damage to the crematorium. With those fat deposits locked in the cadaver, it is difficult (or at least impractical) to determine the total amount of fat and when it may combust - so how does the operator know when to reduce the fuel flow to let the fat burning 'take over' and for how long? Does he just reduce the fuel rate over the entire period, or cut it off during the flare? (It may surprise you to know that it is not efficient to just dump a load of fuel in all at once, and instead better to deliver it at a controlled rate.) Then we have another issue that comes with a rapid, energetic combustion of a fuel source that may still be wrapped inside some pressure containing vessel like say...dehydrated skin. The rapid buildup of pressure as the fat combusts can cause an explosive over-pressurization which could be damaging to your cremation unit - for a traditional single fixed tray unit this may not be a very serious concern, but for complex and mechanically convoluted designs like the ones purported to exist such events could severely damage the unit and take it out of commission for some time.

Perhaps I misspoke earlier, but I'll clarify; the use of human fat as a combustible fuel is theoretically possible, but not practical or feasible in the time (1940s) or manner that has been proposed by Speaks or Chugger.

 

[mrolonzo]

After completing a circuit of

"There are no bodies because they cremated them all to dust."
"Where did the fuel come from for that?"
"Well they don't need that much fuel, they had crematoriums."
"Well that doesn't seem possible and the evidence you're showing is burn pits, not even crematoriums."
"That is because they did most of the burning outside."
"THAT REQUIRES EVEN MORE FUEL SO WHERE DID THE FUEL COME FROM?"
"They don't need much, they had fat jews to fuel specially designed magic crematoriums!"
"What? You just said they used burn pits! Now magic crematoriums? This is implausible on its face! Where's the evidence?"
"Well here is a memo from a guy who knew a guy that heard in a bar that it happened, and a patent application from after the war!"
"What? That is implausible on its face! Where's the evidence?"
"Well here is a memo from a guy who knew a guy that heard in a bar that it happened, and a patent application from after the war!"

Now we have gone back to the old canard of them assigning a strawman position and trying to shift the burden of proof:
"There is no confirming evidence that positively demonstrates every detail of a position I assigned to you, therefore you are wrong and I am right."
"Uh, that's cool and all, but then where is your positive evidence proving your thesis?"
"There is no evidence, therefore you can't disprove my thesis."
"You just said a second ago that a lack of positive, detailed evidence demonstrates probable falsity, so how can you-"
"SHUT UP IDIOT, THERE WAS NEVER A MOON RESETTLEMENT AND YOU'LL NEVER PROVE YOUR CONSPIRACY THEORY, RETARD!"

He just tried the amazing pre heated ovens giving you extra thingy on Jim Rizoli.

Jim; do not bullshit me young man the cremations have to be rebuilt after a small number of operations.

Matt; but repairs tho....

Jim; but 200 doctors in Auschwitz

Matt; yeah nah, they would only help special people and would never help a five year old...

I didn't watch the whole thing. I'll get back to it. Kudos for having a go but he just comes off as a really really ignorant bs artist.

Can you give examples of german coded words from that era beyond Sonderbehandlung, Endlösung and Umsiedlung, which are all specifically related to the holocaust.

It seemed you were saying there was a broader example of coded words, but so far you've only used words that mean exactly what you would expect them to mean in german. Genuinely asking, because so far you seem reasonable and I'm genuinely curious and don't know the answer if there are more of those coded words or not.

Because purging loan-words is really just a political action comparable to "freedom fries", which if I think about it, is a war crime.
Though maybe not as big as genocide.

Loan words should be a war crime. Based.

 

[History Speaks]

A lot of absurdity but at least Jim was sincere. I do not get the feeling that he is a cruel man or a grifter, and bet he is decent and generous in his personal life. Just muddle headed I guess, and Jew-obsessed. He believed every document I mentioned was forged at Nuremberg, and that it makes perfect sense for a bunch of people to admit to committing a genocide that never happened, including those who were under no coercion and not being prosecuted .

When my tech guy is no longer MIA hopefully we can have another stream but this time in my channel, I will also post this once Jim sends it to me.

This was OT but since Jim brought up Allied war crims--which are obviously real, how can firebombing a city and nuking cities not be war crimes?--I should have brought up that his beloved Nazis razed Warsaw out of spite. It was a savage war in which the Nazis stood out for their savagery and their kill count, even compared to the Soviets.

They also committed genocide against Poles and Russians, not just Jews. Although these genocides were not as thorough, so to speak, they were genocides under any reasonable definition, claimed millions of Russian and Polish lives, and were inspired by Nazi race hatred against Slavs.

 

[mrolonzo]

A lot of absurdity but at least Jim was sincere. I do not get the feeling that he is a cruel man or a grifter, and bet he is decent and generous in his personal life. Just muddle headed I guess, and Jew-obsessed. He believed every document I mentioned was forged at Nuremberg, and that it makes perfect sense for a bunch of people to admit to committing a genocide that never happened, including those who were under no coercion and not being prosecuted .

When my tech guy is no longer MIA hopefully we can have another stream but this time in my channel, I will also post this once Jim sends it to me.

This was OT but since Jim brought up Allied war crims--which are obviously real, how can firebombing a city and nuking cities not be war crimes?--I should have brought up that his beloved Nazis razed Warsaw out of spite. It was a savage war in which the Nazis stood out for their savagery and their kill count, even compared to the Soviets.

They also committed genocide against Poles and Russians, not just Jews. Although these genocides were not as thorough, so to speak, they were genocides under any reasonable definition, claimed millions of Russian and Polish lives, and were inspired by Nazi race hatred against Slavs.

Look. Firstly that's free entertainment so thank you. Secondly, you engaging with us is a risky road. So fair enough. Moreover you've got to really be at your best if you're not ignoring us while still wanting to write books about this.

In what way is he muddle headed? He's not satisfied by your assertion that you have a 1985 that helps you.

He prefers a cautious approach to known science and doesn't take documents that are not original.

Can't see what's muddle headed here.

By the way, this "raised Warsaw out of spite"...then do the" nazi race hatred" thing. Who are you talking to when you just say things like that? Me? Am I just supposed to say, oh yeah Matt that's just so true, you're such a smart guy etc ? Is that it?

 

[JohnDoe]

He just tried the amazing pre heated ovens giving you extra thingy on Jim Rizoli.

We're dealing with people that hear stories of roller coaster ovens and trained bear/eagle combos and their first reaction is
"This makes perfect sense to me, nothing to think about here."

 

[History Speaks]

As of tomorrow my vacation is over. I am sure I will still post here, but you guys are going to have to sustain this thread without me for the most part.

I do not consider this to be a risky road, but I certainly plan on engaging you--and with much bigger audiences than today--so we will see!

 

[Stan]

Can you give examples of german coded words from that era beyond Sonderbehandlung, Endlösung and Umsiedlung, which are all specifically related to the holocaust.

It seemed you were saying there was a broader example of coded words, but so far you've only used words that mean exactly what you would expect them to mean in german. Genuinely asking, because so far you seem reasonable and I'm genuinely curious and don't know the answer if there are more of those coded words or not.

Because purging loan-words is really just a political action comparable to "freedom fries", which if I think about it, is a war crime.
Though maybe not as big as genocide.

I'll guess that you can read German, right? Kennen Sie Deutsch? Guten Tag, Freund! Glücklich Sie zu sehen.

To me, in German, Nazi writings come off with a distinct style and use of vocabulary peculiar to them as a product of their propaganda machine. They coin words like "Rassenschande" (racial disgrace) and repurpose words like "Säuberung", which would literally mean 'cleaning' or 'purging', or "vernegern" (v. to nullify or negate) as a way of saying they were killing Jews without using verbs like "vertoten" or "morden" or "sterben". Nazis like to describe Jews and other 'untermenschliche Häftlinge' (subhuman detainees) using the same grammar as you might use for animals, and animal-specific words (e.g. 'fressen', to devour) are used to describe Jews as if they are animals. This may be because the Nazis viewed camp detainees as animals, because Nazi propaganda consistently describes Jews as subhuman. Nazi use of the phrase "Umsiedlung nach dem Osten" was a euphemism, meant to hide the purpose of the Holocaust in the short term and to sugar-coat its effects in the long term. It's kind of like how in America, a farmer would say they "harvested" a flock of chickens, not "murdered" them.

Edit: there was a distinct style used during Aktion T4 too; while it didn't outright dehumanize its victims, it tended to describe them as "unworthy of life", and that "nach menchlichen vermensen", 'mercy killing' (Gnadentod) was an act of social justice to the "unheilbaren Kranken", unhealable patients. It's a different style, but it demonstrates the sophistication of Nazi language and propaganda. Nazi German also has a vocabulary set and stylebook peculiar to political prisoners, but I can't comment on it as thoroughly as the last two examples, and I think I made my point, anyway.

 

[mrolonzo]

I'll guess that you can read German, right? Kennen Sie Deutsch? Guten Tag, Freund! Glücklich Sie zu sehen.

To me, in German, Nazi writings come off with a distinct style and use of vocabulary peculiar to them as a product of their propaganda machine. They coin words like "Rassenschande" (racial disgrace) and repurpose words like "Säuberung", which would literally mean 'cleaning' or 'purging', or "vernegern" (v. to nullify or negate) as a way of saying they were killing Jews without using verbs like "vertoten" or "morden" or "sterben". Nazis like to describe Jews and other 'untermenschliche Häftlinge' (subhuman detainees) using the same grammar as you might use for animals, and animal-specific words (e.g. 'fressen', to devour) are used to describe Jews as if they are animals. This may be because the Nazis viewed camp detainees as animals, because Nazi propaganda consistently describes Jews as subhuman. Nazi use of the phrase "Umsiedlung nach dem Osten" was a euphemism, meant to hide the purpose of the Holocaust in the short term and to sugar-coat its effects in the long term. It's kind of like how in America, a farmer would say they "harvested" a flock of chickens, not "murdered" them.

There was no such euphemism.

you being deliberately dense? Are you seriously suggesting the Nazis did not have a substantial propaganda arm within the party used to 'spin' all kinds of issues to the public?

The Nazis use of euphemism during the Holocaust was a direct result of opposition to Aktion T4. When Aktion T4 was implemented, the Nazis did not use euphemism, and openly spoke of providing "Gnadentod", or 'mercy death' to the disabled; or in their words, "Lebensunwertig", 'those unworthy of life'. The protestant Church in Germany and some German judges reacted badly to Aktion T4 and opposed euthanasia on humanitarian or legal grounds. The idea of putting down disabled children was unpopular, and it taught Hitler and Co. that a propaganda campaign and a secrecy campaign would be necessary to hide the purpose of Aktion Reinhard from the general public, even though party propaganda had persuaded Germans to see Jews as 'untermenschen'; subhuman.

Look. They certainly had administrative catch all terms like special handling but that's about it. And there was no ' teaching moment about euthanasia reference killing Jews ' euthanasia was a wide spread idea of the time and that's it.

I'm surprised I have to tell you that works of historical fiction about the Third Reich are not public policy documents. FWIW works of fiction about the Third Reich and the Holocaust (example linked) will sometimes use these euphemisms in context as it's historically accurate to do so. Sometimes they do not, and this is in an effort to make the topic accessible for people who haven't given it much thought since high school or college. Some movies are more accurate than others, some movies are meant to be emotionally moving whereas others are meant to be factual documentaries.

Ridiculous. Off point sperging from an enraged hoaxer.

You've said Mattogno is a "foremost" scholar on the Holocaust. According to whom, other Holocaust deniers?
Mattogno publishes to the Holocaust-denying fandom and only within that fandom are his views afforded esteem. He never sends his work in for peer review or publishes in actual academic journals. Mattogno claims on his website to have completed "university work in philosophy as well as Oriental and religious studies," but not even his own CV lists any preliminary or training work in that field. The plug on Mattogno's own website continues: "Today he has become an accomplished linguist, researcher, and is a specialist in textual analysis." No published work about anything like that is attributable to Carlo Mattogno.

Uh no. Orthodox historians have known about his work for decades and have studiously ignored it. Case in point, his destruction of the Van Pelt and the exposition of the criminal traces of Pressac for the amateurish nonsense it is.
Nor has any orthodox work ever examined the issues in his detail with his sourcing.
And he's been busy debunking the holocaust. That's his actual life's work.

You are not automatically a "foremost" scholar just because you publish a lot of books about it, you could be a lolcow who self-publishes poorly contrived 'handbooks', which Mattogno is. He deliberately stays out of any forum where his views would be subject to fact-checking or logical reasoning prior by an editor or peer reviewers prior to publication. Mattogno occasionally writes with other authors in the Holocaust denial fandom, and then those writings are crosspublished to Nazi-fanboy newsites with names like "the Vangaurd". At least, that is what a search of Google Scholar returns for Mattogno's full name. He is a lolcow who makes up his degrees and accreditations to chip away at the facts of the Holocaust to reaffirm his pro-Nazi audience that the Holocaust was overblown in scope or never happened; and those who remember the Holocaust, especially Jews who talk about the Holocaust, are over-reacting or malingering for sympathy

He is foremost in revisionist scholarship therefore revisionists being foremost in holocaust scholarship he is a foremost scholar. If you've got someone better im all ears.

Mattogno is an author, and a prolific one at that, but he is not a scholar. He's more like a romance novel writer, churning out these "handbooks" that make cringe assertions like

The Holocaust is not somehow better if the Nazis boiled the Jews with steam versus gassing them to death with hydrogen cyanide versus shooting them vs hanging vs neglect + disease. The horror of the Holocaust is that the Nazis used all of those methods together and developed a smooth, calm, factory-like process where millions were led to their deaths.

Wow. Such ignorant. You literally haven't read revisionists yet here you are.

@mrolonzo Here's a Mattogno chestnut that the revisionists/deniers in this thread are aping; he says that because the calculated, estimated output of the crematories is lower than the reported death toll, it was impossible for that many people to have died there. That doesn't make logical sense; killing Jews is one step before disposing of their bodies. It's as if Mattogno couldn't allow for possibilities such as bodies piling up in the winter, or being cremated after a delay of a week or more, executing new arrivals after a delay of up to a few days, reducing crematory downtime below recommended limits, or hastily burning and burning the overflow dead in mass cremation pits. There are photographs, eyewitness accounts, and documentation that the Nazis were doing all of those things to cope with insufficient crematory space. Topf and Sohne furiously drew up plans for better crematory ovens adapted to use in extermination camps throughout the war. So although Mattogno's calculations may be fine, his inferences put the cart before the horse. The causal direction of events here is basically the opposite of Mattogno's claim. Increasing crematory capacity throughout WW2 just establishes the increasing rate of prisoner death at the camps; that would tend to support the eyewitness accounts of the Holocaust, few as they are.

Gish gallop nonsense. Not even the balls to simply offer one issue.

Mattogno's amazement that not many eyewitnesses survived a death camp is him playing stupid, like a lot of you shitposters here do. Mattogno won't allow that the Holocaust was a process of charnel innovation. The first gas chambers were just transport vans with the exhaust pipe rerouted into the back. The first mass executions occurred in Aktion T4, and the same protocols were refined for Aktion Reinhard. The Reich was building new gassing facilities and crematories basically up until they had to tear them down in retreat. That would seem to support a theory of high crematory demand; almost as if the Germans were killing the Jews a little bit faster than they could get rid of their bodies, and in response German industry was refining the process of killing people and expanding facilities to do so.

A process of innovation in delousing yes.

Also, I don't think Mattogno knows Latin, Greek, or Hebrew very well, despite his claims to be a master of all that as well. Sounds like another claim he makes to burnish his own CV.

He's fluent in polish and German and another I think. This doesn't actually make him a genius. In central Europe multi lingual people are common.

As of tomorrow my vacation is over. I am sure I will still post here, but you guys are going to have to sustain this thread without me for the most part.

I do not consider this to be a risky road, but I certainly plan on engaging you--and with much bigger audiences than today--so we will see!

Ok great.
Am I right in thinking you have experience in not only chemistry, history but also law practice now? This came up with Jim. Thought I'd check it.

Do you actually deny that the Nazis razed Warsaw? Many Poles who saw them doing it or experienced it as kids are still alive, why would they all lie about this if the Soviets did it?

Poles may be the most anti-Communist people in the world- they have no problem calling out Soviet atrocities like Katyn. So why would all witnesses "pretend" the Nazis did this and not the Soviets? And who "faked" the documents showing the Nazis ordering the razing?

Right. But you're telling us they were doing urban operations out of spite rather than military necessity. Did you serve in the army too? Another string to add to the bow?

 

[History Speaks]

By the way, this "raised Warsaw out of spite"...then do the" nazi race hatred" thing. Who are you talking to when you just say things like that? Me? Am I just supposed to say, oh yeah Matt that's just so true, you're such a smart guy etc ? Is that it?

Do you actually deny that the Nazis razed Warsaw? Many Poles who saw them doing it or experienced it as kids are still alive, why would they all lie about this if the Soviets did it?

Poles may be the most anti-Communist people in the world- they have no problem calling out Soviet atrocities like Katyn. So why would all witnesses "pretend" the Nazis did this and not the Soviets? And who "faked" the documents showing the Nazis ordering the razing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Warsaw yes wikipedia, but the pictorial evidence is great and you can folilow the secondary sources.

If you are honestly interested in reading the history of Nazi genocide against Poles--through ethnic cleansing, slave labor, mass murder of intellectuals, deliberately depriving Poles of education, underfeeding, and numerous cases of outright murder and razing of villages--I can recommend Richard Lukas' book

Forgotten Holocaust: The Poles Under German Occupation 1939-1944.​

 

[History Speaks]

Right. But you're telling us they were doing urban operations out of spite rather than military necessity. Did you serve in the army too? Another string to add to the bow?

How exactly was burning down, for example, the Zaluski Library, AFTER the Poles in the Warsaw Uprising had capitulated, a matter of "military necessity"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Załuski_Library#Repeated_destruction

The Nazis were savages and committed genocide against not only Jews but white gentiles. It makes no sense for you to defend them if you care about "white genocide," as this is a real case of it, not just a meme.

 

[mrolonzo]

How exactly was burning down, for example, the Zaluski Library, AFTER the Poles in the Warsaw Uprising had capitulated, a matter of "military necessity"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Załuski_Library#Repeated_destruction

The Nazis were savages and committed genocide against not only Jews but white gentiles. It makes no sense for you to defend them if you care about actual "white genocide," as you purport to as a white nationalist.

Just simple logic. Normally buildings are destroyed because they present juicy spots for snipers to hold a position in. This being a public building was easier to access for partisans.

Look stop just telling me about Nazis and savages etc. It's insulting and patronising.

 

[History Speaks]

Normally buildings are destroyed because they present juicy spots for snipers to hold a position in. This being a public building was easier to access for partisans.

The Warsaw Uprising had ended already though, with the Warsaw Home Army having capitulated.

re chem, I get why you guys want to meme this, since I am not an expert inchemistry andit would be false for me to say I am. But I absolutely never claimed expertise in chemistry. I have claimed to be a former chem major who dropped the major as an underclassman and was not close to getting a degree in chem.

Doing great in very low level college theoretical (as opposed to lab) chemistry classes, but dropping a chemistry major before I even got to the upper undergraduate courses because I did mediocre in the non theoretical (lab) classes--which is all I have claimed to have done--does not make one an expert in chemistry. This is all I have claimed to have done in chem (many years ago).

If you have no integrity I guess you can lie about me having claimed to be a chemist to make me look stupid. (One of the other guys parsed I quote where I said I did excellent in low level theoretical chemistry classes--which I did--into me saying that I am excellent at theoretical chemistry, which would be absurd-as if I am placing myself, as a dude who took low level classes tens of of thousands of people do excellent in every year, in the tier of academic chemists.)

I do know enough about chemistry to know that the stuff you and Jim say about it is nonsense.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I'll guess that you can read German, right? Kennen Sie Deutsch? Guten Tag, Freund! Glücklich Sie zu sehen.

To me, in German, Nazi writings come off with a distinct style and use of vocabulary peculiar to them as a product of their propaganda machine. They coin words like "Rassenschande" (racial disgrace) and repurpose words like "Säuberung", which would literally mean 'cleaning' or 'purging', or "vernegern" (v. to nullify or negate) as a way of saying they were killing Jews without using verbs like "vertoten" or "morden" or "sterben". Nazis like to describe Jews and other 'untermenschliche Häftlinge' (subhuman detainees) using the same grammar as you might use for animals, and animal-specific words (e.g. 'fressen', to devour) are used to describe Jews as if they are animals. This may be because the Nazis viewed camp detainees as animals, because Nazi propaganda consistently describes Jews as subhuman. Nazi use of the phrase "Umsiedlung nach dem Osten" was a euphemism, meant to hide the purpose of the Holocaust in the short term and to sugar-coat its effects in the long term. It's kind of like how in America, a farmer would say they "harvested" a flock of chickens, not "murdered" them.

Edit: there was a distinct style used during Aktion T4 too; while it didn't outright dehumanize its victims, it tended to describe them as "unworthy of life", and that "nach menchlichen vermensen", 'mercy killing' (Gnadentod) was an act of social justice to the "unheilbaren Kranken", unhealable patients. It's a different style, but it demonstrates the sophistication of Nazi language and propaganda. Nazi German also has a vocabulary set and stylebook peculiar to political prisoners, but I can't comment on it as thoroughly as the last two examples, and I think I made my point, anyway.

Guten abend Reisender

I can read german reasonably, though not nearly fluently. My speaking and writing is atrocious, but I can make myself understood. I supplement with an old pre-war german dictionary so that I have paper versions as a resource, seeing how certain things are translated strangely online* sometimes, and how I've also noticed redefinition of terms in english dictionaries. For example, I liked verifying all the symbols in the eyes wide shut movie. There are a lot of claims made about this movie's symbols and anyone can claim any symbol means anything, so as a hobby I tried to verify or falsify as many as I could. I also read the novel it was based on in english and german side by side to see how things were translated. I read about 3 pages per day until I was finished and found only one word that was translated imperfectly in the end.
My first language is dutch, so I can also rely to some degree on the similarities on top of these things. The earlier ausrotten discussion for example has the same linguistical root as the dutch uitroeien. I'm not a linguist though, I like to dabble in a lot of fields.

--

I appreciate your description, but it seems like your answer to my question is no. The only places where a word is used as euphemism or as code word, all relate to genocide, it seems. Again, this is not dismissing the possibility of code words, but I got the impression earlier that you were saying that there was lots of coded language outside of things relating to the supposed genocide that is the topic of this thread, and so far you still only give examples relating to genocide.

Appreciating the exchange though,

tschüss



* One example of something that is translated strangely/poorly through online translators is the last name of the character ziegler. The claim goes that this is a freemasonry reference. However ziegler offers no translation in google translate or any of the other online translators I found. Though if I open a deutsches wörterbuch, it is explained that it does indeed mean brickmaker/bricklayer. A mason.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I am not an expert inchemistry andit would be false for me to say I am. But I absolutely never claimed expertise in chemistry. I have claimed to be a former chem major who dropped the major as an underclassman and was not close to getting a degree in chem.

Doing great in very low level college theoretical (as opposed to lab) chemistry classes, but dropping a chemistry major before I even got to the upper undergraduate courses because I did mediocre in the non theoretical (lab) classes--which is all I have claimed to have done--does not make one an expert in chemistry. This is all I have claimed to have done in chem (many years ago). If you have no integrity I guess you can lie about me having claimed to be a chemist to make me look stupid. (One of the other guys parsed I quote where I said I did excellent in low level theoretical chemistry classes--which I did--into me saying that I am excellent at theoretical chemistry, which would be absurd-as if I am placing myself, as a dude who took low level classes tens of of thousands of people do excellent in every year, in the tier of academic chemists.)

I do know enough about chemistry to know that the stuff you and Jim say about it is nonsense.

Hey repeat these words:

"I thought I knew, but I was wrong. Thank you for showing my error in regards to chemistry". If you learn to say these words you can stop this embarrassing display where you keep trying to rationalize, when reality is that you were caught with your pants down. That's why I apologize when I make a mistake. It hurts, sure, but then you can get past it instead of making things worse.

You really don't deserve this good advice, but it'll make it even more entertaining when you stubbornly refuse good advice.

 

[Stan]

There was no such euphemism.

Look. They certainly had administrative catch all terms like special handling but that's about it. And there was no ' teaching moment about euthanasia reference killing Jews ' euthanasia was a wide spread idea of the time and that's it.

They do not and I think you need to bring a lot more citations to bear to substantiate any of your claims.

Ridiculous. Off point sperging from an enraged hoaxer.

Wrong again; I'm explaining these topics to you as if you are five years old, so that I don't go too fast for you.

Uh no. Orthodox historians have known about his work for decades and have studiously ignored it. Case in point, his destruction of the Van Pelt and the exposition of the criminal traces of Pressac for the amateurish nonsense it is.
Nor has any orthodox work ever examined the issues in his detail with his sourcing.
And he's been busy debunking the holocaust. That's his actual life's work.

He writes your fap folder

He is foremost in revisionist scholarship therefore revisionists being foremost in holocaust scholarship he is a foremost scholar. If you've got someone better im all ears.

OK, he's the foremost scholar jo material author of a pseudohistoric interest fetish in denying the Holocaust; as attested to by all his pro-Nazi author friends and a few vanity presses and "publications" owned and controlled by other Holocaust deniers.

And I do have someone(s) better: Yad Vashem. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. The Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation. The Memorial Museum of Auschwitz Birkenau. The Russian Research and Educational Holocaust Center. They don't have stupid conjecture about oven capacity, they have physical evidence, the Nazi's own documents, recorded eyewitness accounts, documents from the Allies, real photographs, and some of the fucking buildings are still there.

Wow. Such ignorant. You literally haven't read revisionists yet here you are.

Do you read Yad Vashem?

Gish gallop nonsense. Not even the balls to simply offer one issue.

I did though, it was crematory efficiency. Did you miss my giant wall of text about it?

A process of innovation in delousing yes.

Do you still believe in the tooth fairy? Are you seriously suggesting that the huge quantities of Zyklon B shipped to the death camps and the disappearance of millions of Jews from the Nazi ID system is a coincidence, or the result of disease and unluckiness? You are really gonna go with 'delousing needs'? You must be pulling my leg.

He's fluent in polish and German and another I think. This doesn't actually make him a genius. In central Europe multi lingual people are common.

Carlo Mattogno is like an overproofed bowl of bread dough, puffed up and gunty when you unwrap it, but then you punch it down and there's nothing there. The only people who publish him are vanity presses and holocaust revisionist "academic journals" with deliberately bland names like "Thesis and Research Publishing". He's completely self-accredited and publishes to imprints that are within his fandom. He doesn't engage with the outside world of historical academia because he cannot. His grift is Holocaust revisionism and it always has been, since he got of out the "Italian military" or whatever other vague achievements Dr. Mattogno says he has, like chess grandmaster titles or black belts in Jiu Jitsu.

In a criminal trial, juries are instructed to consider whether the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; which is a high bar to clear. If we put ourselves in the jury box, and look at the pro-Nazi exhibits like oven thermodynamic calculations and shitflinging about fuel as if cremations oven capacity has a causal relationship with oven demand, which it doesn't, and posturing about mostly sham efforts on the part of the SS to protect the detainees of the camp or give them medical intervention.

On the side of the defense, we have a lengthy and historically cited and tracked body of evidence gathered at the end of the war and further expanded on via archaeological efforts. Scores of individual witnesses to the Holocaust have testified to their experiences, and allowing Holocaust survivors some emotional lability for their experience, essentially corroborate one another independently. I'm reading a book now, called "Into that Darkness", by Gitta Sereny. It features the testimony of the man in charge of Sobibor during its deadliest run as a primary source.

I feel that it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Holocaust happened, and that you all are harboring an unreasonable doubt to minimize or negate the effects of the Holocaust.

 

[Mothra1988]

If we are on the subject of pictorial evidence, the below is relevant -

View attachment 3495737

Why is this woman being shoved by Sonderkommando into crema 5 - one of the buildings we say was a gas chamber? (The following photo with the Analysis of her location comes via ex-denier Eric Hunt)
View attachment 3495736

The people who deny this stuff deserve to burn in the Lake of Fire for eternity.

 

[mrolonzo]

The Warsaw Uprising had ended already though, with the Warsaw Home Army having capitulated.

re chem, I get why you guys want to meme this, since I am not an expert inchemistry andit would be false for me to say I am. But I absolutely never claimed expertise in chemistry. I have claimed to be a former chem major who dropped the major as an underclassman and was not close to getting a degree in chem.

Doing great in very low level college theoretical (as opposed to lab) chemistry classes, but dropping a chemistry major before I even got to the upper undergraduate courses because I did mediocre in the non theoretical (lab) classes--which is all I have claimed to have done--does not make one an expert in chemistry. This is all I have claimed to have done in chem (many years ago).

If you have no integrity I guess you can lie about me having claimed to be a chemist to make me look stupid. (One of the other guys parsed I quote where I said I did excellent in low level theoretical chemistry classes--which I did--into me saying that I am excellent at theoretical chemistry, which would be absurd-as if I am placing myself, as a dude who took low level classes tens of of thousands of people do excellent in every year, in the tier of academic chemists.)

I do know enough about chemistry to know that the stuff you and Jim say about it is nonsense.

Oh really? So the home army capitulates but being the local population they all still live there. So you as the tactical commander on the ground just leave it because you know that there cannot be a second uprising?

There was no such euphemism.


They do not and I think you need to bring a lot more citations to bear to substantiate any of your claims.


Wrong again; I'm explaining these topics to you as if you are five years old, so that I don't go too fast for you.


He writes your fap folder


OK, he's the foremost scholar jo material author of a pseudohistoric interest fetish in denying the Holocaust; as attested to by all his pro-Nazi author friends and a few vanity presses and "publications" owned and controlled by other Holocaust deniers.

And I do have someone(s) better: Yad Vashem. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. The Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation. The Memorial Museum of Auschwitz Birkenau. The Russian Research and Educational Holocaust Center. They don't have stupid conjecture about oven capacity, they have physical evidence, the Nazi's own documents, recorded eyewitness accounts, documents from the Allies, real photographs, and some of the fucking buildings are still there.


Do you read Yad Vashem?


I did though, it was crematory efficiency. Did you miss my giant wall of text about it?

Do you still believe in the tooth fairy? Are you seriously suggesting that the huge quantities of Zyklon B shipped to the death camps and the disappearance of millions of Jews from the Nazi ID system is a coincidence, or the result of disease and unluckiness? You are really gonna go with 'delousing needs'? You must be pulling my leg.


Carlo Mattogno is like an overproofed bowl of bread dough, puffed up and gunty when you unwrap it, but then you punch it down and there's nothing there. The only people who publish him are vanity presses and holocaust revisionist "academic journals" with deliberately bland names like "Thesis and Research Publishing". He's completely self-accredited and publishes to imprints that are within his fandom. He doesn't engage with the outside world of historical academia because he cannot. His grift is Holocaust revisionism and it always has been, since he got of out the "Italian military" or whatever other vague achievements Dr. Mattogno says he has, like chess grandmaster titles or black belts in Jiu Jitsu.

In a criminal trial, juries are instructed to consider whether the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; which is a high bar to clear. If we put ourselves in the jury box, and look at the pro-Nazi exhibits like oven thermodynamic calculations and shitflinging about fuel as if cremations oven capacity has a causal relationship with oven demand, which it doesn't, and posturing about mostly sham efforts on the part of the SS to protect the detainees of the camp or give them medical intervention.

On the side of the defense, we have a lengthy and historically cited and tracked body of evidence gathered at the end of the war and further expanded on via archaeological efforts. Scores of individual witnesses to the Holocaust have testified to their experiences, and allowing Holocaust survivors some emotional lability for their experience, essentially corroborate one another independently. I'm reading a book now, called "Into that Darkness", by Gitta Sereny. It features the testimony of the man in charge of Sobibor during its deadliest run as a primary source.

I feel that it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the Holocaust happened, and that you all are harboring an unreasonable doubt to minimize or negate the effects of the Holocaust.

Certainly I read Yad Vashem but that's not actual scholarship. That's an internet database that they make loose claims from.

Zb. Yes. There was a big drive against typhus.

He's engaged with the outside world repeatedly. See his exposes noted above.

You don't have any such thing on the defense. It's a calumny of vague rumours boosted by propagandists.

Sham efforts at medical intervention? Stop posting.

Did you just try to throw Gita in my face? Stop.

Your feels about reasonable doubt are just that.

 

[Lemmingwise]

The people who deny this stuff deserve to burn in the Lake of Fire for eternity.

People who see a picture of a woman being restrained and an aerial photo with captions on it and think it's evidence of anything more than a woman being restrained do not have the capacity to think for themselves.

 

[JohnDoe]

And I do have someone(s) better: Yad Vashem. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. The Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora Memorials Foundation. The Memorial Museum of Auschwitz Birkenau. The Russian Research and Educational Holocaust Center. They don't have stupid conjecture about oven capacity, they have physical evidence, the Nazi's own documents, recorded eyewitness accounts, documents from the Allies, real photographs, and some of the fucking buildings are still there.

So claims and a narrative from people that benefit politically from pushing a certain false narrative, people that make money pushing that narrative, and people that have historically falsified war crimes - including fabricating evidence and witness statements. That's so very very credible and iron clad, wow these aerial photos with the captions obviously prove the existence of Roller Coaster Cremators and Masturbation Machines. I feel so silly now.

A shame that they can never produce actual direct evidence, just memos from some guy's cousin's former roommate's coworker's mechanic's brother in law and blurry aerial photographs.

 

[History Speaks]

The people who deny this stuff deserve to burn in the Lake of Fire for eternity.

I fully understand this point of view, but I disagree with it. Some of them are charlatans (lying to others or themselves), which is why there are many fake denier documents (like the "Red Cross" document which is not from the Red Cross and is deliberately mistranslated). But some believe it, like some honestly believe in Scientology or the idea that Bush lanned 911 because science.

I do not think we can justly punish people for honestly held belief, or trust the state and silicon valley to discern between historical truth and laws (which is a power we are implicitly granting them when we promote criminlization and censorship of denial).

I am usually emotionally detached when I am reading documents about the Holocaust, and I think historians should try much harder to assume a more detached tone when writing about the Nazis, to be honest.

But while I am generally quite detached, there are a couple times where I got emotional eading about Nazi atrocities.

The worst probably was when I saw pictures of the results of Nazi "medical experiments," such as attempts at different types of sterilization and mustard gas experiments. I saw these at the Shapell Center, the archives of the USHMM. Many of these photos are "limited use" at the archives because of privacy considerations related to the dignity of the victims or to their surviving families. But I actually had permission from the Holocaust Musem's archives in to take pictures of these for my purposes (debunking denial), and I had these pictures on a USB drive. But in the end I just could not bear the thought of being the one to bring these pictures to Holocaust deniers, with how cruelly and stupidly they would "dissect" these pictures to "discredit" the idea that these children and inmates were tortured.

Gonna check out now all. Need a bit of a break from this joint and my vacation is over. But I will be back soon. Maybe tomorrow.