Added: 5 years ago
From: sobe104839
Views: 6,586
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (891)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Anyone else here cannot stand the childs voice to the point of not even listening to the clip, like me? the video debunks itself by using a childs voice in some messed up attempt to gather sympathy?

  • tim, the Nazi monkey is everywhere. I am out of nazi bananas today. Darn.

  • My entire family was gassed at Belzec. I lost 32 relatives. My aunt was shipped to Auschwitz and made into a lampshade. I found the lampshade in France in 1946 in a pawn shop. I told the man who owned the shop that lampshade was my aunt. He still wanted $400 for it. I asked him; How as a jew could you charge me. He said, it's shoah business kid.

  • @390bullitt1968 that was toooo funny

  • Someone's upset. Oh dear

    You dont have the balls to post quotes of the detailed first hand Soviet accounts through communiques from General F. M. Krasavin, Major Anatoly Pavlovich, Shapiro and Petrenko because these do you and your group fantasy considerable harm.

    Dont they.

    You know once upon a time I worried that the sanctifcation of the so-called holocaust stifled learning. Now I worry that the trivialization of the so-called holocaust will see it disappearing.

    Yikes!

  • @avisionry

    Noooooooo, someone's more intrigued at your loss of a REPLY button and whatever it is you're waiting for, fuckwit.

    "You dont have the balls to post quotes of ..."

    Until you put them up, bright lad......neither do you. But as you have them - and a great big hard-on for them - put them up.

    There's a good lad.

  • @avisionry

    Good decision, mate.

    You look stupid enough as it is.

  • Well well look, the two moral high grounders.

    Firstly you FAIL spectacularly and need to be corrected. I think that you'll find in your own so-called historical records that the Allies fast tracked to change the surrendering enemy status from POW to DEF.

    So why hide that fact.

    Secondly, help the multi-account keeping timpovikings bluespaceoddesey airfixkits et al by quoting Soviet communiques that were swapped backwards and forwards after the so-called Auschwitz liberation.

    Go on

  • @avisionry

    It's your claim we need to source: that Eisenhower killed more than a million and issued a shoot-to-kill order. We can then discuss the POW and DEF status issue in realtime, if you like. (laughs behind hand)

    Your only source is Bacque and sadly, he was proven to have used poor research, bad journalism, lies and lamentable mathematics. German historians even trashed his work.

    You're a liar and a coward, mate. You stay in the trees. You'll be safe there. ;-)

  • @avisionry

    Don't get too concerned about DEF status or the motivation for such changes. The reasons are not that sinister.

    To mirror some of the denier equivalence arguments, however, I suggest you look at how the nazis played with camp internee status in order to exclude camps from inspections. Does the name Belsen ring a bell, fuckwit? The nazis purposely mixed signatory (Hague/Geneva) and non-signatory nations, so neutral ICRC scrutiny was avoided.

    Hope this helps.

  • @alanheath

    Yes, we have a claim Ike was responsible for >1 million deaths and an order to shoot anyone who fed them. The idiot making the claim has spent a year avoiding it, and is a Ralph Keeling fan. Yet another example of a denier making demands on the evidence front and looking ridiculous when those same standards are directed back at him.

    You can't kill more >1 million Jews and leave no evidence of the crime, but you can if it's >1 million Germans!

    Perfectly reasonable.

  • @timpovikings A bit like the Dresden argument. It is perfectly possible to burn 250k Germans on one pyre in three weeks in relative secrecy in the middle of a large city but it is not possible to burn 400k Jews on several pyres without having to worry about secrecy over a period of many months. Obviously Germans burn better than Jews!

  • @avisionry

    Whilst the 'death camps' were located in the East and largely discovered by the Soviets, the conspiracy theory infers collectinve culpability involving the allies at all levels. Yet there is no evidence of this conspiracy or indeed a willingness to accept prima facie, Soviet allegations in isolation. Katyn wasn't taken as read, just as Dachau was not a mass gassing site and neither was Belsen. Strange, as they were perfect for any such false conclusion of systemic mass gassing.

  • @timpovikings

    Really now where are the answers to those questions I posed to you?

    Answers please

    One thing we do agree on is the backlog so please dont add to it.

    If I'm not mistaken I did ask you (well over a year ago now) to provide me with a link to a film reel or photo taken during 1933-45 of a German gassing operation being undertaken, where people were being systematically killed by either diesel petrol zB or Chanel No.5, either in a homicidal gas chamber or gaswagen.

    Still waiting

  • @avisionry

    I take it this is the logic which says that if an event is not filmed, it could not have happened?

    ROFLMFAOOOOOO!

    Well, I'll make a deal with you. You show me footage of Hitler's intact corpse before the chancellery garden barbecue, the Sagan murders, the Roehm Purge and the massacre of Lidice and only then will I and the rest of intelligent mankind believe they occurred or existed.

    I mean, how else would anyone establish these events took place!?

  • @avisionry

    "Really now where are the answers to those questions I posed to you?"

    Ditto.

    Your questions are irrelevant in the light of the published academic consensus over the last 50 years at least. No film or photo of an historic event clearly and demonstrably cannot mean it never happened.

    However, a categorical and clearly worded claim such as your Eisenhower allegation, must rely on something you have seen. You become the eyewitness, so to speak.

    So what did you see?

  • @timpovikings I assume the Eisenhower allegation is that he ran death camps - something the denier liars continually harp on about.

    It is strange that there is no evidence for this - nor is it backed up by any other sources - yet the Denier Liars swear to its authenticity.

  • Comment removed

  • @alanheath

    "Nor is it backed up by any other sources - yet the Denier Liars swear to its authenticity".

    It's denier-land, Alan, and anything goes. One bright spark tried to cast doubt on Ambrose's criticisms of Bacque by accusing him of plagiarism. It never entered his head that if Ambrose was guilty as charged, then it only strengthens his case because there must be TWO people who share those views, and not just one!

    Like shelling peas, isn't it?

  • @MSM4U2POM I can't see the point! Do they really believe it or is it a case that they know it is not true but they are trying to convince others, a bit like a guilty person before the judge trying to convince him or her that he is innocent?

  • @alanheath

    "I can't see the point".

    No more can I. It's very much like a phobia - the fear that the gas chambers may have existed, and the Jews may not be lying about it - which compels them to act so irrationally. It's a prospect they find so terrifying that they are willing to cast aside all semblance of common sense. Whenever their standards are applied to anything other than the holocaust, they immediately cry foul, which suggests that they CAN think straight when it suits them. Wierd.

  • @MSM4U2POM I will think about the phobia question.

    The Eisenhower death camp idea by the way is something I looked at. I filmed the cemetery at Sinzig with 2112 burials there (film on my channel) - not exactly the two million claimed by the denier liars and furthermore nearly all - if not all - appeared to have died of wounds. I do not doubt that the German POWs were not kept in accordance with the terms of the Geneva Convention but people dying shortly after capture is normal.

  • @alanheath (1)

    In context, those mortality figures and the reasons for them are not surprising.

    I agree that the western allies' record on the treatment of POW's was not squeaky clean, and there must have been occasions when unsupervised troops vented their anger on both them and civilians. In fact, it would be amazing if there weren't.

    If we accept this, then it is fair to say that ill-treatment and tacit murder must have accounted for thousands of deaths;

    (cont'd)

  • @alanheath (2)

    a serious matter indeed, but hardly indicative of genocide. As stories got around, they would have been exaggerated and distorted in the usual way, to the point at which the whole thing was blown out of all proportion.

    I am certain that this partially explains the 'deliberate starvation' claimed by Neo-Nazis and other parties. Camp staff were in a position to mete out rough treatment, and some of them must have been embittered, perhaps sadistic, individuals...

    Cont'd

  • @alanheath (3)

    ...who enjoyed playing fast and loose with the rules by withholding food.

    The notion that Eisenhower ordered it, though, is absurd: for one thing, it wasn't his job to dictate policy, but to implement it. If we assume, though, that he did receive instruction from above to starve prisoners to death, then where is the written evidence? It's not as if his orders were clouded with euphamism and veiled language like German documents pertaining to the Holocaust -

    Cont'd

  • @alanheath (4)

    "You will estimate requirements of supplies necessary to PREVENT STARVATION or widespread disease or such civil unrest as would endanger the occupying forces" - Directive to Commander-in-Chief of United States Forces of Occupation Regarding the Military Government of Germany; April 1945 (JCS 1067), paragraph 21 (my emphasis).

    How much clearer could it be?

  • @MSM4U2POM I do not think that there was any starvation of German POWs. However the lack of cover and medical facilities did lead to deaths which under different circumstances could have been prevented.

  • @avisionry

    "I did ask you...to provide me with a link" etc.

    Tell you what: if you show us a film of Polish prisoners being shot at Katyn, then I'll believe the Soviets did it.

    Hang on. I already do - film or no film!!! Something to do with Gorbochev saying 'Yeah, we did it', I think. Rather like the Nazis did after the war, and have continued to do ever since.

    Come off it, sunshine. If you saw this crap logic applied to anything else, you would be the first to laugh.

  • in 1988, during the second trial against Ernst Zundel, the public prosecutor deemed it prudent to abandon any recourse to witnesses. Canadian justice had apparently understood the lesson of the first trial:

    there were no credible witnesses to the existence and operation of the ' Nazi gas chambers'

  • @TheRedcatchop

    "there were no credible witnesses to the existence and operation of the ' Nazi gas chambers'"

    ....therefore the Holocaust was a hoax?

    Quoting Faurisson won't do you a lot of good, mate. This is a man who disappeared up his own anus when Harry Mazal proved the holes in the kremas, negating his battlecry of, "NO HOLES - NO HOLOCAUST!"

    Ernst Zundel is a nazi who laughed publicly at the gullibility of those who gave him money when he was selliing UFO expeditions.

  • @TheRedcatchop

    If there are/were no credible witnesses to gassing operations, what exactly have the revisionists been getting upset about over all these years?

    There are indeed credible witnesses, bright lad. Many of them SS officers and doctors, some of whom continued to admit these crimes for decades after.

    A more interesting fact is that all these years later we still have no SS denial of AR and Auschwitz mass murder by gas, no alternative and not one crumb of a hoax.

  • Christie: Can you give me one scientific report that shows the existence of gas chambers anywhere in Nazi-occupied territory? Hilberg: I'm at a loss. Christie: You are (at a loss) because you can't. I want one report, before, during or after the war that shows that someone was killed by the use of those gases. Hilberg: You want an autopsy (report) and I know of no autopsy

  • 1985 trial in Toronto, witnesses were grilled for the first time ever over the existence of the alleged " gas chambers, "

    Zundel " s lawyer Doug Christie to Dr Raul Hillberg

  • im off to bed, night night.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Keep a glass of water handy.

    It'll reduce the hangover.

  • Funny how they never mentioned LYE being used in the process. The Germans made rockets, so I am pretty sure that they knew how to make soap hahaha!

  • "According to this recipe 5 kilos of human fat are mixed with 10 liters of water and 500 or 1,000 grams of caustic soda. All this is boiled 2 or 3 hours and then cooled. The soap floats to the surface while the water and other sediment remain at the bottom. A bit of salt and soda is added to this mixture. Then fresh water is added, and the mixture again boiled 2 or 3 hours. After having cooled the soap is poured into molds"-Claims of nazi soap made from Jewish fat is wrong lol

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Wrong again.

    The recipe is in Blue vol. XXXIX page 463 and makes no mention of the word 'human'. While the testimony you quote includes it, the letterheaded recipe - which Porter claims is a forgery - does not, which is strange. Letterhead from the institute concerned and someone forgot to add the 'human' in the (allegedly) fake document.

    Next, in 2006 the IMT sample was proven to contain human DNA. see Mail & Guardian online / October 6, 2006

  • @timpovikings "Next, in 2006 the IMT sample was proven to contain human DNA"-So you all believe that soap was mass produced now? Can't you guys make up your minds? Also, did the DNA tests tell of what origin they were? Jewish? Non Jewish?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Wrong again. The only one attempting 'strawman', false propositions and non sequitur is you, mate.

    The IMT soap sample was proven to contain human material. The IMT judgement was that attempts were made, not that it was a widespread occurrence. Who - I mean apart from you - mentioned an official statement or any science based opinion of mass production?

    Where does it say "human fat" in the recipe?

    It's you that wants to change history. Try doing it sober.

  • @timpovikings "The IMT soap sample was proven to contain human material" and yet you post "Where does it say "human fat" in the recipe?" Which is it? And where in those tests does it say that the soap is from Jews? Any at all? And soap is commonly made from fats such as from animals and humans, yet this proves not that they are Jewish soap!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Raed it more slowly or put the bottle down.

    Where in the recipe does it say "human fat"?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    So, had the Soviets wished to present fabricated evidence, the documentary evidence of soap whould have had a lot more impact had it said "human fat", which it doesn't. Mazur's testimony would also have been weakened had it appeared in isolation. It didn't. British POWs corroborated it.

    The evidence that such evidence was false is, ipso facto....false.

    WHERE IN THE RECIPE IS THE TERM, "HUMAN FAT" - AS YOU CLAIM?

  • @timpovikings "So, had the Soviets wished to present fabricated evidence, the documentary evidence of soap whould have had a lot more impact had it said "human fat"

    "In February 1944 Professor Spanner gave me the recipe for the preparation of soap from human fat. According to this recipe 5 kilos of human fat are mixed with 10 liters of water and 500 or 1,000 grams of caustic soda." IMT bro, had you read it, you would have known that he said it hahaha!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    What question was this quoted answer in response to?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    

    Strange and rather polarised way you have of looking at this so called false evidence. Suddenly it has enough integrity to support your argument - and yet you say it's false! Had the reds wished to force a false line, the document would have clearly stated "human fat" or "Jewish fat". It doen't. The questions was put: 'Tell us how the soap was made out of human fat at the Danzig Anatomic Institute.'

    The answer referred to a basic recipe with the substituted human fat.

  • @timpovikings "the document would have clearly stated "human fat" or "Jewish fat". It doen't." And yet testimony from the Soviet's witness stated human fat was used.

    And where in the testimony did it say "substituted human fat"?

    And you are contradicting your previous statement "Next, in 2006 the IMT sample was proven to contain human DNA.".

    "The answer referred to a basic recipe with the substituted human fat."- This is rather amusing lol!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    So what was falsified?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    In terms you'll better understand when you sober up, Mazur's testimony alone would probably have gone nowhere. He volunteered mention of human material being used in a recipe which does not. The Soviets could not have invented evidence from British POWs - which came from the British!

    "And where in the testimony did it say "substituted human fat"?" I thought you just quoted the source of "human fat", bright lad! As it isn't in that recipe, human fat was thus substituted!

  • @timpovikings "And where in the testimony did it say "substituted human fat"?" I thought you just quoted the source of "human fat", bright lad! As it isn't in that recipe, human fat was thus substituted!"

    " I thought you just quoted the source of "human fat"-Not substituted fat as you claim lol!

    "He volunteered mention of human material being used in a recipe which does not."- Uh huh.

    And if this were substituted fat, then the samples should not show human dna not should it? haha!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    ROFLMFAOOOOOOO!

    I mean that a recipe which merely stated "fat" of no particular origin, had that unspecified "fat" substituted / exchanged / replaced....with the human material which Mazur clearly stated it was.

    YOU just quoted him!!!

  • @timpovikings "I mean that a recipe which merely stated "fat" of no particular origin, had that unspecified "fat" substituted / exchanged / replaced....with the human material which Mazur clearly stated it was."- Where in his statement did he say that the fat was substituted?

    ""The fat of the human bodies was collected by Borkmann and Reichert. I boiled the soap out of the bodies of women and men." More substituted fat again? lol this is very comical to say the least!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    That's because you're under the influence of alcohol.

    What was falsified?

  • @timpovikings "That's because you're under the influence of alcohol."-Lame -_-

    "The soap sample was alleged to have been made from human fat.

    The documentary evidence didn't specify "human".

    British witness evidence from 2 POWs supported this allegation.

    The same IMT sample was proven to contain human DNA."

    And yet this is substituted soap that contains DNA of humans? Tell me, of what substance is substituted for human soap?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Incredible.

    I don't mean a synthetic or substitute substance, I mean a non specified fat became - specifically - human fat.

    Is there a grown-up there, mate! LOL!

  • @timpovikings "I don't mean a synthetic or substitute substance, I mean a non specified fat became - specifically - human fat." "In the Danzig Anatomic Institute semi-industrial experiments in the production of soap from human bodies and the tanning of human skin for industrial purposes were carried out, and yet he is specified on record of stating human fat.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    In the IMT soap allegations, what did the Soviets falsify?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "the fact that the Soviets introduced false evidence"

    Go on then......?

  • @timpovikings The fact that soap today, and then, was made from Human and animal fat, and that as stated by the USHMM "He says the evidence that would prove it conclusively would include shipping bills, physical evidence from a manufacturing plant, or receipts for economic transactions — none of which has been found."

    Again, they submit evidence of this without proving that it was a policy of the Germans.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    " I did not lie about the Soviets submitting the testimony as proof of using Jewish fat."

    Just when you're ready, explain that one and tell me what was falsified - as you claim?

  • @timpovikings The fact that there are no "shipping bills, physical evidence from a manufacturing plant, or receipts for economic transactions", and the fact that the USHMM considers it a myth.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    The subject is soap, the IMT, the Soviets....and your claims.

    If you want to argue that the USHMM and the Jewish Virtual Library are sources of integrity and fact, just say so.

    Yes, you did lie, the Soviets could only submit evidence and, as Smirnov said, he was submitting evidence of a semi-industrial experiment.

    WHAT WAS FALSIFIED AND HOW ARE YOU LINKING THIS TO YOUR CLAIM THAT THEY "PROVED" IT WAS JEWISH FAT?

  • @timpovikings So, if the soap story were true, where did the documents and exhibits go?

  • Comment removed

  • @EdwardTheGray

    

    What was falsified?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "Tell me, of what substance is substituted for human soap?"

    When you get the hang of English, you're going to be a nightmare.

    You provide the evidence from three sources that human material was used in soap - and then ask where the evidence is of human material being used in soap?

    What a schoolboy howler!!!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    " I did not lie about the Soviets submitting the testimony as proof of using Jewish fat. "

    I'm afraid you'll have to explain that one.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    In Lego bricks.

    The soap sample was alleged to have been made from human fat.

    The documentary evidence didn't specify "human".

    British witness evidence from 2 POWs supported this allegation.

    The same IMT sample was proven to contain human DNA.

    Can you tell me what was falsified?

  • "Very simply, soap is made by mixing animal or vegetable oils or fats with lye that has been dissolved in water. It is a chemical reaction which results in a completely new substance - soap!

    Animal and vegetable fats are made up of fatty acids and glycerin. When lye solution is mixed with the oils, the lye and fatty acids combine to make soap; some water and glycerin are left over from the process. This process is called saponification. It looks like this:"

  • Again, Roberto claims that the Soviets "didn't fake evidence where they felt no need to do so for the reasons explained above"

    And yet we have the stories of electrocution chambers and soap made from the far of Jews.

    Again, very detailed to be mistakes from the Soviets.

  • @EdwardTheGray Edit *fat*

  • I am done discussing documents and eye witness testimony, it is claimed that the dead are buried in the six camps, and that their ashes are there as well, so I say we lay all of it on the table, the Polish and German government stop their laws for a revisionist and historian excavation of the camps. So many are said to be buried there, and I want to see proof that they are. If the testimony is true, then the dead should be there, and there should be no worries about not finding anything!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    You attribute fake evidence to the Soviets.

    Wrong again.

    The relevant affidavits from British POWs Henry Witton and William Neeley were given to the British Judge Advocate General's Office, not to the Soviets.

    The Soviets merely assigned their own document references to them. That means they were British in origin.

  • @timpovikings "The relevant affidavits from British POWs Henry Witton and William Neeley were given to the British Judge Advocate General's Office, not to the Soviets."- And yet the testimony from the Soviets came from

    Sigmund Mazur, and was submitted by the Soviets. Again, your strawman of an attempt to refute the fact that the Soviets introduced false evidence is rather amusing. LOL!!!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "And yet the testimony from the Soviets came from Sigmund Mazur" No shit.

    They also introduced documentary evidence which YOU have lied about, and British POW statements for which there is zero evidence of fabrication.

    The Katyn fiasco was also not allowed to progress to where the Siviets wished it to go. German witness evidence killed that one dead and they failed to support their allegations.

    The Soviets did not hold sway over the other 3 powers.

  • @timpovikings "They also introduced documentary evidence which YOU have lied about, and British POW statements for which there is zero evidence of fabrication. " OK, so where are these results that said that the soap is from Jews? And I lied? No sir, I did not lie about the Soviets submitting the testimony as proof of using Jewish fat.

    "Where in the recipe does it say "human fat"?" If this is the case, then why even bring up the allegation that Jewish fat were used?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    But you're the one saying this evidence is false! So, no mention of human fat in this document and no mention of Jewish corpses. The supporting evidence came from British POWs in the form of affidavits given to the British legal team.

    So, given the soap sample had no lettering stamped in it and that it was subsequently proven to contain human material, in this particular instance the Soviets were fabricating what?

  • "The Katyn fiasco was also not allowed to progress to where the Siviets wished it to go" And yet it still did not stop them from blaming Germany now did it?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Katyn in a minute.

    Where in the recipe...etc?

    You claimed it - now show where you read it.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "I am done discussing documents and eye witness testimony"

    Probably for the best.

    Or try staying off the drink before you come on the thread, mate.

  • @avisionry

    !?

    If you want to dsicuss, try a little direct and succinct intercourse. I'm sure we all remember how you disappeared up your own bahookie with the Eisenhower paradox. More of that later...

    I keep hearing bullshit about anomalies regarding the AR "murder weapon". Well, all roads lead to Carbon Monoxide from an internal combustion engine. But it's in the nature of these threads, that if you have an alternative chronology, no-one can stop you posting it.

    Off you go.

  • Burg alluded to above all, the purpose of engraining in the German people a consciousness of collective guilt, so that its sons and daughters would be born already burdened with the German original sin.

    No murder weapon, no link to any forensic evidence to the murders. All the dead bodies of the victims were...absent, apparently now ash and post mortem records made by the experts regarding the time and cause of death didnt exist.

    And witnesses who cant seem to make up their minds

    Oh dear

  • @avisionry

    I'll approach the 'H' in the round until you get more specific.

    There is 'murder weapon', confession, first-hand eyewitness (victim), FHE (perpetrator), forensic, physical, chemical, documentary, demographic and legalistsic. Top revisionists have repeatedly been caught lying and fabricating; strange when their dissent can not lie in that Holocaust, but must lie in the same standard of evidence integrity they demand, in a hoax they have yet to show a crumb of evidence for.

  • @avisionry

    The accuser wins the burden of proof, which in Holocaust terms has been met by historians and experts within the disciplines mentioned, over 66 years.

    The accusation displacing this Holocaust (which never happened[!]) is conspiratorial fraud. Therefore the accuser of this vast subterfuge has it all to do.

    The Holocaust depended solely on the surrender and the order of camp liberations across a huge area. If you can show this was orchestrated, if I were you, I'd start now.

  • @timpovikings

    "The Holocaust depended solely on the surrender and the order of camp liberations across a huge area"

    When did the British/US liberate the camps they found?

    When did the Soviets? Tell me what the Soviet communiques said, particularly re Auschwitz. What happened next?

    Furthermore I understand that you're currently experiencing some personal problems but if you could be so good as to answer those questions, somewhat in detail then we can go from there.

    There's a good lad

  • @avisionry

    At last!

    I think there's something of a backlog of unanswered questions, but at least we're communicating again, more later.

    The Holocaust, or to be more specific, the scale of criminal activity involving organised transports of people to places from which they didn't return, could not have been pursued, ivestigated or detailed had the Germans not surrendered and 'evacuated' the camps concerned and then admitted said crimes in subsequent trials, well into the 60s.

  • Comment removed

  • @avisionry

    If you have evidence which shows the level of collective or individual influence which could compel SS witnesses to continue to admit such crimes - and never deny them - decades after. or can explain why we have no published or leaked hard evidence of any such hoax, or indeed why so many revisionists have resorted to lies about places like Treblinka ( a camp which only ever required a German to say, "Camp! What camp?", then do please post it.

    It HAS been 66 years, after all.

  • @avisionry

    Backlog: I recall you made quite specific claims about Eisenhower and a shoot-to-kill order you said he issued.

    I can quote you if you'd like, but I think you know what I mean.

    Tidy this little loose end up, one way or another...there's a good lad.

  • @avisionry

    "Actually this IS fun steve...etc, etc.....Oh dear"

    That's the whole point; history should at least be fun.

    So, to show goodwill, a following wind and an assurance you can match the standards you are about to demand, tidy up the loose end that is the claim, by you, that Eisenhower was directly responsible for a minimum of 1 million deaths and an order to shoot people who fed his German prisoners.

    Would you be good enough to list the evidence categories in support?

  • @avisionry

    You see where this is going, don't you?

    At some point you WILL list eyewitness (1st, 2nd & 3rd hand) testimony. Just as you WILL cite court transcript, newspapers, writers, psuedo-scientists and Jews. The difference is that the pro-Holocaust argument adheres to legal precedents, rules of jurisprudence, tenets of historical recording, convergence and corroboration. All across decades.

    Our narrative is imperfect. It's just way more contiguous than anything you can concoct.

  • @timpovikings "Our narrative is imperfect" And yet you fail to provide such video that proves mass graves. lol

  • @EdwardTheGray

    

    I think I said somewhere; you can have the whole thing.

    My terms.....not yours, bright lad.

  • @timpovikings Right, as we all know what happens to revisionists who show their location! David Cole, Robert Faurisson, Ernst Zundel, Germar Rudolf. So yea, you can upload the clip. Stop being a pussy and do it! Fair use policy does not stop you!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    But you're not a revisionist, bright lad.

    Same terms. Mine.

  • @timpovikings Video clip? Out of all those notes that he made about mass graves, his video diary should show some of these mass graves! Get with it! You wont post them because there is nothing on the videos (if they exist) that show any sort of mass graves! Pad locks, glass bottles and occasional litter is proof of mass killings? WOW!

  • Why dont you tell eveyone about the show trials that seem to be lacking the agreement and/or harmony with logical connection - agreement with what has already been done or expressed, you know the conformity with previous practice.

    You know the con·sis·tency -

    Again for bluestainedbrain and timpovikings its kən sis′tən sē

    Your traditional narrative seems to be in a spot of boffa

    certainly lacking CONSISTENCY

  • Consistency & conformity with existing practice ...

    When Browning quoted Bauer for HDOT he provided ZStL, 208 AR-Z 251/59, vol. 5, p. 990 as a reference in a footnote and included the German text for the excerpt from the original transcript as well. I checked a scan of that page and noticed a stamp reading 208 AR-Z 251/59 B.V p. 990

    There is a system for the way statements by former camp personnel is filed. Do you have a reference based on that system for the words you attribute to Münzberger?

  • @bluespaceoddity How about those pictures and videos of all these bodies and ash that seem to be everywhere in the camps? Right, the videos and pictures are not worth the thought when it comes to the big bad hand written survey! If documents prove mass murder, why not provide us with the mass graves that seem overwhelming? This is a challenge!

  • @avisionry Brilliant stuff, real cutting edge. Now, about the Münzberger source?

  • @avisionry

    Someone's upset. Oh dear.

    The narrative of AR is much like the narrative of even more recent and even filmed history: clearly defined and with dissenting opinion on some aspects. In terms of chronology, evidence and weight of expert academic opinion, it is far safer than your version of the Eisenhower camp deaths and an order to kill, for example, for which you don't have the square root of a mosquito's fart.

    Try harder, mate.

  • @timpovikings

    Actually this IS fun steve. The internal contradictions, the unquestionably problematic testimonies, implausible details and the rather immaginitive exagerrations.

    How's the fairytale go again? Oh yes,

    Once upon a time a German court ruled that diesel was used to kill!

    The Bundestag extended the statue of limitations to keep Israel happy, then the "exemplary aspect of the re-education of the German people" began.

    Got any Bauer? No?

    Can I tempt you with a little Burg then?

  • Comment removed

  • @avisionry

    O'Neil's video is his personal record and is in the Belzec archive. It is his to distribute and or edit. Not mine.

    

    Perhaps if you approached Belzec and YV about it?

    That might be an idea, eh?

  • That's what Oneill the expert has...

    You see the word "amateur" in there at all? And "poor sound quality" LMFAO!

    Apparently timpovikings has the footage in his possession...

    "I had the discs last summer"

    as well as a little AMD.

    timpovikings and bluestainedfaces are one of the same,

    bluefacedanddeadwithshitallove­rmyself doesnt want the public to see his page...for apparently he's an odessey

  • I find your evidence finding skills very amazing! Maybe the FBI will one day ask both you and O'neal to join their team, as evidence is not as good as hand written data haha!

  • @EdwardTheGray

    I take it the logic now at work is, you can fake written evidence - but not video evidence?!

    Okay, fine.

    Tell me what it is - in video form - that you would be happy with in a few minutes of uploaded footage....?

  • "You'll have to stop ducking and diving like an idiot, mate."-Like your video from O'neil? Or the evidence of those mass graves? lol

  • @EdwardTheGray

    We can play this game all night, mate. It's you that looks the dickhead.

    WHO HAVE YOU CONTACTED IN ORDER TO FIND THE BELZEC SURVEY?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Here's another one you won't like.

    

    Have you read O'Neil's "Stepping Stones..." on the Belzec survey?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Mattogno accepts the evidence of mass graves, bright lad.

    That's why he attempts to explain and negate it.

  • @timpovikings Videos please.....

  • @EdwardTheGray

    I'll tell you where the videos are when you answer the questions, bright lad.

  • @EdwardTheGray I can give you the address of an archive where O'Neil's footage is kept. As Timpo suggests by asking you who you've contacted about his footage, it is a rather obvious one.

    You can't give me an archival source for the words attributed to Münzberger. I've checked Münzberger statements but can't find those words. Why is that you think?

  • @bluespaceoddity OK, provide us with these videos then :D

  • @EdwardTheGray When I contacted the archive I received a satisfactory answer. I also contacted the person who first mentioned those words Avisonary uncritically repeated and attributed them to Münzberger but so far no satisfactory answer from anyone on the origin of those words.

    O'Neil's footage is just one part of the AR record but at least it exists, even though it can't be found on YouTube.

  • @bluespaceoddity "O'Neil's footage is just one part of the AR record but at least it exists, even though it can't be found on YouTube." And yet he has not released them to the public? If they were produced to the holocaust museums, then where is the link to the video?

    I mean, timpovkings has the videos, why not provide a clip of it here on youtube? Tell you both, I will be back on in a couple of days as I have work to do, so try to upload these damning videos :)

  • @EdwardTheGray The footage merely complements O'Neil's written publications. You(ve been told this so many times by Timpo yet months go by without any initiative from any of you. The footage won't be uploaded to YouTube. Not by me and not by Timpo. If that is your reason to return you don't need to bother.

  • @bluespaceoddity And yet you want us to believe that this video exists? Why has he not published this video? You both are BS about the video and you know it! If such a video existed, we would never hear the end of it now would we?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    ROFL! If you don't believe it exists, you party, mate.

    Who is it wants to change history? Remind me.

    You evidence junkies have seen the Krege survey, then?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "And yet you want us to believe that this video exists?"

    Mate....you can bare your ass in Macey's front window for all I care!

    You want to deny, but you don't have a clue why, no alternative, no SS denials, no survivors, no academic support, no non-sinister survivor accounts, no interest, no clue and no idea how to do your own footwork.

    You're a bit of paradox, mate. Logically speaking, with your quals, you should be about 60 feet of wooden fencing.

  • @timpovikings Again with the Ad Hominems and Red Herring! Video? You claim to have seen it, and claim to have a copy, so why not send me this copy, as we are both right here?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Why are you so averse to reading an academic survey which is complete and covers the camp history, excavations, borehole samples and comprehensive reference sources?

  • @EdwardTheGray In part because it is just amateur footage of a historian who brought his own camera along when he visited several AR related sites, including the excavation sites in Belzec when the site was surveyed for the new memorial. He filed the material at the appropriate places for interested researchers to review but O'Neil's main work and priority is in his writing.

    It can be verified, unlike the statement attributed to Münzberger

  • Tell you what I'll do bluestainedwall.

    I'll send you a tube of superglue to assist in holding your cherished ediface together.

    Provide a verifiable archival photo or film reel, for the specific claim of people, namely jews, being killed by petrol or diesel or Zyklon B, in homicidal gas chambers as requested again

    and again

    and again

    and again over 66 years

    ad nauseum.

    There's a good lad

  • @avisionry

    "Eisenhower was a WWII criminal of epic preportions who was solely responsible for the deaths of over 1000000 Germans. He also ordered those who tried to feed the German POWs to be shot."

    Just when you're ready.

  • Evasionary, About a year ago I posted excerpts in this thread from a.o. Karl Alfred Schluch's statements. I referenced them to Browning, HDOT. He in turn provided archive references. I've read that particular statement. The first page is marked 208-ARZ-252/59 Bd. VIII. The sentence I posted is on p. 1512 [1512 is crossed out and replaced with 359 at the top of the scan].

    You can send me superglue but you can't send me such an archival source for the words you attributed to Münzberger, can you?

  • Fuchs' statement includes recollections about making adjustments to the way the engine he installed ran and he mentioned a chemist checking the gas concentration inside the gas chamber. Creating a deadly atmosphere was the objective and that is certainly possible with a large engine and an enclosed space. "Der Chemiker, den ich schon aus Belzec kannte, begab sich mit einem Meßgerät in die Gaskammer, um die Gaskonzentration zu prüfen. Im Anschluß daran wurde eine Probevergasung durchgeführt."

  • @bluespaceoddity I am curious, as to the mounting of the engine, and the modifications, can you provide us some details? He speaks of modifying, so can you please continue about what modifications that he did?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Have you read the Fuchs statement in full?

  • @timpovikings have you checked that link that I sent ya in the other video? Also, his statement does not tell of what kind of modifications. If there are any, please provide them. And where is this so called engine at? Can you tie the murder weapon to the situation? Also, the diesel claims were part of the witness' testimonies, and was used for convicting the criminals. Loads of people tell of the type of engine, but Fuchs only skims on the details. Funny at best.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    !?

    Yes, we've seen the attention to detail you work to, bright lad. Not impressive.

    What is it about the Fuchs statement you are unhappy with?

  • @timpovikings Here we go again, your refusal to read. Again, does he not tell in his testimony about all that he did to the engine? I mean witnesses are recorded on documents swearing to diesel engines, so why the sudden change?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    !!!

    What issue do you have with the engine in the Fuchs statement.

    Can you tell me what it is you think is at fault?

  • @timpovikings Maybe the lack thereof? Can you provide us some of these details of the things that was supposedly done to the engine? Where the engine came from? What vehicle? Also, the man mentioned in the above video claimed that ropa oil was added to the mixture, ropa oil is for diesel engines btw.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    Let's attempt what you ran away from when I asked about the origin of the Auschwitz plaque 4 million you were telling me was 80% Jews. We'll start at the beginning.

    Based on what you know of the AR sites - or the main ones if you'd rather - how many people would you accept were transported to these camps?

  • @timpovikings First of all, I provided for you an example of where it was claimed, so don't try to change the subject on me! If you go back to the video, you can find it! Back to the engines, what type of vehicle did they come from? The tanks I am seeing from the Soviets are all 90 HP that are gasoline, and the diesel engines are in the same HP range.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "First of all, I provided for you an example of where it was claimed"

    You didn't, but it was also significant that you ran like a stuck pig from the question.

    For the benefit of the non-experts......how many people???

  • @EdwardTheGray

    I'll even help you out, mate.

    There were no engines of any type. The AR sites were not eradicated to hide evidence, they were never ransacked for decades by locals, the excavations by Kola and O'Neil found no graves and Aktion 1005 was a pop-group.

    So.....where did the people who arrived at AR sites go to?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "Really, in all actuality, the majority of witnesses claim diesel engine,"

    Irrelevant. All the witnesses said an IC engine. Both types of which are lethal, as proven by the Holtz & Elliott data and the Pattle et al study of diesel engines. Both tests attained a lethal level of CO with relative ease.

    Either way, you won't weaken a narrative because you demand to know the origin of 'the engine'. This is tacit acceptance that there was 'an engine' in the first place.

  • @timpovikings Holtz & Elliott's tests the times that it took to kill said animals took 6 times longer then the 30 minutes claimed.

    "The AR sites were not eradicated to hide evidence"-And the katyn massacre was not done by the Soviets?

    And Kola? He provided hand drawings lol! And why has O'Neil not released the video of the excavation?

    And we have the lists of the people arriving, where are the departure lists?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    !?

    Well, we're getting closer.

    Why were they eradicated? Katyn is irrelevant; you won't win that one either. Presumably you are better qualified than Kola and have done a camp survey, yes? O'Neil's video. Yes, he has. I've seen it.

    How many is 'lots'?

  • @timpovikings "Yes, he has. I've seen it."- Provide us this video please :)

    "Why were they eradicated?"-Where are the bodies and the autopsies of said bodies?

    Also, where are those departing train lists? Plenty of incoming, there should be plenty of out going lists as well. Are the lists of incoming prisoners not as important as the out going ones?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    

    I'm so sorry. 'Debate' is not an interrogation of me for your whimsical demands or light entertainment.

    How many people have you asked about the videos?

    Third time. Just for clarity, how many people arrived at AR sites - IYO?

  • @timpovikings Really, so is there is no video? You claim to have seen it, so why has it not been released? And did they do autopsies of the bodies? Show us this video please.

  • @EdwardTheGray

    You'll have to stop ducking and diving like an idiot, mate.

    Let's take this at a pace that won't scare you.

    WHO HAVE YOU CONTACTED IN ORDER TO FIND O'NEIL'S VIDEOS?

  • @EdwardTheGray

    "Really, so is there is no video?" (sic)

    You're not listening, moron. I've seen the videos. I think there were about 6 or 7 discs.