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

Willie Thrills

Michael Bay should be in charge of Marvel movies
kiwifarms.net
I will submit three points.

Firstly, Jews are among the least popular demographics in human history for a reason - I don't feel any sympathy for Jewish victims of anything in the same way I don't feel too bad about the Spanish conquests of the Aztecs - unlike their noble neighbours, the Inca, the Azteca were foul beyond all description, as are Jews. Some cultures are better off isolated from civil discourse, and very little of Jewish culture is compatable with any modern civilisation.

Secondly, to the point - the one piece of data I have seen, insultingly, absent in any document is Jewish military deaths. Jews are apparently a third party in any conflict - most will include civilian and military deaths, but Jews apparently make a third category. What proportion of these casualties were civilian - can it be that if none were military, and they were entirely, as purported, civilian deaths, then they're a race of worthless cowards of little value to any nation. If there were miltiary deaths, then the "Holocaust" wouldn't make any sense - you'd have to include other military casualties, like those in the USSR who number over twenty million, since the loss to Russia is normally excused, rightly, as "total war"

Thirdly, to the point again, how exactly do Jews make up the vast majority of all civilian casualties during the entire war? Are Jews bomb-magnets or something? Were no Jews killed in a similar manner to Soviet civilians, who starved or died in the cold winter after the infrastructure was destroyed? Why is it six of eleven: why does the Holocaust not include Soviet civilians?

How many Jews were killed in the manner that Soviets were - how many Jews died in Leningrad, how many in Belarus where 25% of the population died?

Why would I give a fuck about Auschwitz when St Petersburg has hundreds of thousands of bodies under the floorboards - as does Volgograd - to the extent that they are still pulling out bodies to this day - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-602-World-War-II-Soviet-soldiers-buried.html

To me it seems like everyone knows about Auschwitz but few people seem to know, or even care, about the enormous loss of life elsewhere in Europe at the time. What exactly makes Jews so important?

Not only that, but it appears to me that a street in Leningrad in which two hundred died, all Jews among them are counted as part of the Holocaust while the Russians, Estonians, Latvians, Ukrainians, Belorussians, Lithuanians, all the little Republics that made up the USSR who may have had citizens in the city at the time it was surrounded are not counted because "lol"
 
Last edited:

Wooz

Public enemy #1
kiwifarms.net
Not wholly related to whether the Holocaust actually happened the way it did or not, but I've seen this group brought up occasionally in political shitflingings about "x group" supporting "x group/person i deem to be evil" from every side as the ultimate analogy to deny their validity, with the most notable person I can recall talking about them to be none other than our own favorite epileptic hentai conneiseur Kurt Eichenwald. The thing is that I have never, in my life, ever heard of this group or any other real significant groups of Jews supporting Nazism in that era, and any searches about it didn't bring anything substantial to prove that it existed once in history. You'd think that this would be a much bigger mainstream talking point, but at best from what I can gather from the vast spaces of the internet, any mention of this group on internet discussions gain little traction, leading me to believe this is the only thing most of these people have read about the group, as they tend to repeat the article's contents word for word.
1630520524400.png

 

Serbian Peacekeepers

Spook's riding first class
kiwifarms.net
I think main stream perception of the holocaust , ie the camps , the trains , and the gas chambers , has led to alot of the modern denial of the holocast. In context of a continent wide war across 6 years of active fighting , it isn't hard to believe that the germans and their allies could hunt down and kill 6 million people , its actually resonable given the total death toll of the war , but when you frame all 6 million as happening in the camps , it becomes insane to even think it could happen , and thats why most modern holocaust denial focuses on the camps , and not on the bigger picture of the war , and even then the camps are misrepresented as purely for murder , and not for work.

Yes , if the germans wanted to kill all the jews they sent to the camps they could just park the train in the tunnel and wait , but dead bodies make shit slaves.
Yes if the germans were just gonna murder all the jews why build all the nice stuff like pools and theaters? The answer is because the camps werent just for murder , the jews were a slave work force because most of germanys able bodied men were on the front line and they needed more hands to help with the war , thats why they didnt just kill them all at once.

i think alot of media and stories regarding the holocaust is fake , made by grifters and propaganda departments to make the germans look even worse post war , remember Auschwitz was liberated by the soviets , but 6 million jews were killed in the 6 years that the 2nd world war lasted , and the only way to deny it is to move the goal post.
 

Lemmingwise

Female gamers
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
but 6 million jews were killed in the 6 years that the 2nd world war lasted , and the only way to deny it is to move the goal post.
See? In the first 30 pages of this thread or so, besides a couple of affirmers who didn't really engage in any type of discussion, none of the holocaust affirming position said that 6 million was accurate and in fact each agreed that the number of 6 million was an exaggeration, (but that it didn't matter).

I said then that it did matter and I asked then as I'll ask again, what the (roughly) number threshold is to call this a holocaust.
 

Serbian Peacekeepers

Spook's riding first class
kiwifarms.net
See? In the first 30 pages of this thread or so, besides a couple of affirmers who didn't really engage in any type of discussion, none of the holocaust affirming position said that 6 million was accurate and in fact each agreed that the number of 6 million was an exaggeration, (but that it didn't matter).

I said then that it did matter and I asked then as I'll ask again, what the (roughly) number threshold is to call this a holocaust.
By pure definition a holocaust is a slaughter or destruction on mass scale , so there isnt a proper threshold for how many death equal one , in general it seems more than 100,000 is a genocide so id say over 500,000 is a holocaust.

As for where the 6 million came from , i dont know , and was it 6 million jews? I dont know , i just said 6 million because that the number everyone throws around.
 

Lemmingwise

Female gamers
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
By pure definition a holocaust is a slaughter or destruction on mass scale , so there isnt a proper threshold for how many death equal one , in general it seems more than 100,000 is a genocide so id say over 500,000 is a holocaust.
Kudos for being the first to answer it. I think the answer is pretty reasssonable too.

I think you'd get in trouble if you had any degree of media influence and would state this though. You would come across the very active lobby that makes sure the holocaust is only ever applied to jews in 2nd world war.

As for where the 6 million came from , i dont know , and was it 6 million jews? I dont know , i just said 6 million because that the number everyone throws around.

The number was 6 million jews and 5 million non-jews. As for the origin of the figure... I have read so many different sources on both holocaust rememberance sites as well as many different original sources on holocaust critical sites. In any case the 6 million figure is the number used at the nuremberg trials.

But then if you dive into newspaper archives you can find hundreds of mentions of holocaust and 6 million jews stretching back to 1880s.

A couple of years ago I could have linked you to archives like https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/259401194/ directly so you could read for yourself the guardian where it said 27 January 1943, "proposal to save the jews… Some six million lives remained in imminent peril."

Or the yorkshire post in 1943: "Hitler had pronounced a sentence of death on the 6,000,000 Jews of Europe. The Nazis had already murdered two millions by machine-gun and lethal chamber, by torture and hunger, and were now busy exterminating the third million.”


It's not too hard to find compilations of 100s of examples. Back before the whole adpocalypse and the ensuing censorship, I took the time to verify 20 of a list as a test sample and they were all accurate.

I also looked for examples with different numbers of jews, like 5 million or 4 million or 7 million and those existed too, but in amounts of about 30:1 compared to 6 million jews. Typically 6 millions jews of russia, or 6 million jews of europe, but sometimes of other more specific regions.

Images have been posted earlier in this thread.

Note also that a number of these newspaper articles refer to it as "another holocaust" or "risking another holocaust" (pre 2nd ww), since it's a religious term for jews, much like the number 6 has religious significance.
 
Last edited:

Retired Junta Member

Currently on the run.
kiwifarms.net
Secondly, to the point - the one piece of data I have seen, insultingly, absent in any document is Jewish military deaths. Jews are apparently a third party in any conflict - most will include civilian and military deaths, but Jews apparently make a third category. What proportion of these casualties were civilian - can it be that if none were military, and they were entirely, as purported, civilian deaths, then they're a race of worthless cowards of little value to any nation. If there were miltiary deaths, then the "Holocaust" wouldn't make any sense - you'd have to include other military casualties, like those in the USSR who number over twenty million, since the loss to Russia is normally excused, rightly, as "total war"

Thirdly, to the point again, how exactly do Jews make up the vast majority of all civilian casualties during the entire war? Are Jews bomb-magnets or something? Were no Jews killed in a similar manner to Soviet civilians, who starved or died in the cold winter after the infrastructure was destroyed? Why is it six of eleven: why does the Holocaust not include Soviet civilians?
Why would I give a fuck about Auschwitz when St Petersburg has hundreds of thousands of bodies under the floorboards - as does Volgograd - to the extent that they are still pulling out bodies to this day - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-602-World-War-II-Soviet-soldiers-buried.html

To me it seems like everyone knows about Auschwitz but few people seem to know, or even care, about the enormous loss of life elsewhere in Europe at the time. What exactly makes Jews so important?
From what I gathered, the term “Holocaust” when speaking about WWII is used specifically in reference to the killing of the Jews, which is why doesn’t include other groups.

Not being very aware of the enormous amount of victims in the soviet area is probably an American thing tho, Europeans seem to be more aware of it even if some facts and issues regarding what happened on the eastern front are still something of a taboo to this day.
 

Willie Thrills

Michael Bay should be in charge of Marvel movies
kiwifarms.net
From what I gathered, the term “Holocaust” when speaking about WWII is used specifically in reference to the killing of the Jews, which is why doesn’t include other groups.

Not being very aware of the enormous amount of victims in the soviet area is probably an American thing tho, Europeans seem to be more aware of it even if some facts and issues regarding what happened on the eastern front are still something of a taboo to this day.
I always find Americans to be the least respectful and most vulgar regarding the Second World War in general. Probably since they learn Jewish history instead of American history. The Holocaust is, if it excludes most of the war, worthless from a historical perspective and warped from a political perspective. Immensely disrespectful to every other ethnic group in the continent.
 

Retired Junta Member

Currently on the run.
kiwifarms.net
I always find Americans to be the least respectful and most vulgar regarding the Second World War in general. Probably since they learn Jewish history instead of American history. The Holocaust is, if it excludes most of the war, worthless from a historical perspective and warped from a political perspective. Immensely disrespectful to every other ethnic group in the continent.
Americans have a weird approach to history indeed, especially now. A lot of people seem to be completely incapable of analysis, especially young people. They read it through modern lenses and tend to warp it based on the current political trend which is unnerving and toxic.
 

Willie Thrills

Michael Bay should be in charge of Marvel movies
kiwifarms.net
Americans have a weird approach to history indeed, especially now. A lot of people seem to be completely incapable of analysis, especially young people. They read it through modern lenses and tend to warp it based on the current political trend which is unnerving and toxic.
It's so strange to see them interact with Europeans.

"NAZIS BAD" "Well, in my country, Poland, we were invaded by both Nazis and Communists. We fought hard but couldn't handle both - the Germans started the war over a territorial dispute, but the Russian stabbed us in the back and attacked us without warning"

"NAZIS. BAD."
 

Lemmingwise

Female gamers
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
It's so strange to see them interact with Europeans.

"NAZIS BAD" "Well, in my country, Poland, we were invaded by both Nazis and Communists. We fought hard but couldn't handle both - the Germans started the war over a territorial dispute, but the Russian stabbed us in the back and attacked us without warning"

"NAZIS. BAD."
We have to destroy germany for what they did to poland!

1945: mission accomplished!
 

Chugger

kiwifarms.net
See? In the first 30 pages of this thread or so, besides a couple of affirmers who didn't really engage in any type of discussion, none of the holocaust affirming position said that 6 million was accurate and in fact each agreed that the number of 6 million was an exaggeration, (but that it didn't matter).

I said then that it did matter and I asked then as I'll ask again, what the (roughly) number threshold is to call this a holocaust.
Well holocaust is defined as genocide of European Jews, so 'genocide' is the complicating term. Bosnian genocide is referred to as such and had "only" 8000 victims. Genocide can also mean starving people, forced sterilization, etc

So if the number of Jews killed was 300k, and that was just Jews being mass murdered in the East by German Police (documents attest to murder of more than 1 million), this could technically constitute "holocaust"

We should also put non-Jewish deaths into perspective. They weren't part of the holocaust (because by definition they are not Jewish duh) but there is compelling argument of genocidal practice towards them, eg when the Nazis let 2 million Soviet POWs starve to death in the first year of the war, or refused to allow surrender of Leningrad because they didn't want to feed all those people and preferred they starve to death. Was it genocidal when they launched a war with the express aim of colonizing vast swaths of territory, which would necessarily lead to tens of millions dying of hunger or through deportations?

I agree with the previous posters about Jewish vs non-Jewish death tolls. One could argue Nazis "genocided" 15 to 20 million Slavs, as well as 5-6 million Jews

It also should be said that Allies killed 400-700k Germans and 300-500k Japanese w strategic bombing during the war, acts which could also be regarded as genocidal
 

Ponzo

kiwifarms.net
Im a born austrian and all i can say is that my great grandfather who was part of the SS oberabschnitt donau until the merger, never denied the holocaust. The stories he told my grandma are pretty haunting. Take that however you want, but people here knew that something was up because their jewish neighbors didn't just disappear for no reason.
 

Lemmingwise

Female gamers
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
The stories he told my grandma are pretty haunting. Take that however you want, but people here knew that something was up because their jewish neighbors didn't just disappear for no reason.
Legit interested in any stories that would support it.

I'll repeat what I said earlier because not everyone is going to read the whole thread. Americans put japanese in concentration camps and did not murder them. It could have led to similarly spooky situation.

I find that some of my grandparents could give very accurate answers when asked about their wartime experience whereas others would answer more based on what they learned later through newspapers or tv programs. It's weird to realize if you ask some pointed questions, but people's worldview in some cases is barely constructed from their own experiences.

1. How many neighbours that they knew did it relate to?
2. He didn't deny holocaust; did she affirm it? Did he share he experiences that would support it?
3. I don't know your great grandfather, so I'll rely on your judgement: do you think he would have denied it if he saw or heard things that made him question it? Why?
 
Last edited:

Ponzo

kiwifarms.net
Legit interested in any stories that would support it.

I'll repeat what I said earlier because not everyone is going to read the whole thread. Americans put japanese in concentration camps and did not murder them. It could have led to similarly spooky situation.

I find that some of my grandparents could give very accurate answers when asked about their wartime experience whereas others would answer more based on what they learned later through newspapers or tv programs. It's weird to realize if you ask some pointed questions, but people's worldview in some cases is barely constructed from their own experiences.

1. How many neighbours that they knew did it relate to?
2. She didn't deny holocaust; did she affirm it? Did she experience things that would support it?
3. I don't know your great grandfather, so I'll rely on your judgement: do you think he would have denied it if he saw or heard things that made him question it? Why?

She only knew of three jewish families from her town disappearing and never coming back. Two more non-jewish families committed suicide when the russians came, kids and all.

I grew up near "Hinterbrühl", many old people there knew about the bad things that happened there because KZ inmates were transported from mauthausen to hinterbrühl to assemble rocket parts.

My great grandfather left the austrian SS when they merged into the alpenland division but many of his friends did not. He knew about all the shit that happened in warsaw from personal letters from his friends. Many don't know that members of the austrian SS almost deserted and rebelled because some of their officers were screwed over by the germans.

Like i said, i wasn't alive back then and only toured three concentration camps, one with school and two alone. I personally believe the holocaust happened, i don't know the exact numbers, if they were inflated or not. I do not believe that jews hat the capability or power to pull of such a huge false flag/psyop during that time period to completely make up a holocaust.
 

Lemmingwise

Female gamers
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I do not believe that jews hat the capability or power to pull of such a huge false flag/psyop during that time period to completely make up a holocaust.
I mean, it was pretty common war propaganda for brits to say their enemies bayonetted babies and such, they did so during both world wars.

And there were a lot of things that people in general "deny", which were thought to be true at the time of nuremburg trials (skin lamps, humansoap). The "rebuilt" gaschamber at auschwitz where the chimney isn't connected to the building doesn't help. The zyklon B gas theory has serious flaws, as does the supposed rate of cremation.

That said, there is no doubt in my mind that plenty of people died at the hands of the german regime, including jews.

There is plenty of evidence for the mass machinegunning of people on the eastern front, for being jewish. As well as evidence of numerous false flags done by soviets. I think it very likely that both happened.

I am unconvinced that the german genocide of jewish people exceeded that of the holodomor (just as I am unconvinced the holodomor exceeded that of the holocaust). Of the two, I find the holocaust more troublesome. The hounding of competing historical opinions, up to including offering money for Cole's address and the way in which people have been wrangled by legal system, broken into, beaten up, suggests to me that most of the holocaust story is an exaggeration.

The intellectually dishonest engagement I typically experience with people that affirm the holocaust doesn't help with that.

But to get back to the idea where you think they wouldn't be able to psyop it; why not? Certainly the US public is pyopped against about a number of topics.

The average person thinks the woman who sued mcdonalds for hot coffee was unreasonable for example. That was just one multinational vs a little person. In the case of the holocaust you had all camps were originally called death camps, but only those in soviet control, that allowed no independant researchers remained as death camps. And we know at least three cases of deception.

1. The number of deaths at auschwitz

2. The soviet built gas chamber

3. Which even in recent times was presented as authentic when david cole shot his documentary

Considering the length to which soviets went to support the holocaust narrative (as well as hollywood I suppose with always giving every award to holocaust movies, but then kgb files showed that hollywood has received incredible amount of funds every year from the kgb, so maybe that is part of the reason).

Considering some of these things, it doesn't seem like a hard psyop. Certainly less effort than 9/11 to invade iraq.
 
Top