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

  • The site is having difficulties because our bandwidth is totally overextended. Our 1Gbps line is at 100% even when there aren't 8000 people on the site. We were supposed to get a second Gbps line months ago but I'm struggling to get technicians scheduled to set it up.

Chugger

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
Yes, lets just bring it right down for arguments sake. It still means they dedicated themselves to the defeat and typhus and the health and well being of Jews as shown in the documents. Can we at least agree that just murdering innocents is not something nazis do any more than any other power? Could you at least consider that concept or is it too much against your life long training?
Yes, soon we can talk about how the Nazis trying to prevent epidemics among their labor force is proof of their beneficence towards the Jews, but I'm still caught up about the numbers. Is it millions of RM, or trillions equivalent, as you repeatedly affirmed? I assume you have some reason for your confidence in the latter figure.
 

mrolonzo

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Apr 9, 2022
Yes, soon we can talk about how the Nazis trying to prevent epidemics among their labor force is proof of their beneficence towards the Jews, but I'm still caught up about the numbers. Is it millions of RM, or trillions equivalent, as you repeatedly affirmed? I assume you have some reason for your confidence in the latter figure.
If one considers that they were using state of the art technology while also taking widespread and various measures against typhus while also treating it we can safely stick with only millions of RM of the day. Im happy to take back any notion of trillions.
 

Chugger

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
Im happy to take back any notion of trillions.
Hold on, this isn't a negotiation. History is more meaningful than this. I brought up "the trillions" a few days ago, and you repeatedly affirmed the figure, so I know it wasn't meant as a rhetorical statement or even an exaggeration. And now you are providing an alternative figure 100,000 times lower. How can we have a discussion if you are so loose about the "facts"?
 

mrolonzo

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Apr 9, 2022
Hold on, this isn't a negotiation. History is more meaningful than this. I brought up "the trillions" a few days ago, and you repeatedly affirmed the figure, so I know it wasn't meant as a rhetorical statement or even an exaggeration. And now you are providing an alternative figure 100,000 times lower. How can we have a discussion if you are so loose about the "facts"?
No this literally is a negotiation. You didn't like the deal codoh offered you and you walked. Which is fine. Now you're here. Im not exact about everything, and accept the need for constant criticism and revision which is what revisionists are about. We can discuss the facts in detail if you like. Guys like you fascinate me.
 
Last edited:

Oglooger

One of few based™ oldfags
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Holy shit, why is Chugger still here?
He's still doing the epic pearl clutching in the vain hopes that the holocaust happened and then changes goalposts when he runs out of things to say.
It's like a kid trying to justify that Santa is real.
 

mrolonzo

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Apr 9, 2022
Holy shit, why is Chugger still here?
He's still doing the epic pearl clutching in the vain hopes that the holocaust happened and then changes goalposts when he runs out of things to say.
It's like a kid trying to justify that Santa is real.
Which is fine if you're clearly trying to keep abreast of the true scope of the debate, can make changes to your rhetoric and seek reason. I think he knows there are problems with his training so he keeps looking for something more. I get that.
 

Oglooger

One of few based™ oldfags
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Which is fine if you're clearly trying to keep abreast of the true scope of the debate, can make changes to your rhetoric and seek reason. I think he knows there are problems with his training so he keeps looking for something more. I get that.
I'd say he's always argued in bad faith, The moment he joined he exclusively posted in the holocaust thread and nowhere else until I called him out and he shortly posted in another thread which was still holocaust related.
Why did he come to argue the holocaust here? if I remember right, he actively looked for holocaust stuff around the internet and found us despite being a "site for people with dark hearts" or some other bullshit, which is autistic because that be if I joined a forum about cars because they have a console war thread.
It didn't occur to me until recently that he joined around the same time Mike from TDS was going to have a holocaust debate but his opponents pussied out because they couldn't argue with him without getting a handicap or manipulating data.
 

Chugger

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
I don't think I ever said why I came here, nor did I ever suggest I had an open mind on these events. Kind of like when scientists talk to flat earthers, though in my defense history is much easier than physics.

But I will say one of the things I've enjoyed in my time here is making deniers look dumb (and I'm not even hurting anyone's feelings because they are at best dimly aware of it). Kiwis should at least be able to appreciate this, though perhaps not that I have a certain amount of empathy for my targets of ridicule

EDIT:

*open mind

I guess I should say that I have an open mind about Holocaust Denial similar to how I have an open mind about most far out conspiracies. Like if you showed me evidence of the Hollow Earth or whatever I might be inclined to believe it.

But H Deniers have no positive evidence for their claims, and if they had they would have released it by now, sooooo
 
Last edited:

mrolonzo

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Apr 9, 2022
I don't think I ever said why I came here, nor did I ever suggest I had an open mind on these events. Kind of like when scientists talk to flat earthers, though in my defense history is much easier than physics.

But I will say one of the things I've enjoyed in my time here is making deniers look dumb (and I'm not even hurting anyone's feelings because they are at best dimly aware of it). Kiwis should at least be able to appreciate this, though perhaps not that I have a certain amount of empathy for my targets of ridicule

EDIT:

*open mind

I guess I should say that I have an open mind about Holocaust Denial similar to how I have an open mind about most far out conspiracies. Like if you showed me evidence of the Hollow Earth or whatever I might be inclined to believe it.

But H Deniers have no positive evidence for their claims, and if they had they would have released it by now, sooooo

What positive evidence for revisionism are you looking for? I just told you that the nazis were not allowed to harm Jews.

It seems you don't like revisionist because you're incredulous as to the possibility of propaganda and coercion.

In fact the holocaust itself is the initial claim and the conspiracy theory. Revisionism merely seeks to revise it from, alot of Jews died because the nazis conspired to gas and shoot them to alot of people died because they were part of a world conflagration and alot of them in Europe were detained.

There is indeed positive evidence for the holocaust, but it's weak and it's easily outweighed by the hard evidence.

I'd say he's always argued in bad faith, The moment he joined he exclusively posted in the holocaust thread and nowhere else until I called him out and he shortly posted in another thread which was still holocaust related.
Why did he come to argue the holocaust here? if I remember right, he actively looked for holocaust stuff around the internet and found us despite being a "site for people with dark hearts" or some other bullshit, which is autistic because that be if I joined a forum about cars because they have a console war thread.
It didn't occur to me until recently that he joined around the same time Mike from TDS was going to have a holocaust debate but his opponents pussied out because they couldn't argue with him without getting a handicap or manipulating data.

This makes sense as a good place to do research on opponents in a debate to be fair. I doubt he's actually interested in the history over trying to dunk on nazis.
 

Chugger

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
What positive evidence for revisionism are you looking for? I just told you that the nazis were not allowed to harm Jews.
Yes you could also tell me the Nazis whisked the Jews to Antarctica on UFOs. Post evidence, whatever you think is strongest
 

Lemmingwise

You need more time
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 2, 2019
I don't think I ever said why I came here
You've said:
1. You come here because you were banned on twitter
2, Because you want to discuss holocaust
3. In your podcast proposal to your producer you claimed you wanted to goad kiwifarm members
4. The theme you thought appropriate for said podcast was "paranoia"

You've also said at you think this community falsely believes you have some secret evil motive. I think your motive has been made crystal clear by inference of the things you've said and how you've acted. But if it were genuinely true that you've never given any indication of your motive, then at the very least it must be secret. So once again you're trying to have things two ways that are mutually exclusive.
 
Last edited:

mrolonzo

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Apr 9, 2022
Yes you could also tell me the Nazis whisked the Jews to Antarctica on UFOs. Post evidence, whatever you think is strongest

"General rules for guards who served in concentration camps expressly
forbade mistreating inmates. A form with questions and answers entitled “Instructions on the tasks and duties of concentration camp guards”

says in this regard:

“Question: What must the guard do if he observes laziness, negligence and idleness?

Reply: He must report this to the team leader or the preventive detention camp commandant indicating the inmate’s number.

Question: What may he not do under any circumstances?

Reply: It is prohibited to physically punish an inmate."

Carlo Mattogno: Healthcare in Auschwitz Section 1.3 page 23.
 

Chugger

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 22, 2021
You've also said at you think this community falsely believes you have some secret evil motive. I think your motive has been made crystal clear by inference of the things you've said and how you've acted.
are you inferring I have a secret evil motive?

"secret" If someone asked me in good faith I would try to answer thoughtfully, but you aren't going believe me

"evil" I don't believe in it so I reject this hypothesis on all grounds

"General rules for guards who served in concentration camps expressly
forbade mistreating inmates. A form with questions and answers entitled “Instructions on the tasks and duties of concentration camp guards”
these instructions for guards at Ravensbruck Women's camp not to punish inmates on their own initiative are your strongest positive evidence of no genocide? OK
 

soy_king

Joshua Connor Moon: Born to the Broom
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
I'm not really stepping into this much but all I can say is that the figures make sense to an extent. 3 million polish jews disappeared in the span of 6 years, about 2 million disappeared from the record in the USSR, hundreds of thousands of Romanian Jews, Hungarian Jews, German Jews, etc. There were camps, that is established. there are eyewitness accounts of conditions from these camps and from people who've seen the end result. there are also accounts of Einsatzgruppen, and I have personal accounts from people I've met who've described how their villages were wiped out by the Germans. Finally, you have a stated motive by a group of people who wanted to exterminate the Jews from the face of the earth.

Now, is the 6 million dead figure of just dead jews proven beyond a reason of a doubt? probably not, but there is a significant amount of evidence of Nazi atrocities perpetrated against Jews, you have a loss of six million lives, and you have a motive. By that alone, the actual number is only relevant because the autists on both sides hang onto that like it's the Ark of the Covenant.
 

mrolonzo

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Apr 9, 2022
I'm not really stepping into this much but all I can say is that the figures make sense to an extent. 3 million polish jews disappeared in the span of 6 years, about 2 million disappeared from the record in the USSR, hundreds of thousands of Romanian Jews, Hungarian Jews, German Jews, etc. There were camps, that is established. there are eyewitness accounts of conditions from these camps and from people who've seen the end result. there are also accounts of Einsatzgruppen, and I have personal accounts from people I've met who've described how their villages were wiped out by the Germans. Finally, you have a stated motive by a group of people who wanted to exterminate the Jews from the face of the earth.

Now, is the 6 million dead figure of just dead jews proven beyond a reason of a doubt? probably not, but there is a significant amount of evidence of Nazi atrocities perpetrated against Jews, you have a loss of six million lives, and you have a motive. By that alone, the actual number is only relevant because the autists on both sides hang onto that like it's the Ark of the Covenant.

1. Hungarian Jews were being treated in Auschwitz hospital so no.
2. You don't have 6 million.
3. You don't have nazi atrocities.
4. You have contradictory and mostly second hand accounts.
5. You don't have a murder weapon
6. You don't have bodies.
7. You don't have an order, or a budget, or a plan.

are you inferring I have a secret evil motive?

"secret" If someone asked me in good faith I would try to answer thoughtfully, but you aren't going believe me

"evil" I don't believe in it so I reject this hypothesis on all grounds


these instructions for guards at Ravensbruck Women's camp not to punish inmates on their own initiative are your strongest positive evidence of no genocide? OK

"The Auschwitz regulations strictly prohibited the SS from killing or arbitrarily mistreating an inmate. SS personnel who were transferred to the
camp had to sign the following “Pledge”:32 “I am aware that only the Führer may decide upon the life and death of an enemy of the state. I may not physically harm or kill any opponent of the state (inmate). Any killing of an inmate in a concentration camp requires the personal authorization of Reichsführer SS [Himmler]. I am also aware that any violation of this pledge will be inexorably accounted for. CC Auschwitz, [day missing] November 1943."
Same source, next page.
 
Last edited: