Question

[loseyourname]

Originally posted by Dan yeah, and is that why we don't see any inconsistent memories on the part of the Armenians who survived the genocide?

Show me enough documentation of inconsistent memories on the parts of Jewish survivors, then show me convincing evidence that the physical artifacts are all mistaken, and I will begin to listen. But if you insist, please start another thread, because this is all beside the point. The point of this thread is not to discuss the historicity of the holocaust.

[Dan]

You are avoiding my questions.

Like I said, his plans did not work because of interference on the part of the 'lemmings.' You are using a fallacy by saying that if it's not proven that it didn't happen, it did happen..... so if I can't prove that God doesn't exist, that means that he exists? Your premises are incorrect to begin with. As for the 'proof' that 'millions' of jews were 'slaughtered', statistics say (and I am yet to get a hold of the source I read it from) that if jews had been massacred by such numbers, the survivors would've had to breed 1 baby/minute for 24/7/365 in order to be at the population number post-'holocau$t'...

[loseyourname]

I'm not saying it did happen. I'm saying it's an accepted historical fact. I'm also saying it's beside the point. My point is that what Hitler did did not work. You cannot dispute that point, so you deflect and talk about the holocaust instead. Your lemming rhetoric is not being backed up by anything, Dan. Hitler, like any other initially successful military conqueror, overstepped his bounds and paid the price. Even after taking over most of Europe, he still likely would have succeeded if not for Stalingrad. It was hubris that ruined him, just as it did Napoleon and Robert Lee.

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by loseyourname Because Germany was still stigmatized, and this was without any doubt unfairly, from the first world war. Any sign of military aggression on their part was not going to be taken kindly to. They simply weren't trusted. Nobody yet knew what to make of the Soviet Union.

That is unimportant in the context of events, for it was originally the Allies once again, who can be blamed for Hitler coming to power, since it was the Allies who instituted the conditions necessary for such a man to rise. Now if you are versed on the Hegelian Dialect and see history as a chain of causation, controlled and manipulated by powerful forces, then you would see that World War I Germany lost, it's peace treaty was organized the allied governments, in reality, the people behind the curtains of government. It was necessary to create conditions for the eventually rise a person such as Hitler, and rise he did. While all the negotiations on Versailles were going on, prior to it, it was also some of the same elites in the Allied countries that supported the rise of Bolshevism.

Hitler merely did what was only logical to any nation that we agree has self determination, arm itself, and build up its economy. To assume this means war is stupid. So when Hitler tried to avoid war, he had it brought to its door, by a careful maneuvering of the Allies manipulating the Danzig-Corridor event with Lord Halifax ). Unless he committs the crime of starting war, it is not valid to try to police over him in the event that he might start war.

Originally posted by loseyourname I don't see how you can group together all governments operating on political systems. If you're going to stretch that far, I can say the caucasian race has caused more damage than anything else.

You can certainly argue that. But by and large governments are nothing more than institutionalized violence.

Originally posted by loseyourname The only thing Hitler was guilty of that the allies were not, and this is what I trying to say to begin with, was being too open and too brazen about what he was doing. Had he taken things a little slower and not been so fanatical, his ideas might have taken hold. As I have said before, I think the United States' own displacement and genocide of the indigenous people of this continent is a far more eggregious sin than anything Hitler ever did. Not to mention the numerous interventions in third world countries perpetrated in the name of "democracy" that have in fact been nothing more than ploys to install friendly regimes, mostly totalitarian regimes, since the second world war.

What was Hitler "open" and "brazen" about? I'm sorry I'm missing what you're saying.

[Anonymouse]

Can we stick to the intended topic of the thread, namely Hitler?

[Dan]

The point of the thread was about Nazism and it's outcomes. And we are discussing just that.

Moreover, just because there were "rooms" doesn't mean they were "gas chambers."

http://www.codoh.com/gcgv/gcdiesel.html

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n4p-2_Okeefe.html

Perhaps most remarkable, we discovered that it was not until the summer of 1980 -- that is, after he decided to respond to the IHR challenge -- that Mermelstein first made his key "eyewitness" claim about seeing his mother and sisters enter a gas chamber. In none of the numerous newspaper interviews he gave prior to 1980 (that we were able to discover) did he make any mention of seeing anyone go into any gas chamber. (note). Similarly, Mermelstein makes no mention of seeing his mother and sisters enter any building or "gas chamber" in the first, 1979 edition of his detailed memoir, By Bread Alone (written before the reward offer). (note).

Instead he makes only an ambiguous reference (p. 119) to seeing them for the last time as he and his father watched from near their barracks building ("The column neared our barracks. Separated only by strands of barbed wire, I could see them ..."). He even suggests that, instead of being gassed, his mother and sisters had been "burned alive. Specifically, he recounts (p. 129) the words of his father during a conversation a few days after their arrival at Birkenau:

"Your mother and sisters are..." He paused a moment, unable to go on. "And you must not torture your minds [sic] about their fate. Yes, yes. Look! There!" And he pointed to the flaming [sic] chimneys. The vision of my mother, Etu and Magda being burned alive made me feel faint.

More to the point, what Mermelstein wrote on this matter in his memoir actually contradicts his later claims. In By Bread Alone he specifically relates that it was only at the end of the war, after his liberation from Buchenwald, that he first heard, second-hand, that his mother and sisters had been gassed. Believing that his brother and sisters and likely his mother were still alive, he made his way back to Munkacs, where his uncle, Moshe-Aron, told him that none had survived. Moshe-Aron said he had heard that Mermelstein's mother and sisters had been "led to the gas chambers at Birkenau." (note)

Yet, in a letter published in a California daily paper in July 1980 (responding to the IHR challenge for proof of a Nazi gas chamber), he wrote: (note).

I witnessed my own mother and two sisters driven among others to the tunnel for their final station, the Gas Chamber No. 5 at Birkenau. It was on May 22, 1944, at dawn. I remember it. I was but a stone's throw away from the gas chambers and crematoriums...

Enjoy reading..

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by loseyourname
I mean he had a system in place that was designed solely to exterminate people who he did not deem desireable as part of the gene pool.

These are a bit of harsh indictments. I'd consider this to be one of the propagandas about National Socialism. It is clear Germany was intended for "Germans", not anyone else. Expulsion maybe, extermination, well unless you're terribly religious and not a rational mind basing conclusions on evidence, well there is no reason to assume that he was set out to exterminate anyone of the "gene pool". Rather there was Sterilization of non German offspring that resulted from German Women and Black French soldiers stationed around the Rhineland, as part of the Nazi Sterilization Law. In fact it is no secret that Nazis were involved in Eugenics. The United States moans about this today, yet it itself had eugenics instituted in the early teens of the last century.

[Anonymouse]

No Mr. Mermelstein. I've seen all these arguments before, and have participated in the revisionist forum, the older one, many times. Of course I have since no time to engage in side pursuits of interest, but indeed it is a compelling argument brought forth by revisionists.

Let's not get too much into the details for the average Dan, but focus on the ethical issues such as, why are there laws in Germany, France, and Canada, that punish individual for questioning the Holocaust? To me, that itself seals the case. If there is incontestable fact, why the need to use coercion to have everyone religiously believe it?

The answer of course is because this was the basis of the modern State of Israel, with the Jews there now, having learned nothing of their persecutions, are persecuting the Palestinians.

[Dan]

If there is incontestable fact, why the need to use coercion to have everyone religiously believe it?

exactly. and that makes their "story" suspicious even to the average listener..... And they are yet to answer that question, btw.. any/all jews I've asked this question to are yet to answer it.. instead they try to change the subject...

[Anonymouse]

Hopefully when I move back to Armenia in the future, all this will be inconsequential xxxx for me.

Tens baner. Kakem irants orenkneri vran. HAR HAR HAR!