Holocaust Evidence

@carloslebaron,

carloslebaron wrote:

The same way the Vatican allowed the scientific investigation on the Turin Shroud, the holocaust supporters must agree with a scientific investigation on the rooms assumed as being former gas chambers.

I posted a link to the report. Why do you prove you are an idiot by pretending it doesn't exist?

1 Reply

@mark noble,

mark noble wrote:

Wtf are you babbling on about?

Animal suffrage; your chosen topic.

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Don't expect him to get it. You'll have to spell it out.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Don't expect him to get it. You'll have to spell it out.

OK. I believe in universal suffrage, including all ages,
with picture identification on their voter registration cards.
If it were up to me, your children coud vote in England.

A few years ago, I was waiting in line to vote in my polling place.
Ahead of me was a woman with her 12 year old son.
Passing the time, I told him that if it were my choice, he coud freely vote.
He said he wanted to.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

In the Scottish referendum the age was lowered to 16.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I think any age at which the voter is able to read is OK.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

carloslebaron wrote:

The same way the Vatican allowed the scientific investigation on the Turin Shroud, the holocaust supporters must agree with a scientific investigation on the rooms assumed as being former gas chambers.

I posted a link to the report. Why do you prove you are an idiot by pretending it doesn't exist?

A genuine idiot wouldn't know that he is proving that he is an idiot.

I think we have a genuine one in our midst.

1 Reply

@ cicerone imposter

Quote:

Your ignorance is astounding! You even attempt to redefine holocaust.

Lets check the free online dictionary:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/holocaust

Quote:

1. Great destruction resulting in the extensive loss of life, especially by fire.

2.
a. Holocaust The genocide of European Jews and others by the Nazis during World War II: "Israel emerged from the Holocaust and is defined in relation to that catastrophe" (Emanuel Litvinoff).

b. A massive slaughter: "an important document in the so-far sketchy annals of the Cambodian holocaust" (Rod Nordland).

3. A sacrificial offering that is consumed entirely by flames.

Check the definition of holocaust in number 2.

You have a and b as a definition of Holocaust as technical terms for history, solely for history, as mere "titles" of a document. Do you understand?

A technical term does not necessarily mean the same that the original meaning of the word. Like the word "evolution" which in Biology as a technical term means different that the original meaning of this word.

Comprende?

The original and "true" meaning of holocaust is defined in number 1 and number 3.

Please, stop your ignorance.

1 Reply

@Lordyaswas,

Lordyaswas wrote:

A genuine idiot wouldn't know that he is proving that he is an idiot.

Because his mental age woud fall short of 3 years ?

Lordyaswas wrote:

I think we have a genuine one in our midst.

I believe that illiteracy is a defining criterion of idiocy.

0 Replies

Quote:

Your apparent desire to blame bankers over those who actually start the wars and commit the atrocities is interesting and likely reflects an underlying bias.

A banker who knowingly provides funds for a war of aggression has failed his test of human decency and morality, but it's a bit ludicrous to put all or the most of the blame for war on him and his ilk. You might as well assign the same level of blame to anyone who sells equipment and goods of any kind to an army (whether it is during times of peace or war) The same principle of "if not for them, no war" would apply.

Hate to agree with it.

Bankers and investors do what they do, to make more money and getting more rich.

The problem is the corrupt politicians and leaders.

When you read the news and articles like "government waste of taxpayers money on research about bikers", or "taxpayer money wasted in this and that", you know that behind that waste of money it is a politician who brought the corrupt agenda to be approved by the rest, and the rest of corrupt politicians gave green light to it.

So, the ones to be blamed are the corrupt politicians. A corrupt politician brought the agenda to built a museum of Holocaust right in front of the Treasury building in Washington DC.. lol

And the rest of corrupt politicians agreed with that proposal.

In other nations, people are not stupid like the inhabitants of the Western culture, because here in the US some idiots had the initiative to build tents in front of bank institutions to protest against their wealthy, a complete waste. Their protests didn't work at all.

On the other side, lets say Egypt, over there, people directed their protests straight were the problem is, this is to say, in front of the government buildings. Their protests did work.

So, when corruption is about, the target is not the bankers but the corrupt politicians, or the corrupt leaders in dictatorship system countries.

0 Replies

@carloslebaron,

carloslebaron wrote:

Check the definition of holocaust in number 2.

You have a and b as a definition of Holocaust as technical terms for history, solely for history, as mere "titles" of a document. Do you understand?

a) and b) are the definitions of holocaust.

The term to look at here is Holocaust.

(The word Holocaust is derived from the Greek holokauston, a translation of the Hebrew word ʿolah, meaning a burnt sacrifice offered whole to God. This word was chosen because in the ultimate manifestation of the Nazi killing program - the extermination camps - the bodies of the victims were consumed whole in crematoria and open fires.
The biblical word Shoah [which has been used to mean “destruction” since the Middle Ages] became the standard Hebrew term for the murder of European Jewry as early as the early 1940s. The word Holocaust, which came into use in the 1950s as the corresponding term, was generally used from the 1950's onwards.)

0 Replies

Quote:

"unnecessary" to WHAT??
"unnecessary" by what criteria?????
In actual point of fact, I learned of the death of my father
only indirectly and by accident in a different century, long after the fact.
I have no clue qua whether he suffered or not, know not cause of death.
I guess that PROVES that any grief by me is "unnecessary."

There is a Korean owner of a grocery store located in an area of the city where the majority of the population is black.

The store suffered of robberies by lots, and in one of them the owner was murdered. After a few months, the wife of the owner was also murdered in another robbery. After a few months, one of the children was also murdered in another robbery committed in that store.

The grocery store is still owned by the survivors.

I don't see them crying in front of customer every day complaining about the killings committed against their family. I don't see them building effigies commemorating the killings inside the store or somewhere else.

I have passed by and stop in that store, and the children (the survivors) keep doing business regularly as if nothing happened over there, just their work.

And the killings of their family members have passed between a decade, so their pain and suffering is very recent.

I admire their way of life, I admire their strong position in front of adversity, they didn't cry loud in order to gain the compassion of others, their dignity stop them the trying to take advantage on others because their misery.

http://pjmedia.com/blog/global-anti-semitism-poll-finds-shocking-rate-of-holocaust-denial/

Quote:

Global Anti-Semitism Poll Finds Shocking Rate of Holocaust Denial

I suggest to the supporters of the holocaust who post and post their cries and remembrance of their 70 years ago misery, to learn from this Korean family, to learn dignity by copying the exemplar model of other cultures.

A remembrance made one time a year as a patriotic duty in every country because former wars is acceptable and encouraged.

So, it is OK if in Israel people remember their misery in WW2, I even support that, and if they want it, they can do their remembrance 24/7 everyday if they want to.

But, the rest of the world is really busy to be wasting their schedules by listening irrelevant cries about the Holocaust.

Come one, you want to cry about it, then go to your house, get inside your room, close the door, and cry loud all you want, but please, stop bothering others with your crap.

End of the story.

0 Replies

@ Walter Hinteler

Quote:

a) and b) are the definitions of holocaust.

The term to look at here is Holocaust.

(The word Holocaust is derived from the Greek holokauston, a translation of the Hebrew word ʿolah, meaning a burnt sacrifice offered whole to God. This word was chosen because in the ultimate manifestation of the Nazi killing program - the extermination camps - the bodies of the victims were consumed whole in crematoria and open fires.
The biblical word Shoah [which has been used to mean “destruction” since the Middle Ages] became the standard Hebrew term for the murder of European Jewry as early as the early 1940s. The word Holocaust, which came into use in the 1950s as the corresponding term, was generally used from the 1950's onwards.)

You missed the point.

Your excellent explanation reveals a failure in your interpretation.

Holocaust refers to "sacrifice" and "fire' in your biblical reference.

Burning corpses is not doing burnt sacrifices to a god. I don't think that the Nazis in concentration camps burnt living people to honor Hitler or a deity.

And more, I truly think that Hitler himself ignored the mass murdering of people in concentration camps. Since the allies in both sides started to diminish the power of the Germans, Hitler was very busy trying to win battles instead of taking care of people inside concentration camps.

And again, the starvation of people inside concentration camps was not a planned strategy, but historical chronology agrees that Germans losing the war caused delays and the lack of food and supplies to the far away from Berlin concentration camps.

I noticed that no one of the supporters of the holocaust want to discuss about it. The reason is obvious, it will debunk their hoax.

So, with H or h, when holocaust is used as a historical event in WW2 or in another recent genocide, it becomes a technical word because fire and a sacrifice to a god are not involved.

2 Replies

@carloslebaron,

Here's the link to the scientific report you demanded be done.
http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/iffr/report.shtml
I await your response to agree with them since you now have the science you demanded.

1 Reply

@carloslebaron,

I'm not a supporter of the Holocaust, to clarify that strongly.

It's really a lost effort to try ... but nevertheless.

Hitler didn't ignore the concentration camps - but certainly you'll say that the all the sources related to that have been falsified as well.

0 Replies

@parados,

carlos is strictly here to get attention; he has absolutely no opinion that he can backup with other reliable sources.
Offering facts are ignored by him; he needs to be ignored.
IN OTHER WORDS, HE'S A BIG WASTE OF TIME. A SPAMMER.

0 Replies

Just some general thoughts.
There have been quite a few Germans after WWII, who were kind of Holocaust deniers - "kind of", because they only acted on orders, weren't involved at all, were civilians, who knew nothing ... when they were in courts.
Another group were those hardcore Nazis, who somehow survived not only the war but the later prosecutions as well.
(The third group, people like Ratcliffe, Reed, Bardeche and the like can be ignored as they were in 40's/50's: they were biased by their Anti-Semitism and the facts were already to prove how wrong they were.)

Holocaust deniers came back in the 1970's: mostly non-Germans. And their "ideas" were absorbed by German neo-Nazis.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Just some general thoughts.
There have been quite a few Germans after WWII, who were kind of Holocaust deniers - "kind of", because they only acted on orders, weren't involved at all, were civilians, who knew nothing ... when they were in courts.
Another group were those hardcore Nazis, who somehow survived not only the war but the later prosecutions as well.
(The third group, people like Ratcliffe, Reed, Bardeche and the like can be ignored as they were in 40's/50's: they were biased by their Anti-Semitism and the facts were already to prove how wrong they were.)

Holocaust deniers came back in the 1970's: mostly non-Germans. And their "ideas" were absorbed by German neo-Nazis.

Same thing I learned...good sources.

0 Replies

@ parados

Quote:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/chemistry/iffr/report.shtml

Is any holocaust denier expert in collecting samples and lab test participating in the research?

You must understand that in order to be "impartial" the participation of both sides of the holocaust issue must be involved.

It is already understood that fanaticism by trillions is the motivation of the holocaust supporters who obtain paper and ink from leftovers of the war, and using the leftover printers, they are starting to falsify documents like crazy.

Look, as I said before, cry your dead inside a room and stop bothering the rest. Instead of finding compassion, most of the people feel rejection to your cries.

I myself won't give a dime because your fake pain, forget about it.

I have nothing against my family and against nobody's family, so, when you come to forums to spread out your fake victimization, crying wolf! to anyone who disagrees with you, look, you might obtain the compassion of the idiots, because I have not any reason why I should be sorry today because the crimes that happened in WW2 70 years ago.

Do you understand?

Now, from the historical part itself, history is a compendium of manipulated records in order to please the convenience of the historian and his nationality. What for one country a dude is a former hero, for another country is a tyrant.

So, for you, the holocaust is whatever you want, but for the majority of the world, your fake pain is nothing, nobody cares.

2 Replies

@carloslebaron,

carloslebaron wrote:

Now, from the historical part itself, history is a compendium of manipulated records in order to please the convenience of the historian and his nationality. What for one country a dude is a former hero, for another country is a tyrant.

You studied history at what university? Some prof there might taught you something, you totally misunderstood: the interpretation of historical records may be different - but even manipulated records (like many from the Medieval Ages) are historical sources.

It would have taken more people than lived and stayed in Europe to manipulate all the various sources and records from Germany's time between 1923 and 1945. And it would have been a hard work, to keep all the population still today in a status of manipulation.

You seem to be woolly-headed fantasizing Nazi oldtimer.

0 Replies

Holocaust Evidence

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know