/lit/ - Literature

>Judge essentially agreeing with everything
is that what your /pol/ infographic told you?

That's gross, OP. We don't tolerate anti-Semitism here.

>>17702085
>My assessment is that, as a military historian, Irving has much to commend him. For his works of military history Irving has undertaken thorough and painstaking research into the archives. He has discovered and disclosed to historians and others many documents which, but for his efforts, might have remained unnoticed for years. It was plain from the way in which he conducted his case and dealt with a sustained and penetrating cross-examination that his knowledge of World War 2 is unparalleled. His mastery of the detail of the historical documents is remarkable. He is beyond question able and intelligent. He was invariably quick to spot the significance of documents which he had not previously seen. Moreover he writes his military history in a clear and vivid style. I accept the favourable assessment by Professor Watt and Sir John Keegan of the calibre of Irving's military history (mentioned in paragraph 3.4 above) and reject as too sweeping the negative assessment of Evans (quoted in paragraph 3.5).
(1)

>>17702078
He was pretty good at collecting documents but very dishonest in his presentation of evidence and the conclusions he draws from it. Not remotely of "incomparable quality".

>>17702092
>Even so, it appears to me to be incontrovertible that Irving qualifies as a Holocaust denier. Not only has he denied the existence of gas chambers at Auschwitz and asserted that no Jew was gassed there, he has done so on frequent occasions and sometimes in the most offensive terms. By way of examples, I cite his story of the Jew climbing into a mobile telephone box-cum-gas chamber; his claim that more people died in the back of Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than died in the gas chambers at Auschwitz; his dismissal of the eye-witnesses en masse as liars or as suffering from a mental problem; his reference to an Association of Auschwitz Survivors and Other Liars or "ASSHOLS" and the question he asked of Mrs Altman how much money she had made from her tattoo. I reject as being untrue the claim made by Irving in his evidence that in his denial of the existence of any gas chambers at Auschwitz, he was referring solely to the gas chamber constructed by the Poles after the war for the benefit of visitors to the site or, as Irving put it, as a "tourist attraction". In this connection I refer to paragraph 9.13 above. Even if Irving had referred to gas chamber in the singular, it would not have been apparent that he was speaking of the reconstructed gas chamber at the camp.
(2)

>>17702101
>What is the evidence for mass extermination of Jews at those camps? The consequence of the absence of any overt documentary evidence of gas chambers at these camps, coupled with the lack of archeological evidence, means that reliance has to be placed on eye witness and circumstantial evidence, which I shall shortly summarise.
(3)

>>17702092
you... you don't think this is the judge agreeing with what he said, do you? I thought people on this board were readers...

>>17702111
are you retarded?

>>17702110
>the lack of archeological evidence, means that reliance has to be placed on eye witness and circumstantial evidence
This is a very concerning and telling stance.

>>17702101
>the Jew climbing into a mobile telephone box-cum-gas chamber
Where do I buy one of these?

>>17702110
>>17702158
Which, as we know, would be completely unacceptable in basically any criminal trial: taking the (inconsistent) testimony of witnesses DESPITE a complete lack of documentary evidence of the claim.

>>17702092
>>17702101
>>17702110
Are you going to link the full thing or do you unironically just have a txt file saved with meme arrow talking points?
>go find it yourself the truth is out there

>>17702111
In the third post, he acknowledges the lack of documentary evidence. Before that, he basically says that Irving qualifies as a holocaust denier not because he denies it, but because he was offensive and trivial in his manner of denying the existence of operable gas chambers at aushwitz. This before saying:
>The consequence of the absence of any overt documentary evidence of gas chambers at these camps, coupled with the lack of archeological evidence, means that reliance has to be placed on eye witness and circumstantial evidence, which I shall shortly summarise

>>17702078
No, Irving was an obvious Germanophile and that's what got him to write his books. He didn't just "fall in love" with Germans, he wanted to present them as victims before going into writing on Dresden and such. Everything he wrote before going full nuts defending Zundel in the 80s was just lose with numbers and leaving certain things unstated but not outside the conservative mainstream

>>17702436
Irving started defending flawed works claiming there was no gas chambers, a good documentary is "Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.":
https://archive.org/details/Mr.Death.The.Rise.and.Fall.of.Fred.A.Leuchter.Jr.DVDRip

>>17702634
Why would the judge assert that there is "a lack of documentary and archeological evidence" of gas chambers at Auschwitz?

>>17702661
yeah the gas chambers were made up but the nazis still shot millions of jews

He grew up in England during the war then later went to Germany as a manual labourer and experienced the people and country for himself. These experiences heavily clashed with what he had been raised to belief in England which set the path for later controversies. After initial success and mainstream recognition the cultural change that turned the Holocaust into the focal point of WW2 as the post war religion started to form. As a result the establishment could not tolerate someone like Irving anymore and aimed to destroy him. In return he became more and more hostile and also extreme in his views. In a way he thus became an ideologue himself with all that entails.

>>17702101
>his reference to an Association of Auschwitz Survivors and Other Liars or "ASSHOLS"
holy based...

>>17702661
Because there was basically none available at that point. Lots of WWII documents were still classified and Auschwitz was behind the Iron Curtain. What was available? The Nuremberg documents, personal stories, etc, etc. It wasn't until after the collapse of the USSR archives were open and a lot of new information came out.

>>17702154
>why won't anyone misread things in the same way /pol/ taught me to?
>>17702436
but that's irrelevant. The judge's job isn't to prove the holocaust. That's actually irrelevant to his job. The earlier poster claimed the judge agreed with the evidence -- all he did was give some lip service to the guy. Basically, "thank you for your time". At no point does the judge say anything that indicates he thinks the evidence has merit.

>>17702110
What you are quoting there is the judge giving a summary of the case at the beginning of the trial, rather than his own views at the end of it after expert testimony had been provided.

>>17702092
>>17702092
The judge is talking about his reputation as a military historian in general, not about specific claims regarding the Holocaust.

There's really no way you can actually study the Holocaust and not come away as a "Holocaust Denier". In Academia, there's a reason there are no "Holocaust Scholars", but rather scholars of a specific aspect of the Holocaust charged with defending a very specific aspect of a narrative. The Six Million number itself is patently chosen for political propaganda (remember, the Five Million gentiles was chosen by various Jewish organizations precisely to give Gentiles a reason to care, but not to overshadow the moral crimes against the Jews), every "death camp" either turned out not to be a death camp at all or to have been reconstructed by the USSR for the explicit purpose of justifying East German occupation, the numbers don't add up, and on and on and on.

More to the point, one can't actually study the Holocaust without being a Denier because the very act of gathering information on the Holocaust is Denial. The Holocaust is a specific mythological narrative meant to justify certain moral ends. The Holocaust HAD to happen so that political uniforms could be illegal in France; the Holocaust HAD to happen to justify the genocide of the Irish people; the Holocaust HAD to happen to justify the Federal Reserve, and so on and so forth. Anything but unwavering loyalty to the narrative is Denial by virtue of not being unwavering loyalty and acceptance. You either accept a myth, or you don't. Casting doubt on a myth is not a historiographical act, but a moral one. To say "okay, maybe it wasn't six million, but five million" decreases the moral legitimacy of the ends that the Holocaust Myth exists to justify.

It's why you're a Holocaust Denier if you fit into the (rare) niche of individual who believes that the Holocaust happened exactly according to the narrative, holocosters, masturbation machines, anvil-drops and all, but that it still doesn't justify the aims of Jewish Finance. You aren't denying the Holocaust as a historical event, but rather the moral legitimacy of certain aims. That is the real offense: denying the morality of the Post-WWII Liberal (Jewish) Political Order.

And that is why Irving was punished.

>>17702078
/pol/posters are just like religious nuts. They come to you uninvited and unwelcome, show you some seemingly uninteresting piece of evidence, point at it and look expectantly, like, "Do you understand what this proves?" The answer, of course, is invariably "no"

>>17702773
>In Academia, there's a reason there are no "Holocaust Scholars", but rather scholars of a specific aspect of the Holocaust charged with defending a very specific aspect of a narrative
It's always funny when the uneducated make assumptions about how the educated operate. Go back to /pol/, people will entertain your delusions there

>>17702773
> every "death camp" either turned out not to be a death camp at all or to have been reconstructed by the USSR for the explicit purpose of justifying East German occupation, the numbers don't add up, and on and on and on.
Stalin wanted a neutral demilitarized unified Germany, why would they work to up such a crazy plot? Stalin even offered to pull out of East Germany. If you want to be a conspitard why not go with blaming the Poles like Hitler did
The general consensus in holocaust studies is the USSR was anti-Semitic and didn't place emphasis on the uniqueness of Jewish suffering.

>the Holocaust HAD to happen to justify the Federal Reserve
When you go full schizoid you lose intertemporal capacity

>>17702844
>When you go full schizoid you lose intertemporal capacity
Yeah, I agree that it's pretty zany of the ADL to argue that the Federal Reserve is justified because of the Holocaust, but hey, they do.

https://archive.org/details/ThomasDaltonDebatingTheHolocaust
Read this if you want a look at the arguments of both sides

>>17702844
>the USSR was anti-Semitic
You are an idiot.

t. Russian

>>17702844
>Stalin even offered to pull out of East Germany
This is the single stupidest thing I've heard all week. You don't seriously believe this, do you? What's your next trick, arguing that Katyn was actually done by the Nazis?

>>17702883
*****Stalin, leading the USSR, was anti-Semitic

>>17702868
>>17702883
>>17702894
hmmm, three new posts but the poster count hasn't increased. Interesting.

>>17702782
Yes mate, the Holocaust, which is a literal term from the Bible, which has to be believed at pain of imprisonment, certainly isnt religious

>>17702883
They claim Stalin became totally unhinged with the anti-cosmopolitanism campaign and putting the real names of Jews in brackets after their pseudonyms in print and the USSR went from supporting Israel to the Arabs

>>17702894
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin_Note

>>17702773
>And that is why Irving was punished.
Irving was not put on trial for "holocaust denial" though. He brought a libel case himself against Penguin Books because another author used that label for him, after he failed to get her books pulped by the publisher.

Irving went on to say, five years later:
>"I've changed my views. I spoke then about Auschwitz and gas chambers based on my knowledge at the time, but by 1991 when I came across the Eichmann papers, I wasn't saying that any more and I wouldn't say that now. The Nazis did murder millions of Jews. ..I made a mistake by saying there were no gas chambers, I am absolutely without doubt that the Holocaust took place. I apologise to those few I might have offended though I remain very proud of the 30 books I have written."

>>17702917
That's not at all a response to what I said. I feel like /pol/posters' brains are just operating as a word association game, they just latch on to a few words and start typing, entirely ignoring how those words were used

>>17702880
Very important book

>>17702926
>Irving was not put on trial for "holocaust denial" though
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_trial

>>17702934
lol good post

>>17702950
typical /pol/tard. i already addressed this here >>17702914

>>17702950
I'm referring to the Lipstadt trial, which every quote in this thread has been regarding. In the case of the Austrian trial, he both stated that he then accepted the existence of gas chambers and plead guilty. So far as this goes as a "free speech" issues, I would again point out that he attempted to get books critical of him removed from circulation by legal means.

>>17702971
>>17702914
Are you unironically one of those 40% of Jews who suffer from crippling paranoid schizophrenia?

>>17702985
Is it really only 40%?

>>17702982
I'm >>17702773, and I was referring to Irving's arrest in Austria. I don't particularly care about the Libel suit for the same reason I don't care that his apartment was broken into in the 60s.

Also, just to inb4 the schizo in this thread, this is my second post in this thread.

>>17702425
Path of least resistance. It's much more likely that Irving is bullshitting than it is that tens of thousands of eye witnesses are bullshitting.

>>17703002
>tens of thousands of eye witnesses
If only there were so many, but even then it's telling that so many have had to retract their statements later

>>17703002
When those eye witness testimonies come solely from fabricated sources, yes, it's very likely that they're bullshitting as they don't exist. Remember that over 50% of the Yad Vashem names are exact duplicates. Unless you're seriously going to suggest that Brummel Brunstein, cobbler, born whenever and wherever, was killed four times.

>>17703032
it's not though. I can publicly state the holocaust didn't happen with no legal repercussions. people would think I'm an idiot though, because I would be

>>17703042
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Holocaust_denial

>>17702883
The Doctor's plot?

>>17702993
More like 70%; And they obssessed with Sex for some reason. I can at least respect the Orthodox Jews because they keep themselves in order.

>>17702782

>>17703032
doubting doesn't equal denial jesus fuck what has /lit/ come to

>>17703073
see >>17702773

>>17703074
poor Thom Yorke, I didn't realize thats why his eyes are wonky

>>17703001
>I was referring to Irving's arrest in Austria
Then I think it's relevant that Irving knowingly embarked on a speaking tour of Austria while fully aware that he was banned from entering the country. The comment that led to that ban being things that even he later disavowed.

>for the same reason I don't care that his apartment was broken into in the 60s
Why is that? I mean, considering who did it and how small the fines imposed on them were, it actually seems something that was inflicted on him moreso than the trials. Gerry Gable's continuing quest to discourage people from antisemitism by behaving like a caricature from Der Stürmer.

>>17702672
Okay. So were there or were there not gas chambers at Auschwitz? Because the case in question was regarding that issue as one of the pillars of the lawsuit.
>>17702706
So the judge, who made this ruling in 1996, was unaware that there was documentary and archeological evidence of gas chambers at Auschwitz?

>>17703053
Why would I care what laws are in totalitarian states? It's entirely legal where I live

>>17703197
Regarding that quote, it's not a question of what the judge was aware of. He was summing up Lipstadt's defence. Robert Jan van Pelt subsequently prepared a lengthy report for the court which included an analysis of documentary evidence such as documents from the Auchwitz records office describing the construction of special crematoria and so on. The debate was more about the extent to which some of the language in such documents was euphemistic.

>>17702078
The problem with him is he questions the Religions Theology created around a certain event. It is now a Religion and a billion dollar industry. The basis of the post war morality and law. You can read Norman Finkelstein’s book on this.
50 million people died in the war but all that matters is the 6 gorillian
Their narcissism and hatred knows no bounds

>>17703398
>50 million people died in the war but all that matters is the 6 gorillian
If only there was some kind of memorial to the soldiers who died.

>>17703153
>Why is that?
This sort of thing is just to be expected. He put his name out criticizing the state religion, and its most fervent adherents punished him for it when given the opportunity.

More broadly, it's just the lead up to the sort of Anarcho-Tyranny we see today, wherein the State declares certain people or things excommunicated and thus allows violence to be freely enacted against them. That's literally the point of Antifa. Focusing on the people who, when allowed to by the state, enacted violence against a stranger for no reason but their own sadism, rather than the state that allowed this, is silly. If someone chucks an angry badger into your home, getting angry at the badger is pointless, it, like Antifa, is just a dumb animal with no higher political or spiritual capacity. It's just lashing out.

The person who chucked the badger into your home, however, certainly has some kind of higher capacity, and discussing what he's on about is more interesting.

>>17703306
crematoria are very very different from gas chambers. what was the evidence to suggest it was used euphemistically?

>>17702661
Because there isn't? Notice how the judge then affirms the eyewitness accounts.

>>17703553
It's generally a case of interpreting, in the context of the general treatment of Jews at that time, whether phrases like "final solution" and "special actions" meant everyone was going to Madagascar. Here's a link if you'd like to read it yourself: https://www.hdot.org/vanpelt/ - you can also find transcripts of the trial there.

>>17703509
>He put his name out criticizing the state religion, and its most fervent adherents punished him for it when given the opportunity.
I can't help thinking that a lot of the responses ITT are the inversion of the same - that because aspects of something are mythologized each criticism of it must automatically be valid on a technical level. The great suffering becomes the great lie and remains beyond the reach of nuance. I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that mass violence being inflicted by the state or its proxies is tyrannical in both cases.

>>17703858
>The great suffering becomes the great lie and remains beyond the reach of nuance.
the rightful place of nuance lies beyond the standard dialectic of material truth - the whole reason anybody cares about the "nuance" of the subject itself is because they must think it's important, whether it happened or not or how. but the real truth is that the fact that any meaning is invested in this event at all is also "beyond the reach of nuance" - you have to actually give a shit about muh six billion before you desire nuance in understanding the event itself, and if you don't, then none is necessary. rejecting the moral system that makes the holocaust such a big deal in the first place means also obviating the need for understanding it in material terms at all (something which most holocaust deniers sadly do not yet understand, which leads to pointless exercises about prussian blue or muh limited number of ovens)
in the end, my holocaust denial transcends material truth: it did not happen, even if it did. no matter how many jews died, by what means and for what reasons, the holocaust never happened, it did not happen, and no matter how many jews die in the future, it still will not happen. they can or could have literally shoveled jews into massive purpose-built ovens by the trainful, and it still will never have happened. they could execute the last jew by firing square after making him dig his own grave, and what has transpired would still not qualify as a holocaust
i don't care about jews or what happens to them, i just don't give a shit

>>17704000
>in the end, my holocaust denial transcends material truth: it did not happen, even if it did.
This is the kind of kikery I can support.

>>17702110
Oof

David Irving is perhaps the finest Third Reich historian the world has ever seen. His demonization was a major loss for historiography and truth.

>>17704051
>>in the end, my holocaust denial transcends material truth: it did not happen, even if it did.
>This is the kind of kikery I can support.
that's not kikery, thats plain Baudrillard.

>>17702844
>taking Stalin at his word
If communists ever take over your country you deserve what they will do to you.

>>17702078
Thucydides
Gibbon
Irving

Mortals can't touch this guy.

https://www.unz.com/runz/the-remarkable-historiography-of-david-irving/

>>17702796
You sound like some smug, status obsessed retard
You're welcome to brown nose sonewhere else

>>17704000
>you have to actually give a shit about muh six billion before you desire nuance in understanding the event itself
I'm not sure that's quite so in that there's room for separation of statistics from the lived experience and suffering of the individual (who was not always Jewish). Of course you, personally, don't have to be invested in that either but I don't think it has to presuppose a great interest in the event as a symbol. It's possible to take the stance that such suffering is always of interest on its own terms regardless of the supposed historical significance (or lack of) of events that frame it, which also obviates the need for material scale.
>in the end, my holocaust denial transcends material truth
That's an interesting take on it but I'm struggling to reconcile your disinterest with your elevation of it to a transcendental belief.

>>17704154
Why not? Stalin made an alliance with Nazi Germany and and he never broke any agreement, he was the one who got stabbed in the back always. His only condition was neutrality, instead the West made sure reunification would never occur except if Germany was a Western puppet who would follow their orders. Thatcher and Bush were terrified of German reunification as late as the 1990s.

>>17702844
>didn't place emphasis on the uniqueness of Jewish suffering.
why should they? Do filthy goyim not suffer in the same way?

>>17702868
Sauce

>>17704220
it's "smug" and "status-obsessed" to not believe baseless conspiracy theories?

>>17702110
>lacking good evidence
>well
>we'll just have to believe bad evidence
what about not believing? that's an option! the whole search for evidence is about this option to begin with!

>>17704407
>baseless conspiracy theories
like the Holocaust

>>17704324
I'm just saying that's the take by people like deborah lipstadt. The Nuremberg trial is mostly about establishing guilt for plotting a war of aggression instead of presenting a case for genocide against the Jewish race. It took a couple decades to begin to revise the record and extend blame further to anti-Semites within the US state department or FDR failing to nuke Auschwitz etc, etc so everyone is really guilty to some degree. After the six day war there was a movement to change the way WWII was taught in the west so students would understand it was all about Hitlers hatred of Jews so they could understand Israel has a right to defend itself today against a revival of anti-Semitism, but that never happened in the USSR where textbooks kept talking about politico-military affairs instead of warning about the eternal threat of anti-semitism

>>17704425
why didn't any of the germans accused of war crimes say, "No, none of that ever happened"?

>eyewitness reports are not enough for the holocaust
>but they are enough to prove other genocides or for communist crimes

>>17704450
Judicial notice. Many of them did out of court.

>>17704469
It literally is different with Jews.

Also, the Holocaust is not just *unsupported* like Russell's teacup. It's *impossible.* We should be strong atheists w/r/t the Holocaustian god.

>>17704267
>waaaaaaaah stalin wanted to backstab the nazis and they backstabbed him first!
The last book you read was Catch in the Rye in High School. Under a Communist regime you wouldn't be the People's Commissar of Dietary Transgender Inclusion, you'd be a shit shoveler. There's a reason for that.

>>17704469
>eli weasel
lol

>>17702689
>After initial success and mainstream recognition the cultural change that turned the Holocaust into the focal point of WW2 as the post war religion started to form.
would i be correct in saying that this change occurred in the late ’70s/early ’80s?

>>17704540
Whatever the point you're trying to make it doesn't change the fact today all substantive sovereignty of the German nation has been destroyed because of decisions made by the bonn regime which could of been avoided if they took up Stalins offer and joined in a struggle to put down Anglo-American power

>>17704497
>Judicial notice
Why would they continue to feel bound by this even at the point where they were ready to commit suicide or be executed? A number of defendants at Nuremberg continued to protest their individual innocence up until their last words but none seem to have rejected the suggestion that such events took place even at the point where they had absolutely nothing to lose.

>>17703002
And yet many of them have admitted to bullshitting.

>>17704626
Maybe they believed other Germans did it. Doesn't mean they *knew* other Germans did it.

>>17704086
Underrated

>>17702425
witnesses are completely valid evidence lol

>>17704895
Guess the Virgin Mary made the sun dance at Fatima

>>17704906
she did though?

>>17704939
Yahweh drones are not reliable on Jewish issues, stop posting ITT

>>17704870
Yet you have people like Stangl, who claimed to have witnessed these things directly, and Höss, who expressed remorse for participating in them.

>>17704870
>here's one implausible explanation
>please ignore the plausible and correct explanation stated here >>17704950

The Wannsee myth continues unabated, I see.

>>17702101
>referring solely to the gas chamber constructed by the Poles after the war for the benefit of visitors to the site
>the gas chamber constructed by the Poles after the war for the benefit of visitors

Anyone here read Der Nasenring by Mohler?

>>17702773
Good post, insightful.

>>17705053
Are you referring to this?
https://archive.org/details/TheMythOfTheWannseeConferenceFDupontUpload/page/n3/mode/2up
Dupont, page 17:
>3) The Wannsee meeting never discussed gas chambers, shootings or any of the fantasies propagated by the exterminationists
Eichmann, page 47:
>Q: Did they discuss killing by poison gas?
>A: No, with gas no.
>Q: But, how then?
>A: It was ... this business with the engine, they spoke about this; they spoke about shooting, but not about gas.

>>17705173
Must be a troll account

>>17704950
>Höss
Who 'confessed' to 3x the killings they now say happened
>Stangl
Who cares. When religions get started people swear up and down they saw crazy things.

You guys are thinking of the Holocaust in a vacuum. As Arthur Butz is fond of saying, there was a war going on during WWII. All kinds of observable things would have followed the alleged extermination, like the reallotment of rail capacity to move all the Jews.

If there are no ripples in the water, you wouldn't believe someone just threw a big rock in. No smoke, no fire. You wouldn't believe NYC burned down last night even if confessions of incontestable authenticity were shown to you.

>>17705190
What's your point?

Holocaust Denialism is evidence that even Neonazis have some remnants of moral sense in them. They subconsciously understand that mass murder is wrong, but they don't want to admit their heroes were evil. They have to deny it to feel good about themselves.

>>17705257
>Who 'confessed' to 3x the killings they now say happened
And then qualified that: "I regard a total of 2.5 million as far too high. Even Auschwitz had limits to its destructive capabilities."
>When religions get started people swear up and down they saw crazy things.
An argument you only seem to apply to one side. National Socialism itself had a semi-religious tone.
>As Arthur Butz is fond of saying, there was a war going on during WWII
Prior to which, Kristallnacht, Einsatzgruppen, Aktion T4.

>>17703736
thanks

>>17704895
Not if the testimony from other witnesses contradicts it, and not when it is contradicted by other documentary or material evidence.

>>17705378
Good thing this is about revisionism then, not denialism.
>They subconsciously understand that mass murder is wrong, but they don't want to admit their heroes were evil. They have to deny it to feel good about themselves.
Just like the allieds and commies huh

The holocaust probably happened but so much has been exaggerated by kike lies and sensationalism. 6 gorillian, holocoster, masturbation machines, bending rifle barrel, mengele, etc. all made up for shekels and sympathy, anything to drive the guilt home and cement their power.

All of this is to say: it was a good thing and should happen again.

>>17702672
The Nazis shot millions of Russians too.

>>17702773
This is a compelling post.

>>17705378
False. Neocons acknowledge that the US government has killed millions of civilians in various wars and they don't feel even slightly guilty about it.

>>17705857
Yeah, what does that say about Israelis who openly glorify people who murder Palestinian children?

>>17705378
>Neonazis have some remnants of moral sense in them
No shit. Only an absolute brainwashed retard or a 12 year old would just assume that people are inherently amoral actors just because they have dissident political ideals. The fact that you felt this was profound enough to say is actually bothering me.

>>17702926
Do you have the source for that quote? Thanks

>>17705882
It says that nobody feels guilty about killing their enemies. However, most people will object to being falsely accused.

>>17705926
>Nazis don't like being accused of the Holocaust because it's fake
>Israelis love being lauded for bombing Palestinians because it's happening
...Woah...

>>17705907
>The fact that you felt this was profound enough to say is actually bothering me
Why does it have to be profound, sometimes common sense is all you need

>>17702926
>>17705921
I ask because I listened to an undated video with him mentioning 2 buildings in Auschwitz that he had said were used for gassing people who were physically inable to perfrom labour of any kind. He has also said in this video that his belief was that around 330000 jews had died in Auschwitz.

>>17702078
Anglo incitement of both wars is the elephant in the room, centering on Churchill and the Foreign Office. Irving’s primary sourcing is to a higher standard than court historians’ recursive secondary literature in translation circle jerks, bare minimum.

>>17702078
>Guy is a WW2 historian of incomparable quality
He's not an historian at all, he has no degree or training in history whatsoever. At best his work is pop history.
>with the judge essentially agreeing with everything he said
I don't know if this is dishonestly or just ignorance but that statement couldn't be farther from the truth, if the judge agreed with everything he said, Irving wouldn't have lost the case.

>Historians are human: they make mistakes, misread and misconstrue documents and overlook material evidence. I have found that, in numerous respects, Irving has misstated historical evidence; adopted positions which run counter to the weight of the evidence; given credence to unreliable evidence and disregarded or dismissed credible evidence. It appears to me that an analysis of those instances may shed light on the question whether Irving's misrepresentation of the historical evidence was deliberate.

> I have found that most of the Defendants' historiographical criticisms of Irving set out in section V of this judgement are justified. In the vast majority of those instances the effect of what Irving has written has been to portray Hitler in a favourable light and to divert blame from him onto others. I have held that this is unjustified by the evidence. Examples include Irving's portrayal of Hitler's conduct and attitude towards the events of Kristallnacht and the importance attached by Irving to Hitler's attitude towards the Jewish question as he claims is evidenced by the Schlegelberger note. I have seen no instance where Irving has misinterpreted the evidence or misstated the facts in a manner which is detrimental to Hitler. Irving appears to take every opportunity to exculpate Hitler

>>17706267
>The same is true of the broader criticism made by the Defendants' of Irving's unwarrantedly favourable depiction of Hitler in regard to his attitude towards the Jews, which criticism I have found in section VI above to be justified. Irving sought in his writings to distance Hitler from the programme of shooting Jews in the East and from the later genocide in the death camps in a manner which the evidence did not warrant. Irving has argued, unjustifiably as I have found, that the evidence indicates that Hitler was unaware of any programme for the extermination of Jews at Auschwitz. In his account of the bombing of Dresden Irving (as I have found in section X1 above) persistently exaggerates the number of casualties, so enabling him to make comparisons between the number of civilians killed in Allied bombing raids with the number of Jews killed in the camps.

>In my opinion there is force in the opinion expressed by Evans that all Irving's historiographical "errors" converge, in the sense that they all tend to exonerate Hitler and to reflect Irving's partisanship for the Nazi leader. If indeed they were genuine errors or mistakes, one would not expect to find this consistency. I accept the Defendants' contention that this convergence is a cogent reason for supposing that the evidence has been deliberately slanted by Irving.

>>17706079
Because that wasn’t your implication. You were stating it as if you had arrived at some sort of “gotcha” when it is in fact not a gotcha but something that should be obvious to any thinking adult even if you and I both know it’s not.

>>17704251
the entire reason why the holocaust is significant at all is the principle that suffering is always of interest on its own terms - it is the pinnacle of both human suffering, and suffering caused by humans, who were acting in direct opposition to that principle. what avenue for nuance is there, except from the standpoint of either accepting or rejecting this principle?
>That's an interesting take on it but I'm struggling to reconcile your disinterest with your elevation of it to a transcendental belief.
there's no such thing as disinterest in the holocaust - it is already a transcendental belief, therefore its negation must also be. if the holocaust did not happen, then in the space it occupies must have happened the anti-holocaust, which is just the normal holocaust but with "and that's a good thing, or at least their heart was in the right place gawd bless 'em" appended to the end. you can't simply not care - it looms so large over us that to not address it means you must be content with living in its shadow

>>17706653
This is a purely Western view of the holocaust, in other countries it is 'just another genocide'.

>>17702078
Didn't he release a book about Himmler like last year or so where he thought Himmler was murdered and did not commit suicide.
Anyone read it yet and if so is it any good?

>>17706653
The Holocaust is an inverted Christianity desu senpai. It's the anti-crucifixion that steals Yahweh back from the Europeans who stole him 2,000ya

>>17702078
He's a fake historian.

>>17707125
He's a great historian

>>17707313
Where did he get his history degree from?

>>17707373
Bruh who cares. It is a social science getting a degree for that is 9 out of 10 times completely optional. In all of his works he discovered documents never seen before by all historians with degrees.

>>17707396
>Bruh who cares.
People who are concerned with historical truth. I don't trust pop history writers like Irving the same way I don't trust wackos with no medical background that push for alternative medicine

>>17707480
>People who are concerned with historical truth
You mean the people who were unable to find large parts of the historical truth the pop science writer was? Plus more than enough wackos with no background made advances in medicine as well. Some playboy bunny girl for example just one day decided to get into immune cancer therapy and became quite well known and respected. Same whith Iriving. He was controversial sure but overall quite respected in the field untill suddenly the court case happend and every historian always knew how much of a fraud he was and nothing he said was to be accepted anymore.

>>17707373
>blocks your path

>>17707524
Tell me which historical truths Irving singlehandedly uncovered

>>17706751
This. The jews said "You goyim want to worship a dead jew? Then we'll trick you into worshipping 6 million dead jews instead."

>>17707610
ah yes I'll just pull out my list
Look for yourself dude that was literally the thing he was so respected for in the historic community even someone who is a biased as you can find that.

>>17707633
I did and I wasn't able to find any, If he's so well known for it as you say, surely it's very easy for you to give me just one example, no?

>>17707639
The docuents on what the brithish goverment did to hess when he was imprisoned for example.

>>17702154
Are you? JC peanut brain.

>>17707639
First one to make use of Goebbels his diaries as well.
Multiple documents about the war he read in German archives. Most of this info is accessible in archives across countries if you look for it but your mainstream historians just don't really do that

>>17707666
Can you give me a source for this?
>>17707686
What truths did he uncover in these documents?
>but your mainstream historians just don't really do that
They don’t access archives? What are you talking about? All historians do is read old material and publish research

>>17707725
>All historians do is read old material and publish research
you don't really need to travel much to say "holocaust bad"

>>17707725
>All historians do is read old material and publish research
Exept when there are thousand of ducuments most of which are useless across the soviet union, USA, england and Germany. That was why he was respected because he would spend such insane amount of time pouring over every document, he was kind of autistic about it.

>>17707725

>What truths did he uncover in these documents?
Smaller things in general like personal letters certain reasons why hitler did some things and more details on what happend on the night of the long knives. For example how rhom was offered to kill himself and left alone with a gun for around 20 minutes three times if I remember correctly because that would more honerable than being shot and he and Hitler used to be good friends.

>Can you give me a source for this?
Not since you would not accept his word as proof I would need to find the papers he used and documents pre internet times stating it and since I don't have the book here that would be to much of a bother
Funny how you didn't ask about the goebbels diary tho since that is the most know example and if you searched you could perhaps even find some article seething about it online.
Guess you don't want to actually adress the proof tho ;)
Since I can't be botherd I'll just go to sleep

>>17707824
>That was why he was respected because he would spend such insane amount of time pouring over every document, he was kind of autistic about it.
For someone who spent so much time pouring over all the documents, he sure made a ton of "errors" translating and representing them as was demonstrated in his court case
>For example how rhom was offered to kill himself and left alone with a gun for around 20 minutes three times if I remember correctly because that would more honerable than being shot and he and Hitler used to be good friends.
can you show me that it was Irving who uncovered this?
>Not since you would not accept his word as proof
Obviously i'm not going to accept this guys word as proof when his court case showed beyond a reasonable doubt that he's a serial liar who distorts historical fact to fit his ideological agenda
>Funny how you didn't ask about the goebbels diary tho since that is the most know example and if you searched you could perhaps even find some article seething about it online.
I was asking about it, and i'm asking you again to show me what historical truths he uncovered in them

>>17708034
>he sure made a ton of "errors" translating and representing them as was demonstrated in his court case

He made a few minor mistakes over the breadth of his research. Most writers make more mistakes in a single volume (Toland, Ulrich, Evans, Kershaw, and Shirer).

Lol I don't care if the holocaust happened or not. Im still antisemitic. It must suck to be the descendant of a bunch of ass blasted refugee hebrew cuvks who couldn't even defend their own "nation".

The image of jewish women and children being executed in ditches is horrific though. The SS leaders responsible for cleaning up the frontier got carried away.

But really. You faggots expect me to believe this isn't a morgue?? Fuck off.

>>17707824
>>17708034
it's poring over

>>17702773

>>17705857
neocons are not humans

>>17708287
You’re actually sick in the head.

>>17708286
He did not just make a few minor mistakes, see the judge's ruling here>>17706267 and here >>17706274

>>17702088
gas the kikes race war now

>>17708286
Yeah dude i'm sure it's just a big coincidence that all of his "minor mistakes" portray Hitler in a positive light

>>17708343

The 'proof' that opposed Irving was just system historiography. There is zero conclusive evidence either way. At least, to Irving's credit, he had actually learned German to engage with the source documents.

The lesson is simple -- toe the line on the stinky Hitler narrative, or go to prison.

>>17702773

>>17708389
>The lesson is simple -- toe the line on the stinky Hitler narrative, or go to prison.
Nigger this was a civil suit where Irving was the PLAINTIFF, not the defendant

>>17708388
>postwar """"witness"""" testimony
Just fucking lol. I have no doubt you take Trevor-Roper to be a definitive and reliable source.

>>17708403
What does any of what you're saying have to with the image I posted? Did you even fucking read it?

>>17708401
The Lipstadt and Austria trials were adjudicated along the same lines. He got punished for not sucking up to Jews. Not an anti-semite, just don't like 'em. Simple as.

>>17708416
I'm talking about the Lipstadt trial, he sued her for defamation and lost because he's a retard, it had nothing to do with not sucking up to Jews

>>17704906
she did though

>>17702101
>cum gas chamber

>>17708364
edgy

>>17705378
the holocaust would have been good if it happened but the evidence shows it didn't sadly

>>17708429
>it had nothing to do with not sucking up to Jews
Tragic.

>>17708442
nice revisionism moron

>when a historical event is so well substantiated and obviously true you have to make it a crime to say otherwise

>>17704450
The nuremberg trials were predicated on the assumption that they did, arguing it didn't happen would be the same as "i did it all i'm guilty"
Arguing around it, like "ohhh i just didnt know what was going on" was their best chance at getting a reduced sentence

>>17708453
the holocaust happened, but has been grossly exaggerated for ignoble reasons

>>17708453
People who intentionally distort history should face the consequences, suck it up buttercup

>>17708480
>should face the consequences
You believe that prison is a reasonable response to what you perceive as a lie?

Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists and Whites in general would be better served to assert that the "Holocaust" was justified than argue about details.

>>17702950
Irving brought a libel case to court because Lipstadt called him a holocaust denier.

>>17708486
but it wasn't

>>17708486
To expand: the point is that the Germans wanted to do away with jews. Whether they wanted to exterminate them, subjugate them or exile them is not important. How many died or how they died does not matter. The discussion should be about why the Germans wanted to get rid of jews. These trivialities are a distraction and derail people from the central issue.

>>17708480
imagine being a dogma jannie on the internet to defend the status quo

>>17708485
No, but prison is a reasonable response to someone who intentionally and continually distorts the truth in a way that harms society

>>17704000

>>17708514
For you.

>>17708514
who determines what is "truth"?

David Irving. Eric Dubay. Kent Hovind. Truly gods among men.

>>17708486
>Neo-Nazis, White Nationalists and Whites
stop using these labels, thanks

>>17708538
The point went right over your head. These labels have to be embraced, they aren't going away.

>>17704098
Baudrillard wasn’t far right

>>17708548
opticscucks can never understand that they don't hate your optics, they hate you, and if you won't even admit to being the thing you hate, then you're cowardly in addition to being a nazi or whatever (which of course then makes it even easier to hate you)

Nazis lost

>>17708588
its not about whether the enemy hates you, retard
its about support by regular people
if your movement looks unnapproachable, then you're fucked
>>17708609
i didn't know this, when did it happen??

>>17708614
yeah I guess that's a good point. Most of them survived and are responsible for some of the most reprehensible shit in today's society.

>>17708588
It's literally not even possible to be a member of the National Socialist German Workers Party today. And what the fuck do you know about optics? You think cuck box Heimbach is a real hero eh?

>>17708614
>its about support by regular people
The NSDAP were literal street thugs who took power with 10% of the population supporting them. BLM, for example, is not "approachable," and yet the House just passed a bill named after George Floyd. Point is, don't be a pussy.

>>17708635
>BLM, for example, is not "approachable," and yet the House just passed a bill named after George Floyd
yeah BLM has billion dollar companies and the government supporting them retard they are the establishment. you are so fucking out of touch

>>17708642
Correct but none of that matters if "normal people" don't sign on. Normal people signed on because it felt cool to go out in all black and burn things that summer. That can't be bought. Fascists could go out and do the same thing and people would gravitate. No one wants to be associated with scared little bitches fussing over how others perceive them.

>>17708642
Not to mention that, again, the NSDAP went out, made trouble and took power without all of BLM's backing.

>>17708635
no, they were respectable people
Street fighting was part of weimar politics, having the SA doesn't make the NSDAP "street thugs"

>>17708694
There are NSDAP propaganda films glorifying the men that took control of the streets as the genesis of the movement.

>>17708713
just a bunch of angry farmers

>>17708635
>The NSDAP were literal street thugs

The SA was a direct response to the KPD's excessive street violence.

>>17708694
>>17708735
pic related murdered Horst Wessel

>>17708796
not to mention the KPD was associated with the criminal underground

>>17708735
>>17708796
>>17708802
More info on this please?

>>17708457
cope

It's not that he totally denies Jews were killed, but the more fanciful tales about it that are told (in schools and hollywood to masses of people in particular). Many people do and rightfully so. What's more alarming is the fanaticism regarding it, it is clearly more than a historical event which, if you care about getting things straight, is not good. Btw I'm pretty sure Irving is a little unreliable.

>>17708903
it was a thinly veiled farce to kill some people, don't be ridiculous.

>>17708970
some people who would have every reason to claim innocence if they were innocent

>>17708804
dude in the Pic was called Albrecht Höhler, he was part of the Roter Kämpferbund, a Communist Paramilitary
Horst Wessel, who was an SA leader, was murdered and made into a martyr figure, which is why the NSDAP anthem was named after him

>>17708330
>>17708388
>>17708401
lol calm down you sperg

>>17702773
Basado. Just look at how many bunkertrannies you triggered. The truth about the Holohoax will eventually come to light.

>>17702111
>I thought people on this board were readers...
That was a mistake.

So Jews lie because they are Jews, what about all the other groups who were sent to the camps

>>17702078
MODS GET OFF YOUR ASS AND DELETE THREAD
>b-but muh nazi site
>>>/pol/

>>17702634
Ah yes, because the thousands of innocent civilians who were bombed to shit in Dresden were absolutely not victims and anyone who would paint them as such must be a nazi sympathizer. And yeah, it's really nuts to defend a guy who gets put in jail for exercising free speech. Do you fucking hear yourself you deluded psychopath?

>>17706751
They are the same: Jewish calumny shamelessly and relentlessly propagandized into a Jewish innocence tale of supernatural proportions, for goy consumption.
>>17708287
About as big as a living room, yet millions died in it. Jews are the original liars for the faith; their literature is full of alleged horrific and gory persecutions with absurd body counts and other numerological fantasies; and the ethnohistory on which they base their very ontology is invented, fraudulent, ethnic propaganda. What's shocking is how an intelligent and sophisticated people can express such thoroughgoing mendacity, and how good they are at it and how good at getting everyone else to buy it.

>>17709623
>Ah yes, because the thousands of innocent civilians who were bombed to shit in Dresden were absolutely not victims and anyone who would paint them as such must be a nazi sympathizer. And yeah, it's really nuts to defend a guy who gets put in jail for exercising free speech. Do you fucking hear yourself you deluded psychopath?

Not the same anon, but can't really use Dresden as an example when Germans bombed Rotterdam and London to smithereens among other places. Will you shed a tear for those people too?

>>17706309
>that should be obvious to any thinking adult

The thing is that most adults just don't think about this stuff. If you tell them about their own country's war crimes they will just shrug it all off as "stuff that happened", with a general sense of "if my people did it it was probably what they had to do", while considering evidence of an enemy's crimes as evidence that we were justified in attacking them.

>>17709973
>london
berlin and london were both being bombed at the same time, and was only escalated because the germans bombed the wrong place at night, to which the english responded by also bombing civilians in berlin
>rotterdam
the dutch accepted the german ultimatum but the bombers didn't actually get the message in time iirc

>>17709973
plus the sheer scale of how much germany was bombed to shit, whilst being invaded on three sides was much more devastating than either of these

>>17709623
>muh Dresden

lol fuck off Nazi, total war bitch

>>17702101
Whst Irving did not realize is that there are some things held as truths beyond any evidenciary basis, as this limp sperg illustrates.

>>17708388
So they question him for using Ribbentrop as a source but then go ahead and build their whole case on conflicting and bad but totally reliable ''witness'' testemonies. seems legit

>>17708796
nazi probably deserved it

>>17705921
>>17706102
>Do you have the source for that quote? I took it from the Wikipedia page on his Austrian trial, which sources it from several newspaper articles at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_trial#Sentencing
https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/three-years-jail-holocaust-denier-irving-2510768
Unfortunately, there don't seem to be any transcripts of that trial available as there are for the English one. There's also Irving's prison memoir, "Banged Up", where he refers to it:
>He asked me to set out the process by which I had updated my views on Auschwitz, since 1989. I began by saying that it would take three or four minutes, and explained the first two stages—securing the Adolf Eichmann papers while visiting Buenos Aires in 1991, and finding Hans Aumeier’s manuscripts (he was deputy commandant of Auschwitz) the year after that. After thirty seconds, Liebetreu wearily interrupted and that was that.
http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Banged/up.pdf

>>17706653
>the entire reason why the holocaust is significant at all is the principle that suffering is always of interest on its own terms - it is the pinnacle of both human suffering, and suffering caused by humans
To describe a hierarchy of suffering based on an economy of scale is not to take that suffering on its own terms, which must always be direct personal experience or empathy with same. In what way is the Holocaust the 'pinnacle' of anything for a Tutsi woman being beheaded in the Rwandan genocide? There is simply a mode of behavior.
>what avenue for nuance is there
Recognition that these events transpired as a result of the interaction of flawed human beings with consequences for all parties, rather than as a Manichean struggle by either group.
>it is already a transcendental belief, therefore its negation must also be
Do you apply this to all transcendental beliefs of others which you don't personally adhere to?

>>17710717
>total war bitch
So holohoax was justified?

>>17710767
Not only that, but part of their defense is the other half of the, to them, unreliable Ribbentrop quote. Really does your head in.

>>17710988
And oh the whole TOTALEN KRIEGE came after the allies declared only unconditional surrender would be accepted.
All the NS kraut brutality came after that.

>>17702078
This is really a /his/ post, both in topic and quality. feck off

>>17710988
no, they started it

>>17711100
They didn't start the bombing of population centers and definatly not the bombing of all bombing with the intent to kill as many normal citizens as possible

>>17711062
>All the NS kraut brutality came after that.
Not really, you have events like the Wormhoudt massacre in 1940, Lidice in 42.

>>17711119
yeah but they started Nazism

>>17711100
>>17711181

>>17711186

>>17711123
>Wormhoudt massacre
Alright still was an outliner and only like 80 were killed
> Lidice in 42
Came in retaliation after Heydrich was murdered. Thousands of Czech people literally protested his murder.

Allies dindu nuffin

>start war
>start losing
>NOOOO YOU CAN'T KILL US LIKE THAT IT'S NOT FAIR!
>also all the massacres we did were justified because reasons

>>17702078
first guy to question the holocaust mainstream and the inflated numbers. got a lot of shit for it because no scientist wanted to take up the mantle because the'yre all owned by jewish sponsorships.

>>17711119
look i dont believe in the holohoax either but you're retarded if you believe that. luftwaffe was practicing terror bombing in poland as early as 1939. first luftwaffe raid was on a non military target on the polish border. luftwaffe strafed columns of fleeing people as well. terror bombing is nothing new though, in the old days they just called it sacking the populace

>>17707373
Interestingly enough, most historians who write books don't tend to have history degrees, they instead have a degree in some sort of -ology

>>17706662
Yeah but because the political ramifications it’s had for western countries are enormous and like this thread shows, you can’t actually talk about it let alone doubt it.

>>17711213
Lmao wont even reply goddamn coward

>>17702773
Desu

What is even the current official story of what happened at Auschwitz? The jews were locked into a cellar and Zyklon B was dropped down from the cans into holes in the roof?

The Holocaust is perhaps the most widely studied historical event to ever happen. All you morons in this thread talking about "not enough evidence" are plainly self-delusional. The "holes in the narrative" are so insignificant in comparison to the overwhelming avalanche of documentary evidence and historical work that has been done on the subject.

The most annoying thing is that 90% of these Holohoax fags know deep in their heart that it happened, but they take the denialist position for purely aesthetic purposes. It's so fucking gay and dishonest.

>>17711265
6 million died in the camps and that’s all you need to know.

>>17711272
>The "holes in the narrative" are so insignificant in comparison to the overwhelming avalanche of documentary evidence and historical work that has been done on the subject.
Why don’t you point out some of this overwhelming avalanche of evidence then?

>>17711265
I'm not sure anymore, every year new Holocaust survivor's are added with new stories. I think the death toll is at 20 million officially now. I imagine ina few more years after more Holocaust survivor's are found we iwll be close to 40 million. According to the narrative, the Jews were taken big sections and routinely sent to a gas chamber where they were mass killed. Then the corpses were all taken to crematorium and turned to ashes and then buried in an undisclosed location. Of course, the conflicting story has to do with mass graves of people.

>>17711281
Google "books about the Holocaust". The end.

Not my job to try and convince you to crawl out of the rabbit hole.

Holocaust denialism is, by its very nature, an ideology obsessed with turning empiricism on its head. So, there's little-to-no point quibbling about it in a 4chan thread.

I'm just here to tell you that you faggots are fooling no-one and that everyone sees you for the dishonest creeps that you are.

>>17711338
most of those books about the holocaust are nothing more than emotional appeals and more than enough just ignore things or assume it is setteled. Most holocaust books shit on empiricism

>>17711209
>Came in retaliation after Heydrich was murdered
So you're equivocating now from 'no brutality' to 'justified brutality'.
>Allies dindu nuffin
Or: the intentional infliction of civilian casualties by either side was a moral wrong and putting them side by side, rather than justifying the war crimes of the SS, demonstrates a process of escalation which strengthens the case against actions of that type in general.

>>17711209
>chaired the January 1942 Wannsee Conference which formalised plans for the "Final Solution to the Jewish Question"—the deportation and genocide of all Jews in German-occupied Europe.

Sounds justified

>>17711461
what?
you know that they no where in the actual planning or transcripts of the conference the actual genocide of jews is discussed. They discussed the deportation east through transit camps which was later just said oh yeah that is actually 100% genocide. It even included exemptions for some jews and never said anything about execution shooting or gas chambers.

>>17711495
oh I guess it's OK then, sorry Hitler

>>17711413
> So you're equivocating now from 'no brutality' to 'justified brutality'.
I was just stating the reason. The reason Heydrich was assassinated was because the Czech people were happy and comfortable under him than they were under the government in exile. This is why added that the people protested. What I find evil is that they were ready to make their own people suffer

> the intentional infliction of civilian casualties by either side was a moral wrong and putting them side by side
Yeah sure why not but it is all crap.

>>17711461
Excellent piece of evidence

>>17711573
No but the wannsee conference stated nothing about genocide so using that to insinuate anything about hte final solution is idiotic

>>17711609
>they didnt mention killing them specifically so that makes it OK

never breed

>>17709440
Mods want this board to go to shit

>>17710988
so you admit it happened? or are you asking, hypothetically?

>>17711631
>I ignore what anyone says and just assume what they mean.
You will never breed tranny

>>17711592
You don't think, then, that the Czech view of Heydrich may have been influenced by the stated goals of Generalplan Ost or his role in things like the mass murder of other Slavs in Operation Tannenberg?

>>17711652
cope all you want, nazis still lost :)

>>17711656
No most people liked him. He was also assasinated by Czechs who fled to England not just random citizens. The normal citizens quite liked him since he saw it more benificial to take care of them as to keep production high and so he introduced social programmes they never had before. This made him quite popular.

>>17711656
Heydrich was killed in 41 none of that crap had happened by then
> Generalplan Ost
Yeah bro it must be true if soviets said so
No fucking proof at all

Stop simping for allies dindu nuffin they’re destroying the world just as destroyed the axis

>>17711735
>muh nazis dundu nuffin hitler was innocent

lol

>>17711735
>Heydrich was killed in 41 none of that crap had happened by then
Heydrich was directly responsible for the creation of Zentralstelle IIP Polen, which carried out both Tannenberg and Intelligenzaktion. This was in 1939-1940.
>No fucking proof at all
Other than the surviving documents, the testimony of the people involved in formulating it, the mass murder of Slavic peoples, and the NSDAP's stated doctrine of Lebensraum, including the chapter "Eastern Orientation" in Mein Kampf.

>>17711265
shut up and watch the hollywood movies bigot

>jews must be exterminated
>holocaust didn't happen
So much for german efficiency

>>17711735
>Stop simping for allies dindu nuffin
Could you give me an example of a situation where people deny that allied war crimes on any comparable scale to your attempt to deny Germany's activities in the east? Is there perhaps an equally highly motivated Biscari denial movement of which I'm unaware?

>>17702425
>Which, as we know, would be completely unacceptable in basically any criminal trial: taking the (inconsistent) testimony of witnesses DESPITE a complete lack of documentary evidence of the claim.
No lie is too big for the skaven, it's why they managed to get away with it. You wouldn't imagine someone to lie this grandly.

>>17702868
They don't.

>>17702773
>The real crime in their eyes is.... TURNING THE SQUEAKY LAMP IN THE DARKENED ROOM TOWARDS THOSE IN POSITIONS AND INSTITUTIONS OF JEWISH POWER. ANYONE WHO POINTS OUT JEWISH POWER MUST BE DESTROYED.

"THERE IS NO, ZERO, ZIP JEWISH POWER!! REMEMBER THE 6,000,000 GOYIM!! ! WATCH THE SCHINDLER'S LIST DOCUMENTARY AGAIN!! OY VEY!"

>>17702425
of course, there is plenty of archeological and corroberating witness accounts of plenty of atrocities even at the camps, but let me guess that was just typhus ;)

>>17702773
Theres some great links of people speaking about the camp currency they used and also when the lady went in to get gassed and water came out of the shower not gas.

>>17712025
lol cope

>>17702796
I met a guy like you in passing at University he smoked Marlboro lights and spoke in confidence once how he had gone to an upper class school and tried sucking a cock. He said he realized it wasn't for him.

I made my excuses and left the room and had no more contact with him as I don't keep contact with sausage jockeys. I believe you to be like that young man.

>>17708527
Unironically kys relativist.

>>17711807
>no copies of the original Generalplan Ost have ever been found
>wanting to expand eastwards =/= wanting to murder and enslave millions of slavs

>>17702425
Multiple eyewitness accounts which corroborate each other.
>unacceptable in basically any criminal trial
Why do people think this? If you shoot somebody and throw the gun into the sea, and ten other people who were present saw you do it, you are going to jail.

>>17702880
Quick run down as I don't read good

>>17712056
objective truth exists anon,
it's just filtered through subjective experience

Whether the holocaust happened or not, the NatSocs were the good guys and you people will never, ever change my mind.

>>17712047
Do you have knee socks and a clear perspex dildo? You write like you do.

>>17711750
Reddit

>>17712062
What the fuck are you even doing here

>>17709973
>Will you shed a tear for those people too?
For A*glos? Never (Dutch are just Germanized A*glos)

>>17711338
What do you mean when you say hollocost denial?

Actual Holocaust deniers only deny the Zyklon B fabrication and exaggerated numbers. Everything else is true the kidnapping the forced labour the guards the dogs the disease the lack of medicine especially after getting bombed.

Holocaust believers think that deniers deny the whole existence of camps and pairs of shoes and suitcases from prisoners which they don't.

>>17711272
Studied by people who have a vested interest to maintain the established narrative. Do you think any historian or philosopher is going to go against the grain? You must be a naive sperm guzzler.

>>17712121
This is the problem with the label of "Holocaust denier": it implies those who question an aspect of the event thereby deny the whole event.

It's a really good poison-the-well phrase.

>>17711265
Basically there was a Rollercoaster which carried loads of women and kids into massive ovens in the ground while their ear drums bursted due to amplified Deutschland Uberalles played over the Nazi sound system.

>>17712057
Perhaps because there was a concerted effort to destroy such sensitive documents under
Operation Clausewitz. However secondary documents referring to are preserved. There seems to be something of having your cake and eat it mentality ITT in this thread where the Holocaust didn't happen because the Jews were supposedly to be "settled in the east" rather than exterminated according to Irving's interpretation of the Wannsee, but one is simultaneously meant to accept that there was no plan to settle the east.
>wanting to expand eastwards =/= wanting to murder and enslave millions of slavs
And yet large numbers of Slavs were murdered. 100,000 in Intelligenzaktion alone. Priests, university professors, artists, doctors, etc, were executed en mass but this, I take it, went unnoticed because Reynhard Heidrich distributed free shoes.

>>17712119
>(Dutch are just Germanized A*glos)
No no no. Dutch are Germans of the Lower Saxony type. Not Britoids.

>>17709440
Kvetch! OY VEY!! Discussion of a historian and his books!!

>>17712138
>It's a really good poison-the-well phrase.
This is what Jews do. Control the narrative and the rules of the discussion so that if you think outside of the establishment framework, then, in the eyes of the normalfag, you are already "wrong" even though you actually are objectively right.

>>17702880
that cover sure makes it seem really trustworthy.

>>17712146
Did you know that Hitler had great respect and admiration for Poles? Read this, anons.
https://polishforums.com/history/hitler-thought-poles-letter-himmler-62093/

>>17712112
You racist against low grade readers or somethin?

>>17712185
But if it had Jewish Star of Rempham and Allied flags all over the cover you would think it's totally legitimate and trustworthy.

>>17712090
/pol/shit has atrophied your brain

>>17702773
Six million was always their token number.

>>17712185
Well read it and look at the sourches then. You want me to think a book with crying jews on the cover is trustworthy as well?

>>17712206
One thing I noticed about uni-brow University dwellers is when they are losing an argument they just attack the person not the point. ESPECIALLY if it's anything to do with pointing the finger jewish power.

>>17712217
Anti-polfags will always ignore this. They are programmed to deny reality if it conflicts with their narrative. A jewish rabbi could walk right up to them and punch them in the face and anti-polfags would blame it on white supremacist neo-nazis.

>>17712225
because that's all you knuckle dragging ignoramuses understand!

>>17712235
nope, try again kiddo

>>17712217
And of course they used the mass murder of jews in WWI against the central powers and also against the Russian tzar and during the communist revolution in Russia

>>17712190
>>17712190
>>17712190

>>17712190
wow, a scrap of paper they found in his bunker after he an heroed, such respect

>>17712203
>>17712224
Cry all you want you're not gonna convince me to read a book that has a street fighter character selection menu as the cover.

>It's not my fault I got kicked out of 109 restaurants! Those restaurant managers are hateful bigots who kicked me out for no reason!!

>>17712279
>food analogy

Why do they do this, anons?

>>17712287
The Jew mocks snidely and snarky as he deflects.

>>17712318
As opposed to the pure and direct Aryan dignity of the the oy-vey-restaurants post he was replying to.

>>17712279
Why are they always so ugly? They look like disgusting, repulsive goblin freaks.

>>17704857
They didn't say that the holocaust amd gas chambers itself wasn't real though.

Get a grip dickwad.

>>17712146
>Operation Clausewitz
>executed on April 20
bit late to be covering that kind of stuff up by that point
"quick, find an example of the germans destroying war documents!!"

>>17712367
1945*

>>17705882
You mean the human shield children?

>So in conclusion we agree that the Germans were the good guys breaking away from the jewish bankers and have been eternally lambasted by leftists and noses and will continue to be so as long as Schindler's list plays in front of every child's eyes in every school until the death of time itself.

I am sick and tired of spineless neocons and classical liberals who don't care about the white race and only care about preserving democracy, individualism, and free market talmudism.
I will state this as directly as I can. Fuck Jews. Fuck leftists. Fuck neoliberals. Fuck classical liberals. Fuck Marxists. Fuck sexual perverts. Fuck controlled opposition whores like Jordan Peterson. Fuck """conservatives""" who never conserve a damn thing except Israel. Fuck anti-whites.

>>17712367
>bit late to be covering that kind of stuff up by that point
Not so much if you put in the context of being parallel with evacuation.
>"quick, find an example of the germans destroying war documents!!"
It's not like it's just an interpretation of them happening to burn a few documents. All of the relevant orders of how that was to be carried out explicitly still exist in the Bundesarchiv, as well as being attested to by those present in Berlin.

>>17712297
Our mere existence haunts them, constantly reminding them of their inferiority. "If I can't be beautiful, no one can."

>>17712387
go off sis!

>>17712412
it was the battle of berlin bro
where does it say they were burning their evul genocide master plan, and not asinine logistical bullshit?

>>17702894
I betcha didn't know that Khrushchev wanted full nuclear disarmament either. The shooting down of Gary Powers U-2 plane all but forced him to concede his disarmament plans to the Soviet militarist faction in the politburo.

>>17712387
and I'm sick of incels whose only accomplishment is the color of their skin

>>17712449
>incels
Piss off

>>17712459
you first :)

>>17712449
>>17712461
Shut the fuck up roastie whore

>>17712469
lol you sound like a democrat

>>17712429
>where does it say they were burning their evul genocide master plan
In secondary memoranda which survive and refer to parts of that plan. Then there's the Sonderfahndungsbuch Polen. Or the literal mass graves.

>>17712387
>>17712476
>american """"national socialism"""" larp

>>17712476
No, I don't vote because I'm not gay or retarded.

>>17712055
not your blog

>>17708804
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Revolution_of_1918
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburg_Uprising

Commies in Weimar Germany were rabidly militant and repeatedly tried to carry out a revolution. Political violence was simply the norm and it has been distorted to seem like a specifically Nazi thing.

>>17712416
Laffin at how europeans cope with their extinction