The Truth Behind The Gates Of Auschwitz

[IlluSionS667]

Let's face it, the moon is made of cheese and Illusionist needs more bitch-slapping.

Let's face it : you have no arguments whatsoever against any of these vids.

I have read and seen books, tv shows about the death camps and spoken to a few US soldiers who survived being POW's and Death March survivors.  (from my Home health nursing career)

Most books and TV shows on the topic contain lots of propaganda mixed in with the facts.

US soldiers I expect to tell the truth, however. They have little interest in lying about their experiences. Feel free to explain how the testimonies you mentioned contradict any of the videos.

[odeon]

Let's face it, the moon is made of cheese and Illusionist needs more bitch-slapping.

Let's face it : you have no arguments whatsoever against any of these vids.

Let's face it, the moon is actually made of cheese. Prove me wrong. 

[IlluSionS667]

Let's face it, the moon is actually made of cheese. Prove me wrong. 

First of all, there is no evidence whatsoever in favor of the claim that the moon is made of cheese. All we have, is the imagination of individuals like Nick Park (cfr. Wallace & Gromit) which doesn't apply as evidence.

Second, there are various arguments against the moon being made of cheese :
*) samples of the moon surface show no traces of cheese.
*) photographs of the moon show traces of meteors having hit the moon. If the moon had been of cheese, these meteorites would have done a lot more damage.
*) where would the milk have come from to produce the cheese? There is no explanation for that.
*) Maximum temperatures of the moon are about 390 K. I'm pretty sure cheese would melt at that temperature, which in turn would result in a much smoother surface.
*) ....

Considering the lack of evidence in favor of the moon being made of cheese and various reasons why it cannot be made of chees, we can reasonable conclude that the moon is not made of cheese.

Similarly, there is a lot of evidence in favor of Holocaust revisionism and none against it. Therefore, one can reasonable conclude that Holocaust revisionists are correct. It would therefore be better not to compare Holocaust revisionism with the statement that the moon is made of cheese but rather orthodox Holocaust history.

[odeon]

It's been proven beyond reasonable doubt that the moon is, in fact, made of cheese. Your arguments have been debunked by known experts in the field. Many of the photographs are obvious fakes, the trips to the moon were a gigantic hoax, exposed by countless websites, articles, and well-known academics, and I'm fairly sure you haven't actually measured the temperature on the moon, only read about it in NASA propaganda.

Oh, and why do you think it's called the Milky Way? 

Pathetic, really, your attempts at trying to hide the truth from the public.

[IlluSionS667]

It's been proven beyond reasonable doubt that the moon is, in fact, made of cheese. Your arguments have been debunked by known experts in the field. Many of the photographs are obvious fakes, the trips to the moon were a gigantic hoax, exposed by countless websites, articles, and well-known academics, and I'm fairly sure you haven't actually measured the temperature on the moon, only read about it in NASA propaganda.

Feel free to provide sources on the cheesy nature of the moon. Feel free to provide any arguments that support it. Even if the moon photographs are obvious fakes, even if the trips to the moon were all a hoax (including robot trips) and even if the temperature estimates were incorrect you still haven't given the slightest proof in favor of the moon being made of cheese.

Your attempts to ridicule Holocaust Revisionism (rather than address their arguments) are more than pathetic.

[odeon]

Your pathetic attempts at hiding the cheesy truth have all been debunked by many well-known academics in the field using the latest scientific methods. Sad, really.

[IlluSionS667]

Your pathetic attempts at hiding the cheesy truth have all been debunked by many well-known academics in the field using the latest scientific methods.

Feel free to provide sources on the cheesy nature of the moon. Feel free to provide any arguments that support it. Even if the moon photographs are obvious fakes, even if the trips to the moon were all a hoax (including robot trips) and even if the temperature estimates were incorrect you still haven't given the slightest proof in favor of the moon being made of cheese.

Your attempts to ridicule Holocaust Revisionism (rather than address their arguments) are more than pathetic.

[IlluSionS667]

A proper debate impies that you actually respond to the previous arguments of your oponent. You seem to be absolutely incapable of this, so it seems.

[odeon]

[IlluSionS667]

A hell of an argument that is

[Nocturnalist!]

The Truth Behind The Gates Of Auschwitz  -- Part 1
David Cole - The Truth Behind The Gates Of Auschwitz 1 of 2

I've found myself with time to watch this first video presentation. I do intend to watch the others. Here's a few things that sprung to my mind on one viewing.

Some points the revisionist said seem good points on the face of it. However, they do not convince whole-heartedly... since I am admittedly highly skeptical of Revisionist history regarding the holocaust.

I believe he started by saying that Russian Propoganda is behind a lot of the current understanding of the holocaust, but later said that the Russians are more concerned with the plight of the Poles and others from the late Eastern Bloc at Auschwitz than the Jews. Yet are we not dealing with the Holocaust which is supposed to be the German attempt to wipe the Jews out of European existence... an attempted genocide.

The issue of the Zyklon B staining remaining in the de-lousing chambers and yet not in the Gas Chamber, on the face of it seems a good point. However, the undisputed evidence that the Gas-Camber was turned into an Air Raid shelter by the Germans in 1943 after its use as a gas chamber can suggest that during construction the building would have been cleaned as well as new walls put in and the ceiling vents removed. It is reasonable to assume the building would have been cleaned of the debris of its former use. So it is a good point so long as it is presumed that the use of the building didn't change during the war and, unfortunately for the point, the use DID change.

What the video maker considers a fraud in reconstructing the buildings to how they approximately were before the changing from Gas Chamber to Air Raid Shelter, most would consider to be Restoration... which takes place in many historical buildings. The Tour Guide can not be expected to know all the historical details and it is human nature to try and muckle through so as not to disappoint what she thought to be an interested Jewish tourist - yes she made a booboo, but those who were better qualified were perfectly open and gave good explaination... indeed seemed to bend over backwards for the interviewer.

Oh and regarding the de-licing chambers... I thought they were common knowledge, as also the use of Zyklon B to kill infestations. It was, after all, invented before the war as a pesticide, wasn't it?

Regarding the swimming pool. I have a question. Was the pool constructed while Auschwitz was a military barracks, or was it constructed for the purpose of the inmates when the site became a prison camp. It does indeed seem very surprising that the Germans would have constructed an item of luxury for it's professed enemies.

The piece also rests heavilly on the lack of documentary evidence for the holocaust (ignoring witness statements). However, a lack of documentary evidence for traditional history is ALSO a lack of documentary evidence for revisionist history and thus siting it is a fallacy of logic. A lot of documents were destroyed when Nazi Germany fell and as to the lack of coded transmissions detailing the activities of exterminating the Jews... why would such local activity need to be transmitted in coded transmissions through the airways, what purpose would that serve if the mechanisms were already in place and operating.

I think it is a given, since the estimated dead at Auschwitz fell from 4 million to 1.1 million, that Russian propoganda played a part in the figures being so high for this particular camp. However no evidence is presented by the Revisionist for his suggestion that the figure be lower still. No evidence or even argument whatsoever.

Lastly regarding the questioning of the tour guide. Of course she will falter when asked questions she is not used to answering. She is not a historian but a person employed to guide an average tourist around the site. I would imagine just as much faltering would happen if you asked a man in a Mickey Mouse costume at Disney World on the life of Walt Disney. The questioning was not fair because the interviewer was hiding his interests, so of course she would be ill-prepared. Not that she was given much screen time in the video any way. He said he had, was it 9 hours of footage with her... she seemed to have only seconds of screen time. Very limited clips of what she had to say.

So. All-in-all this first video can appear to deliver some good points on the face of it, but it is not in any way convincing to a thinking/questioning skeptic looking for weaknesses in its arguments as any skeptic would.

It is a worthwhile video to watch, because it does bring up some interesting points. However it could also mislead because of what it, itself leaves unsaid by its careful construction. If I am to be asked to think outside the box of the holocaust, then I will certainly seek to think outside the box of the revisionist. Rather like those who claim the moon landings never happened, on the face of it the arguments seem convincing, but under the surface, if interrogated, they are questionable. Which is after all, exactly what the Revisionists are saying about the Traditionalists... so its a fair point to make in return

[odeon]

A hell of an argument that is

On par with any of yours, fuckwit.

[TheoK]

Regarding the swimming pool. I have a question. Was the pool constructed while Auschwitz was a military barracks, or was it constructed for the purpose of the inmates when the site became a prison camp. It does indeed seem very surprising that the Germans would have constructed an item of luxury for it's professed enemies.

That's one good point. There were no military barracks in Auschwitz before 1939, since, as I pointed out before, Auschwitz was part of Poland until October 1939, when it was incorporated in Upper Silesia. It was just a small village with no military installations at all.

[TheoK]

The X marks Auschwitz on this map of the 1939 incorporated areas.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[IlluSionS667]

I've found myself with time to watch this first video presentation. I do intend to watch the others.

I'm happy to encounter at least someone with an open mind.

Some points the revisionist said seem good points on the face of it. However, they do not convince whole-heartedly... since I am admittedly highly skeptical of Revisionist history regarding the holocaust.

So was I in the beginning.

I believe he started by saying that Russian Propoganda is behind a lot of the current understanding of the holocaust, but later said that the Russians are more concerned with the plight of the Poles and others from the late Eastern Bloc at Auschwitz than the Jews. Yet are we not dealing with the Holocaust which is supposed to be the German attempt to wipe the Jews out of European existence... an attempted genocide.

The Holocaust myth orriginated in Polish and Russian propaganda and was later picked up by British, Americans and Jews. After the major war trials, it was pretty much ignored until ancient aliens and Holocaust revisionists picked it up during the '60s. Since then, the Jewish aspect of the Holocaust myth became more and more important as more and more ancient alien propaganda was published.

However, the undisputed evidence that the Gas-Camber was turned into an Air Raid shelter by the Germans in 1943 after its use as a gas chamber can suggest that during construction the building would have been cleaned as well as new walls put in and the ceiling vents removed.

How do you know that the air raid shelter had been anything but an air raid shelter before the Russians entered the camp?

The Tour Guide can not be expected to know all the historical details and it is human nature to try and muckle through so as not to disappoint what she thought to be an interested Jewish tourist

It is an obvious fraud when you tell any tourist the room is in its orriginal state when it is not.

Oh and regarding the de-licing chambers... I thought they were common knowledge, as also the use of Zyklon B to kill infestations. It was, after all, invented before the war as a pesticide, wasn't it?

It is far from common knowledge. Most people are not aware of the use of Zyklon B for delycing and are just told it was used for killing people.

Regarding the swimming pool. I have a question. Was the pool constructed while Auschwitz was a military barracks, or was it constructed for the purpose of the inmates when the site became a prison camp.

Was the Auschwitz complex a military barracks before it became a concentration camp? This is new for me. Please elaborate.

The piece also rests heavilly on the lack of documentary evidence for the holocaust (ignoring witness statements). However, a lack of documentary evidence for traditional history is ALSO a lack of documentary evidence for revisionist history and thus siting it is a fallacy of logic.

Actually, there is quite some evidence in favor of the Holocaust Revisionist version of history, which is mentioned in some of the other films and in the many books published on the topic. This film only deals with a tiny aspect of the issue.

I think it is a given, since the estimated dead at Auschwitz fell from 4 million to 1.1 million, that Russian propoganda played a part in the figures being so high for this particular camp. However no evidence is presented by the Revisionist for his suggestion that the figure be lower still. No evidence or even argument whatsoever.

Again, there are other sources that deal with this.

Lastly regarding the questioning of the tour guide. Of course she will falter when asked questions she is not used to answering. She is not a historian but a person employed to guide an average tourist around the site.

When I hire a tour guide, I espect him or her to know important things such as whether or not "gas chambers" are in their orriginal condition.

I would imagine just as much faltering would happen if you asked a man in a Mickey Mouse costume at Disney World on the life of Walt Disney.

A man in a Mickey Mouse costume at Disney World is supposed to entertain. A tour guide in a museum is supposed to inform. I"m not spending my money on a tour guide who doesn't know more about the museum than I already do.

So. All-in-all this first video can appear to deliver some good points on the face of it, but it is not in any way convincing to a thinking/questioning skeptic looking for weaknesses in its arguments as any skeptic would.

That's why videos like this one should be looked at as an introduction into Holocaust Revisionism only. For a more detailed insight, you should read articles or books.

It is a worthwhile video to watch, because it does bring up some interesting points. However it could also mislead because of what it, itself leaves unsaid by its careful construction. If I am to be asked to think outside the box of the holocaust, then I will certainly seek to think outside the box of the revisionist.[/quote]

I can only encourage you to continue your research. When I first watched that video, I was just as sceptical as you are now.