What Part Of The Word Genocide Do You Not Understand?
Today Jonnie Hargis, posting as "Goethe," reports on a happening in Los Angeles reported in the Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles.He's so obvious that if he were a cop, he'd go on a stakeout in a squad car...a.m.
LOL ... no doubt. Thanks to Sergey for his quick response.I have been looking for a spot to post this bit of weirdness, from Carlo's Cutlass Supreme:http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3713On Sobibor --"you can't interact with the "clean" people, it would be easy to believe they were being killed. Thus the death camp (totenlager) is just the clean side after delousing.""The Sobibor maps and models have a ridiculously small "death camp" (Totenlager.) It's not much bigger than a suburban back yard in the USA. The workers supposedly lived in this area also. But this small space makes perfect sense for a delousing operation. The Jews get their deloused clothes back, put them on, and leave at the train station which is a 2 minute walk away."Interesting theory, no?Yes, except for one issue. They are "deloused", which includes the removal of their clothes. Their clothes need delousing, too, no? (According to even revisionists, clothes take 24 hours to be deloused in chambers especially for this purpose). So what do these "clean Jews" do for 24 hours? And where do they stay, (He's already said that the area is very small) and what do they wear? If this were to be feasible, it might make sense to keep them on the "dirty" side for 24 hours, while their clothes are deloused, and then reunite them (after human delousing) with their cleaned articles prior to them leaving the camp.This, of course, ignores the fact that the Jews on the "dirty" side would have had to somehow get the clothes to the delousers, which would then return them to their owners, rather then having them sent, minus their owners, somewhere else, as evidence indicates.More fun:"[T]his situation makes perfect sense for a delousing operation: There never was anyone there in the first place. That's why none of them escaped and why no one knew who they were. Wow. So, there was a massive operation on the "dirty" side, but NO ONE to help the Jews after the delousing, or helping them with their clothes (or the supposed delousing operation of the clothes), on the clean side? Maybe they just used SS guards and little signs -- but one wonders why they'd need the Jews on the "dirty" side, then.But wait, a few posts later, our intrepid soul posts:"Yes, as Dahl mentions: 200-300 prisoners in camp 3.(Arad pg. 79) [...] There's about enough room for 6 people to live there."Wait, I thought that NO ONE was there. But, internal contradiction was never a revisionist strongpoint.(Note too, if there is only room for "6 people" to live there, where did the deloused "clean" transports stay while their clothes were processed?)There is more interesting stuff in that thread, but this was the main gist of the arguement.
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3773Hannover comments:Bradley Smith, welcome to the Forumon a poster named "Bradley".Um:Joined: 15 Oct 2006Posts: 1(this is his FIRST post, and he joined in the middle of last month?)For those unfamiliar, Bradley Smith is the controversial figure who FOUNDED the "Committe for Open Debate on the Holocaust", or CODOH. So, after amalgamating with the Cesspit, he only joined the "forum" 2 weeks ago? (We won't delve into the irony of the "CODOH" forum being one of the most censored on the net).Ok, back from that tangent. "Bradley" had asked:I'm not really interested in anti-Israeli, anti-American images, but those related directly to the Holocaust story.(this was about Iran's Holocaust cartoon contest)Hannover posts some of the cartoons.The second is a concrete wall being erected in front of the Dome of the Rock by a bulldozer with a Star on it, the wall having a picture of Auschwitz on it.The eighth and final is an Israeli soldier on a tombstone with the words "Holocaust" on it.That's just the "anti-israeli" ones that "Bradley" DIDN'T ask for. Amazing that revisionists like Hannover can't give proper answers even to FELLOW revisionists.The mind boggles
Another gem from Carlo's Cutlass Supreme:http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3774"There would have been guns, knives, cameras galore. Yet nothing in the story follows from this."(He's talking about Treblinka here, and talking about inmates who had to sift through luggage, and how they got "first dibs" at whatever was there)If memory serves, most of the arrivals at the AR camps would have been from Poland. I'm assuming by "guns" he's talking about handguns, as keeping a rifle or shotgun in your suitcase would be obvious.Having said that, I'd like to see CCS present some evidence that many household in Poland would have handguns or cameras at this time. I would think that both of these items would be expensive, and probably would be possessed by only a very small minority of Poles.So, in the least we would require proof that there were "guns and cameras ... galore" in the luggage.Next, CCS:"Can you believe that on the subject of "lenses" he never mentions cameras? LOL. He might then have to explain why there are no good photos of the camp."He's refering to Rajzman's account in Donat. First, I'm not sure why "lenses" would mean he should mention cameras; he talks about scientific equipment in the quote. Second, even if there were cameras, the inmates would need film, opportunity to take "good pictures", ability to operate the camera, then a way to smuggle the film out of the camp and get the pictures developed. More CCS:"Inmates who had taken money from the luggage. The guards didn't care, because they knew they'd get it anyway at some point. But that principle doesn't work for handguns, knives in the luggage.One more reason why this whole thing is a giant lie."Now, how do the guards know they are going to "get it anyway" (the money)at some point?Remember, now, that CCS hasn't actually offered ANY evidence for his "theory" that there would be guns in the luggage. But, based on his conjecture that the population should have been armed, we have to accept his speculation that the "whole thing" is a lie.
I'm not sure if Sergey is getting the comments, but coward Hargis has bumped a thread that CCS started where they "debunk" a Holocaust Controversy blog entry.My favourite entry is a Hargis/Hannover post where he says "Sergey Romanov is a member of The Famous Nutjobs". Nice Ad Hom, but will the brave Hargis come over to Rodoh to "debate" and face Sergey man to man?His ironic "bump" posting: "Sergey and Andrew Mathis share the same thoughts. Yet Mathis claims he's going to debate someone on gas chambers, LOL."LOL indeed. When are YOU going to debate someone, coward? Remember, your run a forum called "committee for OPEN DEBATE on the Holocaust", which is one of the most severly censored forums on the internet. Debate my butt.
I asked the guys at HC to start this thread due to the nonsense of CCS, but lately Hargis (posting as Hannover) is losing his grip on reality.http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3787Closely following revisionist mantra, Hargis re-hashes Berg's old "Producer Gas" article, which tells us that the Nazis should have used CO gas from this method, rather then engine exhaust. (Been debunked, but I digress)Now, Breker responds to this by asking why nerve gasses weren't used. Neil Ludd then responds by stating that it was cheaper to use on site produced CO, rather then exotic nerve gasses.Bergmann chimes in with "Combat gases are difficult to remove after a gassing. Tney cling to the ground level and would endanger the whole surroundings during the de-gassing procedure." (after this sentence, he has a long quote. I'm not sure if this is his signature, or just an off topic rant on "gas chambers" in general)Now Hargis chimes in:"As does Zyklon-B." (quoting Bergmann, just the nerve gas sentence)Later:"If carbon monoxide was so ideal, then why is it that the insecticide Zyklon-B was supposedly the agent of choice at Auschwitz and other labor sites?"Neil Ludd responds: "CO is not used for fumigation except possibly for rodents under certain circumstances."Finally, the Hargis topper:"Given the ridiculous story, German nerve gasses would have much more efficient than what is claimed.I think Breker is right, I think Berg is right."Um, Sorry Jonnie, Berg is saying CO, and Breker is saying Nerve agents. So, they can't both be right, can they? (don't forget Jonnie admits that nerve agents are difficult to remove, trying to say that Zyklon-B is too -- despite Zyklon-B being used as a pesticide) But Jonnie is so desperate to "destroy" the arguments, he's not above contradicting himself and making himself look like an idiot, as long as whoever he supports as "right" is against the Holocaust.
Post a Comment