OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 01, 2014, 10:07:16 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ADL concerned about possible Vatican/SSPX Reconciliation  (Read 7755 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« on: September 19, 2011, 05:59:10 PM »

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/6117_62.htm


ADL Urges Vatican To Ensure Anti-Jewish Sect Accepts Teachings Of Vatican II Before They Are Welcomed Back


New York, NY, September 16, 2011 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jews and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church...       

 

Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
Vlad
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Orthodox, Greek Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 405



« Reply #1 on: September 19, 2011, 06:17:30 PM »

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/6117_62.htm


ADL Urges Vatican To Ensure Anti-Jewish Sect Accepts Teachings Of Vatican II Before They Are Welcomed Back


New York, NY, September 16, 2011 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jews and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church...       

 



They dont teach anti judaism they teach Catholicism. I went to their Churches for years and the only "anti jew" thing I heard was prayers for jewish conversion which is not anti jewish but rather the most charitable thing a Christian can do. These guys need to get their yalmakas out of a twist. I hope the SSPX sticks to teaching real Catholicism.
Logged
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2011, 06:40:32 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,744


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2011, 06:55:01 PM »

I listened to a couple of that guy's online speeches. They will make your skin crawl.

Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,159


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2011, 08:39:20 PM »

I listened to a couple of that guy's online speeches. They will make your skin crawl.


He should be censured by the Church until he stops his anti-semitism.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2011, 10:53:58 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

Well, I would say "denies" might be a tad too strong a word.

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."

Dumb statement, and insensitive, no doubt, and he was punished for it by the Society. There are bishops out there promoting heresy with impunity. Perhaps Rome can work on that scandal more rather than fuss over this silly bishop.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2011, 10:55:13 PM »

I listened to a couple of that guy's online speeches. They will make your skin crawl.


He should be censured by the Church until he stops his anti-semitism.

I highly doubt he will go along if the SSPX takes the deal the Holy See just offered them last week.
Logged
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2011, 11:32:43 PM »

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/6117_62.htm


ADL Urges Vatican To Ensure Anti-Jewish Sect Accepts Teachings Of Vatican II Before They Are Welcomed Back


New York, NY, September 16, 2011 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jews and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church...       

 


Firstly, the ADL is bunch of whiners who will accuse everything under the sun of being "anti-Semitic". This is another organization whose criticism I would take as a compliment.

Secondly, imagine if the prayers said something truly anti-Semitic. If they specifically prayed for the Jews not to convert to Catholicism, then the ADL would complain on the basis that such exclusion is anti-Semitic. Either way, they are going to criticize you.

Finally, the idea that Holocaust "denial" is inherently anti-Semitic, is one of the dumbest ideas I know of. Trying to explain the logic behind it, is like trying to explain how 2 +2 = 5. The fact that people are waking up to the truth (and not buying the crap that the media feeds them) behind this absurd horror story has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.
Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2011, 11:37:34 PM »

Screw the ADL
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2011, 11:51:52 PM »

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/6117_62.htm


ADL Urges Vatican To Ensure Anti-Jewish Sect Accepts Teachings Of Vatican II Before They Are Welcomed Back


New York, NY, September 16, 2011 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jews and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church...       

 


Firstly, the ADL is bunch of whiners who will accuse everything under the sun of being "anti-Semitic". This is another organization whose criticism I would take as a compliment.

Secondly, imagine if the prayers said something truly anti-Semitic. If they specifically prayed for the Jews not to convert to Catholicism, then the ADL would complain on the basis that such exclusion is anti-Semitic. Either way, they are going to criticize you.

Finally, the idea that Holocaust "denial" is inherently anti-Semitic, is one of the dumbest ideas I know of. Trying to explain the logic behind it, is like trying to explain how 2 +2 = 5. The fact that people are waking up to the truth (and not buying the crap that the media feeds them) behind this absurd horror story has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

Sometimes people end up being right for the worst of all possible reasons.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #10 on: September 20, 2011, 12:27:31 AM »

Finally, the idea that Holocaust "denial" is inherently anti-Semitic, is one of the dumbest ideas I know of. Trying to explain the logic behind it, is like trying to explain how 2 +2 = 5. The fact that people are waking up to the truth (and not buying the crap that the media feeds them) behind this absurd horror story has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

Really? we're going there?   Roll Eyes  Angry 
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #11 on: September 20, 2011, 12:48:01 AM »

Finally, the idea that Holocaust "denial" is inherently anti-Semitic, is one of the dumbest ideas I know of. Trying to explain the logic behind it, is like trying to explain how 2 +2 = 5. The fact that people are waking up to the truth (and not buying the crap that the media feeds them) behind this absurd horror story has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

Really? we're going there?   Roll Eyes  Angry 
Only if you so desire. I am simply sick of the lack of logic applied to such matters. It's bad enough that groups like the ADL push this agenda, but even worse that people buy into it without the slightest bit of critical thinking.

The accusations leveled against Bp. Williamson are incredibly unfair. What logical connection does Holocaust revisionism have with "anti-Semitism"? Is David Cole (a Jew) anti-Semitic? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXKHw0EZrqM
Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
WetCatechumen
Roman Catholic
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic Christianity
Jurisdiction: Latin Rite - Archdiocese of Santa Fe; Ruthenian Byzantine Catholic Eparchy of Phoenix
Posts: 297



« Reply #12 on: September 20, 2011, 01:25:34 AM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
Logged

"And because they have nothing better to do, they take cushion and chairs to Rome. And while the Pope is saying liturgy, they go, 'Oh, oh, oh, filioque!' And the Pope say, 'Filioque? That-uh sound nice! I think I divide-uh the Church over it!'" - Comrade Real Presence
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #13 on: September 20, 2011, 02:06:44 AM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?
Logged
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968


Ungrateful Biped


« Reply #14 on: September 20, 2011, 02:18:18 AM »

all of us are Jews, truly.

Huh?
Logged

North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #15 on: September 20, 2011, 02:20:17 AM »

I guess some folks here are referring to the fact that Jews have intermarried so extensively that most of us wear Jewish jeans. Smiley

Yes, their genes are everywhere.

For example, my husband has duputrens contracture which is apparently of Jewish origin, but is found extensively in Scandanavian countries.

« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 02:22:36 AM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968


Ungrateful Biped


« Reply #16 on: September 20, 2011, 02:25:22 AM »

I guess some folks here are referring to the fact that Jews have intermarried so extensively that most of us wear Jewish jeans. Smiley

Well if Jordache is Jewish, then I guess they're right!

For example, my husband has duputrens contracture which is apparently of Jewish origin, but is found extensively in Scandanavian countries.
 
Methinks that might be a spurious connection.

So the idea is that Jews, who make up a very small percentage of the world's population, many of whom have not and do not intermarry, have somehow bred with everyone?

« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 02:32:48 AM by Cognomen » Logged

North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #17 on: September 20, 2011, 05:25:50 AM »

I guess some folks here are referring to the fact that Jews have intermarried so extensively that most of us wear Jewish jeans. Smiley

Well if Jordache is Jewish, then I guess they're right!

For example, my husband has duputrens contracture which is apparently of Jewish origin, but is found extensively in Scandanavian countries.
 
Methinks that might be a spurious connection.

So the idea is that Jews, who make up a very small percentage of the world's population, many of whom have not and do not intermarry, have somehow bred with everyone?



And truly one of the tightest inbred of folks, the Ashkenazi, who are some of the biggest users of genetic counseling? I doubt it.

The weird thing about the Ashkenazi ain't their insistence on intermarriage or "converting" to marry, but their incredible success at doing so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_studies_on_Jews

We ain't all Jews. 
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #18 on: September 20, 2011, 05:33:27 AM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.

If that number is 3,642,431, so be it. No Jew or weird holocaust nerd fetishist should care.

May their memory rest eternal. I saw how being one of the few survivors in my family weighed on my Grandfather his entire life.

Not dying was no walk in the park either for many.

 
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 05:33:43 AM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #19 on: September 20, 2011, 02:21:35 PM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.
1.  What evidence do we have even for the 4 million number? What if we find out that the number is really more like 1 million?
2.  What of the countless Catholics, Poles, and Gypsies who were interned in the concentration camps? Why is this portrayed as just a Jewish thing?
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #20 on: September 20, 2011, 02:49:00 PM »

All I need to know about ADL, I learned from Brother Nathanael
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,383



« Reply #21 on: September 20, 2011, 02:49:52 PM »

I thought Stewart had already settled the calculus of suffering debate...?
Logged

"Change is the process of becoming more like who we are."
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #22 on: September 20, 2011, 02:57:38 PM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.
1.  What evidence do we have even for the 4 million number? What if we find out that the number is really more like 1 million?
2.  What of the countless Catholics, Poles, and Gypsies who were interned in the concentration camps? Why is this portrayed as just a Jewish thing?

Jews (of which I am one) portray this as "a Jewish thing" (without, btw, minimizing for one second the horrific murder of countless Catholics, Poles, Gypsies, etc--many at the hand of Stalin and not a few at the hands of so-called "Christians") because there was a public and concerted effort on the part of the Nazis to completely eliminate the Jewish "race", amongst other so-called "undesirables".  Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C. or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?

I might be mistaken but I believe that the number of 6 million was arrived at by comparing the pre-war Jewish population with the post-war Jewish population.  Now, how *those* figures were arrived at, I couldn't tell you.  (Here's a quote from Answers.com: the figure of 6 million first became public in an affidavit by Wilhelm Hoettl, dated 25 November 1945 and presented to the Nuremberg Tribunal in evidence. (Hoettl was a close associate of Eichmann).  (Here's more from him: "Approximately 4,000,000 Jews had been killed in the various concentration camps, while an additional 2,000,000 met death in other ways, the major part of whom were shot by operational squads of the Security Police during the campaign against Russia." gleaned from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_H%C3%B6ttl
which references this: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/12-14-45.asp, which I admit to not having read yet.)

So, perhaps I *am* mistaken, after all.  Embarrassed


In answer to your question, "What if we find out the number is really more like 1 million?", let me respond in true stereotypical Jewish fashion with a question of my own--Why are there so many people who seem to like to reduce or minimize the number of Jews murdered?  And, would it make it somehow less significant or horrific if the number was 1 million?  Would that act as some kind of salve to someone's conscience?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #23 on: September 20, 2011, 03:10:58 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

Well, I would say "denies" might be a tad too strong a word.

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."

Dumb statement, and insensitive, no doubt, and he was punished for it by the Society. There are bishops out there promoting heresy with impunity. Perhaps Rome can work on that scandal more rather than fuss over this silly bishop.
A bishop who asks questions of the official history we've received regarding the Holocaust I would think is hardly anywhere near as much of a threat as a bishop who preaches that Christ didn't rise from the dead.
Logged
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,534



« Reply #24 on: September 20, 2011, 03:14:09 PM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.
1.  What evidence do we have even for the 4 million number? What if we find out that the number is really more like 1 million?
2.  What of the countless Catholics, Poles, and Gypsies who were interned in the concentration camps? Why is this portrayed as just a Jewish thing?

Even if it were "more like" one million, it would still have been one million too many. How can we possibly try to quantify human suffering? It is a venture which is fundamentally de-humanizing.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 03:17:28 PM by Cavaradossi » Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #25 on: September 20, 2011, 03:22:19 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

Well, I would say "denies" might be a tad too strong a word.

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."

Dumb statement, and insensitive, no doubt, and he was punished for it by the Society. There are bishops out there promoting heresy with impunity. Perhaps Rome can work on that scandal more rather than fuss over this silly bishop.
A bishop who asks questions of the official history we've received regarding the Holocaust I would think is hardly anywhere near as much of a threat as a bishop who preaches that Christ didn't rise from the dead.

Amen. Brother.

However, an insensitive Bishop as well as an outright heretical one will both be a stumbling block to many.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 03:22:45 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #26 on: September 20, 2011, 03:24:35 PM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.
1.  What evidence do we have even for the 4 million number? What if we find out that the number is really more like 1 million?
2.  What of the countless Catholics, Poles, and Gypsies who were interned in the concentration camps? Why is this portrayed as just a Jewish thing?

Even if it were "more like" one million, it would still have been one million too many. How can we possibly try to quantify human suffering? It is a venture which is fundamentally de-humanizing.

Indeed!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #27 on: September 20, 2011, 03:28:15 PM »

The ADL is a piece of crap. The V2 RCC has changed their teaching in regard to Judaism. There was nothing wrong with their original teaching. Ecumenism is dumb! Teach the truth, stop changing things because it upsets people.
Logged

Forgive my sins.
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #28 on: September 20, 2011, 03:28:15 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

If someone denied anything else (genocide commited against Armenians, or what people did to Native Americans, Aboriginals of Australia, etc.) people wouldn't care. Hell, what if I denied that the Irish were persecuted by the Brits...no one would make as big of a deal. Why? The ADL is a tad racist itself. I just think it's fishy how they put the holocaust in the spot light more than anything else. I'm not a holocaust denier, although I think the numbers are out of whack, but that doesn't mean we should call for the heads of people who have reason to not accept the exact story the winners of the war make.

Bigotry to you all who attack someone so harshly over that.
Logged

Forgive my sins.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #29 on: September 20, 2011, 03:38:06 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

Well, I would say "denies" might be a tad too strong a word.

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."

Dumb statement, and insensitive, no doubt, and he was punished for it by the Society. There are bishops out there promoting heresy with impunity. Perhaps Rome can work on that scandal more rather than fuss over this silly bishop.
A bishop who asks questions of the official history we've received regarding the Holocaust I would think is hardly anywhere near as much of a threat as a bishop who preaches that Christ didn't rise from the dead.

Amen. Brother.

However, an insensitive Bishop as well as an outright heretical one will both be a stumbling block to many.
It's insensitive to question the established history?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #30 on: September 20, 2011, 03:40:55 PM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.
1.  What evidence do we have even for the 4 million number? What if we find out that the number is really more like 1 million?
2.  What of the countless Catholics, Poles, and Gypsies who were interned in the concentration camps? Why is this portrayed as just a Jewish thing?

Even if it were "more like" one million, it would still have been one million too many. How can we possibly try to quantify human suffering? It is a venture which is fundamentally de-humanizing.
That's not the point of my first question, though. If the original numbers were wrong, how do we know we can trust the current numbers?
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #31 on: September 20, 2011, 03:42:02 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

Well, I would say "denies" might be a tad too strong a word.

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."

Dumb statement, and insensitive, no doubt, and he was punished for it by the Society. There are bishops out there promoting heresy with impunity. Perhaps Rome can work on that scandal more rather than fuss over this silly bishop.
A bishop who asks questions of the official history we've received regarding the Holocaust I would think is hardly anywhere near as much of a threat as a bishop who preaches that Christ didn't rise from the dead.

Is there such a bishop?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #32 on: September 20, 2011, 03:43:21 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

Well, I would say "denies" might be a tad too strong a word.

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."

Dumb statement, and insensitive, no doubt, and he was punished for it by the Society. There are bishops out there promoting heresy with impunity. Perhaps Rome can work on that scandal more rather than fuss over this silly bishop.
A bishop who asks questions of the official history we've received regarding the Holocaust I would think is hardly anywhere near as much of a threat as a bishop who preaches that Christ didn't rise from the dead.

Is there such a bishop?
I hope not. I'm just using a hypothetical comparison to make a rhetorical point.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #33 on: September 20, 2011, 03:49:25 PM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.
1.  What evidence do we have even for the 4 million number? What if we find out that the number is really more like 1 million?
2.  What of the countless Catholics, Poles, and Gypsies who were interned in the concentration camps? Why is this portrayed as just a Jewish thing?

Even if it were "more like" one million, it would still have been one million too many. How can we possibly try to quantify human suffering? It is a venture which is fundamentally de-humanizing.
That's not the point of my first question, though. If the original numbers were wrong, how do we know we can trust the current numbers?

That may not have been the point, but that's kind of how it came across.  As for whether or not the original numbers are right or wrong, see my post above.  The Nazis, were, as you know, scrupulous, almost obsessive record keepers.  And, even if your point about trusting past numbers to be able to trust "the current numbers" (not sure what you're  referring to here, but never mind), was clear, to participate in this kind of counting, is, as Cavaradossi wrote, very much fundamentally de-humanizing.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #34 on: September 20, 2011, 03:59:29 PM »

For what its worth, Auschwitz did lower its "death toll" from 4 million to 1.5 million in 1988. Compare :



What happened to those 2.5 million deaths? Why has this number not been subtracted from 6 million figure?

Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #35 on: September 20, 2011, 04:00:04 PM »

I think they're more concerned about the Bishop who denies the Holocaust.

Well, I would say "denies" might be a tad too strong a word.

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."

Dumb statement, and insensitive, no doubt, and he was punished for it by the Society. There are bishops out there promoting heresy with impunity. Perhaps Rome can work on that scandal more rather than fuss over this silly bishop.
A bishop who asks questions of the official history we've received regarding the Holocaust I would think is hardly anywhere near as much of a threat as a bishop who preaches that Christ didn't rise from the dead.

Amen. Brother.

However, an insensitive Bishop as well as an outright heretical one will both be a stumbling block to many.
It's insensitive to question the established history?

Of course not. It is wise to question history as the "Powers That Be" continually attempt to recreate history in their own liking.

However, a bishop who fails to watch his tongue can pose problem to everyone around him.

If that bishop could introduce PROOF to substantiate his claims, that would be another matter.
I have heard that he claims that few actually died in gas chambers, but that most who died under Hitler, including millions of Christians, died of starvation, disease, being crushed in cattle cars, and other forms of execution, such as the firing squad.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 04:29:35 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #36 on: September 20, 2011, 04:02:50 PM »

For what its worth, Auschwitz did lower its "death toll" from 4 million to 1.5 million in 1988. Compare :



What happened to those 2.5 million deaths? Why has this number not been subtracted from 6 million figure?



See post #22 above.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #37 on: September 20, 2011, 04:19:21 PM »

For what its worth, Auschwitz did lower its "death toll" from 4 million to 1.5 million in 1988. Compare :



What happened to those 2.5 million deaths? Why has this number not been subtracted from 6 million figure?

See post #22 above.
I am not sure appealing to the recorded population totals are the root of their estimates. Strictly following the evidence :

Pre-WWII :

World Almanac, 1938, pg. 510 -- world Jewish population = 15,748,091

American Jewish Committee Bureau of the Synagogue Council, 1939 -- 15,600,000

Post-WWII :

World Almanac USA, 1947, pg. 748: World Jewish Population -- 15,690,000

Statistical Handbook of Council of Churches USA 1951 -- 15,300,000
Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #38 on: September 20, 2011, 04:22:19 PM »

For what its worth, Auschwitz did lower its "death toll" from 4 million to 1.5 million in 1988. Compare :



What happened to those 2.5 million deaths? Why has this number not been subtracted from 6 million figure?

See post #22 above.
I am not sure appealing to the recorded population totals are the root of their estimates. Strictly following the evidence :

Pre-WWII :

World Almanac, 1938, pg. 510 -- world Jewish population = 15,748,091

American Jewish Committee Bureau of the Synagogue Council, 1939 -- 15,600,000

Post-WWII :

World Almanac USA, 1947, pg. 748: World Jewish Population -- 15,690,000

Statistical Handbook of Council of Churches USA 1951 -- 15,300,000

I did say I might be mistaken.  Here's the part of post #22 I was referring to:  (Here's a quote from Answers.com: the figure of 6 million first became public in an affidavit by Wilhelm Hoettl, dated 25 November 1945 and presented to the Nuremberg Tribunal in evidence. (Hoettl was a close associate of Eichmann).  (Here's more from him: "Approximately 4,000,000 Jews had been killed in the various concentration camps, while an additional 2,000,000 met death in other ways, the major part of whom were shot by operational squads of the Security Police during the campaign against Russia." gleaned from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_H%C3%B6ttl
which references this: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/12-14-45.asp, which I admit to not having read yet.)
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 04:34:16 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #39 on: September 20, 2011, 04:33:27 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2011, 04:43:01 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just for a little perspective...as we discuss how many millions of people were murdered in various ghastly ways, please let us not forget that every single one of those millions was a human being, created by the very God you and I worship in His own image, and beloved and precious to Him, if not to those who committed the atrocities, supported those who did, turned a blind eye, and those who deny it ever happened.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 04:49:14 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #41 on: September 20, 2011, 04:45:14 PM »

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/6117_62.htm


ADL Urges Vatican To Ensure Anti-Jewish Sect Accepts Teachings Of Vatican II Before They Are Welcomed Back


New York, NY, September 16, 2011 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jews and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church...       

 


Firstly, the ADL is bunch of whiners who will accuse everything under the sun of being "anti-Semitic". This is another organization whose criticism I would take as a compliment.

Secondly, imagine if the prayers said something truly anti-Semitic. If they specifically prayed for the Jews not to convert to Catholicism, then the ADL would complain on the basis that such exclusion is anti-Semitic. Either way, they are going to criticize you.

Finally, the idea that Holocaust "denial" is inherently anti-Semitic, is one of the dumbest ideas I know of. Trying to explain the logic behind it, is like trying to explain how 2 +2 = 5. The fact that people are waking up to the truth (and not buying the crap that the media feeds them) behind this absurd horror story has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

Seems like it does Tongue
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #42 on: September 20, 2011, 04:48:18 PM »

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/6117_62.htm


ADL Urges Vatican To Ensure Anti-Jewish Sect Accepts Teachings Of Vatican II Before They Are Welcomed Back


New York, NY, September 16, 2011 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jews and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church...       

 


Firstly, the ADL is bunch of whiners who will accuse everything under the sun of being "anti-Semitic". This is another organization whose criticism I would take as a compliment.

Secondly, imagine if the prayers said something truly anti-Semitic. If they specifically prayed for the Jews not to convert to Catholicism, then the ADL would complain on the basis that such exclusion is anti-Semitic. Either way, they are going to criticize you.

Finally, the idea that Holocaust "denial" is inherently anti-Semitic, is one of the dumbest ideas I know of. Trying to explain the logic behind it, is like trying to explain how 2 +2 = 5. The fact that people are waking up to the truth (and not buying the crap that the media feeds them) behind this absurd horror story has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

Seems like it does Tongue
How so?
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #43 on: September 20, 2011, 04:49:26 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #44 on: September 20, 2011, 04:50:17 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good point.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #45 on: September 20, 2011, 04:53:09 PM »

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/6117_62.htm


ADL Urges Vatican To Ensure Anti-Jewish Sect Accepts Teachings Of Vatican II Before They Are Welcomed Back


New York, NY, September 16, 2011 … The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jews and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church...       

 


Firstly, the ADL is bunch of whiners who will accuse everything under the sun of being "anti-Semitic". This is another organization whose criticism I would take as a compliment.

Secondly, imagine if the prayers said something truly anti-Semitic. If they specifically prayed for the Jews not to convert to Catholicism, then the ADL would complain on the basis that such exclusion is anti-Semitic. Either way, they are going to criticize you.

Finally, the idea that Holocaust "denial" is inherently anti-Semitic, is one of the dumbest ideas I know of. Trying to explain the logic behind it, is like trying to explain how 2 +2 = 5. The fact that people are waking up to the truth (and not buying the crap that the media feeds them) behind this absurd horror story has nothing to do with anti-Semitism.

Seems like it does Tongue
How so?

People who take up Holocaust denial often appear to also be Anti-Semitic.  If you are willing to massage very well established historical facts, your motivation becomes suspect. 
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #46 on: September 20, 2011, 04:53:37 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

This is true, but what's your point?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #47 on: September 20, 2011, 04:54:16 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #48 on: September 20, 2011, 04:54:48 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.
What evidence do you have of this?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #49 on: September 20, 2011, 04:55:53 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.
What evidence do we have of this?
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #50 on: September 20, 2011, 04:56:08 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

This is true, but what's your point?

That a great many people were murdered by other means besides the Gas Chamber.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #51 on: September 20, 2011, 04:56:27 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.

Is anyone forgetting that?  The Catholic Church has canonized some of them--probably not nearly enough!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #52 on: September 20, 2011, 04:57:46 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

This is true, but what's your point?

That a great many people were murdered by other means besides the Gas Chamber.

I believe that's already been well established.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #53 on: September 20, 2011, 04:59:18 PM »

A Jewish friend of mine once told me that a quarter of the world was Jewish before the Holocaust.

I think that Abraham's seed has now touched all men - all of us are Jews, truly. All of us have been united to the House of Israel and the Son of Man who was God in the flesh.

But the idea that several hundred million died in the Holocaust? I think my friend did not understand the whole situation.


But I've always heard 4 million as the number, more or less. Anything else is inconsistent with the vast majority of the testimony I've heard.
And where did you hear this testimony?

The whole calculus of "suffering" and evil is sorta sick from the ground up.

Are 4 million better than 6? I dunno. Seems wrong. I ain't no utilitarian or at least try to avoid the Anglo-American pull in that direction.

For historians and the like, these are issues to be sorted out and there should be no magic 6 million number. And I don't see how this gives or robs Jews of "genocide cred".

They like many others were systematically sought out, deprived of property, family, basic humane treatment, and then life on an enormous scale. This cannot be denied.
1.  What evidence do we have even for the 4 million number? What if we find out that the number is really more like 1 million?
2.  What of the countless Catholics, Poles, and Gypsies who were interned in the concentration camps? Why is this portrayed as just a Jewish thing?

Even if it were "more like" one million, it would still have been one million too many. How can we possibly try to quantify human suffering? It is a venture which is fundamentally de-humanizing.
That's not the point of my first question, though. If the original numbers were wrong, how do we know we can trust the current numbers?

That may not have been the point, but that's kind of how it came across.  As for whether or not the original numbers are right or wrong, see my post above.  The Nazis, were, as you know, scrupulous, almost obsessive record keepers.  And, even if your point about trusting past numbers to be able to trust "the current numbers" (not sure what you're  referring to here, but never mind), was clear, to participate in this kind of counting, is, as Cavaradossi wrote, very much fundamentally de-humanizing.

Being the resident expert of all things Germanic and having to have to sit through more discussions on this subject than I care, I can say the Germans were nutz about record keeping.

We also forget they farmed out some of their extermination to less industrious folks like the French.

Again, it certainly was substantial.

But it wasn't just a Jewish thing. Again being the resident expert in all things German this is much more complicated subject.

Also, I have an enormous amount of family gone because of the holocaust and saw how it affected those who "got out" or "survived".

Still the ideology behind National Socialism while anti-Jewish certainly was against many people. The first to go were the mentally retarded (insert PC term), severely mentally ill, etc.

During this beginning of human extermination it should be noted the RC portion of Germany didn't go along and went to great effort to stop the "disappearances" of such undesirables from hospitals / asylums. Too bad the RCC didn't maintain this stance and strength longer.

This is not RCC muck-raking since many of the Orthodox countries were just glad to send their Roma and Jews packing.

A complicated mess. And when reduced to a numbers games outside academia it is disgusting frankly.

EDIT: lol @ Warning - while you were typing 8 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
 
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #54 on: September 20, 2011, 04:59:37 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.
What evidence do we have of this?

Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  Or read any of the vast number of books available that treat the subject of the Holocaust?  I can't help but wonder why you even ask that.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 05:03:42 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #55 on: September 20, 2011, 05:01:48 PM »

PeteR,

I thought we were in agreement at first about reducing this to some numbers game on an silly internet board is ridiculous.

Guess it ain't likely we are going to agree on much.

Save, again you are right about the ADL for many of the wrong reasons.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #56 on: September 20, 2011, 05:05:16 PM »

In Bishop Williamson's defense, should the ADL's main problem with him be his denial of the holocaust (NOTE: I'm not a holocaust denier, but I do have questions of the official history we've been taught to believe.)...

Since one of the pieces of evidence often cited in defense of the official record is eyewitness accounts, I think this article on the Troy Davis execution in Georgia (scheduled for tomorrow) quite appropriate:

Eyewitness Testimony Often Lies, an op-ed by Laura Wexler of Yale University

Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #57 on: September 20, 2011, 05:06:18 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.
What evidence do we have of this?

Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  Or read any of the vast number of books available that treat the subject of the Holocaust?  I can't help but wonder why you even ask that.
Simple. I ask questions.
Logged
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #58 on: September 20, 2011, 05:07:18 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.

Is anyone forgetting that?  The Catholic Church has canonized some of them--probably not nearly enough!


Exactly. Father Maximillian Kolbe is one such Catholic Saint who starved to death along with a lot of other Christians and Jews.

During WWII, thousands of Serbian Orthodox Christians were rounded up with the blessings of the Gestapo, placed in cattle cars, and then pushed off the cliffs at Medjugore. A Catholic author, Davies, wrote that he thought that the so-called Virgin of Medjugore was actually a ghost of one of the Orthodox Christians.

Millions of Russians were killed by the Germans during WWII. There are some martyred Orthodox Christians who were canonized, one of whom was a Russian nun who harbored Jewish children in her orphanage.

And do not forget the Greeks who sacrificed their lives to save Jews. Even Mt. Athos harbored Jews (including women).
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 05:13:20 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #59 on: September 20, 2011, 05:11:35 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29



« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 05:12:44 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #60 on: September 20, 2011, 05:12:29 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.
What evidence do we have of this?

Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  Or read any of the vast number of books available that treat the subject of the Holocaust?  I can't help but wonder why you even ask that.
Simple. I ask questions.

That's an answer that isn't. 

It is good to ask questions.  It is also good to question what we question, and to answer questions that arise from the questions we ask.  So...  What were you trying to get at by asking that particular one?  And have you ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  Or read any of the vast number of books available that treat the subject of the Holocaust?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #61 on: September 20, 2011, 05:13:00 PM »

Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  I can't help but wonder why you even ask that.

J (is ok to shorten this?),

The thing that kills me about the Holocaust Museum is that it is in D.C. USA.

WTF? Ever traveled Germany nowadays? You can't turn around without running into a Holocaust memorial. The place where this should a point of interest is making very clear about their history.

Here is where I am WITH Gebre.

Long before we build a "holocaust" museum (remember that was the War where we think we were undisputedly the good guys), we should have built a museum to American Slave Trade that did build Washington DC. Or the genocide of the peoples here before Europeans showed up by the Americans.

I live in a city with the Underground Railroad Freedom Center:

http://www.freedomcenter.org/

Cause Cincinnati was the end of the South and beginning of the North and played an incredible role in the escape of many slaves to the North or Canada, some thought it a great idea to celebrate that and point out America's history in the slave trade.

The county folks (whites) fought tooth and nail against the city (blacks and whites) for it to be built. It's in the past . . . We have to move past all this race stuff . . . etc. And we are talking about a museum celebrating the brave black and white souls who risked their lives to do good.

No one goes. But they will pay $30 a head to see sharks swimming in a tank 1/4 mile away.

IOW. Hat's off to the Germans with their Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung, we in the US should follow suit.

The sooner, the better.

And boy are race relations ******* in this city.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #62 on: September 20, 2011, 05:15:15 PM »

PeteR,

I thought we were in agreement at first about reducing this to some numbers game on an silly internet board is ridiculous.
You may like to think we agreed on this, but I never said any such thing.

Save, again you are right about the ADL for many of the wrong reasons.
I don't know that I've ever told you what I think of the ADL or explained my reasons for the way I think.


I also have to think you're still playing with my username to keep from calling me what I want to be called. I do not want to be called PeteR; I want to be called Peter. Please show some respect for my patron saint by calling me only those variants of my username that I permit you to call me.
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #63 on: September 20, 2011, 05:17:55 PM »

"I believe that the historical evidence is strongly against, is hugely against six million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler...I think that 200,000 to 300,000 Jews perished in Nazi concentration camps, but none of them in gas chambers."
So, what do you think of this statement from Bp. Williamson? He doesn't deny that Jews died in the concentration camps, which itself is an atrocity. All he denies is that they were executed by the millions in the gas chambers.

Good catch!  Hoettl himself says that 2 million were killed "in other ways..." and I can't see that he said that 4 million were gassed.  Bp. Williamson just could be correct in his statement, as far as the numbers are concerned.  The fact remains, however, that approx. 6 million Jews were murdered, and that it was a deliberate policy of Adolf Hitler to rid Europe, if not the entire planet, of all Jews.  You know, "The Final Solution".  Sounds pretty deliberate to me.

Just shooting people proved expensive and cumbersome so they eventually switched to assembly line type extermination camps. They were actually developing ammunition shortages.

Starvation was also time consuming. Freezing to death took less time. Both were inhumane.
We need to remember that millions of Christians died along side the Jews.
It was genocide.

Is anyone forgetting that?  The Catholic Church has canonized some of them--probably not nearly enough!


Exactly. Father Maximillian Kolbe is one such Catholic Saint who starved to death along with a lot of other Christians and Jews.

During WWII, thousands of Serbian Orthodox Christians were rounded up with the blessings of the Gestapo, placed in cattle cars, and then pushed off the cliffs at Medjugore. A Catholic author, Davies, wrote that he thought that the so-called Virgin of Medjugore was actually a ghost of one of the Orthodox Christians.

Millions of Russians were killed by the Germans during WWII. There are some martyred Orthodox Christians who were canonized. one of whom was a Russian nun who harbored Jewish children in her orphanage.

And do not forget the Greeks who sacrificed their lives to save Jews. Even Mt. Athos harbored Jews (including women).

St. Maximillian is very special to me and has been from the moment I first heard of him.  An instant "connection" for lack of a better word.

As for forgetting the Serbs, Greeks, Russians, Germans, Croats, Italians, the Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.---it is not I that is forgetting them.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #64 on: September 20, 2011, 05:23:25 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment? This isn't a matter of high Christology here.

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 05:29:16 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #65 on: September 20, 2011, 05:26:54 PM »

Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  I can't help but wonder why you even ask that.

J (is ok to shorten this?),

The thing that kills me about the Holocaust Museum is that it is in D.C. USA.

WTF? Ever traveled Germany nowadays? You can't turn around without running into a Holocaust memorial. The place where this should a point of interest is making very clear about their history.

Here is where I am WITH Gebre.

Long before we build a "holocaust" museum (remember that was the War where we think we were undisputedly the good guys), we should have built a museum to American Slave Trade that did build Washington DC. Or the genocide of the peoples here before Europeans showed up by the Americans.

I live in a city with the Underground Railroad Freedom Center:

http://www.freedomcenter.org/

Cause Cincinnati was the end of the South and beginning of the North and played an incredible role in the escape of many slaves to the North or Canada, some thought it a great idea to celebrate that and point out America's history in the slave trade.

The county folks (whites) fought tooth and nail against the city (blacks and whites) for it to be built. It's in the past . . . We have to move past all this race stuff . . . etc. And we are talking about a museum celebrating the brave black and white souls who risked their lives to do good.

No one goes. But they will pay $30 a head to see sharks swimming in a tank 1/4 mile away.

IOW. Hat's off to the Germans with their Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung, we in the US should follow suit.

The sooner, the better.

And boy are race relations ******* in this city.

"J" is fine Wink.

I don't understand why the Holocaust Museum is in D.C., either, but it is.  Fact of the matter is, too, that although I live only 40+ miles away, I've never been to it.  After living in Israel for 5 years, 4 of them on a kibbutz specifically built by survivors as a living memorial to the holocaust, having served in the I.D.F., and having been to Yad Vashem, I cannot bring myself to go to the museum in D.C.  I can only handle so much heartbreak.

I understand, I believe, your point about slavery, the Underground Railroad, etc.  Perhaps that is something for another thread, as this one, even though we've somewhat digressed, is about, well...about the title of the thread.  Do not misunderstand me though, I am not trying to minimize what you've said.

(By the sound of it, you're probably old enough to know just how fickle people can be.)
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #66 on: September 20, 2011, 05:29:49 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment?

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

If you have an "alternative" history that can be independently verified by numerous reliable and respected sources, where is it?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #67 on: September 20, 2011, 05:35:57 PM »

Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  I can't help but wonder why you even ask that.

J (is ok to shorten this?),

The thing that kills me about the Holocaust Museum is that it is in D.C. USA.

WTF? Ever traveled Germany nowadays? You can't turn around without running into a Holocaust memorial. The place where this should a point of interest is making very clear about their history.

Here is where I am WITH Gebre.

Long before we build a "holocaust" museum (remember that was the War where we think we were undisputedly the good guys), we should have built a museum to American Slave Trade that did build Washington DC. Or the genocide of the peoples here before Europeans showed up by the Americans.

I live in a city with the Underground Railroad Freedom Center:

http://www.freedomcenter.org/

Cause Cincinnati was the end of the South and beginning of the North and played an incredible role in the escape of many slaves to the North or Canada, some thought it a great idea to celebrate that and point out America's history in the slave trade.

The county folks (whites) fought tooth and nail against the city (blacks and whites) for it to be built. It's in the past . . . We have to move past all this race stuff . . . etc. And we are talking about a museum celebrating the brave black and white souls who risked their lives to do good.

No one goes. But they will pay $30 a head to see sharks swimming in a tank 1/4 mile away.

IOW. Hat's off to the Germans with their Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung, we in the US should follow suit.

The sooner, the better.

And boy are race relations ******* in this city.

"J" is fine Wink.

I don't understand why the Holocaust Museum is in D.C., either, but it is.  Fact of the matter is, too, that although I live only 40+ miles away, I've never been to it.  After living in Israel for 5 years, 4 of them on a kibbutz specifically built by survivors as a living memorial to the holocaust, having served in the I.D.F., and having been to Yad Vashem, I cannot bring myself to go to the museum in D.C.  I can only handle so much heartbreak.

I understand, I believe, your point about slavery, the Underground Railroad, etc.  Perhaps that is something for another thread, as this one, even though we've somewhat digressed, is about, well...about the title of the thread.  Do not misunderstand me though, I am not trying to minimize what you've said.

(By the sound of it, you're probably old enough to know just how fickle people can be.)

I was actually trying to connect with a like mind. I don't get into the holocaust Pron myself. The Jewish Museum in Berlin had interesting potential as it traces the history of the Jewish peoples relations with the German peoples.

But it comes off as the new museum "edutainment" way of presentation.

And frankly the whole Libeskind addition is ungodly terrible in its architecture. And not in a good way. Pure schlock.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 05:36:45 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #68 on: September 20, 2011, 05:36:38 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment? This isn't a matter of high Christology here.

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

A sign of a good moderator. Thanks.

Back on topic: I hope the Vatican pays no attention to the ADL, but pays more attention to heretics and incompetent/criminal Catholic priests and bishops, giving them this message: Be truly Orthodox Catholic or find another job.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #69 on: September 20, 2011, 05:45:24 PM »

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

Periphery?

They are outta the loop. I call BS on the ADL. But the folks here are just out to lunch. Take in their posts on this subject on the board in total.

You ain't defending anyone against some Grand Inquisition.

You are just posing questions which are dealt with in a scholarly manner elsewhere.

They are cut and paste questions I could bring to any discussion. The fact that no reputable information is contained in your posts to add to the counter argument or the others' is telling.

To the OP, I think the ADL can shove it and are detrimental to free speech and inquiry.

But to this tangent come the main thread, no one is offering any arguments other than something like: But how can we REALLY know?

And I know you like to name fallacies. What is the name of the one when a informed opinion changes, say from 6 millions Jews killed to 4.5 million, and one uses that to question if we can trust them at all, since they were wrong in the first place?

Go tell Newton and company that.

Or Xeno, I guess we can't cross a room after all.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #70 on: September 20, 2011, 05:51:48 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment?

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

If you have an "alternative" history that can be independently verified by numerous reliable and respected sources, where is it?
The task of asking questions doesn't require the submission of an alternative point of view. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, so I bear no burden of proof to submit any evidence. I'm just trying to get you to prove your point of view.
Logged
akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #71 on: September 20, 2011, 05:53:46 PM »

Or Xeno, I guess we can't cross a room after all.

Cool points for this.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #72 on: September 20, 2011, 06:07:42 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment?

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

If you have an "alternative" history that can be independently verified by numerous reliable and respected sources, where is it?
The task of asking questions doesn't require the submission of an alternative point of view. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, so I bear no burden of proof to submit any evidence. I'm just trying to get you to prove your point of view.

The point of the internet ain't for everyone who basically says that sky is blue to have to prove it.

Typically those who say the sky is red are under the gun.

If you would like, I could go through get at least a couple thousand academic peer reviewed papers for you to read.

But do any of us seriously want to do that? No.

Leave the Agora to those who know how to use it.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #73 on: September 20, 2011, 06:58:37 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment?

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

If you have an "alternative" history that can be independently verified by numerous reliable and respected sources, where is it?
The task of asking questions doesn't require the submission of an alternative point of view. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, so I bear no burden of proof to submit any evidence. I'm just trying to get you to prove your point of view.

The point of the internet ain't for everyone who basically says that sky is blue to have to prove it.

Typically those who say the sky is red are under the gun.

If you would like, I could go through get at least a couple thousand academic peer reviewed papers for you to read.

But do any of us seriously want to do that? No.

Leave the Agora to those who know how to use it.
Ah, the one who prides himself on sniffing out BS and calling us on it refuses to play the game when someone does the same to him. Can't stand the taste of your own medicine, can you? Wink
Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #74 on: September 20, 2011, 07:00:15 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment?

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

If you have an "alternative" history that can be independently verified by numerous reliable and respected sources, where is it?
The task of asking questions doesn't require the submission of an alternative point of view. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, so I bear no burden of proof to submit any evidence. I'm just trying to get you to prove your point of view.

The point of the internet ain't for everyone who basically says that sky is blue to have to prove it.

Typically those who say the sky is red are under the gun.

If you would like, I could go through get at least a couple thousand academic peer reviewed papers for you to read.

But do any of us seriously want to do that? No.

Leave the Agora to those who know how to use it.
Ah, the one who prides himself on sniffing out BS and calling us on it refuses to play the game when someone does the same to him. Can't stand the taste of your own medicine, can you? Wink

Again with not reading the posts.

Hoi polloi have made their decision. I stick with them.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #75 on: September 20, 2011, 07:08:15 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

The History Department at Duke University, responding to a CODOH ad, unanimously adopted and published a statement noting: "That historians are constantly engaged in historical revision is certainly correct; however, what historians do is very different from this advertisement. Historical revision of major events. . . is not concerned with the actuality of these events; rather, it concerns their historical interpretation - their causes and consequences generally. There is no debate among historians about the actuality of the Holocaust... there can be no doubt that the Nazi state systematically put to death millions of Jews, Gypsies, political radicals and other people."


Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."

Another frequent claim of Holocaust "revisionists" concerns what they describe as the lack of objective documentation proving the facts of the Holocaust, and the reliance by scholars on biased and poorly collected testimonies of survivors. However, the Germans themselves left no shortage of documentation and testimony to these events, and no serious scholar has relied solely on survivor testimony as the conclusive word on Holocaust history. Lucy Dawidowicz, in the preface to her authoritative work, The War Against the Jews 1933-1945, wrote, "The German documents captured by the Allied armies at the war's end have provided an incomparable historical record, which, with regard to volume and accessibility, has been unique in the annals of scholarship.... The National Archives and the American Historical Association jointly have published 67 volumes of Guides to German Records Microfilmed at Alexandria, VA. For my work I have limited myself mainly to published German documents."26 The author then proceeds to list 303 published sources - excluding periodicals -documenting the conclusions of her research. Among these sources are the writings of recognizable Nazi policy makers such as Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, Rudolf Hoess and Alfred Rosenberg.
Similarly, Raul Hilberg in his three-volume edition of The Destruction of the European Jews, wrote, "Between 1933 and 1945 the public offices and corporate entities of Nazi Germany generated a large volume of correspondence. Some of these documents were destroyed in Allied bombings, and many more were systematically burned in the course of retreats or in anticipation of surrender. Nevertheless, the accumulated paper work of the German bureaucracy was vast enough to survive in significant quantities, and even sensitive folders remained."26
It is thus largely from these primary sources that the history of the Holocaust has been compiled. A new factor in this process is the sudden availability of countless records from the former Soviet Union, many of which had been overlooked or suppressed since their capture at war's end by the Red Army. Needless to say, the modification of specific details in this history is certain to continue for a number of years to come, considering the vastness and complexity of the events which comprise the Holocaust. However, it is equally certain that these modifications will only confirm the Holocaust's enormity, rather than - as the "revisionists" would -call it into question.
Another frequent "revisionist" assertion calls into question the generally accepted estimates of Jewish victims of the Holocaust. In attempting to portray the deaths of millions of Jews as an exaggeration or a fabrication, Holocaust deniers wildly manipulate reference works, almanac statistics, geopolitical data, bedrock historical facts and other sources of information and reportage.
For example, "revisionists" commonly cite various almanac or atlas figures - typically compiled before comprehensive accounts on the Holocaust were available - that appear to indicate that the worldwide Jewish population before and after World War II remained essentially stable, thereby "proving" that 6 million Jews could not have died during this period.

The widely cited "6 million" figure is derived from the initial 1945 Nuremberg trial estimate of 5.7 million deaths; subsequent censuses, statistical analyses, and other demographic studies of European Jewry have consistently demonstrated the essential accuracy of this first tally.27 After nearly 50 years of study, historians agree that approximately 6 million Jews perished during the course of the Nazi genocide.28
In The War Against the Jews, Lucy Dawidowicz offers a country-by-country accounting of Jewish deaths.29
IOW, toe the party line of what the establishment wants you to believe, or be branded a heretic. I've seen it before in the sciences, and now I see it in the study of history. Where's the academic freedom in this? Where's the freedom to employ critical thinking and discernment?

Personally, I don't know anymore what to believe on the question of the holocaust, but I will no longer stand by and watch those on the periphery of this issue get squelched merely because they have the temerity to question the official record.

If you have an "alternative" history that can be independently verified by numerous reliable and respected sources, where is it?
The task of asking questions doesn't require the submission of an alternative point of view. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, so I bear no burden of proof to submit any evidence. I'm just trying to get you to prove your point of view.

The point of the internet ain't for everyone who basically says that sky is blue to have to prove it.

Typically those who say the sky is red are under the gun.

If you would like, I could go through get at least a couple thousand academic peer reviewed papers for you to read.

But do any of us seriously want to do that? No.

Leave the Agora to those who know how to use it.
Ah, the one who prides himself on sniffing out BS and calling us on it refuses to play the game when someone does the same to him. Can't stand the taste of your own medicine, can you? Wink

Again with not reading the posts.

Hoi polloi have made their decision. I stick with them.
Well, please forgive me if I decide to break from the herd. (I never was much of a herd animal.)
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 07:09:21 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Ionnis
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 1,069



« Reply #76 on: September 20, 2011, 07:18:00 PM »

Too alike. :-)
Logged

"If you cannot find Christ in the beggar at the church door, you will not find Him in the chalice.”  -The Divine John Chrysostom

“Till we can become divine, we must be content to be human, lest in our hurry for change we sink to something lower.” -Anthony Trollope
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #77 on: September 20, 2011, 07:20:37 PM »

Too alike. :-)
Well, I suppose when it comes to challenging others to employ critical thinking skills, orthonorm and I are quite a bit alike. I just try not to worship ANY sacred cows. Grin
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 07:20:48 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #78 on: September 20, 2011, 07:22:40 PM »

Too alike. :-)
Well, I suppose when it comes to challenging others to employ critical thinking skills, orthonorm and I are quite a bit alike. I just try not to worship ANY sacred cows. Grin

Please, your questions are empty. Mine are loaded.

Keeping reading and you will learn. But you might be too old to my Alcibiades anymore.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #79 on: September 20, 2011, 07:24:48 PM »

Well, please forgive me if I decide to break from the herd. (I never was much of a herd animal.)

Seem to be following most of the herd here . . . oh forget it.

Might as well give you something to brilliantly question.

A Jew died at least once.

Now ask how I know.

lulz.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #80 on: September 20, 2011, 07:36:53 PM »

Well, please forgive me if I decide to break from the herd. (I never was much of a herd animal.)

Seem to be following most of the herd here . . . oh forget it.

Might as well give you something to brilliantly question.

A Jew died at least once.

Now ask how I know.

lulz.

+1
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #81 on: September 20, 2011, 07:58:20 PM »

Returning to the topic as addressed by the OP.

I can see why the ADL is concerned about SSPX /Vatican reconciliation.

Whereas the Vatican made changes in the Holy Week Services, the SSPX has not done so, but continues to use the prayers for the "perfidious Jews."

Has the Vatican insisted that the SSPX edit their Holy Week books to remove these prayers that offend Jews?

(Is there a thread or should we start a thread to address the Orthodox prayers for the Jews or references to the Jews that concern the death of Christ? Should Jews and/or the ADL determine how we Orthodox Christians pray or conduct our Holy Week services?)



« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 08:01:13 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #82 on: September 20, 2011, 08:30:50 PM »

Ever been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?  Or Yad Vashem in Jerusalem?  I can't help but wonder why you even ask that.

J (is ok to shorten this?),

The thing that kills me about the Holocaust Museum is that it is in D.C. USA.

WTF? Ever traveled Germany nowadays? You can't turn around without running into a Holocaust memorial. The place where this should a point of interest is making very clear about their history.

Here is where I am WITH Gebre.

Long before we build a "holocaust" museum (remember that was the War where we think we were undisputedly the good guys), we should have built a museum to American Slave Trade that did build Washington DC. Or the genocide of the peoples here before Europeans showed up by the Americans.

I live in a city with the Underground Railroad Freedom Center:

http://www.freedomcenter.org/

Cause Cincinnati was the end of the South and beginning of the North and played an incredible role in the escape of many slaves to the North or Canada, some thought it a great idea to celebrate that and point out America's history in the slave trade.

The county folks (whites) fought tooth and nail against the city (blacks and whites) for it to be built. It's in the past . . . We have to move past all this race stuff . . . etc. And we are talking about a museum celebrating the brave black and white souls who risked their lives to do good.

No one goes. But they will pay $30 a head to see sharks swimming in a tank 1/4 mile away.

IOW. Hat's off to the Germans with their Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung, we in the US should follow suit.

The sooner, the better.

And boy are race relations ******* in this city.


Millions of dollars were spent building a New Museum and visitors center at Gettysburg. In fact monuments and museums to the events of the Civil War are everywhere around here. And yes there are also museums focused just on Slavery.  You guys need to get out more.

Oh and the American Indian Museum is just around the block from the Holocaust museum.. ditto comment above

Oh and the MLK Monument is being dedicated in a week or two. Hotels are filling up to overflow..double ditto
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #83 on: September 20, 2011, 08:38:45 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.   

Questions?
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #84 on: September 20, 2011, 08:45:11 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 08:53:54 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #85 on: September 20, 2011, 09:45:59 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

Oh okay..Well..crack open a book by someone who knows what they are talking about and then take a shot.

All I can tell you is that the issue is settled among scholars with a reputation to protect backed by voluminous documentation. But feel free to beleive whatever floats your boat.  
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 09:46:42 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #86 on: September 20, 2011, 09:48:03 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

You are quoting a pretty biased source.
Logged

Forgive my sins.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,744


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #87 on: September 20, 2011, 09:50:08 PM »

This thread has gotten weird.

 Tongue

You have the right to your opinions. I have the right to mine.

Mine is, this thread is weird.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #88 on: September 20, 2011, 09:59:44 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

I'm just curious why you would rely on internet chatboards to educate you about history.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,030


« Reply #89 on: September 20, 2011, 10:35:11 PM »

Real Pope, real talk.

(or)

I'll just leave that here...

Seriously, the Vatican is freaking weak towards the Jews, Muslims, and all the other Christ-deniers. I should hope that if Benedict is serious he won't demand that the SPPX bend to the complaints of the ADL. Prayers for the conversion of the Jews is not wrong. What the heck else would they ever expect their relations with any Christian church to center around? How much we all like bagels? (I do love me a good bagel...)

And all this holocaust business...I'm pretty sure that we were around for nearly 2000 years before Hitler was even born, so that's a non-issue. See how it just gets people riled up? People who can otherwise get along fine...?  Undecided I think that certain agitators and interest groups like the ADL feed off that. Don't fall for it.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2011, 10:35:40 PM by dzheremi » Logged

stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #90 on: September 20, 2011, 11:21:27 PM »

Oh okay..Well..crack open a book by someone who knows what they are talking about and then take a shot.
Have you ever cracked open the book by Butz? Is there a refutation of this particular book online?
http://vho.org/dl/ENG/Hoax.pdf
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #91 on: September 21, 2011, 01:11:58 AM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

I'm just curious why you would rely on internet chatboards to educate you about history.
Haven't you figured it out already? I'm not doing this to educate myself about history. Kiss
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #92 on: September 21, 2011, 01:16:39 AM »

Oh okay..Well..crack open a book by someone who knows what they are talking about and then take a shot.
Have you ever cracked open the book by Butz? Is there a refutation of this particular book online?
http://vho.org/dl/ENG/Hoax.pdf
Haven't you figured it out already? By questioning Marc's sacred cow, you automatically show that you don't know what you're talking about. Wink It doesn't matter how much credibility you had beforehand.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #93 on: September 21, 2011, 01:20:59 AM »

This thread has gotten weird.

 Tongue

You have the right to your opinions. I have the right to mine.

Mine is, this thread is weird.
And yet, the discussion is on topic, for one of the main issues the ADL has with the SSPX is apparently the Holocaust-denying statements of one Bishop Williamson.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 01:21:14 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #94 on: September 21, 2011, 01:26:52 AM »

I'm just curious why you would rely on internet chatboards to educate you about history.

It offers other opinions. It's called broadening your horizon.
Logged

Forgive my sins.
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #95 on: September 21, 2011, 01:26:53 AM »

Real Pope, real talk.

(or)

I'll just leave that here...

Seriously, the Vatican is freaking weak towards the Jews, Muslims, and all the other Christ-deniers. I should hope that if Benedict is serious he won't demand that the SPPX bend to the complaints of the ADL. Prayers for the conversion of the Jews is not wrong. What the heck else would they ever expect their relations with any Christian church to center around? How much we all like bagels? (I do love me a good bagel...)

I love you...
Logged

Forgive my sins.
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #96 on: September 21, 2011, 01:26:53 AM »

Oh okay..Well..crack open a book by someone who knows what they are talking about and then take a shot.

What do you define as "someone who knows what they are talking about"? Someone who agrees with your views?

That's how you people define it. Be honest.
Logged

Forgive my sins.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #97 on: September 21, 2011, 03:19:06 AM »

Oh okay..Well..crack open a book by someone who knows what they are talking about and then take a shot.
Have you ever cracked open the book by Butz? Is there a refutation of this particular book online?
http://vho.org/dl/ENG/Hoax.pdf
Haven't you figured it out already? By questioning Marc's sacred cow, you automatically show that you don't know what you're talking about. Wink It doesn't matter how much credibility you had beforehand.
I am basically looking for a detailed refutation of the Butz book. This book is in the library here, but it is in a caged section where access is restricted and you must sign in and leave your ID with the clerk. However, now the book has appeared online with free access to anyone. I am not saying that Butz is right, but I would like to crack open a book or article that gives a refutation step by step of this particular book written from an engineering standpoint. 
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #98 on: September 21, 2011, 06:46:04 AM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

I'm just curious why you would rely on internet chatboards to educate you about history.
Haven't you figured it out already? I'm not doing this to educate myself about history. Kiss

Oh I know that. It's more about projecting yourself as the Socratic gadfly of the internetz. But, as someone else mentioned, there are better places and better people for that sort of thing.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #99 on: September 21, 2011, 06:46:40 AM »

I'm just curious why you would rely on internet chatboards to educate you about history.

It offers other opinions. It's called broadening your horizon.

Ha, if you come to an internet forum to broaden your horizon you need to get out more.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Cavaradossi
法網恢恢,疏而不漏
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Chalcedonian Automaton Serial No. 5Aj4bx9
Jurisdiction: Chalcedonian Automaton Factory 5
Posts: 1,534



« Reply #100 on: September 21, 2011, 08:39:56 AM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Logged

Be comforted, and have faith, O Israel, for your God is infinitely simple and one, composed of no parts.
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #101 on: September 21, 2011, 12:37:21 PM »

Ha, if you come to an internet forum to broaden your horizon you need to get out more.

Proof?
Logged

Forgive my sins.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #102 on: September 21, 2011, 01:48:26 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.
Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #103 on: September 21, 2011, 02:04:27 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #104 on: September 21, 2011, 02:36:23 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.
Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #105 on: September 21, 2011, 03:02:23 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

So you are a philosophical skeptic in the true sense and thus not an Orthodox Christian?

How do you prove all that stuff? What truth claim can you possibly utter given the litany of your questions above?

Those questions you raise are constantly being asked within academia by experts in their fields in lieu of a long winding road of world-historical events that have brought us to the point where we tend to allot credence to certain groups of people who went they primarily agree on something, we accept their judgement.

Have you lived in academia? I've actually seen fist fights break out at an English Symposium and that was before the liquor was poured. It ain't like you have a fleet of rubber stamping folks out there OKing the same research over and over.

The internet "scholar" takes a blip of a disagreement out of a journal or starts asking "hard" questions starting from nothing.

Lotsa Jews died. We agree, I think. I don't tend to read marc's posts cause he is another person who selectively applies critical thought to certain subjects. I read his first few posts and he didn't seem to be going all Zionist (which I reject), so I ignored that part of the debate.

But you are placing yourself in the philosophical skeptical corner. Which means you pretty much are unable to make any statement regarding "truth claims", even the fact that they ought to be questioned.

This ain't sophistry here. Some folks really have held to this belief.

We now know creation is the product of "evolution" in the general sense, well those of us who are not nuts, that is the consensus of the scientific community. The experts. How that all works out gets argued within that community. The presence of those arguments or the changes in our understanding of things doesn't discount understanding altogether.

Who are the people examining that historical record? The historians. Are we all to learn and study everything for ourselves? Even then we could never be sure of anything to any degree. Should I learn pharmacy while I am at it?

Some folks in academia are unjustly painted as kooks, holocaust deniers ain't them.

I do think they should be allowed to hold those views (unlike they can in France and Germany for example) without being legally prosecuted.

But again, we've taken human ugliness and complication and reduced to some bloodless questions like:

How do you know?
How do you know they know?
etc.

If you would like to open up a thread on epistemology in general have at it. But to take a stance close to philosophical skepticism in this thread really make zero sense.

And I am finished with cute and clever remarks. For this thread at least.

And finished at least for now.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Online Online

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,159


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #106 on: September 21, 2011, 03:03:45 PM »

This can also be seen as an appeal to authority, because historians are viewed as authoritative in matters pertaining to history. It's not actually a problem to appeal to an authority in an argument if the authority is legitimate. It doesn't absolutley prove a position but it certainly supports the view. Now it would be fallacious to argue that a certain historical reality is true because an English teacher said so. That is an illegitimate appeal to authority.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #107 on: September 21, 2011, 03:23:10 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?), and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?  I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.

By the way, if we're only talking about those who perished in the gas chambers themselves, as opposed to by other means, I think that's already been addressed a little earlier in this thread.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #108 on: September 21, 2011, 03:44:13 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

You are quoting a pretty biased source.

 

People with a keen interest in a topic are the ones who are going to take the time and effort to make a thorough case. 

What you should take note of is that they reference totally objective expert sources, such as:

"Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."   

Also, for those unfamiliar with the topic the article provided some very basic information. For example, a couple of people here thought the evidence for the Holocaust was based purely on hearsay from survivors. The historical record is far more reliable than just that. German documentation was extensive, as is their habit with all things they do. There is also corroborating documentation from the Soviets as well. So now those folks know better if they thought the Holocaust was based on flimsy personal testimonies..... We are all here to learn.   
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #109 on: September 21, 2011, 03:53:36 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

So you are a philosophical skeptic in the true sense and thus not an Orthodox Christian?
I don't know where you get that idea. I just believe that certain truth claims need to be challenged.

How do you prove all that stuff? What truth claim can you possibly utter given the litany of your questions above?
Please don't make such crass generalizations from what little I've said about my participation here.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #110 on: September 21, 2011, 03:57:07 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

You are quoting a pretty biased source.

 

People with a keen interest in a topic are the ones who are going to take the time and effort to make a thorough case. 

What you should take note of is that they reference totally objective expert sources, such as:

"Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."   

Also, for those unfamiliar with the topic the article provided some very basic information. For example, a couple of people here thought the evidence for the Holocaust was based purely on hearsay from survivors. The historical record is far more reliable than just that. German documentation was extensive, as is their habit with all things they do. There is also corroborating documentation from the Soviets as well. So now those folks know better if they thought the Holocaust was based on flimsy personal testimonies..... We are all here to learn.   
You've trotted out that appeal to consensus before. Do you have any other arguments you can offer us?
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #111 on: September 21, 2011, 04:06:05 PM »

Orthonorm wrote:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true.

There is a rhetorical trick that people with very weak or outlandish arguments often use. They appeal to Absolute Truth as the standard. Yes indeed, the entirety of the Academic Community could be wrong. It's possible. The Earth "Could be" flat. Scientology could be the True Religion... It "Could be".  

But that is not the Standard reasonable people go by. The Standard is evidence beyond any reasonable doubt as to  be able to persuade an ordinarily prudent and objective person.

Here is a true statement. It is extraordinarily unlikely that the Holocaust deniers are correct.  

Why is that? It is because the entire community of  highly credentialed Historians and their organizations have studied the topic in depth and have concluded  that Holocaust Denial is a form of "academic fraud".  In addition, this is not an obscure topic. The Holocaust is a major event in World History and a fairly recent event. In other words, it is not difficult for scholars to study it in depth and to draw final conclusions that have held up under rigorous scrutiny.

The Holocaust has been studied in depth by reliable scholars at great length. Their conclusions have held up over time under the scrutiny of their peers. The new information that has come along ( Such as the release of Soviet documents) has only strengthen that case, not weakened it.

The book is closed on the basic facts and numbers of the Holocaust. Find another hobby.    
« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 04:17:52 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #112 on: September 21, 2011, 04:11:24 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

You are quoting a pretty biased source.

 

People with a keen interest in a topic are the ones who are going to take the time and effort to make a thorough case.  

What you should take note of is that they reference totally objective expert sources, such as:

"Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."  

Also, for those unfamiliar with the topic the article provided some very basic information. For example, a couple of people here thought the evidence for the Holocaust was based purely on hearsay from survivors. The historical record is far more reliable than just that. German documentation was extensive, as is their habit with all things they do. There is also corroborating documentation from the Soviets as well. So now those folks know better if they thought the Holocaust was based on flimsy personal testimonies..... We are all here to learn.    
You've trotted out that appeal to consensus before. Do you have any other arguments you can offer us?

Peter--

1.  Have you been to Yad Vashem?

2.  Have you been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C.?

3.  Have you read The War Against the Jews: 1933-1945 by Lucy S. Dawidowicz or anything related to it?

4.  Have you read this: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/12-14-45.asp ?

5.  With reference to the "information" you've referred to in an earlier post, what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?), and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?

6.  What exactly have you read or studied about the Holocaust?

7.  Why should anyone answer *your* questions without some reciprocity from you?

« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 04:16:09 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #113 on: September 21, 2011, 04:14:57 PM »

Here you go. I have culled out a few of the most pertinent statements to answer questions here about evidence for the existence and size of the Holocaust but it would be best to read the whole article. Here is the link:  

 http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html

You are quoting a pretty biased source.

 

People with a keen interest in a topic are the ones who are going to take the time and effort to make a thorough case.  

What you should take note of is that they reference totally objective expert sources, such as:

"Perhaps most significantly, in December 1991, the governing council of the American Historical Association (AHA), the nation's largest and oldest professional organization for historians, unanimously approved a statement condemning the Holocaust-denial movement, stating, "No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place." The council's action came in response to a petition circulated among members calling for an official statement against Holocaust-denial propaganda; the petition had been signed by more than 300 members attending the organization's annual conference. Moreover, in 1994, the AHA reaffirmed its position in a press release which stated that "the Association will not provide a forum for views that are, at best, a form of academic fraud."  

Also, for those unfamiliar with the topic the article provided some very basic information. For example, a couple of people here thought the evidence for the Holocaust was based purely on hearsay from survivors. The historical record is far more reliable than just that. German documentation was extensive, as is their habit with all things they do. There is also corroborating documentation from the Soviets as well. So now those folks know better if they thought the Holocaust was based on flimsy personal testimonies..... We are all here to learn.    
You've trotted out that appeal to consensus before. Do you have any other arguments you can offer us?

Nope..that's about it. The overwhelming consensus among scholars and historians and their professional organizations is that Holocaust Denial amounts to Academic Fraud. I find that persuasive and pretty darn final.

 If you think that's flimsy evidence then that's totally your call.

  
« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 04:45:14 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #114 on: September 21, 2011, 04:21:15 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

  I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #115 on: September 21, 2011, 04:31:21 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box. Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand. The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" . Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.

 
« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 04:37:44 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #116 on: September 21, 2011, 04:44:05 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

  I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

So....you've seen 1 internet video (unfortunately the computer I work on here is unable to access videos) and that's thrown everything (whatever *that* is) you've learned about the Holocaust previously into doubt?  Oy vey.  So...because it's caused you to doubt what you think you previously "knew", that certainly implies giving it credence in enough measure to overshadow your prior knowledge.  So, more credence?  And you never answered why you give it credence.  I can make up things and present them in a totally "rational" manner, as if they were God's truth, and they'd still be wrong.  I wonder if you'd believe me  Grin?

And you haven't gotten any better at all in answering others' questions, by the way.

Oh, and by the way, it seems to me somewhat disingenuous at the very least, to try to pin others down about their beliefs and the sources of their knowledge while being yourself as vague as possible about your own. You seem more than happy to ignore the weight of evidence that is out there in the world (you know, all that "consensus" stuff) for you to investigate yourself if you were willing to be intellectually honest with yourself and others, as you demand of others.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #117 on: September 21, 2011, 04:51:38 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #118 on: September 21, 2011, 05:02:04 PM »

And you haven't gotten any better at all in answering others' questions, by the way.

Oh, and by the way, it seems to me somewhat disingenuous at the very least, to try to pin others down about their beliefs and the sources of their knowledge while being yourself as vague as possible about your own.
No, I'm actually trying to be consistent. I question other persons' truth claims because I don't like dogmatism. Why, then, would I substitute my own dogmatism for someone else's?

You seem more than happy to ignore the weight of evidence that is out there in the world (you know, all that "consensus" stuff) for you to investigate yourself if you were willing to be intellectually honest with yourself and others, as you demand of others.
Seriously, what "weight of evidence" is there on this thread? If I were truly to investigate the truth claims made on this thread--BTW, you have no idea what I do away from this forum, so your perception that I'm all too happy to ignore the evidence and refuse to do my own research may in fact be way off base--do you honestly think I'd conduct my research here?
Logged
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #119 on: September 21, 2011, 05:15:25 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?

Peter,

A fraud is someone who uses deceit, trickery, or outright lies to advance their theory or position.  One who doesn't toe the party line is not, per se, a fraud.

When there is overwhelming abundance of evidence gathered by numerous independent sources to create a consensus,  refusing to adhere to that consensus doesn't make one a fraud.  It just makes one look, well, blind or silly perhaps, or at worst, intransigent and/or stupid.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #120 on: September 21, 2011, 05:23:34 PM »

And you haven't gotten any better at all in answering others' questions, by the way.

Oh, and by the way, it seems to me somewhat disingenuous at the very least, to try to pin others down about their beliefs and the sources of their knowledge while being yourself as vague as possible about your own.
No, I'm actually trying to be consistent. I question other persons' truth claims because I don't like dogmatism. Why, then, would I substitute my own dogmatism for someone else's?

You seem more than happy to ignore the weight of evidence that is out there in the world (you know, all that "consensus" stuff) for you to investigate yourself if you were willing to be intellectually honest with yourself and others, as you demand of others.
Seriously, what "weight of evidence" is there on this thread? If I were truly to investigate the truth claims made on this thread--BTW, you have no idea what I do away from this forum, so your perception that I'm all too happy to ignore the evidence and refuse to do my own research may in fact be way off base--do you honestly think I'd conduct my research here?

Ha!  Consistency is good.  Unless, of course, it becomes dogmatic  Grin.

The "weight of evidence" consists in the plethora of scholarly, academic, and legal works about the Holocaust that are available to any inquiring member of the public, both on the internet and in libraries, on amazon.com, and any number of bookstores.  No one, I believe, is talking about a weight of evidence peculiar to this thread, and no one, least of all me, would expect you to conduct serious research about the Holocaust on an Orthodox internet discussion board, of all places.  Just suggesting that you *do* some serious, or even some relatively superficial with serious sources, research about it before demanding proof of others, who may actually know a little bit more than you of what they are talking about.  And a few serious, respectable and respected sources have been suggested to you.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #121 on: September 21, 2011, 05:41:07 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?

Peter,

A fraud is someone who uses deceit, trickery, or outright lies to advance their theory or position.  One who doesn't toe the party line is not, per se, a fraud.

When there is overwhelming abundance of evidence gathered by numerous independent sources to create a consensus,  refusing to adhere to that consensus doesn't make one a fraud.  It just makes one look, well, blind or silly perhaps, or at worst, intransigent and/or stupid.
Which only makes my point.
Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #122 on: September 21, 2011, 06:17:21 PM »

Orthonorm wrote:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true.


Let's make this clear. I did not write that PtA did.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #123 on: September 21, 2011, 06:59:20 PM »

Orthonorm wrote:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true.


Let's make this clear. I did not write that PtA did.

( oo )

Oh my eyes. Must you shout?

With this detour, should we detour further into a thread comparing German and Jewish beer?

BACK ON TOPIC: Perhaps we should tell the ADL to mind their own business and quit interfering with Christian Holy Services.

Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #124 on: September 21, 2011, 07:02:07 PM »

Orthonorm wrote:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true.


Let's make this clear. I did not write that PtA did.

( oo )

Oh my eyes. Must you shout?

Yes, when such nonsense is attributed to me.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #125 on: September 21, 2011, 07:03:08 PM »

Perhaps we should tell the ADL to mind their own business and quit interfering with Christian Holy Services.



Or you could ignore them. Usually the best way to extinguish unwanted behavior.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,157


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #126 on: September 21, 2011, 07:14:29 PM »

Perhaps we should tell the ADL to mind their own business and quit interfering with Christian Holy Services.



Or you could ignore them. Usually the best way to extinguish unwanted behavior.



For such a small organization, they get an inappropriately large amount of press coverage when they throw their little tantrums.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2011, 07:15:13 PM by Maria » Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #127 on: September 21, 2011, 07:20:59 PM »

Perhaps we should tell the ADL to mind their own business and quit interfering with Christian Holy Services.



Or you could ignore them. Usually the best way to extinguish unwanted behavior.



For such a small organization, they get an inappropriately large amount of press coverage when they throw their little tantrums.

All the more reason. I can't take them personally.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #128 on: September 21, 2011, 07:53:23 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?

Well now your just fishing for excuses..

There is no "Party" and therefore no Party Line. Any scholar who came up with credible evidence that could hold up would the the Academic Toast of the Town..Book deals.. Oprah ( if she were still on) etc. The sad fact is that Holocaust Denial doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's been labeled a Fraud because of specious evidence that has not held up. Sorry.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #129 on: September 21, 2011, 07:59:23 PM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?

Peter,

A fraud is someone who uses deceit, trickery, or outright lies to advance their theory or position.  One who doesn't toe the party line is not, per se, a fraud.

When there is overwhelming abundance of evidence gathered by numerous independent sources to create a consensus,  refusing to adhere to that consensus doesn't make one a fraud.  It just makes one look, well, blind or silly perhaps, or at worst, intransigent and/or stupid.
Which only makes my point.

I think an Academic Fraud would be someone who uses specious evidence to gain notoriety or advancement in his field or money. In this case Holocaust Denial is often politically motivated so the conclusion comes first and then they  backfill with  conjecture and weak evidence that can only fool their naive target political audience but not professional historians.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #130 on: September 22, 2011, 02:01:48 AM »

Orthonorm wrote:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true.


Let's make this clear. I did not write that PtA did.
Indeed! No use you getting blamed for something I wrote. Wink
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,625


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #131 on: September 22, 2011, 02:09:28 AM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?

Well now your just fishing for excuses..
Fishing for excuses? Nah! Do try to not attribute to me motives I've never expressed.

There is no "Party" and therefore no Party Line. Any scholar who came up with credible evidence that could hold up would the the Academic Toast of the Town..Book deals.. Oprah ( if she were still on) etc. The sad fact is that Holocaust Denial doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's been labeled a Fraud because of specious evidence that has not held up. Sorry.
And yet, you're still resorting to your appeal to consensus. I see nothing in here that actually refutes my suspicion that there is a party line that a historian must toe if he wants to be taken seriously.
Logged
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #132 on: September 22, 2011, 02:16:33 AM »

I think an Academic Fraud would be someone who uses specious evidence to gain notoriety or advancement in his field or money. In this case Holocaust Denial is often politically motivated so the conclusion comes first and then they  backfill with  conjecture and weak evidence that can only fool their naive target political audience but not professional historians.

LOL. You could also make up a holocaust story and write a book and make a ton of money. People believe alot of those. Goes both ways.
Logged

Forgive my sins.
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #133 on: September 22, 2011, 02:16:33 AM »

There is no "Party" and therefore no Party Line. Any scholar who came up with credible evidence that could hold up would the the Academic Toast of the Town..Book deals.. Oprah ( if she were still on) etc. The sad fact is that Holocaust Denial doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's been labeled a Fraud because of specious evidence that has not held up. Sorry.

I will repeat, people keep changing the story all the time, making the numbers incredibly and unrealistically high, society allows this, why? Because if you question any official statement of the holocaust, dare say the numbers are out of proportion, what happens? You are labelled anti-semitic. Doing so is bigotry in its own right.
Logged

Forgive my sins.
IsmiLiora
Chronic Exaggerator
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: One step closer!
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOA)
Posts: 3,434


Back by unpopular demand.


« Reply #134 on: September 22, 2011, 08:15:04 AM »

There is no "Party" and therefore no Party Line. Any scholar who came up with credible evidence that could hold up would the the Academic Toast of the Town..Book deals.. Oprah ( if she were still on) etc. The sad fact is that Holocaust Denial doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's been labeled a Fraud because of specious evidence that has not held up. Sorry.

I will repeat, people keep changing the story all the time, making the numbers incredibly and unrealistically high, society allows this, why? Because if you question any official statement of the holocaust, dare say the numbers are out of proportion, what happens? You are labelled anti-semitic. Doing so is bigotry in its own right.
Usually it takes more than arguing that the Holocaust numbers are slightly high for most people to use the anti-Semitism card.
Logged

She's touring the facility/and picking up slack.
--
"For in much wisdom is much grief, and he who increases knowledge increases sorrow." Ecclesiastes 1:18
--
I once believed in causes too, I had my pointless point of view --
Life went on no matter who was wrong or right
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #135 on: September 22, 2011, 10:08:26 AM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?

Peter,

A fraud is someone who uses deceit, trickery, or outright lies to advance their theory or position.  One who doesn't toe the party line is not, per se, a fraud.

When there is overwhelming abundance of evidence gathered by numerous independent sources to create a consensus,  refusing to adhere to that consensus doesn't make one a fraud.  It just makes one look, well, blind or silly perhaps, or at worst, intransigent and/or stupid.
Which only makes my point.

I'm beginning to wonder if you really have a point, and if so, how does this make your point?

And I notice (hard to miss, really) that you still haven't answered a number of questions.  Makes one wonder, too, if you're at all informed on the subject (the Holocaust) or if you just like to wallow in rhetorical b.s.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #136 on: September 22, 2011, 10:16:36 AM »

There is no "Party" and therefore no Party Line. Any scholar who came up with credible evidence that could hold up would the the Academic Toast of the Town..Book deals.. Oprah ( if she were still on) etc. The sad fact is that Holocaust Denial doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's been labeled a Fraud because of specious evidence that has not held up. Sorry.

I will repeat, people keep changing the story all the time, making the numbers incredibly and unrealistically high, society allows this, why? Because if you question any official statement of the holocaust, dare say the numbers are out of proportion, what happens? You are labelled anti-semitic. Doing so is bigotry in its own right.

What "numbers"  (you know, all those human beings created and loved by God) are "credible" and "realistic", and what are your sources?

What constitutes an "official statement of the holocaust"?
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,236


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #137 on: September 22, 2011, 10:38:04 AM »

I hate to bring this up, but the numbers of dead caused by the Hiroshima bomb keeps changing too. Does that mean it never happened? What about the plague during Justinian's reign? They just updated that not too long ago. The revolutionary war? Vietnam?

The Orthodox martyrs in the Soviet union gets changed too. Does that mean it's made up?

Updates do not equal deception.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #138 on: September 22, 2011, 11:01:41 AM »

I hate to bring this up, but the numbers of dead caused by the Hiroshima bomb keeps changing too. Does that mean it never happened? What about the plague during Justinian's reign? They just updated that not too long ago. The revolutionary war? Vietnam?

The Orthodox martyrs in the Soviet union gets changed too. Does that mean it's made up?

Updates do not equal deception.

PP

Well said!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #139 on: September 22, 2011, 11:11:41 AM »

Ummm...Huh ?

Anyway, there is no scholarly debate about the essential events of or the numbers killed in the Holocaust. No serious scholar thinks otherwise. The entire community of credentialed Historians thinks Holocaust denial and its variations (it occurred but just a few were really killed) is a fraud. The events and the numbers are very well documented. The Germans have a habit of being thorough. They documented everything.  

Questions?
IOW, appeal to authority and threat of anathema to those who don't preach the accepted dogma, but appeal to authority is no substitute for actually posting some of those documents here for us to see them.

You seem not to understand what the fallacy of appeal to authority is.
Yes, you may be right. I think the fallacy of the appeal to consensus may be a more accurate assessment.

What does the fallacy of consensus mean? And how did you come to understand such a concept?

What is a bird? In virtue of what do you and I, I hope, understand what that is when I point out the thing with feathers (wait how do we understand what feather are . . . )

Consensus?

Try again.

Hint: There is no fallacy here. Except for the fallacy of thinking you know what you are talking about.

Or what might be loosely defined as "sophistry".

 
The fallacy of Marc's appeal to the consensus of historians is as follows:

Marc argues that no serious historical scholar questions the received tradition on the Holocaust, that the entire historical community has branded Holocaust denial a fraud. But just because even the entire historical community says something is true doesn't make it true. The truth of a historical claim should be evident from the historical record itself; it is not dependent on what a consensus of historical scholars proclaims it to be. The consensus of historical scholars could be wrong. How did they come to their consensus? What information are they all examining, and how do they know it's not just wartime propaganda? On what basis do they brand as heretics those who disagree? Are they not refining their consensus artificially (i.e., stacking the deck) by purging those who won't toe the party line? What if there's some information they have all overlooked? (It seems to me we've had similar controversy recently regarding whether global warming is human-caused.)

Again, I'm not asserting anything as fact on this thread. I don't deny that millions of Jews suffered inhumanely in the Nazi concentration camps and that many of them died. I don't even deny that some of them were executed like dogs. I've just seen enough information to raise a few questions regarding the established history that millions died in the gas chambers in an around-the-clock effort to exterminate the race of the Jews. I've come to realize that I simply don't know what I once thought I knew, and I've always been one to question the consensus, believing as I do that consensus, even when real, is not proof that the consensus point of view is correct.

Without reiterating Orthonorm's excellent comments, I would ask you what is the information you've seen (you know, sources?),
Have you watched the video linked to this thread by Ioannis Climacus? I know nothing of David Cole's background, except that he identifies himself as a Jew by birth and an atheist by choice. Might he be a nut? I don't know. Having watched his rational presentation of his case, however, challenged me to think about all the images I'd been fed regarding the Holocaust.

and why do you give it the credence you seem to give it?
I give it no more credence than I give the officially received tradition.

 I would also add that you seem adept at asking questions but not quite as skilled in answering those posed to you, at least on this thread.
Thanks for noticing that. I do try to be somewhat nebulous about what I believe. I figure that the fewer truth claims I make, the less often I bear the burden of proof to substantiate my truth claims.

There will always be people on the outside fringe of scholarship. You should try to properly locate those people on your own radar screen as way out of the box.
And I try to force myself to think outside the box.

Listen to whatever makes some sense but then realize that people far more expert than you ( in this case) dismiss Holocaust Denial out of hand.
I can certainly show respect for their expertise, but in the back of my mind is still the thought that they could still be wrong. Expertise does not grant infallibility.

The consensus is overwhelming and for good reason.
And what would those reasons be?

For every fringe element you look at on the Internet it would be good to balance out your understanding with what most experts understand to be true and discover why..
True. And for every expert who claims something to be true, it's good to know an alternative point of view. Don't follow after the fringe elements, but also don't put too much trust in the experts.

Several books have been recommended to you. Get ye to a library.

PS.. Oh and Historical Scholarship is not a "Received Tradition". That makes it sound like something taken on Faith. Rather the expert study of History is a "Social Science" .
And yet it sounds to me as if there's still a consensus belief, such that the refusal to adhere to it automatically marks one as a fraud whether that person is truly a fraud or not. That looks to me like how we treat religious dogma.

Standards are high and fraud is pretty easily spotted.
But don't you think that branding someone a fraud merely because he won't toe the party line is a violation of the spirit of academia?

Well now your just fishing for excuses..
Fishing for excuses? Nah! Do try to not attribute to me motives I've never expressed.

There is no "Party" and therefore no Party Line. Any scholar who came up with credible evidence that could hold up would the the Academic Toast of the Town..Book deals.. Oprah ( if she were still on) etc. The sad fact is that Holocaust Denial doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's been labeled a Fraud because of specious evidence that has not held up. Sorry.
And yet, you're still resorting to your appeal to consensus. I see nothing in here that actually refutes my suspicion that there is a party line that a historian must toe if he wants to be taken seriously.

The problem is using the term "Party Line" as a pejorative term.

Yes, Holocaust Deniers are laughed at. There is no motive for that which I can think of other than that their arguments are laughable within a scholarly context.

For example, if someone is in a PhD history program at a top University, lets say Princeton. And they attempt to present a written thesis supporting Holocaust Denial, they wouldn't be able to get away with it. In fact, the department head would probably place a call to the admissions people and try to find out how such a crack-pot got into the dept. in the first place.

That's not because there is a "Party Line" that for some inexplicable reason cant be challenged. Rather it is because at the higher levels of scholarship idiocy and weak evidence are not tolerated.  

All you're doing Peter is spinning words.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2011, 11:13:04 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #140 on: September 22, 2011, 11:17:25 AM »

I hate to bring this up, but the numbers of dead caused by the Hiroshima bomb keeps changing too. Does that mean it never happened? What about the plague during Justinian's reign? They just updated that not too long ago. The revolutionary war? Vietnam?

The Orthodox martyrs in the Soviet union gets changed too. Does that mean it's made up?

Updates do not equal deception.

PP

Well said!

All such events will be better understood as time goes by. If some new calculation says 6 million deaths vs 5.7 ( or vice versa), that is entirely possible.

But to say it never happened or to put forward numbers like 200,00 to 300,00 deaths are extraordinarily unlikely to be credible based on the volumes of evidence already in hand and well understood.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #141 on: September 22, 2011, 11:21:17 AM »

I hate to bring this up, but the numbers of dead caused by the Hiroshima bomb keeps changing too. Does that mean it never happened? What about the plague during Justinian's reign? They just updated that not too long ago. The revolutionary war? Vietnam?

The Orthodox martyrs in the Soviet union gets changed too. Does that mean it's made up?

Updates do not equal deception.

PP

Well said!

All such events will be better understood as time goes by. If some new calculation says 6 million deaths vs 5.7 ( or vice versa), that is entirely possible.

But to say it never happened or to put forward numbers like 200,00 to 300,00 deaths are extraordinarily unlikely to be credible based on the volumes of evidence already in hand and well understood.

Or to use words like "unrealistic" or "incredible" without defining what that means in the context of the discussion and without referencing sources, and without establishing what exactly *is* realistic and credible is, at the very best, extremely lame, and no argument at all.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #142 on: September 22, 2011, 11:41:01 AM »

I hate to bring this up, but the numbers of dead caused by the Hiroshima bomb keeps changing too. Does that mean it never happened? What about the plague during Justinian's reign? They just updated that not too long ago. The revolutionary war? Vietnam?

The Orthodox martyrs in the Soviet union gets changed too. Does that mean it's made up?

Updates do not equal deception.

PP

Well said!

All such events will be better understood as time goes by. If some new calculation says 6 million deaths vs 5.7 ( or vice versa), that is entirely possible.

But to say it never happened or to put forward numbers like 200,00 to 300,00 deaths are extraordinarily unlikely to be credible based on the volumes of evidence already in hand and well understood.

Or to use words like "unrealistic" or "incredible" without defining what that means in the context of the discussion and without referencing sources, and without establishing what exactly *is* realistic and credible is, at the very best, extremely lame, and no argument at all.

 Huh

Credible evidence is evidence that holds up under rigorous scrutiny.

Holocaust Denial theories have been labeled as "Academic Fraud" by such leading organizations as the "American Historical Association". That position is consistent within the entirety of top level historical scholarship.

Therefore, on the face of it, it appears that Holocaust Denial theories are to date, not credible and so much so that they are actually termed as " "Fraud" which is an extreme characterization for professional scholars to use.

« Last Edit: September 22, 2011, 11:42:40 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #143 on: September 22, 2011, 11:52:04 AM »

I hate to bring this up, but the numbers of dead caused by the Hiroshima bomb keeps changing too. Does that mean it never happened? What about the plague during Justinian's reign? They just updated that not too long ago. The revolutionary war? Vietnam?

The Orthodox martyrs in the Soviet union gets changed too. Does that mean it's made up?

Updates do not equal deception.

PP

Well said!

All such events will be better understood as time goes by. If some new calculation says 6 million deaths vs 5.7 ( or vice versa), that is entirely possible.

But to say it never happened or to put forward numbers like 200,00 to 300,00 deaths are extraordinarily unlikely to be credible based on the volumes of evidence already in hand and well understood.

Or to use words like "unrealistic" or "incredible" without defining what that means in the context of the discussion and without referencing sources, and without establishing what exactly *is* realistic and credible is, at the very best, extremely lame, and no argument at all.

 Huh

Credible evidence is evidence that holds up under rigorous scrutiny.

Holocaust Denial theories have been labeled as "Academic Fraud" by such leading organizations as the "American Historical Association". That position is consistent within the entirety of top level historical scholarship.

Therefore, on the face of it, it appears that Holocaust Denial theories are to date, not credible and so much so that they are actually termed as " "Fraud" which is an extreme characterization for professional scholars to use.



Precisely what I was trying to get at, but you said it more precisely.  Thanks.

Better watch out, though--Peter might think that the "American Historical Association" is one of those subversive parties whose line must be toed under threat of some kind of horrible excommunication, exile, and torture  Grin Grin Grin!

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #144 on: September 22, 2011, 02:12:05 PM »

Yes, Holocaust Deniers are laughed at. There is no motive for that which I can think of other than that their arguments are laughable within a scholarly context.

For example, if someone is in a PhD history program at a top University, lets say Princeton. And they attempt to present a written thesis supporting Holocaust Denial, they wouldn't be able to get away with it. In fact, the department head would probably place a call to the admissions people and try to find out how such a crack-pot got into the dept. in the first place.
And that folks, is all the Holocaust supporters have going for them. Go ahead, mock the revisionists, claim over and over again the no credible historian would say otherwise, etc. etc. Why is it that the Holocaust historians flee from debate every time the issue arises? Mostly because they make a fool out of themselves time after time. Contradictory stories and reconstructed "evidence" based on Soviet propaganda are all they have.

I am not even an expert on the issue, but put me one-on-one in a room with a Holocaust "historian", and I will tear him to shreds (figuratively speaking). These people are the real jokes. Have we really reached the point where we no longer critically examine the authenticity of Soviet evidence?

The only way to defend their pretentious claims is silence the opposition. Refuse to discuss the issue, imprison the "deniers", stereotype them as white supremacists or Islamic fundamentalists, etc. Truth does not fear investigation!
Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #145 on: September 22, 2011, 02:33:54 PM »

Yes, Holocaust Deniers are laughed at. There is no motive for that which I can think of other than that their arguments are laughable within a scholarly context.

For example, if someone is in a PhD history program at a top University, lets say Princeton. And they attempt to present a written thesis supporting Holocaust Denial, they wouldn't be able to get away with it. In fact, the department head would probably place a call to the admissions people and try to find out how such a crack-pot got into the dept. in the first place.
And that folks, is all the Holocaust supporters have going for them. Go ahead, mock the revisionists, claim over and over again the no credible historian would say otherwise, etc. etc. Why is it that the Holocaust historians flee from debate every time the issue arises? Mostly because they make a fool out of themselves time after time. Contradictory stories and reconstructed "evidence" based on Soviet propaganda are all they have.

I am not even an expert on the issue, but put me one-on-one in a room with a Holocaust "historian", and I will tear him to shreds (figuratively speaking). These people are the real jokes. Have we really reached the point where we no longer critically examine the authenticity of Soviet evidence?

The only way to defend their pretentious claims is silence the opposition. Refuse to discuss the issue, imprison the "deniers", stereotype them as white supremacists or Islamic fundamentalists, etc. Truth does not fear investigation!

Wow!  Really?HuhHuhHuh  Really?HuhHuhHuhHuhHuhHuh?

I'm not sure if you're being deliberately provocative, incredibly prideful and arrogant, or just plain young and stupid.  Perhaps a combination of all of those.  I could give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest you may just be talking (well, writing) tongue-in-cheek, but somehow I don't think so.

Perhaps you would like to provide some credible evidence (see Marc1152's definition above) with references (plural, you notice), etc. that either the Holocaust did not happen, or if it did, that the numbers given for those who perished is grossly overstated and if so, by how much.

Oh, and by the way, if the Holocaust did happen, and the numbers are smaller than is given by a consensus (there's that naughty word again!) of credible, respected historians, lawyers, and survivors, does that somehow justify the death of a single victim, and somehow make it better?  It saddens me to say that the tone of your posts suggests that it does.

As for you tearing to shreds ("figuratively speaking") a respected Holocaust historian, well....ROTFL!!!!!
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 12,535


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #146 on: September 22, 2011, 02:57:02 PM »

Yes, Holocaust Deniers are laughed at. There is no motive for that which I can think of other than that their arguments are laughable within a scholarly context.

For example, if someone is in a PhD history program at a top University, lets say Princeton. And they attempt to present a written thesis supporting Holocaust Denial, they wouldn't be able to get away with it. In fact, the department head would probably place a call to the admissions people and try to find out how such a crack-pot got into the dept. in the first place.
And that folks, is all the Holocaust supporters have going for them. Go ahead, mock the revisionists, claim over and over again the no credible historian would say otherwise, etc. etc. Why is it that the Holocaust historians flee from debate every time the issue arises? Mostly because they make a fool out of themselves time after time. Contradictory stories and reconstructed "evidence" based on Soviet propaganda are all they have.

I am not even an expert on the issue, but put me one-on-one in a room with a Holocaust "historian", and I will tear him to shreds (figuratively speaking). These people are the real jokes. Have we really reached the point where we no longer critically examine the authenticity of Soviet evidence?

The only way to defend their pretentious claims is silence the opposition. Refuse to discuss the issue, imprison the "deniers", stereotype them as white supremacists or Islamic fundamentalists, etc. Truth does not fear investigation!

LOL. .Fluff and bluster will get you no where.

I googled the American Historical Association web page and found a further statement:

The American Historical Association Council strongly deplores the publicly reported attempts to deny the fact of the Holocaust. No serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place.

http://www.historians.org/index.cfm

Seems pretty clear to me. Is English not your first language?
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,236


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #147 on: September 22, 2011, 03:04:54 PM »

Yes, Holocaust Deniers are laughed at. There is no motive for that which I can think of other than that their arguments are laughable within a scholarly context.

For example, if someone is in a PhD history program at a top University, lets say Princeton. And they attempt to present a written thesis supporting Holocaust Denial, they wouldn't be able to get away with it. In fact, the department head would probably place a call to the admissions people and try to find out how such a crack-pot got into the dept. in the first place.
And that folks, is all the Holocaust supporters have going for them. Go ahead, mock the revisionists, claim over and over again the no credible historian would say otherwise, etc. etc. Why is it that the Holocaust historians flee from debate every time the issue arises? Mostly because they make a fool out of themselves time after time. Contradictory stories and reconstructed "evidence" based on Soviet propaganda are all they have.

I am not even an expert on the issue, but put me one-on-one in a room with a Holocaust "historian", and I will tear him to shreds (figuratively speaking). These people are the real jokes. Have we really reached the point where we no longer critically examine the authenticity of Soviet evidence?

The only way to defend their pretentious claims is silence the opposition. Refuse to discuss the issue, imprison the "deniers", stereotype them as white supremacists or Islamic fundamentalists, etc. Truth does not fear investigation!

Perhaps you would tear apart a 5th grader arguing the holocaust but you cant be serious. You're trolling on purpose. C'mon.


PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #148 on: September 22, 2011, 03:07:31 PM »

Perhaps you would like to provide some credible evidence (see Marc1152's definition above) with references (plural, you notice), etc. that either the Holocaust did not happen, or if it did, that the numbers given for those who perished is grossly overstated and if so, by how much.
Can do. Traditionally, the burden of proof lies on you (or anyone who claims it exists in the first place), but most people have already heard that pitiful song, so we'll jump right in. Before we being, however, I need to understand where you are coming from. Which holocaust do you believe in? Do you accept the traditional version presented at Nuremberg (i.e. shrunken heads, Jewish-fat soap bars, Jewish-skin lampshades,etc.), or do you accept the more modern version (which insists entirely on gassing and medical experimentation)? Do you accept the traditional locations of the camps (the original reports stated that death camps existed within German borders) or the more modern consensus (the death camps were all located outside of German borders)?

Oh, and by the way, if the Holocaust did happen, and the numbers are smaller than is given by a consensus (there's that naughty word again!) of credible, respected historians, lawyers, and survivors, does that somehow justify the death of a single victim, and somehow make it better?  It saddens me to say that the tone of your posts suggests that it does.
Nothing can justify the actions of the Nazis. Forcing the enemies of the Third Reich into concentration camps was entirely wrong.

Creating propaganda to not only demonize the German people, but to detract from the crimes committed by the Allies has no justification either.
Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,236


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #149 on: September 22, 2011, 03:13:38 PM »

Quote
Can do. Traditionally, the burden of proof lies on you (or anyone who claims it exists in the first place), but most people have already heard that pitiful song, so we'll jump right in. Before we being, however, I need to understand where you are coming from. Which holocaust do you believe in? Do you accept the traditional version presented at Nuremberg (i.e. shrunken heads, Jewish-fat soap bars, Jewish-skin lampshades,etc.), or do you accept the more modern version (which insists entirely on gassing and medical experimentation)? Do you accept the traditional locations of the camps (the original reports stated that death camps existed within German borders) or the more modern consensus (the death camps were all located outside of German borders)?
Actually the burden of proof is on you because you are accusing historians of deception. Your accusations are also that a commonly held belief is not accurate.

Here's the link for the study about the jewish fat soap. Translated for your reading. Im not saying it happened, but it looks like these folks say it did.

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.wiadomosci24.pl/artykul/zakonczono_sledztwo_w_glosnej_sprawie_profesora_spannera_8420.html%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D953%26bih%3D467%26prmd%3Dimvns&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=pl&u=http://www.wiadomosci24.pl/artykul/zakonczono_sledztwo_w_glosnej_sprawie_profesora_spannera_8420.html&usg=ALkJrhittBqtu-o3PO5nDIeD0Gn7IVunlQ
PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #150 on: September 22, 2011, 03:15:18 PM »

Perhaps you would like to provide some credible evidence (see Marc1152's definition above) with references (plural, you notice), etc. that either the Holocaust did not happen, or if it did, that the numbers given for those who perished is grossly overstated and if so, by how much.
Can do. Traditionally, the burden of proof lies on you (or anyone who claims it exists in the first place), but most people have already heard that pitiful song, so we'll jump right in. Before we being, however, I need to understand where you are coming from. Which holocaust do you believe in? Do you accept the traditional version presented at Nuremberg (i.e. shrunken heads, Jewish-fat soap bars, Jewish-skin lampshades,etc.), or do you accept the more modern version (which insists entirely on gassing and medical experimentation)? Do you accept the traditional locations of the camps (the original reports stated that death camps existed within German borders) or the more modern consensus (the death camps were all located outside of German borders)?

Oh, and by the way, if the Holocaust did happen, and the numbers are smaller than is given by a consensus (there's that naughty word again!) of credible, respected historians, lawyers, and survivors, does that somehow justify the death of a single victim, and somehow make it better?  It saddens me to say that the tone of your posts suggests that it does.
Nothing can justify the actions of the Nazis. Forcing the enemies of the Third Reich into concentration camps was entirely wrong.

Creating propaganda to not only demonize the German people, but to detract from the crimes committed by the Allies has no justification either.

You are dodging and deflecting.  You say you can provide **credible** evidence with **references**, etc.  Well.....never mind what I accept, being a Jew, having lived amongst and with survivors, and read multiple credible sources (heck, I even went to school a long, long time ago!!)---do what you say you can do.  You know, put up or shut up.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #151 on: September 22, 2011, 03:19:34 PM »

Perhaps you would like to provide some credible evidence (see Marc1152's definition above) with references (plural, you notice), etc. that either the Holocaust did not happen, or if it did, that the numbers given for those who perished is grossly overstated and if so, by how much.
Can do. Traditionally, the burden of proof lies on you (or anyone who claims it exists in the first place), but most people have already heard that pitiful song, so we'll jump right in. Before we being, however, I need to understand where you are coming from. Which holocaust do you believe in? Do you accept the traditional version presented at Nuremberg (i.e. shrunken heads, Jewish-fat soap bars, Jewish-skin lampshades,etc.), or do you accept the more modern version (which insists entirely on gassing and medical experimentation)? Do you accept the traditional locations of the camps (the original reports stated that death camps existed within German borders) or the more modern consensus (the death camps were all located outside of German borders)?

Oh, and by the way, if the Holocaust did happen, and the numbers are smaller than is given by a consensus (there's that naughty word again!) of credible, respected historians, lawyers, and survivors, does that somehow justify the death of a single victim, and somehow make it better?  It saddens me to say that the tone of your posts suggests that it does.
Nothing can justify the actions of the Nazis. Forcing the enemies of the Third Reich into concentration camps was entirely wrong.

Creating propaganda to not only demonize the German people, but to detract from the crimes committed by the Allies has no justification either.

You are dodging and deflecting.  You say you can provide **credible** evidence with **references**, etc.  Well.....never mind what I accept, being a Jew, having lived amongst and with survivors, and read multiple credible sources (heck, I even went to school a long, long time ago!!)---do what you say you can do.  You know, put up or shut up.
I am not dodgeing anything. I have said quite plainly that I will discuss the issue with you (and provide evidence for my claims). All I have asked of you is to provide a preliminary statement concerning what you understand the Holocaust to be. I do not wish to create a strawman of your beliefs.
Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine
Posts: 10,015


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #152 on: September 22, 2011, 03:27:54 PM »

Perhaps you would like to provide some credible evidence (see Marc1152's definition above) with references (plural, you notice), etc. that either the Holocaust did not happen, or if it did, that the numbers given for those who perished is grossly overstated and if so, by how much.
Can do. Traditionally, the burden of proof lies on you (or anyone who claims it exists in the first place), but most people have already heard that pitiful song, so we'll jump right in. Before we being, however, I need to understand where you are coming from. Which holocaust do you believe in? Do you accept the traditional version presented at Nuremberg (i.e. shrunken heads, Jewish-fat soap bars, Jewish-skin lampshades,etc.), or do you accept the more modern version (which insists entirely on gassing and medical experimentation)? Do you accept the traditional locations of the camps (the original reports stated that death camps existed within German borders) or the more modern consensus (the death camps were all located outside of German borders)?

Oh, and by the way, if the Holocaust did happen, and the numbers are smaller than is given by a consensus (there's that naughty word again!) of credible, respected historians, lawyers, and survivors, does that somehow justify the death of a single victim, and somehow make it better?  It saddens me to say that the tone of your posts suggests that it does.
Nothing can justify the actions of the Nazis. Forcing the enemies of the Third Reich into concentration camps was entirely wrong.

Creating propaganda to not only demonize the German people, but to detract from the crimes committed by the Allies has no justification either.

You are dodging and deflecting.  You say you can provide **credible** evidence with **references**, etc.  Well.....never mind what I accept, being a Jew, having lived amongst and with survivors, and read multiple credible sources (heck, I even went to school a long, long time ago!!)---do what you say you can do.  You know, put up or shut up.
I am not dodgeing anything. I have said quite plainly that I will discuss the issue with you (and provide evidence for my claims). All I have asked of you is to provide a preliminary statement concerning what you understand the Holocaust to be. I do not wish to create a strawman of your beliefs.

Paleeeeeze...give me a break.  As PP said, the burden of proof is on Y  O  U.  If you haven't figured out what my understanding of the Holocaust is yet, you're dimmer than I thought.  

I'll say it one last time, and then I'm done with you--put up or shut up!
« Last Edit: September 22, 2011, 03:29:16 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian
Ioannis Climacus
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 863


"There is no religion higher than TRUTH"


« Reply #153 on: September 22, 2011, 03:34:01 PM »

Perhaps you would like to provide some credible evidence (see Marc1152's definition above) with references (plural, you notice), etc. that either the Holocaust did not happen, or if it did, that the numbers given for those who perished is grossly overstated and if so, by how much.
Can do. Traditionally, the burden of proof lies on you (or anyone who claims it exists in the first place), but most people have already heard that pitiful song, so we'll jump right in. Before we being, however, I need to understand where you are coming from. Which holocaust do you believe in? Do you accept the traditional version presented at Nuremberg (i.e. shrunken heads, Jewish-fat soap bars, Jewish-skin lampshades,etc.), or do you accept the more modern version (which insists entirely on gassing and medical experimentation)? Do you accept the traditional locations of the camps (the original reports stated that death camps existed within German borders) or the more modern consensus (the death camps were all located outside of German borders)?

Oh, and by the way, if the Holocaust did happen, and the numbers are smaller than is given by a consensus (there's that naughty word again!) of credible, respected historians, lawyers, and survivors, does that somehow justify the death of a single victim, and somehow make it better?  It saddens me to say that the tone of your posts suggests that it does.
Nothing can justify the actions of the Nazis. Forcing the enemies of the Third Reich into concentration camps was entirely wrong.

Creating propaganda to not only demonize the German people, but to detract from the crimes committed by the Allies has no justification either.

You are dodging and deflecting.  You say you can provide **credible** evidence with **references**, etc.  Well.....never mind what I accept, being a Jew, having lived amongst and with survivors, and read multiple credible sources (heck, I even went to school a long, long time ago!!)---do what you say you can do.  You know, put up or shut up.
I am not dodgeing anything. I have said quite plainly that I will discuss the issue with you (and provide evidence for my claims). All I have asked of you is to provide a preliminary statement concerning what you understand the Holocaust to be. I do not wish to create a strawman of your beliefs.

Paleeeeeze...give me a break.  As PP said, the burden of proof is on Y  O  U.  If you haven't figured out what my understanding of the Holocaust is yet, you're dimmer than I thought. 
Now you are dodging my questions. I am more than happy to supply evidence for my claims, but I will not begin until I first understand my opponent's position. Are my two questions that difficult to answer?

The burden of proof certainly does not lie upon me. Regardless of how you wish to twist it, the Holocaust is not an axiom. It must be proven and defended like any other idea.
Logged

Note : Many of my posts (especially the ones antedating late 2012) do not reflect charity, tact, or even views I presently hold. Please forgive me for any antagonism I have caused.
celticfan1888
Production Operator - Chemtrusion
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholicism
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church of America
Posts: 3,026



« Reply #154 on: September 22, 2011, 03:36:54 PM »