Didn't the six million come from population estimates rather than by adding together the alleged death tolls at individual camps? I've heard that no one in the west took the 4 million at Auschwitz number seriously but that it stayed up because the Soviets were in control of it and wanted it to stay up.
This isn't as convincing to me as is the fact that all of the alleged death camps were in territory controlled by the USSR after the war. Under what other circumstance would we trust the Soviets to tell the truth about something when lieing would be politically advantageous for them?
The population numbers were doctored after the fact.
I've heard that no one in the west took the 4 million at Auschwitz number seriously but that it stayed up because the Soviets were in control of it and wanted it to stay up.
Then why was it taught that Auschwitz was far and away the worst one? Also, (((soviets))) at the time that were genociding whites.
This isn't as convincing to me as is the fact that all of the alleged death camps were in territory controlled by the USSR after the war. Under what other circumstance would we trust the Soviets to tell the truth about something when lieing would be politically advantageous for them?
It came from Jewish prophecy crap stating that 6 million of them had to be "holocausted" (burned to death) before the state of Israel could exist.
That could absolutely have been where they got the motivation for that particular number, but my understanding is that the evidence they offered for that number was population estimates.
As a propaganda device I like this infographic even if it's not terribly hard to counter, because the counter involves bringing up the uncomfortable fact that the Soviets were happy to lie to make the Germans look worse. Then it remains only to point out how much control the Soviets had over the alleged crime scene and the rest of the evidence.
Then why was it taught that Auschwitz was far and away the worst one?
If 1 million had died there, it still would have had the highest death count according to the official narrative, but I don't have a better answer than that off hand.
That could absolutely have been where they got the motivation for that particular number, but my understanding is that the evidence they offered for that number was population estimates.
They didn't have evidence. At all. If they did, the Nuremburg trials wouldn't have needed articles 19 and 21 of the London Charter, which directed the actions of the Tribunal:
Article 19: The Tribunal shall not be bound by the rules of evidence.
Artilce 21: The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of common knowledge but shall take judicial notice thereof.
The Red Cross numbers show it to be bullshit, the World Almanac numbers, acquired from JEWISH institutions, showed no significant losses from the war for Jews, whatsoever.
That is, until the numbers were changed, after the fact, so Jews could point to it as "evidence" of the 6 million.
As a propaganda device I like this infographic even if it's not terribly hard to counter, because the counter involves bringing up the uncomfortable fact that the Soviets were happy to lie to make the Germans look worse. Then it remains only to point out how much control the Soviets had over the alleged crime scene and the rest of the evidence.
No one has successfully countered the above.
If OFFICIAL number of dead for Auschwitz was changed from 4 million to 1.1 million, then the TOTAL, not based on population numbers, or really anything at all worth calling "evidence", then the Jews lied.
If 1 million had died there, it still would have had the highest death count according to the official narrative, but I don't have a better answer than that off hand.
Treblinka was supposedly 900,000. An extra 100-200k isn't such a large difference that they wouldn't have even mentioned it in children's textbooks. All you ever hear about is Auschwitz. And 6 million.
I'm not talking about at Nuremberg, I'm talking about later on.
That is, until the numbers were changed, after the fact, so Jews could point to it as "evidence" of the 6 million.
Right, and all I'm saying is that (as far as I know) the 4 million number was never used, at least in the west, as evidence that 6 million were killed. The 6 million came from other fudged sources, not from tallying up the alleged death tolls in the camps and elsewhere.
I'm not talking about at Nuremberg, I'm talking about later on.
No new evidence was gained later on.
Right, and all I'm saying is that (as far as I know) the 4 million number was never used, at least in the west, as evidence that 6 million were killed.
It was, though. Literally on the memorial placard. The official number. What (((they))) counted. That went into your teachings.
The 6 million came from other fudged sources, not from tallying up the alleged death tolls in the camps and elsewhere.
At the postwar International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (1945-1946), the victorious Allied powers charged that the Germans exterminated four million people at Auschwitz. This figure, which was given in a report produced by a Soviet government commission, was uncritically accepted for many years, and often appeared in major American newspapers and magazines. / 2
Are you saying that the prosecution at nuremberg used the same population estimates that the more recent holocaust promoters use? My understanding is that the prosecution was mostly relying on eye-witness testimony and tortured confessions, and not based at all on population estimates. Today, holocaust promoters point to population estimates as evidence for the number killed. A lot of the post-war population estimates which the modern promoters use had not even been collected by the end of the nuremberg trials. Some were not taken until 1950.
That went into your teachings.
That may well have been the case, but textbooks for children being based on outdated information is not really evidence of much. They're not exactly known for being at the forefront of human knowledge.
I honestly don't understand what "official" numbers you're getting at here.
The ones that modern holocaust promoters put forward.
Today, holocaust promoters point to population estimates as evidence for the number killed.
Doctored ones, that support the narrative.
A lot of the post-war population estimates which the modern promoters use had not even been collected by the end of the nuremberg trials. Some were not taken until 1950.
You say that they were not taken till 1950, then why the difference in population numbers at all? Were nearly 6 million just accidentally counted?
They doctored those numbers after the fact to match the four million at Auschwitz plus whatever else claimed elsewhere.
That may well have been the case, but textbooks for children being based on outdated information is not really evidence of much. They're not exactly known for being at the forefront of human knowledge.
There was literally nothing to be learned after the fact, besides lies. That 6 million number came out of nowhere for the teachers and schoolkids some time in the early 50s.
The ones that modern holocaust promoters put forward.
Yeah, and that really makes zero sense. Germany was charged with 4 million at Auschwitz; books were written about the 4 million at Auschwitz; the placard says 4 million at Auschwitz.
On that point there is no disagreement between us.
WrongJPG.
A picture of the world almanac from two years after hoess was hanged does not help your claim that no new evidence was collected after nuremberg, though I will grant to you that additional trials were held in the same vein in nuremberg up until 1948 at least which you may have been referring to.
You say that they were not taken till 1950, then why the difference in population numbers at all? Were nearly 6 million just accidentally counted?
I'm not following your argument here.
They doctored those numbers after the fact to match the four million at Auschwitz plus whatever else claimed elsewhere.
That may well be the case. I'm not trying to argue that the 6 million number was not related in any way to or motivated by the 4 million auschwitz number at some point in time. Still as far as I know, it was never used in the west for that purpose, but I could absolutely be wrong. I'm simply saying that modern holocaust promoters (going back even to the early 1950's here) do not back up their estimates of 6 million killed overall by tallying up 4 million in Auschwitz and .9 million in treblinka and so on. They back up the 6 million number with population estimates.
Germany was charged with 4 million at Auschwitz; books were written about the 4 million at Auschwitz; the placardPNG says 4 million at Auschwitz.
And if you brought that up to any holocaust promoter today, they would tell you that 4 million at auschwitz was a russian lie, that the auschwitz figure is closer to 1 million, that no one in the west has taken the 4 million number seriously since the 1950's, and that population estimates suggest 6 million kikes were killed overall.
I think at this point I am either missing your point or you are missing mine. If you feel I am missing yours, feel free to let me know and try to state it another way.
They occasionally encountered the corpse of a relative, or saw them entering the gas chambers. According to Höss they were obviously shaken by this but "it never led to any incident." He mentioned the case of a Sonderkommando who found the body of his wife, yet continued to drag corpses along "as though nothing had happened."
LOL. Once you've heard enough kike lies, you begin to notice a certain pattern to them, and new ones can be recognized immediately. They're not very inventive.
Yep. Something's not being communicated properly here.
I'm thinking it has something to do with you caring about the latest holocaust lie from the apologists, and me not giving a fuck because most people already know Auschwitz was supposed to have been 4 million of the 6.
Their latest bullshit is found on Quora or holocaustmuseum.org or some such bullshit that people don't visit in any large numbers. What's taught in schools before the age of reason is what people hold on to.
Had trouble reading the red. I had to put on my glasses.
Here’s some future material:
How many ovens/gas chambers did auschwitz have?
Run the math at 24/7/365 and full participation from labor and zero over head or break down time.
How many died after the Allies fucked up German infrastructure?
Nobody mentions the Russians coming in and already had an attitude towards the west.
Red Cross paper work exists.
IBM machines recorded information. Why else put numbers on people? Why put numbers on people if they were headed straight for an open ditch? Why transport them at all?
Why put them in a gas chamber? Those chambers don’t look very air-tight! Wouldn’t the whole camp be dangerous? Many German bunkers were reporpised because they couldn’t demolish them. Bayer used them to store chemicals after blowing out a few blocks of windows trying to destroy a bunker. Auschiwitz is crappy construction.
Why not put them in one area and just drop a bomb?
How many died before the West even gave a fuck?
Fact: Jews were killed by Nazis and Russians.
Hard to believe fact is 6 million.
Fact: Jews hunted Nazis for years after WWII. Very little is mentioned about the Israeli nazi hunters. Why?
I go to find the evidence scouring far and wide looking for videos of the evil nazi's brutally killing the Jews. Nothing, So then I go looking for any evidence at all.
I come across a few shitty photo's which were stolen from the Holodomor/Bolshevik genocides and the udder shadiness involved in the Nuremberg trials.
That's all it took for me, I instantly knew I had been bamboozled.
A few months later I watch the greatest story never told while verifying the facts it brings to light.
Best redpill ever.
Edit:
Eyewitness testimony presented at the Nuremberg trials laid the foundation for much of what we know about the Holocaust
Holocaust deniers ignore the overwhelming evidence of the event
These masses of documents were translated into the court's four official languages, analyzed for their significance, and reproduced for distribution to defense attorneys and other trial participants. The prosecution presented other evidence through artifacts, diagrams, and photographs taken by Nazi photographers in concentration camps.
But
Eyewitness testimony presented at the Nuremberg trials laid the foundation for much of what we know about the Holocaust
This works well when you include details like time and fuel costs associated with cremation.
Aside from what a few others have mentioned about the red text on gray background... It's very thought provoking, all the little inconsistencies that start to add up and show (((them))) for the liars they are
The "4 million at Auschwitz" was never included in the 6 million total calculations, though. Easy "redpill" for people who already agree with you. Anyone else not so much.
And I'll accept criticism from users that have contributed. You've contributed fuck-all in your 2.7 years, so fuck off and learn some English before you return next month for your sockpuppet account upkeep.
I contribute to society and making myself, family and community better. I work 12-14 hour days so my wife can raise my children. When I'm not working, I'm being a god damn man and father so my kids don't become OC on /fuckyoudad You'll have to excuse me for not making shit memes on a fucking internet forum.
Absolutely not true, I've questioned him relentlessly over the course of a year, he has always responded patiently, with firm data, no supposition. If you are willing to look at evidence, and come I the spirit of learning, you went be abused or dismissed.
Sir, this is beautiful. So succinct and without any prejudice or malice. Just genuine, sincere questions in three spirit of inquiry. Perfectly done! ♡
So you agree with him on the thing he cares about the most and he treats you nicely. Wow, big surprise. Try telling him that jews are not alien space lizards and watch him flip his shit.
I agree there are exaggerations and outright lies, and an aggressive global campaign to keep those lies and exaggerations in place.
I learned about those facts from him. I came in here like every other American who learned everything they know a about the holocaust in grade school. I came into the conversation towing that line, which I had no evidence for, aside from what I'd been taught in fifth grade, and media like Schindlers List, etc. Do you have evidence? Present it.
He's never said Jews were alien space lizards, and you damage your credibility when you exaggerate that way. If you want to have a serious discussion, and you want to defend the holocaust narrative, I want to hear you! If you're lazy and looking to troll, its a waste of time.
So you're a crensch convert and you're telling me how nice he is when talking to you? Top kek.
I came in here like every other American who learned everything they know about the holocaust in grade school.
They teach that shit in grade school in the US? That's fucked up.
Do you have evidence? Present it.
Wannsee Protocol, countless confessions by both high- and low-ranking nazi officials, countless pieces of eyewitness testimony, simple demographics (several million people don't wanish into nothing), the impossibility of keeping a conspiracy that involves at least tens of thousands of people secret, and of course photographics evidence galore.
A better question would be what sort of evidence you would accept. None that can exist, I assume.
Nice? I don't know him. And yes, fifth grade is where my holocaust knowledge stems from. Where does yours stem from?
The fact that I would say to you that I've been presented with evidence that caused me to ask more questions, then you
respond to that with "no evidence that exists could sway you". You're closed minded, you make assumptions and assessments that are lazy and simple. This isn't how you have a rational conversation.
People "vanish" during a WORLD WAR in a thousand ways. This discussion is about a holocaust carried out specifically against the Jewish people perpetrated by Germany. Do you understand the difference?
You've insulted me, repeatedly. You're engaging in a facetious argument for what purpose, I don't know.
I contribute to society and making myself, family and community better. I work 12-14 hour days so my wife can raise my children. When I'm not working, I'm being a god damn man and father so my kids don't become OC on /fuckyoudad You'll have to excuse me for not making shit memes on a fucking internet forum.
I don't believe you, nor do I care.
If your English is that bad, you're a terrible fucking dad.
I think it's called the "black value" of the color; i.e. when the background and foregrounds color are converted to gray, they should be reasonably apart. If the black values are close together, the color combination is hard to read.
Dunno if that makes sense. It's the best I can write at this time of day/night.
lordbeatlejuicethe1 ago
thanks
Cheesebooger ago
I'd like to see Redcross figures at the end claiming less than 300,000.
Crensch ago
You'd be surprised how unconvincing that is to some people.
Cheesebooger ago
But its official, though. I always shoved that one out there. I'm like: "take it up with the Red Cross". lol
Crensch ago
Oh, for sure. It OUGHT to be a Jew-gasser, but people look at it and think "photoshop" or something, I guess. It's just not real enough to them.
everef ago
Didn't the six million come from population estimates rather than by adding together the alleged death tolls at individual camps? I've heard that no one in the west took the 4 million at Auschwitz number seriously but that it stayed up because the Soviets were in control of it and wanted it to stay up.
This isn't as convincing to me as is the fact that all of the alleged death camps were in territory controlled by the USSR after the war. Under what other circumstance would we trust the Soviets to tell the truth about something when lieing would be politically advantageous for them?
Crensch ago
No, it didn't. It came from Jewish prophecy crap stating that 6 million of them had to be "holocausted" (burned to death) before the state of Israel could exist. (I wrote some of them out for you here)
The population numbers were doctored after the fact.
Then why was it taught that Auschwitz was far and away the worst one? Also, (((soviets))) at the time that were genociding whites.
(((Soviets)))
everef ago
That could absolutely have been where they got the motivation for that particular number, but my understanding is that the evidence they offered for that number was population estimates.
As a propaganda device I like this infographic even if it's not terribly hard to counter, because the counter involves bringing up the uncomfortable fact that the Soviets were happy to lie to make the Germans look worse. Then it remains only to point out how much control the Soviets had over the alleged crime scene and the rest of the evidence.
If 1 million had died there, it still would have had the highest death count according to the official narrative, but I don't have a better answer than that off hand.
Crensch ago
They didn't have evidence. At all. If they did, the Nuremburg trials wouldn't have needed articles 19 and 21 of the London Charter, which directed the actions of the Tribunal:
The Red Cross numbers show it to be bullshit, the World Almanac numbers, acquired from JEWISH institutions, showed no significant losses from the war for Jews, whatsoever.
That is, until the numbers were changed, after the fact, so Jews could point to it as "evidence" of the 6 million.
No one has successfully countered the above.
If OFFICIAL number of dead for Auschwitz was changed from 4 million to 1.1 million, then the TOTAL, not based on population numbers, or really anything at all worth calling "evidence", then the Jews lied.
Treblinka was supposedly 900,000. An extra 100-200k isn't such a large difference that they wouldn't have even mentioned it in children's textbooks. All you ever hear about is Auschwitz. And 6 million.
everef ago
I'm not talking about at Nuremberg, I'm talking about later on.
Right, and all I'm saying is that (as far as I know) the 4 million number was never used, at least in the west, as evidence that 6 million were killed. The 6 million came from other fudged sources, not from tallying up the alleged death tolls in the camps and elsewhere.
Crensch ago
No new evidence was gained later on.
It was, though. Literally on the memorial placard. The official number. What (((they))) counted. That went into your teachings.
http://archive.is/Ip7w9#selection-155.0-155.367
They charged Germans for 4 million at the Nuremburg trials. I honestly don't understand what "official" numbers you're getting at here.
The decades after are subject to the same evidence, are they not?
everef ago
Are you saying that the prosecution at nuremberg used the same population estimates that the more recent holocaust promoters use? My understanding is that the prosecution was mostly relying on eye-witness testimony and tortured confessions, and not based at all on population estimates. Today, holocaust promoters point to population estimates as evidence for the number killed. A lot of the post-war population estimates which the modern promoters use had not even been collected by the end of the nuremberg trials. Some were not taken until 1950.
That may well have been the case, but textbooks for children being based on outdated information is not really evidence of much. They're not exactly known for being at the forefront of human knowledge.
The ones that modern holocaust promoters put forward.
Crensch ago
Doctored ones, that support the narrative.
Wrong.
You say that they were not taken till 1950, then why the difference in population numbers at all? Were nearly 6 million just accidentally counted?
They doctored those numbers after the fact to match the four million at Auschwitz plus whatever else claimed elsewhere.
There was literally nothing to be learned after the fact, besides lies. That 6 million number came out of nowhere for the teachers and schoolkids some time in the early 50s.
Yeah, and that really makes zero sense. Germany was charged with 4 million at Auschwitz; books were written about the 4 million at Auschwitz; the placard says 4 million at Auschwitz.
everef ago
On that point there is no disagreement between us.
A picture of the world almanac from two years after hoess was hanged does not help your claim that no new evidence was collected after nuremberg, though I will grant to you that additional trials were held in the same vein in nuremberg up until 1948 at least which you may have been referring to.
I'm not following your argument here.
That may well be the case. I'm not trying to argue that the 6 million number was not related in any way to or motivated by the 4 million auschwitz number at some point in time. Still as far as I know, it was never used in the west for that purpose, but I could absolutely be wrong. I'm simply saying that modern holocaust promoters (going back even to the early 1950's here) do not back up their estimates of 6 million killed overall by tallying up 4 million in Auschwitz and .9 million in treblinka and so on. They back up the 6 million number with population estimates.
And if you brought that up to any holocaust promoter today, they would tell you that 4 million at auschwitz was a russian lie, that the auschwitz figure is closer to 1 million, that no one in the west has taken the 4 million number seriously since the 1950's, and that population estimates suggest 6 million kikes were killed overall.
I think at this point I am either missing your point or you are missing mine. If you feel I am missing yours, feel free to let me know and try to state it another way.
Crensch ago
Relevant.
everef ago
LOL. Once you've heard enough kike lies, you begin to notice a certain pattern to them, and new ones can be recognized immediately. They're not very inventive.
Crensch ago
Yep. Something's not being communicated properly here.
I'm thinking it has something to do with you caring about the latest holocaust lie from the apologists, and me not giving a fuck because most people already know Auschwitz was supposed to have been 4 million of the 6.
Their latest bullshit is found on Quora or holocaustmuseum.org or some such bullshit that people don't visit in any large numbers. What's taught in schools before the age of reason is what people hold on to.
Artofchoke ago
Sir, this is beautiful. So succinct and without any prejudice or malice. Just genuine, sincere questions in three spirit of inquiry. Perfectly done! ♡
WhiteRonin ago
Had trouble reading the red. I had to put on my glasses.
Here’s some future material:
How many ovens/gas chambers did auschwitz have? Run the math at 24/7/365 and full participation from labor and zero over head or break down time.
How many died after the Allies fucked up German infrastructure?
Nobody mentions the Russians coming in and already had an attitude towards the west.
Red Cross paper work exists.
IBM machines recorded information. Why else put numbers on people? Why put numbers on people if they were headed straight for an open ditch? Why transport them at all?
Why put them in a gas chamber? Those chambers don’t look very air-tight! Wouldn’t the whole camp be dangerous? Many German bunkers were reporpised because they couldn’t demolish them. Bayer used them to store chemicals after blowing out a few blocks of windows trying to destroy a bunker. Auschiwitz is crappy construction.
Why not put them in one area and just drop a bomb?
How many died before the West even gave a fuck?
Fact: Jews were killed by Nazis and Russians.
Hard to believe fact is 6 million.
Fact: Jews hunted Nazis for years after WWII. Very little is mentioned about the Israeli nazi hunters. Why?
Crensch ago
https://voat.co/v/Shekelverse/2035040
Most of that is in the link above. Wanting simple, for the normies.
WhiteRonin ago
Damn! Fine job!
I just did that in question format because people might be more inclined to a question than a statement.
It’s like asking why god created Satan? It makes a person knee jerk and this trigger their own statement for defense.
Chimaira92 ago
My redpill on the holocaust was this.
Debating a holohoax'er
I'm drawing all of my "facts" from shit I learned and watched back at school.
I go to find the evidence scouring far and wide looking for videos of the evil nazi's brutally killing the Jews. Nothing, So then I go looking for any evidence at all.
I come across a few shitty photo's which were stolen from the Holodomor/Bolshevik genocides and the udder shadiness involved in the Nuremberg trials.
That's all it took for me, I instantly knew I had been bamboozled.
A few months later I watch the greatest story never told while verifying the facts it brings to light.
Best redpill ever.
Edit:
https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007147
On the very same page
But
Can't even stick to the narrative.
bdmthrfkr ago
This is the easiest one but not anywhere near the funnest. That honor goes to the "Death Rollercoaster".
pic related: https://kek.gg/i/89ZDN_.png
individualin1984 ago
https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=N1cbsLKXasQ
bdmthrfkr ago
Kek.
pic related: https://kek.gg/i/8dY5Mv.png
Hey_Sunshine ago
This works well when you include details like time and fuel costs associated with cremation.
Aside from what a few others have mentioned about the red text on gray background... It's very thought provoking, all the little inconsistencies that start to add up and show (((them))) for the liars they are
Crensch ago
Source
@SexMachine
SexMachine ago
Red pills like this are best left as teasers. You don't want to give them everything, you want them to think for themselves, and find the answers.
Ho-Lee-Fuk ago
This is wonderful.
Crensch ago
Source
Saufsoldat ago
The "4 million at Auschwitz" was never included in the 6 million total calculations, though. Easy "redpill" for people who already agree with you. Anyone else not so much.
Crensch ago
Yeah, how's that workin' out for ya?
Saufsoldat ago
What are you talking about?
Crensch ago
Stupid kike. Stupid, stupid, low IQ kikes all around.
Seriously, you're an imbecile.
You write:
The faggot in my link didn't agree with me 10 days ago.
bdmthrfkr ago
So you fucking kikes are now upping it to 10 gorrillion?
Why am I not surprised.
Saufsoldat ago
Are you having a stroke or something? What in the fuck are you talking about?
bdmthrfkr ago
I guess that jews can't add. 6 gorrilion plus the unaccounted for 4 gorrillion from Auschwitz = 10 gorillion.
Keep at it though, someday somebody might believe you.
Saufsoldat ago
Who said they were unaccounted?
I'm stating the fact that the commonly-cited 6 mio estimate does not postulate 4 mio dying at Auschwitz. Your strawman is not impressive in any way.
bdmthrfkr ago
So you are saying that 6 + 4 = 10?
Saufsoldat ago
Concession noted.
bdmthrfkr ago
Fuck off jew and learn how to add.
Saufsoldat ago
I'm sorry that you don't speak English.
bdmthrfkr ago
Fuck off JIDF.
Open borders...for Israel!
projection ago
Good stuff again. Thank you.
pissedoffhonkey ago
jesus fucking christ never use red text on a gray background again
Crensch ago
User for 9 months. 21scp 54ccp.
Take a walk, faggot.
pissedoffhonkey ago
Crensch ago
Someone pretending to belong here asking me to go back to rEddit for character reference.
Kek.
SexMachine ago
Why do you hate white people so much, Crensch?
RAMASULE ago
Hez right and thats why it hurts.
Crensch ago
And I'll accept criticism from users that have contributed. You've contributed fuck-all in your 2.7 years, so fuck off and learn some English before you return next month for your sockpuppet account upkeep.
SexMachine ago
The red text is pretty hard to read. You should feel bad about it and feel bad about yourself.
Crensch ago
Not a chance I'll feel bad about it, but I might change it for the next one.
bdmthrfkr ago
Sleeper account.
RAMASULE ago
I contribute to society and making myself, family and community better. I work 12-14 hour days so my wife can raise my children. When I'm not working, I'm being a god damn man and father so my kids don't become OC on /fuckyoudad You'll have to excuse me for not making shit memes on a fucking internet forum.
Saufsoldat ago
Crensch spazzes out whenever he is questioned in any way. Just the average power user with a god complex.
Artofchoke ago
Absolutely not true, I've questioned him relentlessly over the course of a year, he has always responded patiently, with firm data, no supposition. If you are willing to look at evidence, and come I the spirit of learning, you went be abused or dismissed.
Saufsoldat ago
Your other comment:
So you agree with him on the thing he cares about the most and he treats you nicely. Wow, big surprise. Try telling him that jews are not alien space lizards and watch him flip his shit.
Artofchoke ago
I agree there are exaggerations and outright lies, and an aggressive global campaign to keep those lies and exaggerations in place.
I learned about those facts from him. I came in here like every other American who learned everything they know a about the holocaust in grade school. I came into the conversation towing that line, which I had no evidence for, aside from what I'd been taught in fifth grade, and media like Schindlers List, etc. Do you have evidence? Present it.
He's never said Jews were alien space lizards, and you damage your credibility when you exaggerate that way. If you want to have a serious discussion, and you want to defend the holocaust narrative, I want to hear you! If you're lazy and looking to troll, its a waste of time.
Saufsoldat ago
So you're a crensch convert and you're telling me how nice he is when talking to you? Top kek.
They teach that shit in grade school in the US? That's fucked up.
Wannsee Protocol, countless confessions by both high- and low-ranking nazi officials, countless pieces of eyewitness testimony, simple demographics (several million people don't wanish into nothing), the impossibility of keeping a conspiracy that involves at least tens of thousands of people secret, and of course photographics evidence galore.
A better question would be what sort of evidence you would accept. None that can exist, I assume.
Artofchoke ago
Nice? I don't know him. And yes, fifth grade is where my holocaust knowledge stems from. Where does yours stem from?
The fact that I would say to you that I've been presented with evidence that caused me to ask more questions, then you respond to that with "no evidence that exists could sway you". You're closed minded, you make assumptions and assessments that are lazy and simple. This isn't how you have a rational conversation.
People "vanish" during a WORLD WAR in a thousand ways. This discussion is about a holocaust carried out specifically against the Jewish people perpetrated by Germany. Do you understand the difference?
You've insulted me, repeatedly. You're engaging in a facetious argument for what purpose, I don't know.
Raise the bar.
Crensch ago
I don't believe you, nor do I care.
If your English is that bad, you're a terrible fucking dad.
"Dad" typing in Ebonics.
Reddit_traitor ago
This is great info. thank you, but I do agree the red on gray hurts the eyes.
Crensch ago
I'll keep that in mind for the next one.
BlockMe ago
I think it's called the "black value" of the color; i.e. when the background and foregrounds color are converted to gray, they should be reasonably apart. If the black values are close together, the color combination is hard to read.
Dunno if that makes sense. It's the best I can write at this time of day/night.
Reddit_traitor ago
Keep em coming.