Scott Smith wrote:Charles Bunch wrote:Scott Smith wrote:Charles Bunch wrote:Scott Smith wrote:
Nobody is saying that the Holocaust didn't happen. That is a dishonest reductio ad absurdum.
Nonsense. You deny the Nazis intention to exterminate Europe's Jews. You deny the gas chambers which accounted for half the 6 million murdered. You even attempt to minimize the death toll.
No I don't. Perhaps you are confusing me with Hannover.
I admit to the similarities.
Now answer the following questions so we quickly dispense with your dishonesty.
Chuck, you are just making an elitist ass of yourself--perhaps something learned at Bowdoing.
What I'm doing is exposing you as a liar.
1. Do you accept that Nazi Germany murder Jews in gas chambers at Treblinka?
Not proved as far as I'm concerned because the murder-weapon is not established with forensic science, nor the fantastic body-disposal rates with minimal fuel.
And what is the forensic evidence proving the bombing of Dresden, London, Hiroshima, or Nagasaki?
Since this excuse for not accepting the evidence is clearly ridiculous, you are merely denying gassing at Treblinka.
2. Belzec?
3. Sobibor?
Same.
The same denial.
4. Chelmno?
Even less evidence, almost apocryphal.
You don't even know what the evidence is.
So you deny Chelmno.
5. Maidanek?
NO. Here we have almost as much physical evidence as at Dachau but we have to keep the story straight, so we can't just say that the gaschambers (actually delousing closets) were never used for homicide.
The gas chamber at Maidanek was not a delousing closet.
I would be amazed if anybody ever proved mass-gassings here at facilities available intact for inspection.
I'd been amazed if you knew anything about the camp.
More mindless denial.
6. Mauthausen?
Even less convincing than Dachau.
So Smith denies gassing at Mauthausen as well.
I question the intent,
No you don't. You deny it.
Without proof it is argumentative at best.
You mean without evidence. Proof is a subjective assessment of evidence.
If there was no evidence for intent, Holocaust historians would hardly universally acknowledge it.
but there is a whole school of Holo-historians called Functionalists who deny that.
You reveal your utter ignorance of the history once again.
Let's have some Chuckooin enlightenment then. Don't hold back, now.
Why don't you read some history, instead of Nazi apologia?
Functionalists do not deny intentionality.
They Deny the Intentionalist thesis, Socrates.
But the intentionalist thesis is not just a matter of intent.
Functionalists acknowledge the intent to commit genocide with the adoption of the Final Solution.
Your ignorance of these historiographical aspects of the history further betray your true intent, and your willingness to spout about things you know nothing about.
I am skeptical of gaschambers, yes. I do not deny them.
So you deny intentionality and gas chambers! No one is fooled by your "skepticism".
I don't care. You don't seem any harder to fool than Mr. Magoo. And he was a Rutgers man.
But you're not fooling anyone. You deny gas chambers. Your semantical fig leaf only embarrasses you.
I don't have enough evidence to do that.
You don't have any evidence. And you don't have a better scenario which explains the evidence, nor do any of your cohorts who call themselves revisionists, but have no revisionist history to offer.
Hannover says, "if it couldn't have happened as alleged then it didn't."
LOL!
Quoting that fool only embarrasses you more!
Poor Hannover doesn't have a high school graduates understanding of science, and yet claims the gassing, shooting and cremation of Jews during WWII was scientifically impossible.
I say it might have anyway but it is not proved.
Oh, it's proved, you merely deny the evidence.
I do deny diesel-gaschambers and diesel gas-vans.
Let's add this to the list. This denies the history of Chelmno.
...and also published by Gerald Fleming. That still doesn't mean that I find the story believable, Mein Chuck.
Of course you don't find it believable, you deny it!
That doesn't mean it isn't a proven fact of history.
I also find the body-disposal rates questionable, as claimed.
Another major theme of Holocaust denial.
I've debated that before. Chuck has been conspicuously absent in debates over technical issues.
You know nothing about the technical issues.
And neither you nor your scientifically illiterate cohorts have shown any reason to question cremation rates.
I have said many times that I do not quarrel with Hilberg's figures of about five-million.
But that is just ass covering nonsense!
You've missed the point again, Chuck. I never said I endorsed Hilberg's figures.
A distinction without a difference for the sake of this conversation.
quote]So how can you accept Hilberg's figures if you deny Chelmno, and "doubt" the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, Sobibor, Belzec, and Maidanek?
I never said that I accepted them. I just don't take issue with Hilberg's figure of five-million, largely because it is the closest figure to six-million without actually being six-million. Not hard to understand, really.[/quote]
It is impossible to understand how you could not quarrel with figures the basis of which you deny.
Nice try. I really enjoy it when I am portrayed as a sort of Manichean heretic, a "dangerous amateur" as Roberto once said.
You are shown to be a mindless denier who says such embarrassing things that, like most deniers, he does his cause a disservice.
