Varför tror du på förintelsen?

Ursprungligen postat av curiamobilium
När uppgifter står mot varandra är det oftast svårt för parter att lägga fram så tillförlitlig bevisning att det inte kan råda något tvivel om att den enes uppgifter är riktiga.

- Överviktsprinciper (det enskilda beviset kanske inte alltid kan fälla, men tusentals bevis av samma värde ger en fällande dom)

British historian A.J.P. Taylor once gave a marvellous description of this situation in an attempt to explain “the almost universal agreement among historians” on the origins of the Second World War, an explanation which applies equally to Holocaust historiography:
123
“If the evidence had been sufficiently conflicting, scholars would soon have been found to dispute the popular verdict, however generally accepted. This has not happened; and for two apparently contradictory reasons –
there is at once too much evidence and too little. The evidence of which there is too much is that collected for the trials of war-criminals in Nuremberg. Though these documents look imposing in their endless volumes, they
are dangerous material for a historian to use. They were collected, hastily and almost at random, as a basis for lawyers’ briefs. This is not how historians would proceed. The lawyer aims to make a case; the historian wishes
to understand a situation. The evidence which convinces lawyers often fails to satisfy us; our methods seem singularly imprecise to them. But even lawyers must now have qualms about the evidence at Nuremberg. The documents were chosen not only to demonstrate the war-guilt of the men on trial, but to conceal that of the prosecuting Powers. If any of the four Powers who set up the Nuremberg tribunal had been running the affair alone, it would have thrown the mud more widely. The Western Powers would have brought in the Nazi-Soviet Pact; the Soviet Union would have retaliated with the Munich conference and more obscure transactions. Given the four-Power tribunal, the only possible course was to assume the sole guilt of Germany in advance. The verdict preceded the tribunal; and the documents were brought in to sustain a conclusion which had already been settled. Of course the documents are genuine. But they are ‘loaded’; and anyone who relies on them finds it almost impossible to escape from the load with which they are charged.”

Att kräva full visshet om de verkliga förhållandena skulle innebära att ett stort antal rättsligt grundade anspråk aldrig skulle bli tillgodosedda.

Ursprungligen postat av 12-12-12
[...]
Jag talar inte om ett bevis i logisk mening utan om bevismaterial.

Så vad skulle ha kunnat få dig att tro på "Förintelsen"? Vad hade räknats som tillräckliga "bevismaterial"/vittnesmål/indikationer/bevisföremål i dina ögon?

Jag talar inte om vetskap eftersom vetskap förutsätter att tron är både berättigad och återspeglar sanningen, vilket vi inte kan veta när det gäller historiska händelser. Därför talar vi om tro, d.v.s. tro som i ett antagande.

Jag tolkar ditt slingrande som att du inte skulle godta några som helst bevis för att "Förintelsen" ägt rum, oavsett om det fanns en videoinspelning på varje enskilt påstått mord där en SS-man står intill och säger "Vi utför detta mord på uppdrag av Adolf Hitler".
__________________
Senast redigerad av 12-12-12 2013-01-22 kl. 16:57.

Ett väl fungerande rättssystem förutsätter därför att rättsliga tvister avgörs med utgångspunkt från vissa sakförhållanden, trots att det finns en osäkerhet om hur det verkligen ligger till med sakförhållandenas existens.

Ursprungligen postat av Kapten Stofil
När det gäller själva sakfrågan blir en debatt nästan meningslös eftersom revisionister liksom kommunister, ortodoxa religiösa mf l, lever i ett slutet värde-system. De har slagit fast ett antal grundbultar runt vilka det inte går att föra något vettig debatt:
-Gud finns.
-Koranen är Allahs ord.
-Nazisterna använde inte gas för att död judar.
Det går inte att diskutera koranens ursprung med en Islamist lika lite som man kan diskutera förintelsen med revisionister.

Förintelsen (bl a) lär oss helt enkelt en del om vad vi har att undvika i framtiden!

Ursprungligen postat av curiamobilium
Att kräva full visshet om de verkliga förhållandena skulle innebära att ett stort antal rättsligt grundade anspråk aldrig skulle bli tillgodosedda.

Ursprungligen postat av curiamobilium
Skulle jag göra anktestet på dig skulle jag tro att du är muslim och arbetar på Radio Islam?
Nädå anktestet visar en helt annan bild.
Kvack-salveri!

On March 12, 1933 the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Gardens for March 27. At that time the commander in chief of the Jewish War Veterans called for an American boycott of German goods. In the meantime, on March 23, 20,000 Jews protested at New York's City Hall as rallies were staged outside the North German Lloyd and Hamburg-American shipping lines and boycotts were mounted against German goods throughout shops and businesses in New York City.

According to The Daily Express of London of March 24, 1933, the Jews had already launched their boycott against Germany and her elected government. The headline read "Judea Declares War on Germany - Jews of All the World Unite - Boycott of German Goods - Mass Demonstrations." The article described a forthcoming "holy war" and went on to implore Jews everywhere to boycott German goods and engage in mass demonstrations against German economic interests. According to the Express:

The whole of Israel throughout the world is uniting to declare an economic and financial war on Germany. The appearance of the Swastika as the symbol of the new Germany has revived the old war symbol of Judas to new life. Fourteen million Jews scattered over the entire world are tight to each other as if one man, in order to declare war against the German persecutors of their fellow believers.
The Jewish wholesaler will quit his house, the banker his stock exchange, the merchant his business, and the beggar his humble hut, in order to join the holy war against Hitler's people.

Sterilization is not to be confused with castration. It is
a safe and simple operation, quite harmless and painless,
neither mutilating nor unsexing the patient
. Its effects are most often less di
stressing than vaccination and not more
serious than a tooth extraction. Too, the operation is extremely rapid requiring no more than ten minutes to
complete. The patient may resume his work immediately af
terwards. Even in the case of
the female the operation,
though taking longer to perform, is as safe and simple. Performed thousands of times, no records indicate cases of
complication or death. When one rea
lizes that such health measures as
vaccination and serum treatments are
considered as direct benefits to th
e community, certainly sterilization of the German people cannot but be considered
a great health measure promoted by humanity to immunize itself forever against the virus of Germanism.

COMMUNIST ORIGINS
Of the first kind, the most outstanding example is Commandant of Auschwitz by Rudolf
Hoess (London, 1960), which was originally published in the Polish language as
Wspomnienia
by the Communist Government. Hoess, a young man who took over at Auschwitz in 1940, was
first arrested by the British and detained at Flensburg, but he was soon handed over to the
Polish Communist authorities who condemned him to death in 1947 and executed him almost
immediately. The so-called Hoess memoirs are undoubtedly a forgery produced under
Communist auspices, as we shall demonstrate, though the Communists themselves claim that
Hoess was "ordered to write the story of his life" and a hand-written original supposedly exists,
but no one has ever seen it. Hoess was subjected to torture and brain-washing techniques by the
Communists during the period of his arrest, an
d his testimony at Nuremberg was delivered in a
mindless monotone as he stared blankly into space. Even Reitlinger rejects this testimony as
hopelessly untrustworthy. It is indeed remarkable how much of the "evidence" regarding the Six
Million stems from Communist sources; this includes the major documents such as the
Wisliceny statement and the Hoess "memoirs", which are undoubtedly the two most quoted
items in extermination literature, as well as all the information on the so-called "death camps"
such as Auschwitz. This information comes from the Jewish Historical Commission of Poland;
the Central Commission for the Investigation of War Crimes, Warsaw; and the Russian State
War Crimes Commission, Moscow. Reitlinger acknowledges that the Hoess testimony at
Nuremberg was a catalogue of wild exaggerations, such as that Auschwitz was disposing of
16,000 people a day, which would mean a total at the end of the war of over 13 million. Instead
of exposing such estimates for the Soviet-inspired frauds they obviously are, Reitlinger and
others prefer to think that such ridiculous exaggerations were due to "pride" in doing a
professional job. Ironically, this is completely
irreconcilable with the supposedly authentic
Hoess memoirs, which make a clever attempt at plausibility by suggesting the opposite picture
of distaste for the job. Hoess is supposed to have "confessed" to a total of 3 million people
exterminated at Auschwitz, though at his own trial in Warsaw the prosecution reduced the
number to 1,135,000. However, we have already noted that the Soviet Government announced
an official figure of 4 million after their "investigation" of the camp in 1945. This kind of casual
juggling with millions of people does not appear to worry the writers of extermination literature.
A review of the Hoess "memoirs" in all their horrid detail would be tedious. We may confine
ourselves to those aspects of the extermination legend which are designed with the obvious
purpose of forestalling any proof of its falsity. Such, for example, is the manner in which the
alleged extermination of Jews is described. This was supposed to have been carried out by a
"special detachment" of Jewish prisoners. They took charge of the newly arrived contingents at
the camp, led them into the enormous "gas-chambers" and disposed of the bodies afterwards.
The S.S., therefore, did very little, so that most of the S.S. personnel at the camp could be left in
complete ignorance of the "extermination programme". Of course, no Jew would ever be found
who claimed to have been a member of this gruesome "special detachment", so that the whole
issue is left conveniently unprovable. It is worth repeating that no living, authentic eye-witness
to these events has ever been produced. Conclusive evidence that the Hoess memoirs are a
forgery lies in an incredible slip by the Communist editors. Hoess is supposed to say that the
Jehovah's Witnesses at Auschwitz approved of murdering the Jews because the Jews were the
enemies of Christ. It is well known that in Soviet Russia today and in all her satellite countries of
eastern Europe, the Communists conduct a bitter campaign of suppression against the
Jehovah's Witnesses whom they regard as the religious sect most dangerous to Communist
beliefs. That this sect is deliberately and grossly defamed in the Hoess memoirs proves the
document's Communist origins beyond any doubt.

On March 12, 1933 the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Gardens for March 27. At that time the commander in chief of the Jewish War Veterans called for an American boycott of German goods. In the meantime, on March 23, 20,000 Jews protested at New York's City Hall as rallies were staged outside the North German Lloyd and Hamburg-American shipping lines and boycotts were mounted against German goods throughout shops and businesses in New York City.

According to The Daily Express of London of March 24, 1933, the Jews had already launched their boycott against Germany and her elected government. The headline read "Judea Declares War on Germany - Jews of All the World Unite - Boycott of German Goods - Mass Demonstrations." The article described a forthcoming "holy war" and went on to implore Jews everywhere to boycott German goods and engage in mass demonstrations against German economic interests. According to the Express:

The whole of Israel throughout the world is uniting to declare an economic and financial war on Germany. The appearance of the Swastika as the symbol of the new Germany has revived the old war symbol of Judas to new life. Fourteen million Jews scattered over the entire world are tight to each other as if one man, in order to declare war against the German persecutors of their fellow believers.

Dachau was opened in March 1933.[1] The press statement given at the opening stated:

On Wednesday the first concentration camp is to be opened in Dachau with an accommodation for 5000 people. 'All Communists and—where necessary—Reichsbanner and Social Democratic functionaries who endanger state security are to be concentrated here, as in the long run it is not possible to keep individual functionaries in the state prisons without overburdening these prisons, and on the other hand these people cannot be released because attempts have shown that they persist in their efforts to agitate and organize as soon as they are released.[1]

Münchner Neueste Nachrichten ("The Munich Latest News") (in German) (The Holocaust History Project). 21 March 1933. "The Munich Chief of Police, Himmler, has issued the following press announcement: On Wednesday the first concentration camp is to be opened in Dachau with an accommodation for 5000 persons. 'All Communists and—where necessary—Reichsbanner and Social Democratic functionaries who endanger state security are to be concentrated here, as in the long run it is not possible to keep individual functionaries in the state prisons without overburdening these prisons, and on the other hand these people cannot be released because attempts have shown that they persist in their efforts to agitate and organise as soon as they are released.'"