War in Palestine

Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
4,678
Likes
6,091
@Thunderian @Lisa

As you Jews always tell the truth about porn industry, freemasonry, ISIS, 9/11, population control, one world government, bankers' cabal, chemtrails, abortion, mass surveilance, immigration etc.... so are you, again, telling the truth about Palestinian/israeli conflict.

it was the Israeli Jews who stole palestininan lands and yet the palestinians are the one who start the fight?

Gaza is mostly populated area, it is an open prison and the few open areas are always under constant surveillance. Hamas has no other choice but to use Gazan land for retaliation to the God's chosen cowards (actually Satan's chosen and they know that). people of Gaza are slaughtered every month or so anyway and Gazans know that regardless of Hamas rockets being fired upon occupied areas by the Jews, they are going to be targeted with or without Hamas.
There are more things wrong in your post than there are words.
 





Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,841
Likes
3,439
@Thunderian @Lisa

As you Jews always tell the truth about porn industry, freemasonry, ISIS, 9/11, population control, one world government, bankers' cabal, chemtrails, abortion, mass surveilance, immigration etc.... so are you, again, telling the truth about Palestinian/israeli conflict.

it was the Israeli Jews who stole palestininan lands and yet the palestinians are the one who start the fight?

Gaza is mostly populated area, it is an open prison and the few open areas are always under constant surveillance. Hamas has no other choice but to use Gazan land for retaliation to the God's chosen cowards (actually Satan's chosen and they know that). people of Gaza are slaughtered every month or so anyway and Gazans know that regardless of Hamas rockets being fired upon occupied areas by the Jews, they are going to be targeted with or without Hamas.
Well, friend, I’m not a Jew. Yes, I believe that I am telling the truth about the palestinian/Israeli conflict. We both seem to have our own biases when you capitalize palestinian and I capitalize Israeli. However, I do believe my bias is the truth.

Don’t you know how the Jews came to be in the land? After 6 million of them were imprisoned , tortured and gassed by Hitler, the forces that came out on top after WWII decided to give in and give the Jews a homeland...and guess what it was the homeland that God told them was their land forever. So, how can you say that Israel stole the land when it was given to them, first by God and then by human authorities? If you want to be mad...I guess you could be mad, but I don’t think it will do you any good, since He doesn’t go back on His promises. You could be mad at the governments of the world that allowed it and ironically, they aren’t for Israel all that much anymore either. But, being mad at Israel, I feel is like being mad at a baby who is conceived that you don’t really want, doesn’t make sense to be mad at the baby, it just wants to live.

I thought Gaza was self ruled by the muslim authorities...your anger is misplaced then. I have heard that when Israel pulled out their citizens to give to the palestinian’s that they left a huge greenhouse business but that the muslim’s wrecked them and started a war of rocket launches into Israel. They are God’s chosen people, and I don’t think they are cowards. Usually cowards run from fights, but they will stand up for themselves by force if necessary. Sure, they give a little lee way, but I believe once that line is crossed, they will retaliate, however how much damage do the palestinian’s wreak onto them before they retaliate.

I do believe that the palestinan’s have no care for their own people when they put their military in civilian places putting those people in danger, and also acting quite cowardly in doing so. Also teaching their children to go in harm’s way to throw rocks at the Israeli military, hoping that they kill some of them so they can cry fowl. It really is like one Israeli prime minister said, they love death.

No, if they are targeted without Hamas, where are the news stories? They would be crucified in the world’s press if they did that. The stories of retaliation are only after Hamas or anyone else has been firing many rockets into Israel or lighting balloons and tires on fire and sending them into Israel to wreak havoc on the Israeli’s. In your opinion, then, friend, should Israel do nothing?
 





Joined
Jul 26, 2017
Messages
603
Likes
1,003
Well, friend, I’m not a Jew. Yes, I believe that I am telling the truth about the palestinian/Israeli conflict. We both seem to have our own biases when you capitalize palestinian and I capitalize Israeli. However, I do believe my bias is the truth.

Don’t you know how the Jews came to be in the land? After 6 million of them were imprisoned , tortured and gassed by Hitler, the forces that came out on top after WWII decided to give in and give the Jews a homeland...and guess what it was the homeland that God told them was their land forever. So, how can you say that Israel stole the land when it was given to them, first by God and then by human authorities? If you want to be mad...I guess you could be mad, but I don’t think it will do you any good, since He doesn’t go back on His promises. You could be mad at the governments of the world that allowed it and ironically, they aren’t for Israel all that much anymore either. But, being mad at Israel, I feel is like being mad at a baby who is conceived that you don’t really want, doesn’t make sense to be mad at the baby, it just wants to live.

I thought Gaza was self ruled by the muslim authorities...your anger is misplaced then. I have heard that when Israel pulled out their citizens to give to the palestinian’s that they left a huge greenhouse business but that the muslim’s wrecked them and started a war of rocket launches into Israel. They are God’s chosen people, and I don’t think they are cowards. Usually cowards run from fights, but they will stand up for themselves by force if necessary. Sure, they give a little lee way, but I believe once that line is crossed, they will retaliate, however how much damage do the palestinian’s wreak onto them before they retaliate.

I do believe that the palestinan’s have no care for their own people when they put their military in civilian places putting those people in danger, and also acting quite cowardly in doing so. Also teaching their children to go in harm’s way to throw rocks at the Israeli military, hoping that they kill some of them so they can cry fowl. It really is like one Israeli prime minister said, they love death.

No, if they are targeted without Hamas, where are the news stories? They would be crucified in the world’s press if they did that. The stories of retaliation are only after Hamas or anyone else has been firing many rockets into Israel or lighting balloons and tires on fire and sending them into Israel to wreak havoc on the Israeli’s. In your opinion, then, friend, should Israel do nothing?
@Thunderian / @Lisa

Read Original Article Here : http://www.tomatobubble.com/id801.html


One thing you will notice about the professional liars of the Fake News and Fake Academia is that, when cornered, they will concede a point for strategic purposes, before following up with a quick "yeah-but" to hold up their argument. Those conceded points should never be allowed to pass for they are the basis of an effective "Judo" response. For example; imagine that an accused car thief is confronted with evidence of his past record of stealing. Forced to concede the point, the thief will say: "Yes. It is true that I stole 7 cars over the past 5 years, but to suggest that I stole this particular car is ridiculous."

We then press the thief on the fact that several witnesses just saw him driving the same color, make & model of the stolen car in question. He again concedes: "Yes. It is true that I was seen driving a vehicle fitting that exact description, but that was a rented car which coincidentally matched the description of the car that you claim I just stole."
When challenged on his ability to rent a car when he has no credit cards, the artful liar, without skipping a beat, retorts: "Yes. It is true that I have no credit cards, but that's because my cousin, who just moved to Brazil, let me use his credit card."

Now, let us review what we have just learned from our thieving friend, as carelessly confirmed from his own big mouth!
1
. He is in fact a repeat car thief.
2. He was in fact driving a vehicle fitting the description of the recently stolen car.
3. He did not possess a credit card, which would have been needed had he really rented a similar car, as claimed.

Those concessions are known as "hard data points." The rest is just fluff. Considered individually, none of those concessions will clinch the prosecution's case. But taken cumulatively, such self-admitted facts begin to paint the accused liar into a very tight corner. That's logical Judo for you. And it is precisely why Defense Lawyers advise that suspects should always remain silent when questioned by police. You know, the so-called "Miranda Rights" warning; "Anything you say can and will be used against you."
With this logical principle in mind, let us similarly corner one of one of Holohoaxianty's High Priests, Timothy Ryback, by using the accumulation of his own 2004 written concessions, as published by the oh-so-"prestigious" Wall Street Urinal, against him. This is 'gonna' be fun!



Forensic Evidence Of the Holocaust Must Be Preserved


By: Timothy Ryback


July 7, 2004






Full Wall Street Journal Article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB108914879023756502


Ryback:
Last month, Jarek Mensfelt, spokesman for the Auschwitz memorial site, announced plans to preserve the ruins of the gas chambers and crematoria in the notorious death camp at Birkenau near the Polish town of Oswiecim (Auschwitz). "This is an attempt to keep it as it is now -- in ruins -- but not let the ruins go," he said. "It was meant to be here forever as a warning."

Analysis: So, Mr. Ryback, both you and Mr. Mensfelt now admit that what you claim were "gas chambers and crematoria" now lie in ruins. That means the "gas chambers and crematoria" that are still being shown to the teary-eyed tourists are Soviet-era "reconstructions" -- a fact that "Holocaust Deniers" were once attacked for claiming. Thanks for confirming that for us in the Wall Street Urinal.


Images 1 & 2 are of the Soviet-era reconstruction of the "gas chambers" ™. Image 3 depicts the ruins of the what is said to the original "gas chambers".
Ryback and the Polish curators concede that what is shown to gullible tourists are NOT the actual "gas chambers" ™.






Ryback: In the coming weeks, as the Auschwitz preservationists begin their work, they should be guided by the knowledge that these heaps of dynamited concrete and twisted steel are not only historic artifacts but among the few remnants of untainted, forensic evidence of the Holocaust.

Analysis: How exactly do these bombed-out remnants constitute "forensic evidence" of mass murdering gas chambers? Have any traces of poisonous gas been detected in the stones?

Ryback: Of course, the historical and circumstantial evidence of a premeditated Nazi plan to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe is overwhelming.

Analysis: Ah yes. The good ol' "the-evidence-is-overwhelming" rhetorical trick. Such a bold statement may sway the weak-minded, but it proves nothing. Talk is cheap, as they say. My. Ryback, could you please share with us this "overwhelming evidence" of a premeditated "Nazi" plan to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe.

Ryback: There are the watch-tower-girded enclosures of Nazi concentration camps ....

Analysis: "Watch-towers?" Well, duh! They were internment camps, after all. No one is denying the Jewish internment of World War II. What we want is evidence of a genocide campaign. Continue.

Ryback: ...and the extensive testimonials of Holocaust survivors.....

Analysis: Yes, "testimonials" which, as even some of your Jewish colleagues now openly admit, are often unreliable. Speaking of "testimonials," what do you have to say of the former Auschwitz inmates who later told of spirited soccer games and fun activities for the children? If the Germans were out to commit genocide, why were so many "survivors" allowed to live? Auschwitz alone had 9,000 survivors when the Soviets arrived there.









Yakov Tzur testimony, March 2009: "I played soccer games at Auschwitz in 1944." (YouTube here)


(Other camps had actual Jewish soccer leagues.)




Ryback: .... as well as the court protocols of Nazi war criminals,

Analysis: So-called "Nazi war criminals" were tortured and the Nuremberg Trials were a joke. Those same "court protocols" told of shrunken Jewish heads, and Jews being fashioned into lamp shades and bars of soaps -- claims which all "Holocaust schollars" now admit were false.

Ryback: .... but there is little forensic evidence proving homicidal intent.

Analysis: Hold it! What did you just say???

Ryback: ...but there is little forensic evidence proving homicidal intent.

Analysis: That's what I thought you said. Thank you! After just having talked about "overwhelming evidence," now you say "there is little forensic evidence." How can that be?

Ryback: The Nazis were scrupulous when it came to obscuring the "Final Solution" in bureaucratic euphemism and also dismantling or obliterating their machinery of death.

Analysis: Yet they left the remains of the "gas chambers" on the camp grounds along with 9,000 witnesses behind for the Soviets to interview. That doesn't sound like too "scrupulous" of a cover up now, does it?

Ryback: The dearth of hard evidence ....

Analysis: A "dearth (complete lack) of hard evidence." Dearth is a very strong word. Thank you, Timmy. Thank you, thank you and thank you!

Ryback: ... has fueled a growth industry in Holocaust-denial.

Analysis: "Holocaust Denial" --- a silly slogan used to silence debate. In other words, just because there is a "dearth of hard evidence," it is still wrong to question the Holocaust. This is known as "circular logic." It is like a prosecutor saying to a jury: "Ladies and Gentleman of the jury, do not let the 'dearth' of hard evidence influence your verdict. The only reason why there is no hard evidence is because the defendant covered his tracks so well."

Absurd, to say the least. But thanks just the same, Timmy, for conceding that hard evidence is totally lacking.





Open mouth, insert foot: "The dearth of hard evidence." Thanks,Timmy!




Ryback:The revisionists' plaint is simple: They demand a proverbial "smoking gun" to prove that the Nazis deliberately and systematically designed an industrial system of extermination.

Analysis: Well, excuuuuuse us "anti-Semites" for being so impertinent as to simply ask for evidence of this "industrial system of extermination." But thanks for admitting that there is no "smoking gun" and that you cannot prove your case.



Ryback: Auschwitz has been a particular target of Holocaust deniers -- in particular, the gas chamber in Auschwitz I, the original base camp a mile east of Birkenau. It was here that some of the first experiments with poison gas were undertaken in a converted air-raid shelter refitted with air-tight doors and special ducts for homicidal purposes. Dynamited by the Nazis in the autumn of 1944, the gas chamber was reconstructed after the war.

Analysis: Why did the "Nazis" dynamite the "gas chamber?" Did they suddenly decide to stop "gassing" people? And thanks again for conceding that the current "gas chamber" is a Soviet reconstruction -- a fake.

Ryback: As one revisionist notes: "The official view holds that the Soviets and Poles created a 'gas chamber' in an air-raid shelter that had been a 'gas chamber'. The revisionist view holds that Soviets and Poles created a 'gas chamber' in an air-raid shelter that had been an air-raid shelter." While most serious historians refuse to dignify such statements with a response, Polish administrators have taken the bait.

Analysis: Ah yes. The "No serious person" Logical Fallacy and the old "I-refuse-to-dignify-that-with-a-response" rhetorical trick. It is the sure sign of an empty case, and an empty mind, when one has to resort to such pathetic High School debating tactics.

Ryback: In response to revisionist charges, they (the Poles) tested the gas chamber walls for residual traces of cyanide gas but found none.

Analysis: They found no residual traces of cyanide gas. THANK YOU!

Ryback: Unlike the delousing chambers whose walls still show cyanide "staining,".....

Analysis: And thanks for admitting that there were "delousing chambers" at Auschwitz. In so doing, you have confirmed the fact that the Germans were trying to prevent the inmates from dying of typhus. I suppose they had to save the Jews in order to kill them?

Ryback: ..... the gas chambers betrayed no residual traces of Zyklon B.

Analysis: So, in addition to your concessions that there is a "dearth" of hard evidence, and that the gas chambers are Soviet reconstructions, you further concede that the forensic analysis shows no traces of "Zyklon B" (a pesticide-turned-into-poison) in the stone walls. Stone is like sponge, Timmy. Any poison gas would have been absorbed and preserved for posterity to analyze, as it was in the de-lousing chambers which, as you conceded, do indeed show traces of bug spray. Can you explain, or should I say, rationalize that bit of scientific reality away for us, Timmy?

.......

.......

Go ahead, Timmy Two-Face. Tell us why not a single trace of deadly chemicals was found in the analysis. We just gotta hear this!

.......

.......

.......

We're still waiting, Timmy.

.......

.......


Ryback: The homicidal process was so murderously brief that the cyanide never penetrated the interior surface.







"Murderously brief!" --- ROFLMFAO!!! Mass-murder gassings of millions of people were too "murderously brief" to leave a trace, but the delousing of clothes with a much smaller does of Zyklon B did leave a trace? That's a good one!




Ryback: Similarly, it was found that repeated postwar "cleaning" had leached the last traces of cyanide from the heaps of human hair, one of the most damning pieces of Holocaust evidence.

Analysis: Let me get this straight, Timmy. You're saying that the "Nazis" shaved the heads of their victims after killing them in poison-gas chambers but before finally cremating them? And that the poison-saturated hair was later shampooed by the Soviets and the chemical traces are now gone? Are you flippin' serious? What were the "Nazis" planning to do with the "heaps of human hair?" Make wigs? And why would the shaving of hair be considered a "damning piece of evidence" when it was done to prevent the spread of typhus-carrying lice. Doesn't that prove that the big bad "Nazis" were NOT out to kill their prisoners?



Ryback: In the battle against Holocaust deniers, Birkenau's extermination facilities remain important forensic evidence.

Analysis: Timmy! You're gonna give a friggin' heart-attack! What forensic evidence?! You just admitted that there are no traces of poison in neither the stones nor the hair. There you go again with that quintessentially Jewish circular reasoning. "The gas chambers existed. Although there is a "dearth" of hard evidence; that doesn't disprove anything because we already know that the gas chambers existed."



Ryback: Between 1942, when they were first put into operation, and 1944, when they were dynamited, more than a million human beings -- mostly Jewish -- were fed into these extermination plants, forced into subterranean chambers and gassed, their corpses removed and transported by mechanical conveyance to the crematoria ovens.

Analysis: More than one-million were gassed, yet you said earlier that "the cyanide never penetrated the interior surface" because the episodes were "so murderously brief." Timmy, even if the "brief" mass gassing episodes were just 10 seconds long, when multiplied 1000's of times to reach that one million number -- an average of 40,000 "gassing deaths per month", (right under the noses of Red Cross inspectors!) we're talking about many hours of poison gassing. Why no traces of this in the forensic analysis?

And Timmy, one more thing; for nearly 50 years, you and your gang told us that 4,000,000 died atAuschwitz. Then, after "Holocaust Deniers" began poking around Auschwitz, the official number was suddenly chopped down to 1,000,000. How do you account for such a drastic reduction? And if the 4,000,000 was wrong, why should we now take your word now on the "1,000,000?"








Cue the sound of crickets, please....












And furthermore, if the Auschwitz "death toll" was shaved down by 3 million, why do "youse guys" keep saying "6 million" died in all. Has 1st-grade math, like modern physics, now become "relative" too?










Ryback: The chimneys belched smoke into the air.

Analysis: Chimneys emitting smoke? Really? No friggin' way! Perhaps you were expecting little white doves to come out of the chimneys? Or maybe, soap bubbles?

Ryback: The remnant ash was scattered in the surrounding fields, or dumped in a nearby pond whose muddied bottom, even today, is of a sticky gray viscosity ...

Analysis: So, after 60 years of natural forces at work in the pond (article written in 2004), the "sticky gray viscosity" never went away; yet the cyanide traces completely disappeared from the untouched remnants of the stone walls and the "heaps of human hair." Bend that "science," Timmy, bend it hard!

Ryback:....laced with matchstick-size splinters of human bone.

Analysis: "Match-like splinters?" Seriously, Tim? Fish and geese bone splinters and the bottom of a pond, if even that. But thanks for conceding the fact that there are no actual bodies nor skeletons. No forensics, no documents, no direct eye-witnesses, no bodies. With a "prosecutor" like you, Timmy, who even needs a defense lawyer!


Ryback: The horrors of this machinery have been preserved in the classic memoirs of survivor-authors like Elie Wiesel and Primo Levi...

Analysis: The good ole "Appeal to Authority" Fallacy. If it is in a book, written by other known liars who continue to cash in on book sales and speaking fees, then it must be true, eh Timmy? Elie the Weasel was the money-grubbing clown who once wrote that Germans used to throw babies into the bonfires they had lit at Auschwitz -- just for laughs.


Ryback: But, as with any account filtered through human memory, this "evidence" is subject to challenge and rebuttal. There is no arguing with presence of the Birkenau gas chambers. Here the proof of the Holocaust is written in concrete and steel.

Analysis: "There is no arguing?" Says who, Timmy? Says you? This is the old, "Case Closed" debating trick; a variation of the "I-refuse-to-dignify-that-with-a-response" trick. You're right Timothy. There is "no arguing" with lunatics and liars. But thanks for inadvertently conceding the case by repeatedly admitting that there is no evidence.


SUMMARY OF RYBACK'S CONCESSIONS

  • Auschwitz 'Gas Chambers' shown to tourists are actually a "reconstruction"
  • Germans used delousing chambers to prevent death by typhus
  • Remains of alleged "gas chambers" tested negative for poison gas
  • Original Auschwitz death toll of "4 million" was a massive exaggeration
  • No documentary evidence of the "Holocaust"
  • No "smoking gun" evidence / "dearth of hard evidence"
  • No bodies


Keep making concessions like that and soon they'll be calling you a "Holocaust Denier" and taking your books off of Amazon -- as they did with "The Bad War," by yours truly (see ad below). Timmy, you have lost the Jewdo match. Next time; know your Miranda Rights and shut that stinking hole in your lying mouth.

Full Wall Street Journal Article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB108914879023756502



ADDENDUM: OTHER JEWISH 'HOLOCAUST' CONCESSIONS

C.L. Sulzberger
The "gas chambers" claim originated in a report issued by a Soviet Committee just hours after Germany had unconditionally surrendered (and thus, could not rebut).
(here)

Deborah Lipstadt
German documents never refer to a genocide campaign and the story of Jews being used to make soap is a hoax. (here)

Simon Weisenthal
Contrary to Eisenhower's propaganda films, there was no "gas chamber" at the Dachau Concentration Camp. (here)

Elan Steinberg, Peter Novick and others
The testimony of Holocaust survivors is often unreliable. (here) (here)

The Jewish Virtual Library
The International Red Cross inspected the German POW and concentration camps and gave passing grades (but, of course, remained silent about the Jews). (here)

The New York Times
The '6 Million Dead' was proclaimed before a single camp had been liberated. (here)
 





Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,841
Likes
3,439
@Thunderian / @Lisa

Read Original Article Here : http://www.tomatobubble.com/id801.html


One thing you will notice about the professional liars of the Fake News and Fake Academia is that, when cornered, they will concede a point for strategic purposes, before following up with a quick "yeah-but" to hold up their argument. Those conceded points should never be allowed to pass for they are the basis of an effective "Judo" response. For example; imagine that an accused car thief is confronted with evidence of his past record of stealing. Forced to concede the point, the thief will say: "Yes. It is true that I stole 7 cars over the past 5 years, but to suggest that I stole this particular car is ridiculous."

We then press the thief on the fact that several witnesses just saw him driving the same color, make & model of the stolen car in question. He again concedes: "Yes. It is true that I was seen driving a vehicle fitting that exact description, but that was a rented car which coincidentally matched the description of the car that you claim I just stole."
When challenged on his ability to rent a car when he has no credit cards, the artful liar, without skipping a beat, retorts: "Yes. It is true that I have no credit cards, but that's because my cousin, who just moved to Brazil, let me use his credit card."

Now, let us review what we have just learned from our thieving friend, as carelessly confirmed from his own big mouth!
1
. He is in fact a repeat car thief.
2. He was in fact driving a vehicle fitting the description of the recently stolen car.
3. He did not possess a credit card, which would have been needed had he really rented a similar car, as claimed.

Those concessions are known as "hard data points." The rest is just fluff. Considered individually, none of those concessions will clinch the prosecution's case. But taken cumulatively, such self-admitted facts begin to paint the accused liar into a very tight corner. That's logical Judo for you. And it is precisely why Defense Lawyers advise that suspects should always remain silent when questioned by police. You know, the so-called "Miranda Rights" warning; "Anything you say can and will be used against you."
With this logical principle in mind, let us similarly corner one of one of Holohoaxianty's High Priests, Timothy Ryback, by using the accumulation of his own 2004 written concessions, as published by the oh-so-"prestigious" Wall Street Urinal, against him. This is 'gonna' be fun!



Forensic Evidence Of the Holocaust Must Be Preserved


By: Timothy Ryback


July 7, 2004






Full Wall Street Journal Article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB108914879023756502


Ryback:
Last month, Jarek Mensfelt, spokesman for the Auschwitz memorial site, announced plans to preserve the ruins of the gas chambers and crematoria in the notorious death camp at Birkenau near the Polish town of Oswiecim (Auschwitz). "This is an attempt to keep it as it is now -- in ruins -- but not let the ruins go," he said. "It was meant to be here forever as a warning."

Analysis: So, Mr. Ryback, both you and Mr. Mensfelt now admit that what you claim were "gas chambers and crematoria" now lie in ruins. That means the "gas chambers and crematoria" that are still being shown to the teary-eyed tourists are Soviet-era "reconstructions" -- a fact that "Holocaust Deniers" were once attacked for claiming. Thanks for confirming that for us in the Wall Street Urinal.


Images 1 & 2 are of the Soviet-era reconstruction of the "gas chambers" ™. Image 3 depicts the ruins of the what is said to the original "gas chambers".
Ryback and the Polish curators concede that what is shown to gullible tourists are NOT the actual "gas chambers" ™.






Ryback: In the coming weeks, as the Auschwitz preservationists begin their work, they should be guided by the knowledge that these heaps of dynamited concrete and twisted steel are not only historic artifacts but among the few remnants of untainted, forensic evidence of the Holocaust.

Analysis: How exactly do these bombed-out remnants constitute "forensic evidence" of mass murdering gas chambers? Have any traces of poisonous gas been detected in the stones?

Ryback: Of course, the historical and circumstantial evidence of a premeditated Nazi plan to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe is overwhelming.

Analysis: Ah yes. The good ol' "the-evidence-is-overwhelming" rhetorical trick. Such a bold statement may sway the weak-minded, but it proves nothing. Talk is cheap, as they say. My. Ryback, could you please share with us this "overwhelming evidence" of a premeditated "Nazi" plan to exterminate the Jewish population of Europe.

Ryback: There are the watch-tower-girded enclosures of Nazi concentration camps ....

Analysis: "Watch-towers?" Well, duh! They were internment camps, after all. No one is denying the Jewish internment of World War II. What we want is evidence of a genocide campaign. Continue.

Ryback: ...and the extensive testimonials of Holocaust survivors.....

Analysis: Yes, "testimonials" which, as even some of your Jewish colleagues now openly admit, are often unreliable. Speaking of "testimonials," what do you have to say of the former Auschwitz inmates who later told of spirited soccer games and fun activities for the children? If the Germans were out to commit genocide, why were so many "survivors" allowed to live? Auschwitz alone had 9,000 survivors when the Soviets arrived there.









Yakov Tzur testimony, March 2009: "I played soccer games at Auschwitz in 1944." (YouTube here)


(Other camps had actual Jewish soccer leagues.)




Ryback: .... as well as the court protocols of Nazi war criminals,

Analysis: So-called "Nazi war criminals" were tortured and the Nuremberg Trials were a joke. Those same "court protocols" told of shrunken Jewish heads, and Jews being fashioned into lamp shades and bars of soaps -- claims which all "Holocaust schollars" now admit were false.

Ryback: .... but there is little forensic evidence proving homicidal intent.

Analysis: Hold it! What did you just say???

Ryback: ...but there is little forensic evidence proving homicidal intent.

Analysis: That's what I thought you said. Thank you! After just having talked about "overwhelming evidence," now you say "there is little forensic evidence." How can that be?

Ryback: The Nazis were scrupulous when it came to obscuring the "Final Solution" in bureaucratic euphemism and also dismantling or obliterating their machinery of death.

Analysis: Yet they left the remains of the "gas chambers" on the camp grounds along with 9,000 witnesses behind for the Soviets to interview. That doesn't sound like too "scrupulous" of a cover up now, does it?

Ryback: The dearth of hard evidence ....

Analysis: A "dearth (complete lack) of hard evidence." Dearth is a very strong word. Thank you, Timmy. Thank you, thank you and thank you!

Ryback: ... has fueled a growth industry in Holocaust-denial.

Analysis: "Holocaust Denial" --- a silly slogan used to silence debate. In other words, just because there is a "dearth of hard evidence," it is still wrong to question the Holocaust. This is known as "circular logic." It is like a prosecutor saying to a jury: "Ladies and Gentleman of the jury, do not let the 'dearth' of hard evidence influence your verdict. The only reason why there is no hard evidence is because the defendant covered his tracks so well."

Absurd, to say the least. But thanks just the same, Timmy, for conceding that hard evidence is totally lacking.





Open mouth, insert foot: "The dearth of hard evidence." Thanks,Timmy!




Ryback:The revisionists' plaint is simple: They demand a proverbial "smoking gun" to prove that the Nazis deliberately and systematically designed an industrial system of extermination.

Analysis: Well, excuuuuuse us "anti-Semites" for being so impertinent as to simply ask for evidence of this "industrial system of extermination." But thanks for admitting that there is no "smoking gun" and that you cannot prove your case.



Ryback: Auschwitz has been a particular target of Holocaust deniers -- in particular, the gas chamber in Auschwitz I, the original base camp a mile east of Birkenau. It was here that some of the first experiments with poison gas were undertaken in a converted air-raid shelter refitted with air-tight doors and special ducts for homicidal purposes. Dynamited by the Nazis in the autumn of 1944, the gas chamber was reconstructed after the war.

Analysis: Why did the "Nazis" dynamite the "gas chamber?" Did they suddenly decide to stop "gassing" people? And thanks again for conceding that the current "gas chamber" is a Soviet reconstruction -- a fake.

Ryback: As one revisionist notes: "The official view holds that the Soviets and Poles created a 'gas chamber' in an air-raid shelter that had been a 'gas chamber'. The revisionist view holds that Soviets and Poles created a 'gas chamber' in an air-raid shelter that had been an air-raid shelter." While most serious historians refuse to dignify such statements with a response, Polish administrators have taken the bait.

Analysis: Ah yes. The "No serious person" Logical Fallacy and the old "I-refuse-to-dignify-that-with-a-response" rhetorical trick. It is the sure sign of an empty case, and an empty mind, when one has to resort to such pathetic High School debating tactics.

Ryback: In response to revisionist charges, they (the Poles) tested the gas chamber walls for residual traces of cyanide gas but found none.

Analysis: They found no residual traces of cyanide gas. THANK YOU!

Ryback: Unlike the delousing chambers whose walls still show cyanide "staining,".....

Analysis: And thanks for admitting that there were "delousing chambers" at Auschwitz. In so doing, you have confirmed the fact that the Germans were trying to prevent the inmates from dying of typhus. I suppose they had to save the Jews in order to kill them?

Ryback: ..... the gas chambers betrayed no residual traces of Zyklon B.

Analysis: So, in addition to your concessions that there is a "dearth" of hard evidence, and that the gas chambers are Soviet reconstructions, you further concede that the forensic analysis shows no traces of "Zyklon B" (a pesticide-turned-into-poison) in the stone walls. Stone is like sponge, Timmy. Any poison gas would have been absorbed and preserved for posterity to analyze, as it was in the de-lousing chambers which, as you conceded, do indeed show traces of bug spray. Can you explain, or should I say, rationalize that bit of scientific reality away for us, Timmy?

.......

.......

Go ahead, Timmy Two-Face. Tell us why not a single trace of deadly chemicals was found in the analysis. We just gotta hear this!

.......

.......

.......

We're still waiting, Timmy.

.......

.......


Ryback: The homicidal process was so murderously brief that the cyanide never penetrated the interior surface.







"Murderously brief!" --- ROFLMFAO!!! Mass-murder gassings of millions of people were too "murderously brief" to leave a trace, but the delousing of clothes with a much smaller does of Zyklon B did leave a trace? That's a good one!




Ryback: Similarly, it was found that repeated postwar "cleaning" had leached the last traces of cyanide from the heaps of human hair, one of the most damning pieces of Holocaust evidence.

Analysis: Let me get this straight, Timmy. You're saying that the "Nazis" shaved the heads of their victims after killing them in poison-gas chambers but before finally cremating them? And that the poison-saturated hair was later shampooed by the Soviets and the chemical traces are now gone? Are you flippin' serious? What were the "Nazis" planning to do with the "heaps of human hair?" Make wigs? And why would the shaving of hair be considered a "damning piece of evidence" when it was done to prevent the spread of typhus-carrying lice. Doesn't that prove that the big bad "Nazis" were NOT out to kill their prisoners?



Ryback: In the battle against Holocaust deniers, Birkenau's extermination facilities remain important forensic evidence.

Analysis: Timmy! You're gonna give a friggin' heart-attack! What forensic evidence?! You just admitted that there are no traces of poison in neither the stones nor the hair. There you go again with that quintessentially Jewish circular reasoning. "The gas chambers existed. Although there is a "dearth" of hard evidence; that doesn't disprove anything because we already know that the gas chambers existed."



Ryback: Between 1942, when they were first put into operation, and 1944, when they were dynamited, more than a million human beings -- mostly Jewish -- were fed into these extermination plants, forced into subterranean chambers and gassed, their corpses removed and transported by mechanical conveyance to the crematoria ovens.

Analysis: More than one-million were gassed, yet you said earlier that "the cyanide never penetrated the interior surface" because the episodes were "so murderously brief." Timmy, even if the "brief" mass gassing episodes were just 10 seconds long, when multiplied 1000's of times to reach that one million number -- an average of 40,000 "gassing deaths per month", (right under the noses of Red Cross inspectors!) we're talking about many hours of poison gassing. Why no traces of this in the forensic analysis?

And Timmy, one more thing; for nearly 50 years, you and your gang told us that 4,000,000 died atAuschwitz. Then, after "Holocaust Deniers" began poking around Auschwitz, the official number was suddenly chopped down to 1,000,000. How do you account for such a drastic reduction? And if the 4,000,000 was wrong, why should we now take your word now on the "1,000,000?"








Cue the sound of crickets, please....












And furthermore, if the Auschwitz "death toll" was shaved down by 3 million, why do "youse guys" keep saying "6 million" died in all. Has 1st-grade math, like modern physics, now become "relative" too?










Ryback: The chimneys belched smoke into the air.

Analysis: Chimneys emitting smoke? Really? No friggin' way! Perhaps you were expecting little white doves to come out of the chimneys? Or maybe, soap bubbles?

Ryback: The remnant ash was scattered in the surrounding fields, or dumped in a nearby pond whose muddied bottom, even today, is of a sticky gray viscosity ...

Analysis: So, after 60 years of natural forces at work in the pond (article written in 2004), the "sticky gray viscosity" never went away; yet the cyanide traces completely disappeared from the untouched remnants of the stone walls and the "heaps of human hair." Bend that "science," Timmy, bend it hard!

Ryback:....laced with matchstick-size splinters of human bone.

Analysis: "Match-like splinters?" Seriously, Tim? Fish and geese bone splinters and the bottom of a pond, if even that. But thanks for conceding the fact that there are no actual bodies nor skeletons. No forensics, no documents, no direct eye-witnesses, no bodies. With a "prosecutor" like you, Timmy, who even needs a defense lawyer!


Ryback: The horrors of this machinery have been preserved in the classic memoirs of survivor-authors like Elie Wiesel and Primo Levi...

Analysis: The good ole "Appeal to Authority" Fallacy. If it is in a book, written by other known liars who continue to cash in on book sales and speaking fees, then it must be true, eh Timmy? Elie the Weasel was the money-grubbing clown who once wrote that Germans used to throw babies into the bonfires they had lit at Auschwitz -- just for laughs.


Ryback: But, as with any account filtered through human memory, this "evidence" is subject to challenge and rebuttal. There is no arguing with presence of the Birkenau gas chambers. Here the proof of the Holocaust is written in concrete and steel.

Analysis: "There is no arguing?" Says who, Timmy? Says you? This is the old, "Case Closed" debating trick; a variation of the "I-refuse-to-dignify-that-with-a-response" trick. You're right Timothy. There is "no arguing" with lunatics and liars. But thanks for inadvertently conceding the case by repeatedly admitting that there is no evidence.


SUMMARY OF RYBACK'S CONCESSIONS

  • Auschwitz 'Gas Chambers' shown to tourists are actually a "reconstruction"
  • Germans used delousing chambers to prevent death by typhus
  • Remains of alleged "gas chambers" tested negative for poison gas
  • Original Auschwitz death toll of "4 million" was a massive exaggeration
  • No documentary evidence of the "Holocaust"
  • No "smoking gun" evidence / "dearth of hard evidence"
  • No bodies


Keep making concessions like that and soon they'll be calling you a "Holocaust Denier" and taking your books off of Amazon -- as they did with "The Bad War," by yours truly (see ad below). Timmy, you have lost the Jewdo match. Next time; know your Miranda Rights and shut that stinking hole in your lying mouth.

Full Wall Street Journal Article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB108914879023756502



ADDENDUM: OTHER JEWISH 'HOLOCAUST' CONCESSIONS

C.L. Sulzberger
The "gas chambers" claim originated in a report issued by a Soviet Committee just hours after Germany had unconditionally surrendered (and thus, could not rebut).
(here)

Deborah Lipstadt
German documents never refer to a genocide campaign and the story of Jews being used to make soap is a hoax. (here)

Simon Weisenthal
Contrary to Eisenhower's propaganda films, there was no "gas chamber" at the Dachau Concentration Camp. (here)

Elan Steinberg, Peter Novick and others
The testimony of Holocaust survivors is often unreliable. (here) (here)

The Jewish Virtual Library
The International Red Cross inspected the German POW and concentration camps and gave passing grades (but, of course, remained silent about the Jews). (here)

The New York Times
The '6 Million Dead' was proclaimed before a single camp had been liberated. (here)
Well friend, I’m not sure what you want me to say about your degrading hit piece?
 





Joined
Jul 26, 2017
Messages
603
Likes
1,003
Well friend, I’m not sure what you want me to say about your degrading hit piece?
Well you can keep posting that scripture and I will keep telling you I don’t understand how that proves I’m deceived and wrong. You will have to be more direct than that and your derogatory remarks towards me doesn’t help my understanding either.
normally Zionists/Jews do that when their lies are caught.
 





Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
6,841
Likes
3,439
normally Zionists/Jews do that when their lies are caught.
Is that what happens? I don’t even know why you posted what you posted, it had nothing to do with what I had said. So I really don’t know what you wanted me to respond to, your post was a bunch of nonsense really.

And what’s wrong with asking questions of someone only to have them be a jerk to you about it? I didn’t understand what that verse has to do with what I had said and instead of explaining why they thought the verse fit their reply, they made derogatory comments towards me. I don’t feel like any of that was my fault.
 





Joined
Jul 26, 2017
Messages
603
Likes
1,003
Is that what happens? I don’t even know why you posted what you posted, it had nothing to do with what I had said. So I really don’t know what you wanted me to respond to, your post was a bunch of nonsense really.

And what’s wrong with asking questions of someone only to have them be a jerk to you about it? I didn’t understand what that verse has to do with what I had said and instead of explaining why they thought the verse fit their reply, they made derogatory comments towards me. I don’t feel like any of that was my fault.