>>544863 I never understood how could the members of the central committee and government officials let stalin kill them one by one. He's killing everybody, you know your time is coming eventually, how hard is it to just pull out your gun and shoot?
>>545023 Which according to him was the entire central committee or any party member with power apparently, so the question stands. Except molotov i guess, there was some weird sociopath bromance there.
>>544863 >>inb4 holocaust Well fucking hell. Why are you people so afraid of the holocaust. Historians don't plug their ears at something they suspect will be disagreeable. >b-but da JOOZ dindu nuffin!!1!!!1!! Kill yourselves. Cowards.
>>545116 People don't like you because that's all you fags ever think about. You regurgitate the same infographs over and over and circle jerk about how much you hate Jews. Nobody cares outside of /pol/
>>544863 There's a lot of shit about the roman republic that sounds hard to believe to me. I think things like Marcus Antonius's orator skills or Cato's stubbornness have to be at least a little bit exagerated.
>>545116 There's no real disagreement among historians regarding the holocaust so there's no reason to plug any ears. There is, on the other hand, a containment board unable to contain itself that keeps shitting on threads.
>>545206 >There's no real disagreement among historians regarding the holocaust I agree. Us functionalists are correct and those intentionalists and synthesisers are trying to white wash the nations of central europe of their collective guilt. (Browning, Ordinary Men)
almost all of them. It's nearly impossible to avoid biases when writing histories or any other factual material so i that sense everything is revised and tampered with. With modern propaganda almost nothing can get through without being filtered, especially in totalitarian states.
Oh, I love Browning. I thought he was a synthesis historian but it's been literally years since I studied Holocaust historiography. I guess I got mixed up, but doesn't Browning take a lot from synthesis like Kershaw's cumulative radicalisation thesis?
>>545888 This, it wasn't nearly as dire a situation as people like to make it out in retrospect. It was actually relatively stable and was growing economically, the monarchy was relatively effective, and overall it was functional if not chaotic. Especially with Franz Ferdinand's reform plans it would have definitely had a fighting chance of making it through the 20th century in some form or another.
>>545116 It was an event that was so massive, on such a scale, spread out over a long period of time. The people who carried it out admit to carrying it out. No one involved ever denied it, they just tried to minimize their involvement in it.
Saying that the holocaust never happened is like saying that the Vietnam War never happened. When you say that something like that never happened, an event on the order of 9/11, it immediately marks you as a crank.
Is it not plausible to imagine that they were destroyed? I think it's enough that even the fucking SS defence witnesses didn't dispute that gas chambers existed, they just said they had nothing to do with the SS
>>546074 http://www.telescopes.com/blogs/helpful-information/18965572-can-you-see-objects-left-behind-on-the-moon >Unfortunately the answer to this question is no. Not even the most powerful telescopes ever made are able to see these objects. The flag on the moon is 125cm (4 feet) long. You would require a telescope around 200 meters in diameter to see it. The largest telescope now is the Keck Telescope in Hawaii at 10 meters in diameter. Even the Hubble Space telescope is only 2.4 meters in diameter. Resolving the lunar rover, which is 3.1 meters in length, would require a telescope 75 meters in diameter. So our backyard 6 inch and 8 inch telescopes are not even going to come close!
>>546095 It's plausible, but then you might as well argue that the nazis had rockets which visited the far side of the moon, only their plans were destroyed!
>I think it's enough that even the fucking SS defence witnesses didn't dispute that gas chambers existed, It's not, witnesses at the Nuremberg trials were tortured into signing confessions.
It's incredible how low the standards at which evidence is held drop when one is talking about the holocaust.
I'm not a denier btw, I'm just underlining the hypocrisy.
>>546102 >You think they wouldn't have destroyed the limited documents they did create about it? I think at least one would've survived the war. Instead there's this whole mythology that nazis allegedly used secret code words to talk about gas chambers. Ridiculous if you want my opinion. Add to this the fact that there are plenty of telegrams describing execution quotas of jews killed by the einsatzgruppen in soviet territories, so it's not like nazis didn't record their atrocities.
>And that's absolutely a lie, there are written documents and schematics for the chambers. Care to share them?
>you might as well argue that the nazis had rockets which visited the far side of the moon, only their plans were destroyed!
Hardly. It would have been very much the rational thing to do to start destroying that kind of incriminating evidence when it became apparent Germany was losing the war.
I'm not a muh six gazillion shill, either, in fact I probably think most victims died of disease, but I don't see any reasonable cause to doubt that Nazis also actively exterminated probably millions of Jews and gas chambers were one such method of doing so
>>546244 >Hardly. Why not? If your line of defense is "the evidence was burnt", you can pretty much claim anything.
>It would have been very much the rational thing to do to start destroying that kind of incriminating evidence when it became apparent Germany was losing the war. Right, but statistically the probability that every single fucking document was burned is incredibly slim.
>but I don't see any reasonable cause to doubt that Nazis also actively exterminated probably millions of Jews and gas chambers were one such method of doing so It should be reasonably doubted because of lack of evidence, like anything.
>>546440 The original photo, as it appeared in the newspaper during World War II. I didn't believe it at first myself, but when I looked up the article in the newspaper's archives online, the naked Jew guy isn't there.
>>546065 to deny the moon landings is to conclude the ussr and usa were working together during the cold war. so you going to have to explain that--that essentially the cold war didnt happen.
the ussr acknowledged all apollo missions. they never denied one bit of it. so if they didn't happen ussr was in on the cover up.
>hur dur the ussr couldnt have known do not embarrass yourself by showing you dont understand that both the ussr and usa had the technology to easily detect eachothers activity in orbit and deep space. its basic radio technology.
I thought this thread might be fun, stimulating and thought provoking and then realize of course this was going to attract tin foil hats.
I do believe history can be altered or skewed (e.g. usa "internment" camps vs nazi "concentration" camps or our allies are always "freedom fighters" and never "terrorists" yet these are all the same thing.) but this thread is a great example why academics or politicians etc wont waste their time discussing this.
>>546260 >>546257 >>546250 >>546192 https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/view/Nuremberg-Trial-Film-Nazi-Concentration-Camps http://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/php/docs_swi.php?DI=1&text=doc_anal http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/holocaust/h-engineer.htm http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/ar/argaschambers.html http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/goebbels-joseph/goebbels-1948-excerpts-01.html http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/wannsee.asp Heinrich Himmler speech about the extermination of the Jews https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2a_cmbi3iIg
>>546625 To be fair, if it wasn't the Holocaust deniers, what the fuck would this thread be about? Ancient historians exagerated their accounts? Everyone knows that and pretty much nobody disagrees, or the regular tinfoil that the moon landing was faked? Which is pretty much a claim that the cold war was faked.
>>546573 >to deny the moon landings is to conclude the ussr and usa were working together during the cold war. Ding ding ding. Correct!
The international banking mafia controls Russia, USA, UK, and every other country with a central bank. The moon landings and the cold war were for a psychological purpose, and the countries USSR and USA played their role in the act.
"All Wars Are Bankers Wars" is a recommended watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfEBupAeo4
>>545116 Holocaust denial is not history. It requires an assault on the study of History.
We present you with the evidence and you immediately try to disqualify it. We give you sources and you handwave them away. You should be asking why you're so afraid to consider the overwhelming possibility that it happened. Not the other way around.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.