/r/conspiracy is the new politics.

It will be if people don't start pushing paid for shills out.

It already is, state a conspiracy theory that goes against the status-quo view that the CIA/Mossad rule the world and watch the downvotes come. People downvote theories that don't go along with their own.

The word theory gets thrown around here way too much. Theories have evidence.

That's nice I'll just spend an hour on every post backing it up with a bibliography because reddit is so important.

And google is just so hard to use.

Exactly, I just don't understand why it is so hard for some people to use Google and fact check themselves. It's faster and less bothersome.

Isn't it easier to open google and type in what you want to know rather than replying "Source?" to a comment and then waiting for the op to reply?

I mean I understand the burden of proof argument and I agree it should apply to certain situations but not for EVERY single little claim.

No, it's important because sometimes somebody here will say something asinine, like "Ramen noodles are made of ground-up bugs", and you can google around yourself for a while, but if you get them to point out where they actually got that idea in the first place it turns out they just misread / misrepresented some silly page about the FDA approved levels of insect parts in wheat flour.

Citing specific sources is important because it gets us to start considering the merit of sources as well.

Theories circumstantial evidence but no proof, hence theory.

So, can you give me any evidence that a "paid-for" shill exists on /r/conspiracy? Can you single out a given poster or commenter as a shill, and provide evidence of why you think they're a shill?

Why are you not capable of doing a search before you post and see for yourself others outing all the crap posts in this sub? Trying looking in /r/shill - I've also outed a couple of users here on reddit in other threads having to do with GMO foods .. perhaps you can take your own time to go back and look those up.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4655196.stm

this has been pointed out enough that you are either aware or just dull not to realize it? Please go somewhere else...

Funny, because I've been "outed" as a shill in regards to GMO foods (and fluoride, and chemtrails, and the list goes on). The simple fact is, though, that I just disagree with the conspiracist assertion that GMOs are dangerous. /r/shill just looks like it calls out trolls (/u/eastindiacomp is a clear troll), and mis-identifies skeptics (like /u/firemylasers) as shills. I've often spent time here arguing against ideas like Sovereign Citizen legal interpretations. Does that make me a shill? Or does it reflect the fact that I'm an attorney and happen to enjoy setting people straight when they start going down the primrose path to legal nonsense?

Edit: I'll also point out that you've not yet provided evidence that anyone involved in this is getting paid, which is a requirement for shillery. Do you have any evidence of that, or are you just supposing they're getting paid because they disagree with you vocally? How can I be sure you're not being paid by various conspiracy peddlers, like Alex Jones or the 911 Truth folks?

In fact why don't you show me a case of where one has been called out and explain to me why that isn't true and they are actually "the good guy".

Because they banned all your shitty sources.

They banned everything but corporate media. They are now justa feeder site for corporate media. And I bet reddit gets a kickback for every reader they deliver to them. Isn't that normally how it works?

Digg Rev 5 has arrived.

Busy busy.

Yep affiliate marketing at it's finest.

I liked the part where you talked in your response to my comment above about examining sources and then blindly joining the conga line behind this unsubstantiated claim of quid pro quo between reddit and sites like motherjones.

Good on you for waiting the full 90 seconds before contradicting yourself.

Wonderful nick. Suits you.

I bet reddit gets a kickback

Wouldn't that then imply the sites that were banned did not provide kickbacks? A Quid pro quo? You surely have evidence of that. Otherwise you're just a rabblerouser who's pissed that your garbage marxist propaganda tools were given the heave-ho.

I would suggest providing evidence of your claim or shutting the fuck up.

I assume the payments are secret, at least from us. But from time to time people have been banned for sending traffic to for-profit sites, traffic for which they got paid or even had a job doing. So this traffic has value. Wouldn't reddit's owners want that money?

Yes cause Mother Jones is soooooooo shitty.

Troll

To use the liberal vernacular, motherjones is published by a tax dodging 501 c3 funded by a greedy billionaire with an agenda. Yeah, it's shitty. It's all kinds of shitty.

So how is that different than any other MSM source?

Any source of a conspiracy should be examined and read then decide on your own whether or not it's a good source. Blocking sites because reddit doesn't like what it says is what people hate most about mindhive and shill reddit because it doesn't allow us to read. If we had to go by what political reddit wants we'd all be reading the autobio on Obama daily. Let us decide and you stay out of it if you don't like it.

I browse conspiracy all the time but have not subscribed so you have to consider also that there are active readers/participants that aren't represented by that 200k number.

All the "you must be a member to vote/comment" BS can all be ignored by overriding the custom subreddit styles in reddit preferences.

Dead user accounts. Now there's a creepy concept. Zombie accounts. Comments from across the veil of night. Oooo-wheeeee-yeooooo.

what about the accounts belonging to the people who got "grabbed" by the secret gov?

Those get permanently deleted, disappeared as a verb, duh...

Never did find out what happened to /u/OCDTrigger

I have posted this some where else in this thread thought you might be interested

/u/ambiversive

http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/pltz6/redditor_ambiversive_died_february_10_2012_he/

His last comment before "suicide".

He was a moderator here.

I like to imagine you doing Dr Evil air quotes while saying that.

Ide venture to say that about half of the accounts are real..

The other half you could throw to shills, dead accounts, dead person, etc.

Plus don't forget user's who delete accounts and then create new ones…does that effect the subscriber tick marking?

Never did find out what happened to /u/OCDTrigger

Why is a ghost singing the Doctor Who theme?

What about the shill accounts?

Certainly a number of these. Over the years I have been able to group these shills into a few separate groups:

• The debunkers - these guys crop up when inconvenient facts appear (regarding 9/11 or any other false flag/major event). They are armed with a playbook of rebuttals which play out the same every time, many are conspiratards.
• The shit disturbers - these fellas usually promote violence as a solution in order to make "conspiracy theorists" appear reckless. They appear in the bad cop threads and sometimes just post nonsense.
• The polluters - Look for anyone posting predictions (especially with dates), most often these guys will appear to be 'in the inside' with military ties. Their aim is to simply stir up fear and also discredit any material here.
• And of course, special interest groups. Talk about Israel, GMO, Bad science or any other golden egg you will rouse these folks.

Of course there are just plain ordinary indoctrinated people who will defend their paradigms nail and tooth.

The debunkers are an important element of this sub. The one's who are legitimately interested in the truth, and not just insulting the regulars.

They poke holes in the theories, expose weak reasoning and out there ideas. They help us drop the stupider ideas and focus on the stronger ones.

We really need to stop the blanket cries of shill, and allow our ideas to be challenged.

Thanks. At the end of the day, I'm only interested in the truth, which is why you will almost never see me in the political conspiracy threads. Although I don't agree with them all 100%, I think there's more accurate there than inaccurate, and therefore slim pickings to debunk.

If you see me laying into a subject, it's usually because the supporting evidence is really, really weak.

I'm a lazy person at heart, so if I appear you can be sure you have a poor argument, or there's something inaccurate that stands out like a sore thumb.

I also find conspiracy theories / theorists fascinating (I was very into UFOs back in the 70s). So there's that too.

lies.

It clearly bothers some people when I occasionally open up and reveal that I'm an ordinary person with my own thoughts and ideals.

It's probably much easier to consider people who disagree as faceless enemies.

[deleted]

I haven't gotten banned yet and I play devils advocate quite a bit. I'm just not a dick about it. You can debunk without talking down to people.

In fact my constructive criticism has gotten me quite a bit of karma from this board.

I agree I enjoy having my views challenged.

[deleted]

lol. Dude I'm on your side. I'm saying they're not all copy/paste shills. Those you can ignore. Or type to in all caps if that's your thing.

And of course, special interest groups. Talk about Israel, GMO, Bad science or any other golden egg you will rouse these folks.

I enjoy watching the comment section of any /r/news submission involving Israel become a completely unreadable clusterfuck that scares off any meaninful discussion.

Doesn't the exact same thing happen in this sub?

And the assumption is that all of these people are being paid to do this? Or has the word "shill" truly lost all meaning?

Hey you conspiratard troll. Go back and jerk off your bigoted Zionist friends in conspiratard.

And get a dictionary.

Shill does not necessary mean receiving payment. You have trouble with basic English words. You keep callig people racist for things that are not racist. You keep alleging people deny the Holocaust when they do no such thing.

You conspiratard trolls are only here to disrupt.

What? You literally linked me to neo-nazi websites that deny that jews suffered as much as they did or that the camps were even made for extermination or had gas chambers. I don't know how that is

So basically "shill" just means anybody who disagrees with me?

A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization.

It really doesn't sound like that's what it means. I think you just like to use it to shut down debate. And please, I live in Australia, I've met probably 2 jewish people in my life and I have no connection to Israel. Me calling you out for posting nazi propaganda is not being a "zionist". The fact that you see zionists everywhere and assume anyone who you dislike is one is very telling though.

I did not link to "neo-nazi" websites. I don't know anyone who supports the German National Socialist party--which has been defunct for about 60 years now. It's just a stupid slur you use to discount the evidence presented in those articles.

And I don't believe a word you write about youself. For whatever reason you are pushing Zionist propaganda as are the conspiratard brigade that is hounding me and hounding this sub. These issues (Israel/Zionism/Jews/WW II) draw you guys out . . . and as the defiinition above states . . . you're not going to disclose your close relationship with the Zionist cause if you're a shill, are you?

For some average dude in Australia you sure have all the Zioniist talking points lined up ready to go. And you sure seem dedicated to this cause.

I did not link to "neo-nazi" websites. I don't know anyone who supports the German National Socialist party--which has been defunct for about 60 years now. It's just a stupid slur you use to discount the evidence presented in those articles.

You linked to this. They are described by [wikipedia as an anti-semitic group set up explicitly for holocaust denial - www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Historical_Review - Here is some further information about their ties to neo-nazis and how they were founded entirely because of anti-semitism This was the information you didn't respond to.

And I don't believe a word you write about youself. For whatever reason you are pushing Zionist propaganda as are the conspiratard brigade that is hounding me and hounding this sub. These issues (Israel/Zionism/Jews/WW II) draw you guys out . . . and as the defiinition above states . . . you're not going to disclose your close relationship with the Zionist cause if you're a shill, are you?

I think it's ridiculous when people deny the holocaust, and I think conspiracy theorists are nutcases. I do not remember pushing any zionist propaganda, unless you're saying wikipedia is zionist. All I have said is that you are anti-semitic and because of your anti-semitism you just assumed I have some connections to Jews. But I really don't. And why would a zionist state waste good shill money to argue with a nutter who is already considered (Apparently) one of the more anti-semitic guys on here? You are a very paranoid person.

For some average dude in Australia you sure have all the Zioniist talking points lined up ready to go. And you sure seem dedicated to this cause.

I'm bored and I dislike nazi propaganda and historical revisionism. By the same logic, you spend almost your entire life talking about zionism and jews. If I'm a zionist shill just for defending the historical validity of the holocaust a few times, you must be a raging anti-semite.

But no, if I was being paid for this I'd probably post nearly as much as you do (nearly, do you ever sleep?). Not a few times a day, and as you've seen, occasionally on old posts. That's not shill behaviour.

Nice paranoia based on your anti-semitism though. And I still don't understand what this "black propaganda trolling" you refer to occasionally is. It's not as racist as it sounds is it?

Oh, Wikipedia and the ADL refer to the IHR as anti-semitic so it must be true!

Bullocks.

The IHR does research about WW II and they are one of the few places to publish German sources and there is nothing wrong with this. It's a good thing. We need to see both sides of a conflict to better understand a conflict. What other area of history do people insist only one side's evidence be shown? Why shouldn't they review German literature from that time? Or record German officer's statements? Etc.

It's absurd that in many countries simply presenting this evidence is illegal. For instance the author who conducted scientific forensic research into the gas chambers that I was citing:

Germar Rudolf had completed his doctoral dissertation in chemistry while working at the renowned Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart, when publication of his forensic study of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz caused university authorities to forbid him from completing the doctorate. In 1995 Rudolf was sentenced to fourteen months in jail for authoring the Rudolf Report; in the same year all available copies of Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte, a collection of up-to-date research on the Holocaust problem, were seized and destroyed by court order (the English-language version, Dissecting the Holocaust, can be purchased from IHR). Rudolf edits the revisionist quarterly Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung, and is currently seeking political asylum in the United States. He has submitted a lengthy affidavit in support of David Irving's appeal of the adverse ruling in the Lipstadt trial.

You show your true intentions here:

I think it's ridiculous when people deny the holocaust, and I think conspiracy theorists are nutcases.

You once again use terms that I reject and most revisionists reject. Questioning the scope of crimes committed against Jews is not denying that crimes occurred. If I questioned how many Armenians died at the hands of the Turks would I be a denialist? It's just a buzzword you use to shut down debate (which you learned from the ADL).

Also, your hostility to conspiracy theorists and description of them as "nutcases" indicates why you should be banned from here. All you do is troll here. That's your only purpose.

And I love the feigned ignorance about black propaganda trolling as if you don't know that Bipolar_Bear, your conspiratard troll friend, and others, post anti Jewish cartoons and slurs here so they can claim this sub is anti Jewish.

And again, I am not anti-semitic. I like and respect Jewish people. I simply don't think a Zionist state should have been created, I'm critical of Israel's actions, and I think Jews are overrepresented in U.S. foreign policies and power, and I question the official story about WW II. This does not make me racist or anti Jewish.

Edit: spelling.

Oh, Wikipedia and the ADL refer to the IHR as anti-semitic so it must be true!

Bullocks.

So you are saying that wikipedia and all of the sources cited in the article are anti-semitic? Are you saying that the current director Mark Weber didn't formerly work for the National Alliance, a white-supremacist organisation? Is everything except things said by alleged anti-semites just a lie to you?

You once again use terms that I reject and most revisionists reject. Questioning the scope of crimes committed against Jews is not denying that crimes occurred.

Right but when you belong to an anti-semitic organisation that spends all it's time trying to revise elements of the holocaust so that it altogether seems like it was less bad for the Jews, including saying the camps weren't for extermination or that the gas chambers weren't used etc. You don't have to DENY the holocaust to be a denialist.

and I question the official story about WW II.

based on information gathered by anti-semites. Hmm. I guess you are just not self-aware to see that when all you do is yell about jews and zionists, and make claims that the holocaust wasn't as bad as it seemed repeatedly, then you really are the definition of an anti-semite.

And I love the feigned ignorance about black propaganda trolling as if you don't know that Bipolar_Bear, your conspiratard troll friend, and others, post anti Jewish cartoons or slurs here so they can claim this sub is anti Jewish.

Oh I remember bear doing that, I just didnt know what the term "black propaganda trolling" meant.

The IHR is much bigger than Mark Weber. They publish a wide variety of articles and original sources about WW II that one often can't find elsewhere (often because of censorship).

I don't know anything about him or National Alliance. I don't think I've read anything by him there.

"and I question the official story about WW II."

based on information gathered by anti-semites.

No, revisionists are not anti-semites. If an article is anti-semitic, talking about how Jews are inferior or something, then I will discount it. I'm not interesting in "yell[ing] about Jews," contra your allegation. The articles I've read there cite the closing argument of the American lawyer defending a German in his war crime trial, for instance, or the forensic report about the chemical tests done at Auschwitz. These are legitimate articles by legitimate sources and you're trying to tar them as "anti-semitic" so you don't have to deal with them.

You're extremely dishonest and not arguing in good faith. Instead of discussing facts you just hurl insults and try to disrupt. As you said, you think everyone here is a bunch of nutters and when you aren't giving Bipolar_Bear a nice hand job at conspiratard or wherever you guys hang out, laughing at this sub, you're over here trying to stir up shit.

All you do is post about Israel and try to make minor adjustments to the history so as to feel more justified in your continued rants about Israel. I don't know how you can't see it but if you're that unaware of your own prejudice then I can just leave you to your angry ranting about the jews if you like. I don't even think it's debatable that it's an anti-semitic organisation. The same people are connected to various other holocaust-questioning or holocaust-denying organisations.

The IHR is much bigger than Mark Weber. They publish a wide variety of articles and original sources about WW II that one often can't find elsewhere (often because of censorship).

Right, but the director formerly worked for a white supremacist organisation, and was in contact with IHR during that time period. You could probably find a less biased source of information if you were really unaware he was the director.

I have noticed you stop responding to posts as soon as you cannot deny your anti-semitism.

Oh man, you had some time on your hands, didn't you? Thoroughly enjoyed the read (your part of the conversation, not that uneducated antisemitist fuckwit you were responding to), thanks!

Oh look, another conspiratard troll coming over here to support his other troll friend.

And once again the mods allow comments that do nothing but hurl insults:

uneducated antisemitist fuckwit

Well, you are an antisemitist, and I reserve the right to call you people fuckwits. I live in Germany, I have (had) family who served in the Wehrmacht, and I have seen the inside of a KZ - I would love to show you around some time. Take my calling you "uneducated" as proof of my faith in humanity, like maybe you just don't know any better.

Edit: Banning me or removing my comments would be censorship, bruh! Muh rights!

Well, I'm not anti semitic, and you're ignorant for not knowing the definition of the word.

Banning you conspiratard trolls from posting here is a last ditch effort at protecting open discussion here.

You add no value when you hurl insults like "fuckwit." And you're very language ("Muh rights!") shows you're just another (probably poorly educated) juvenile delinquent from conspiratard.

So what if you've seen the inside of a KZ? Americans had concentration camps too. Does that mean they had a policy of exterminating Japanese Americans? Hell, Americans probably incinerated more Japanese by bombing that Jews were incinerated by Germans.

And you do realize the Soviets built mock ups of the alleged gas chambers, no? Complete with fake chimneys not even attached to anything?

Watch David Cole visiting Auschwitz to get an example of the lies that are told on the tours of these alleged extermination camps.

This David Cole? olol

Edited to add: an.ti.se.mite - holding antipathy towards people of the semitic tribes, commonly Jews. (Off the top of my head) Even if you aren't one, you Holohoax revisionism makes you look like one.

No, this David Cole before scumbag terrorists (your ideological brethren) got to him by marking him for assassination for daring to ask questions about history:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWCOjOj4RAU

Read the Guardian article, it's the same dude, dude! :D

Also, I feel honored to be associated with the JDL! Am I famous now?

I'm associating your mindset with the JDL which is the mindset of terrorists. I have no evidence to assume you actually are associated with them.

I understand it is the same dude. I'm pointing out that he was targeted and that we can't believe media reports about him because of the incendiary subject matter. His work in the 1990s speaks for itself and I don't trust the Guardian to accurately reflect what his views are today and I doubt he's free to openly share his views.

He is a very disturbed man. And unfortunately this is what a lot of /r/conspiracy is like these days. They have long sinced stopped looking for the truth and now they just acept propaganda from whichever is the antithethis of their beliefs. ie. blindly supporting putin over obama, or blindly supporting neo-nazi/holocaust denying organisations over actual history.

Yeah. We get it. You think this sub is "retarded" and mentally sick, hence the name of the sub you guys hang out in, conspiratard, where you spend all your time mocking people here.

What's that say about you that you spend so much time mocking people you think have mental infirmities?

This is precisely why you conspiratard trolls should be banned from here.

I didn't invent the conspitaratard sub or it's name and I've posted there maybe 10 times. I don't think you guys are literally retarded although you definitely suffer from some paranoid delusions about zionists and propaganda. I'm going to move our conversation about you being a holocaust denier to here because I can only post once per ten minutes due to downvote based censorship. Here we go!

The head historian at Auschwitz admits the one standing gas chamber at Auschwitz is a Soviet era mock up and you go on a rant about Nazis. I know you are smart enough to know this is conclusive proof the Soviets did this yet you try to avoid this fact.

It really says a lot about you that you think 1 guy saying 1 thing is proof. What about all the people who said that the holocaust did happen? all the people in the camps who said it happened, all the guards? All those stories are fake I guess, but this 1 guy must be completely right. And you think that there not being gas chambers at a single concentration camp, one of many proves what ? It doesn't prove your sources other asssertions that the camps were not for extermination, or that hitler did not plan to kill the jews but to release them/move them to their own land. This doesn't prove that you can't stack bodies and cremate them (how much experience do you have with cremation?).

You just see what you want to see and what you want to see is that Jews are everywhere and the holocaust wasn't that big of a deal.

I wonder if you will respond after reading this letter where Dr Piper condemns David Cole's methods and calls him a fraud and a liar?

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/p/piper.franciszek/press/daily.texan.1093

Obviously the Zionist propaganda artists put a gun to his head too?

You are an anti-semite who does not bother to google his own sources because you are just so sure of the zionist conspiracy that you literally deny any information that is not nazi propaganda. David Cole really has not done anything that could be considered "conclusive", except maybe be a fraud and then one day admit he was a fraud.

Some choice quotes from Dr Piper:

In his advertisement he introduces me as a "Head of Auschwitz Archives at the Auschwitz State Museum". This is untruth. I am not and I have been neither a head of Auschwitz Archives nor a director of Auschwitz Musum, as Cole maintains in other propaganda leaflets. The purpose of such manipulation with of facts is clear - to attract potential purchasers of his "Interview" video tape.

In spite of the fact that such secondary restoration works had to be done there is an undisputable reality that the gas chamber in question is housed in the same building which has been existed from prewar times till now.

The fact that the Nazi murderers used gas chambers (in Birkenau you can see the ruins of the other 5 gas chambers) for mass annihilation of innocent men, women and children, mostly Jews, has been proved by thousands of memoires and depositions of eyewitnesses as well as by German official documents and plans. It is obvious fact for everybody who wants to approach the problem, to contact still living witnesses and to study historical sources.

Hmmm ... and his thoughts on cole in general (translated from polish so mind the grammar):

In his ingenuousness he decided to halt the part of the murderers instead of their innocent victims - different every honest man does. My answers on a few questions of Cole ( who deceitfully introduced himself as a man who wanted to convince his acquaintances in America that Auschwitz was really a place of genocide) constitute a small proportion of this video tape.

So uh, you still going to pretend you're not an anti-semite who uses nazi propaganda sources and denies the holocaust? Or do you have a neo nazi based source that will claim that Dr Piper wrote that letter under durress?

Gig is up my friend, it's pretty clear what your agenda is and where your information comes from.

Once again with the anti semite slur. I'm not biased against Jews you conspiratard troll. You repeatedly libel me because you are an intellectual fraud.

And is this the best you can do? Thank you for showing me Dr. Piper's letter. It shows there is no rebuttal to the admissions Cole wrung out of him.

What proof is there that the Soviet mock up gas chamber is "in the same building" as the alleged original gas chamber? This is nothing but a bald claim that we have to take his word for. All the evidence of homicidal gas chambers, all the accoutrements of terror, are literally mock ups added later by the Soviets. So this defense of his previous claims is actually quite damning. He doesn't deny the Soviets recreated the gas chamber and he doesn't provide any further details demonstrating why we should trust their mock up as historically accurate. Who were the Soviet set designers and what evidence did they use to "recreate" the chambers they said were in that building (and we simply have to take their word for it). They only proof these were the gas chambers are literally the evidence the Soviets planted there; because there certainly isn't Prussian blue indicating cyanide poisoning. Hoss "confessed" that gassings occurred in farmhouses. These were not farmhouses so whose testimony or what evidence did the Soviet's rely upon? Why can't he tell us?

So thank you for showing us all how weak the rebuttal is to Mr. Cole's smoking gun evidence he uncovered at Auschwitz from the chair of the Historical Department at the Auschwitz State Museum. Cole got Dr. Piper to admit the gas chambers are a mock up recreation. And all you have in response is to lamely call Cole a "neo nazi."

And picking nits over Dr. Piper's title hardly makes your case any better. Weak shit my man.

Dr. Piper claims Cole misrepresented his title by calling him "Director of the Auschwitz Museum" when he's actually "chair of the Historical Department at the Auschwitz State Museum." Big diff. And he may not be "head of Auschwitz Archives" but he obviously has control over the primary evidence as he offers to show Cole evidence (the doors you asked about earlier) during his interview with him at his office at Auschwitz in 1992 (which he later reneged upon).

From a source you trust, for some reason, even though you don't accept videos of interviews on Youtube or articles and studies published at IHR:

Franciszek Piper (born 1941) is a Polish scholar, historian and author. Most of his work concerns the Jewish Holocaust, especially the history of the concentration camps at Auschwitz. Dr. Piper is credited as one of the historians who helped establish a more accurate number of victims of Auschwitz-Birkenau death camps. According to his research, at least 1.1 million people perished at Auschwitz-Birkenau, of whom about 960,000 were Jewish.[1] He is the author of several books and chair of the Historical Department at the Auschwitz State Museum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franciszek_Piper

When are you going to admit you're a conspiratard troll slinging libelous accusations of anti semitism because you don't have the truth on your side? When are you going to admit you're nothing but a pathetic propagandist troll?

You literally will not accept evidence that is from anyone except people with anti-semitic agendas. You read that and actually thought:

He doesn't deny the Soviets recreated the gas chamber and he doesn't provide any further details demonstrating why we should trust their mock up as historically accurate.

How can you even think this? He says quite clearly "The fact that the Nazi murderers used gas chambers (in Birkenau you can see the ruins of the other 5 gas chambers) for mass annihilation of innocent men, women and children, mostly Jews, has been proved by thousands of memoires and depositions of eyewitnesses as well as by German official documents and plans. It is obvious fact for everybody who wants to approach the problem, to contact still living witnesses and to study historical sources." Because he didn't say the word Auschwitz you think he didn't actually deny it? Your brain is so riddled with anti-semitism you are literally incapable of viewing it from the possibility that Jews were actually gassed. This is a translation from a letter written in polish and you are attacking it semantically. Very weak.

From a source you trust, for some reason, even though you don't accept videos of interviews on Youtube or articles and studies published at IHR

because they are not peer-review, it's pseudo-science. It doesn't matter what his wiki says if he himself denies it. Again, you are saying this man is a liar? He is involved in this huuuuge cover up that 1 camp had fake gas chambers installed? What is the motive? How would lying about 1 camp when there were already various other camps achieve anything?

Again, how does this justify your anti-semitism, your desire to read information from organisations with ties to neo-nazis, and all the constant grumbling you do about israel in a state of paranoid rage?

but he obviously has control over the primary evidence as he offers to show Cole evidence (the doors you asked about earlier) during his interview with him at his office at Auschwitz in 1992 (which he later reneged upon).

Yes, but we didn't get to see the doors did we? So again, 1 guy saying 1 thing is not compelling proof.

They only proof these were the gas chambers are literally the evidence the Soviets planted there; because there certainly isn't Prussian blue indicating cyanide poisoning. Hoss "confessed" that gassings occurred in farmhouses. These were not farmhouses so whose testimony or what evidence did the Soviet's rely upon? Why can't he tell us?

First of all, what about the testimonies of everyone who survived, the depositions and eyewitnesses? They're all fake, every single person was all lying?

Secondly, you have no proof that they were planted there outside of 1 guy saying 1 thing in a video that he claims was a set up by a fraud who lied to him. He claims he was entirely duped by the man and that David Cole did not even tell him he is a holocaust denier (or "questioner"). And I don't see how this proves that no Jews were gassed in the holocaust or that somehow this means it's okay to scream about israel 24/7 and talk about how the holocaust wasn't as bad as everyone says. Even if you were right I do not see how this changes the holocaust. They were still extermination camps for a planned genocide of an entire group of people. Of course, all your sources (the IHR) seem to claim that they were not extermination camps and hitler was actually a pretty sweet guy who was going to move them off his land. and they were given a full breakfast every day and there was a basketball court or some dumb bullshit.

When are you going to admit that you're an anti-semitic troll slinging crazy theories about the holocaust to justify your hatred of Israel because you don't have the facts on your side?

edit: and again, I have like 10 posts ever to conspiratard, stop confirming your paranoia repeatedly.

Because he didn't say the word Auschwitz you think he didn't actually deny it? Your brain is so riddled with anti-semitism you are literally incapable of viewing it from the possibility that Jews were actually gassed.

Dude. Your brain is just plain riddled. Cole got him to admit Krema I at Auschwitz is a mock up. In rebuttal to this fact . . . Piper changes the subject to memoires and eyewitnesses and ruins at another camp . . . so once again no concrete proof. No pictures. Just ruins and one mock up and some eyewitness testimony. He doesn't describe what process the Soviets used to accurately recreate this gas chamber (and we know the Soviets are sticklers for accuracy in this regard--ha).

We also know both the Soviets and other Allies faked evidence after the war to "prove" Nazi crimes . . . like the lampshades and soap made from Jews they would put on tables and march Germans by. Or the "showers" at Dachau that were never used for killing but has been falsely used as proof of German crimes (for a while at least).

He is involved in this huuuuge cover up that 1 camp had fake gas chambers installed?

He admits they are mock ups! He's not covering it up. He simply changes the subject and doesn't discuss how the Soviets knew how to replicate the mock up gas chambers now being passed off as the original.

and there was a basketball court

No, there was a swimming pool and soccer clubs. They had a theater and saw movies and had a canteen where they could use their prison scrips to buy cigarettes and weak beer and treats. They could write letters.

But make no mistake about it. It was a harsh life and many died . . . mostly from disease. It was a travesty that the Germans put Jews there simply based on their religion (just like Americans put Japanese Americans in concentration camps for their heritage).

And blah blah blah, anti semitic this, anti semitic that. You sure cheapen anti semitism by foaming at the mouth with your false accusations.

You're a conpsiratard troll that debates in bad faith like your juvenile gang of bigoted, terror-loving, hate-filled, Zionist, conspiratard troll friends.

Piper changes the subject to memoires and eyewitnesses and ruins at another camp

He said "THE OTHER 5 GAS CHAMBERS". You are intentionally misreading him to support your assertion that Jews are evil and lied about the holocaust.

Can you please provide your proof that the gas chambers were faked? Again, 1 guy saying 1 thing he later disagrees with is not compelling evidence.

Or the "showers" at Dachau that were never used for killing but has been falsely used as proof of German crimes (for a while at least).

If I ask you for proof you're going to link to more neo-nazi sites aren't you. Do you think that ANY Jews were gassed or killed at all in the holocaust?

No, there was a swimming pool and soccer clubs. They had a theater and saw movies and had a canteen where they could use their prison scrips to buy cigarettes and weak beer and treats. They could write letters.

Proof? From the pictures of all the bodies piled up it really didn't look as cosy as you make it sound. But I guess you're right, those Nazis were nice guys! Can I get some proof that every eye-witness/guard lied and every Jewish person who's survived memoirs are fake? That's quite a claim to make with no evidence.

But make no mistake about it. It was a harsh life and many died . . . mostly from disease. It was a travesty that the Germans put Jews there simply based on their religion (just like Americans put Japanese Americans in concentration camps for their heritage).

Mostly ... from ... disease? My god. How many Jews do you think died in the holocaust? And the difference between the camps I would think is that the ones in the holocaust were extermination camps.

You sure cheapen anti semitism

As a raging anti-semite I guess that must offend you. I don't know what else to use to describe someone who doesn't think Jews were gassed and killed and uses this as justification to rant in /r/worldnews and other subs constantly about how much he hates Israel.

Thanks for proving you're a nazi-defending anti-semite holocaust denier though. I'll happily accept the label of "troll" for exposing that one to the community.

your assertion that Jews are evil

Yeah, were did I assert that again? Oh yeah, you're a dishonest conspiratard troll. Right.

Can you please provide your proof that the gas chambers were faked? Again, 1 guy saying 1 thing he later disagrees with is not compelling evidence.

That one guy happens to be from the Auschwitz State Museum and he admits that the one standing gas chamber is fake (well, the Dachau showers are standing but was never used by the Germans so that's fake too). Pick up Piper's book. He's quite the authority.

As you linked to one of his papers, he's also written others and his proof consists of what you've already shown . . . ruins, misinterpreted blueprints, and testimony.

The burden shouldn't be on me to prove these fake. That's already been established. The burden is on you to prove the fake mock ups accurately represent the buildings before the Soviet's recreated them.

Proof? From the pictures of all the bodies piled up it really didn't look as cosy as you make it sound. But I guess you're right, those Nazis were nice guys!

Watch Spielberg's Shoah testimonies and the prisoners themselves acknowledge these things. You don't even know the basic facts you are just talking out of your ass.

And I never said the Nazis were nice guys. I specifically said it was an abuse to put Jews in concentration camps . . . just like it was to put Japanese Americans in concentration camps.

Mostly ... from ... disease? My god. How many Jews do you think died in the holocaust? And the difference between the camps I would think is that the ones in the holocaust were extermination camps.

Well this is what we're debating, right? Whether there was a policy of extermination? Idk how many died in the camps. Probably around 150,000 in Auschwitz so probably around 300,000 total in the camps? Of course this is really rough and I'm just throwing an educated guess out there. I would bet a good number were executed in places like Hungary and Poland and Russia, etc., though. Maybe some were legitimate executions for being partisans but I bet a good number were simply under that pretext and a few other incidents were just murder without even using that pretext.

As a raging anti-semite I guess that must offend you. I don't know what else to use to describe someone who doesn't think Jews were gassed and killed and uses this as justification to rant in /r/worldnews and other subs constantly about how much he hates Israel.

I don't think I rant about Israel much. Also, having questions about history does not make me an anti semite. Just like having questions about 9/11 doesn't make anyone less of a patriot. So when you try to "expose" me for asking questions you're just trying to shut down legitimate historical inquiry . . . probably because the facts don't support your agenda.

The burden shouldn't be on me to prove these fake. That's already been established.

By 1 guy saying 1 thing he later claimed was incorrect? I'm not sure that's exactly a mountain of evidence.

Well this is what we're debating, right? Whether there was a policy of extermination? Idk how many died in the camps. Probably around 150,000 in Auschwitz so probably around 300,000 total in the camps?

Yep, you're a textbook holocaust denier. You are denying the suffering of millions. This was my original accusation.

I notice no proof for any of your claims. You have no right to speak of "facts" when you are claiming that millions of jews did not die in the holocaust with no supporting evidence other than "well, 1 guy at 1 museum is in a video shot by a charlatan that says Auschwitz didn't have any".

I'm done here, enjoy spreading your anti-semitic message onto /r/conspiracy.

But he's the Chair of the Auschwitz State Historical Musuem, or some such similar title. He sitting in their offices giving an interview to David Cole, no?

He claims he was taken out of context but he never denies his previous admission that the Soviets created a mock up of Krema I. I believe the tour guides eventually admitted to this too. Why hasn't Auschwitz or any other defender of the official story debunked this claim that even the tour guides will tell you if asked? C'mon.

Yep, you're a textbook holocaust denier. You are denying the suffering of millions. This was my original accusation.

Then many historians on your side are Holocaust deniers. Even Dr. Piper wrote a book lowering the number of dead at Auschwitz by a couple million. The Auschwitz State Historical Musuem dropped its number from 4 million to a little of 1 million. Are they "Holocaust deniers" under your definition? They denied the suffering of millions.

You and your fellow propagandists have set up a propaganda trap suited for a Soviet show trial . . . a witch trial.

People debate how man millions of Russians were killed and yet people don't try to put them in jail and shout them down for "denying the suffering of millions." Historians argue over how many Armenians were killed and they aren't called deniers.

No, there's only one people's tragedy that is protected in this manner.

I notice no proof for any of your claims.

There is plenty of proof. I pointed you to where it is. You're too lazy to verify it. Watch Spielberg's testimonies.

I'm done here,

Good. Have fun with your conspiratard troll friends jerking each other off.

Well, I'm not anti semitic

Right, you just think a gang of lying Jews conspired to smear the Nazis with the most disgusting hoax of all time.

Well, it was wartime propaganda pushed by the Soviets and the other Allied victors. Any historian is going to point out that there was a lot of propaganda at the time that has now been walked back (like the allegations lamp shades and soap was made out of Jews, etc.).

And many people recognize the victors' justice that was Nuremberg where a lot of these allegations originated.

This skepticism of the official story is not focused on "lying Jews." This is what you are inventing to make it fit your false allegation of anti Jewish animus.

This skepticism of the official story is not focused on "lying Jews."

The thousands of survivor accounts (the vast majority of which are from Jews) describing gas chambers and extermination camps are all lies, yes or no?

No. A few may be lying, some may be mistaken. And some may be giving accurate testimony that has been misinterpreted or utilized in a deceptive way.

How do you "misinterpret" the testimony of Sonderkommandos who say they cleaned out mounds of dead bodies from gas chambers and burned them? There are dozens of stories from them. Are they lying when they say they were active participants in the genocide of their own people?

They also match up perfectly with stories from guards at the extermination camps who admitted to what was going on.

The sonderkommandos were likely lying. And they do not match up perfectly with stories from the Germans. There are tons of contradictions and impossibilities.

The sonderkommandos were likely lying

Impressive that not a single one of them ever said so in the decades since WWII.

Picking out contradicting statements from witness testimony is hardly impressive. It also doesn't invalidate the main facts, that Nazis were gassing and burning Jews by the train load. Of that there is NO discrepancy.

Picking out contradicting statements from witness testimony is hardly impressive. It also doesn't invalidate the main facts, that Nazis were gassing and burning Jews by the train load.

Your logic is flawed. The only evidence is eyewitness testimony so if that's invalidated your "main fact" (which you simply assume) is invalidated.

And why would a sonderkommando recant? He was likely well compensated and would suffer greatly if he recanted. Hell, for the first few years they probably had to worry the Communists would kill them or other governments would punish them.

Also, simply google "Holocaust fraud" to see the number of people that lie about being survivors to obtain money and have been charged with fraud. See also Norman Finkelstein who points out the Holocaust Industry is motivated by huge sums of money that has been wrung out of Germany to pay anyone that alleges they were a survivor.

The only evidence is eyewitness testimony

So wrong on so many levels.

There is a mountain of physical evidence, paperwork, orders for Zyklon-B, blueprints for crematoria, aerial photographs of the complex, photographs of body burning pits, 15 massive furnaces at the Auschwitz camp (just what WERE they burning that they needed 15 massive furnaces?), chemical testing on the remains of the gas chambers, letters describing how many bodies can be disposed of in 24 hours, public statements made by Nazi officials at the time...

The MOUNTAIN of evidence combined with thousands of witness accounts from survivors of the camps, from Sonderkommandos and from Nazi guards makes your argument hopelessly foolish in addition to being disgustingly racist.

Not a single Nazi guard ever claimed the holocaust was a hoax. Not a single survivor ever recanted their story. Not a single witness claimed those chambers were solely for "delousing".

There is a mountain of physical evidence, paperwork,

Extensive paperwork showing concentration and labor camps where about 150,000 prisoners (in Auschwtiz) died mostly of Typhus. No paperwork that shows a state policy of extermination.

orders for Zyklon-B

For killing pests to stop the spread of Typhus. This saved prisoners lives rather than ended prisoner lives.

blueprints for crematoria

which showed the Germans were interested in cremating bodies for the people that died of disease, etc. If their plan was to cremate the numbers of people alleged they surely would have built better crematoria. Plus, the blueprints show the attached building was a morgue and not a gas chamber.

aerial photographs of the complex

Which do not support mass extermination.

photographs of body burning pits

Which do not prove extermination.

15 massive furnaces at the Auschwitz camp (just what WERE they burning that they needed 15 massive furnaces?)

These were not nearly massive enough. This was insufficient to burn the number of bodies they allegedly burned. The sonderkommando's testimony of putting 3 or 4 bodies in each cremation chamber is not believable nor is their alleged time frame to burn the thousands of bodies per gassing.

chemical testing on the remains of the gas chambers

Which proves my point, not yours. We've already been through this.

letters describing how many bodies can be disposed of in 24 hours, public statements made by Nazi officials at the time...

They were worried about the large numbers of deaths from Typhus and wanted to cremate the bodies for health reasons. Just like the U.S. would have done. You're saying the Nazi's made public statements acknowledging the gassing of Jews? Prove it.

Not a single Nazi guard ever claimed the holocaust was a hoax. Not a single survivor ever recanted their story.

The Nazi guards were forced to give confessions. These were not voluntary confessions. And plenty of Germans denied having personal knowledge of these things. They were not allowed to claim the whole thing was a hoax. Individual defendants were interested in saving themselves so it would be foolish for them to defend all of Germany from these charges rather than simply saying they were not involved and didn't see anything like this.

Plenty of alleged "survivors" have been convicted of Holocaust fraud or otherwise had their claims disproved.

Here's one example: http://www.newsday.com/news/new-york/holocaust-fraud-leads-to-8-year-prison-term-1.6378584

Not a single witness claimed those chambers were solely for "delousing".

No one claims the alleged chambers were solely for "delousing." There were separate delousing chambers where clothes were deloused and this is an admitted fact even by people on your side. There may have been some delousing in the alleged gas chabmer in Krema II, for instance, to kill any disease carrying pests, but this was probably primarily used as a morgue (since it was underground it was cool) before the bodies could be incinerated upstairs.

The Nazi guards were forced to give confessions. These were not voluntary confessions

You have not a single shred of proof that the confessions were forced. You also have not a shred of proof that the confessions were false.

Not a single one of them ever recanted that "forced" confession. Not even on their deathbeds.

They were not allowed to claim the whole thing was a hoax.

And exactly how would you stop them? Many Nazis gave interviews to historians late in their lives, on the cusp of death. The interviews they gave then corroborated 100% what we know about the gassings. Not a single one of them, stained with the most hideous crime in human history, ever took the chance to say "the Holocaust story is fictional. The gas chambers were false. This is all a giant lie."

Not one.

Individual defendants were interested in saving themselves so it would be foolish for them to defend all of Germany from these charges rather than simply saying they were not involved and didn't see anything like this.

And yet we have REAMS of statements from Nazis who ADMITTED involvement. They admitted to participating in selections on the train platforms, marching the Jews to certain death, locking them inside the gas chambers and disposing of the bodies.

Plenty of alleged "survivors" have been convicted of Holocaust fraud or otherwise had their claims disproved.

And this overrules the mountain of physical evidence and thousands of witness testimonies how? So some people tried to falsely profiteer from Nazi atrocities, that's hardly surprising. It's BEYOND idiotic to use a story like this as "proof" that the ENTIRE EVENT was fabricated.

I notice you failed to address the photographs of pits of naked Jewish corpses being burned by Nazi soldiers, or the mountain of other physical evidence, all of which backs up the THOUSANDS of witness statements.

I've already posted one "shred" of proof the confessions were coerced. I already quoted the statement Hoss made to the man he was shackled to saying he would have signed his name to killing 5 million people if they made him.

So you're wrong they never claimed they were forced. And many of these people were hung as part of the victor's justice so they didn't really have the ability to recant.

Also, why would they recant later in life if it's literally illegal in Germany and they could go to jail? Plenty of people like Mengele denied the allegations. Others were murdered by Israel.

It's a known fact many German prisoners were tortured. Torturing someone taints the quality of the evidence which is why most courts (not Kangaroo courts like Nuremberg) exclude evidence obtained by torture.

So you're wrong they never claimed they were forced. And many of these people were hung as part of the victor's justice so they didn't really have the ability to recant.

Not all of them were hung. A good number survived and maintained the reality of the Holocaust until their deaths, staining their family name for eternity rather than pointing out the gross injustice being heaped upon them.

Also, why would they recant later in life if it's literally illegal in Germany and they could go to jail?

Not even on their deathbeds did they recant. A number of Nazis were ALREADY IN JAIL for atrocities committed during the Holocaust...what was their motivation to keep up with the hoax?

It's a known fact many German prisoners were tortured.

Good. They deserved every second of it.

Torturing someone taints the quality of the evidence which is why most courts (not Kangaroo courts like Nuremberg) exclude evidence obtained by torture.

They didn't need Nazi statements. They had more than enough physical evidence, statements from Sonderkommandos, statements from camp survivors, paperwork and everything else.

You're insinuating something that not a single person in all of human history ever claimed. Not one survivor. Not one Nazi. There is not a single witness statement backing up your point.

Once again, you ignore the MOUNTAIN of physical evidence in favor of putting words into witnesses mouths that THEY NEVER SAID!

Doesn't surprise me you support torture and the use of evidence obtained by torture.

A number of Nazis were ALREADY IN JAIL for atrocities committed during the Holocaust...what was their motivation to keep up with the hoax?

Not to be hanged like the others? To be released from prison? Not to have crazy Zionist terrorists assassinate them and harass their families. To be able to live in peace in a defeated Germany.

Those poor Germans! Having to perpetuate the Holocaust lie, living in constant fear of the "crazy Zionist terrorists" out to get them! All they wanted was to "live in peace"...

...Amazing. You're a real piece of work.

Indeed. The German people were victims. Just like Jews were victims.

They didn't need Nazi statements. They had more than enough physical evidence, statements from Sonderkommandos, statements from camp survivors, paperwork and everything else.

All they had was these coerced confessions and some cherry picked testimony from Sonderkommandos whose testimony is unreliable. There is no paperwork or anything else that proves a policy of extermination.

I notice you failed to address the photographs of pits of naked Jewish corpses being burned by Nazi soldiers

What photos are you referring to? Link please.

http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/camps/auschwitz/images/burning-pit.jpg

http://www.aetherometry.com/Electronic_Publications/Philosophy/AS1-06/images/auschwitz_bodies.jpg

Your second link appears to go to Stephan Hawking.

The first link appears to contain a doctored photo. See here:

http://winstonsmithministryoftruth.blogspot.be/2011/04/dresden-auschwitz-ghosts-holocaust.html?zx=d4eaf712f36d3b05

Also, this does not look like a smart way to burn bodies. You need some sort of fuel, like piles of wood. People are not going to just burn bodies on the ground like that and then walk amongst the bodies.

Linking to a Holocaust denial site to disprove the photo is ridiculous. You know that, right?

Also, this does not look like a smart way to burn bodies.

No one claimed it was smart.

With regard to your insinuation that the photo of Germans burning bodies was doctored, you're half right...

http://hungarianskeptics.blogspot.hu/2012/12/a-charge-of-forgery-supported-by.html

The photo you Holocaust deniers use to "prove" the Auschwitz photo was doctored was actually doctored in THE OTHER DIRECTION! The producers of Ghost Advenures took the famous Auschwitz photo, digitally copied parts of the scenery over and over to cover some of the bodies, and used that doctored photo as a stand in for a photo of a train accident.

There are actually 3 other photos taken from the same spot, shot surreptitiously from the hip by a Sonderkommando as photographing was forbidden at Auschwitz.

http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2010/09/02/the-sonderkommando-photos/

They were shot from inside the doorway of a crematoria. 2 of them show other Sonderkommandos burning a massive pile of naked corpses, one of them shows a group of female prisoners undressing, and one is a shot of sky and trees.

Historians have located the actual spot the photos were snapped at Auschwitz based on the scenery visible. Lo and behold, it matches up with the burning corpse pit seen in aerial photographs taken by the Brits.

It's a photo of a mass burning of what looks to be likely hundreds of naked corpses, exactly as Holocaust survivors, Nazi soldiers and Sonderkommandos described.

Checkmate.

Checkmate.

Ha. Whatever dude.

At best the evidence is inconclusive, and it doesn't even prove much if true.

I don't have the patience to look into it in full details right now, but I will note you haven't proved the authenticity of these photos.

It doesn't look like enough room for there to be a pit in that smoky haze. And where is all the extra fuel to burn these prisoners? Shouldn't there be cords of wood standing by?

It's a photo of a mass burning of what looks to be likely hundreds of naked corpses

Hardly hundreds. More like a dozen or two, if that.

Even if this were really Sonderkommandos burning prisoners, it doesn't prove a plan of extermination of over a million people.

And wtf is the "Ghost Adventures" doing doctoring a Auschwitz photo in this manner? Weird.

I'm not sure about the different evidence and allegations of photo manipulation from either side . . . I like these type of conspiracy theories and like evaluating it but it's a bit hazy and inconclusive.

At best the evidence is inconclusive

Nope, the evidence is rock solid. It's 2 photographs of a pile of naked corpses being burned in behind the crematoria at Auschwitz.

I don't have the patience to look into it in full details right now, but I will note you haven't proved the authenticity of these photos.

You don't understand how "burden of proof" works, so let me enlighten you. The photos are among the most famous photos taken in human history. There are several first generation prints available for viewing at various museums. The spot where the photos were snapped has been located exactly where you would expect it to be. There is not a single shred of evidence that the photos are not 100% authentic. If you want to assert that they are NOT authentic, the burden of proof is on you.

It doesn't look like enough room for there to be a pit in that smoky haze. And where is all the extra fuel to burn these prisoners? Shouldn't there be cords of wood standing by?

This is where guys like you go from being laughable to pathetic. The framing of the photo is very narrow. There is likely a ton of stuff happening outside the margins that we can't see. Typical conspiracy thinking, "let's not focus on the pile of naked corpses or the massive plume of smoke indicating a fire, let's nitpick and point out the lack of wood within the framing of the photo"

Hardly hundreds. More like a dozen or two, if that

Again, I can see probably 2 or 3 dozen within the very narrow framing of the photo. How many do you think are outside the framing of the photo? How many are smoldering on the pile to create that massive cloud of smoke?

Why would there be a massive pile of naked corpses being burned behind the crematoria?

Nope, the evidence is rock solid.

Not rock solid. I'm inclined to agree there's a good chance it's a picture from Auschwitz (but I don't agree with your interpretation of what is depicted nor its significance).

But we have two competing images and one is fake. So there is fakery going on somewhere. It's weird for a television program to doctor what you claim is one of the most important images in human history (really?). Why would they do this?

The Allies admit to cropping the photos in different ways and the person taking the photo is not around to verify anything about it and we don't have the negatives and it was quickly used for propaganda at the time (whether true or false propaganda we don't know).

There are several first generation prints available for viewing at various museums.

But no negatives.

The spot where the photos were snapped has been located exactly where you would expect it to be.

We see a tree line and fences. It's possible this is the same location but even the "proof" acknowledges that features exist there that didn't before, like trees, etc. There does appear to be similar tree line and similar fence, although there is more of a berm now. There is not much to verify but I agree there is some support for your claims but it's not conclusive.

The framing of the photo is very narrow. There is likely a ton of stuff happening outside the margins that we can't see.

Or, there is likely not much. We don't know. I love how you accuse me of faulty logic yet you're the assuming details from things you can't see.

Typical conspiracy thinking, "let's not focus on the pile of naked corpses or the massive plume of smoke indicating a fire, let's nitpick and point out the lack of wood within the framing of the photo"

So you see massive plumes of smoke? I see a smoky haze in an area that the verification information indicates is a very small area. We're talking very small "pits" here. And I don't even see pits. We are simply told there are pits. To burn human bodies requires a great deal of heat and fuel, so how are these Sonderkommandos able to just linger right by the raging inferno necessary to burn humans?

The image appears to be more consistent with Sonderkommandos burning a pile of clothes in a small area. That makes a lot more sense actually. They probably were Tyhpus victims and they put the victims at the edge of camp to limit the spread of the disease and made Jewish prisoners strip the dead bodies of their clothes then burned a small pile of their clothes. I don't see huge pits nor do I see how they could fit in that area.

Why would there be a massive pile of naked corpses being burned behind the crematoria?

Well, we don't see that, do we. We see a few inmates walking around a few dozen (at most) bodies while there is smoke in the background. We see no corpses being burned and this is simply information supplied to us.

It's possible corpses were being burned but I would imagine the reason for this is there were more bodies from the Typhus disease than could be accommodated in the cremation furnaces. Which goes against the extermination story, btw. How could they not handle these few dozens (to hundreds you insist are off camera) if they were allegedly burning thousands a day?

So even if we do accept your interpretation of events how does this photo prove mass homicidal extermination by gas chamber? Even the Germans and the Red Cross claimed there were about 150,000 victims of disease and at the worst times almost 10,000 were dying in a month so of course there were lots of dead bodies there.

The image appears to be more consistent with Sonderkommandos burning a pile of clothes in a small area

Except that there are no clothes in the shot at all.

We're talking very small "pits" here.

Large enough to be seen from several different aerial photographs.

They probably were Tyhpus victims and they put the victims at the edge of camp to limit the spread of the disease and made Jewish prisoners strip the dead bodies of their clothes then burned a small pile of their clothes. I don't see huge pits nor do I see how they could fit in that area.

Except that the pit of burning corpses ran night and day as per survivors, guards, Sonderkommandos.

It's possible corpses were being burned but I would imagine

Stop right there. You're imagining. Your imaginings mean exactly fuck all. You don't NEED to imagine. We have HUNDREDS of independent witnesses explaining EXACTLY what was going on, gassed corpses being burned in a pit. These burnings happened night and day.

Which goes against the extermination story, btw. How could they not handle these few dozens (to hundreds you insist are off camera) if they were allegedly burning thousands a day?

You're a moron.

They needed the pits because the crematoriums were OVERFLOWING. There were literally more corpses than the crematoriums could handle, necessitating a separate open air pit behind them.

If you think this shows massive open air "pits" burning day and night with continuous corpses being piled in you're a moron. Where's the massive amounts of fuel required to incinerate this many human bodies? This pit is nowhere big enough and it's a stupid way to try to burn bodies.

We know much of the testimony is unreliable because people claim bodies were thrown into a fire like logs and they claimed the fat from the bodies was sufficient fuel to burn the bodies. Ridiculous. Pure fantasy meant to stoke passions.

Stop right there. You're imagining.

I'm stating my assumptions. At least I'm trying to make sense of the visual evidence I see whereas you're imaging things that are out of the frame.

pit of burning corpses ran night and day as per survivors, guards, Sonderkommandos.

And we know how reliable these Sonderkommandos and guards are as witnesses.

Some "Holocaust" writers, apparently struck by such technical considerations, have greatly exaggerated Birkenau's crematory capacities. Citing eyewitness testimonies, such as those of Filip Müller,[note 44] they claim that the corpses of many of the alleged gassing victims were incinerated in open-air cremation pits (in the courtyard of crematory [Krema] V, and near crematories II and III, and "Bunker 2"). Thanks to a fortunate coincidence, Birkenau was twice photographed from the air by Allied reconnaissance aircraft on May 31, 1944,[note 45] a day when 15,000 Hungarian Jews arrived at the camp. Moreover, we are authoritatively told, some 184,000 Jews had arrived there from Hungary during the previous 14 days -- an average daily total of some 13,000. The aerial reconnaissance photographs show not the slightest trace of the alleged extermination action: No trace of pits, no lines of people in front of the crematories, no evidence of open-air burning in the areas mentioned by witnesses.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n4p-4_Graf.html

If you think this shows massive open air "pits" burning day and night with continuous corpses being piled in you're a moron.

The pits were large enough to be spotted by aerial photographs:

http://imgur.com/Kry7mMJ

http://imgur.com/p5XYrBo

"This photograph, taken at 11am on 23 August 1944, by 60 Squadron RAF, has never previously been published, having only recently been discovered in the Aerial Reconnaissance Archives at Keele University. At this stage in the history of Auschwitz, in the final months of the war, we know now that Hungarian Jewry was being devastated. The number of people being gassed was so high that the crematoriums were unable to burn all the corpses. Huge pits were dug for the bodies instead, and this image graphically illustrates the burning of one such pit."

Where's the massive amounts of fuel required to incinerate this many human bodies?

What, you mean like this?

They had 15 massive furnaces on site. You think they DIDN'T have any firewood around? Jesus man, a little lateral thinking might save you from looking like a complete buffoon.

I'm stating my assumptions. At least I'm trying to make sense of the visual evidence I see whereas you're imaging things that are out of the frame.

You don't need assumptions. You have HUNDREDS of witness accounts describing massive pits of burning corpses. You have aerial photographs of burning pits behind the crematoria. You have photos on the ground showing massive piles of naked corpses in front of a smoldering fire. You have human remains still present in the ash in those areas.

You're ignoring hundreds of witnesses and photographs in favor of your own interpretation because you know looking at the evidence honestly is not an option.

Why would they dig pits to burn human bodies? It makes no sense. It's a terrible way to go about it. There's a reason that cultures that burn people stack about a cord of wood above ground (a pyre) and put the body on top.

Those piles of wood could easily have been to heat the many buildings as that's how they were heated. You're going to need much more wood than that to provide fuel to heat the buildings and incinerate tens or hundreds of thousands of people. You need massive amounts of wood.

Also, the aerial pictures are inconclusive. Maybe something was burned in that corner, but they do not show corpses being burned. In fact, the U.S. did not use this evidence against the Germans at trial because it was not incriminating and even the CIA guys looking at the evidence acknowledge witness testimony of continuous burning is false:

Figures 8 and 8a have an extraordinary historical value. The photograph was taken by the U.S. Air Force on 25 August 1944 and then went completely unnoticed, without anything abnormal being found in it by the photo intrepretation specialists of the time. It was not until 1979, as a result of the telecast of the Holocaust series, that two specialists of the CIA, D.A. Brugioni and R.G. Poirier, rescued it from the dusty archives, interpreting it and commenting on it according to the official dogma. [1] In spite of their Exterminationist good intentions, the authors had to acknowledge that

"even though the camp survivors remember a cloud of smoke and flames that issued continuously from the chimneys of the crematory furnaces and that was visible in a radius of some kilometers, the photographs we have studied do not offer any positive proof."[2]

G. Wellers comments on this grave disagreement with the official thesis as follows:

"In short, the photos do not confirm the statements according to which the crematories and burial pits were in constant activity every day."

"I am willing to believe that it is more a matter of an expression then a daily reality: when we say: "I'm dying of hunger," we are not really at the brink of death." [3]

The confession of Wellers is important insofar as it serves to acknowledge that it is not necessary to take the testimony of the supposed witnesses literally. It is an important concession. In order to give his argument more force, the French author remarks that on the date the photograph was taken, no convoys of Jews arrived at Auschwitz. According to Wellers,

"this explains perfectly the absence, on the days indicated, of exceptional activity around the crematoria and of clouds of smoke issuing from the chimneys or from the incineration pits." [4]

As we have stated, the photograph which we reproduce is dated 25 August 1944, a date on which, according to the Kalendarium of Auschwitz, no convoy arrived at Birkenau. But the previous day, according to the same source, yielded the arrival of five convoys destined for extermination. And it is absolutely inconceivable that several thousands of people could be exterminated and incinerated in less than 24 hours without leaving the slightest trace. In the photograph, which, according to the position of the shadows, was taken in the early hours of the morning, there is not the slightest trace of smoke, open fires, or movement of crowds of people or vehicles around the crematoriums to be detected. That the five convoys slated for extermination should have vanished into thin air in less that 24 hours without leaving any traces is one of the typical physical impossibilities that characterize the Auschwitz legend.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v08/v08p303_Aynat.html

So even the CIA officials trotting out these inconclusive pictures as "proof" have to acknowledge the "hundreds of witnesses" are wrong about some very critical aspects of their testimony.

Why would they dig pits to burn human bodies? It makes no sense. It's a terrible way to go about it.

Argument from incredulity. Massive logical fallacy. Just because YOU can't imagine why they would do it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Those piles of wood could easily have been to heat the many buildings as that's how they were heated.

You asked this question:

Where's the massive amounts of fuel required to incinerate this many human bodies?

I showed you a massive pile of wood. Asked and answered you fucking dullard. You want to know where the fuel for fire pits was? They had MASSIVE PILES OF FIREWOOD JACKASS!

Also, the aerial pictures are inconclusive.

The aerial photos combined with the HUNDREDS of witness testimonies combined with the Sonderkommando photos are anything but inconclusive. Got it? Every piece of evidence is there. In summer of 1944, the Nazis were gassing more Jews daily than they could dispose of in 15 massive furnaces, necessitating the burning of corpses in open air pits.

Maybe something was burned in that corner, but they do not show corpses being burned

Fuck you. The Sonderkommando photos of PILES OF NAKED FUCKING CORPSES IN FRONT OF A SMOLDERING FIRE prove you wrong.

Argument from incredulity. Massive logical fallacy. Just because YOU can't imagine why they would do it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Nice try. Ha. Let me guess, you weren't on the High School debate team.

I'm arguing the most logical interpretation of how the Germans would go about incinerating human bodies. Look how many people around the world burn bodies upon death. Do many of them dig pits in the ground to do so? No, they usually build above ground pyres. This makes sense because air can more easily feed the fire.

So it's not very likely the Germans would do this. It's possible, I suppose, but not likely.

The aerial photos combined with the HUNDREDS of witness testimonies combined with the Sonderkommando photos are anything but inconclusive. Got it? Every piece of evidence is there. In summer of 1944, the Nazis were gassing more Jews daily than they could dispose of in 15 massive furnaces, necessitating the burning of corpses in open air pits.

But your evidence fails miserably. As even the analysts on your own side acknowledge, on days after tens of thousands of prisoners are arriving, there is no evidence of smoke from this chimneys who your "HUNDREDS" of witnesses claim were operating non stop. So the very evidence you cite PROVES your witnesses are incorrect. And these "15 massive furnaces" were not massive, they were normal cremation furnaces that could accommodate one person and the Sonderkommando claims about how they cremated so many people in these are fanciful. Totally not believable.

You showed me an average sized pile of wood. Especially since all those barracks had to be heated because of the snow we see in that picture.

Plus, they needed that pile of wood next to these open air pits. Where is that pile of wood next to the open air pits you claim--which is necessary to incinerate the hundreds of people you claim were incinerated in these open air pits. Especially since it's going to be much less efficient to burn people in pits rather than above ground (they altered the story at other camps claiming a grill was used).

The Sonderkommando photos of PILES OF NAKED FUCKING CORPSES IN FRONT OF A SMOLDERING FIRE prove you wrong.

You must not have made debate team. First, you unwittingly concede too much when you use the word "smoldering." We need a raging fire to consume a human body not a smoldering one. Second, just because there are people lying dead in front of a fire doesn't mean they are going to be put in the fire. They are naked so the burning material could be their clothes. Hell, the Ghost whatever show allegedly used this picture to imply a train accident where the ruins were smoking and people were laying beside the ruins. So no, this photo is not "proof" that people were burned in open air pit fires.

In fact, on days when tens of thousands of prisoners are said to have arrived, there is no evidence of these massive furnaces producing any smoke.

I'm arguing the most logical interpretation of how the Germans would go about incinerating human bodies.

You're arguing AGAINST the hundreds of witnesses that described exactly how it was done, and the photographic record. In other words, you're inventing your own version of the truth to gloss over the version inconvenient to your anti-semitism.

But your evidence fails miserably. As even the analysts on your own side acknowledge, on days after tens of thousands of prisoners are arriving, there is no evidence of smoke from this chimneys who your "HUNDREDS" of witnesses claim were operating non stop.

There was no smoke on that one day. On the day the Brits flew over, there was a massive cloud of smoke. On the day the Sonderkommando photos were taken, there was a massive cloud of smoke with a pile of naked corpses around it. Hundreds of witnesses described the constant smell and constant haze of smoke from bodies being incinerated. Nazi guards described burning bodies in open air pits. Human remains are still present in the ground at Auschwitz.

Where is that pile of wood next to the open air pits you claim--which is necessary to incinerate the hundreds of people you claim were incinerated in these open air pits.

There is a massive amount of information outside the area of that photograph. Just because you can't see a pile of wood within the narrow margins doesn't mean there wasn't wood anywhere near there.

First, you unwittingly concede too much when you use the word "smoldering." We need a raging fire to consume a human body not a smoldering one.

Holy fucking hell do you love playing semantics. In your buffoonish cartoon moron fucking world, does a fire just spring into a ROARING INFERNO the second you light it? Or does it take a few minutes of smoking and smoldering before it gets lit?

How about when you start dumping corpses that are 90% water on top of a fire? Do ya think that might cause it to smolder and smoke? Have you ever tried to burn wet wood on a campfire genius?

Again, there is the matter of the PILE OF NAKED CORPSES IN FRONT OF A MASSIVE CLOUD OF SMOKE! What exactly do you think is going on there? Were they piling bodies next to the fire for fun? To keep them warm?

So no, this photo is not "proof" that people were burned in open air pit fires.

Yes, it really is. Sorry that your "holohoax" beliefs can't see that, but the hundreds of witnesses, the aerial photos and the photos of naked corpses in front of a fire all point to one inevitable conclusion.

I know you'll never concede it, but you know how ridiculous you sound. That's what's important. To believe your version, we have to believe the following:

• All the Sonderkommandos were lying.

• The majority of surviving Jews were either lying or completely ignorant.

• All of the captured Auschwitz guards with knowledge of the extermination process were intimidated.

• The photos of naked corpses in front of a fire show something completely innocent. Nazis were in the habit of stacking corpses beside fires to keep them warm I guess. Oh, you'll try to sell the "typhoid victims and a burning pile of clothes" bullshit, despite the fact that not a single witness statement corroborates it.

You've shown your stripes. You don't care about the evidence. You don't care about the thousands of statements, the photos, the human remains still in the ground at multiple camps. You'll attempt to hand wave all of this away because you're a horrible anti-semetic racist.

You're arguing AGAINST the hundreds of witnesses that described exactly how it was done, and the photographic record.

No, the photographic evidence contradicts the witness testimony as even the CIA analysts on your own side admit! So you are falsely claiming the photographic and eyewitness testimony supports your side when it is contradictory.

The aerial photos do not show smoke from the crematoria when there were tens of thousands of humans allegedly being exterminated and at a time some witnesses claim they were running these "massive furnaces" around the clock.

Hundreds of witnesses described the constant smell and constant haze of smoke from bodies being incinerated.

Except you just admit it wasn't "constant" as on some days when Allies flew over there was no smoke from crematoria chimneys but smoke near these alleged "pits."

Nazi guards described burning bodies in open air pits.

Yeah, evidence obtained through torture and coercion is real convincing. Especially when that information contradicts other evidence in critical ways that demonstrates they were making it up to please their torturers.

Human remains are still present in the ground at Auschwitz.

Some small fragments were found, which is not surprising, but no massive pits or burial grounds were found as the eyewitness testimony indicates should be there. The forensic tests of the grounds show an amazing lack of physical evidence.

How about when you start dumping corpses that are 90% water on top of a fire? Do ya think that might cause it to smolder and smoke? Have you ever tried to burn wet wood on a campfire genius?

Excellent questions. Now you're starting to wrap your head around the improbability of the Germans burning tens of thousands of inmates in open air pits. The testimony from witnesses describing throwing humans on the fire like logs and having their fat provide the fuel is a fantasy and there are lots of other improbable claims like the testimony.

Again, there is the matter of the PILE OF NAKED CORPSES IN FRONT OF A MASSIVE CLOUD OF SMOKE! What exactly do you think is going on there? Were they piling bodies next to the fire for fun?

I don't know (assuming the picture is real). I already gave a plausible scenario. They were keeping the bodies away from the buildings because they may have been infected with lice and so they had the prisoners take their clothes off and burn them.

Also, where are the implements one would think were necessary for conducting this cremation? They didn't have long poles? What, did they just swing the bodies into this "pit" that we can't see and are told to assume is behind that smoke?

Also, yes, we should see stacks of wood right next to the fires. They've stacked the bodies right next to the fires under your scenario. Why would they have the wood stacked in a different location? They would need an easily accessible pile.

You've shown your stripes. You don't care about the evidence. You don't care about the thousands of statements, the photos, the human remains still in the ground at multiple camps. You'll attempt to hand wave all of this away because you're a horrible anti-semetic racist.

I do care about the evidence. That's why I've taken the time to examine it. I used to simply accept all these claims as true. But then I became more skeptical of official claims and skeptical of people who want to literally put people in prison for questioning facts. So the evidence has led me here.

And I am far from a racist and I am not anti semitic. I actually respect Jews enough to think they can handle the truth. The truth is bad enough. They were horribly mistreated by the Germans.

You can't rely on the evidence so you have to engage in libel.

Yah man, I am unemployed atm. I was doing temp work on-and-off for the aussie goverment, but now I have waaaaay too much time on my hands. And if someone posts a comment that full of holes, its REALLY hard not to begin pointing out why they're so full of shit.

That said, I need some new hobbies outside of being a JIDF disinfo agent helping to cover up the holohoax /s

Oh god, he has trapped me! Now I am replying to him where you left off!

Greetings literally from across the globe, stranger. Hope you find something worth your talents, soon. :)

Sorry my friend. Unfortunately whenever anyone disagrees with him he assumes they are trolls sent from a specific sub-reddit. I do not think he will ever be self-aware enough to recognise his own anti-semitism.

Oh, he doesn't stop at subreddits: He just associated me with the JDL, and said that the Guardian's interviews with Holohoaxers cannot be trusted... The same saintly Guardian that is publishing Eddie Snowden's stuff...

I'm being attacked by a whole gang of you conspiratard trolls and I've repeatedly denied your false allegations that I'm anti Jewish.

You're pissing me off because you keep repeating this slur even as I attempt to explain why my statements and beliefs aren't anti-Jewish; my anti Zionism is no more anti Jewish than the Jews who are anti Zionist. My skepticism of the official WW II story is not based on animus toward Jews--I'm skeptical of lots of events because I like history and I want to pursue the truth and I enjoy pursuing alternative histories that one finds on places like /r/conspiracy.

You are a troll. You're just egging me on. I've spent more time than I should fighting with you conspiratard trolls. If we had mods that cared they would ban you people for your obvious trolling.

My skepticism of the official WW II story is not based on animus toward Jews--I'm skeptical of lots of events because I like history and I want to pursue the truth and I enjoy pursuing alternative histories that one finds on places like /r/conspiracy.

Name 1 other event you are as skeptical of that you also post about for at least a few hours per day.

Labelling me a troll is just your way to continue denying your anti-semitism. It's understandable. Your mods do in fact ban people for trolling and for posting in other subs that don't agree with yours, but that was the Flytape style of moderation. We'll see if that continues. Banning people who dare to say that the holocaust actually happened as the history books says is a pretty bold move to restrict free speech though.

Where's the documentation of Hitler's plan? Hitler definitely was anti Jewish and he wanted to expel the Jews from Germany. This is why he partnered with the Zionists to force Jews to emigrate to Palestine until Hitler stopped cooperating with the Zionists in the early 1940s.

proof? It seems like he built a lot of extermination camps, rounded them up and attempted to murder them. Not having an explicit order from Hitler does not change his views or what happened. Are you saying that the number of Jews who died in the holocaust is not what was reported?

Do you have any evidence the mock up the Soviets built is accurate? You prove the ventilation they allege is feasible. You do know they built a chimney that isn't even connected to the gas chamber? As in totally fake? I don't need a degree in physics to know this is no proof of a homicidal gas chamber.

Proof? And not from a webiste that has ties to neo-nazis? I'm not sure how this makes it okay to hate jews and talk about them negatively constantly but i'd still like to see proof.

I've repeatedly denied your false allegations that I'm anti Jewish.

The thing is, it's pretty tough when all you do is talk about how awful Jews are and how the holocaust barely even happened. I think you should just be more open. You're better than amos_quito but still in complete denial about your irrational hatred for an entire group of people you have likely had very little interaction with.

Name 1 other event you are as skeptical of that you also post about for at least a few hours per day.

Are you kidding me? I've posted on a ton of different topics. Fuck off you troll!

I've been focused on this issue in the last few days because you trolls have been attacking me and I've defended myself.

Labelling me a troll is just your way to continue denying your anti-semitism.

No. I've repeatedly tried to deny your false accusations using reason. The fact you aren't interested in reason and are intentionally obtuse and ignore my reasoning tells me you aren't here in good faith. You and your buddies try to shut down any discussion about Zionism, Israel, and WW II by labelling it anti semitic. This is trolling.

It seems like he built a lot of extermination camps, rounded them up and attempted to murder them. Not having an explicit order from Hitler does not change his views or what happened. Are you saying that the number of Jews who died in the holocaust is not what was reported?

Fuck you, you obtuse troll. You are purposely ignoring my arguments and playing dumb just to stir shit up.

Proof? And not from a webiste that has ties to neo-nazis?

Again, I posted a link to the fricking head of Aushwitz's historical society admitting the Soviets "recreated" the gas chambers and you refuse to look at it. I've seen no credible people deny that Krema I is a mock up. How could they? The guy in charge of this evidence just admitted it on camera to David Cole (is David Cole a "neo nazi"? and does it even matter who the interviewer is if the interviewee admits something?).

You are an intellectual fraud and being intentionally obtuse.

You must think your little games are clever. Fucking conspiratard troll.

Are you kidding me? I've posted on a ton of different topics. Fuck off you troll!

You didn't name one. Name 1 other historical event you regularly question (possibly with the help of neo-nazi websites, maybe that's just the holocaust thing for you).

No. I've repeatedly tried to deny your false accusations using reason. The fact you aren't interested in reason and are intentionally obtuse and ignore my reasoning tells me you aren't here in good faith. You and your buddies try to shut down any discussion about Zionism, Israel, and WW II by labelling it anti semitic. This is trolling.

I merely label holocaust-denying, relying on nazi propaganda and rambling hatred of jews disguised as hatred of "zionism" as anti-semitic. It's not unsual and it's why Amos_Qutio was banned from /r/news and /r/conspiracy was removed from /r/bestof privileges.

Again, I posted a link to the fricking head of Aushwitz's historical society admitting the Soviets "recreated" the gas chambers and you refuse to look at it.

You posted a single anecdotal piece of evidence from an interview with a notable holocaust denier, David Cole. You might as well have posted something by David Irving, another blatant holocaust denier. Your argument that the gas chambers are fake is nothing more than evidence that your anti-semitism drives you to try to say "look! look! the holocaust wasn't that bad!" There was no part of that video that actually showed evidence that the gas chambers were fake. It was just a video of some guy saying that they were. This is not conclusive justification for your anti-semitism.

(is David Cole a "neo nazi"? and does it even matter who the interviewer is if the interviewee admits something?).

An anti-semite holocaust denier, yes. Neo Nazi? Not sure, but I imagine he has some connections to them. Should we take the interviewer into question? Yes, of course. You woulld not trust ANYTHING about the holocaust where the interviewer was JEwish, in fact you would probably lose your shit if i attempted to present such evidence.

You are an intellectual fraud and being intentionally obtuse.

Ad-hom, i am just presenting evidence and very basic arguments against holocaust denial.

You must think your little games are clever. Fucking conspiratard troll.

More baseless insults. I really do not post in conspiritard much, i just think the holocaust happened and that you're an anti-semite.

You're a fucking troll. A lying propagandist troll who is here in bad faith.

The head historian at Auschwitz admits the one standing gas chamber at Auschwitz is a Soviet era mock up and you go on a rant about Nazis. I know you are smart enough to know this is conclusive proof the Soviets did this yet you try to avoid this fact.

A sure sign of a dishonest troll.

So who would you trust for your information then?

Myself.

All information is biased, period. Even witnessing an incident first hand is subject to your brains interpretation of senses. Finding truth is a matter of deciding what enters your reality, but respect that everyone has their own interpretations. Trusting someone to boil down events is fine, but recognize there are infinite vantage points (thus infinite truths). A most basic example would be this image. In a world of absolutes, we want to know if she is spinning left or right - but it really depends on the viewer.

I apologize for rambling, but for me it's just a matter of consuming as much information as I can - and deciding (using my flawed tools) what I believe.

I hate to wax all philosophical but... wouldn't that mean that there isn't an infinite number of truths? Wouldn't that mean there is one truth subjected to relative interpretations of the same phenomena?

Hey that's a pretty good observation...

For every perspective, there is a truth. All reality is subjective, so what 'one truth' is there? Reality could itself be a construct, hologram, multi-verse or who knows, so even these truths would be within the confines of a paradigm (meaning the truths in this reality could be false from a much higher perspective). This is why I say there could be infinite truths.

"All reality is subjective" I actually think that it's the exact opposite. All reality is objective. We might not understand the full breadth and extent of this objective reality because we all view it subjectively and can only see the tip of the iceberg so to speak. If there are infinite truths wouldn't they exist in some relation to the next therefore they all would encompass a whole truth? Shit this should go on /r/philosophy.

Well I can't agree on your first point, since reality is subject to interpretation. We have yet to find the basis for reality in the finer spectrum (wave / particle physics) so the very foundation we make observation upon is questionable. We have theories but the deeper we look, the more complex things become (fractal in a sense). How did you arrive at your conclusion if I may ask?

Does this interpretation of reality exist in the mind and the mind alone? Are we blaming reality for not being objective or are we blaming the mind? Lets just say that we all think the world is flat. That's all fine and good, we get by. But eventually we learn more and more about our environment and figure out that the world wasn't indeed flat like we had thought. The truth was that the earth was round and that truth existed even before we could comprehend it. Do I need to comprehend the truth for it to exist? The reality was that the earth was round even when we did not believe it.

We know that conspiracies are real.

con·spir·a·cy An agreement between two or more persons to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.

We also know that the US government and Interpol believe in conspiracies. They rarely catch anyone actually doing anything so they make deals with murderers, killers, fraudsters, liars, and thieves to turn in their friends & cohorts to be charged with conspiracy crimes...millions of times each year.

RICO act was originally put on the books to catch mafioso, narco drug traffickers, pedophile rings, etc...but are now being used to go after children running lemonade stands, Amish dairy farmers, and community bake sales.

An Amish man was recently sent to prison for 18 years for forcibly cutting the beard of someone in his community. The conspiracy?...buying an electric razor in PA and bringing it into OH to cut the man's hair.

They couldn't charge him with a hate crime since they both belonged to the same church so they used an old arcane law to charge him with conspiracy/interstate transportation for a weapon used in a crime.

An Amish man was recently sent to prison for 18 years for forcibly cutting the beard of someone in his community. The conspiracy?...buying an electric razor in PA and bringing it into OH to cut the man's hair.

So, uh, are you saying there should have been a post here about the amish dude's conspiracy to cut the other amish dude's beard?

Because I think when we talk about "conspiracies" we mean something a little more specific...

I think you will find a big overlap between debunkers and the special interest groups, since this sub's average science education level seems to be preschool.

Well, that is one way to demonize people who don't agree with you and shift the blame from conspiracy theorists who post non sense.

The "people that dont agree with you" is a tired conspiratard ploy to validate their trolling, and you appear to be an active participant of that sub (which stated goal is to demonize this sub). Irony?

"How dare you disagree with me. No one, ever, can disagree with me, for no logical reason, other than to troll."

Am I a shill?

Probably.

Yes. Like ownthnwo etc. They're bringing down this sub.

No, he's not.

edit: no surprise here, folks.

conspiratard

Here's what that subreddit is all about:

Day 45 of its existence

Burn the witch!!!

How so?

Logged in to second this. OWNtheNWO, based on numbers and behavior, is someone who gets paid to drive traffic, pure and simple. He drives content on this sub by constantly submitting and obviously he has many +friends and is making some serious $$ - however it works.

Is he simply the Mr.BabyMan of /r/conspiracy? If he were, I wouldn't mind so much honestly. But the quality of the sub has deteriorated due to wanton submissions of the "They found Atlantis!" variety and really a lack of filter on what is considered relevant.

This sub began as political discussion and has been turned into Fringe/X-Files/Lone Gunman and it fucking sucks, IMHO. Personally I don't think OtN is some nefarious operator. What's important is that his significant impact on the nature of submissions has driven down the intelligence of the sub while obliterating its focus - political awakening.

Is being a mod just a numbers game? Do any mods have financial interest in plugging particular sites? I don't know the answers, but I appeal to the mods to apply some better filters for whatever passes as information on this sub, and curb the influence of shills and "power users".

me Me ME! can you guys tell me if I'm one in the same of OWNtheNWO?

I mean come on my username is very similar. That has to label me instantly.

The xfiles stuff is to deliberately distract us and make us look foolish.

Straight out of a gentleperson's guide to forum spies:

Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a ‘RESOURCE BURN.’ By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a ‘gossip mode.’ In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to ‘drive in the wedge.’

200k members 50k shills and pentagon cheerleaders...

Then we have to count the conspiratard and skeptic trolls who have nothing better to do with their time.

At times it seems like at least a 1/4 of users here are trolls from places like /r/conspiratard.

How many of them are shills and down voters?

Shills? Not as many as you'd think.

Downvoters? Almost all of them. Find me a thread without downvotes for every side of the issue. People here downvote stuff they disagree with, plain and simple.

i disagree. that's a downvote. :p

I pay attention to the level of discourse and who's actually contributing in a constructive manner. Numbers mean almost nothing.

There's also an unrepresented group in OP's post; those who simply lurk with an account. I'm on the subreddit because I'm genuinly interested in conspiracy theories, even if I don't agree with some. I mostly just read what others are saying because I'm not incredibly well read on this stuff.

Welcome! Feel free to ask questions. Some of us are more skeptical than most, but if you ask honestly and openly there are those who will do their best to give an answer that is understandable.

I am in the same boat. I don't know any hard evidence, and I am very interested in the theories tossed around here. I even ask a question here and there to gain more knowledge.

Very true. A post may have 200 comments but if they are all irrelevant to the post or sub then it isn't worthwhile

No doubt a large amount of them is inactive or otherwise not contributing. Look at any other 200,000 subreddit and compare their contribution rate to this subreddit. Top threads here rarely break a hundred comments. The number one thread right now has SEVEN comments in it.

Still, there are quite a few just browsing /r/conspiracy without ever posting or even subscribing.

I mainly just browse around here to see what the current conversation is most of the time. Even though I don't agree with a lot of what people are saying here I still enjoy seeing opposing viewpoints to mine and there are a few things this sub has changed my opinion on.

This is a fun sub. Stuff gets talked about here that doesn't get talked about anywhere else.

Yeah, it's very nuanced too, which I suppose is healthy! Some of us are only half-way down the rabbit hole. Most humans never venture there. ... Said the rabbit, wrapped inside wolf fur, inside another layer made out of sheeps clothing. That's where it comes from, right? :)

And there are quite a few who aren't. Which was his point...

How does counting comments equal page views (which was his incorrect hypothesis)?

Don't forget about how the sub grew - from 100k to 200k in under a year. Those aren't all dead/inactive accts.

Wasn't it around 100k shortly before the Boston Marathon incident? I seem to remember those few weeks afterwards expanding the subscribers significantly.

And...Half of those are sock-puppets.

It would cool to see a program that analyzed all the users output and showed some sweet pie charts with different characteristics.

[deleted]

You're just being non consensual.

Well, would someone who's terribly clever at scripting be able to run something on the subreddit that would scan for the number of unique commenting / posting users for, say, a three month period?

That would capture all of the regular users and discount old, lapsed accounts. It wouldn't be 100% accurate, but it would certainly give you a "ballpark figure".

Watching you, reading you.

You can just ask mods to screenshot their traffic data if you really want to know how many uniques are here every day.

Won't someone please think of the jews.

Read the responses in this thread:

http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1s00h0/dominos_tests_drone_pizza_delivery_get_used_to/

This will give you a good idea of the type of people that make up this sub. There are 1 or 2 comments that are actually relevant and are posted by someone who can understand the big picture. Every other comment is complete garbage. Literally no one has pointed out that this is just a social manipulation tactic to get the public to accept the militarization of domestic airspace. And this is the top conspiracy-related post in this sub.

We need to find someplace else to go.

Yeah. The place has literally been overrun by shills and trolls. Half decent moderation of banning people from the troll sub /r/conspiratard would help a bit.

There are obviously a good number of people who are super dedicated to trolling this sub. Look how much time they spend mocking this sub on conspiratard and then they are allowed to come over here and disrupt! Obviously these are the people that are motivated enough to use multiple accounts and engage in vote brigading.

It stinks because it would be nice to have discussions without the constant harassment.

Oh, just for fun, let's see how many people are over at r/conspiratard. Hmmmmm, only 23,110. Lolololololo...

If we created troll accounts or signed up over there to game their sub like they do this sub it would probably increase significantly.

It's a shame more isn't done to stop this trolling on this sub.

We'll need 20 million to ever be taken seriously.

We need a demand to be taken seriously -- 1% Wall St Sales Tax now!

http://againstausterity.org/program/1-wall-street-sales-tax

I have two accounts. This one and the one I use while I am at work.

I'm subscribed for the lulz.
Don't forget us

Suspicious...

Do people seriously have sock puppet accounts? What's the point?

Yes hopefully we can use this momentous occasion to help push for a 1% Wall St Sales Tax to pay for free health care, education and infrastructure improvements (JOBS!) in the USA

http://againstausterity.org/program/1-wall-street-sales-tax

Don't forget we silent observers!!!!!

i have just joined this thing. its still very small but looks like a decent attempt at a reasoned environment. http://awak333.com/mboard/

EDIT: Can't believe I didn't specifically mention THE SHILLS - the bane of this subreddit! To be honest, I think these are the people who really go to town with the multiple sockpuppet accounts to downvote stories that they have been told to neutralise. They're smart enough to know they don't have to push any story into negative - it will die from lack of oxygen at 0 or 1.

Yes, and they wait until a thread like this is a few days old and the gang of conspiratard trolls/shills outnumber legitimate conspiracy users still here and they can manipulate the voting of comments.

These shills are very dedicated. See redping below and his gang of nutcases that spend all their time on conspiracy threads for an example.

Further proof from this thread:

Conspiratard troll "redping" engages me in a back and forth and gets backed up by another conspiratard user who adds no value but simply hurls insults at me:

[–]Cryogenian 1 point 1 hour ago

Oh man, you had some time on your hands, didn't you? Thoroughly enjoyed the read (your part of the conversation, not that uneducated antisemitist fuckwit you were responding to), thanks!

These are conspiratard trolls whose only interest in this sub is to derail conversation and attack users here yet the mods do nothing to stop it (and actually seem to be helping them in many instances).

I'd imagine that most conspiratard and upvote accounts wouldn't actually subscribe. I go to this sub fairly often and I don't subscribe because I prefer to browse it on my own and not have them pop up in my regular feed. (if that happened I'd never get anything done)

[deleted]

Ah yeah, I just turned off the custom styles to get around that. Kind of funny that I'm being downvoted for pointing out that some people who frequent this subreddit do not subscribe to it. I'm not sure what the issue people have with that is.

They could also be viewers that are scared due to the MSM labeling everyone in here as "suicidal warriors". It is like they are finding their scapegoat again that is responsible for their own problems.

Everyone seems to be throwing paid shills into the pot. For some reason I doubt that problem exists.

I've seen it first hand. I peeked in a "coffee shop" that was for members only. Younger people were working on laptops and there was a bid/ask board that was hanging on the wall. The bid/ask board scrolled jobs and this was representative:

"Need 50 unique Facebook users to like my account. $10"

It appeared to do this for a number of different social media.

After a few weeks the windows were frosted so I couldn't see inside anymore.

I dont get how this is an active sub... the content on here is shit reposted from facebook, or forwards from grandma

/r/Conspiracy should have more subs, but I think a lot were removed from the government or something.

I have about 10 subscribed but only use 1 or 3, depending on the topic.

And yet the mods don't ban people like this (who admits to gaming the sub and probably is a /r/conspiratard regular) and he gets to troll away and disrupt.

Meanwhile other legitimate conspiracy users like MaxActivist and Amos_Quitos are banned when they get into a tussle with these conspiratard trolls.

Finally hits 200,000 again

FTFY

Oh, Wikipedia and the ADL refer to the IHR as anti-semitic so it must be true!

Bullocks.

The IHR does research about WW II and they are one of the few places to publish German sources and there is nothing wrong with this. It's a good thing. We need to see both sides of a conflict to better understand a conflict. What other area of history do people insist only one side's evidence be shown? Why shouldn't they review German literature from that time? Or record German officer's statements? Etc.

It's absurd that in many countries simply presenting this evidence is illegal. For instance the author who conducted scientific forensic research into the gas chambers that I was citing:

Germar Rudolf had completed his doctoral dissertation in chemistry while working at the renowned Max Planck Institute in Stuttgart, when publication of his forensic study of the alleged gas chambers of Auschwitz caused university authorities to forbid him from completing the doctorate. In 1995 Rudolf was sentenced to fourteen months in jail for authoring the Rudolf Report; in the same year all available copies of Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte, a collection of up-to-date research on the Holocaust problem, were seized and destroyed by court order (the English-language version, Dissecting the Holocaust, can be purchased from IHR). Rudolf edits the revisionist quarterly Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung, and is currently seeking political asylum in the United States. He has submitted a lengthy affidavit in support of David Irving's appeal of the adverse ruling in the Lipstadt trial.

You show your true intentions here:

I think it's ridiculous when people deny the holocaust, and I think conspiracy theorists are nutcases.

You once again use terms that I reject and most revisionists reject. Questioning the scope of crimes committed against Jews is not denying that crimes occurred. If I questioned how many Armenians died at the hands of the Turks would I be a denialist? It's just a buzzword you use to shut down debate (which you learned from the ADL).

Also, your hostility to conspiracy theorists and description of them as "nutcases" indicates why you should be banned from here. All you do is troll here. That's your only purpose.

And I love the feigned ignorance about black propaganda trolling as if you don't know that Bipolar_Bear, your conspiratard troll friend, and others, post anti Jewish cartoons and slurs here so they can claim this sub is anti Jewish.

And again, I am not anti-semitic. I like and respect Jewish people. I simply don't think a Zionist state should have been created, I'm critical of Israel's actions, and I think Jews are overrepresented in U.S. foreign policies and power, and I question the official story about WW II. This does not make me racist or anti Jewish.

Edit: spelling.

An Amish man was recently sent to prison for 18 years for forcibly cutting the beard of someone in his community. The conspiracy?...buying an electric razor in PA and bringing it into OH to cut the man's hair.

So, uh, are you saying there should have been a post here about the amish dude's conspiracy to cut the other amish dude's beard?

Because I think when we talk about "conspiracies" we mean something a little more specific...

My skepticism of the official WW II story is not based on animus toward Jews--I'm skeptical of lots of events because I like history and I want to pursue the truth and I enjoy pursuing alternative histories that one finds on places like /r/conspiracy.

Name 1 other event you are as skeptical of that you also post about for at least a few hours per day.

Labelling me a troll is just your way to continue denying your anti-semitism. It's understandable. Your mods do in fact ban people for trolling and for posting in other subs that don't agree with yours, but that was the Flytape style of moderation. We'll see if that continues. Banning people who dare to say that the holocaust actually happened as the history books says is a pretty bold move to restrict free speech though.

Where's the documentation of Hitler's plan? Hitler definitely was anti Jewish and he wanted to expel the Jews from Germany. This is why he partnered with the Zionists to force Jews to emigrate to Palestine until Hitler stopped cooperating with the Zionists in the early 1940s.

proof? It seems like he built a lot of extermination camps, rounded them up and attempted to murder them. Not having an explicit order from Hitler does not change his views or what happened. Are you saying that the number of Jews who died in the holocaust is not what was reported?

Do you have any evidence the mock up the Soviets built is accurate? You prove the ventilation they allege is feasible. You do know they built a chimney that isn't even connected to the gas chamber? As in totally fake? I don't need a degree in physics to know this is no proof of a homicidal gas chamber.

Proof? And not from a webiste that has ties to neo-nazis? I'm not sure how this makes it okay to hate jews and talk about them negatively constantly but i'd still like to see proof.

I've repeatedly denied your false allegations that I'm anti Jewish.

The thing is, it's pretty tough when all you do is talk about how awful Jews are and how the holocaust barely even happened. I think you should just be more open. You're better than amos_quito but still in complete denial about your irrational hatred for an entire group of people you have likely had very little interaction with.

How do you "misinterpret" the testimony of Sonderkommandos who say they cleaned out mounds of dead bodies from gas chambers and burned them? There are dozens of stories from them. Are they lying when they say they were active participants in the genocide of their own people?

They also match up perfectly with stories from guards at the extermination camps who admitted to what was going on.

Once again with the anti semite slur. I'm not biased against Jews you conspiratard troll. You repeatedly libel me because you are an intellectual fraud.

And is this the best you can do? Thank you for showing me Dr. Piper's letter. It shows there is no rebuttal to the admissions Cole wrung out of him.

What proof is there that the Soviet mock up gas chamber is "in the same building" as the alleged original gas chamber? This is nothing but a bald claim that we have to take his word for. All the evidence of homicidal gas chambers, all the accoutrements of terror, are literally mock ups added later by the Soviets. So this defense of his previous claims is actually quite damning. He doesn't deny the Soviets recreated the gas chamber and he doesn't provide any further details demonstrating why we should trust their mock up as historically accurate. Who were the Soviet set designers and what evidence did they use to "recreate" the chambers they said were in that building (and we simply have to take their word for it). They only proof these were the gas chambers are literally the evidence the Soviets planted there; because there certainly isn't Prussian blue indicating cyanide poisoning. Hoss "confessed" that gassings occurred in farmhouses. These were not farmhouses so whose testimony or what evidence did the Soviet's rely upon? Why can't he tell us?

So thank you for showing us all how weak the rebuttal is to Mr. Cole's smoking gun evidence he uncovered at Auschwitz from the chair of the Historical Department at the Auschwitz State Museum. Cole got Dr. Piper to admit the gas chambers are a mock up recreation. And all you have in response is to lamely call Cole a "neo nazi."

And picking nits over Dr. Piper's title hardly makes your case any better. Weak shit my man.

Dr. Piper claims Cole misrepresented his title by calling him "Director of the Auschwitz Museum" when he's actually "chair of the Historical Department at the Auschwitz State Museum." Big diff. And he may not be "head of Auschwitz Archives" but he obviously has control over the primary evidence as he offers to show Cole evidence (the doors you asked about earlier) during his interview with him at his office at Auschwitz in 1992 (which he later reneged upon).

From a source you trust, for some reason, even though you don't accept videos of interviews on Youtube or articles and studies published at IHR:

Franciszek Piper (born 1941) is a Polish scholar, historian and author. Most of his work concerns the Jewish Holocaust, especially the history of the concentration camps at Auschwitz. Dr. Piper is credited as one of the historians who helped establish a more accurate number of victims of Auschwitz-Birkenau death camps. According to his research, at least 1.1 million people perished at Auschwitz-Birkenau, of whom about 960,000 were Jewish.[1] He is the author of several books and chair of the Historical Department at the Auschwitz State Museum.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franciszek_Piper

When are you going to admit you're a conspiratard troll slinging libelous accusations of anti semitism because you don't have the truth on your side? When are you going to admit you're nothing but a pathetic propagandist troll?

Why would they dig pits to burn human bodies? It makes no sense. It's a terrible way to go about it. There's a reason that cultures that burn people stack about a cord of wood above ground (a pyre) and put the body on top.

Those piles of wood could easily have been to heat the many buildings as that's how they were heated. You're going to need much more wood than that to provide fuel to heat the buildings and incinerate tens or hundreds of thousands of people. You need massive amounts of wood.

Also, the aerial pictures are inconclusive. Maybe something was burned in that corner, but they do not show corpses being burned. In fact, the U.S. did not use this evidence against the Germans at trial because it was not incriminating and even the CIA guys looking at the evidence acknowledge witness testimony of continuous burning is false:

Figures 8 and 8a have an extraordinary historical value. The photograph was taken by the U.S. Air Force on 25 August 1944 and then went completely unnoticed, without anything abnormal being found in it by the photo intrepretation specialists of the time. It was not until 1979, as a result of the telecast of the Holocaust series, that two specialists of the CIA, D.A. Brugioni and R.G. Poirier, rescued it from the dusty archives, interpreting it and commenting on it according to the official dogma. [1] In spite of their Exterminationist good intentions, the authors had to acknowledge that

"even though the camp survivors remember a cloud of smoke and flames that issued continuously from the chimneys of the crematory furnaces and that was visible in a radius of some kilometers, the photographs we have studied do not offer any positive proof."[2]

G. Wellers comments on this grave disagreement with the official thesis as follows:

"In short, the photos do not confirm the statements according to which the crematories and burial pits were in constant activity every day."

"I am willing to believe that it is more a matter of an expression then a daily reality: when we say: "I'm dying of hunger," we are not really at the brink of death." [3]

The confession of Wellers is important insofar as it serves to acknowledge that it is not necessary to take the testimony of the supposed witnesses literally. It is an important concession. In order to give his argument more force, the French author remarks that on the date the photograph was taken, no convoys of Jews arrived at Auschwitz. According to Wellers,

"this explains perfectly the absence, on the days indicated, of exceptional activity around the crematoria and of clouds of smoke issuing from the chimneys or from the incineration pits." [4]

As we have stated, the photograph which we reproduce is dated 25 August 1944, a date on which, according to the Kalendarium of Auschwitz, no convoy arrived at Birkenau. But the previous day, according to the same source, yielded the arrival of five convoys destined for extermination. And it is absolutely inconceivable that several thousands of people could be exterminated and incinerated in less than 24 hours without leaving the slightest trace. In the photograph, which, according to the position of the shadows, was taken in the early hours of the morning, there is not the slightest trace of smoke, open fires, or movement of crowds of people or vehicles around the crematoriums to be detected. That the five convoys slated for extermination should have vanished into thin air in less that 24 hours without leaving any traces is one of the typical physical impossibilities that characterize the Auschwitz legend.

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v08/v08p303_Aynat.html

So even the CIA officials trotting out these inconclusive pictures as "proof" have to acknowledge the "hundreds of witnesses" are wrong about some very critical aspects of their testimony.

Argument from incredulity. Massive logical fallacy. Just because YOU can't imagine why they would do it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Nice try. Ha. Let me guess, you weren't on the High School debate team.

I'm arguing the most logical interpretation of how the Germans would go about incinerating human bodies. Look how many people around the world burn bodies upon death. Do many of them dig pits in the ground to do so? No, they usually build above ground pyres. This makes sense because air can more easily feed the fire.

So it's not very likely the Germans would do this. It's possible, I suppose, but not likely.

The aerial photos combined with the HUNDREDS of witness testimonies combined with the Sonderkommando photos are anything but inconclusive. Got it? Every piece of evidence is there. In summer of 1944, the Nazis were gassing more Jews daily than they could dispose of in 15 massive furnaces, necessitating the burning of corpses in open air pits.

But your evidence fails miserably. As even the analysts on your own side acknowledge, on days after tens of thousands of prisoners are arriving, there is no evidence of smoke from this chimneys who your "HUNDREDS" of witnesses claim were operating non stop. So the very evidence you cite PROVES your witnesses are incorrect. And these "15 massive furnaces" were not massive, they were normal cremation furnaces that could accommodate one person and the Sonderkommando claims about how they cremated so many people in these are fanciful. Totally not believable.

You showed me an average sized pile of wood. Especially since all those barracks had to be heated because of the snow we see in that picture.

Plus, they needed that pile of wood next to these open air pits. Where is that pile of wood next to the open air pits you claim--which is necessary to incinerate the hundreds of people you claim were incinerated in these open air pits. Especially since it's going to be much less efficient to burn people in pits rather than above ground (they altered the story at other camps claiming a grill was used).

The Sonderkommando photos of PILES OF NAKED FUCKING CORPSES IN FRONT OF A SMOLDERING FIRE prove you wrong.

You must not have made debate team. First, you unwittingly concede too much when you use the word "smoldering." We need a raging fire to consume a human body not a smoldering one. Second, just because there are people lying dead in front of a fire doesn't mean they are going to be put in the fire. They are naked so the burning material could be their clothes. Hell, the Ghost whatever show allegedly used this picture to imply a train accident where the ruins were smoking and people were laying beside the ruins. So no, this photo is not "proof" that people were burned in open air pit fires.

In fact, on days when tens of thousands of prisoners are said to have arrived, there is no evidence of these massive furnaces producing any smoke.

I'm arguing the most logical interpretation of how the Germans would go about incinerating human bodies.

You're arguing AGAINST the hundreds of witnesses that described exactly how it was done, and the photographic record. In other words, you're inventing your own version of the truth to gloss over the version inconvenient to your anti-semitism.

But your evidence fails miserably. As even the analysts on your own side acknowledge, on days after tens of thousands of prisoners are arriving, there is no evidence of smoke from this chimneys who your "HUNDREDS" of witnesses claim were operating non stop.

There was no smoke on that one day. On the day the Brits flew over, there was a massive cloud of smoke. On the day the Sonderkommando photos were taken, there was a massive cloud of smoke with a pile of naked corpses around it. Hundreds of witnesses described the constant smell and constant haze of smoke from bodies being incinerated. Nazi guards described burning bodies in open air pits. Human remains are still present in the ground at Auschwitz.

Where is that pile of wood next to the open air pits you claim--which is necessary to incinerate the hundreds of people you claim were incinerated in these open air pits.

There is a massive amount of information outside the area of that photograph. Just because you can't see a pile of wood within the narrow margins doesn't mean there wasn't wood anywhere near there.

First, you unwittingly concede too much when you use the word "smoldering." We need a raging fire to consume a human body not a smoldering one.

Holy fucking hell do you love playing semantics. In your buffoonish cartoon moron fucking world, does a fire just spring into a ROARING INFERNO the second you light it? Or does it take a few minutes of smoking and smoldering before it gets lit?

How about when you start dumping corpses that are 90% water on top of a fire? Do ya think that might cause it to smolder and smoke? Have you ever tried to burn wet wood on a campfire genius?

Again, there is the matter of the PILE OF NAKED CORPSES IN FRONT OF A MASSIVE CLOUD OF SMOKE! What exactly do you think is going on there? Were they piling bodies next to the fire for fun? To keep them warm?

So no, this photo is not "proof" that people were burned in open air pit fires.

Yes, it really is. Sorry that your "holohoax" beliefs can't see that, but the hundreds of witnesses, the aerial photos and the photos of naked corpses in front of a fire all point to one inevitable conclusion.

I know you'll never concede it, but you know how ridiculous you sound. That's what's important. To believe your version, we have to believe the following:

• All the Sonderkommandos were lying.

• The majority of surviving Jews were either lying or completely ignorant.

• All of the captured Auschwitz guards with knowledge of the extermination process were intimidated.

• The photos of naked corpses in front of a fire show something completely innocent. Nazis were in the habit of stacking corpses beside fires to keep them warm I guess. Oh, you'll try to sell the "typhoid victims and a burning pile of clothes" bullshit, despite the fact that not a single witness statement corroborates it.

You've shown your stripes. You don't care about the evidence. You don't care about the thousands of statements, the photos, the human remains still in the ground at multiple camps. You'll attempt to hand wave all of this away because you're a horrible anti-semetic racist.