create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
 Everything Diaries Technology Science Culture Politics Media News Internet Op-Ed Fiction Meta MLP

 You Guys Really Buy the 6 Million Number? By GhostOfTiber in Op-EdSun Jun 14, 2009 at 09:52:16 PM EST Tags: Jews, Holocaust, History (all tags) Did you know that if Hitler had started killing Jews at the beginning of World War 2, in 1939, and stopped when it ended in 1945, he would have to kill two Jews every minute. That's the six million number. For 12 million - a Jew every 15 seconds. Below the fold: We're going to play with math.

Assumptions for Argument
Lets assume that Hitler started killing Jews at the beginning of World War 2. The moment it started - Hitler ordered the Jews dead. Lets also assume there's a steady flow of Jews into the hands of the SS who are executing the Jews. The SS just shoots them, we'll make no appeals to logistics yet.

March 15th of 1939 marks the first official hostile action on the part of Hitler. May of 1945 marks the massed surrender of Nazis across Europe and effectively bows Nazi Germany out of the war.

This means the German war machine, allegedly responsible for killing 6 million Jews on the low side, was functioning for 5 years.

5 years = 1825 days
1825 days = 43800 hours
43800 hours = 2628000 minutes
6,000,000 Jews divided by 2628000 minutes = 2.28310502 Jews a Minute.

See what the problem is?

That's 2 Jews a minute, one Jew every 30 seconds, from the start of Hitlers war machine until the mass surrenders when it broke down. This number is for 6 million. That's the low side. Make it 12 million and suddenly Hitler somehow has to kill almost 5 Jews a minute.

What Does History Say?
We have to put some kind of context to this argument. We can't just assume that this mass of SS rounded up every single Jew and started shooting. Doesn't happen. Not enough troops for too many Jews. Add to that the fact that the Jews didn't go willingly. So how many people were actually involved in the operation of destroying the Jews? Well, talking about people who actually hunted down Jews, a single squad - the Einsatzgruppen - was assigned the task. Going back the first part of the article the assumption that a 5 man detachment can keep pace and be everywhere at once, you might get to kill a Jew (12 million x 5 man detachment) or a Jew every two minutes (6 million x 5 man detachment).

But that's not what history records. These squads only lasted a year before being disbanded. They really only served to get the word out: "Jews - We're coming for you."

No, Hitler thought they were "ineffective and inefficient". Something new had to be done. Hitler decided to build death camps.

The Logistics of the Death Camp
Not all Jews were sent to death camps. There were eight death camps in total. Out of those, the first and longest operating one (Auschwitz II) didn't have gassing facilities until June of 1943. The date of the official closure of the extermination machine isn't clear and I feel it's a safe assumption to peg the surrender date (May 1945) as the official closure to the camp. This means that - at most - Auschwitz was open two years. If we want to go by the "plaque number" (the low estimate) of two million, that's a million people a year.

Number time again:
365 days = 8760 hours
8760 hours = 525600 minutes
1,000,000 dead / 525600 hours = 1.90258752 killed a minute.

30 seconds to kill one person. I see a disturbing trend here: There seems to be a common assumption that it takes 30 seconds to kill one person so surely every 30 seconds these camps were open and operating they must have killed someone.

There's one problem here. We know it took four hours from start to finish to operate a crematorium. Four hours to kill 2000 people. This means that each individual took 8 minutes to die. Obviously we have to have one or another, which is it? Rudolf Hoss forever regretted throwing the "2 million" number out there. "But", you say, "2000 people died concurrently!" All well and good, but the deaths took 20 minutes on top of the four hour cleanup, so we know one person took 20 minutes to die, 2000 people at a time. Could it be done within the context of the numbers? Yes. Concurrency test: 30 seconds per Jew, by 2000 Jews in batch gives us 60000 seconds for the total operation, or 16 minutes. I see no reason to doubt the time it took to operate the "kill cycle" of the gas chamber.

Working the Other Side
Lets work it from the other direction. We know that it took 8 minutes to kill one person. Lets assume that the death camp was factory and could continue, uninterrupted, 24/7/365. We'll use the two years number again because Hitler felt that killing the Jews by gunfire or hanging took too long and was ineffective. The other side of this assumption is that the Jews were put to a purpose - building a death factory. Until it was built, there was a compelling reason not to execute them en masse.

730 days x 24 hours in a day x 60 minutes in an hour gives us = 1,051,200 minutes. Divided by eight minutes to kill someone, we see that the best death camp the Third Reich could come up with might have killed only 131,400 people. This is a far, far cry from the "revised" number of 1,400,000 claimed by the "historians".

Lets take that and work by percents:
Belzec - 42% of Auschwitz - 55,188 dead
Chelmno - 23% - 30,222 dead
Jasenovac - 42% - 55,188 dead
Majdanek - 26% - 34,164 dead
Maly Trostinets - 4% - 5,256 dead
Sobibór - 18% - 23,652 dead

Total?

The math just doesn't add up.

 Poll
Six Million?
 Less than 416,538 - I saw Schindlers List 16% More than 416,538 less than 6 million - We don't know how many were executed at gunpoint 28% More 6,000,000 but less than 12 million - History is right! 36% More than 12,000,000 - the Nazis brought populations of Jews to their Lunar Deathcamp 20%

 Votes: 25 Results | Other Polls

 Display: Threaded Minimal Nested Flat Flat Unthreaded Sort: Unrated, then Highest Highest Rated First Lowest Rated First Ignore Ratings Newest First Oldest First
 You Guys Really Buy the 6 Million Number? | 144 comments (137 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
 you mean someone with an agenda lied to me?! (2.60 / 5) (#2) by totmacher on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 11:12:14 AM EST

 i am shocked and appalled, sir! -- I'll sum it up for yo: You = Douche bag ~ Butthurtapotamus
 so, totmarcher (3.00 / 3) (#3) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 11:16:06 AM EST

 interesting name - does it mean totenkampf marcher? [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 i think it's a :w: reference (3.00 / 2) (#32) by Creative Hate on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 11:21:06 AM EST

 [ Parent ]
 yup, already said yes to this (3.00 / 2) (#46) by totmacher on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 12:39:16 PM EST

 if you're so interested in me, you could buy me a drink first and look me in the eye when you're talking -- I'll sum it up for yo: You = Douche bag ~ Butthurtapotamus[ Parent ]
 was elucidating that fact (none / 0) (#104) by Creative Hate on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 02:48:37 AM EST

 for the ghostly tuber [ Parent ]
 It wasn't just the Germans (2.85 / 7) (#4) by Blarney on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 11:39:49 AM EST

 Poland's population was 40% Jewish before the war. It wasn't just the Germans. And it wasn't just the Jews either. America and Britain largely escaped, but most people who lived in the 20th Century had at least one experience with soldiers coming to their town and sorting out undesirables from those allowed to live.
 Great, but... (3.00 / 4) (#5) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 11:46:21 AM EST

 You don't know if they were executed or imprisoned or deported or what. The Americans did it to the Japanese. Guess how many interred Japanese America sent back to their original address (either in Japan or America)? NONE. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 I am 100% positive that it will happen in our life (none / 0) (#36) by Ron Paul on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 05:05:39 PM EST

 times perhaps even in the US. Resource limitations are population growth are big problems ..
 Britain escaped? (none / 0) (#81) by Ruston Rustov on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 03:48:53 PM EST

 TL:DR (2.00 / 4) (#6) by jolt rush soon on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 12:27:18 PM EST

 Come on, he'd at least have done them in batches. -- Subosc — free electronic music.
 clear the DR emphasized (nt) (3.00 / 3) (#7) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 01:20:46 PM EST

 [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Huh? (2.66 / 6) (#9) by mirleid on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 01:35:14 PM EST

 530 days x 24 hours in a day x 60 minutes in an hour gives us = 1051200 minutes That would be 730 days, not 530. Also, you're assuming that all deaths happened sequentially and all as a result of gassing. So, and taking your logic, assuming that you'd manage to kill 2000 people every four hours, and that you'd run non stop, you'd get Total number of hours in 530 days = 12720 Number of people that you can kill in 4 hour periods = 2000 Total number of people that you'd be able to kill in 12720 hours assuming non-stop operation = 6360000 Ergo, under your assumptions, Auschwitz II alone would be able to exterminate the 6M people that are projected to have been killed. Chickens don't give milk
 I fixed the numbers (3.00 / 3) (#12) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 01:52:15 PM EST

 MATH IN YOUR HEAD IS HARD. I didn't assume the deaths were sequential, I only tried to prove that "a death every 30 seconds" was consistent with the intervals provided. The answer is "Yes". I realize they didn't run the gas chamber 24/7/365, so I won't argue with you there. But lets further the discussion for a moment. The plaque claims that only 1.4M people died in auschwitz. Why? Where's the bodies? The teeth? The bones? [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Don't know about the bodies and the bones... (2.66 / 6) (#23) by mirleid on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 04:43:59 PM EST

 ...but quite a lot of the teeth are in bank vaults in Switzerland. Chickens don't give milk[ Parent ]
 Yeah, dooooood, (3.00 / 3) (#29) by Ruston Rustov on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 01:08:47 AM EST

 seeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeecret bank vaults. In Switzerland! I had had incurable open sores all over my feet for sixteen years. The doctors were powerless to do anything about it. I told my psychiatrist that they were psychosomatic Stigmata - the Stigmata are the wounds Jesus suffered when he was nailed to the cross. Three days later all my sores were gone. -- Michael CrawfordMaybe tomorrow. -- Michael CrawfordAs soon as she has her first period, fuck your daughter. -- localroger [ Parent ]
 Isn't it based upon shoe counts? (none / 1) (#49) by Wen Jian on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 02:08:40 PM EST

 It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 Jehova's WItness shoe pile exibit FTW (none / 0) (#85) by Ron Paul on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 06:30:06 PM EST

 Shoes were collected on intake and persoanl effects were organized. SImilar to modern jails
 I SEE WHUT YOU DID THAR (3.00 / 2) (#14) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 01:59:45 PM EST

 Where are you getting the 530 number from? 365 * 2 = 730. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 From your piece before you fixed it.[] (3.00 / 4) (#22) by mirleid on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 04:39:36 PM EST

 oh ok (3.00 / 2) (#24) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 04:51:04 PM EST

 While I like having less jews roll through the ovens to support the point, I corrected it to the right amount of days. That being said, if they could only operate it once a day, then we're still left with 1,460,000 dead. Now I'm interested in finding the zyklon B or operational records. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Well, when you factor in leap years (none / 0) (#73) by Harry B Otch on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:40:56 PM EST

 (the extra days in 1940 and 1944), and the fact that the summer Olympics were canceled as well as the World Series, I think the numbers still hold up. ----- Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.[ Parent ]
 +1 FP Could this kill K5? (2.57 / 7) (#10) by Wen Jian on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 01:36:15 PM EST

 I think this is an interesting subject to discuss; I do believe that the Holocaust existed, but would also like to see more scrutiny on the figures. But you've left a few really really obvious weaknesses; There is widely accepted evidence that large numbers of Jews were killed by machinegun fire in a systematic way. For instance in Russia, where, regardless of the role of Einsatztruppen, a part of the process of the German army taking control of a town or area was to exterminate the jewish part of the population (along with a fair few others for good measure). It is certainly questionable that the death camps operated at the rate that accounts for the number of deaths that are supposed to have occurred. However, it is unlikely that all (or even the majority) of the deaths would have been directly down to the operation of the deadly apparatus itself. For example, given the circumstances and conditions of death camps and concentration camps in general, how do you account for work-gang accidents, exhaustion, starvation/malnourishment and the spread of disease? At Bergen-Belsen alone, 35,000 inmates died of Typhus, out of 150,000 prsoner that were there - though this was primarily a POW camp. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
 This is why I limited the discussion (3.00 / 6) (#13) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 01:57:19 PM EST

 to the death camps. It's really hard to account for the untold numbers of people who died at the hands of the Germans. Also I feel Russia blamed a lot of Germany for the pogroms where they exterminated Jews to save their own skins. The problem is we have anecdotal evidence of this, but very little records from Russia. What records do exist (Ellie Weisel's "Night") are from the perspective of one person. However I feel that these numbers are probably a factor of the total, and I think we can look at the work camps (even the work-yourself-to-death camps like Trostinets which didn't even have formal gas chambers) for numbers. At Trostinets, the made the prisoners plant trees. I wonder if Greenpeace knows about this? [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 At least one of the special action squads kept (none / 0) (#37) by Ron Paul on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 05:08:18 PM EST

 detailed reports of what was happening in lithiuania etc. Riga. I'm glad to have sparked your interest with my comment on this interesting subject.
 you limited discussion because youre trolling (none / 0) (#132) by manjal on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 05:02:31 PM EST

 if you are not trolling, then god help you and us all. it is not 'hard to get a grip' on the numbers of people who died in ghettos, slave caps, etc. they kept records. they planted treees... so what? why would greenpeace care? they also built toilets and at the nursery in auschwitz some lady painted the seven dwarves on the wall. himmler was a horticultural nutjob and forced slaves to work in agricultural experiments, its all well documented and well known by anyone who has studied it... they also built jet airplanes and tanks and sewed buttons on jackets... so what? you bring it up, why? how is it relevant? "because not a lot of people know it..." uhh.. so the hell what not alot of people know that i have belly button lint, but its not relevant to the question. what is the question? 'how many jews died in the holocaust'. no? thats not the question you want ? what is the REAL question you want to ask then? why not just ask it? why beat around the bush? because nobody understands your poor oppressed nazi grandparents? actually yes, a lot of people know about gardening and whatever. namely, the hundreds of thousands of people who ran the camp system or were prisoners there, do you think you can stop us from talking to the germans who were there, or somehow burn down every house of records in germany and erase reality from the face of consciousness? [ Parent ]
 yes (2.71 / 7) (#25) by Delirium on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 06:33:14 PM EST

 because it's not as if dozens of books haven't been written scrutinizing the figures in mind-numbing detail [ Parent ]
 IGTT 8/10 (2.80 / 10) (#11) by channel on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 01:42:57 PM EST

 +10 for lots of "I know what I'm talking about" statistics and such, -2 for lack of originality. This is the signature line that appears underneath my comments on kuro5hin.org.
 next week: abortion snipers (3.00 / 11) (#15) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 02:21:10 PM EST

 [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Bonus points if (none / 1) (#67) by Sgt York on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 11:30:02 AM EST

 it's a howto on a new abortion technique by that title. There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks.[ Parent ]
 Kerri on mythbusters is pregnant (none / 0) (#72) by GhostOfTiber on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:36:11 PM EST

 my first thought was "sweet we can do abortion myths now!" [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 IAWTP (3.00 / 3) (#31) by Enlarged to Show Texture on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 10:22:45 AM EST

 "Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." -- Isaac Asimov[ Parent ]
 About shooting chicks in the womb? (1.00 / 2) (#70) by Wen Jian on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:30:54 PM EST

 Hawt. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 I inspired this troll. (none / 1) (#84) by Ron Paul on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 06:28:58 PM EST

 I was told by a history professor ~ 50,000. I personally beleive around 1-2 total victims.
 no you didn't (none / 0) (#87) by GhostOfTiber on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 07:26:45 PM EST

 my enthusiasm for hitler long predates Ron Paul. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Yea well I questioned the figure the same day you (none / 1) (#89) by Ron Paul on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 07:57:51 PM EST

 posted this story.
 yeah you were like (none / 1) (#91) by GhostOfTiber on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 08:46:41 PM EST

 "oh it's at least 50 million" and I was like "lol". [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 No i said 50 thousand was the figure i was given (none / 0) (#124) by Ron Paul on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 10:37:11 PM EST

 I suspect it is much higher (for KZ and einsatgruppzens combined).
 I really stimulated you with my comment didn't I? (none / 1) (#16) by Ron Paul on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 03:50:03 PM EST

 Remember to factor in not just KZ death camps but also the Einsatzgruppen (sic).
 a lot of KZ refuges were put on ships at the end (none / 1) (#17) by Ron Paul on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 03:50:59 PM EST

 of the war and the British bombed them and sank em.
 I've only played Killzone 2 but now I want to try (none / 0) (#44) by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 04:46:28 AM EST

 the original! -- Tenured K5 uberdouchebag - Herr mirleid Meatgazer - Frau gr3y[ Parent ]
 Einsatzgruppen was not a single squad (2.50 / 2) (#18) by Ron Paul on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 03:52:30 PM EST

 It was I believe 4 separate ones. Many members had high education and were forced to alcoholism to deal with what they were doing.
 Yes this is why modern germany is good (3.00 / 2) (#21) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 04:12:26 PM EST

 with beer! [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 THIS IS THE SAME REASON (2.81 / 11) (#27) by Delirium on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 08:48:10 PM EST

 I DON'T BELIEVE STALIN KILLED THAT MANY PEOPLE EITHER
 It's not common knowledge but (2.71 / 7) (#28) by yellow shark on Fri Jun 12, 2009 at 11:25:42 PM EST

 most jews killed by the nazis were siamese twins so they were getting twofers in the kill zone. still, it doesn't seem to give the same numbers, even with the twofers or even the threefers.
 Shutup before I inject you with urine in the heart (none / 1) (#38) by Ron Paul on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 05:09:30 PM EST

 Like the Doctor.
 Maybe it's accurate, maybe not (2.92 / 14) (#30) by some nerd on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 10:12:00 AM EST

 but ultimately it's not really relevant, since either way the answer is "a hell of a lot". Also it's the systematic, mechanised nature of the killing and the fact it happened quite recently in a modern western society that make it one of history's most significant genocides, more so than the raw bodycount. That said, it does annoy me that questioning of the 6M figure or any other aspect of the Shoah is immediately shouted down as anti-semitism. Hope this makes it if only because I think it could get k5 banned in germany, which would be pretty ror. -- Home Sweet Home
 GoT you should turn this into an arms control issu (none / 0) (#39) by Ron Paul on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 05:10:41 PM EST

 issue. We have to be well armed to defend against right wing paramilitaries and nazis.
 It is really fucking relevant. (2.00 / 3) (#50) by Wen Jian on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 02:17:21 PM EST

 Since reparations are paid on the basis of the estimated number of victims of the German war crimes against Jews, and the political weight of Zionism has much to do with its proponents positioning it as some kind of solution to the problem of antisemitism. I think that it does a great disservice to the memories of those who suffered that the investigation and debate of this issue pretty much ends as soon as it has been worked out that the Germans were going to have to pay through the nose for it. However, sadly, to re-open the debate would probably serve to allow freaks and weirdos to pour further scorn on the deceased; the whole subject has been pretty much moved out of the scope of reasoned debate or research. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 Penny pincher \$ (none / 1) (#75) by Harry B Otch on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:43:12 PM EST

 ----- Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.[ Parent ]
 Why, for god's sake... (none / 1) (#61) by dhk on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 08:28:59 AM EST

 should K5 be banned in Germany? And by the way, there are so many idiot racist sites in Germany that probbly nobody would care the least bit about an entirely misguided and futile attempt to calculate something that - in its most important aspect - cannot be calculated: The dehumanisation of the better part of the German people and its helpers. - please forgive my bad english, I'm not a native speaker[ Parent ]
 It's not misguided (none / 0) (#63) by Nimey on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 09:21:18 AM EST

 the author (and the kurons who voted up the story) has successfully trolled you. -- Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford I already fuck my mother -- trane Nimey is right -- Blastard i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal[ Parent ]
 Aw, you blew it! (none / 1) (#76) by Wen Jian on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:44:20 PM EST

 For a moment there I thought GOT had hit a true Natalee Holloway. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 Only for the rubes (none / 1) (#78) by Nimey on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:50:06 PM EST

 I mean, Holocaust denial is seriously old-school stuff. FNH was at least fresh and topical. -- Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford I already fuck my mother -- trane Nimey is right -- Blastard i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal[ Parent ]
 Abuse Report filed on this site with DE (none / 0) (#86) by Ron Paul on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 06:31:44 PM EST

 -1, dull reinvention of a broken wheel (3.00 / 5) (#33) by N0574 on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 12:54:52 PM EST

 "Deniers often use the 'Four Million Variant' as a stepping stone to leap from an apparent contradiction to the idea that the Holocaust was a hoax, again perpetrated by a conspiracy. They hope to discredit historians by making them seem inconsistent. If they can't keep their numbers straight, their reasoning goes, how can we say that their evidence for the Holocaust is credible? One must wonder which historians they speak of, as most have been remarkably consistent in their estimates of a million or so dead. In short, all of the denier's blustering about the 'Four Million Variant' is a specious attempt to envelope the reader into their web of deceit, and it can be discarded after the most rudimentary examination of published histories." http://www.nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/four-million-02.html - NCCTG N0574 CANCER PROTOCOL
 HM, A SITE NAMED IN HEBREW (3.00 / 3) (#34) by GhostOfTiber on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 02:53:23 PM EST

 FOR WE WILL REMEMBER. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT YOU TO DieGroßeLüge.com LOL NO AGENDA THERE. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 That page no contain "a million or so" (none / 0) (#40) by Ron Paul on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 05:12:55 PM EST

 stop being a revisionist.
 That's a reductio ad absurdum argument. (1.50 / 2) (#51) by Wen Jian on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 02:20:21 PM EST

 "Anyone who argues that less than x Jews died is actually arguing Nazism is OK!" Actually, it's a combination of reductio ad absurdum and ad hominem. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 no, what it says is (none / 0) (#58) by N0574 on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 06:58:04 AM EST

 "people who argue over 'x number' of jews are presenting a fallacious argument, often in order to cast doubt on whether the holocaust really occurred." - NCCTG N0574 CANCER PROTOCOL[ Parent ]
 I think the 6M (none / 1) (#41) by lastdayoftherestofyourlife on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 08:49:13 PM EST

 also includes those that died in the ghettoes and as a consequence of war. It seems like it would be hard to put a definitive number out there, and I would say that we could all agree that "most" of the European Jewish population was wiped out because of World War II and particularly due to the policies of Nazi Germany: primary among those the work and death camps. It's a terrible thing that happened, though on the other hand not unique in human history.  If we are to remember the Holocaust, we should also remember all the other genocides that happened and strive to prevent the indiscriminate slaughter of humans based solely on identity politics. It should also not excuse the actions of the Israeli government and elite in their genocide of the Palestinians.
 how about we stop the slaughter of humans? (none / 1) (#55) by rhiannon on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 11:47:08 PM EST

 ps I don't think indiscriminate is the word you're looking for. ----------------------------------------- I continued to rebuff the advances... so many advances... of so many attractive women. -MC[ Parent ]
 re: indiscriminate (none / 0) (#83) by lastdayoftherestofyourlife on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 06:17:01 PM EST

 I was referring more to the killing of other people for those qualities we assign to them due to their "identity" without confirming those qualities or those identities. Like running through a town and killing everyone that "looks jewish/tutsi/communist/queer" etc. [ Parent ]
 that's discrimination..... (none / 1) (#88) by rhiannon on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 07:35:01 PM EST

 That's pretty much the definition of discrimination, in fact. Discrimination being the opposite of indiscriminate. Try 'arbitrary'. ----------------------------------------- I continued to rebuff the advances... so many advances... of so many attractive women. -MC[ Parent ]
 awww semantics (none / 0) (#93) by lastdayoftherestofyourlife on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 09:14:11 PM EST

 discrimination being the act of discerning and application of the discernment, but if the discernment is invalid/inaccurate then isn't it indiscriminate or invalid? I'm opposed to murda and I leave it at that [ Parent ]
 genocide of palestinians? (none / 0) (#139) by Zombie Schrodingers Cat on Wed Jun 24, 2009 at 03:28:50 PM EST

 yeah lets never forget the genocides that have happened. Instead lets water down the meaning of the word to the point it doesn't mean anything. You're committing genocide against the english language. [ Parent ]
 For someone who advocates violence... (3.00 / 8) (#42) by Pentashagon on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 09:25:44 PM EST

 You sure have a paltry imagination for it. You also forget that the Nuremberg laws were enacted in 1935, easily pushing back the earliest date for detention and murder. Cho averaged almost 3 kills per minute, close to 4 casualties per minute.  It's ludicrous to think that a group of guards armed with poison gas, machine guns, bulldozers, rifle butts, or just about any other weapon would be able to do worse than that. If you want a real example, look at slaughterhouses:  One slaughterhouse in that article can handle 32,000 pigs a day, which involves not just killing but gutting, cleaning, butchering, and packaging an animal quite a bit larger than a human.  It would take that slaughterhouse 187.5 days to handle 6,000,000 pigs, and I am sure that if soylent green were Part Of This Complete Breakfast, it could handle 6,000,000 humans in 187.5 days as well.  In case you doubt, the Allgemeine SS outnumbered the employees of the referenced slaughterhouse by about 16 to 1. All the retards who think the crematoriums/gas chambers were too slow to kill 6,000,000 people need to be buried alive in a mass grave by bulldozers as a demonstration of other effective methods. I voted +1FP, best foot-in-mouth article all month.  It deserves the front page.
 Are you saying jews are pigs? (3.00 / 7) (#43) by GhostOfTiber on Sat Jun 13, 2009 at 09:36:10 PM EST

 That's fucked up. What the fuck is wrong with you? [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Not just jews were killed. (3.00 / 4) (#48) by Pentashagon on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 01:13:00 PM EST

 The gypsies, gays, cripples, and a few other stereotypes are also pigs.  It's an equal opportunity swine equivalence class. [ Parent ]
 DON'T BRING RATIONALITY INTO HOLOCAUST DENIAL! /nt (3.00 / 5) (#45) by MotorMachineMercenary on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 04:48:28 AM EST

 -- Tenured K5 uberdouchebag - Herr mirleid Meatgazer - Frau gr3y[ Parent ]
 Cho didn't achieve 3 per minute (none / 1) (#62) by Wen Jian on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 09:14:07 AM EST

 Not even close. I make it 40,2960 minutes per kill. Even if you only count the day of that operation itself, that's still 48 minutes for each victim. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 The second attack was supposedly 12 minutes. (none / 0) (#68) by Pentashagon on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 12:23:40 PM EST

 In that time, he killed 30 people.  That approaches 3 per minute.  Another Wikipedia article quotes 9 minutes for the second attack, which would break the magical barrier you quoted. [ Parent ]
 But you can't separate the act: (none / 1) (#74) by Wen Jian on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:41:51 PM EST

 Reasonably from the time Cho required to equip himself physically or mentally (several years incubation on the latter, I think) or the planning. Even if you discount these it's unreasonable to consider only the time from the first pull of the trigger to the last, within each of the theatres of his operation counted as separate incidents and then to take that rate of murder and try to apply it to a military organisation of the 3rd reich's scale. Also, it's not like WWII was like a Jew turkey-shoot in the way that Cho was able to fill hit boots. The Nazis did have a few other things to worry about aside from where they were going to get their next gold ingot from. Even if they had such a manpower that, given continuous operation, they could hit (or even easily hit) that target, they had engaged several other objectives (too many, in fact) at the same time. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 So it took you 10 years to post this? (none / 1) (#80) by Pentashagon on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 03:36:49 PM EST

 What am I supposed to learn from desecration? (none / 1) (#96) by Wen Jian on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 07:54:12 AM EST

 It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 How to demolish structures with explosives. (none / 0) (#100) by Pentashagon on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 02:51:04 PM EST

 You wanted them to pull the Nazi symbol down with ropes or something? What am I supposed to learn from your lack of response to the rest of my post? [ Parent ]
 That you undermined a reasonable argument (none / 1) (#110) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 06:38:39 AM EST

 With a cheap shot: "Lol ur a nazi here's a swastika expoding". It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 You can't undermine logic (none / 0) (#116) by Pentashagon on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 01:51:56 PM EST

 Being distracted by an exploding building is illogical.  Isn't half the point of posting on k5 to make a solid argument while being as annoying and distracting as possible? Well, if not: Reasonably, I need to include the time it took for you to learn English and how to use a computer and create a k5 account in the total time it took to post your reply.  Even if you discount this, it's insane to count only the time it took between "reply" and "post" because you had to read the comments first. I think it's fairly clear that Cho had a little accident in the residence hall, and realizing the gravity of the situation, regrouped and prepared for his final glory.  This is evidenced by his hurried mail to the press after the first shootings, which any reasonable insane person would have done before even beginning to shoot.  Now that my defense of Cho's awesome kill-rate is complete, on to your other mistakes. Any well-funded paramilitary organization is going to have more ammo, more personnel, more training, and more fully automatic weapons than Cho had.  Their sustained kill rate is going to be orders of magnitude higher than a single individual with a couple handguns. For comparison, Rwandans managed to kill off 500,000 of their neighbors within four months using machetes.  That is over 2 per minute, unless you want to spew some bullshit about having to include all the years of building tensions between the Hutus and Tutsis. I think somewhere along the line you retards forgot how embarrassingly parallel murder is.  When you have 800,000 troops, they don't have to wait patiently in line to kill their three Jews in one minute before returning to the back of the line.  There were more German soldiers than there are casualties assigned to the holocaust, meaning that by the pigeonhole principle MANY GERMANS NEVER EVEN KILLED ONE JEW!!!1one1!   That is the opposite of saying that there were too few soldiers to commit the holocaust.  It means, literally, that a massive portion of the German army would have to be sent out to perform other duties, otherwise the Jews would be killed too soon. [ Parent ]
 You have made some good points. (none / 0) (#118) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 03:22:45 PM EST

 I do not feel that a direct comparison to the events at Virginia Tech constitutes a valid model using which one can project the effectiveness of an army at perpetrating genocide. However, your reference to Rwanda is much more interesting. Though it is true that the Hutus did not experience as much interference in their activities (i.e. other armies, resistance groups of non-Tutsi ethnicity etc), I think that this illustrates much more aptly the rate at which genocide can occur. There we can see that a militia of around 30,000 could kill a minimum of 500,000 in about 100 days. That said, this was with the forced involvement of the general population (villagers were ordered to kill their Tutsi nieghbours, and those who refused were themselves killed). So really you are talking about roughly 6 million people killing a minimum of 500,000. As stated international preventative action was extremely limited and the French are even accused of having supported it. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 Eventually there will be Rwanda deniers. (none / 0) (#123) by Pentashagon on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 07:23:33 PM EST

 I think the problem is that people are mentally unable to accept horrific numbers of murders as accurate, or to accept that a large enough group of humans would commit the necessary murders.  I don't think the allies (or even the general German population) truly believed it until they saw the death camps and tried to find missing people after the war. What is generally not questioned is the overall death toll in WWII, which was about an order of magnitude larger than the deaths due to the holocaust.  War is fought by trained troops who are generally well armed and supplied, while murder is generally done individually.  Where genocide is concerned, it is much closer to a war on civilians where one side of the conflict has arms, training, supplies, and leadership while the other side is fighting a guerrilla war with basically no weapons and very few hiding places, and where POWs are simply killed. [ Parent ]
 This is unhealthy. (2.50 / 2) (#47) by Ward57 on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 01:02:05 PM EST

 16 Hours, not 16 minutes. It's no more difficult or expensive to kill that many people than a comparable industrial operation, just far more wrong. Note that this moral view does not mesh well with any form of ultracompetetiveness, but no more than that.
 Pipelining and parallelization FTW (3.00 / 5) (#53) by QuantumFoam on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 06:10:50 PM EST

 - Barack Obama: Because it will work this time. Honest!
 Other possible sources of death (3.00 / 4) (#54) by Curuinor on Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 11:42:24 PM EST

 Usually, the SS would fill the trains to the death camps to ridiculous overcapacity and fail to give the people on the trains any food or water. There were 25% attrition rates, and some trains could have had higher attrition rates. Source: The Gerstein Report, http://www.deathcamps.org/belzec/gerstein.html
 You have been trolled (none / 0) (#59) by Nimey on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 08:12:09 AM EST

 -- Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford I already fuck my mother -- trane Nimey is right -- Blastard i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal[ Parent ]
 You vomit a lot, but did you eat the food? (none / 1) (#56) by the77x42 on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 12:03:27 AM EST

 If you read the book that actually came up with the six million number, maybe you'd have something to argue. "We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature "You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮
 Hoss came up with it (none / 0) (#60) by GhostOfTiber on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 08:17:33 AM EST

 Lucy S. Dawidowicz - Jew name. 100%. He "guessed" that his camp and the others had killed six million jews, but this was within the framework of personal speculation. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 That's not the point. (none / 0) (#65) by the77x42 on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 10:54:50 AM EST

 Personal speculation and an argument with actual numbers are completely different. Even if Hoss speculated about the number, your Front Page article surely isn't going on that alone, is it? Why not argue against something more concrete like the Jew's book? Oh, and who cares if she's Jewish. She has the argument that you are supposedly questioning. But wait, Front Page articles on K5 aren't supposed to be informative, only diarrhea with HTML tags. "We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature "You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮ [ Parent ]
 Of course not (none / 0) (#69) by GhostOfTiber on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:09:58 PM EST

 I'm not buying the six million number. That's the point of the article is to call that into question. Why not argue against something more concrete like the Jew's book? She wasn't there. She lived in New York. Hoss was there, he ran the camp. Her agenda is Jewish history after she became interested in her own religion in 1938 - just in time for world war 2. Hoss's motivation is to cop to whatever the allies tell him to assume responsibility for to evade the death penalty. (It didn't work, he was hung). Authur Dodd, however, is a much more credible witness. This is because he's a POW. British POWs generally kept to themselves and were uninterested observers because they were held in the labor camp side. Dodd reports bonfires of bodies but he doesn't ever come close to saying a million were killed. Oh, that and because Dodd was there. While he's probably got some survivors guilt and hence optimism, I also don't feel he's got any reason to lie. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 the idea is that (none / 0) (#90) by the77x42 on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 08:39:31 PM EST

 While those people may have uttered something, she actually wrote a book and published figures. All I am saying is that if your article is merely disagreeing with what someone said as opposed to published and taken to be an authority, then your article is very weak. It shouldn't be on the FP. Dissect a published work and then come back. "We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature "You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮ [ Parent ]
 Come on. (3.00 / 6) (#57) by humongouspenis on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 04:21:34 AM EST

 I know you're just trolling for outrage here, but this is simply stupid. There's one problem here. We know it took four hours from start to finish to operate a crematorium. Four hours to kill 2000 people. This means that each individual took 8 minutes to die. Obviously we have to have one or another, which is it? Rudolf Hoss forever regretted throwing the "2 million" number out there. "But", you say, "2000 people died concurrently!" All well and good, but the deaths took 20 minutes on top of the four hour cleanup, so we know one person took 20 minutes to die, 2000 people at a time. Could it be done within the context of the numbers? Yes. Concurrency test: 30 seconds per Jew, by 2000 Jews in batch gives us 60000 seconds for the total operation, or 16 minutes. I see no reason to doubt the time it took to operate the "kill cycle" of the gas chamber. Every one in a gas chamber suffocates concurrently. 20 minutes to gas 2000 people + 4 hours crematorium operation = 500 minutes / 2000 people = 4 dead per minute. Your subsequent death toll gets multiplied by 32, and your so-called conclusion goes down the drain. The math just doesn't add up. Ha ha.
 You Guys Really Buy the 26.6 million number? (1.75 / 4) (#64) by Liar on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 10:35:32 AM EST

 Did you know that if Hitler had started killing Soviets at the beginning of World War 2, in 1939, and stopped when it ended in 1945, he would have to kill 12 Soviets every minute. That's the twenty-six point six million number. For 50 million - a Russian every 3.5 seconds. I admit I'm a Liar. That's why you can trust me.
 Them Russkies practically killed themselves! (none / 1) (#79) by Wen Jian on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:52:42 PM EST

 It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 Only if you think Stalin's capable of it (none / 1) (#82) by Liar on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 03:49:00 PM EST

 Except the math just doesn't add up! I admit I'm a Liar. That's why you can trust me.[ Parent ]
 Amortization (none / 1) (#66) by Metasquares on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 11:19:54 AM EST

 Your argument rests on the assumption that there's a steady stream of killing at a rate which is impossible. But in reality, the holocaust killings occurred in batches, thus the gas chambers. If you can kill hundreds or thousands in a short span of time, the average can certainly work out to 2+ per minute.
 You can't actually read, can you? (1.50 / 2) (#77) by Wen Jian on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:45:00 PM EST

 That bit was covered. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 I feel like I missed out on a part of history (2.33 / 3) (#71) by Harry B Otch on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 01:32:01 PM EST

 Since I was busy doing other things this weekend, I had to sacrifice my opportunity to help put a Holocaust denial story on the K5 FP. As you can see, it's not only Jews that suffer :( ----- Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.
 On Auschwitz II (3.00 / 3) (#92) by the77x42 on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 08:51:36 PM EST

 I don't know why you think this 'Jews per minute' thing is at all relevant. Auschwitz II could gas for, let's say two years. The two gas chambers could hold a total of 2,000 people. Since it takes four hours to clean up the chamber, let's say it's only run once per day. That's: 730 days x 2000 people = 1,460,000 dead And that's with the chambers on only once per day. And that's only one extermination camp. And that's only two out of five years... Why would the 6,000,000 be THAT far off. Even 4,000,000 is still a lot dude. And besides, that's WAY above your total of 416,538, and remember, I used only your figures. "We're not here to educate. We're here to point and laugh." - creature "You have some pretty stupid ideas." - indubitable ‮
 True. (none / 0) (#99) by GhostOfTiber on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 11:00:10 AM EST

 But then all the other camps did less than Auschwitz II, so we can adjust the figures accordingly. Basically it's in the neighborhood of two million if you do it that way. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 What this math proves (2.25 / 4) (#94) by Nimey on Mon Jun 15, 2009 at 09:40:14 PM EST

 is that Josh Knarr is a nigger. -- Never mind, it was just the dog cumming -- jandev You Sir, are an Ignorant Motherfucker. -- Crawford I am arguably too manic to do that. -- Crawford I already fuck my mother -- trane Nimey is right -- Blastard i am in complete agreement with Nimey -- i am a pretty big deal
 just because I am the drummer in (none / 0) (#98) by GhostOfTiber on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 10:56:26 AM EST

 Rusted Root does not make me a nigger. I will have you note that the drummer is a north-of-the-sahara black. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Play with math, exactly (2.00 / 2) (#95) by tetsuwan on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 07:24:28 AM EST

 This entire piece can be summed up in the equation: 4*60/2000 = 8. That "calculation" demonstrates the general meaningfulness of the story at hand. Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
 this story is over 9000 (none / 0) (#97) by GhostOfTiber on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 10:55:41 AM EST

 [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Well.. (3.00 / 2) (#102) by The Amazing Idiot on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 05:41:49 PM EST

 At least the Germans knew how to Triforce. ‮[ Parent ]
 He did much better with everyone else though (none / 0) (#101) by wheely on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 05:08:20 PM EST

 He and his cohorts managed one death every 3 seconds if you use your concepts and take everybody, excluding 6 million Jews into account. They must have been loading those guns at lightening speed!
 IGTT 88/10 (3.00 / 3) (#103) by localroger on Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 06:00:44 PM EST

 It's a meaningful number, yo. And that is what is so great about the internet. It enables pompous blowhards to connect with other pompous blowhards in a vast circle jerk of pomposity. -- Bill Maher
 Argument from ignorance and innumeracy (3.00 / 2) (#105) by it certainly is on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 04:15:05 AM EST

 You're another closet white supremacist who'd say "The Holocaust didn't happen but I hope it happens again". If you're going to recycle the same wrong arguments here at K5, I'm going to recycle my responses. The Nazis started off by shooting their victims directly in front of mass graves, but they found many ways to make killing more efficient, from rail links to death camps in Poland, Croatia and Belarus, to inventing/discovering Zyklon-B rather than wasting expensive bullets, to making the prisoners run the death camps themselves. Auschwitz-Birkenau was founded with 4 gas chambers and 4 incinerators. After the gassing, other prisoners would be made to take the bodies, remove the hair, put them in the incinerator, drain off the fat, keep the fire stoked and so on. The Nazis only had to supervise and manage. The efficiency of Nazi killing is legendary. The most deadly camp was Auschwitz, which killed between 1.1-1.6 million victims. The rate-limit on killings was the incinerators. An estimate of the theoretical maximum number that could be killed in the time that Auschwitz-Birkanau ran is roughly 1.7 million people. This is based on the Nazi's own estimates - they originally claimed they could kill 1400 per day, but had to lower this estimate to 800 per day. There is evidence that the undercapacity of the Auschwitz furnaces led to open pit burning of the remainder (which some deny even occured because it "wasn't possible" - do you think this is impossible?) The Nazis claimed that the Auschwitz camps killed 2-3 million people, however this hasn't been shown in evidence, which they burned before they were caught. The most accurate estimates come from matching up train timetabled arrivals at the camps with known deportations in at the trains' origins, which gives the 1.1 million figure. The Nazi extermination camps killed between 3.6 and 4.6 million people, of which at least 4/5s were Jews. This is based on records of people taken there, not speculation as to the efficiency of the camps or other arguments from ignorance. Overall, the Nazis killed somewhere between 5 and 7 million people including Jews, Roma, Serbs, gays and the disabled, not including military or unintentional civilian casualties during WW2. Many of the direct archives of activities at Auschwitz were burnt, while some are preserved (for example, the "Sterbebücher"). Even then, most Auschwitz-Birkenau victims went straight from the trains to the gas chambers. Hence you have to go to the records of them being rounded up and put on the trains. Please go and read the study "Auschwitz. How Many Perished--Jews, Poles, Gypsies." by Franciszek Piper (Yad Vashem Studies, 21 - 1991). Lower estimates than this are generally based on faulty extrapolations or wilful misdirection - for example, see this debunking of Fritjof Meyer's "356000 gassed" estimate. My point is that the killing capacity of the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp is higher than the number of people believed to be killed there, so all arguments from ignorance ("I can't think of how that many people could be killed in such a space of time - think of the logistics!", etc.) are bunk. Completely denying that the Holocaust occured or reducing the number of people killed to miniscule numbers is batshit insane in light of the evidence left behind. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 Wow, you bit. (1.33 / 3) (#106) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 05:34:36 AM EST

 It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 I recycled. (none / 1) (#107) by it certainly is on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 05:46:14 AM EST

 Did you read the first two links? This topic has been done before on K5 and I felt like repeating an old smackdown. I seriously doubt Josh Knarr is a shit-for-brains holocaust denier like the guy I was originally responding to really was. Please remember this is a front page story and is therefore the direct voice of K5 to an outside audience. They don't keep up with Josh Knarr's diary fantasies about becoming a KKK member. I don't want them to get the wrong idea and think K5 is exclusively populated by retards. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 How exactly is that the wrong impression? (1.33 / 3) (#108) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 06:06:50 AM EST

 And who the hell is Josh Knarr? Umm, I hope you don't mind me ssaying, but you're coming across a bit Husi=`=``=`> Aside from that, I thought that your contribution to the debate was interesting and would like to see further figures. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 Josh Knarr is t1ber / GhostOfTiber (none / 1) (#109) by it certainly is on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 06:14:45 AM EST

 You have a poor memory, given you had to read that already. I like K5 stocked with my sort of retards, not balderson's sort of retards. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 Yeah (none / 1) (#111) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 07:42:19 AM EST

 Check the Queue. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 So what's your name? (1.33 / 3) (#112) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 07:59:41 AM EST

 And where does your mum live? It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 My name's Stuart. (none / 1) (#113) by it certainly is on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 08:19:38 AM EST

 If you click on my username, and read my personal website listed in my profile, you would know that. My mum lives in Aberdeen, where I was born. Have fun with this already information - it has been available to anyone who wants to find it, on the internet, for years. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 You aren't that hot on the whole point thing... (1.33 / 3) (#114) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 08:37:22 AM EST

 I don't really care who your mum is. However, responding to someone who takes a controversial position on K5 by pulling their mask off and going 'HAY EVERYBODY! IT'S OLD MAN JESSOPS FROM THE MILL!' is poor form, old chap. tsk tsk. If you want to make yourself useful, go and egg the BNP or something. Actually, scratch that, go and do something that makes them look stupid, rather than justified. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 It's a form I've maintained for, hmm, 7 years now (none / 1) (#115) by it certainly is on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 09:09:05 AM EST

 I find it very effective. If you want to be anonymous, be anonymous and people will likewise give you scant attention. If on the other hand you use a pseudoname to hide behind while at the same point screaming "look at me", you should expect people to pop your balloon. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 So you silence voices you oppose by dredging (1.33 / 3) (#117) by Wen Jian on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 02:58:22 PM EST

 Incidentally (none / 0) (#119) by GhostOfTiber on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 04:15:01 PM EST

 My GMAIL name is Josh.Knarr@gmail.com which I put in my profile. There's scant little else to use online which relates to me personally. I'm comfortable with people knowing my name because Knarr is an incredibly common in PA. Joshua doubly so, the only larger instance of the Knarr family tree is Jeremiah. To add to the confusion, there's two bands out there also with Josh Knarrs in them, and I personally find it amusing giving people enough rope to hang themselves with. And yes, the Josh Knarr in the band from PA is black. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 EXCEPT UR WIFE'S WEBSITE (none / 0) (#120) by Ruston Rustov on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 05:39:07 PM EST

 That's your mother, (none / 0) (#121) by GhostOfTiber on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 06:44:41 PM EST

 SON. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 GOD I HAVE A HOT MOM (none / 1) (#122) by Ruston Rustov on Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 07:20:50 PM EST

 Wow, you just bit hard. (1.50 / 2) (#126) by it certainly is on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 09:06:56 AM EST

 You seem very outraged for what is pretty average behaviour. I have no problem with what people say, I just like them to stand by their words. I stand by mine, even when I'm physically assaulted for saying them. frankly it's the first time I've seen any meaningful figures regarding the logistical achievability of the Holocaust. Then you really haven't looked very hard then, have you? There are been hundreds of publications about them and you managed to miss all them until now. It doesn't help that the issue is so highly politicised Well, anything in Israel's purview is going to be highly politicised. You don't get away with being a racist, apartheid state without serious propaganda efforts. But anyone can have an opinion, what really matters are facts, and the research to get those facts... which is why I'd recommend reading more about the Holocaust rather than the trollocausts. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 You're conflating 2 situations: (1.33 / 3) (#127) by Wen Jian on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 10:26:07 AM EST

 One in which you've picked on animal rights dudes who are trying to force their worldview on the people around them. They're trying to make society conform to their view. In this, I think that they're fair game. In this situation, people are merely saying things. It's not right to curtail that. And well done for getting roughed up for trying to meat-troll animal rights activists. I mean, it's not like you couldn't have predicted that happening...though I agree perfectly with your opinion of that movement. What you're actually doing is actually reminiscent of the behaviour of the animal rights extremists. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 People don't say things in a vacuum (1.50 / 2) (#133) by it certainly is on Fri Jun 19, 2009 at 09:18:49 AM EST

 If you want to say outrageous things you don't believe, and don't want any repercussions for saying them, don't attach your (pseudo)name to them. Say them anonymously, and people can rightly give zero credibility to them. If that still annoys them that an anonymous person said something they don't like, that's their problem. If you want to engender discussion, use an appropriate tone, e.g. "playing devil's advocate, how can we take the 6 million number as read?", rather than "6 million is obviously bullshit... [after getting bites] lawl i wuz just trollin'". If you believe X, but wouldn't be willing to defend your viewpoint in front of a hostile crowd, then I'd say you don't really believe X; you have a weak conviction at best. I think there's everything wrong with intimidating people with violence, which is SHAC's modus operandi. I have no problem with the idea of them revealing who bought publicly traded HLS shares; hiding that information only makes sense as a response to the known threat of SHAC thuggery. If you eliminate that threat by jailing SHAC members, there is no problem knowing who buys and sells shares of publically traded companies. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 You are a sanctimonious cunt. (none / 1) (#136) by Wen Jian on Sat Jun 20, 2009 at 04:12:23 PM EST

 I take it back though, you aren't really a hypocrite. I honestly think that you can't tell the difference. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 It's a good thing to be. (2.00 / 3) (#137) by it certainly is on Sun Jun 21, 2009 at 12:19:54 PM EST

 Dr Professor Foxy: am I non-monogamous? No dear, you're a cock-craving slut who gets off on the thrill of cheating on the guy who loves you. But hey, you're a woman asking something on feministing.com, so nothing can possibly be your fault. kur0shin.org -- it certainly is
 Wow. (none / 1) (#138) by Wen Jian on Sun Jun 21, 2009 at 05:01:13 PM EST

 I'm just imagining the transverse: "Hi, I'm a 25 yo guy in a loving relationship with a girl I really love, but sometimes I get tempted to sleep with other people. What should I do?" YOU@RE A BAAAAASTAAAAARD!!!!!!!!!!!!! In fact, that could be a great troll right there. It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty [ Parent ]
 Here are some useful links for you, GoT (none / 0) (#125) by ixian on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 03:53:11 AM EST

 Not funny; suicide is serious ~ (none / 1) (#128) by tweet on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 10:49:27 AM EST

 _______________________________________________ Not everything in black and white makes sense. [ Parent ]
 I love watching fireworks (none / 1) (#129) by patellar reflex on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 03:57:29 PM EST

 so do me a favor and digg this if you have an account.Their powder keg is sooooo much bigger.Wait a while before making too many incendiary comments, you don't want a whole lot of those until it's approaching the front page.Yeah, yeah, yeah shooting fish in a barrel and all that. I'm BORED, OK? ----Patellar reflex
 this was posted here a few years ago (none / 0) (#130) by manjal on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 04:36:32 PM EST

 and uhm.... yeah. i know what you're thinking. did hitler kill 6 million jews, or only 5? to tell you the truth, i've forgotten myself, what with all this excitement. so, seeing as how this is reality, the most powerful  force in the world, you gotta ask yourself a question, nazi. do i feel lucky? well, do you? nazi?
 yes and yes (none / 0) (#134) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 19, 2009 at 11:05:51 AM EST

 Although I find myself wishing that Africa were more involved in WW2 so we could have nuked them. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 ok Borat (none / 1) (#131) by manjal on Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 04:52:41 PM EST

 Einsatzgruppen: "They really only served to get the word out: "Jews - We're coming for you."" uhmmm... yeah. that contradicts just about every study ever done of the einsatzgruppen. why didnt you cite any source for your information? Death camps: 'there were eight death camps in total' Uhm, so you left out slave labor camps, concentration camps, political prisoner camps, POW camps, and then there were the ghettos. jews, and others, died in all of them, from purposeful starvation, disease, murder, overwork, etc, and the nazis kept records of things like calories permitted, cause of death, etc. not to mention the wannsee protocol which basically said the goal is to work jews to death, and listed country by country how many jews were left to go before europe would be 'free of jews',,, which means, ie, that they had people who spent all day figuring out how many jews lived where, when. so there is ample evidence to back up all of this. but you didnt even mention these non-death-camp places, where people died like flies. why didnt you? you also didnt mention that the first camp, dachau, started up in the early/mid 30s, and the concentration camp system grew from there.... why would you start the clock in 1939?
 What's your point? (none / 0) (#135) by GhostOfTiber on Fri Jun 19, 2009 at 11:06:37 AM EST

 There were incidental numbers of deaths in each of the other camps. Assuming I'm wrong by a factor of two, we're still under a million here. [Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne[ Parent ]
 Not so funny all of a sudden... (none / 1) (#140) by Wen Jian on Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 07:04:20 AM EST

 It was an experiment in lulz. - Rusty
 Oh, just cause I was reminded of this... (none / 0) (#141) by humongouspenis on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 09:29:56 AM EST

 Down-calculating Capacities An amateurish attempt to play down Auschwitz, and its failure : by Albrecht Kolthoff ... The capacity of the crematoria was never a limiting factor for the number of those who perished at Auschwitz, for at various times corpses were burned in huge numbers on pyres or in pits in the open. ... But then again, maybe your "argument" is a subtle parody of the holocaust denier fuckup when trying to correctly time-order two letters cited in the link?
 A minor point. (none / 0) (#143) by SacredSalt on Fri Jul 30, 2010 at 07:17:39 AM EST

 So I leave for a few years and come back to this (1.50 / 2) (#142) by fester on Mon Jul 27, 2009 at 03:54:01 PM EST

 I thought K5 had gone to shit back in 2002, but apparently I underestimated you guys. I was sitting at my desk today and thought, "what the hell ever happened to K5?"  So I load up the front page and this is what I'm greeted with.   Surely this story is some kind of elaborate troll, right?  Other comments have already shown how millions of dead jews/gypsies/homosexuals/etc is entirely possible, although the author doesn't seem too interested in those facts.  I realize the appeal of discovering the absolute historical "truth", but in a complex situation where we will never have all the facts, calculating the exact number of people killed is an exercise in futility. And really, whether it's 1 million or 10 million it doesn't fucking matter.  A helluva lot of people were systematically killed and your "mathematical FUD" doesn't help anybody.
 I missed k5 so much. (none / 0) (#144) by diocletian on Wed Jun 29, 2011 at 01:29:29 AM EST

 I think i'm going to kill myself tonight. _____________________________________ simple empathy is my motivation ~ circletimessquare
 You Guys Really Buy the 6 Million Number? | 144 comments (137 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
 Display: Threaded Minimal Nested Flat Flat Unthreaded Sort: Unrated, then Highest Highest Rated First Lowest Rated First Ignore Ratings Newest First Oldest First