Aushwitz memorial twitter

[Johndoe]

If you look at the twitter page of aushwitz memorial you would see a lot of mugshot style pictures of people who supposedly died in the camp. Most of which are mentioned to have died in the gas chamber on a certain date.

I kind of want to rationalize how they are going about claiming specific people were gassed on specific dates like they have any real evidence of it. I feel like at best they are going off the death records at Aushwitz and making up lies as to how they died. (Like claiming a victim of disease died in a gas chamber) but for all we know they could be completely lying and making up these fictional deaths.

How would they know a specific person was gassed when the nazis apparently destroyed all the evidence? Do they want us to believe the nazis kept records of people they gassed?

[hermod]

"The Nazis' meticulous record-keeping stopped only when Jews and other victims were herded into gas chambers."

https://postimg.cc/HrhcGsbD

https://postimg.cc/vcjNSGYM

[Hektor]

If you look at the twitter page of aushwitz memorial you would see a lot of mugshot style pictures of people who supposedly died in the camp. Most of which are mentioned to have died in the gas chamber on a certain date.

I kind of want to rationalize how they are going about claiming specific people were gassed on specific dates like they have any real evidence of it. I feel like at best they are going off the death records at Aushwitz and making up lies as to how they died. (Like claiming a victim of disease died in a gas chamber) but for all we know they could be completely lying and making up these fictional deaths.

How would they know a specific person was gassed when the nazis apparently destroyed all the evidence? Do they want us to believe the nazis kept records of people they gassed?

They even don't have death records. What they use is documentation of deportation. If somebody was deported to Auschwitz and he/she isn't registered as "Auschwitz survivor" then this is counted as 'gassed in Auschwitz'... Although they got more careful with this now... They'll say killed or murdered now. Which is of course dishonest. They can say the assume or suspect this, but not that they know. But if they say they don't know, then this cast doubt. So rather be assertive on matters. With there mode of proof, you can prove anything. There are no records of people? "Oh, they must have been gassed".

Serious issues with the evidence they are using there. But they go on, they know it better, because they 'have experts'. And they demand public compliance with their postulates. Unbelievable, if you think about it. In Germany they essentially conquered what they call "Erinnerungskultur". So there is whole - publicly funded - industry around this as well.

[Michael_Snowy]

No doubt at some point in the future these tweets will be "evidence" after all their precious shoes have decayed. It really makes me mad that they are getting away with this bullshit.

On a lighter note, I love how German has such precise words. Erinnerungskultur is culture of remembrance, if Google translate is correct.

[curioussoul]

If you look at the twitter page of aushwitz memorial you would see a lot of mugshot style pictures of people who supposedly died in the camp. Most of which are mentioned to have died in the gas chamber on a certain date.

I kind of want to rationalize how they are going about claiming specific people were gassed on specific dates like they have any real evidence of it. I feel like at best they are going off the death records at Aushwitz and making up lies as to how they died. (Like claiming a victim of disease died in a gas chamber) but for all we know they could be completely lying and making up these fictional deaths.

How would they know a specific person was gassed when the nazis apparently destroyed all the evidence? Do they want us to believe the nazis kept records of people they gassed?

When the Auschwitz Museum tweets a mugshot of a prisoner, this means the prisoner was regularly registered in the camp and thus not gassed. They will only claim that the person "perished", dishonestly leaving it to be understood that he/she was gassed.

When they tweet a regular photograph of a prisoner, this means the person was deported to Auschwitz and then purportedly gassed there, although there is no evidence of this. One striking example from a few days ago is the tweet naming the Czech Jew Karel Eben, who was deported from the Theresienstadt getto to Auschwitz on the 28th of October 1942. The Jews deported from Theresienstadt during this period ended up in Belarus, as the witness Isak Grunberg indicates, and which Thomas Kues has proven. Grunberg mentions that hordes of Jews kept arriving in Minsk long after the last documented direct transport to Belarus from Theresienstadt happened (which was the 22nd of September 1942). Grunberg specifically mentions Jews arriving in Minsk from Auschwitz, which means that the Theresienstadt Jews deported there were transfered to Belarus, not gassed - which is exactly what revisionists have been hypothesizing.

[Hektor]

Photos of people are more effective emotionally. That's why they are used. It's easy to imply that somebody was 'murdered', when disproving this is simply not feasible for more than 99% of the audience. Is it dishonest of them? Pretty sure it is, but they simply presume that their paradigm is somehow true. And I think many of them believe the conclusions. Even if they don't they find it to be justified to lie, because after all aren't they fighting against "Nazism" and for a "Never Again"?!


Meanwhile, they had millions of Holocaust Survivors cashing in from Germany. To the believer this is even more proof. Because:" If the Holocaust didn't happen, why are there so many Holocaust survivors?"