There is no evidence for a final solution (extermination), so your theory is kind of flawed.

Besides hundreds if not thousands of first-hand accounts etc...

Me and you have already been through this. How about those accounts of human soap and lampshades, or the tickling death chambers, or the mobile gas chambers? Fairy-tales, that's all they are. There is no business like the Shoah business.

The accounts which are accepted now as false? Rumours circulate.

So every single guard etc has lied about what happened?

History is written by the victors. Also, if it was true historical fact, they would not need laws against questioning it, now would they... Face it, there is no evidence for a final solution. None.

You ignored my points there. The testimonies are evidence so you're wrong to say there's none

Did you have any points? For all we know, the guards could've been lying to save their own asses. You know, just tell them what they want to hear, hopefully I'll get off easier, kind of thing. Some fucked up shit probably did go down, but it didn't come from the top as an official doctrine/order.

Yes, so every single guard/ person there is openly lying to this day? Seems extraordinarily unlikely

This the pointless thing that hitler never signed an order? Yes the holocaust wasn't planned out, but those at the top knew about it certainly. Himmler referenced it and visited the camps. Also the death squads in the ussr had orders from the top, the rounding up was also from the top

Yes, so every single guard/ person there is openly lying to this day?

When did I say that?

This the pointless thing that hitler never signed an order? Yes the holocaust wasn't planned out, but those at the top knew about it certainly.

K? Hence, no final solution.

Also the death squads in the ussr had orders from the top, the rounding up was also from the top

Thought we were talking about the Nazis?

Claimed there's no evidence and that guards could be lying, 2+2=4 so if not all guards are lying that's evidence

I don't mean no plan at any stage but more the road to Auschwitz wasn't a straight line

The nazi groups in areas they'd occupied

Claimed there's no evidence

Because there is no evidence for a final solution doctrine/order.

and that guards could be lying

Some very well could've been.

so if not all guards are lying that's evidence

Circumstantial, at best.. Sure.

I don't mean no plan at any stage but more the road to Auschwitz wasn't a straight line

According to MS academia it is.

The nazi groups in areas they'd occupied

I'm sure there were death squads. I'm not denying that possible genocide didn't happen. It was a fucked time in history. But, it was not officially from the top.

Also, it wasn't just Jews being killed, it was Slavs, Christians, Gypsies, homosexuals, etc etc. Jews should not have a monopoly on WWII.

You clearly don't follow the mainstream historical debate do you? In school we did stuff on whether it was a straight road to Auschwitz, most historians now say it wasn't so you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. In unis the holocaust is debated in such ways as well. Will you accept that?

The Holocaust refers specifically to the genocide of the Jews, it's not denied other groups were also persecuted similarly

You clearly don't follow the mainstream historical debate do you? In school we did stuff on whether it was a straight road to Auschwitz, most historians now say it wasn't so you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. In unis the holocaust is debated in such ways as well. Will you accept that?

This may be true, but if it is, it's because people are questioning it, so they have to keep re-framing it.

The Holocaust refers specifically to the genocide of the Jews, it's not denied other groups were also persecuted similarly

No final solution genocide == no Holocaust.

"This may be true" No. This IS true, an undeniable fact that you were either ignorant of or lied about. Either way you clearly don't actually know anything about the mainstream debate

But there was

"This may be true" No. This IS true, an undeniable fact that you were either ignorant of or lied about.

Okay, it's been a while since I was in college. Glad things are starting to be talked about. In other countries, that can get you locked up for "holocaust denial".

Either way you clearly don't actually know anything about the mainstream debate

I know the gist of the mainstream, just not every angle to it. How could anyone know all the various angles?

But there was

Once again, no evidence.

We've come full circle. Anyways, lovely convo. But, I'll be leaving now.

This has been a debate a few decades now at least. No. This isn't just a case of not knowing the tiny intricacies it's a case of not looking into the debate whatsoever while attempting to criticise the mainstream.

You claim to know about this issue but it's patently clear you do not, at the very least look at the Wikipedia on this. The different schools are on there! This is shocking ignorance

Did you know the auschwitz chimney was build in 1947

Dude, you could show this guy a live feed of a gas chamber at Auscwitz and he'd still find a way to deny/skirt the discussion.

Check out this exchange. It's incredible:

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/69tscf/a_rothschild_banker_the_new_french_president_at/dh9w10j/

Just annoys me how he doesn't know anything about the mainstream debate then proceeds to try and criticise it

If Austrians were gased. Green smoke would come out.

If Bulgarians were gased. Orange smoke would come out

Source: eye witnesses

The illuminati were a society influenced by the Jesuits.

The Jesuits were close to hitler. Even wrote his famous book

1666 Frank, Rothschild, Weishaupt... only one was a Jesuit.

Weishaupt was accused being a Jesuit lackie.

Many argue Rothschild of the court Jews - are too

What I mean to say is that the power structure today seems to be firmly non-Jesuit, even if there was some Jesuit influence or heritage at one point.

Why do you this?

Have you checked out r/RomeRules

Yeah, I've checked that out before. Rome vs. the Sabbatean-Frankists seem to be the final two conspiracy theories. Personally, I see more evidence for the Sabbatean-Frankists holding the power today which I can go into if you're interested.

Why Sabbatean-Frankists rule not Rome:

• The money flows to Rothschild who are way more culty than Jesuity
• All current political events easily traceable to Zionist Israel, presumably informed by this cult. What does Rome want in Syria vs. what does Israel want in Syria
• Hard to imagine Zionists taking orders from Romans
• Freemasonry infiltrated by the cult, as evidenced by their entire mythos being centered around Solomon's temple, one of the cult's focuses
• 1666 Weishaupt, Rothschild are united by Frank, who carries on the Sabbatean messianish Jewish cult. Perfect place to stop and analyze history without having to go back to BC, Egypt, etc.

Why /r/romerules is suspicious:

• Written by one dude
• Refers you to his previous posts for information which are sometimes not super relevant
• Likes to call people trolls and delete their posts
• Very low explanation and discussion of: B'nai B'rith, Zionism, Israel, Greater Israel, Solomon's/Third Temple
• Low interest by this community

Hi man thanks for the reply that's interesting stuff. Much appreciated.

I will defend V_A (main Rome rules dude), the Jesuit theories and r/RomeRules:

It's mostly one guy posting but others do too. The number of posters in a reddit sub doesn't mean shit. For example the Donald has a lot and it's rubbish. There are thousands or more here yet a lot of bots shills and losers on this sub. Doesn't make it better (?)

There are a lot of trolls. Posts get deleted or chaned here too... I understand your point that he limits free speech is suspicious but no different to say te real world

He actually explains and sources the Jesuit control of Zionism pretty well IMHO

Lots of people are interested in aliens. I think aliens are fake and the amount Of interest doesn't add greater authority

I will look into the guys you talked about and the points you raise cheers

He actually explains and sources the Jesuit control of Zionism pretty well IMHO

Would love a link if it's to something more than "X Rothschild was a court Jew"

No, Hitler was the Rothschilds most fierced opponent. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6esmzp/jewish_6_million_holocaust_number_symbolism_from/ The holohaux was already there long before WWII.

So many testimonies of the mass murder

Ooh edgy, bit of a difference between genocide and bombing campaigns

I understand the genocide definitions.

As an example what the Jewish people are doing to Palestine is considered genocide

Yeah, I've checked that out before. Rome vs. the Sabbatean-Frankists seem to be the final two conspiracy theories. Personally, I see more evidence for the Sabbatean-Frankists holding the power today which I can go into if you're interested.

Why Sabbatean-Frankists rule not Rome:

• The money flows to Rothschild who are way more culty than Jesuity
• All current political events easily traceable to Zionist Israel, presumably informed by this cult. What does Rome want in Syria vs. what does Israel want in Syria
• Hard to imagine Zionists taking orders from Romans
• Freemasonry infiltrated by the cult, as evidenced by their entire mythos being centered around Solomon's temple, one of the cult's focuses
• 1666 Weishaupt, Rothschild are united by Frank, who carries on the Sabbatean messianish Jewish cult. Perfect place to stop and analyze history without having to go back to BC, Egypt, etc.

Why /r/romerules is suspicious:

• Written by one dude
• Refers you to his previous posts for information which are sometimes not super relevant
• Likes to call people trolls and delete their posts
• Very low explanation and discussion of: B'nai B'rith, Zionism, Israel, Greater Israel, Solomon's/Third Temple
• Low interest by this community