Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Sticky: Chicken Challenge

Updated on 18.09.2007:

It took
162 days

for One Third of the Holocaust author to link to us on 28.02.2007!
But on 08.03.2007 the link has been removed. So we're starting this anew: it's been

194 days

and there's still no link to us on UVP's site! (And he has a cheek to complain about his ad being thrown out!)


Read more!
To the author of the One Third of the Holocaust video:

It's been several months since we have started posting our rebuttals to your videoclips. But there hasn't been any meaningful response from you. You have even deleted the links which one of us placed at YouTube. To us that signifies that you know that you have produced trash and that you simply can't defend your deception-packed video.

You can prove us wrong by placing the links to our rebuttal both at your YouTube page and your sites.

After all, if you think that we haven't rebutted anything, what can you be afraid of? Here's a link you can place at your pages if you have any intellectual honesty:

http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/04/quick-links.html#debuv

Today is September 18, 2006. This posting will be a sticky for a while, so
that everybody can see how many days you will play dumb and not post the
links.

Show us you're not a chicken!

~ HC team

PS: and yes, we don't give a damn about your so-called "guidelines". If you can't even deal with what amateurs have to offer, you're done.


A note to our readers: please, go to the Ugly Voice's YouTube page and urge him to link to our rebuttals.

Check out these other postings about:

Denierbud (aka the Ugly Voice)

Jonnie Hargis

«White Pride»

70 comments:

Nick Terry said...

Please post any off-topic comments in the open thread below. Comments on subjects other than the Chicken Challenge will be deleted. Thank you.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

For the latest from UV, have a look here:

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=denierbud

Anonymous said...

Hi guys: this is sobe from YT. Do you need to make a blog to have an account? When he was messaging me, UV wrote, "I can totally refute Sergey." "I can tell when he's lying." But he has never done anything to defend himself. Instead, he makes up excuses like , "who would read my refutations?" and "I hate it how he calls me Ugly voice like a 7th grade thug." haha.

Anonymous said...

Someone already commented to denierbud: Let's have a comprehensive discussion at either the Holocaust Controversies website or the RODOH discussion forum. You choose.

His response: (my comments in brackets)
I'll choose:

forum.codoh.com

You know you won't get deleted there. (Bwahahahahahahaha) Lokulotes and Sobe can post there too. (At least until they start kicking my ass -- then their posts will mysteriously disappear)

Anyone who takes a look at the ones proposed by Cortagravatas and the one proposed by me, can see that Codoh forum is the best one. (At least, if you want to avoid any SERIOUS debate or critisism) No name calling, orderly. (And Deniers are guaranteed to win) See you there.

Further comment -- who is this guy kidding? He can't address the evidence, and he's going to hide over at CODOH to boot. What intellecutal honesty.

Anonymous said...

denierbud:
You know you won't get deleted there.

You mean, like this thread:
http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?t=3661

Referenced here:
http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/09/absence-of-logic-response-to-mcnally.html

One hopes he put more "analysis" into his denier videos then research into CODOH. "Open" debate, sure.

Sergey Romanov said...

"I hate it how he calls me Ugly voice like a 7th grade thug"

I'm glad he hates it ;-) I'm sure he hates the refutation itself even more! So much work, and all for nothing. Just imagine. Just like Fuehrer in his bunker.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Hi Sobe,

Cortagravatas64 on YT is me, Roberto. Check out my comments on denierbud's profile (including those regarding episode 13, which for some reason can't be made to appear on the place of that episode), as long as they last.

You can also contact me by e-mail, my address is cortagravatas@yahoo.com

Cheers,
Roberto

Anonymous said...

Hey guys: Nice to have some more recruits. When I was chatting with UV, he was saying that he can "totally refute sergey" because you're "lying." But as usual, he has failed to give me proof of your "lies." I think that the brute evidence presented by you guys is SO outstanding that he can do nothing but call you guys liars without presenting evidence for that absurd claim. I love your blog and congrats. I'll see you guys in YT.
Cheers

Anonymous said...

denierbud said:
> Anyone who goes to Rodoh will see they call people names frequently. Dirty names. I'm not going to go to a forum like that.

C'mon, be serious. You can dig through body disposal, dissect mass grave info, get into the nitty gritty of how people are killed, but ... ooooh ... name calling? Heaven forbid. I love the warped logic some deniers have to use to avoid actually defending their drivel.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Anonymous,

You’ll find me on YT as cortagravatas64. I had a longer chat with buddy on his profile, maybe he has deleted some of it in the meantime, and posted some comments on the thread of his video episode 13. But posting with the restrictions imposed there by the software sucks, especially the 500-character mini-posts on the video threads with time-outs, no URLs allowed etc. And there are also other people besides the YT community to be informed about UV's deceptions, as the guy has a website featuring his videos. So I will basically keep to my profile there and focus on detailed debunking of the video clips on this blog, just like my fellow contributors. But feel free to visit me on my YT profile any time.

Anonymous said...

Hi guys ... this is a little piece I put together, inspired by some comments. Let me know what you think. :)

Response to clip 17:

1. I can't imagine prisoners in a top secret death camp going on basic errands.

But why not? Who would be expected to do the "basic errands", if not the prisoners?

2. The SS were the elite forces of the German Army.

Ooops, no they weren't. The SS were the elite forces of the Nazi Party, and were never integrated into the German Army.

3. Why would 4 of them go do an errand, as opposed to regular members of the German Army?

As the Camps were the jurisdiction of the SS, and they were strictly secret, how would the Army be involved?

4. With 5 able bodied men, was it really necessary to take a prisoner and jeopordize the secrecy of the camp?

How would having a prisoner along put the camp in jeopordy? How was the prisoner supposed to communicate the nature of the camp, and to whom?

5. Especially considering that Reder was 61 years old.

(This implies that he was too old "to do work"). Why would they bring someone younger, who might try and dash away? As long as he was able to perform the task, and he'd been working at the camp for a few months, it would make sense to take him.

6. He then tries to impeach the Bibliography (in Arad).

He does this by refering to other clips, thus "proving" the book is less then reliable. However, he only tackles a small portion of the authors whose last name begins with "R".

7. The guard falls asleep .. with a camp run like this, why didn't more escape?

Probably because the _camp_ wasn't run like this?

8. If Reder was the only one to survive out of 600,000 people, then security must have been tight.

(Reder wasn't the only one to survive -- there were a few, and one other survivor gave written testimony, but only Reder was a witness). Or perhaps the guards were more careful in the camp, and after the escape, they were also more careful outside the camp?

9. I thought that barbed wire was meant to keep animals in an enclosure. Can't humans just grab it where there is no barb and pull it apart, so someone can crawl through?

Aside from the fact that barbed wire was used in both world wars as an obstacle against foot soldiers, it was also employed in POW camps to keep prisoners in. So, if it can be crawled through, why weren't their massive POW escapes?

10. My christmas tree gets dry and brittle in a number of weeks. (in reference to the camoflage for the fence)

This can be solved by using a live tree; it is outside, after all.

11. Why couldn't they get "normal" fencing material in Lvov?

As opposed to barbed wire, which would be more effective?

12. If Oberhauser was in charge of building the camp, it means he built and maybe even designed the fence.

Does it? A contractor builds a house, but usually it's an architect that designs the house.

13. Does this look like a man who would choose barbed wire with tree branches for security for a top secret death camp?

What do looks have to do with the design of a fence?

14. Oberhauser got caught in the middle of a big fraud. His facial expressions convey that, while being harrased at his job by Lanzmann.

I'm amazed at this little bit. While the narrator is skeptical of all testimony, he can read someone's facial expressions and conclude what they are thinking.

15. My guess is ... (Oberhauser saw that he could get life in prison or executed, so he "through the prosecution a bone")

Well, anybody can guess. So far, not one shred of evidence -- a number of fascinating speculations, but NO evidence on Oberhauser at all.

16. They have been using his story ever since.

He then concludes, without showing any evidence doubting Oberhauser's testimony, that it's all in question, and that all citations of it are unreliable.

However, Oberhauser didn't plead guilty, and there was no reason to "through the prosecution a bone".
One of the other SS from the camp said "Oberhauser not only knew well the entire running of the extermination operation but he also took part in it."

He was interviewd by officers investigating Belzec, and those statements were read at trial -- there was no "confession" as is claimed in the clip.

Kiwiwriter said...

2. The SS were the elite forces of the German Army.

Ooops, no they weren't. The SS were the elite forces of the Nazi Party, and were never integrated into the German Army.

Nor were the SS particularly "elite." The initial SS divisions were trained poorly and fought poorly in the campaigns in Poland, France, and the Balkans. The later Waffen SS panzer and panzergrenadier divisions got first call for men and equipment, so they were larger in size and better-armed than Wehrmacht troops, and were able to fight better.

But most of the rest of the SS divisions, drawn from somewhat less "Aryan" manpower sources, were not first in line for weapons and skilled men, and did not fight as well. The 30th SS Division, made of renegade Russians, actually mutinied!

The SS Muslim divisions, raised in Yugoslavia to butcher other Yugoslavians, did so poorly that they were disbanded.

The SS men that fought to the end in Berlin, oddly enough, were mostly French, Dutch, Norwegian, and Danish renegades, who had nothing to live for, knowing that capture would merely be a ticket to a treason trial in the nation they had disowned and dishonored by their service for Hitler.

Other SS units that compiled records of sadism and brutality without any battlefield merit included the Dirlewanger Penal Brigade, an outfit made of convicted criminals, led by a convicted sex offender. Their chief accomplishments were the butchery of partisans in Russia and Warsaw.

And finally, most of the KZ staff were the bottom of the German manpower barrel, thugs, often police and army rejects without the capacity or inclination for skilled work, some declining into petty criminals who saw in KZ service the opportunity for graft and the exercise of power. SOme were real sadists, like Wilhelm Boger, the flogger.

Most, however, as Roger Manvell wrote, "were insensitive and brutalized morons of a kind any nation can produce if the streets, prisons, and brothels are scoured. The best men of Germany were on the fighting fronts, or doing skilled work in the factories. The worst gravitated towards the concentration camps, or into the guard rooms and interrogation cells of the Gestapo."

Manvell further writes in his book 'SS and Gestapo,' that the SS "inherited the men of the poorest quality whom Hitler could spare from his failing battlefronts, and they incorporated the waste products in manpower of the occupied countries in the form of collaborators prepared to join forces with them for what they could get out of the camps in graft and petty theft."

He adds: "the msot alarming fact about the SS is that it was manned, rank and file, by very ordinary men and women of many nationalities, most of them below normal intelligence, leavened here and there by sadists who reached instinctively for victims, by criminals who welcomed a quick release from jail and the chance for graft, and above them at the 'top,' by intellectuals who savored the opportunity of power.

"The SS attracted the kind of people who were in one way or another the misfits in normal society, from whatever level or class or nation they might originate. They were, whatever they pscyhological motive, teh enemies of the people, and the destroyers of their libierties. This is the final outcome of a police state, that the best must be destroyed at the hands of the worst."

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

>Anonymous said...
>Hi guys ... this is a little piece I put together, inspired by some comments. Let me know what >you think. :)

I think it’s good to see that people who think a little don’t fall for buddy’s bullshit.

Your comments will be taken into consideration when I write about clip 17, following other articles about technical issues and an article about clip 1.

What’s I particularly dislike about this clip 17 is the fellow’s calling the murderers who ran these extermination camps – most of whom, incidentally, had not even been part of SS military formations but worked at the “euthanasia” killing centers, see for instance the curricula of the Belzec staff under http://www.deathcamps.org/belzec/perpetrators.html – , the elite of the German army. Not because their organization did not exactly belong to the German army, but because an uncle of mine, about whom you can read under http://www.geocities.com/orion47.geo/WEHRMACHT/HEER/Muhlenkamp.html , fought and died as a German soldier. I wonder what he would have said if someone had told him that scum like Christian Wirth and Kurt Franz belonged to the elite forces of the German army …

JPSlovjanski said...

Kiwi, you need to brush up on your SS history lest you speak before war-nerds such as myself.

But on that comment, whoever made the statement about the SS is a moron if they didn't realize that the SS in the camps was a DIFFERENT branch of the SS. He is thinking of the Waffen-SS. The camps were run by the Allgemeine SS, who didn't have the same amount of military training.

Nick Terry said...

The IKL was formally part of the Waffen-SS. A great many concentration camp guards and staff were transferred from frontline Waffen-SS divisions, e.g. Mengele came from 'Wiking' division.

However, the AR camps were entirely different, and their staff came either from SSPF Lublin, thus from the Police, or from the Allgemeine-SS and Police via T4 euthanasia program (eg Stangl).

So AR camp staff had very little proper military training, compared to Auschwitz staff.

Kiwiwriter said...

>Kiwi, you need to brush up on your SS history lest you speak before war-nerds such as myself.

But on that comment, whoever made the statement about the SS is a moron if they didn't realize that the SS in the camps was a DIFFERENT branch of the SS. He is thinking of the Waffen-SS. The camps were run by the Allgemeine SS, who didn't have the same amount of military training.


I know the Allgemeine SS and the Waffen SS were different in many ways, and that the Allgemeine SS did not get the military training or equipment that the Waffen SS received. So you're quite right...I should have been clearer on that point.

My irritation was about statements that the SS in general, particularly those in the AR and other camps were an elite force. The Waffen SS's elite reputation is based on its lead divisions. A war-nerd like yourself is familiar with their names: Liebstandarte, Der Fuhrer, Hitler Jugend, Viking, Frundsberg, and Hohenstaufen, and their various battles and campaigns. And some of the "ethnic" SS divisions, like Charlemagne and Nordland, were also very tough...the latter two died in Berlin.

However, neither the Allgemeine SS nor the larger bulk of the Waffen SS divisions were a universal elite of "Universal Soldiers."

Also, one of the early SS divisions, the SS-Polizei Division, was recruited from KZ guards. That was how Himmler got around pre-war bans on creating the Waffen SS from Reichdeutsche. He also got around it by signing up the Volksdeutsche, Germans living outside the Fatherland. As the war droned on, Himmler gained even more power, and was able to create those feared divisions, which is why they didn't show up in the 1940-41 campaigns.

Any veteran cardboard-counter wargamer (also "war nerds") who played SPI's "War in Europe" will tell you of his irritation at not being able to produce 13-8 SS Panzer Divisions in 1940. The rationale behind that rule was, of course, that bar on recruitment and equipment.

I should have been clearer. My reaction was to the statement: "The SS were the elite forces of the German Army." They were not part of the Army, and there is no way one can consider the SS men who ran the extermination operations any kind of an elite force.

JPSlovjanski said...

Let me just point out I am not attacking anyone here- I'm really supporting your excellent work in spotting such a glaring error in that work. It is always funny when Nazi supporters display such glaring ignorance for the way their beloved state worked.


Unfortunately I am not able to watch the video myself. I recommend if someone is seriously interested, make a transcript like that made by Mark Roberts debunking the video Loose Change(about 9-11). He uses a very good format and it is extrememly witty. You can download it from 911Myths.com(Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewer Guide).

In the future a similar format can be used for critiquing videos like the one we are discussing here.

Kiwiwriter said...

>Let me just point out I am not attacking anyone here- I'm really supporting your excellent work in spotting such a glaring error in that work. It is always funny when Nazi supporters display such glaring ignorance for the way their beloved state worked.


Didn't think or say that you were attacking me...I merely recognized that I was not clear in what I said and acknowledged your correction. Don't worry about it.

what you were doing was real historical revisionism, as opposed to the fake kind, so props to you.

I now have the John Keegan book at hand, and it tells me that the Totenkopf Division was recruited beore the war from the permanent guard force of concentration camps, and equipped with captured Czech vehicles and material. The boss of the division was Theodor Eicke, former commandant of Dachau, and their work includes the Le Paradis massacre. That's what I was thinking of the other day.

The complex organization of the SS and Nazi state was deliberate... and this is another thing that Nazi apologists don't care to deal with...Hitler deliberately created a situation where his senior managers and leaders had overlapping fields of authority, and left the boundaries unclear. He intended to keep them squabbling amongst themselves so that they would be unlikely to mount a coup against him. Vague policies and overlapping fields of responsibility made the inner workings of the Third Reich a Byzantine court where courtiers struggled against each other gain favor with the Fuhrer. Furthermore, as Ian Kershaw notes in his biography Adolf, the senior Nazis were expected to "work toward the Fuhrer" and guess at or anticipate his desires, and put them into effect. He who did the best job gained the resulting favor.

The inner workings of the SS followed the same function. Remember that Himmler and his subordinate Heydrich (well,you know this, I'm just saying this for readers, just keep me on track here) were also bitter rivals, so a complex organization of the SS and Gestapo prevented Heydrich and others from establishing clear-cut empires and power bases.

One of the more bizarre results of all this Byzantine infighting was that Nazi atomic research was coordinated by the Post Office.

And I am also amused at how little these folks know about the realities of the Nazi state they love and defend so much. But their arguments are not about facts and realities, but about hatreds and attitudes. It's one of the reasons they dodge and weave and drift off into irrelevancies about Stalin and Israel.

Voxceltica said...

“the Third Reich a Byzantine court where courtiers struggled against each other gain favor with the Fuhrer. Furthermore, as Ian Kershaw notes in his biography Adolf, the senior Nazis were expected to "work toward the Fuhrer"

And this explains why there is very little evidence that can be claimed to directly link Hitler to the holocaust?

Kiwiwriter said...

“the Third Reich a Byzantine court where courtiers struggled against each other gain favor with the Fuhrer. Furthermore, as Ian Kershaw notes in his biography Adolf, the senior Nazis were expected to "work toward the Fuhrer"

>And this explains why there is very little evidence that can be claimed to directly link Hitler to the holocaust?

That, combined with the fact that many of Hitler's orders, particularly on the extermination campaigns after the T4 fiasco, were made verbally.

However, Eichmann recorded in his diaries and memoirs, to David Irving's chagrin, that Hitler gave Himmler the final verbal orders for the extermination campaign in October 1941.

The underlings were expected to determine the Fuhrer's wants and do their best to achieve them. They knew what he wanted, because he outlined what he wanted often enough in his repetitious table talks, speeches, and harangues, for decades.

Hitler, seeing himself as a visionary and artist, was not interested in the details of how things were done, except with military operations, where he threw himself into tiny details, like the number of towed anti-tank guns in an infantry division. He was fascinated with this stuff, from his World War I experiences.

He understood questions of technology, but not as much of strategy. This mania for detail on minor military subjects turned Fuhrer conferences into lengthy ordeals for all attending, as they often focused no trivialities instead of "big picture" stuff. After a few years, the OKW officers knew that the way to present Hitler with bad news was to sandwich stories of an isolated incident of heroism or a small victory, so he would be less infuriated by the defeat, and still focus on the small victory.

Hitler also saw warfare in terms of propaganda, and designed a lot of his military strategy in those terms. The Battle of the Bulge was not designed as much to take Antwerp and cut off the British 21st Army Group as it was to set the Western Allies squabbling amongst each other. He did not understand how well SHAEF worked, compared to his feuding bureaucracies.

It's also worth noting that in the final days in Berlin, a lot of paper in the Fuhrerbunker was burned, some on orders of Hitler, others on orders from Martin Bormann.

While Hitler regarded his war on the Jewish people as central to his life and career, and a subject for which he believed he would be considered a great hero decades later, his aides and courtiers, being more cynical, were less certain of their position. Bormann likely destroyed a lot of key papers.

Another load of key papers went down in one of the planes flying to the Berghof, crashing in what became East Germany. This crash became the tool by which Konrad Kujau displayed his fake "Hitler diaries" in 1983, which apparently were going to whitewash Der Fuehrer. In all likelihood, that plane contained many of the Table Talks that Bormann had transcribed.

But the key point...many of Hitler's orders and desires were given verbally, particularly after the T4 mess.

One of the major facets of how Hitler developed his image in Germany was that he was a leader who was above and beyond the normal political fray, an ordinary man who had given up all normal desires (family, civilian career, time, art) to achieve Germany's destiny. When things went wrong in Germany, they were not the Fuhrer's fault. It was somebody else's. It helped enable him to take the credit, avoid the blame, and keep anyone from noticing what he was really doing, which was essentially living like a man who had won a vast lottery.

You see, Voxceltica...behave like a civilized adult and treat people with respect, and you will get it in return. When you start off hurling "contempt and derision" at others, don't be surprised when that is what is returned to you. You should not sound so shocked and surprised when that happens.

104839sobe104839 said...

"It's been 8 DAYS and the one third of the holocaust video author still won't link.."
And he most likely never will. I wouldn't get your hopes up, not that you wouldn't know that. Even after the HC team is done debunking all of denierbud's trash, he still won't link, he'll just keep on playing dumb like a possum hiding behind a shelf that is purposely plugging his ears to avoid defending his drivel. In a way, however, I guess that I kinda feel sorry for UV. He ACTUALLY believes that the holocaust was a lie, in the same way that we KNOW that the holocaust hapenned. I think of Holocaust denial as a religion. For example, it is pretty hard to convert a mormon to a chrisian.
Of course, that's just my opinion...Sobe

Anonymous said...

Thanks for all the clarifications on the SS guys.

One additional thing -- let's suppose the SS was the "elite guard" of the Nazi movement. Isn't it remarkable that not a single one of these "elites" ever said this whole thing was a lie in court? The defences usually were "I was just following orders" or "I didn't participate". Could be part of the reason UV is forced to "speculate" on the facial expressions of one of the SS.

104839sobe104839 said...

Of course! It's amazing to think that all these SS men where tortured without proof and Not ONE spoke up. Or maybe their families who supposedly knew that it was a lie and where enraged by the "unfair" execution of their fathers/husbands could speak up. But NO, not even ONE SS men spoke up.

JPSlovjanski said...

Many SS men were very fanatical and fought to the death on numerous occasions. Strange that NOT ONE would stand up and scream "I was tortured! I will not lie!" etc.

Sergey Romanov said...

Especially when so many civilians in Stalin's courts denounced their former "confessions". Just take the JAC case - the whole case almost crumbled because all accused except one did not plead guilty, the only one who did, Fefer, in a closed session said that he was acting on MGB orders. Even "experts" in this case basically renounced their "expert" reports. The accused were sentenced basically on Politburo orders.

If this could happen in Stalin's court (and it happened so often that Yezhov or someone - I don't remember - asked for new procedures - i.e., accuseds' renouncing of their confessions should not have been taken into account), then surely it would happen much more often in the courts of a democratic state. There will be a posting on this later.

Comparison with Stalinist trials blows deniers' arguments about "coercion" away, even if they were partially right in some cases (e.g. Hoess). NKVD was the biggest torture lab, and experimental results are not in deniers' favor.

A simple conclusion: there's no way so many people would not complain about coercion if there was any.

Kiwiwriter said...

>Many SS men were very fanatical and fought to the death on numerous occasions. Strange that NOT ONE would stand up and scream "I was tortured! I will not lie!" etc.

Yes, the SS guys have had plenty of opportunities in the past 60 years, as have their descendants, to stand up before all kinds of audiences and say, "My confession on the Holocaust was a fraud, the British got it out of me by forcing me to eat bully beef, while the Americans tortured me by making me watch the 'talent portion' of Miss America Pageants. The only thing we did at Auschwitz was push paper and delouse clothing."

And there's no shortage of audiences for these guys to take it to: Holocaust deniers are always holding "conferences" and publishing stuff on the web, so you'd think these guys would write or appear at one of these events.

Or the descendants, eager to clear grandpa's good name and war service, would come forward...maybe with other families of SS descendants.

Or they would file suit against the US and British governments for the torture, for the physical injuries that must have been created from eating so much bully beef. You'd think these families would be waving X-Rays and doctors' reports. You'd think they'd be lining up in US District Court to file a civil class-action suit...and the US is a very litigious country, where people sue and win over hot coffee at McDonald's. There are plenty of ambulance-chasing personal injury lawyers who would take up such cases.

But they don't.

And neither did the SS guys who got jailed and released after serving their terms (often shortened).

Because the confessions weren't extracted by torture. They were extacted by reasonably trained American and British prosecutors like John Harlan Amen, who knew how to get people to talk without smacking them in the head.

It's interesting how these deniers flip everything...they attribute the behavior of the Nazis to the Allies. I guess it's projection or something...they know what the Nazis did, so they simply attribute what they know to their enemies.

Scott Smith said...

Kiwiwriter said:

<< "2. The SS were the elite forces of the German Army."

++ Ooops, no they weren't. The SS were the elite forces of the Nazi Party, and were never integrated into the German Army. ++

Nor were the SS particularly "elite." >>
>

They were the elite troops of the Nazi Party but the combat forces were always under Wehrmacht operational command.

At least a third to a half of the divisions formed could be considered elite by any measure. They were exceptionally battle-hardened, in spite of Gunther Grass claiming never to have killed anybody in the Waffen-SS.

They also had an unusual amount of unit cohesion even by the high German standards, and the SS had a much better reputation for holding the line when the going got tough. Every Wehrmacht commander wanted a wing or two of Waffen-SS as fire brigades.

<< The initial SS divisions were trained poorly and fought poorly in the campaigns in Poland, France, and the Balkans. The later Waffen SS panzer and panzergrenadier divisions got first call for men and equipment, so they were larger in size and better-armed than Wehrmacht troops, and were able to fight better. >>

No, but the first three divisions were newly formed at the beginning of the war and lacking in experienced cadre, not the same as "doing poorly." They just were not the Panzer spearheads early in the war.

These first divisions were formed in spite of the intense hostility of the Wehrmacht old guard, which controlled procurement of materiel and allocation of manpower until after the July 20, 1944 Bomb Plot.

Not until the SS had established itself in Russia did it share an equal footing with the Wehrmacht for equipment, simply because it had earned the respect from the Junker military establishment by then.

On the other hand, the Leibstandarte, SS-Verfuegungstruppe, and SS-Totenkopfverbaende were motorized from the outset (although not armored) and motorization was ipso facto elite in the German Army, which otherwise relied upon rail, horse, and boot leather for its transport.

Still, the early-war SS was largely left to its own devices for getting their trucks and volunteers, and the only reason the Regular Army tolerated the formation of these Party troops at all was because they were innocuously formed as Hitler's parade detail, "special purpose" auxilliaries, and from prewar concentration camp guard staff (although handpicked by Theodor Eicke who headed the IKL at the time he started forming the SS-TV division).

<< But most of the rest of the SS divisions, drawn from somewhat less "Aryan" manpower sources, were not first in line for weapons and skilled men, and did not fight as well. The 30th SS Division, made of renegade Russians, actually mutinied! >>

Nevertheless, Wehrmacht and SS morale and unit cohesiveness was consistently better than their Allied counterparts. For one thing, the Americans in particular replenished forces with green replacements and "90 day wonder" officers, whereas the Germans withdrew shattered units as a whole and refit using experienced cadre to teach the new personnel the ropes, and when they then engaged the enemy it was as an organic whole. Stalin had to have pistol police standing behind his combat troops to keep them focused, and he routinely tossed relatives of "unmotivated" troops into the Gulag or for getting captured alive.

<< The SS Muslim divisions, raised in Yugoslavia to butcher other Yugoslavians, did so poorly that they were disbanded. >>

They had little reason to fight for Germany unless she were winning, and even less reason to fight for Serb nationalism or Communism. These multiethnic states hated each other anyway, so it was small potatoes. All the Germans needed in this theater was to make sure that the Allies could not establish any bases in the Balkans, which would disrupt their trade routes with Axis allies and with neutrals for things like petroleum and nonferrous metals that they they desperately needed.

<< The SS men that fought to the end in Berlin, oddly enough, were mostly French, Dutch, Norwegian, and Danish renegades, who had nothing to live for, knowing that capture would merely be a ticket to a treason trial in the nation they had disowned and dishonored by their service for Hitler. >>

Degrelle would have said instead that they were fighting for their freedom from Western finance plutocracy and Bolshevism and thereby earning the respect of the new European order.

Who are the traitors, the ones who conspired with the Entente to make a World War against Germany for the second time, or those who opposed war with Germany and fought Bolshevism?

The Churchills and DeGaulles are honored as prophets only because their side could not have lost with American largesse and Soviet cannon fodder behind them.

<< Other SS units that compiled records of sadism and brutality without any battlefield merit included the Dirlewanger Penal Brigade, an outfit made of convicted criminals, led by a convicted sex offender. Their chief accomplishments were the butchery of partisans in Russia and Warsaw. >>

A strawman argument. Penal battalions are not supposed to be crack combat troops, and the Germans would be the first to say so--unlike the Americans, perhaps, who quietly tended to employ felons to fill their infantry ranks. American infantry had a marginal reputation, unlike American artillery, for example.

Besides, some Marines have engaged in atrocities in Iraq, but nobody would say that the USMC is not an elite organization.

Butchery of partisans is not necessarily a bad way to fight partisans, either.

The American problem in Iraq (other than the Interventionism in the first place) is 1) that there are not enough "boots on the ground" for pacification, 2) that the defeated Iraqi government/military was not deputized once Saddam was removed from power, and 3) the U.S. can't afford to make Iraq into Iowa with a Walmart and a Wally World on every streetcorner. If they are too stupid to "cut and run," all that can be done now is continue talking about Democracy, so long as they vote the way that we want them to, and continue to buy loyalties from corrupt officials.

<< And finally, most of the KZ staff were the bottom of the German manpower barrel, thugs, often police and army rejects without the capacity or inclination for skilled work, some declining into petty criminals who saw in KZ service the opportunity for graft and the exercise of power. SOme were real sadists, like Wilhelm Boger, the flogger. >>

Nonsense. Eicke's men were hand-picked for dealing with Enemies of the State as "political soldiers," whether the battle was incarcerating street Reds or fighting the Red Army on the steppe.

Of course later IKL personnel were the bottom of the manpower barrel. The barrel only goes so deep. That's because, especially in wartime, prison staff cannot compare with elite police forces and professional soldiers anywhere. That's why they are always advertising desperately for corrections officers in the U.S., even when unemployment rates are steep.

Much of the later KL staff were Waffen-SS with combat experience who had been invalided from the Front--but that is far from "bottom of the barrel." There is some debate right now trying to find meaningful government work for Rumsfeld's cripples rather than just sending them home to Burger King missing an arm or whatnot.

<< Most, however, as Roger Manvell wrote, "were insensitive and brutalized morons of a kind any nation can produce if the streets, prisons, and brothels are scoured. The best men of Germany were on the fighting fronts, or doing skilled work in the factories. The worst gravitated towards the concentration camps, or into the guard rooms and interrogation cells of the Gestapo." >>

Whatever.

<< Manvell further writes in his book 'SS and Gestapo,' that the SS "inherited the men of the poorest quality whom Hitler could spare from his failing battlefronts, and they incorporated the waste products in manpower of the occupied countries in the form of collaborators prepared to join forces with them for what they could get out of the camps in graft and petty theft." >>

Fantasy.

<< He adds: "the msot alarming fact about the SS is that it was manned, rank and file, by very ordinary men and women of many nationalities, most of them below normal intelligence, leavened here and there by sadists who reached instinctively for victims, by criminals who welcomed a quick release from jail and the chance for graft, and above them at the 'top,' by intellectuals who savored the opportunity of power. >>

Yawn.

Okay, the NSDAP was a lower-middle class movement, and it provided upward mobility for people who were overeducated in terms of the opportunities that normal bourgeois society would have offered in the Depression era. Talented people like Speer, for example, never would have risen above a clerk at some joint-stock firm otherwise, and they were fanatical in what they believed was reshaping their future society. They were anything but anti-Modern, and, I would argue, less motivated by corruption than Western officialdom, where the almighty dollar is the ultimate ideal and the military-industrial gravy train is always the answer.

<< "The SS attracted the kind of people who were in one way or another the misfits in normal society, from whatever level or class or nation they might originate. They were, whatever they pscyhological motive, the enemies of the people, and the destroyers of their libierties. This is the final outcome of a police state, that the best must be destroyed at the hands of the worst." >>

Yet more crowing from the intellectual janissaries of Germany's conquest.

Translation: The classical liberal sees the State in terms of what it can do for financial corporations; the individual is a rootless, soulless atomized unit. At best he is a stockholder, at worst a worker. As a citizen, his freedom is an end in itself with no purpose other than to cultivate consumer tastes and to market the latest demographic trends. He grudgingly pays taxes for useful military campaigns and enthusiastically lets others volunteer--or if he has to, he serves his country himself once he is fed enough pious jingoism.

The Nazis would not have seen any dichotomy between the individual German and the State as the ultimate expression of the will of the people. Even if war had not gotten in the way of their own NS idealism, Mao at least shrewdly observed that without a "people's army" the people have nothing.

:-)

Scott Smith said...

nick terry said:

<< The IKL was formally part of the Waffen-SS. A great many concentration camp guards and staff were transferred from frontline Waffen-SS divisions, e.g. Mengele came from 'Wiking' division. >>

Right, but this does not weaken what the video says, wondering about why elite combat troops would suddenly be undertaking an Extermination Program.

So Mengele is a physician in the elite Wiking division and when invalidated from front-line duties starts up his eyeball collection as the Auschwitz mad scientist camp doctor.

The Holomythology has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

<< However, the AR camps were entirely different, and their staff came either from SSPF Lublin, thus from the Police, or from the Allgemeine-SS and Police via T4 euthanasia program (eg Stangl). So AR camp staff had very little proper military training, compared to Auschwitz staff. >>

Well, they had police training--not exactly Burger King, although Kurt Franz was cook in a state hospital. No big surprise that military police types would be recruited from government jobs like state hospitals, though. Oh forgot, Euthanasia Program.

The Holocheese, it keeps getting better and better.

jpslovjanski said:

<< It is always funny when Nazi supporters display such glaring ignorance for the way their beloved state worked. >>

This presumes that Holocaust Revisionism and National Socialism are congruent. They're not.

:-)

104839sobe104839 said...

"Right, but this does not weaken what the video says, wondering about why elite combat troops would suddenly be undertaking an Extermination Program."

The point is: that while some forces of the SS where elite, such as the Waffen-SS, the kind of the SS in the AR camps where mostly from the tiergartenstrasse-4 program and had no previous significant training. "Why...would suddenly be undertaking an extermination program." Oh, you gotta be kidding me. It's like saying, "why did stalin have an immense system of gulags while he was fighting hitler?" pshhh. Duh. The answer is that believe it or not, a huge anti-semite like hitler did get up the political chain, and had the approval of most of germany to enforce anti-jewish laws. Of course, the German people did not know of the extermination of Judaism because it was a secret operation. Hitler hated Jews enough to kill them. He clearly wrote about how much he hated them in mein kampf. Simple.
"So Mengele is a physician in the elite Wiking division and when invalidated from front-line duties starts up his eyeball collection as the Auschwitz mad scientist camp doctor."

What's so hard to believe that since Mengele was a well-trained physician and happenned to be in the Wiking division, that he was called to Auschwitz to perform experiments?

"The holohoax has more holes than swiss cheese."

With the way you make things seem, sure. With your logic, anything can be "proven wrong" and "refuted". The "revisionism"cheese is the theory with more holes than swiss cheese. thousands of germans where tortured, and not ONE, I repeat, not ONE said anything of torture. Hmm. The supposed Jewish liars of Smith's fantasies must have been very effective. So much that the families of the executed SS men didn't try to file lawsuits in court. In America, one can file lawsuits for a coffee without a cap that spilled on your lap. Strange that Frau Stangl(wife of franz stangl) Frau Hoess, or any other family members didn't come forward and expose the "hoax".
It's also hard to believe(to put it lightly) that the Jewish "liars" could make similiar maps, and for example, draw the gas chambers in the same place without screwing each other up without ever having met each other. But those are just 2 examples. If I knew more people would read it, I'd make an essay exposing the horrible, poorly-thought-out lies of holocaust denial.
"This makes it seem as if holocaust revisionism and National socialism where congruent, but they're not."
But they are so immensely connected with racism and hate speech, which is why holocaust denial will never be accepted into the mainstream media. You can't blame kiwiwriter after the huge evidence connecting holocaust denial and hate speech, racism, anti-semitism, to name a few.

Scott Smith said...

kiwiwriter said:

<< I now have the John Keegan book at hand, and it tells me that the Totenkopf Division was recruited beore the war from the permanent guard force of concentration camps, and equipped with captured Czech vehicles and material. The boss of the division was Theodor Eicke, former commandant of Dachau, and their work includes the Le Paradis massacre. That's what I was thinking of the other day. >>

This mini-massacre was an isolated incident, and even so, the person responsible, Fritz Knochlein may have been a scapegoat since the British trying the defeated Germans after the war did not exactly do so fairly. Plus, no Allied soldier was ever called to account for shooting German prisoners out of hand, so it's another double-standard.

<< The complex organization of the SS and Nazi state was deliberate... and this is another thing that Nazi apologists don't care to deal with...Hitler deliberately created a situation where his senior managers and leaders had overlapping fields of authority, and left the boundaries unclear. He intended to keep them squabbling amongst themselves so that they would be unlikely to mount a coup against him. Vague policies and overlapping fields of responsibility made the inner workings of the Third Reich a Byzantine court where courtiers struggled against each other gain favor with the Fuhrer. >>

This is an oft-used but completely nonsensical thesis. The real purpose of the thesis is to explain away why the Third Reich was supposedly a totalitarian dictatorship but without many of the usual features of totalitarianism and dictatorship.

For example, it is incomprehensible to Allied apologists why Hitler respected the institution of the General Staff, as well as many other respected German institutions like the civil service and the diplomatic corps, when he supposedly could have just ordered anybody gassed or turned into soap and lampshades.

And German officers were initially not even allowed to join the Nazi Party because the military had traditionally been apolitical in theory, and Hitler was not quick to change such things even though his disagreed that military professionals were or should be apolitical.

In addition, it is well-known that Hitler found the professional protocol of his generals and even their personal company irritating. The equestrian Junker caste were even indulged to a fault because of their traditional reverence for German nationalism and the State, even when prudence would have dictated that they be suspected of disloyalty long before the July 1944 Bomb Plot.

German officers actually complained that after the Bomb Plot they had to surrender their sidearms and have their briefcases searched before attending staff meetings where Hitler was present. German sidearms were part of their uniform. I'd like to see some American general take his sidearm into a meeting with the President today. When Bush visits the troops to share Thanksgiving dinner they are all disarmed, in spite of the Second Amendment and cranberry sauce. Hitler rode around Germany in an open car, while today even the Pope pontificates from behind bulletproof glass. I wonder what Gandhi would drive.

<< Furthermore, as Ian Kershaw notes in his biography Adolf, the senior Nazis were expected to "work toward the Fuhrer" and guess at or anticipate his desires, and put them into effect. He who did the best job gained the resulting favor. >>

Most analysts don't have a clue how the Leadership Principle did and did not work, and Keegan is no exception.

<< The inner workings of the SS followed the same function. Remember that Himmler and his subordinate Heydrich (well,you know this, I'm just saying this for readers, just keep me on track here) were also bitter rivals, so a complex organization of the SS and Gestapo prevented Heydrich and others from establishing clear-cut empires and power bases. >>

This rivalry and Heydrich's role is overemphasized because he was assassinated by the instigation of British spooks, and so it makes a better plume of feathers if he was some kind of supernatural force.

As another example, Rommel was built-up as a superhero icon by both Goebbels (for obvious reasons) and by the British as well because it explains their defeats against one whom Churchill called a worthy foe before Parliament--and it inflates the significance of their ultimate victory over him and his ultimately Evil cause.

Rommel is also personally rehabilitated by the "Widerstand mythology" Germans and the surviving generals who universally trashed Hitler in their retrospective memoirs as the scapegoat for all German failures; this is because Rommel supposedly had some involvement in the generals' Bomb Plot against Hitler and chose to commit suicide rather than face the Army court martial and risk the loss of his military pension and honors for his surviving son and spouse. But during the war many venerable generals like Rundstedt and Kesselring were less than happy that Hitler had bumped Rommel up a few grades to Field Marshal (largely for propaganda purposes to underscore the performance of the Afrikakorps).

<< One of the more bizarre results of all this Byzantine infighting was that Nazi atomic research was coordinated by the Post Office. >>

Big deal. The "phone company" invented the transistor, one of the greatest inventions of all time.

Actually, there was no coordination whatsoever of German atomic research. This is because the German scientists were slow to see nuclear energy in apocalyptic terms the way that Jewish scientists did, largely because they were German refugees or Communist sympathizers.

German scientists on the other hand were unable to market their work to the military as the alpha and omega of all siege engines--although the German government did broadly support scientific research, including nuclear physics.

In America, atomic research would have been consigned to basements of college campuses or as a cottage crafts industry rather than a secret government program, first by the Navy and then with unlimited (and Congressionally unaccountable) funding via the Army Corps of Engineers (you know, the guys who built the Pentagon building and the levees in New Orleans) but emigre Szilard talked Einstein into writing a letter to Roosevelt certain that the Germans were about to destroy the universe.

To his credit, Szilard tried to stop the military from dropping atomic weapons on Japan. But this feeling of scientific work subverted for military ends continues today with the Doomsday Clock of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which shows the hands of doom poised a few minutes before midnight. I doubt if "Aryans" would have been capable of this kind of eschatology. A couple of atomic bombs would not have defeated Hitler so they did not think of it.

<< And I am also amused at how little these folks know about the realities of the Nazi state they love and defend so much. But their arguments are not about facts and realities, but about hatreds and attitudes. It's one of the reasons they dodge and weave and drift off into irrelevancies about Stalin and Israel. >>

Well, playing the Holocaust Card is one of the salient features of Zionism, and the unilateral and unconditional American support for Israel.

As far as Stalin, yeah Uncle Joe was one of the Good Guys, wasn't he, since he fought Hitler, and Hitler was the Devil, right?

Besides, totalitarian-liberals like Churchill and Roosevelt need heavy enforcers from time to time.

Anything goes when you fight for Democracy and Capitalism. That is why hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed by Uncle Sam so that their countrymen can vote (just as long as they vote the way that we want them to). Sixty-percent of Iraqis want the Americans out now, but that will never be on any ballot.

If modern governments and other institutions can manufacture historical reality and continue to exploit decades-old conflicts even today it makes the Yellow Journalism of the Hearst and Pulitzer press that drove American imperialism a century ago pale by comparison. Orwell would be impressed.

Scott Smith said...

aldo-umschlagplatz said:

<< "Right, but this does not weaken what the video says, wondering about why elite combat troops would suddenly be undertaking an Extermination Program."

The point is: that while some forces of the SS where elite, such as the Waffen-SS, the kind of the SS in the AR camps where mostly from the tiergartenstrasse-4 program and had no previous significant training. >>


I'm not disputing that the Aktion Reinhardt personnel were not military combat elites, but they were military and security police.

And guess what, these kinds of personnel are involved in deportations and public hygiene measures to control disease vectors among demographic and troop movements, especially in wartime. One sees "disinfection troops" when one goes through customs anywhere. In my part of the world I stop at a checkpoint on the highway at the Arizona and California border and a man with a badge takes away any fruit that I might have with me so that pests are not transferred to California orchards.

In Poland, Russia and the Balkans the problem was body lice, which spread typhus fever. Anybody who travelled by rail in Eastern Europe after World War I got their luggage gassed in a gaschamber, which was why typhus was not a problem on the Western Front, even though the troops were just as lousy. Typhus killed tens of millions in Europe during and between the World Wars, second only to the influenza of 1918-20, which killed from 50-100 million worldwide.

Military, camp, and field hygiene was taken very seriously by the German governemnt and military and they were leaders in this branch of medicine. See this 1944 paper given by the Marburg Prof. Dr. Pfannenstiel, a senior SS hygienist, translated into English for RODOH here:

http://www.rodoh.us/arts/arts1/pfannenstiel/pfannenstiel01101944.html

or:

http://p102.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm12.showMessage?topicID=285.topic

Kurt Gerstein, a lower-ranking SS hygienics officer implicated Colonel Pfannestiel by claiming that they inspected Treblinka and Belzec--which they probably did in the course of their medical work--but he also claimed that they witnessed a gassing of Jews at Belzec with a diesel engine and saw a pile of clothing looted from dead Jews that was fifteen stories high. Both claims are absurd lies quoted as gospel without critical analysis by Holocaust historians.

<< "Why...would suddenly be undertaking an extermination program." Oh, you gotta be kidding me. It's like saying, "why did stalin have an immense system of gulags while he was fighting hitler?" pshhh. Duh. The answer is that believe it or not, a huge anti-semite like hitler did get up the political chain, and had the approval of most of germany to enforce anti-jewish laws. Of course, the German people did not know of the extermination of Judaism because it was a secret operation. Hitler hated Jews enough to kill them. He clearly wrote about how much he hated them in mein kampf. Simple.
"So Mengele is a physician in the elite Wiking division and when invalidated from front-line duties starts up his eyeball collection as the Auschwitz mad scientist camp doctor." >>


I'm not denying that Jews suffered a Holocaust of some sort. So did many other peoples. Ten times as many non-Jews as Jews were killed in the war, a point that the Iranian president recently made during his visit to the United Nations, which makes him the next Hitler or something.

Nor do I deny that Jews were singled out and that their historical communities were eradicated.

But I do have doubts about what the Holocaust was. I want rigorous proof, especially regarding gassings and extermination factories. This is not an unreasonable demand considering the wild claims made of Extermination Programs and so on.

It is no big surprise that medical staff from state hospitals would be involved in deportations and disinfection measures and camp hygiene. If you don't tend to this then epidemics spread and diseases decimates prisoners. This is how the 1918 influenza spread worldwide from American Army camps, although influenza is so contagious that it still causes problems today.

Anyway, when the Americans deloused Iraqis after the first Gulf War it was--surprise--the MILITARY POLICE that did it, under medical supervision. Some veterans groups are complaining that these disinfection troops were exposed to higher concentrations of chemicals that have harmed their health.

The thesis that AR personnel were T4 euthanasia specialists recruited to gas Jews during the war is tenuous at best. Kurt Franz was a hospital cook. Wirth was a hospital administrator or security guard if I remember correctly. Some others were hospital mechanics, and so on. Their selection for security and military police work, and having some medical experience, is not remarkable. They also undoubtedly did a lot of "networking" for jobs with other Nazis that they knew. So what?

<< What's so hard to believe that since Mengele was a well-trained physician and happenned to be in the Wiking division, that he was called to Auschwitz to perform experiments? >>

Oh, I'm sure that he did some minor epidemiological experiments, but he was no mad scientist, a la standard Holocaust lore. There were real scientists doing some experiments on prisoners like high-altitude and hypothermia research, or with vaccines. Other countries have done syphillis and radiation experiments and tests of poison gases on minorities, prisoners and military personnel. The ethical question is whether minorities, prisoners and soldiers are doing so without coercion and with informed consent.

Of course, if the thesis is that the Germans were gassing every Jew that they did not immediately need for work, then, yes, one must believe that mad scientists were collecting eyeballs and buckets of body parts to make into furniture for Nazi housewives.

<< "The holohoax has more holes than swiss cheese."

With the way you make things seem, sure. With your logic, anything can be "proven wrong" and "refuted". The "revisionism"cheese is the theory with more holes than swiss cheese. thousands of germans where tortured, and not ONE, I repeat, not ONE said anything of torture. Hmm. The supposed Jewish liars of Smith's fantasies must have been very effective. So much that the families of the executed SS men didn't try to file lawsuits in court. In America, one can file lawsuits for a coffee without a cap that spilled on your lap. Strange that Frau Stangl(wife of franz stangl) Frau Hoess, or any other family members didn't come forward and expose the "hoax". >>


In fairness, the lady who filed this lawsuit was severely burned when the container broke open over her lap. Coffee sold at the drive-thru shouldn't burn you just so that Ronald McDonald can tell his corporate stockholders that their coffee is fifty degrees hotter than Burger King's.

But my thesis is not that every German hollering Holocaust was tortured. People believed in witches and the Devil in the Middle Ages and this was the law. Only wicked people doubted.

Rumors don't need a conspiracy to become "urban legends," especially if governments do conspire to give certain rumors and propaganda official authority, which the Allied governments did after the war, and German, French, Canadian, and Austrian governments, etc. vigorously do today. The American capital city even has a taxpayer-subsidized Holocaust indoctrination center.

Besides, Frau Hoess did admit that her British captors did threaten to deport their son to the Soviet sector, where he would have been sent to the gulag and probably never heard from again, so she broke and revealed her husband's whereabouts. Hoess knew that he was going to have to play ball for the sake of his family. This should give any reasonable and fair-minded person doubts about his confession.

Even convicted Treblinka commandant Stangl gave us few details about the gassings; he just nodded in general about the received mythology as written, or as it ever will be written, in pure Orwellian terms. Most of the other Perpetrators did not survive the war, or they don't know any details besides blindly following orders. Eichmann is the classic example of this amoral soulless bureacratic automaton who affirms everything but knows nothing. He claimed that submarine engines were the diesels that gassed the Jews, an amazing whopper if there ever was one.

Same with the Bystanders and Survivors. "We bear witness to History and posterity" (but we know no significant details). Billions of dollars are raised to send to Israel-under-eternal-siege, "because we won't go into the gaschambers again," as Netanyahu succinctly put it while defending his country's conduct in the recent Lebanon invasion and bombing.

Germans especially still live under this Medieval intellectual shadow of their Unconditional Surrender, and independent Holocaust researchers and critics are even today harassed, fined, and jailed. Anybody who doubts keeps silent or is crazy at best--not just ex-Nazis who are politically vulnerable like Marburg Professor Dr. Pfannenstiel or General Remer, who put down the general's plot against Hitler. And now not even Germans but anybody.

<< It's also hard to believe (to put it lightly) that the Jewish "liars" could make similiar maps, and for example, draw the gas chambers in the same place without screwing each other up without ever having met each other. But those are just 2 examples. If I knew more people would read it, I'd make an essay exposing the horrible, poorly-thought-out lies of holocaust denial. >>

Most of the stories are based on the same handful of original lies, like Gerstein, Reder, Wiernik, etc.

We have a very real shower or disinfection facility which has become transformed by Allied propaganda into a death factory instead of a place for processing persons, troops, clothing, and equipment. Travelers, prisoners, and troops go into a "dirty side" and emerge from a "clean side" and are issued laundered and gassed clothing. The primary gassing methods were steam, hot-air, hydrogen cyanide gas, and near the end of the war microwave radiation ovens.

Some more modern means of disinfection use gamma radiation to preserve food, which the U.S. military uses for their own rations. Irradiated fruit and milk, for example, can be stored at room temperature in packages. Science fiction can import sinister motives to almost anything--remember the water fluoridation scare alluded to in the 1964 movie Dr. Strangelove?

What is not clear is how many people deported ever actually graced the gates of the Reinhardt camps and how many never left, let alone the names.

Yad Vashem in Israel says that they have three-million names of martyrs killed in the Holocaust--but historians have no access to their genealogical records to verify that they were ever real persons and not just names and hearsay.

Only recently have bona fide Holohistorians even been given limited access to the Arolsen archives of Holocaust victims. Perish the thought that it might be discovered that Uncle Herman, previously gassed at Auschwitz or made into a anatomical exhibit by Mengele, was actually a homosexual or a Communist who instead died of tuberculosis at Dachau while making ammunition for the Nazis.

<< "This makes it seem as if holocaust revisionism and National socialism where congruent, but they're not."

But they are so immensely connected with racism and hate speech, which is why holocaust denial will never be accepted into the mainstream media. You can't blame kiwiwriter after the huge evidence connecting holocaust denial and hate speech, racism, anti-semitism, to name a few. >>


I'm not blaming kiwiwriter for anything. I merely do not share his Faith in the One-True Holocaust. I also resent the implication that any kind of critical history and skepticism of mythology is inherently racist or Hate-speech.

I'm also critical of Revisionists when they do not live up to their own intellectual remonstrations and similarly fail to engage their own critics in debate.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

>aldo-umschlagplatz said:

><< "Right, but this does not weaken what the video says, wondering about why elite combat >troops would suddenly be undertaking an Extermination Program."

>The point is: that while some forces of the SS where elite, such as the Waffen-SS, the kind of >the SS in the AR camps where mostly from the tiergartenstrasse-4 program and had no >previous significant training. >>

>I'm not disputing that the Aktion Reinhardt personnel were not military combat elites, but they >were military and security police.

Military and security police? What are their police functions supposed to have been?

>And guess what, these kinds of personnel are involved in deportations and public hygiene >measures to control disease vectors among demographic and troop movements, especially in >wartime. One sees "disinfection troops" when one goes through customs anywhere. In my >part of the world I stop at a checkpoint on the highway at the Arizona and California border >and a man with a badge takes away any fruit that I might have with me so that pests are not >transferred to California orchards.

Scott’s beaten old "wartime" generalities, strictly for the birds. The folks at the AR camps were involved in deportations only insofar as they bumped off the deportees, and in "public hygiene" only insofar as the starvation death that – according to a statement by General Governor Frank – would otherwise have been the fate of the people they murdered might also have had the undesirable side-effect of disease spreading into the General Government’s non-Jewish population.

>In Poland, Russia and the Balkans the problem was body lice, which spread typhus fever. >Anybody who travelled by rail in Eastern Europe after World War I got their luggage gassed in >a gaschamber, which was why typhus was not a problem on the Western Front, even though >the troops were just as lousy. Typhus killed tens of millions in Europe during and between the >World Wars, second only to the influenza of 1918-20, which killed from 50-100 million >worldwide.

Scott beaten typhus bullshit, with the overblown death figures from some highly respected professor, doesn’t change the fact that what the AR folks did was related to combating typhus or other diseases only in the sense explained in my previous comment.

>Military, camp, and field hygiene was taken very seriously by the German governemnt and >military and they were leaders in this branch of medicine. See this 1944 paper given by the >Marburg Prof. Dr. Pfannenstiel, a senior SS hygienist, translated into English for RODOH here:

>http://www.rodoh.us/arts/arts1/pfannenstiel/pfannenstiel01101944.html

>or:

>http://p102.ezboard.com/frodohforumfrm12.showMessage?topicID=285.topic

The same goes for this irrelevant chatter.

>Kurt Gerstein, a lower-ranking SS hygienics officer implicated Colonel Pfannestiel by claiming >that they inspected Treblinka and Belzec--which they probably did in the course of their >medical work--but he also claimed that they witnessed a gassing of Jews at Belzec with a >diesel engine and saw a pile of clothing looted from dead Jews that was fifteen stories high. >Both claims are absurd lies quoted as gospel without critical analysis by Holocaust historians.

And for this one as well. Gerstein’s claim about the height of the pile of clothes may be fantastic, and his claim about a diesel engine being used, which he didn’t see but had heard about from Globocnkik, may be mistaken – not because it’s as “absurd” as Scott would like it to be but because the evidence mentioned under http://www.deathcamps.org/gas_chambers/gas_chambers_intro.html suggests that the engine used for gassing at Belzec was not a diesel but a gasoline engine. Gerstein also made widely overblown claims about the number of victims, IIRC. But none of that changes the fact that his description of the gassing he witnessed at Belzec essentially coincides with those of other eyewitnesses independent of and more objective than Gerstein, like Prof. Pfannenstiel and Karl Alfred Schluch. There is thus no reason to dismiss this part of Gerstein’s account.

><< "Why...would suddenly be undertaking an extermination program." Oh, you gotta be >kidding me. It's like saying, "why did stalin have an immense system of gulags while he was >fighting hitler?" pshhh. Duh. The answer is that believe it or not, a huge anti-semite like hitler >did get up the political chain, and had the approval of most of germany to enforce anti-jewish >laws. Of course, the German people did not know of the extermination of Judaism because it >was a secret operation. Hitler hated Jews enough to kill them. He clearly wrote about how >much he hated them in mein kampf. Simple.
>"So Mengele is a physician in the elite Wiking division and when invalidated from front-line >duties starts up his eyeball collection as the Auschwitz mad scientist camp doctor." >>

>I'm not denying that Jews suffered a Holocaust of some sort.

That’s an old one too, Scotty. Considering what the “suffering” of the Jews amounted to, it stinks about as much as claiming that none of the Titanic’s passengers drowned but they suffered a lot from the cold and occasionally got hurt while getting off the ship.

>So did many other peoples. Ten times as many non-Jews as Jews were killed in the war, a >point that the Iranian president recently made during his visit to the United Nations, which >makes him the next Hitler or something.

That’s not a point, that’s bullshit. War and mass murder of non-combatants outside the scope of acts of war are two different categories, the one arguably a misfortune, the other clearly a crime. You are right, however, in that the latter category (mass murder) includes many victims of your Nazi heroes other than the Jews, actually more non-Jews than Jews, see my article under http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2006/08/one-might-think-that.html .

>Nor do I deny that Jews were singled out and that their historical communities were >eradicated.

>But I do have doubts about what the Holocaust was.

No, you have “doubts” that are as unreasonable as can be, for no other reason than your eagerness to believe in the virtues of your Nazi heroes and in some sinister conspiracy that undertook to denigrate the poor dears.

>I want rigorous proof, especially regarding gassings and extermination factories. This is not an >unreasonable demand considering the wild claims made of Extermination Programs and so on.

Wrong again, Scotty. There are no “wild claims” about an extermination program and its execution, there are facts proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And the “rigorous proof” you demand has long been provided, by the standards of the pertinent disciplines historiography and criminal investigation, at least as conclusively as in regard to any other historical events. If you postulate exaggerated standards of proof just because the events in question don’t fit into your ideological bubble, that’s your problem.

>It is no big surprise that medical staff from state hospitals would be involved in deportations >and disinfection measures and camp hygiene. If you don't tend to this then epidemics spread >and diseases decimates prisoners. This is how the 1918 influenza spread worldwide from >American Army camps, although influenza is so contagious that it still causes problems today.

>Anyway, when the Americans deloused Iraqis after the first Gulf War it was--surprise--the >MILITARY POLICE that did it, under medical supervision. Some veterans groups are >complaining that these disinfection troops were exposed to higher concentrations of chemicals
>that have harmed their health.

Cut out the “medical staff” and “disease” horseshit, Scott. The AR fellows had been involved or were familiar with the mass killing of physically and/or mentally disabled people at the “euthanasia” installations. The only “medical” expertise they brought along was their experience with and/or indifference to the murder of helpless human beings.

>The thesis that AR personnel were T4 euthanasia specialists recruited to gas Jews during the >war is tenuous at best. Kurt Franz was a hospital cook. Wirth was a hospital administrator or >security guard if I remember correctly. Some others were hospital mechanics, and so on. >Their selection for security and military police work, and having some medical experience, is >not remarkable. They also undoubtedly did a lot of "networking" for jobs with other Nazis that >they knew. So what?

What matters is not what exactly they had done but *where* they had done it. The places where they had been were all mass murder institutions of Aktion T4, as you can see by the curricula shown under http://www.deathcamps.org/belzec/perpetrators.html . Let’s look at some of them:

Wirth, Christian
In October 1939 to Grafeneck euthanasia centre. Then in Brandenburg, Hadamar (chief of registry office) and Hartheim (head clerk and chief of police until Summer 1941).
In mid-1940, Wirth was appointed as a kind of roving director or inspector of all euthanasia institutions throughout the Third Reich. At the Brandenburg euthanasia centre, he experimented in developing gas chambers for gassing the physically and mentally disabled.

Hering, Gottblieb
Chief of the registry offices of Bernburg, Sonnenstein and Hadamar euthanasia centres. Also served at Hartheim. Member of the NSDAP, and SS since 1943.

Dubois, Werner
In August 1939 to T4. Bus driver in Brandenburg and Grafeneck. "Burner" and bus driver in Bernburg (from early 1941 until mid 1941) and Hadamar. As "burner" he also transported corpses and urns.

Franz, Kurt Hubert
End of 1939 summoned to the Führer's Chancellery and detailed for service as cook in the euthanasia institutes at Grafeneck, Hartheim, Sonnenstein and Brandenburg.

Fuchs, Erich
In 1940 or summer 1941 drafted to T4. Worked as Dr Eberl's driver in the gassing centres Brandenburg and Bernburg, and was, as he expressed it himself, "an interested spectator" at the gassing of 50 mental patients. Was driver of a lorry, fetching food for the staff, for a short time.

Gley, Heinrich
Came to T4 on 4 January 1940. At Grafeneck he transported victims. Served also at Sonnenstein.

Oberhauser, Josef
In November 1939 to T4. At Bernburg as "burner" from autumn 1940 until autumn 1941. Also at Grafeneck, Brandenburg and Sonnenstein.

Schluch, Karl Alfred
Duty bound to T4 on 13 June 1940. Served at Grafeneck and Hadamar.

Unverhau, Erich
Duty bound to T4, where he worked as male nurse from January 1940 - early 1942 at the Hadamar and Grafeneck euthanasia centres. There he escorted victims to the gas chambers, injected sedatives, ventilated the gas chambers and dealt with the disposal of the bodies and property.

><< What's so hard to believe that since Mengele was a well-trained physician and happenned >to be in the Wiking division, that he was called to Auschwitz to perform experiments? >>

>Oh, I'm sure that he did some minor epidemiological experiments, but he was no mad >scientist, a la standard Holocaust lore.

The only “lore” here is Scotty’s silly chatter. This was Mengele, see under http://www.geocities.com/onemansmind/hr/methods/Med.html :

«Mengele began his research on twins, and haunted every arriving convoy in search of these subjects. Twins had a special destiny in Auschwitz: they escaped the gas but became the subjects of horrendous experiments which many did not survive.
Mengele had many of his subjects killed for dissection, or disposed of them when they weakened or he no longer needed them. Mengele was obsessed with the nurture v. nature controversy: he wished to demonstrate that heredity counted for everything, environment nothing.
Among his interests were eye color, blood type, and noma, the disease that left gaping holes in the cheeks of Gypsy children inmates.
Former prisoner Hani Schick, a mother of twins who was subjected to experiments together with her children, testified that on July 4, 1944, on Mengele's instructions, blood samples were collected from her children in such quantities that the procedure ended in the death of both son and daughter.
In a case in which a mother did not want to be separated from her thirteen- or fourteen-year-old daughter, and bit and scratched the face of the SS man who tried to force her to her assigned line, Mengele drew his gun and shot both the woman and the child. As a blanket punishment, he then sent to the gas all people from that transport who had previously been selected for work, with the comment: "Away with this sh**!"
Prisoners would "march before him with their arms in the air," Dr. Lengyel tells us, " while he continued to whistle his Wagner"--or it might be Verdi or Johann Strauss. It was a mannered detachment.
More overtly, there are many stories of his striking people with his long riding crop, in one case running it over tattoos on the bosoms of Russian women, as a Polish woman survivor described, "then striking them there", while "not at all excited but...casual,...just playing around a little as though it were a little funny."
Mengele's passion for cleanliness and perfection carried over into a selections aesthetic; he would send people with skin blemishes to the gas chamber or those with small abcesses or even old appendectomy scars. "My two cousins were sent in front of my eyes by Mengele to their deaths because they had small wounds on their bodies," was the way one survivor put it.
Mengele fed his legend by dramatizing murderous policies, such as his drawing a line on the wall of the children's block between 150 and 156 centimeters (about 5 feet or 5 feet 2 inches) from the floor, and sending those whose heads could not reach the line to the gas chamber.
Mengele could also kill directly. He was observed to perform phenol injections, always with a correct medical demeanor...Mengele also shot a number of prisoners and was reported to have killed at least one by pressing his foot on a woman's body.»

>There were real scientists doing some experiments on prisoners like high-altitude and >hypothermia research, or with vaccines. Other countries have done syphillis and radiation >experiments and tests of poison gases on minorities, prisoners and military personnel. The >ethical question is whether minorities, prisoners and soldiers are doing so without coercion >and with informed consent.

Yeah, Mengele’s experiments with twins were merely an “ethical question”. And so, I suppose, were experiments like these, mentioned on pages 979 f of Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich:

«In the murders in this field the Jews were not the only victims. The Nazi doctors also used Russian prisoners of war, Polish concentration camp inmates, women as well as men, and even Germans. The “experiments” were quite varied. Prisoners were placed in pressure chambers and subjected to high-altitude tests until they ceased breathing. They were injected with lethal doses of typhus and jaundice. They were subjected to “freezing” experiments in icy water or exposed naked in the snow outdoors until they froze to death. Poison bullets were tried on them as was mustard gas. At the Ravensbrück concentration camp for women hundreds of Polish inmates - the “rabbit girls” they were called - were given gas gangrene wounds while others were subjected to “experiments” in bone grafting. At Dachau and Buchenwald gypsies were selected to see how long, and in what manner, they could live on salt water.»

>Of course, if the thesis is that the Germans were gassing every Jew that they did not >immediately need for work,

At places like Auschwitz-Birkenau, that was not a “thesis” but a proven fact.

>then, yes, one must believe that mad scientists were collecting >eyeballs and buckets of body >parts to make into furniture for Nazi housewives.

Scott’s idea of “comic relief” has always been somewhat sick.

><< "The holohoax has more holes than swiss cheese."

>With the way you make things seem, sure. With your logic, anything can be "proven wrong" >and "refuted". The "revisionism"cheese is the theory with more holes than swiss cheese. >thousands of germans where tortured, and not ONE, I repeat, not ONE said anything of >torture. Hmm. The supposed Jewish liars of Smith's fantasies must have been very effective. >So much that the families of the executed SS men didn't try to file lawsuits in court. In >America, one can file lawsuits for a coffee without a cap that spilled on your lap. Strange that >Frau Stangl(wife of franz stangl) Frau Hoess, or any other family members didn't come >forward and expose the "hoax". >>

>In fairness, the lady who filed this lawsuit was severely burned when the container broke >open over her lap. Coffee sold at the drive-thru shouldn't burn you just so that Ronald >McDonald can tell his corporate stockholders that their coffee is fifty degrees hotter than >Burger King's.

Horseshit.

>But my thesis is not that every German hollering Holocaust was tortured. People believed in >witches and the Devil in the Middle Ages and this was the law. Only wicked people doubted.

In other words, you thesis is even more idiotic than the torture thesis, which would at least theoretically have been a possibility.

>Rumors don't need a conspiracy to become "urban legends," especially if governments do >conspire to give certain rumors and propaganda official authority, which the Allied >governments did after the war, and German, French, Canadian, and Austrian governments, >etc. vigorously do today. The American capital city even has a taxpayer-subsidized Holocaust >indoctrination center.

Oh, so it was Allied wartime propaganda that has been kept alive over a period of sixty years by some sinister entity or entities, due to the gullibility and incompetence or bad faith of governments, administrative authorities, criminal justice authorities and historians all over the world and with the connivance of thousands of accused perpetrators and millions of non-victims who were so brainwashed to believe in “witches and the Devil” that the former took sometimes harsh sentences upon themselves and the latter ended up believing that they had been murdered. That’s a conspiracy theory as idiotic as can be.

>Besides, Frau Hoess did admit that her British captors did threaten to deport their son to the >Soviet sector, where he would have been sent to the gulag and probably never heard from >again, so she broke and revealed her husband's whereabouts. Hoess knew that he was going >to have to play ball for the sake of his family.

Or so Scotty would like to believe, of course without anything to show for his faith. The fact is that Hoess did everything other than “play ball”, for both his autobiography and the depositions during his pre-trial interrogations in Poland contained a number of statements that his interrogators would rather not have heard or read. The most striking example is his insistence in that “only” about 1.1 million people had been killed at Auschwitz-Birkenau and that the higher figures upheld by the Poles were figments of imagination lacking any foundation whatsoever.

>This should give any reasonable and fair-minded person doubts about his confession.

What is “this”, Scott? “This” is only your own wishful thinking.

>Even convicted Treblinka commandant Stangl gave us few details about the gassings;

Any particular reason why he should have given more details about the gassings? I don’t think he had been the one who ran the gassing engine.

>he just nodded in general about the received mythology as written, or as it ever will be >written, in pure Orwellian terms.

Utter nonsense, which assumes that West German criminal justice authorities were so criminally corrupt as to force-feed a given “story” to an innocent man and convict him on the basis thereof. Actually it was Stangl himself who, without anything being suggested to him outside Scotty’s silly phantasies, provided details like these:

«It must have been at the beginning of 1943. That’s when excavators were brought in. Using these excavators, the corpses were removed from the huge ditches which had been used until then [for burial]. The old corpses were burned on the roasters, along with the new bodies [of new arrivals to the camp]. During the transition to the new system, Wirth came to Treblinka. As I recall, Wirth spoke of a Standartenführer who had experience in burning corpses. Wirth told me that according to the Standartenführer’s experience, corpses could be burned on a roaster, and it would work marvelously. I know that in the beginning [in Treblinka] they used rails from the trolley to build the cremation grill. But it turned out that these rails were too weak and bent in the heat. They were replaced with real railroad rails.»

Source of quote: Yitzhak Arad, Yitzhak Arad, Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka. The Operation Reinhard Death Camps, pages 173 and following.

>Most of the other Perpetrators did not survive the war,

Any figures you can show us?

>or they don't know any details besides >blindly following orders.

… and doing what they had been ordered to do, whether it was organizing transports to extermination camps or pushing the victims into the gas chambers.

>Eichmann is the classic example of this amoral soulless bureacratic automaton who affirms >everything but knows nothing. He claimed that submarine engines were the diesels that >gassed the Jews, an amazing whopper if there ever was one.

No, that was just a mistake Eichmann made about a technical detail he was not and didn’t have to be familiar with, and it doesn’t change the accuracy of his statements about the purpose of the camp he visited. If you could demonstrate that he didn’t know much about the deportations he was accused of having organized, that would be something different.

>Same with the Bystanders and Survivors. "We bear witness to History and posterity" (but we >know no significant details).

Horseshit, and we know what it is that Scott calls “significant details”. He expects witnesses who were watching naked women and children chased into gas chambers and heard their screams to have focused all their attention on how many cylinders the gassing engine had, for instance.

>Billions of dollars are raised to send to Israel-under-eternal-siege, "because we won't go into >the gaschambers again," as Netanyahu succinctly put it while defending his country's conduct >in the recent Lebanon invasion and bombing.

Show us where you got your figures from and what evidence to the reason for this financial aid you got, Scott. Not that it would matter much to the subject under discussion, but I always like to check if you know what you’re talking about.

>Germans especially still live under this Medieval intellectual shadow of their Unconditional >Surrender,

No, Germans have honestly reconstructed, analyzed, confronted and come to terms with their history, thereby providing an example for other nations with experiences similar to that of the Nazi dictatorship and its crimes. (When I first met Scott some years ago, he knew as much about Germany and Germans as a pig does about Sunday. His knowledge hasn’t improved to this day.)

>and independent Holocaust researchers and critics are even today harassed, fined, and jailed.

Not “independent Holocaust researchers”, but ideologically motivated charlatans who pretend to be “Holocaust researchers”. Big difference.

>Anybody who doubts keeps silent or is crazy at best--not just ex-Nazis who are politically >vulnerable like Marburg Professor Dr. Pfannenstiel or General Remer, who put down the >general's plot against Hitler. And now not even Germans but anybody.

No, it’s not “anybody who doubts”, it’s just “anybody who utters hate speech nonsense in public in a way that might disturb the public order, as Scott well knows. He also knows what I think of such legislation, and by now he should have understand my point that, however wrong and counterproductive hate speech laws may be, forbidden nonsense is nonsense all the same. Now, if he could give us some evidence that, how and by whom Prof. Dr. Pfannenstiel was “kept silent”, that would be more interesting than his repetitive bratwurst baloney.

><< It's also hard to believe (to put it lightly) that the Jewish "liars" could make similiar maps, >and for example, draw the gas chambers in the same place without screwing each other up >without ever having met each other. But those are just 2 examples. If I knew more people >would read it, I'd make an essay exposing the horrible, poorly-thought-out lies of holocaust >denial. >>

>Most of the stories are based on the same handful of original lies, like Gerstein, Reder, >Wiernik, etc.

No, that’s just what Scott Smith – who I don’t think can demonstrate that any given eyewitness testimony was influenced by any other eyewitness testimony, or that any testimony was mendacious – is desperately eager to believe.

>We have a very real shower or disinfection facility which has become transformed by Allied >propaganda into a death factory instead of a place for processing persons, troops, clothing, >and equipment. Travelers, prisoners, and troops go into a "dirty side" and emerge from a >"clean side" and are issued laundered and gassed clothing. The primary gassing methods >were steam, hot-air, hydrogen cyanide gas, and near the end of the war microwave radiation >ovens.

Wishful thinking is also thinking, and it’s most of the thinking that Scott is capable off when it comes to certain issues.

>Some more modern means of disinfection use gamma radiation to preserve food, which the >U.S. military uses for their own rations. Irradiated fruit and milk, for example, can be stored at >room temperature in packages. Science fiction can import sinister motives to almost anything->-remember the water fluoridation scare alluded to in the 1964 movie Dr. Strangelove?

Pointless chatter.

>What is not clear is how many people deported ever actually graced the gates of the >Reinhardt camps and how many never left, let alone the names.

Names are not required to establish that at the very least the 1,274,166 deportees mentioned in Höfle’s report to Heim of 11 January 1943 were delivered at the camps of “Einsatz Reinhart” and that, except for a few dozen escapees, no one who entered these camps ever left them alive.

>Yad Vashem in Israel says that they have three-million names of martyrs killed in the >Holocaust--but historians have no access to their genealogical records to verify that they were >ever real persons and not just names and hearsay.

As names are not required to establish that a certain number of people from a certain population group disappeared from the face of the earth behind the gates of a certain place, this rambling is rather irrelevant. And the suspicion that a genealogical record, presumably maintained for the benefit of people who would like to know what became of their relatives or friends, may contain “just names and hearsay”, is of course based on conspiraloon wishful thinking alone.

>Only recently have bona fide Holohistorians even been given limited access to the Arolsen >archives of Holocaust victims. Perish the thought that it might be discovered that Uncle >Herman, previously gassed at Auschwitz or made into a anatomical exhibit by Mengele, was >actually a homosexual or a Communist who instead died of tuberculosis at Dachau while >making ammunition for the Nazis.

As is this filthy crap.

><< "This makes it seem as if holocaust revisionism and National socialism where congruent, >but they're not."

>But they are so immensely connected with racism and hate speech, which is why holocaust >denial will never be accepted into the mainstream media. You can't blame kiwiwriter after the >huge evidence connecting holocaust denial and hate speech, racism, anti-semitism, to name a >few. >>

>I'm not blaming kiwiwriter for anything. I merely do not share his Faith in the One-True >Holocaust.

Well, the only one here who has a Faith in any One-True thing is obviously our dishonest straw-man-builder Scott Smith, who piously believes in the One-True Nazi Germany and accordingly defends the object of his Faith against what he sees as the vile attacks of a sinister, enormously powerful and totally invisible conspiracy.

>I also resent the implication that any kind of critical history and skepticism of mythology is >inherently racist or Hate-speech.

There is no such implication outside Scott’s hollow claims. The sick trash that calls itself “Revisionism” has nothing to do with critical history or skepticism, but is just ideologically motivated propaganda.

>I'm also critical of Revisionists when they do not live up to their own intellectual >remonstrations and similarly fail to engage their own critics in debate.

Oh, how generous of you, Scott. Why are you not critical of the distortions, misrepresentations and piss-poor nonsense that “Revisionism” consists of, then? That’s what I would call a critical approach.

Scott Smith said...

I dispute that anyone was gassed in "euthanasia institutions," although some incurables were euthanized by lethal injection in state hospitals.

My opposition to religious groups determining medical policies, whether it be euthanasia, abortion, etc. is well-known. So no smoking-gun here.

Also, it is simply a fact that police and security troops handle deportations, refugees and population movements. Don't see what the issue is here.

In any case, among laymen there are two types of people: Those who would read a lie-witness account from someone like Gerstein or Wiernik, have an epiphany of religious ecstasy and see Holy Scripture--and those who would see steaming horse biscuits and harbor forbidden doubts.

But what can one say of the intellectuals, especially academic historians--why would they not subject this nonsense to critical review?

Why would they suppress the details and whoppers that do not fit the Exterminationist thesis? What can one say of these kinds of people?

What indeed. Poliakov even tried to alter Gerstein's text to make it more believable--oh, "just a misprint," I know.

:-)

Scott Smith said...

Oh, I forgot to mention. Roberto seems incapable of understanding the gravity of public hygienic measures, especially in wartime and amongst massive troop and population movements. This is well-documented in the medical literature. No running away from it.

Sorry.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Scott
>I dispute that anyone was gassed in "euthanasia institutions," although some incurables >were euthanized by lethal injection in state hospitals.

Who cares what Scott disputes? He’ll dispute anything that doesn’t fit his articles of faith, usually without anything to show for his disputing.

>My opposition to religious groups determining medical policies, whether it be >euthanasia, abortion, etc. is well-known. So no smoking-gun here.

This is not about Scott’s irrelevant personal views regarding his Nazi heroes’ criminal acts, but about his denial of the related facts.

>Also, it is simply a fact that police and security troops handle deportations, refugees and >population movements. Don't see what the issue is here.

The issue is simply that "Aktion Reinhard(t)" was not just a deportation and population movement. It was a deportation to places where the deportees were killed upon arrival. That’s what all evidence clearly shows, and there’s no evidence to the deportees having been taken anywhere further – although there should be plenty of it if such had happened.

>In any case, among laymen there are two types of people: Those who would read a lie->witness account from someone like Gerstein or Wiernik, have an epiphany of religious >ecstasy and see Holy Scripture--and those who would see steaming horse biscuits and >harbor forbidden doubts.

Cut out the crap, Scott. Neither Gerstein’s nor Wiernik’s accounts of homicidal gassing at Belzec or Treblinka contain any lies that you have demonstrated, both of them are essentially confirmed by eyewitness and documentary evidence independent of them, and nobody looks at them as some kind of "scripture" rather than what they are, elements of evidence among numerous others that allow for the reconstruction of historical events. The only ones who «have an epiphany of religious ecstasy and see Holy Scripture» are "Revisionist" true believers hooked on religious faith about Nazi virtues and/or Jewish evil, and about the supernatural powers of some monumental, invisible conspiracy that put a "hoax" into the world and managed to uphold it over a period of six decades. But then, it’s one of the traits of charlatans like Scott Smith that they project their own fallacies onto their opponents.

>But what can one say of the intellectuals, especially academic historians--why would >they not subject this nonsense to critical review?

Poor Scotty, again parroting Bradley Smith’s filth. Academic historians have long submitted this "nonsense" to critical review, as they do with all other evidence. They have done so by cross-checking against eyewitness, documentary and demographic evidence independent of the testimonies in question, like historians always do when reconstructing a historical event. And guess what, the "nonsense" is essentially confirmed by such other evidence.

>Why would they suppress the details and whoppers that do not fit the Exterminationist >thesis? What can one say of these kinds of people?

Nobody is suppressing any details outside Scott Smith’s fantasies. What historians usually do when critically assessing a source is sifting the wheat from the chaff and using that source only insofar as it is matched by other sources independent thereof. There’s nothing wrong with that procedure.

>What indeed. Poliakov even tried to alter Gerstein's text to make it more believable--oh, >"just a misprint," I know.

Scott is invited to show us what supposed alteration of the text he is talking about. And when he has done so, he may explain how such alteration would affect the essential accuracy of Gerstein’s account of the gassing he witnessed at Belzec.

>Oh, I forgot to mention. Roberto seems incapable of understanding the gravity of public >hygienic measures, especially in wartime and amongst massive troop and population >movements. This is well-documented in the medical literature. No running away from >it.

>Sorry.

I have no problem with understanding "the gravity of public hygienic measures, especially in wartime and amongst massive troop and population movements", as our straw-man builder well knows. I do have a problem, and a big one, with accepting the wholly unsubstantiated claim, belied by all known evidence, that "Aktion Reinhard(t)" was about such "public hygienic measures" rather than systematic mass murder.

I can see poor Scott is pissed at me, which doesn’t surprise me at all as I have once more ruined his show of the great Black Knight striking out in defense of "Revisionism". And as usual it amuses me to see my old friend break out into furious and dishonest bullshit babbling, also because it helps to show our readers what "Revisionism" is all about.

newtothis17 said...

Hello, I am going to try to join codoh and pose the questions you have to denierbud and also analyse as best I can his stuff and your rebuttals. I can then see for myself who deletes what. It will take me some time though!

Sergey Romanov said...

"Poliakov even tried to alter Gerstein's text to make it more believable"

Any evidence that he did, or is it one of those deliberate untruths? ;-)

Jon said...

You guys are doing great work on this site. I was wondering if you could tone down the rhetoric just a little bit, though. As despicable as your opponents are, in trying to help them have a paradigm shift in their approach to historiography, insults are counter productive. I want the deniers to read your site, and I think your insults just continue the Girardian mimesis that happens around this issue. Especially think about younger, college aged guys. Your counter responses do not model for them the kind of balance that they really need in their own lives. In fact, they can fulfill the desire to feel persecuted by viewing you as an enemy rather than a trusted friend saying "these deniers are not men that you need to entrust your souls to." Anyway, thanks for your work in refuting that slick youtube video; it has the potential to lead a lot of people astray, especially younger guys looking for the latest countercultural thing to believe. I hope that people find your responses when they see the video.

Calymath said...

How wonderful. Since I posted up a response to denierbud on here, he has since deleted all subsequent comments that I left on the page, including the one which simply asked 'why was my comment deleted?'

This guy is a coward and a fraud who is achieving with his 'one third' what David Cole achieved with Auschwitz, namely making himself look like an idiot.

Sergey Romanov said...

Calymath, what's your nick on YT? :-)

Calymath said...

Calymath, shockingly enough :) http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=Calymath

I also took a screen shot of the question 'why was my comment deleted' ... before it was itself deleted.

Sergey Romanov said...

Calymath, can you please provide the screenshot? I want to collect all the instances of his censorship.

Calymath said...

Here's my pimped up version.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y16/Momanguise/massdebate.jpg

Chris was Anon said...

Hah denierbud deleted my comment on amateur "historians" of his ilk.

"Who do they think they're fooling?"

"You?"

Sometimes an Anarchist slogan can be very effective. I hope it was up there long enough for at least some people to see it and visit this site.

I reason that as he is in the US ANY Brit or European can disrupt his sad agenda by posting a linking comment way before he gets out of his bed. But only once...

chriswasanon

HC Guest Blogger said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Scott Smith said...

SCOTT said:

<< Billions of dollars are raised to send to Israel-under-eternal-siege, "because we won't go into the gaschambers again," as Netanyahu succinctly put it while defending his country's conduct in the recent Lebanon invasion and bombing. >>

ROBERTO said:

<< Show us where you got your figures from and what evidence to the reason for this financial aid you got, Scott. Not that it would matter much to the subject under discussion, but I always like to check if you know what you’re talking about. >>

As is easily verifable, about a third of the entire American budget for Foreign Aid goes to Israel, about $3 billion per year. And this doesn't include Foreign Aid to countries like Egypt who we have paid to be nice to Israel since the Carter Asministration. It also doesn't count tax-dodge private fund-raising for Israel from Jews and Christians and patriotic corporations, especially in the United States, and funds raised by the Israel Lobby and the ADL to promote Zionism and fight "terrorism," and "hate." Holocaust propaganda is an undeniable part of the payola arsenal.

SCOTT said:

<< What indeed. Poliakov even tried to alter Gerstein's text to make it more believable--oh, "just a misprint," I know. >>

ROBERTO said:

<< Scott is invited to show us what supposed alteration of the text he is talking about. And when he has done so, he may explain how such alteration would affect the essential accuracy of Gerstein’s account of the gassing he witnessed at Belzec. >>

The Holohistorians have tended in their secondary works to cherrypick from the primary sources what best fits their twisted "gas 'em and burn 'em" Holothesis. They tend to leave out the whoppers that otherwise discredit in the minds of reasonable people things like the Gerstein statement, long one of the pillars of the Holy Holocaust Faith.

That is why my goal is to eventually collect all of the gaschamber source documents and put them online in their altogether for all to see.

SERGEY said:

<< "Poliakov even tried to alter Gerstein's text to make it more believable"

Any evidence that he did, or is it one of those deliberate untruths? ;-) >>


As is easily verifiable, in Poliakov's book Breviary of Hate (1951) he quadrupled the square-footage of the size of gaschamber that Gerstein actually claimed so that the numbers of victims Gerstein claimed would reasonably fit into the specified space.

"SS men pushed the men into the chambers. 'Fill it up', Wirth ordered; 700-800 people in 93 [sic - Gerstein's original claims 25] square meters. The doors closed. [...]"


ROBERTO said:

<< I can see poor Scott is pissed at me, which doesn’t surprise me at all as I have once more ruined his show of the great Black Knight striking out in defense of "Revisionism". And as usual it amuses me to see my old friend break out into furious and dishonest bullshit babbling, also because it helps to show our readers what "Revisionism" is all about. >>

Indeed, the psychological term Projection is operative here.

:-)

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

>SCOTT said:

<< Billions of dollars are raised to send to Israel-under-eternal-siege, "because we won't go into the gaschambers again," as Netanyahu succinctly put it while defending his country's conduct in the recent Lebanon invasion and bombing. >>

>ROBERTO said:

<< Show us where you got your figures from and what evidence to the reason for this financial aid you got, Scott. Not that it would matter much to the subject under discussion, but I always like to check if you know what you’re talking about. >>

>As is easily verifable, about a third of the entire American budget for Foreign Aid goes >to Israel, about $3 billion per year. And this doesn't include Foreign Aid to countries >like Egypt who we have paid to be nice to Israel since the Carter Asministration. It also >doesn't count tax-dodge private fund-raising for Israel from Jews and Christians and >patriotic corporations, especially in the United States, and funds raised by the Israel >Lobby and the ADL to promote Zionism and fight "terrorism," and "hate." Holocaust >propaganda is an undeniable part of the payola arsenal.

No sources, just some “easily verifiable” chatter – who would have expected anything better from Scott Smith?

>SCOTT said:

<< What indeed. Poliakov even tried to alter Gerstein's text to make it more believable--oh, "just a misprint," I know. >>

>ROBERTO said:

<< Scott is invited to show us what supposed alteration of the text he is talking about. And when he has done so, he may explain how such alteration would affect the essential accuracy of Gerstein’s account of the gassing he witnessed at Belzec. >>

>The Holohistorians have tended in their secondary works to cherrypick from the >primary sources what best fits their twisted "gas 'em and burn 'em" Holothesis. They >tend to leave out the whoppers that otherwise discredit in the minds of reasonable >people things like the Gerstein statement, long one of the pillars of the Holy Holocaust >Faith.

Blah, blah, blah. Here’s what “Holohistorians” actually do, according to Prof. Browning, as quoted in Sergey’s article under http://www.pkblogs.com/holocaustcontroversies/2006/08/ugly-analysis.html#noanchor :

«Many aspects of Gerstein's testimony are unquestionably problematic. Several statements he attributes to Globocnik are clearly exagerrated or false, and it is not clear whether Gerstein or Globocnik was the faulty source. In other statements, such as the height of the piles of shoes and clothing at Belzec and Treblinka, Gerstein himself is clearly the source of exaggeration. Gerstein also added grossly exaggerated claims about matters to which he was not an eyewitness, such as that a total of 25 million Jews and others were gassed. But in the essential issue, namely that he was in Belzec and witnessed the gassing of a transport of Jews from Lwow, his testimony is fully corroborated by Pfannenstiel. It is also corroborated by other categories of witnesses from Belzec.»

What Scott calls “cherry picking” is nothing other than sifting the wheat from the chaff, using of an element of evidence what cross-checking reveals to be reliable and dismissing what is not, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath-water. If Scott thinks the latter is what “reasonable people” do, that’s his problem.

>That is why my goal is to eventually collect all of the gaschamber source documents and put >them online in their altogether for all to see.

So glad to know that.

>SERGEY said:

><< "Poliakov even tried to alter Gerstein's text to make it more believable"

>Any evidence that he did, or is it one of those deliberate untruths? ;-) >>

>As is easily verifiable, in Poliakov's book Breviary of Hate (1951) he quadrupled the square->footage of the size of gaschamber that Gerstein actually claimed so that the numbers of victims >Gerstein claimed would reasonably fit into the specified space.

>"SS men pushed the men into the chambers. 'Fill it up', Wirth ordered; 700-800 people in 93 >[sic - Gerstein's original claims 25] square meters. The doors closed. [...]"

If Scott’s quote is accurate, that doesn’t look good on Mr. Poliakov. But it doesn’t change the fact that, as demonstrated by an experiment conducted by Charles Provan, described under http://holocaust.skeptik.net/documents/provan_gerstein.html , Gerstein’s figures are not implausible.

>ROBERTO said:

<< I can see poor Scott is pissed at me, which doesn’t surprise me at all as I have once more ruined his show of the great Black Knight striking out in defense of "Revisionism". And as usual it amuses me to see my old friend break out into furious and dishonest bullshit babbling, also because it helps to show our readers what "Revisionism" is all about. >>

>Indeed, the psychological term Projection is operative here.

Invoking “projection” here is rather unconvincing. The same does not apply, however, for attributing Scott’s lame reply to the amazing capacity for wishful thinking that “Revisionists” tend to have.

Calymath said...

Scott's Poliakov quote is correct (reference for the English translation is 'Harvest of Hate', Leon Poliakov, 1955, pg. 195).

Sergey Romanov said...

Scott cited no evidence to refute Chuck Provan's interpretation:

http://holocaust.skeptik.net/documents/provan_gerstein.html

"Poliakov later stated that his error was based upon a very poor quality copy of Gerstein's confessions. In support of the "accidental" view of Poliakov's change is the fact that in a 1962 book by Poliakov, he correctly copied "25 m2" from an Israeli copy of Gerstein's manuscript (Rassinier, The Holocaust Story and the Lies of Ulysses, IHR, 1988, pgs. 251-252). Further, he had Breviary of Hate reprinted several years later with the "93 m2". (Roques, pg. 9) This seems hard to fit with deliberate falsification, and in my opinion poor and quite convenient scholarship in this case appears likely, thus introducing a major error into the Gerstein issue. Readers may observe the 93 m2 text in English in Harvest of Hate, by Leon Poliakov."

Scott Smith said...

ROBERTO said:

<< If Scott’s quote is accurate, that doesn’t look good on Mr. Poliakov. But it doesn’t change the fact that, as demonstrated by an experiment conducted by Charles Provan, described under [...] Gerstein’s figures are not implausible. >>

They might not be implausible if we were discussing frat boys stuffing themselves into phonebooths for initiations, or Provan's tribe of kids and some plastic dolls stuffing themselves behind two dressers while Biblical scholar Provan calculates. But it is still 30 people per square meter--even if, as Provan noted, some were children.

SERGEY said:

<< Scott cited no evidence to refute Chuck Provan's interpretation:

"Poliakov later stated that his error was based upon a very poor quality copy of Gerstein's confessions. [...] This seems hard to fit with deliberate falsification, and in my opinion poor and quite convenient scholarship in this case appears likely, thus introducing a major error into the Gerstein issue." >>


So at best Poliakov enaged in shoddy scholarship--and more importantly, no Holocheese scholar caught it, only Holoskeptics.

This kind of "convenient scholarship" (Provan's term) would have gotten Irving skewered.

ROBERTO said:

<< What Scott calls “cherry picking” is nothing other than sifting the wheat from the chaff, using of an element of evidence what cross-checking reveals to be reliable and dismissing what is not, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath-water. If Scott thinks the latter is what “reasonable people” do, that’s his problem. >>

Indeed, reasonable people evaluate the evidence in toto, not just collect the parts that do not support their thesis, as if it had no evidentiary value.

Here's an example. Roberto quoting Holo-Professor Browning:

<< "Many aspects of Gerstein's testimony are unquestionably problematic. [...] Gerstein also added grossly exaggerated claims about matters to which he was not an eyewitness, such as that a total of 25 million Jews and others were gassed." >>

Indeed, this is another example of how we know that Gerstein was bullshitting. He got the 25 million figure from a trade paper on fumigation, which he would have been aware of as an SS hygienic specialist. The 25 million figure refers to the number of persons during the war up to early 1944 who have had their clothing and personal effects gassed by the commercial fumigant Zyklon-B.

The paper was given at the Hydrocyanic Acid Conference of the Labor Committee for Room Disinfestation and Contagious Disease Prevention on January 27-28, 1944 by Emil Wüstinger, an engineer from Frankfurt am Main, and published in Gesundheits-lngenieur, Vol. 67 (1944) on pages 179-80.

Gerstein either brazenly lied that the 25 million figure was for people who were gassed themselves, or he was struggling to concoct bullshit that Allied officials would accept as incriminating against the Nazis.

BROWNING again:

<< But in the essential issue, namely that [Gerstein] was in Belzec and witnessed the gassing of a transport of Jews from Lwow, his testimony is fully corroborated by Pfannenstiel. >>

We don't know exactly how well Pfannenstiel corroborated Gerstein's gassing account because we don't have all of Pfannenstiel's affidavits in their totality--not just juicy tidbits selected and published in secondary sources. These have proven difficult to get but it remains one of my goals once I get the means to properly scan microfilm.

:-)

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

>Scott Smith said...
>ROBERTO said:

><< If Scott’s quote is accurate, that doesn’t look good on Mr. Poliakov. But it doesn’t change >the fact that, as demonstrated by an experiment conducted by Charles Provan, described >under [...] Gerstein’s figures are not implausible. >>

>They might not be implausible if we were discussing frat boys stuffing themselves into >phonebooths for initiations, or Provan's tribe of kids and some plastic dolls stuffing themselves >behind two dressers while Biblical scholar Provan calculates. But it is still 30 people per square >meter--even if, as Provan noted, some were children.

Blah, blah, blah. Provan didn’t use "kids and some plastic dolls", he used a group made up of two adult males, one adult women, 4 children and a doll representing an infant, which corresponds to how Gerstein described the age and sex composition of a transport to Belzec. The only difference between Gerstein’s description and the test group in Provan’s experiment is that the latter consisted of well-fed Americans whereas the deportees to Belzec were Jews worn out by years of malnourishment in ghettos.

>SERGEY said:

<< Scott cited no evidence to refute Chuck Provan's interpretation:

>"Poliakov later stated that his error was based upon a very poor quality copy of Gerstein's >confessions. [...] This seems hard to fit with deliberate falsification, and in my opinion poor >and quite convenient scholarship in this case appears likely, thus introducing a major error >into the Gerstein issue." >>

>So at best Poliakov enaged in shoddy scholarship—

No, that’s the likeliest possibility.

>and more importantly, no Holocheese >scholar caught it, only Holoskeptics.

Looks like the «Holoskeptics» are desperately in need of a victory, however small. So they mouth off about having discovered an inaccuracy in Poliakov’s transcription of Gerstein’s testimony, assuming they did.

>This kind of "convenient scholarship" (Provan's term) would have gotten Irving skewered.

Irving got skewered for deliberate misrepresentations or misinterpretations of evidence in support of an ideological agenda, IIRC.

>ROBERTO said:

><< What Scott calls “cherry picking” is nothing other than sifting the wheat from the chaff, >using of an element of evidence what cross-checking reveals to be reliable and dismissing >what is not, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath-water. If Scott thinks the latter is >what “reasonable people” do, that’s his problem. >>

>Indeed, reasonable people evaluate the evidence in toto, not just collect the parts that do not >support their thesis, as if it had no evidentiary value.

Of course historians evaluate the evidence in toto. That’s what they use those parts of every independent element of evidence that fit together and can thus be reasonably assumed to have evidentiary value, and dismiss the remainder. "Holoskeptics", on the other hand, try to make believe that a little chaff with the wheat means there is no wheat at all, in order to get rid of inconvenient evidence.

>Here's an example. Roberto quoting Holo-Professor Browning:

><< "Many aspects of Gerstein's testimony are unquestionably problematic. [...] Gerstein also >added grossly exaggerated claims about matters to which he was not an eyewitness, such as >that a total of 25 million Jews and others were gassed." >>

>Indeed, this is another example of how we know that Gerstein was bullshitting. He got the 25 >million figure from a trade paper on fumigation, which he would have been aware of as an SS >hygienic specialist. The 25 million figure refers to the number of persons during the war up to >early 1944 who have had their clothing and personal effects gassed by the commercial >fumigant Zyklon-B.

>The paper was given at the Hydrocyanic Acid Conference of the Labor Committee for Room >Disinfestation and Contagious Disease Prevention on January 27-28, 1944 by Emil Wüstinger, >an engineer from Frankfurt am Main, and published in Gesundheits-lngenieur, Vol. 67 (1944) >on pages 179-80.

>Gerstein either brazenly lied that the 25 million figure was for people who were gassed >themselves, or he was struggling to concoct bullshit that Allied officials would accept as >incriminating against the Nazis.

Oh boy, how boring this is, especially the silly conspiracy theories at the end (as if the Allies had ever propagated so high a figure of Nazi gassing victims)! Of course Gerstein’s 25 million are bullshit, a fantasy of Gerstein’s. Everybody knows that. But this doesn’t exclude the possibility of there being some accurate elements in Gerstein’s account, and in fact coincidence with evidence independent of Gerstein shows that there are some.

>BROWNING again:

><< But in the essential issue, namely that [Gerstein] was in Belzec and witnessed the gassing >of a transport of Jews from Lwow, his testimony is fully corroborated by Pfannenstiel. >>

>We don't know exactly how well Pfannenstiel corroborated Gerstein's gassing account because >we don't have all of Pfannenstiel's affidavits in their totality--not just juicy tidbits selected and >published in secondary sources. These have proven difficult to get but it remains one of my >goals once I get the means to properly scan microfilm.

If Scott thinks anything he can find will change the corroborative content of the parts of Pfannenstiel’s depositions that can be found, translated or in the original text, under http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/ftp.py?people//p/pfannenstiel.wilhelm/pfannen.001 , http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/ftp.py?people//p/pfannenstiel.wilhelm/pfannen.002 and on pages 173 f of Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl et al, Nationalsozialitische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, let him be happy with that idea. Me thinks he’s dreaming, which is no surprise. How does Scott know that Browning didn’t have access to those so difficult-to-get depositions of Pfannenstiel’s, by the way ?

Scott Smith said...

Yes, I've read the secondary sources and they're pretty shy about putting the morsels out that don't fit their Holothesis. Also, I don't trust Nizkor as a secondary source; that's why I put the original Human Soap documents online. As far as Pfannenstiel's affidavits, I fear that ultimately we are likely to run into the usual brick wall of continental jurisprudence, i.e., where political judges have selected the primary evidence, the rest not being published and not being readable by mere mortals. If that's the case, then we really cannot be sure that the venerable SS Prof. Dr. Pfannenstiel truly did corroborate the lunatic Widerstand saint, SS Gerstein.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Scott
>Yes, I've read the secondary sources and they're pretty shy about putting the morsels out that >don't fit their Holothesis.

How does you know there are any such "morsels" in Pfannenstiel’s depositions? Little birdie told you or something?

>Also, I don't trust Nizkor as a secondary source that's why I put the original Human Soap >documents online.

Rather than state what you did because you don’t trust Nizkor as a "secondary source", maybe you should explain why you don’t trust them (not the actual reason, which is obvious, but some artificial one you can put up front, of course). Anyway, Nizkor is not the secondary source of the online transcriptions of translations of Pfannenstiel’s depositions. The secondary source is the source quoted by Nizkor.

>As far as Pfannenstiel's affidavits, I fear that ultimately we are likely to run into the usual brick >wall of continental jurisprudence, i.e., where political judges have selected the primary >evidence, the rest not being published and not being readable by mere mortals.

I don’t think you can provide any evidence supporting your "political judges" nonsense, which means you have again shown that you argue based on faith alone. As to the supposed "brick wall of continental jurisprudence", you also have no basis for claiming that it even exists. Have you ever tried to gain access to the files of German criminal investigations? I have neither, but I know someone who was allowed to look into these files and copy whatever he wanted from them, though not for free (he spent some money there). But then, making claims based on pre-conceived notions and wishful thinking alone is a standard feature of "Revisionism", right?

>If that's the case, then we really cannot be sure that the venerable SS Prof. Dr. Pfannenstiel >truly did corroborate the lunatic Widerstand saint, SS Gerstein.

As I said before, if you think anything you can find will change the corroborative content of the parts of Pfannenstiel’s depositions that can be found, translated or in the original text, under http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/ftp.py?people//p/pfannenstiel.wilhelm/pfannen.001 , http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/people/ftp.py?people//p/pfannenstiel.wilhelm/pfannen.002 and on pages 173 f of Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl et al, Nationalsozialitische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, I’ll let you be happy with that idea. Dreams are all you have, after all.

Anonymous said...

Here is a book written by a jew who proclaims the holocaust is being over exaggerated and also used for prosperity. I can see the prosperity portion because by no means does anyone have the right to go in and take land away from someone who was already there.

http://www.rense.com/general69/short.htm

Sergey Romanov said...

Finkelstein's being Jewish is neither here nor there, but thanks for showing your agenda. I'm not into discussing his thesis (though it is also relevant to this blog in general), but I don't think that NF minimizes the Holocaust numerically anywhere.

Scott Smith said...

Roberto said:

<< As I said before, if you think anything you can find will change the corroborative content of the parts of Pfannenstiel’s depositions that can be found, translated or in the original text, under [Nizkor] and on pages 173 f of Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl et al, Nationalsozialitische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, I’ll let you be happy with that idea. Dreams are all you have, after all. >>

It's on page 130 of my copy. Gerstein seques into Pfannenstiel for damage-control. If all you have is Kogon-Langbein-Rückerl's cherrypicked secondary-source Hoaxster text for your proof of homicidal gaschambers, let alone honest corroboration of the lunatic Gerstein, then I can't help you.

:-)

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

Scott
>Roberto said:

<< As I said before, if you think anything you can find will change the corroborative content of the parts of Pfannenstiel’s depositions that can be found, translated or in the original text, under [Nizkor] and on pages 173 f of Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl et al, Nationalsozialitische Massentötungen durch Giftgas, I’ll let you be happy with that idea. Dreams are all you have, after all. >>

Scott
>It's on page 130 of my copy.

Whatever copy you mean, let’s have a quote.

Scott
>Gerstein seques into Pfannenstiel for damage-control.

Translate that “Revisionist” babbling into the language of common mortals, please. Tell us exactly what your claim is and explain how the quote you will provide supports that claim.

Scott
>If all you have is Kogon-Langbein-Rückerl's cherrypicked secondary-source Hoaxster text for >your proof of homicidal gaschambers, let alone honest corroboration of the lunatic Gerstein, >then I can't help you.

There’s no reason to suspect that the text published by Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl leaves out parts of Pfannenstiel’s testimony that would change it’s incriminatory and corroborative contents, sorry. Try providing evidence and arguments instead of rhetorical bratwurst baloney, it might help your currently non-existing credibility.

Scott Smith said...

Roberto said:

<< There’s no reason to suspect that the text published by Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl leaves out parts of Pfannenstiel’s testimony that would change it’s incriminatory and corroborative contents, sorry. Try providing evidence and arguments instead of rhetorical bratwurst baloney, it might help your currently non-existing credibility. >>

Whether it does or it does not is anybody's guess, as the original is not readily available for inspection--assuming it was available to those secondary sources that cherrypicked it.

Gerstein might seem plausible too if the cherrypicked parts were the only available source and not his entire Statement(s).

That is why, for example, I ordered the entire Human Soap documents to put online and not just relied on Nizkor's claim that Neely and Witton corroborated Mazur's story.

Collecting all of Pfannestiel's affidavits and statements is absolutely necessary before we can reasonably claim that he corroborates Gerstein. We should not trust Hoaxster secondary historians in this--and that mistrust is well-placed considering, i.a., the cherrypicking and fudging that was done with Gerstein, which is comparatively easy to check.

:-)

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

>Roberto said:

<< There’s no reason to suspect that the text published by Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl leaves out parts of Pfannenstiel’s testimony that would change it’s incriminatory and corroborative contents, sorry. Try providing evidence and arguments instead of rhetorical bratwurst baloney, it might help your currently non-existing credibility. >>

>Whether it does or it does not is anybody's guess, as the original is not readily available for >inspection--assuming it was available to those secondary sources that cherrypicked it.

Hollow insinuations, based on nonsensical pre-conceived notions alone.

>Gerstein might seem plausible too if the cherrypicked parts were the only available source and >not his entire Statement(s).

Yep, Gerstein’s testimony is not plausible as a whole, but the essential parts of it are. These have not been cherrypicked, of course, for the criterion of selection was not convenience. It was corroboration by evidence independent of Gerstein’s testimony.

>That is why, for example, I ordered the entire Human Soap documents to put online and not >just relied on Nizkor's claim that Neely and Witton corroborated Mazur's story.

A claim is one thing, a lengthy quote from an interrogation protocol, with indication of the criminal investigation file in which that protocol is contained (which is what we have in the case of Pfannenstiel) is quite another. I also wouldn’t compare Nizkor to the scholarly authors who wrote the various chapters of the book edited by Kogon/Langbein/Rückerl et al.

>Collecting all of Pfannestiel's affidavits and statements is absolutely necessary before we can >reasonably claim that he corroborates Gerstein.

No, it’s not. The testimonies, or parts thereof, quoted in secondary sources are clearly corroborative of Gerstein’s description of the gassing procedure at Belzec. It takes a lot of unrealistic wishful thinking to hope for some unpublished part of any of Pfannenstiel’s testimonies that would invalidate his quoted statements.

>We should not trust Hoaxster secondary historians in this--and that mistrust is well-placed >considering, i.a., the cherrypicking and fudging that was done with Gerstein, which is >comparatively easy to check.

Nonsense. If a particular historian has indulged in some “fudging”, skepticism might be warranted in regard to that particular historan, but not in regard to historians (I don’t know what “secondary” historians are supposed to be, and “Hoaxster” is but a showpiece of Scott’s silly superstitions) in general. Also, checking Gerstein’s testimony against evidence independent thereof and using only it only insofar as corroborated by such other evidence is not cherrypicking, for the criterion of selection is not convenience. It’s sifting the wheat from the chaff, as historians are supposed to do.

Renegade Eye said...

I put up the link to this site at my blog. I hope you'll link back in return.

I rethought my previous position. Let the chips fall where they may.

Anonymous said...

(Off topic)

The Italian Justice Minister Clemente Mastella announces: "We will soon bring in the Council of Ministers a project of law that sets negation of the Holocaust as crime." The debate should open in connection with the "Remembrance Day".

But I'm not in favour of the laws against holocaust denial.

"Persecution, and even anything redolent of persecution, produces martyrs, and we have not the slightest interest in making these people into martyrs. I am in no way opposed to proceedings for defamation in the case of lies aimed at individuals or institutions, but I am resolutely opposed to the idea of imposing a historical truth through the legal system. When the French parliament voted for such a law in 1990, every single historian was opposed to it. If there is a lesson we should learn from the history of communism and the State or Party Truth, it is that no historical truth can depend on the state apparatus -however liberal this state- in order to be considered the Truth. But if the truth has no need of police or courts, it certainly does not need historians. Here and there - in England, America, Germany, France, Italy and, of course, in Israel, there are teams of historians who have carried out outstanding work" (Pierre Vidal-Naquet: Who are the Assassins of Memory? 1992)

truthmarch said...

I find this laughable. People calling the creator of that film 'chicken' systematically proves the low level of maturity. That said, instead of chanting for someone to open their lives up only to be turned upside down (long list of academics whose lives are destroyed for investigating the Nazis), why not chant for some core drilling at the German labor camps like Treblinka? You know, to finally prove once and for all that the revisionists are wrong. Don't jail them. Refute them and make them look silly. Jailing someone isn't winning an argument, especially when "the truth is not a valid defence".

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

>I find this laughable. People >calling the creator of that >film 'chicken' systematically >proves the low level of maturity.

No, it keeps proving that the fellow doesn't have the guts to publish criticism to his BS on his own site.

>That said, instead of chanting >for someone to open their lives >up only to be turned upside down >(long list of academics whose >lives are destroyed for >investigating the Nazis),

First of all, what we are asking the fellow to do is to publish criticism to his crap on his site, nothing more and nothing less.

Second, no «academics» have had their lives destroyed for «investigating the Nazis», which actually is what many historians do. Some deplorable charlatans have been rightly ridiculed or wrongly imprisoned (some countries enforce hate speech laws, which we don't support) for having spouted mendacious hate propaganda allegedly based on «investigating the Nazis».

>why not chant for some core >drilling at the German labor >camps like Treblinka?

First of all, the Treblinka we are talking about was not a labor camp but an extermination camp.

Second, while we would welcome an archaeological investigation at Treblinka like was done at Belzec by Prof. Kola's team, there's no point in our «chanting» for it.

Third, while such core drilling might enhance knowledge of certain details of the mass killings in question, it is not necessary to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they occurred. The evidence is conclusive enough without them.

>You know, to finally prove once >and for all that the revisionists >are wrong.

That has long been proven, however stubbornly "Revisionists" (who are no revisionists at all, but ideologically motivated propagandists) refuse to acknowledge this.

>Don't jail them. Refute them and >make them look silly.

I agree, they shouldn't be jailed but made look silly. Making them look silly is what this blog is all about.

>Jailing someone isn't winning an >argument,

Certainly not, and however deplorable laws providing for such jailing are, that is not their intention. The intention of such laws is to keep hate propagandists from influencing resentful frustradoes into provoking disturbances of the public order.

>especially when "the >truth is >not a valid defence".

If these "Revisionist" freaks had the truth on their side, the hate speech laws enforced against them in some countries wouldn't exist in the first place.

Renegade Eye said...

I've been linked to you for quite awhile.

good expose of WN.

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

>good expose of WN

Thanks. All I currently do, however, is occasionally look up a thread where my WN acquaintances from the deleted «Holocaust thread» on SF are posting, to see if they mention me in some way. When they do, I return the favor. Otherwise I couldn't care less about what these people write. But some of them are too dumb and/or too paranoid to understand that and mouth off every time they find me (horrors!) looking at their thread, as if I were Big Brother watching them. Funny bones they are, these Ku Klux Klowns.

Renegade Eye said...

I've been linked to your blog for awhile, you don't link back.

Sergey Romanov said...

RE, we link to Holocaust-related resources/blogs and individual blogs of HC participants/.

Lise said...

Roberto, sorry, I didn't find the open thread for the off-topic comments. I have just recently found this blog and found out that you are a regular contributor! This is great!

May I suggest you add a couple of links on the work of Pe. Patrick Desbois? I think as material evidence goes, it is pretty good, and I didn't find anything on him here. Cheers, Lise

(I will understand if you delete this comment, no problem).

Roberto Muehlenkamp said...

lise,

Your blog looks worth linking to, so I will propose that it be added to our list of links. Meanwhile, please tell me what links about the work of Father Desbois you have in mind.

Best,
Roberto

tommaso said...

Vi saluta Carlo Mattogno