tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post7429917481726819103..comments2024-03-17T20:28:40.281+00:00Comments on Holocaust Controversies: “The Stroop Report is a Forgery” (Part 4)Nicholas Terryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14852758011968360596noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-55699145626534825282010-02-02T22:08:19.154+00:002010-02-02T22:08:19.154+00:00"Like many a good “Revisionist”, denierbud be...<i>"Like many a good “Revisionist”, denierbud believes that every criminal trial involving crimes committed by his Nazi heroes was a charade in which mischievous prosecutors and judges acting on behalf of sinister conspiratorial entities crapped upon the law and their legal duties and sentenced innocent men to death or long-term imprisonment on the basis of flimsy or manipulated evidence."<br /><br />So you actually believe that the Nuremberg and Israeli trials were not rigged?</i><br /><br />They were not perfect, but rigged they were not. <br /><br /><i>Please explain the following:<br /><br />Why were the defendants allowed to be interrogated by the victims ie. Jews who were obviously bias?</i><br /><br />Was there a prosecutor or judge who had been in a concentration camp or lost family to your Nazi heroes, or what do you mean? Please clarify. And then explain what procedural rules or rules of evidence you are aware of would be violated by the procedures you are claiming. <br /><br /><i>What about the reports of torture and threats to harm family members to extract "confessions"?</i><br /><br />Yeah, what about those reports? Show them, please, so that we can establish if they are a) reliable and b) related to depositions made during the trials. Better don't try the "Höss was beaten" - thing, for that happened long before his testimony for the defense before the IMT and had nothing to do with that testimony. <br /><br /><i>Why do the defendant's counsel NEVER cross-examine witnesses despite many offering contradictory evidence?</i> <br /><br />Whence did you get the idea that the defendants' counsels at the mentioned trials never cross-examined witnesses? Have you read the trial session transcripts? Maybe you should. <br /><br /><i>Why are the prosectors allowed to repeatedly lead witness testimony?</i> <br /><br />What are you talking about? Please provide examples. Duly sourced ones. <br /><br /><i>Why was hearsay repeatedly accepted as evidence?</i> <br /><br />Examples, please, so that we can determine if what you call hearsay was really hearsay and would not fall under one of the many hearsay exceptions according to US rules of evidence. <br /><br /><i>Why was a trial even allowed after the defendant appeared before the court as a result of illegal state-sponsored kidnapping?</i> <br /><br />Because the defendant was accused of mass murder, I guess. <br /><br /><i>Why were the defendants tried in Israel judged by the supposed victims?</i> <br /><br />I didn't know any of the judges had been in a concentration camp or lost family to your Nazi heroes. Which of the judges was in that situation? <br /><br /><i>Try any of this crap in a unbiased court and watch it get thrown out so fast your head will spin...</i> <br /><br />Procedural rules may not have been as stringent and defendant-friendly at the IMT and Eichmann trials as according to US rules of evidence or German procedural rules. But from that to show trials it's still a stretch. <br /><br /><i>It is a fact these were the show-trails of the victors.</i><br /><br />Frankly I don't think you even know what the term show-trial means. <br /><br />You seem to have a tendency for throwing around "why" and "what about" claims/questions the underlying assumptions of which you are not able to substantiate. Try to avoid that unless you enjoy making a fool of yourself. And try to be less hysterical.Roberto Muehlenkamphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03608133715777146924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-83634116084117556722010-02-02T17:05:49.496+00:002010-02-02T17:05:49.496+00:00> Yes, then apparently acted like a bunch of re...> Yes, then apparently acted like a bunch of retards when it came to:<br /><br />> a/ being consistent with their "ruse" by whipping, beating and randomly killing people in public for no apparent reason AT THE VERY PLACES they tried to conduct their "ruses"; and <br /><br />What do you mean, exactly? If they were using these ruses for people who probably didn't hear any rumors, but using whips for Polish Jews, what is retarted about it (except you)?<br /><br />> b/ actually carrying out the exterminations which they apparently performed in the most un-German-like way imaginable with bodies everywhere, loads of witnesses and plenty of Jews not exterminated.<br /><br />What is the "German-like" way? Are you really trying to use stale ethnic stereotypes as argument? And you call someone retarded, nitwit?<br /><br />Any mass killing operation of such a scale could not have remained secret, all the Nazis could do is to minimize the exposure. And the bodies weren't "everywhere", doofus.<br /><br />> Why not just drive the Jew around locked in the trains and wait for them to die like so many did during the initial lack of capacity at Treblinka?<br /><br />Um, because (a) they would need to unload and then undress corpses in state of rigor mortis, which is quite a lot of job, (b) because they needed trains back much faster than such a procedure would allow, (c) because even if they could use this retarded procedure, their use of gas chambers is more efficient and doesn't contradict anything?<br /><br />> Tell me would you design a camp like this if you were assigned the task of creating a rail-serviced extermination facility to kill a million or more Jews?<br /><br />I think the results (780,000 dead) speak for themselves.<br /><br />> I am neither a Nazi, anti-semite<br /><br />Doubtful.<br /><br />> or blood-thirsty sadist, yet I can design about 20 camps for the THEORETICAL extermination of 1,000,000 "units" (being an indeterminable entity approximately possessing the characteristics of a human being) and NONE of them look anything like this mess called Treblinka.<br /><br />Heheheh. Above we've already seen an example of your genius. Of course you would design those camps (right after you found your way out of a paper bag).<br /><br />> Lets not forget that Treblinka was expressly designed and constructed by the SS for this very purpose. I am not German, I have F-All skills at designing camps, yet I can do a distinctly better job than the camp at Treblika.<br /><br />HAHAHAHAHAHA!<br /><br />> Go figure...<br /><br />Go.Sergey Romanovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04063444062099331337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-46249584406763006172010-02-02T16:56:15.948+00:002010-02-02T16:56:15.948+00:00> So you actually believe that the Nuremberg an...> So you actually believe that the Nuremberg and Israeli trials were not rigged?<br /><br />What evidence do you have to show that they were rigged?<br /><br />Imperfect they were, but rigged?<br /><br />> Why were the defendants allowed to be interrogated by the victims ie. Jews who were obviously bias?<br /><br />Which of the defendants were interrogated by the Nazis' victims and what evidence there is that their alleged bias played any role?<br /><br />> What about the reports of torture and threats to harm family members to extract "confessions"?<br /><br />I'm not aware of any such _proven_ allegations in regard to _these two_ trials. Can you give examples of torture and such threats specifically in relation to the Nuremberg trial and the Eichmann trial? Not to a possible beating during the initial arrest, not a threat related to some other trial (e.g. Ilse Koch trial), but specifically to these two trials.<br /><br />> Why do the defendant's counsel NEVER cross-examine witnesses despite many offering contradictory evidence?<br /><br />Please, show that the counsels never cross-examined witnesses _when appropriate_.<br /><br />> Why are the prosectors allowed to repeatedly lead witness testimony?<br /><br />?<br /><br />> Why was hearsay repeatedly accepted as evidence?<br /><br />Why not? Read up on admissibility of hearsay.<br /><br />> Why was a trial even allowed after the defendant appeared before the court as a result of illegal state-sponsored kidnapping?<br /><br />Why not?<br /><br />> Why were the defendants tried in Israel judged by the supposed victims?<br /><br />Which of the judges was a victim?<br /><br />> Try any of this crap in a unbiased court and watch it get thrown out so fast your head will spin...<br /><br />Your head spins all right.<br /><br />> It is a fact these were the show-trails of the victors.<br /><br />They were show trials in a non-sinister sense. They were not staged trials, if that's what you mean.Sergey Romanovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04063444062099331337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-66117782381401853642010-02-02T16:40:21.758+00:002010-02-02T16:40:21.758+00:00"The Germans cleverly used a combination of t..."The Germans cleverly used a combination of trickery and terror in order to assure compliance with the deportation measures..."<br /><br />Yes, then apparently acted like a bunch of retards when it came to:<br /><br />a/ being consistent with their "ruse" by whipping, beating and randomly killing people in public for no apparent reason AT THE VERY PLACES they tried to conduct their "ruses"; and <br /><br />b/ actually carrying out the exterminations which they apparently performed in the most un-German-like way imaginable with bodies everywhere, loads of witnesses and plenty of Jews not exterminated.<br /><br />Why not just drive the Jew around locked in the trains and wait for them to die like so many did during the initial lack of capacity at Treblinka?<br /><br />They could have all been delivered to the camp dead, eliminating the need for the gas-chamber entirely.<br /><br />Drive the trains at full speed and you would have had no witnesses to the deaths only trains full of Jews racing past. <br /><br />They could even have dug the pits right next to the tracks and dumped the bodies in directly instead of dragging them the 200-300 meters as claim by the survivors.<br /><br />Tell me would you design a camp like this if you were assigned the task of creating a rail-serviced extermination facility to kill a million or more Jews?<br /><br />I am neither a Nazi, anti-semite or blood-thirsty sadist, yet I can design about 20 camps for the THEORETICAL extermination of 1,000,000 "units" (being an indeterminable entity approximately possessing the characteristics of a human being) and NONE of them look anything like this mess called Treblinka.<br /><br />Lets not forget that Treblinka was expressly designed and constructed by the SS for this very purpose. I am not German, I have F-All skills at designing camps, yet I can do a distinctly better job than the camp at Treblika.<br /><br />Go figure...Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12117494349594020616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-40037793589622066432010-02-02T16:06:16.822+00:002010-02-02T16:06:16.822+00:00joachim neander said...
" All defendants in ...joachim neander said...<br /><br />" All defendants in the 1947 Buchenwald Trial before a U.S. military court were found guilty of violation of the rules of warfare by cruel behavior and mass murder (war crimes) "<br /><br />Whilst the war crimes of the victors were simply ignored hey Joachim?<br /><br />Or is strafing, bombing civilians and then secondary bombing to kill the emergency response, targeting food, medical and water supplies not war crimes?<br /><br />Have you forgotten that "Recorded history is little more than propaganda written by the victors and believed by the naive."Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12117494349594020616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-24041292231165773062010-02-02T16:01:28.294+00:002010-02-02T16:01:28.294+00:00"Like many a good “Revisionist”, denierbud be..."Like many a good “Revisionist”, denierbud believes that every criminal trial involving crimes committed by his Nazi heroes was a charade in which mischievous prosecutors and judges acting on behalf of sinister conspiratorial entities crapped upon the law and their legal duties and sentenced innocent men to death or long-term imprisonment on the basis of flimsy or manipulated evidence."<br /><br /><br />So you actually believe that the Nuremberg and Israeli trials were not rigged?<br /><br />Please explain the following:<br /><br />Why were the defendants allowed to be interrogated by the victims ie. Jews who were obviously bias?<br /><br />What about the reports of torture and threats to harm family members to extract "confessions"?<br /><br />Why do the defendant's counsel NEVER cross-examine witnesses despite many offering contradictory evidence?<br /><br />Why are the prosectors allowed to repeatedly lead witness testimony?<br /><br />Why was hearsay repeatedly accepted as evidence?<br /><br />Why was a trial even allowed after the defendant appeared before the court as a result of illegal state-sponsored kidnapping?<br /><br />Why were the defendants tried in Israel judged by the supposed victims?<br /><br />Try any of this crap in a unbiased court and watch it get thrown out so fast your head will spin...<br /><br />It is a fact these were the show-trails of the victors.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12117494349594020616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-5026320274769272452008-09-11T04:31:00.000+01:002008-09-11T04:31:00.000+01:00Regarding the use of the word "bandit" in the Stro...Regarding the use of the word "bandit" in the Stroop report, I call your attention to the Goebbel's diary entry of 5/22/43, which happens to be referring to the uprising:<BR/><BR/>"The battle of the Warsaw Ghetto continues. The Jews are still resisting. On the whole, however, resistance is no longer dangerous and has virtually been broken. Within the area of the General Government assassinations, acts of sabotage, and raids by bandits are on the increase. Conditions there are in some respects truly chaotic. Unfortunately the Fuehrer has refrained from a personnel change in the General Government as intended. Greiser returned to Posen without accomplishing anything. Frank is to be given one more chance to prove his worth. I should have thought it better to kick Frank right out. When you are once convinced that a man is in no way equal to his job, the necessary conclusions should be drawn."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-46978708422121657022007-10-12T21:38:00.000+01:002007-10-12T21:38:00.000+01:00Re: "180 Jews, bandits, and subhumans were destroy...Re: "180 Jews, bandits, and subhumans were destroyed."<BR/><BR/>Having looked into the German original, I am sure that not three categories of killed enemies (Jews, bandits, subhumans) are listed there, as is suggested by the position of the second comma in the English translation, but that "Banditen und Untermenschen" are an apposition to "Juden." The missing comma behind "Untermenschen" (necessary in correct German) c be explained as being a (frequently occurring) typo. The correct English translation, therefore, should read:<BR/>"180 Jews, bandits and subhumans, were destroyed."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-63403657351361689242007-10-12T18:18:00.000+01:002007-10-12T18:18:00.000+01:00Let me make some remarks about "Ilse Koch's photo ...Let me make some remarks about "Ilse Koch's photo album," about which lots of legends and misconceptions are circulating on the Web. (I've studied not only the "soap," but also the "lampshades," though the latter not - yet - in so much detail as the former.)<BR/> <BR/>1) All defendants in the 1947 Buchenwald Trial before a U.S. military court were found guilty of violation of the rules of warfare by cruel behavior and mass murder (war crimes) and of participation in the common design of the camp (crimes against humanity). The verdict was pronounced unanimously.<BR/><BR/>2) As usual in U.S. military courts, no grounds for the verdict were given. Therefore stating that Ilse Koch was convicted for the flaying crime is equally speculative as stating that she was not convicted for the flaying crime.<BR/><BR/>3) The flaying accusations against Ilse Koch were one of the pillars of the prosecution in her case. At Dachau, the prosecution introduced ten witnesses alone for this item, whose testimonies, btw, were mostly from hearsay and, what is more, inconclusive. The prosecution did also not present a single artifact made out of human skin. It could also not prove that the prepared human skin plates shown at the trial (btw the same as those presented at Nuremberg some time earlier and at Washington DC some time later) had been parts of a lampshade or had been intended to be used for making lampshades. <BR/>For these reasons, the U.S. Senate commission that, in 1948, discussed the Ilse Koch case, as well as the German court that, in 1950/51, tried Ilse Koch again, dropped the flaying accusations. <BR/>Let me make it absolutely clear: Ilse Koch was by no means a "little innocent." She got what she deserved, since there were enough crimes and misdeeds perpetrated by her, which could be proven substantially, to justify a harsh sentence.<BR/> <BR/>4) Ilse Koch's two (!) photo albums played a dubious role in her 1947 Dachau trial. Witnesses for the prosecution testified that they were bound in tattooed human skin. Although they were in possession of the prosecution during the trial, the prosecution did not present them at court. Only an hour or so after the sentences had been pronounced, a member of the prosecution showed both albums to the defense counsel. It turned out that they were bound in dark leather without any ornaments on them! This fact was the main reason why the defense counsel - successfully - applied for revision. <BR/>There is information on the Web (I do not know at the moment, where) that at least one of these albums is still in possession of the U.S. National Archives and that it, indeed, is bound in dark, thick leather without ornaments.<BR/> <BR/>5) To sum up: <BR/>Ilse Koch's photo albums bound in human leather? No.<BR/>Ilse Koch convicted for the flaying crime at Dachau? We do not know.<BR/>Ilse Koch convicted for the flaying crime at Augsburg? No.<BR/>Ilse Koch convicted when innocent? No.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com