On October 28, 1944, the German General Fritz von Brodowski was shot in Allied captivity. Three months later, on 19 January 1945, the Nazis retaliated by shooting the French General Gustave Mesny in a staged escape attempt.
Given the foreign policy implications, the German Foreign Office was involved in planning the killing and left behind a paper trail, see Kaltenbrunner’s Execution Proposal to Himmler: "Carbon Monoxide Introduced Via an Apparatus Operated From the Driver’s Seat". On December 30, 1944, RSHA chief Ernst Kaltenbrunner sent Himmler two murder options:
1) During the relocation of 5 individuals in 3 vehicles with Wehrmacht insignia, an escape scenario arises when the last vehicle breaks down, or
2) Carbon monoxide is introduced into the sealed rear compartment of the vehicle via an apparatus operated from the driver's seat. The device can be installed with the simplest means and removed immediately afterward. A suitable vehicle has now been obtained after significant difficulties.
The very next bright idea after shooting was gassing with carbon monoxide? It’s almost as if the Security Police had some prior experience with this method. Oh right - they had:
- Contemporary German Documents on Carbon Monoxide Gas and Bottles Employed for the Nazi Euthanasia
- Contemporary German Documents on Homicidal Gas Vans
Before deniers start questioning why a suitable vehicle was needed despite the existence of gas vans, let’s set the record straight: First, by this stage of the war, the gas vans employed for mass gassings may have already been dismantled. Secondly, the plan was to gas the French General in a car befitting his rank, not in the cargo compartment of a truck.
I honestly think one of the main reasons for the decline of Holocaust “revisionism” was radical denial. Nowadays I would say that the majority of "revisionist" intellectuals accept as fact other aspects of the genocide such as Operation Reinhard and the Einsatzgruppen, as is the case with Irving, Serge Thion, Mark Weber, etc. Those who adhere to radical denial (like Mattogno and others) end up being seen as lunatics even by skeptics with a minimum of rationality and critical sense. Radical deniers end up screwing the "Revisionist" movement itself, LOL
ReplyDeleteBut I don't know if that was one of the main reasons, I never followed this movement and I don't even care about them. I'm just speculating.
I've always wondered why Holocaust denial tends to be less strategic in its approach and consistently aims for extremes. As if those were more defendable.
ReplyDelete