tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post1553959522637458605..comments2024-03-20T07:25:58.202+00:00Comments on Holocaust Controversies: Rebuttal of Alvarez on Gas Vans: Why the Diesel Issue is Still IrrelevantNicholas Terryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14852758011968360596noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-59034984514701762112017-12-26T00:59:15.716+00:002017-12-26T00:59:15.716+00:00FYI, I started a thread on RODOH critiquing HDOT&#...FYI, I started a thread on RODOH critiquing HDOT's handling of the diesel gassing claims at:<br /><br />https://rodoh.info/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=3160&p=118116<br /><br />Since it is the case that you here are of the same opinion that there were no diesel gassings, you might find a snippet or two of evidence - of which you might not have thought of -<br /> supporting your position among those you consort with on these issues (such as HDOT).<br /><br />I've discovered a couple of technical doozies that HDOT makes in their presentation. And, in all fairness, they might as well clean those up - as I'm sure we are all agreed that these are actual mistakes made - not just my opinion.blake121666https://www.blogger.com/profile/07355647679491593871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-67420849645636947982015-11-27T19:17:36.111+00:002015-11-27T19:17:36.111+00:00Thanks Jeff, although the real plaudits should go ...Thanks Jeff, although the real plaudits should go to the HC team here for the outstanding work they have carried out over the years ( and for the entertainment they have provided lol)DasPrussianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04393315985932866161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-13139780664717483942015-11-26T04:17:58.069+00:002015-11-26T04:17:58.069+00:00Excellent work Das Prussian!
We at SSF are all ...Excellent work Das Prussian! <br /><br />We at SSF are all huge fans of your efforts.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03218089864137630577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-48661988268439123132015-11-23T17:32:21.062+00:002015-11-23T17:32:21.062+00:00I later discovered while reading Hilary Earl's...I later discovered while reading Hilary Earl's book that this letter was one of the reasons why Klingelhoefer attempted suicide. Apparently after he received it he decided to hand it over to the prison guards , which therefore had serious implications for Naumann.<br />Klingelhoefer then began to beat himself up over whether he'd done the right thing. Obviously he would now be labelled a 'grass' by his fellow defendants, and he began to wonder if he could handle this in the future.<br />Coupled with this , he also became depressed over the outcome of the war and the realisation of Hitlers crimes. Unable to cope with such trauma, he decided to take his own life, but before he did this, he also wrote a farewell letter which I quote here :<br /><br />"Too late (Naumann's letter), unfortunately, after the collapse ( of Germany), I gained complete insight into the whole extent of the horrible blasphemy that was carried out here. Nevertheless, I ask that this suicide attempt of mine not be interpreted as an attempt to excuse myself in any way....I am fully conscious of the fact that I must bear the consequences completely for my personal attitude and my acts. Still I will not burden my conscience with acts that are in complete opposition to the attitude I have again achieved"<br /><br />Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on your viewpoint, Klinelhoefer survived his suicide attempt, which consisted of spending several hours cutting a deep hole in the artery of his left wrist with a rather large safety pin ( which can be seen today in the National Archives Washington !!!)DasPrussianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04393315985932866161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-83786592187635402142015-11-23T16:26:00.606+00:002015-11-23T16:26:00.606+00:00I collated some material on gas vans in the USSR b...I collated some material on gas vans in the USSR back in July.<br /><br />http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2015/07/gas-vans-in-ussr-some-testimonies.html<br /><br />Naumann is bad news for deniers on several fronts. He was trying to claim that he did not take over the unit until the end of Nov 41, so he could deny involvement in all the documented killings that month. He could not deny the killings themselves although his counsel did try to claim that numbers in the 1942 reports were too high.<br /><br />As the judgment states:<br /><br />"Naumann's note to the co-defendant Klingelhoefer...would suggest an attempt to influence Klingelhoefer's testimony that Naumann's duties began on November 30th."<br /><br />http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/german/einsatzgruppen/esg/trials/naumann.htmlJonathan Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07929794273877529591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-62518337480548390812015-11-21T16:58:11.410+00:002015-11-21T16:58:11.410+00:00- Basically Naumann was trying to help Klingelhofe...- Basically Naumann was trying to help Klingelhofer by informing him how he could conceal the truth on certain topics. It also looked like they were trying to collude in order to 'get their stories straight'- <br /><br />Interesting find. So the US or anyone else didn't torture or feed defendants a story. The defendants tried to do that themselves to cover their asses. <br /><br />Thanks for sharing this.Nathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02660486969581542489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-29384442150329301132015-11-20T19:31:33.173+00:002015-11-20T19:31:33.173+00:00I came across another piece of evidence for the ex...I came across another piece of evidence for the existence of gas vans today. It was a secret letter that Erich Naumann wrote to a fellow co-defendant while awaiting trial at Nuremberg (The Einsatzgruppen Trial).<br /><br />Unfortunately for Naumann, the intended recipient of this letter ( Waldemar Klingelhofer )attempted suicide on the same night, and the guards discovered the letter and submitted it to the court to be used as evidence against Naumann.<br /><br />Basically Naumann was trying to help Klingelhofer by informing him how he could conceal the truth on certain topics. It also looked like they were trying to collude in order to 'get their stories straight'. Anyway, the part of the letter that confirms the existence of the gas vans said this :<br /><br />"EK B received 2 or 3 gas vans from Berlin which were not used by B and therefore, under directions of the RHSA, were given to C"<br /><br />The document reference is NO 5450 and the full letter has been published in the book "The Nuremberg SS-Ensatzgruppen Trial" by Hilary Earl.<br /><br /><br /><br />DasPrussianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04393315985932866161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-15793815687941764192015-11-20T18:53:00.305+00:002015-11-20T18:53:00.305+00:00Truly remarkable blog. I am finding really great r...Truly remarkable blog. I am finding really great responses to the deniers community. Keep up the good work!<br /><br />JanAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14385472691381429489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-86809843901739807272015-11-20T11:53:16.038+00:002015-11-20T11:53:16.038+00:00Jeff, it was my mistake, I wrote fast thinking of ...Jeff, it was my mistake, I wrote fast thinking of one thing (memory betrays). The Roberto Muehlenkamp's post is it, about Kues and Alvarez:<br /><a href="http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2013/04/alvarez-and-marais-lie-about-judgment.html" rel="nofollow">Alvarez" and Marais lie about the judgment LG München I vom 14.07.1972, 114 Ks 4/70</a><br /><br />The Denier post justifying the use of pseudonyms is it:<br /><a href="http://inconvenienthistory.com/archive/2010/volume_2/number_4/going_underground_catacomb_revisionists.php" rel="nofollow">Going Underground: 'Catacomb Revisionists' and Revisionist Repression</a><br /><br />The truth is, anyone who be Dalton, this "guy" is close to Santomauro, if not himself. The writing style is also a way to identify the (real) authors of the text. It remains interesting these people create false identities to value Denial texts.Roberto Lucenahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03212154918260795160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-17114565945802564292015-11-18T03:29:45.657+00:002015-11-18T03:29:45.657+00:00Roberto, I may be misunderstanding you, but are yo...Roberto, I may be misunderstanding you, but are you saying that the other Roberto (Muehlenkamp that is) stated that "Dalton" was Kues? All the speculation that I've read indicates that "Dalton" was Santomauro himself. Kues had a different writing style than "Dalton" IIRC.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03218089864137630577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-70669452830126661902015-11-17T09:34:43.383+00:002015-11-17T09:34:43.383+00:00Hans, I think I've mentioned the Alvarez-Santo...Hans, I think I've mentioned the Alvarez-Santomauro question in another post. Santomauro was a publisher and he had the VHO domain/host (one of them, I saw it a long time ago, many years ago). Santomauro released the "Dalton"'s book (the "PhD" fake), which is another fake/pseudonym of the same guy. Roberto (Muehlenkamp) comments that Dalton is the Thomas Kues in a post (I've had separated the link to put here but I can't find at the time, there's also a text of a Denier "justifying" the use of pseudonyms).<br /><br />I think this is a relevant issue, because, we're talking/writing to whom?? Imagine the situation, to answer to the same person with three, four "identities". The Deniers proclaim they're "bearers of truth," so why do they need to use so many fakes? This is another intellectual dishonesty of them.Roberto Lucenahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03212154918260795160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-54509244660518507782015-11-17T01:10:37.628+00:002015-11-17T01:10:37.628+00:00Michael Santomauro is a denier publisher who is be...Michael Santomauro is a denier publisher who is believed to have used pseudonyms in the past. It is all but certain that "Thomas Dalton, phd" was actually Santomauro. Many believe that "Alvarez" is another alias.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03218089864137630577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-31209671623048119542015-11-16T22:20:24.663+00:002015-11-16T22:20:24.663+00:00http://revisionismoemlinha.blogspot.de/search/labe...http://revisionismoemlinha.blogspot.de/search/label/Michael%20SantomauroEric Danielskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03070207953884040515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-68090182301993305822015-11-16T16:54:55.404+00:002015-11-16T16:54:55.404+00:00Hi Jeff,
interesting, what's the reason you t...Hi Jeff,<br /><br />interesting, what's the reason you think that Santomauro = Alvarez? I confess that Santomauro is an "unknown quantity" to me and I never read any piece from him, so perhaps I'm just missing the obvious here. Hans Metznerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07746792258730274681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-83405166118515892052015-11-16T02:28:26.963+00:002015-11-16T02:28:26.963+00:00you might want to change "Alvarez" to &q...you might want to change "Alvarez" to "Santomauro" by the way. Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03218089864137630577noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24597325.post-23301205365726183252015-11-15T13:48:26.455+00:002015-11-15T13:48:26.455+00:00https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_701
If...https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_701<br /><br />If a witness is not testifying as an expert, testimony in the form of an opinion is limited to one that is:<br /><br />(a) rationally based on the witness’s perception;<br /><br />The Law (U.S. law in this case) understands that possession of first hand knowledge is important when assessing testimony. It's common sense to assume that the people who directly handled the engines would be in a better position to know what they were, rather than bystanders who simply guessed or assume. The law knows it. Historians know it. "Revisionist" chumps don't.<br /><br />Thanks again for the great read, Hans.Nathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02660486969581542489noreply@blogger.com