• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

General Holocaust denial discussion Part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Now, about them Nazis. Where would they be on the honesty scale? Is it conceivable to you that they might over exaggerate or outright lie about how many they actually killed? If not, why not?
The Nazis didn't exactly boast about the numbers of Jews killed in the weekly Wochenschau or in Der Stürmer. The numbers that were reported by the Nazis, and we know about, come in two flavours:
1) reports to superiors, like the reports from the Einzatsgruppen. Now, these may have had a reason to exaggerate to please their superiors, like any manager wants to paint himself good to his manager;
2) testimony in Nuremberg. Now, I really don't see a reason to exaggerate there.
 
The Nazis didn't exactly boast about the numbers of Jews killed in the weekly Wochenschau or in Der Stürmer. The numbers that were reported by the Nazis, and we know about, come in two flavours:
1) reports to superiors, like the reports from the Einzatsgruppen. Now, these may have had a reason to exaggerate to please their superiors, like any manager wants to paint himself good to his manager;
2) testimony in Nuremberg. Now, I really don't see a reason to exaggerate there.
I agree that point 2 is the most telling.

In the end, the number of millions doesn't matter to me. It is still one of the worst atrocities of all time. Quibbling about whether it was 5 or 6 million Jews (not to mention the millions of Roma, Catholics, etc. who met the same fate) seems rather silly to me.
 
I agree that point 2 is the most telling.

In the end, the number of millions doesn't matter to me. It is still one of the worst atrocities of all time. Quibbling about whether it was 5 or 6 million Jews (not to mention the millions of Roma, Catholics, etc. who met the same fate) seems rather silly to me.

To add to your parenthesis Or as many forget : homosexual and handicapped.
 
All I did was ask if the numbers were accurate. And if so, then how was that number was verified. And if not then how many were actually killed and how was that number verified.

You might have come across the fact that the six million figure was mentioned in the Nuremberg judgement, based on the testimony of an SS officer, Wilhelm Hoettl, who said he heard this from Eichmann in 1944. In fact Hoettl said that Eichmann told him 4 million died in the extermination camps and 2 million died elsewhere by shootings or in ghettos.

This is the origin of the 'canonical' 6M figure, and it doesn't come from "the Jews" at all. But the order of magnitude does not rest on the hearsay of one SS officer alone.

Further digging would have revealed that another SS officer, Dieter Wisliceny, also testified at Nuremberg that the same informant, Eichmann, had told him five million Jews had died. He spent a long time with interrogators going through country by country the numbers he had heard, being very careful to distinguish between what he knew with more certainty and what he knew less well, who his informants (multiple) were, and so on.

So already two sources give an estimate range between 5 and 6 million, and they happen to be right - the number is in between 5 and 6 million.

They are right because Hoettl and Wisliceny were not the only two sources giving figures in the years immediately after the war. The 'verification' comes from contrasting these sources, since we are dealing with a transnational event affecting Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, Italy, Greece, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, Austria, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Poland, and the Soviet Union.

Firstly, one can see that the states that liberated the killing sites reported estimates of the number of victims, without necessarily distinguishing between Jewish and non-Jewish victims. That is less of a problem when looking at estimates for Treblinka since virtually only Jews died there, more of a problem for Auschwitz at this time, since many Poles died there. The initial estimates were provided by the Soviet and Polish states, not Jews.

The 'official' estimates were overestimates:
Auschwitz 4 million
Majdanek 1.5 million

Together these camps add up to 5.5 million, but the victims were not all Jews, and indeed the exaggerations can be attributed in part to a desire by the Soviet and Polish states not to put too much emphasis on Jewish victimhood and to drown it out in universalised suffering.

Historians, beginning with two Jewish historians, Gerald Reitlinger and Raul Hilberg, in 1953 and 1961, reduced these figures by using Nazi documents to circa 1 million Jewish victims at Auschwitz, and 58,000 out of 78,000 Majdanek victims being Jews. The main work in recent decades was done by Polish historians, Franciszek Piper for Auschwitz and Tomasz Kranz for Majanek, the latter making significant use of a document found by the British historian Steve Tyas.

The other main death camps had almost entirely Jewish victims, and they were estimated in 1945 as follows by the Polish state, based on limited documents and estimating numbers of transports per day multiplied by how long the camp functioned:
Belzec 600,000
Sobibor 250,000
Treblinka 781,000
Chelmno 345,000
Total, 1,726,000

These camps claimed mostly Polish Jewish victims. So Polish Jewish and Polish historians checked them by looking at the known deportations. Western historians and West German courts also started using the Korherr report, a very important Nazi document, so Chelmno was reduced to 152,000 based on this source. The same British historian Steve Tyas mentioned above found an intercepted Nazi radio message with cryptic numbers for B, S, T and L (for Lublin, ie Majdanek) that then reduced the other camps to 1.274 million for 1942, and correspondingly reduced the total.

The initial method wasn't so ludicrous - Belzec went from 600,000 to 434,000, which is 85%, and instead of it being thought - by those not studying the regions properly and just going on the attention grabbing big camps - that nearly all victims from the affected regions had died in Belzec, historians (often German) noticed that many had been shot on the spot alongside deportations.

In 1945-46, Polish Jewish historians who had survived the war compared and contrasted the number of Jews estimated prewar with the number of Jews counted as survivors, and factored in survivors still living elsewhere, e.g. exiles in the USSR, to estimate 3 million Jews died in Poland. Other calculations relied on overestimates of the number of exiles in the USSR and came up with 2.7 million.

This 'subtraction' method was quite standard, and made sense in the immediate aftermath. It was supplemented by war crimes investigations by the Polish and Soviet states, and by historical research, increasingly by an international community of historians including non-Jews as well as Jews.

At Nuremberg, the prosecution mentioned one of the earliest country-by-country estimates calculated by the Institute of Jewish Affairs using the 'subtraction' method. This estimated 5.7 million missing, of whom it was thought at least 4.5 million had been killed. The estimate worked with very limited information from the press at a very early stage (July 1945).

Country by country, the estimates were corrected based on state-led war crimes investigations, missing persons enquiries, repatriation ministry statistics, historical research using Nazi documents, and have gone on being corrected to this day. Germany, for example, created a memorial book in the 1980s using the full statistical and archival apparatus of the German state crosschecking all names, and then after reunification updated it with newly available information.

There have been many overall calculations since the first one in July 1945, all going country by country, based on more and more information, combining addition and subtraction methods to check them against each other. For example, Gerald Reitlinger came up with one of the lowest estimates in 1953, calculating 4.2 to 4.5 million victims, but he was excessively conservative, especially regarding Poland and the Soviet Union. Raul Hilberg calculated 5.1 million in 1961. These were both before the end of the Cold War, which made examining the USSR and looking at detailed sources for the East Bloc much easier.

One problem in many calculations is defining the territories since there have been so many border changes. A 1991 study by German historians offered very good country level estimates, but the editor, Wolfgang Benz, then ignored border changes and overlaps, and simply added the numbers provided by specialist contributors up to 6.2 million. Without the overlaps the number would have been more like 5.7 million.

So there is now general acceptance, after multiple calculations, that the number is between 5 and 6 million.

By comparison to calculations regarding other incidences of mass death, this is pretty good - nobody knows the absolutely exact numbers for the Great Leap Forward, for the Soviet Union, for the Holodomor, for the Armenian Genocide. The variations for the USSR and China dwarf the magnitude of the Holocaust. One can produce wildly varying numbers for the Rape of Nanjing depending on how you define that incident.

Your mother's offhand remark, by the way, is true only for a very narrow slice of the Holocaust. Jewish councils had to provide statistical data on mortality in the bigger ghettos like Warsaw, Lodz and Theresienstadt. The records survived the war. They add up to about 150,000 deaths from starvation and disease in these three ghettos. But far from wanting to exaggerate the numbers, the Jewish councils recording the data would have had an incentive to downplay them in order to pretend some Jews were alive and claim rations. Except that wouldn't have worked so well, as the Nazis were undersupplying the ghettos with food, causing the starvation in the first place, and the exact division of rations was delegated to the Jewish councils. So the records are evidently accurate, based on checking them fairly thoroughly (these are some of the most-studied places in the Holocaust). The councils also recorded the numbers deported from these ghettos to the death camps - but the numbers were cross-checked by the Nazis, since the Nazis ran the railways, not the Jewish councils.
 
And yeah, I would consider Jews to be less honest than most because they created this whole story where they accused a people of committing crimes, for which they were innocent of, that were in some ways worse than the real crimes that the Nazis committed. And they promoted it as truth since ancient times and continue to defend it as truth even now in face of mounting evidence that it's not truth.

Where does that fit on your honesty scale?

Excuse me if I'm a bit dumb and missed some random post, but are you saying Jews are worse than nazis because bible?,
 
Excuse me if I'm a bit dumb and missed some random post, but are you saying Jews are worse than nazis because bible?,

The crimes are not specified. Maybe he should do that first? I mean. It is not certain that information of the bible is meant in these crimes.
 
Excuse me if I'm a bit dumb and missed some random post, but are you saying Jews are worse than nazis because bible?

Um... No? I might think that the Jews are a pack of liars because of the various lies they put forth as truth, but being liars doesn't earn them the death penalty and doesn't make them worse than people who were terrible war criminals.

In my opinion, of course.

I think your confusion springs from the fact that I consider the crimes that the ancient Egyptians have been falsely accused of are in some ways worse than what the Nazis had done. And yeah falsely accusing someone of crimes they didn't commit isn't cool but, again, that isn't a death penalty worthy offense.
 
Last edited:
Um... No? I might think that the Jews are a pack of liars because of the various lies they put forth as truth, but being liars doesn't earn them the death penalty and doesn't make them worse than people who were terrible war criminals.

In my opinion, of course.

Could you be more specific about those lies?
Some general examples, perhaps?
 
Could you be more specific about those lies?
Some general examples, perhaps?

Already edited that post, but what would you consider falsely accusing someone of a crime? That certainly isn't telling the truth. And continuing to defend it as truth in face of facts isn't telling the truth either.
 
"I'm not saying the Holocaust never happened, I'm just saying Jews are liars!"

Good going there :rolleyes:
 
Okay, I have to ask. What makes the Jews so special to you? If we were talking about any other group known to have lied and falsely accuse several groups of war crimes against them or their ancestors I would have no problem about calling them out as liars either, especially if they were still promoting it as true in modern times.

You'd have to demonstrate that there's a false accusation, first.
 
Last edited:
I see your confusion then.
Since I'm not confused in the least, I seriously doubt that.

Firstly, the word you're actually looking for is liable since this forum is written format.
Oh boy. Firstly, the word you're looking for is libel, not liable. And lastly, this isn't a courtroom and we aren't discussing potential civil litigation. In casual, conversational usage, the words slander, libel and defamation are all perfectly acceptable synonyms.

Tell me, trustbutverify, have you ever heard the saying "Trust but verify"?
Sure have. I've also heard the phrase "JAQing off". Seen it in weaselly action a number of times, as well.
 
Last edited:
Since I'm not confused in the least, I seriously doubt that.

"You only think you're not confused but you really are confused. That contradiction is what makes it so confusing." ~Anthony DiNozo, NCIS.

TBV said:
Oh boy. Firstly, the word you're looking for is libel, not liable.
I blame the auto-correct. I'm know that because you now think I'm some racist antisemitic because I dare to question the accuracy of what is known so I'm supposed to blame the Jews but it really was the auto-correct.

TBV said:
Sure have. I've also heard the phrase "JAQing off". Seen it in weaselly action a number of times, as well.

I only asked about the accuracy of what is known about how many Jews were executed and I got the answer I needed. It really doesn't get any more complicated than that.

Call it JAQing off if you like, I won't contest it. Don't assign racism where it doesn't exist though.
 
Do you take Exodus as a factual account? Because I can most certainly assure you that it never happened.

Did the Jews write the Bible?

ETA: Or are you talking about Leon Uris' Exodus? A fictional retelling - but based on reality - of the foundation of Israel? Did the Jews write that?
 
Last edited:
Do you take Exodus as a factual account? Because I can most certainly assure you that it never happened.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you were talking about reality, not ancient myths. I'm sure my ancestors had silly beliefs, and I'm sure they lied, but I don't think that has anything to do about me, or how dishonest my ethnic group is.
 
To add to your parenthesis Or as many forget : homosexual and handicapped.
And Slavic (especially Polish) leaders, politicians and intellectuals; Roma; the mentally ill; Esperanto speakers; communists and socialists; Freemasons and Jehovah's Witnesses.
Not forgetting the Hunger Plan and more than ten million Slavic civilian deaths.

Please recall that my first thought was that the Nazis had lied about or over exaggerated the number they had killed. Not that five million executed is any more acceptable than six, but still... Where would the Nazis fit on your honesty scale?
It's worth remembering that the death toll for the Holocaust in toto is around eleven-and-a-half million human lives
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom