• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged General Holocaust denial discussion Part IV

All you have to do is sum up David Irving's attempt to white-wash Himmler while denying the man's singular achievement.

What I want to know is how someone can be pro-Nazi while claiming they failed their quest to create a Jew-Free Germany?
 
I don't see "AAH" in the Help section. The nearest an acronym finder comes up with is "Americans against Hate". Does this mean there is no way to discuss a book on this forum? That seems a bit limiting.

<spoonfeed mode>
At the top of your screen, the first menu item is "Forum Index". Click that.

In the first sub-menu, there is an item also called "Forum Index". Click that.

Scroll down that page until you find a section called "Members Only".

You will find an item called Abandon All Hope. (Second last item in that section)

There you will see posts which have been removed for rule violations.

Note that the first post is stickied and explains why any posts are there.

</spoonfeed mode>

8 frakkin' years and you need the basics explained to you. Sheesh.
 
All you have to do is sum up David Irving's attempt to white-wash Himmler while denying the man's singular achievement.

What I want to know is how someone can be pro-Nazi while claiming they failed their quest to create a Jew-Free Germany?
There's hardly a need, as the text is now available as a free download:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Himmler/TRUE-HIMMLER-pt1.pdf
As you can see, rather than try to "white-wash" Himmler, he endorses much of the standard view of the Holocaust, including Aktion Reinhard and systematic shootings in the east. What he doesn't do is provide his evidence, but we are led to believe that that will be forthcoming in the second volume, yet to appear. He also believes in the deportations of German Jews (as does everyone else). What is distinctive about the first volume is that it moves away from the "Hollywood nazi" stereotypes about Germany in the 1930s, which the SS are at the core of.
 
There's hardly a need, as the text is now available as a free download:

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Himmler/TRUE-HIMMLER-pt1.pdf

As you can see, rather than try to "white-wash" Himmler, he endorses much of the standard view of the Holocaust, including Aktion Reinhard and systematic shootings in the east. What he doesn't do is provide his evidence, but we are led to believe that that will be forthcoming in the second volume, yet to appear. He also believes in the deportations of German Jews (as does everyone else). What is distinctive about the first volume is that it moves away from the "Hollywood nazi" stereotypes about Germany in the 1930s, which the SS are at the core of.
A history book that doesn't provide evidence? Most people would consider that be a bad thing, but being a Naziphile you'll no doubt be able to explain otherwise, I'm sure.
 
There's hardly a need, as the text is now available as a free download:
http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Himmler/TRUE-HIMMLER-pt1.pdf
As you can see, rather than try to "white-wash" Himmler, he endorses much of the standard view of the Holocaust, including Aktion Reinhard and systematic shootings in the east. What he doesn't do is provide his evidence, but we are led to believe that that will be forthcoming in the second volume, yet to appear. He also believes in the deportations of German Jews (as does everyone else). What is distinctive about the first volume is that it moves away from the "Hollywood nazi" stereotypes about Germany in the 1930s, which the SS are at the core of.

I can't think of any quality history of the Third Reich that would qualify as "Hollywood" in any way. The best book on the S.S. is "The Order of the Death's Head", by Heinz Hoehne which chronicles all the stuff you tried to post but in much less space. The book details how how the Nazi Party members spent almost as much time and effort trying to screw each other over as they did exterminating the Jews and conquering Europe.

The idea that the world has been misled about the true nature of the Third Reich is an embarrassing one considering most of their story was written by the Third Reich before the war and its surviving members after the war.
 
Just to follow up my post 727 where I referred too Hitler's Will, or more specifically his Political Will, which the so-called Revisionists, (Or at least the great majority.), are dedicated to carrying out. Here is Hitler's words about the "Evil" Jewish enemy: (From https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/My_Political_Testament)

It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted the war in 1939. It was desired and instigated exclusively by those international statesmen who were either of Jewish descent or worked for Jewish interests. I have made too many offers for the control and limitation of armaments, which posterity will not for all time be able to disregard for the responsibility for the outbreak of this war to be laid on me. I have further never wished that after the first fatal world war a second against England, or even against America, should break out. Centuries will pass away, but out of the ruins of our towns and monuments the hatred against those finally responsible whom we have to thank for everything, international Jewry and its helpers, will grow.

Three days before the outbreak of the German-Polish war I again proposed to the British ambassador in Berlin a solution to the German-Polish problem — similar to that in the case of the Saar district, under international control. This offer also cannot be denied. It was only rejected because the leading circles in English politics wanted the war, partly on account of the business hoped for and partly under influence of propaganda organized by international Jewry.

I have also made it quite plain that, if the nations of Europe are again to be regarded as mere shares to be bought and sold by these international conspirators in money and finance, then that race, Jewry, which is the real criminal of this murderous struggle, will be saddled with the responsibility. I further left no one in doubt that this time not only would millions of children of Europe's Aryan peoples die of hunger, not only would millions of grown men suffer death, and not only hundreds of thousands of women and children be burnt and bombed to death in the towns, without the real criminal having to atone for this guilt, even if by more humane means.

Here Hitler again and again engages in projection and out and out lying and casts himself has of course the "true" victim. And he seems so proud of the murder of men, women and children by "more humane means". (Snark!!!!)

Later Hitler says:

From the sacrifice of our soldiers and from my own unity with them unto death, will in any case spring up in the history of Germany, the seed of a radiant renaissance of the National-Socialist movement and thus of the realization of a true community of nations.

Ah yes Hitler begins to fantasize about getting revenge. The "true community of nations", crap can be dismissed has a lie. Hitler during his rule never had much use for such a thing.

And at the end of Hitler's Political Testament we read:

Above all I charge the leaders of the nation and those under them to scrupulous observance of the laws of race and to merciless opposition to the universal poisoner of all peoples, international Jewry.

Thus right at the end Hitler reveals, yet again, the psychotic, paranoid delusions that obsessed him.

And since that Will was written so many so-called Revisionists have been campaigning against the "universal poisoner of all peoples". They have been following Hitler's suggestion with zeal and passion, against the source of all "Evil" in the world.

In William Luther Pierce's The Turner Diaries Hitler is referred to has "The Great One" and the "Organization" is tasked with tracking down and murdering all of "Satan's spawn". Jews of course.

To so many Revisionists Hitler is "The Great One", and like Hitler's will says they must pickup the struggle against the "universal poisoner of all peoples". Just like Pierce's "Organization". Of course these so-called Revisionists are very mum about what is their ultimate or final solution to the problem of dealing with "the universal poisoner of all peoples", or has Pierce calls them "Satan's spawn". Pierce was of course very honest about his fantasy of mass murdering every Jew down to the last man, woman and child and then goes on to fantasize about murdering most of the Human Race. Thoughts which seem very satisfying to Pierce. (Ugh!!) So just what is the so-called Revisionists actual aim?

So following the directive of "The Great One", so many so-called Revisionists see themselves, like Hitler, engaged in a battle of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness. But such is the will of "the Great One".
 
What is distinctive about the first volume is that it moves away from the "Hollywood nazi" stereotypes about Germany in the 1930s
as though anyone studying German Jewish policy and extermination campaigns was in need of David Irving to "move away from 'Hollywood nazi' stereotypes," stereotypes which those of us who read academic works know are not present in recent scholarship (Gerlach, Longerich, Cesarani, Browning, Confino, Angrick/Klein, Stangneth, you know the full list and IIRC have even read about 3 recent such works, right?) . . . IOW there is absolutely nothing distinctive about not engaging in Hollywood stereotypes when it comes to study of the Nazis and the Third Reich . . .

on Irving, recently I read an aside in - speaking of Hollywood stereotypes that don't exist - Nilsson's Hitler Redux: ". . . it is an established fact that Irving very frequently lies and distorts facts in his books, as well as when he appears in court . . ."
 
Last edited:
In fact, EtienneSC, how about you take some fairly "recent" scholarly works on the Nazi genocide and illustrate for us how they exemplify your claim that Irving is "unique" in "mov[ing] away" from "Hollywood stereotypes"? Let me suggest these, which you should by now have had time to study:

Stangneth, Eichmann before Jerusalem (7 years old)
Feferman, The Holocaust in the Crimea and the North Caucasus (5 years old)
Lozowick, Hitler’s Bureaucrats (nearly 20 years old)
Confino, World Without Jews (7 years old)
Steinhart, The Holocaust and the Germanization of Ukraine (6 years old)
Kay, The Making of an SS Killer (5 years old)


Just some highlights, please, to support your point.
 
In fact, EtienneSC, how about you take some fairly "recent" scholarly works on the Nazi genocide and illustrate for us how they exemplify your claim that Irving is "unique" in "mov[ing] away" from "Hollywood stereotypes"? Let me suggest these, which you should by now have had time to study:

Stangneth, Eichmann before Jerusalem (7 years old)
Feferman, The Holocaust in the Crimea and the North Caucasus (5 years old)
Lozowick, Hitler’s Bureaucrats (nearly 20 years old)
Confino, World Without Jews (7 years old)
Steinhart, The Holocaust and the Germanization of Ukraine (6 years old)
Kay, The Making of an SS Killer (5 years old)


Just some highlights, please, to support your point.

I have one question is The Holocaust in the Crimea and the North Caucasus, the same book has Beyond the Pale: The Holocaust in he North Caucasus, Feferman is listed has an author in both.

As for the rest; our friend EtienneSC seems to have bailed out, again, for the time being. He made some claims about Revisionistic Holocaust Denial getting some traction among the general public in the last c. 4 years and I said that if anything it was becoming more absurd and ridiculous. He has per usual demanded "sources" while himself supplying none to support his position. I didn't because there was no point with him. Of course I could have mentioned the Website Holocaust Controversies which is vastly more scholarly than any of the crap he cites, if he cites anything.

In fact it appears that he came here solely for the purpose of promoting Irving's book about Himmler.

It appears that Holocaust Deniers really don't learn much but keep repeating the same dull nostrums or go off on irrelevant tangents. I doubt he will reply to you. But that's the point I think you are making.
 
as though anyone studying German Jewish policy and extermination campaigns was in need of David Irving to "move away from 'Hollywood nazi' stereotypes," stereotypes which those of us who read academic works know are not present in recent scholarship (Gerlach, Longerich, Cesarani, Browning, Confino, Angrick/Klein, Stangneth, you know the full list and IIRC have even read about 3 recent such works, right?) . . . IOW there is absolutely nothing distinctive about not engaging in Hollywood stereotypes when it comes to study of the Nazis and the Third Reich . . .

on Irving, recently I read an aside in - speaking of Hollywood stereotypes that don't exist - Nilsson's Hitler Redux: ". . . it is an established fact that Irving very frequently lies and distorts facts in his books, as well as when he appears in court . . ."

I think Irving's new hatred for Hollywood is because of "Denial", which is pretty unflattering in it's portrayal of Irving.
 
I have one question is The Holocaust in the Crimea and the North Caucasus, the same book has Beyond the Pale: The Holocaust in he North Caucasus, Feferman is listed has an author in both.

As for the rest; our friend EtienneSC seems to have bailed out, again, for the time being. He made some claims about Revisionistic Holocaust Denial getting some traction among the general public in the last c. 4 years and I said that if anything it was becoming more absurd and ridiculous. He has per usual demanded "sources" while himself supplying none to support his position. I didn't because there was no point with him. Of course I could have mentioned the Website Holocaust Controversies which is vastly more scholarly than any of the crap he cites, if he cites anything.

In fact it appears that he came here solely for the purpose of promoting Irving's book about Himmler.

It appears that Holocaust Deniers really don't learn much but keep repeating the same dull nostrums or go off on irrelevant tangents. I doubt he will reply to you. But that's the point I think you are making.

It's a sign of Irving's fall that he seems to have trouble finding a publisher for his tripe, and has to release it as a free download.
 
I have one question is The Holocaust in the Crimea and the North Caucasus, the same book has Beyond the Pale: The Holocaust in the North Caucasus, Feferman is listed has an author in both.
No, Beyond the Pale is a recent (2020) collection of papers by various authors (which I really should read . . . despite the price!), whilst The Holocaust in the Crimea and the North Caucasus is Feferman's study published in 2016.

The other point I wanted to make is that EtienneSC, like other deniers, doesn't allow his ignorance of recent academic work and his lack of basic literacy in the scholarship get in the way of his making absurd, empty and dishonest judgments about the scholarship . . . which, again, he is unfamiliar with and utterly unqualified to judge.
 
The other point I wanted to make is that EtienneSC, like other deniers, doesn't allow his ignorance of recent academic work and his lack of basic literacy in the scholarship get in the way of his making absurd, empty and dishonest judgments about the scholarship . . . which, again, he is unfamiliar with and utterly unqualified to judge.

I pointed out that Irving's latest book didn't have any references, but EtienneSC seemed unconcerned saying they would be in the unreleased volume 2. He was not at all concerned by a "major historical study" lacking such a thing.

Says everything, really.
 
Himmler was interviewed by a Jew, Norbert Masur, on April 25, 1945, and in the course of the interview gave this succinct and accurate summary of the holohoax ...
"In order to stop the epidemic, we were forced to cremate the bodies of the many people that died of the disease. Heinrich HimmlerThat was the reason we had to build the crematoria, and now, because of this everybody wants to tighten the noose around our neck."

Other notable Nazis denying the hoax .....
Goering : www.bitchute.com/video/GoHRV14Hi2sf/

Hitler: www.bitchute.com/video/LyXJPF92fyxg/

Mengele www.bitchute.com/video/K93Zt9tQNEkh/
 
Well, you can always trust what Mengele and Goering said.

Also, Bitchute? Really? Jesus.
 
Himmler was interviewed by a Jew, Norbert Masur, on April 25, 1945, and in the course of the interview gave this succinct and accurate summary of the holohoax ...
"In order to stop the epidemic, we were forced to cremate the bodies of the many people that died of the disease. Heinrich HimmlerThat was the reason we had to build the crematoria, and now, because of this everybody wants to tighten the noose around our neck."

Other notable Nazis denying the hoax .....
Goering : www.bitchute.com/video/GoHRV14Hi2sf/

Hitler: www.bitchute.com/video/LyXJPF92fyxg/

Mengele www.bitchute.com/video/K93Zt9tQNEkh/

And if you can't believe the accused, who can you believe? :rolleyes:

Give it up, Saggy. The Nazis documented their crimes quite well. That's what earned them the noose.
 

Back
Top Bottom