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

What does everyone think of the Nuremberg Trials-Did they prove Nazi guilt?

Stop trying to derail the conversation by pretending you don't understand. "Holohoax" is the word Saggy uses for "Holocaust". He's not the first or only person to ever call it that. If somebody in this thread repeatedly used the word "Shoah" instead of "holocaust" you would know what he was talking about. You know what Saggy means as well.

Actually, no, I don't always know what he means. What is a "holohoax denier," for instance? Is it someone who denies the Holocaust? Or is it someone he denies the idea the Holocaust was in some way fake?

And what kind of defense is "that's the word he uses"? I could start using the word "Churchill" when I mean "Hitler." Do you not think that will lead to some confusing sentences in a discussion such as this?

So, if Saggy wants to at best sound like a child and at worst not make any sense, he can keep using the word "holohoax." And the conversation will get "derailed" every time he says something that requires me to ask him what he means by his use of the term. Or he can discuss like an adult by using the correct terminology for the subject.
 
Awww nuts! Looks like Vienna was indeed a transit city for the transportation of Holocaust victims.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WW2-Holocaust-Europe-2007Borders.png


That's just weird. It says Vienna is a "transit city" like Rome, Paris, and Berlin. Those are all cities that had relatively large Jewish populations that were deported. Deportations from Vienna started in 1939 and by 1942 there were only 8,000 Jews remaining in all of Austria.

But the gray lines showing the deportation routes don't show any Jews being shipped into any of these "transit" cities. Berlin is called a "transit city" but the map doesn't show Jews shipped either in or out!

Further, Auschwitz isn't shown as a "transit city" even though we know the camp was a collection point for the durchgangjuden.

So what does "transit city" mean on this map?
 
That's just weird. It says Vienna is a "transit city" like Rome, Paris, and Berlin. Those are all cities that had relatively large Jewish populations that were deported. Deportations from Vienna started in 1939 and by 1942 there were only 8,000 Jews remaining in all of Austria.

But the gray lines showing the deportation routes don't show any Jews being shipped into any of these "transit" cities. Berlin is called a "transit city" but the map doesn't show Jews shipped either in or out!

Further, Auschwitz isn't shown as a "transit city" even though we know the camp was a collection point for the durchgangjuden.

So what does "transit city" mean on this map?

The map legend normally helps people as confused as you. The label "major deportation route" might be a hint.
 
The problem is that, even if you fall for the orthodox history of the holocaust hook, line, and sinker, Vienna wasn't a death camp.

Nope it wasn't. It was and is a major city inside the Axis domain during WWII. It had and still does have a major railroad junction for central Europe. So if the Nazi's can get the jews from all over to Vienna than they can sort them out and do what they please. One of the most insidious aspects of the Holocaust was how well organized and efficient the machine was. One last thing - It is very near the polish boarder and just several hundred km from Auschwitz and other concentration camps.

Even if Vienna was a collection point for Jews, the departure point for the Jews prior to arriving in Vienna wouldn't determine their ultimate fate.

I don't understand your point but the letter instructing them to be killed was what determined their fate.

But let's pretend it does and Jews coming from Western Europe or Hungary or Italy into Vienna were destined to be shipped off to a death camp to be holocausted. The letter of 30 June 1944 doesn't reference the point of origin.

[sarcasm]No, no, no. They were put on the trains because they won a special grand prize vacation to the polish country side! It was all inclusive, even a refreshing shower when you got there![/sarcasm]

Please inform me as to the reason the second in command of the SS would ship 12,000 jews to vienna with instructions to kill the worthless ones.

Why does the point of origin matter?

What might have happened or could have been doesn't prove beyond reasonable doubt what was or is. Do you realize how much of the 'evidence' against Kaltenbrunner is in the form of could've/should've/what he really meant was?

No, how much? Do you have a percentage?

Actually much of the evidence comes from him and the organization he headed. He denied that it was him but the evidence proved otherwise. Even if the letter was the only time he actively participated in the extermination of 12,000 people I think that is still a crime.
 
The problem is that, even if you fall for the orthodox history of the holocaust hook, line, and sinker, Vienna wasn't a death camp.

Who said it was? I said the Jews in question were sent to Vienna for work.

Even if Vienna was a collection point for Jews, the departure point for the Jews prior to arriving in Vienna wouldn't determine their ultimate fate.

No, it would not.

But let's pretend it does and Jews coming from Western Europe or Hungary or Italy into Vienna were destined to be shipped off to a death camp to be holocausted. The letter of 30 June 1944 doesn't reference the point of origin.

No, but given the date, Hungary is a pretty fair assumption.

What might have happened or could have been doesn't prove beyond reasonable doubt what was or is. Do you realize how much of the 'evidence' against Kaltenbrunner is in the form of could've/should've/what he really meant was?

What's your point?
 
Yes there is. We know that the "Endlösung" of the Jewish question referred to extermination, as forced emigration and evacuation had proven ineffective. On July 31, 1941 Hermann Göring sent an order to Reinhard Heydrich ordering him to "submit to [Göring] as soon as possible a general plan of the administrative material and financial measures necessary for carrying out the desired final solution (Endlösung) of the Jewish question."

And we know that "Endlösung" means murder because.....?
 
You really are just wrong about he trials and this guy. As far as the charges go he was charged with counts 1, 3, and 4. He was not charged with planning and executing wars of aggression.



http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/de-kaltenbrunner.htm



Oh clearly he denied it so it must not be true!


Your quote from the globalsecurity website contains factually incorrect information. It states that Kaltenbrunner saw gassings among other methods of execution while he was visiting Mauthausen. First of all, Mauthausen is one of those swing-camps; i.e., sometimes it had a gas chamber, sometimes it doesn't.

Second, there is no evidence Kaltenbrunner was present at a gassing except for affidavits from witnesses who were not present in Nuremberg and could not be cross-examined. Physical evidence that there were gas chambers at any camp wasn't introduced at Nuremberg. Kaltenbrunner denied having any part in any gassing operation and no witnesses could prove he did.

In fact, one witness who did testify at Nuremberg was a guy named Rudolf Hoess. He was one of the commandants at Auschwitz. He testified--under oath--that the Final Solution was a super duper triple double secret state secret and that only Himmler, Eichmann, and maybe a couple of other insiders knew about the Jew killing and Kaltenbrunner wasn't one of them. You don't think Rudolf Hoess would perjure himself on the stand, do you?
 
Because most holocaust deniers are anti-semites, and their anti-semitism is the causing factor of their holocaust denialism. This link is so strong that reversing the cause and effect relationship nearly always shows the same.

If you are one of the minuscule minority of holocaust deniers that aren't also anti-semites, we can conclude that your delusion stems more from insanity and not as much from a rabid hatred of Jews.


OK, now I'm confused. I thought an antisemite was somebody who hated the Jews. Based on your response, it sounds like your definition of an antisemite is somebody who hates Romani, the Slavs, the Poles, the handicapped, the homosexuals, the freemasons, the Jehova's Witnesses, Soviet POWs, the East Slavs and the Serbs and South Slavs as well as the Jews.

Or maybe you just weren't answering the question. The question is if the holocaust includes the persecution of anybody who wasn't an "aryan" (whatever that is), how can hating the Jews be a reason for denying it?
 
Actually, no, I don't always know what he means. What is a "holohoax denier," for instance? Is it someone who denies the Holocaust? Or is it someone he denies the idea the Holocaust was in some way fake?

It could also mean somebody who denies that the holocaust is a hoax. I don't recall seeing that term but if I did, I would probably translate it into "holocaust denier" depending on the context. But you're right that it is ambiguous.

And what kind of defense is "that's the word he uses"? I could start using the word "Churchill" when I mean "Hitler." Do you not think that will lead to some confusing sentences in a discussion such as this?

It most certainly would. Those two words have pretty specific meanings, especially in the context of a discussion of mid twentieth century European events. You can't go switching them around without at least some initial confusion.

But I know you've heard of "The Holocaust." You wouldn't be participating here if you didn't. I also know that you know there are some people who have a little trouble believing everything they hear about the holocaust. You also know there are some people who flat out say that the holocaust is a hoax. You wouldn't be here if you didn't or if you didn't know when you arrived, hanging out here would inform you that there are.

If somebody who you know says the holocaust is a hoax uses the word "holohoax" you can figure out that he's talking about the holocaust, which he considers a hoax. It's not that difficult.

So, if Saggy wants to at best sound like a child and at worst not make any sense, he can keep using the word "holohoax." And the conversation will get "derailed" every time he says something that requires me to ask him what he means by his use of the term. Or he can discuss like an adult by using the correct terminology for the subject.


If you want to keep asking the same question over and over again, feel free. I wouldn't expect Saggy to answer you any more than a few times though. It won't derail the conversation but it might make you sound a little dim.
 
If you want to keep asking the same question over and over again, feel free. I wouldn't expect Saggy to answer you any more than a few times though. It won't derail the conversation but it might make you sound a little dim.

But not as dim as Saggy and yourself,that would be difficult to achieve.
 

Netanyahu tried this canard at the UN, after Ahmadinejad called him out, citing, and waving around, a copy of the Wannsee conference minutes. Like all holohoax lies, it assumes complete unfamiliarity of the subject, in this case the Wannsee minutes. Here is an excerpt ...

"III.
Another possible solution of the problem has now taken the place of emigration, i.e. the evacuation of the Jews to the East, provided that the Führer gives the appropriate approval in advance.

These actions are, however, only to be considered provisional, but practical experience is already being collected which is of the greatest importance in relation to the future final solution of the Jewish question.

In the course of the practical execution of the final solution, Europe will be combed through from west to east. Germany proper, including the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, will have to be handled first due to the housing problem and additional social and political necessities.

The evacuated Jews will first be sent, group by group, to so-called transit ghettos, from which they will be transported to the East.

SS-Obergruppenführer Heydrich went on to say that an important prerequisite for the evacuation as such is the exact definition of the persons involved.

It is not intended to evacuate Jews over 65 years old, but to send them to an old-age ghetto - Theresienstadt is being considered for this purpose."

This is a fair description of the Nazis plan to get the Jews out of Europe. Netanyahu's statement that the document charts the extermination of Jews in concentration camps is pure phantasmagoria.

For the record, I am careful to use the word holohoax in complete conformity with the definition.

From wiki ..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holohoax

Def: holohoax -
1. the massive and well orchestrated campaign by organized Jewry to convince the world that the Nazis attempted to exterminate the European Jews , antecedents can be traced back to Zionist sources in the early 1900s, the campaign in its current form got into full swing during WWII. It was directed by the World Jewish Congress and affiliates, it involved a constant drumbeat of phony press releases in the Jewish press, including the NYT, efforts to influence the US Govt, culminating with the establishment of the War Refugee Board under the direction of Henry Morgenthau. The campaign included false testimony at Buchenwald and other captured camps, the operation of the US psych warfare unit to create a movie with fake evidence, false testimony at Nuremberg, efforts to coerce false testimony at Nuremberg, false statements by US government and military officials, and a complete suppression of the facts of the true condition of the camps, and all this was done with the full cooperation of the major US media.

2. the lies of the holohoax, the phantasmagoric and false account of the Nazi efforts to exterminate the European Jews, including, the lies of mass gassings in the camps in imaginary 'gas chambers', and the lies of mass executions of Jews on the Eastern front, for example at Babi Yar.
 
Last edited:
From wiki ..
.
No, nothing you wrote following this was from wiki.

What does it say about your opinions that you have to lie so transparently to justify them?
.
 
Last edited:
So they were evacuated to the east. OK.

So then what happened to them?
 
First of all, Mauthausen is one of those swing-camps; i.e., sometimes it had a gas chamber, sometimes it doesn't.

You don't say.

So tell us all: Who said it didn't have one? And when? Be specific. Name names.
 
Your quote from the globalsecurity website contains factually incorrect information. It states that Kaltenbrunner saw gassings among other methods of execution while he was visiting Mauthausen. First of all, Mauthausen is one of those swing-camps; i.e., sometimes it had a gas chamber, sometimes it doesn't.

Do you have any evidence to back up your claims? Here is the gas chamber.

http://en.mauthausen-memorial.at/db/admin/de/show_article.php?carticle=375&topopup=1

Even if it was used intermittently that still means it was used and he could have witnessed it.

Second, there is no evidence Kaltenbrunner was present at a gassing except for affidavits from witnesses who were not present in Nuremberg and could not be cross-examined.

no evidence except for that which I have bolded. Which is more evidence than any denier has produced. Please prove that there was no in person testimony against him.

Physical evidence that there were gas chambers at any camp wasn't introduced at Nuremberg. Kaltenbrunner denied having any part in any gassing operation and no witnesses could prove he did.

Proof please. Also no one is accusing him of pressing the button. He was in charge of the organization that set up the whole process. It is very unlikely that he was present and actively participating in any gassing and he was never accused of such.

In fact, one witness who did testify at Nuremberg was a guy named Rudolf Hoess. He was one of the commandants at Auschwitz. He testified--under oath--that the Final Solution was a super duper triple double secret state secret and that only Himmler, Eichmann, and maybe a couple of other insiders knew about the Jew killing and Kaltenbrunner wasn't one of them. You don't think Rudolf Hoess would perjure himself on the stand, do you?

If it was super secret how did he know about it? Would you please provide some evidence for any of your claims? I am sick of doing the work you should be doing.
 
Saggy,

Here is another part of the wannsee meeting minutes

Under proper guidance, in the course of the final solution the Jews are to be allocated for appropriate labor in the East. Able-bodied Jews, separated according to sex, will be taken in large work columns to these areas for work on roads, in the course of which action doubtless a large portion will be eliminated by natural causes.

Direct intention to work people to death.
 
Report entitled "Resettlement of Jews" written by SS-SturmbannfŸhrer Gricksch for SS-Col. von Herff and ReichsfŸhrer-SS Himmler, after inspection of Auschwitz camp on 14-16 May 1943.

The prisoners are told that they are to be cleansed and disinfected for their new assignments. They must therefore completely undress to be bathed. To avoid panic and to prevent disturbances of any kind, they are instructed to arrange their clothing neatly under their respective numbers, so that they will be able to find their things again after their bath. Everything proceeds in a perfectly orderly fashion. Then they pass through a small corridor and enter a large cellar room which resembles a shower bath. In this room are three large pillars, into which certain materials can be lowered from outside the cellar room. When three- to four-hundred people have been herded into this room, the doors are shut, and containers filled with the substances are dropped down into the pillars. As soon as the containers touch the base of the pillars, they release particular substances that put the people to sleep in one minute.

http://fcit.usf.edu/HOLOCAUST/resource/document/DocAusch.htm
 
OK, now I'm confused. I thought an antisemite was somebody who hated the Jews. Based on your response, it sounds like your definition of an antisemite is somebody who hates Romani, the Slavs, the Poles, the handicapped, the homosexuals, the freemasons, the Jehova's Witnesses, Soviet POWs, the East Slavs and the Serbs and South Slavs as well as the Jews.

Yes, you are confused.

Or maybe you just weren't answering the question. The question is if the holocaust includes the persecution of anybody who wasn't an "aryan" (whatever that is), how can hating the Jews be a reason for denying it?

I answered it. You just didn't understand it. Try again.
 

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