• 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 thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dogzilla said:
How many statements do you have from German politicians, as opposed to German military leaders, talking about exterminating the Jewish people?
Click to expand...
Are you serious - or this question rhetorical? You have heard of the Fuhrer, no?
 
Last edited:
Dogzilla said:
It's hard to believe Nick would have recommended it. I guess he didn't actually read it beforehand.
Click to expand...
The trouble with the entry, as KDLarsen intimates, is that it is elementary; I assume that is precisely why Nick recommended it to you.
 
Dogzilla said:
You should read up on the history you pretend to have read. Jews weren't citizens by the time they were being holocausted. And it was hardly an existential war of extermination what with the special classes of Jews who were exempt from extermination.
Click to expand...
Joachim Neander, who has studied this question, the matter of Reich citizenship, made this very interesting and informative post a couple years ago:
It is a widely held error that the Nuremberg Laws stripped those Germans who were defined as "Jews" of their "citizenship." Third Reich citizenship law (Staatsangehörigkeitsrecht) is a very complicated matter. If you are interested in details, I can recommend you my article in theologie.geschichte 2007 (in German, on the Web). To make it short: the Reichsbürgergesetz - one of the Nuremberg laws of 1935 - created two classes of German citizens: those with "full political rights " (whatever that might have meant in Nazi Germany), the Reichsbürger, and the non-Reichsbürger. It made "Jews" and "Gypsies" - I deliberately use scare quotes to stress that "Jew" and "Gypsy" was a political construct - second-class citizens, that is right. They remained, however, Staatsangehörige (Reich citizens). As such they were, e.g., interned in France, the UK, and Belgium at the outbreak of the war, Nazis and anti-Nazi refugees, Jewish or Gentile, alike.

I know that it is very difficult for Americans to understand this. Citizenship in your country entitles to full political rights, AFAIK with some minor exceptions, such as - please correct me if necessary - a U.S. president must be a born American.
Nick Terry (thank you, Nick!) provided us with a link to a Web page where all of you can read the original (sorry, German) text of the Reichsbürgergesetz:
http://alex.onb.ac.at/gesetze_drab_fs.htm
You can see there that Staatsangehöriger is the generic term, and Reichsbürger denotes only a subset of all Staatsangehörigen of the 3rd Reich. As the authoritative commentary by Stuckart and Globke clearly stated, Staatsangehörigkeit was not linked to "race" or "nationality," an individual not of "German or related blood" (that was the official word for "Aryan") could be a Reich Staatsangehöriger. Though a German Jewish (or Gypsy) Staatsangehöriger could not be a Reichsbürger, s/he did not become staatenlos ("stateless," if I translate this correctly) by virtue of the Reichsbürgergesetz. That is not "my interpretation," it is the text of the law. It becomes "interpretation" only when translated into a language that has no specific words for the German terms. (Translation is always interpretation - one of the fundamentals I learned when studying Theology.)

Staatsangehörigkeit is and was the only criterion for treating individuals in international relations - it was e.g. mentioned in passports and visa - and had also significant influence in inner state affairs, such as in family and inheritance law. E.g. legal residents of the Reich who had not German Staatsangehörigkeit, were not affected by the Blutschutzgesetz and its decrees. An "Aryan" Swiss merchant living in Berlin could have a love affair with an Italian Jewish girl, and nobody would care about.

The Reichsbürgergesetz - against widely held opinion in English speaking countries - itself had very little influence on everyday life in the Reich. It did not make Jewish and Gypsy Germans stateless, and the discriminations against non-Reichsbürger as mentioned in the First Decree to the Reichsbürgergesetz only repeated and summarized established customs: a non-Reichsbürger could not hold a public office (which was already law since February 1933 with the Law of the Restitution of the Civil Service - thanks to KentFord9 who remembered us of it!), and exclusion from voting had little effect in the Führer state.

BTW, legal discrimination against a subset of the Staatsangehörigen was not a Nazi invention. E.g. women acquired the right to vote in Germany not before 1918, and in Weimar times a woman in the civil service was dismissed when marrying . . .
Click to expand...
Dogzilla might want to "read up" on this topic.
 
LemmyCaution said:
@ Dogzilla,

See, readers are onto how you are dodging specific questions.

To help you understand further why asking where Jews ended up, if 5+ million of them were not killed - and why you really do need to have an answer for this if you are going to wave around ethnic cleansing, resettlement, and removed from Europe - here are some very simple questions that you should try answering for yourself:

- do you seriously doubt that the Jewish population of Warsaw ghetto was about 450,000 as of February 1940?

- do you seriously doubt that the Jewish population of Lodz ghetto was about 160,000 in June 1940?

- do you seriously doubt that the Jewish population of Greater Germany was over 300,000 in May 1939?

- do you know where these figures come from?

- do you know who controlled all these places as of 1939 and 1940 and after?

- can you add in order to see that just among Germany + Lodz + Warsaw + Vilna (from previous posts) we can account for close to 1 million Jews in 1939-1940, before Barbarossa? if you don't like this snapshot, do you want to do the same exercise for June 1941? another time?

(As a reference to give you a sense of the scale we know about from just these 4 places - consider that if every one of the Jews from these places had perished, they would make up nearly 1/5 of the Jewish victims who died in the Holocaust. Note that I haven't bothered to add in Kiev and Riga, to push us above 1 million. These simple questions, in other words, lead you to a large number of Europe's Jews, with good certainty of where they were and none of your faffing about.)

You know by now that if you say you doubt these numbers that I will ask you on what basis you doubt them, other than incredulity - or irrelevant claptrap about European demographics, which you don't really understand . . .
Click to expand...

Irrelevant claptrap? How can you possibly estimate Jewish losses if you don't know how many there were after the war? And if you can't even tell us how "Jew" was defined in any population census, you really don't have any idea at all.

You seem to think German figures are reliable. Is that true?
 
Nick Terry said:
I'm afraid you are once again, comparing apples and oranges. Asking 'where did they go' is asking about the destination of documented deportation transports sent to specific sites which all other evidence indicates were extermination camps. You're conflating this with demographics, which is an entirely different matter. You're also muddling up explaining the postwar situation with tracking the whereabouts of deported Jews in 1942-45.

Thus, for example, we have plentiful sources to indicate that there was a sizeable ghetto in Warsaw from 1939-43. We have records of the Judenrat as well as reports written by the German commissar for the ghetto, Auerswald. These document the ghetto's population rather thoroughly. They count the number who died from starvation month by month - both in Judenrat reports and in reports from Auerswald, and also note additions to the ghetto since in 1941-early 1942, quite a large number of smaller communities in the surrounding region were herded into the ghetto. There is also further confirmation in the monthly reports of the district governor, Ludwig Fischer, which include discussion of the ghetto on an ongoing basis. Thus, there is absolutely no doubt that a large number of Jews died in the ghetto, nor any doubt that there were enough to be deported in the Great Deportation of the summer of 1942, which began on July 22, 1942.

That deportation was documented by the Germans themselves as well as by the Judenrat, with the latter counting how many were deported each day, and this indicates that 250,000 were deported from July to September 1942 while 11,000 were transferred to labour camps. The deportation destination is known to be Treblinka from correspondence between Ganzenmueller and Wolff, and from railway schedules.

We also can confirm this from the Hoefle telegram, which documents 713,555 Jews deported to Treblinka in 1942, a number more than large enough to accomodate the 250,000 from Warsaw. The Hoefle telegram is in turn confirmed by the Korherr report, which uses the headline figure of 1.274 million which appears in the Hoefle telegram.

Asking deniers where did they go is asking what happened to the quarter of a million Jews of the Warsaw ghetto who were demonstrably deported to Treblinka in the summer of 1942.

Among many other questions, of course, since we can also ask what happened to the 1.274 million Jews recorded as deported in the Hoefle telegram or what happened to the Jews documented as deported to Auschwitz from 1942-44 who were not registered at Auschwitz. We can further ask what happened to the 152,000 Jews of the Lodz ghetto and the Warthegau who were demonstrably deported to Chelmno in 1942. There are still more we could ask, but those are some of the main ones.

Conventional history can answer all those questions. You, however, evidently cannot.
Click to expand...

If you want to say the Jews were killed at these camps, you need to explain what happened to them.
 
Rincewind said:
Really, Dogzilla?

This is the best you've got?

One of the things I've learnt here is that history tells us that the nazis deported Jews in order to exterminate them.

See - it's so easy to understand....
Click to expand...


If they want to say that the deported Jews were exterminated, they need to provide evidence of that. If you're going to say that millions of Jews were deported to camps and murdered there, you need to prove that is what happened. The first step would be to show that people were actually killed in the places where they are alleged to have been killed. So far that has been a laughable failure.
 
LemmyCaution said:
Your delightful dreamworld collapses with the simple, twin realizations that Himmler gave this speech, not to soldiers but to generals, in June 1944 and that the past tenses are used to indicate that which has already been done not that which will or should be done:

"It was necessary to resolve another big question. It was the most horrible task and the most awful assignment that any organization could receive: the solution of the Jewish question. I want to say a few words on the matter to this group with complete candor. It's good that we had the hardness to exterminate the Jews in our territory. Don't ask yourselves how difficult it would have been to carry out such an order, even though, as soldiers, I might say you would understand. But thinking critically as German soldiers, you can see that the order was essential. Because we wouldn't have been able to withstand the aerial bombing if we had had the Jews in our cities. I am also convinced we would not have been able to hold the Lemberg front of the Generalgouvernement if the big ghettos in Lemberg, Krakau, Lublin, and Warsaw had still been there. We cleaned out the last one, the big ghetto in Warsaw, in summer 1943. In Warsaw there were 500,000 Jews. I tell you this number confidentially. It took us five weeks of street fighting. Just the same, I want to answer a little question that surely you must have. The question is, of course you had to kill the adult Jews, I understand that, but how could you do the same to the women and children? So I have to tell you something: The children will be grown one day. Do we want to be so improper that we say, no, no, we're too weak to kill children. Our children can deal with them. Our children will fight that one out. But the Jewish hate, small today, will be big tomorrow, and the grown avengers will attack our children and grandchildren, who will then have to deal with them. I am convinced that this will be the case even if Adolf Hitler does not survive. No, we cannot shirk our responsibility to kill all the Jews. That would have been cowardly and therefore we adopted a clear solution to the problem, as difficult as it was."
Click to expand...

Oh, Generals aren't soldiers. I forgot. They're???? What are they again?
 
Dogzilla said:
If they want to say that the deported Jews were exterminated, they need to provide evidence of that.
Click to expand...

Well, let's go on the assumption, for a moment only, that no such evidence has been offered.

(In fact, copious evidence of extermination has been offered, and your refusal to acknowledge that evidence or to hold it to a reasonable standard that you would hold any other historical evidence does not negate that evidence.)

We need prove no such thing as extermination. We need only show that any other plausible explanation is a non-starter. They did not survive elsewhere; if they did, then we could surely demonstrate that. But we cannot. Nor, more importantly, can you. They were not murdered elsewhere. And, again, we would surely be able to demonstrate it if they had been. We'll left only with their having been killed where they were sent.

(And not to put too fine a point on it, the documents, graves, and testimonies of both survivors and perpetrators adequately proves that.)

You are making the mistake of thinking that history is held to the same standards as criminal trials. It is not. Though when an individual is held responsible for specific crimes, the standard you seek is used. See, e.g., the trial of Kurt Franz.
 
LemmyCaution said:
Joachim Neander, who has studied this question, the matter of Reich citizenship, made this very interesting and informative post a couple years ago: Dogzilla might want to "read up" on this topic.
Click to expand...

Jews remained citizens and there wasn't a plan to exterminate ALL of them. I learn something new everyday.
 
Dogzilla said:
Irrelevant claptrap? How can you possibly estimate Jewish losses if you don't know how many there were after the war? And if you can't even tell us how "Jew" was defined in any population census, you really don't have any idea at all.

You seem to think German figures are reliable. Is that true?
Click to expand...
Well, let's start with how many Jews lived in some specific places before the war. And then move on to how many lived in these places after the war.

Or are you arguing that there were 100s of 1000s of Jews in Warsaw after the war? 10s of 1000s in Lodz? 10s of 1000s in Vilna? 100s of 1000s in the Germany? You think there are not reliable sources on the population of these places after the war?

You're kidding, right? Do you know of a dispute, of any significance, about what the Jewish population of Warsaw was, to take one example, after Stroop finished with it - or at war's end, after the Warsaw Uprising was put down?

This is more of the same: another case of your throwing out brave statements - "you need to provide evidence they were there to start with" (as I did), "there's the problem of estimating Jewish population in Europe after the war" (I assure you, it isn't a very big problem for the five cities I asked you about) - and then running away from their implications.

The Nazis could count. That is true.

The question is whether you can count - and respond to direct, straightforward questions.
 
Last edited:
Dogzilla said:
Oh, Generals aren't soldiers. I forgot. They're???? What are they again?
Click to expand...
"Soldier," by definition and as you used it, can mean and often implies common soldier, not officer - certainly your usage did not imply general, and my use was meant to distinguish troops whom officers had to motivate from officers who do such motivating. I think that was clear from the context . . . Anyway . . .
soldier [ˈsəʊldʒə]
n
1. (Military)
a. a person who serves or has served in an army
b. Also called common soldier a noncommissioned member of an army as opposed to a commissioned officer
Click to expand...
It is generals and officers who motivate soldiers - and Himmler was speaking to generals and high-ranking officers, not giving a pep talk, as you made out, to troops he meant to pump up. He was talking to high-ranking officers in a serious manner about serious matters he wanted to review with them. That's all I was trying to get across.

But more importantly . . .

You've ignored the main point, of course, which is that the speech Himmler made at Sonthofen reviewed accomplishments already achieved - and that is the sense in which he spoke of killing and extermination.
 
Last edited:
Dogzilla said:
The first step would be to show that people were actually killed in the places where they are alleged to have been killed. So far . . .
Click to expand...
So far you have ignored almost every piece the evidence for the mass killings at Ponar - and fictionalized about one document relating to Ponar, the Jaeger Report. You do the same sort of ostrich act for other killing actions and sites. So why should anyone take your statement seriously?

But, leaving this aside, you said that Jews were removed from Europe. That is what you say occurred: it was, you said, what Nazi Jewish policy was all about - and that the Nazis did remove the Jews from Europe. So, that means that the Jews were removed to somewhere.

That's why I asked you where the Jews of Vilna, Lodz, Warsaw, Riga, and Kiev were removed to. And how you know.

Instead of answering this straightforward question, you tried avoiding it by talking about European-wide demographics and then you contradicted your own earlier claim that the Nazis meant to, and did, remove Jews from Europe by making out that there weren't many Jews there in the first place - or that there were many Jews there after the war! :confused:

It would help your case if you would fix on a position and state it, with evidence. You could start by telling us about the fate of the Jews of just five cities. Or even just Vilna. Really.
 
Last edited:
Dogzilla said:
Jews remained citizens and there wasn't a plan to exterminate ALL of them. I learn something new everyday.
Click to expand...
Are you not able to follow what Joachim Neander wrote? Granted, what he argues is not black and white - or simple . . .

You've already shown that you either can't understand what Nick and I have written - or want to keep strawmanning it.
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
.
... not a one of which documents the Jews as ever having been "evacuated" anywhere after the death camps...


.
Click to expand...
Which means the so called arrival numbers were inflated.
Click to expand...
.
And proof of this which does not depend on a rabid need to deny history is ...?
.
Clayton Moore said:
The Jewish people left Europe while the getting was good. And they wouldn't have left a forwarding address.
Click to expand...
.
Why would they not? They would have thought they were safe.

And if all that was going to happen was a free ticket somewhere, in what way is that "getting" better than just waiting?
.
Clayton Moore said:
Which is why the catch/cover all "they were never processed into the camps" was used.
Click to expand...
.
Except that we have documentation that they weren't, and you have none that they left.

Why are the records so complete right up until the time of arrival and so sparse for after?
.
Clayton Moore said:
Read my lips. Aside from the liberation there was no after the work/concentration camps.
Click to expand...
.
There certainly wasn't for those that died there...
.
 
Last edited:
New GPR for Treblinka / Mass Graves / Caroline Colls

Clayton? Dogzilla? Can you explain this for me?

http://www.independent.ie/world-new...s-graves-at-treblinka-death-camp-2990076.html

The Independent
16th January 2012

British forensic archaeologist Caroline Sturdy Colls has now undertaken the first co-ordinated scientific attempt to locate the graves..........

Her work at the site, where the Nazis tried to destroy all traces of industrial-scale killing, is being followed in forthcoming Radio 4 documentary The Hidden Graves Of The Holocaust..........

..... the ground-penetrating radar had also discovered the foundations of buildings and that two are likely to have been gas chambers.......


She added: "I've identified a number of buried pits using geophysical techniques. These are considerable in size, and very deep, one in particular is 26 by 17 metres."......
 
Matthew Ellard said:
Clayton? Dogzilla? Can you explain this for me?

http://www.independent.ie/world-new...s-graves-at-treblinka-death-camp-2990076.html

The Independent
16th January 2012

British forensic archaeologist Caroline Sturdy Colls has now undertaken the first co-ordinated scientific attempt to locate the graves..........

Her work at the site, where the Nazis tried to destroy all traces of industrial-scale killing, is being followed in forthcoming Radio 4 documentary The Hidden Graves Of The Holocaust..........

..... the ground-penetrating radar had also discovered the foundations of buildings and that two are likely to have been gas chambers.......


She added: "I've identified a number of buried pits using geophysical techniques. These are considerable in size, and very deep, one in particular is 26 by 17 metres."......
Click to expand...

Lies. Whoppers.
 
Matthew Ellard said:
Clayton? Dogzilla? Can you explain this for me?

http://www.independent.ie/world-new...s-graves-at-treblinka-death-camp-2990076.html

The Independent
16th January 2012

British forensic archaeologist Caroline Sturdy Colls has now undertaken the first co-ordinated scientific attempt to locate the graves..........

Her work at the site, where the Nazis tried to destroy all traces of industrial-scale killing, is being followed in forthcoming Radio 4 documentary The Hidden Graves Of The Holocaust..........

..... the ground-penetrating radar had also discovered the foundations of buildings and that two are likely to have been gas chambers.......


She added: "I've identified a number of buried pits using geophysical techniques. These are considerable in size, and very deep, one in particular is 26 by 17 metres."......
Click to expand...

Monday January 16 2012

A FORENSIC archaeologist has unearthed fresh evidence to prove the existence of mass graves at the Nazi death camp Treblinka.

Some 800,000 Jews were killed at the site, in north east Poland, during the Second World War but a lack of physical evidence at the site has been exploited by Holocaust deniers.

British forensic archaeologist Caroline Sturdy Colls has now undertaken the first co-ordinated scientific attempt to locate the graves, according to an interview in the Radio Times.

As Jewish religious law forbids disturbing burial sites, she and her team from the University of Birmingham have used "ground-penetrating radar"
Click to expand...

The very first line is a lie!
 
Verb 1. unearth - bring to light; "The CIA unearthed a plot to kill the President"
locate, turn up - discover the location of; determine the place of; find by searching or examining; "Can you locate your cousins in the Midwest?"; "My search turned up nothing"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom